Shoba,
The Greek philosopher Epictetus (55-135 AD) outlines
a system of belief that contains elements of both
Eastern & Western thought.
If you're up for a modern interpretation of his writing
(rather than a direct translation), check out
"The Art of Living".
Cheers,
-Jon
PS:
See also: http://classics.mit.edu/Epictetus/epicench.html
* Shoba Narayan ([email protected]) [110328 09:57]:
> >
> > 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
> > ****************************************
>
>
