>
> Somehow the thought of carrying judgements across cultural systems and
> comparing apples with pineapples is quease-inspiring. I think it is best to
> leave each cultural system to make its own judgements on its own products
> internally, and not try to transfer such products across systems.
>
I am nowhere as learned a philosopher as those in this group, but I don't see
why we shouldn't compare across systems. In my limited knowledge, Kant,
arguably the most important modern western philosopher was dealing with
concepts that are remarkably similar to what ancient Hindu philosophers
grappled with: duty, righteousness, and shutting out the pleasure-pain
principle or the pancha-bhootas, as it were.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 12
> Date: Mon, 28 Mar 2011 16:34:45 -0000
> From: "manikuttyanand" <[email protected]>
> To: [email protected]
> Subject: Re: [silk] ancient Indian thought
> Message-ID: <[email protected]>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
>
> Yes. All the more reason why the contributions of all these great
> inventors/discoverers (Dalton, Thompson and Panini) are to be lauded
> without regard to national origin.
> As one data point, J. J. Thompson won the Nobel Prize for Physics in
> 1906 (http://nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/physics/laureates/1906/).
> Panini would have won the leading prize of his day had there been
> institutions and institutional recognition in his time.
> I don't know what philosophical contributions it is that you are
> referring to, but generally, Indians don't figure prominently in
> all-time lists of influential philosophers. Would you say that this list
> is inaccurate? And to put the ball further in your court : what may have
> been the reason for the non-inclusion of, say, Sankara in this list?
> http://www.thoughts.com/herman_bergson/the-100-philosophers-list
> Anand
> --- In [email protected], Suresh Ramasubramanian <suresh@...>
> wrote:
>>
>> Anand Manikutty [27/03/11 16:04 -0700]:
>>> considered generally speculative. The ideas in mathematics and
> linguistics are,
>>> however, well grounded and rightfully acclaimed.
>>
>> and rightly so - but then mathematics and linguistics are much more
>> scientific, certainly far less abstract, than philosophy
>>
>> grounded in reality, at least.
>>
>
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL:
> <http://lists.hserus.net/pipermail/silklist/attachments/20110328/51a86ed1/attachment.html>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> silklist mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://lists.hserus.net/mailman/listinfo/silklist
>
>
> End of silklist Digest, Vol 16, Issue 14
> ****************************************
