Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

Reason or Reasoning?: CLIO OR SIVA?

Reason or Reasoning?: CLIO OR SIVA? Social Text 78, Vol. 22, No. 1, Spring 2004. Copyright © 2004 by Duke University Press. they inhabited the present, was the main mode by and through which the reason of the non-West was declared to be lesser. Suppose “we” were to reject such historicism (the “we” in question, let it be noted, is not an essentialist “we,” and certainly not a particular race or peoples; this essay is written by an Indian who works within the Western intellectual tradition and teaches aspects of this tradition in Australia, to students of mostly European origin): reject the notion that different intellectual traditions and the ways of being that sustain them can be plotted on the same (temporal) grid, such that non-Western intellectual traditions are revealed to be inadequate approximations of Reason, mere steps on the way to Reason. Two implications would follow. First, Reason itself would no longer appear as singular — it would clearly be someone’s reason.1 And second, once Reason was pluralized, there would be no easy way to compare intellectual traditions, let alone declare one superior to all others. This, not in the name of some flabby liberal tolerance that declares everything equal and nothing subject http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Social Text Duke University Press

Reason or Reasoning?: CLIO OR SIVA?

Social Text , Volume 22 (1 78) – Mar 1, 2004

Loading next page...
 
/lp/duke-university-press/reason-or-reasoning-clio-or-siva-i8Yg1L3fH4
Publisher
Duke University Press
Copyright
Copyright 2004 by Duke University Press
ISSN
0164-2472
eISSN
1527-1951
DOI
10.1215/01642472-22-1_78-85
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

Social Text 78, Vol. 22, No. 1, Spring 2004. Copyright © 2004 by Duke University Press. they inhabited the present, was the main mode by and through which the reason of the non-West was declared to be lesser. Suppose “we” were to reject such historicism (the “we” in question, let it be noted, is not an essentialist “we,” and certainly not a particular race or peoples; this essay is written by an Indian who works within the Western intellectual tradition and teaches aspects of this tradition in Australia, to students of mostly European origin): reject the notion that different intellectual traditions and the ways of being that sustain them can be plotted on the same (temporal) grid, such that non-Western intellectual traditions are revealed to be inadequate approximations of Reason, mere steps on the way to Reason. Two implications would follow. First, Reason itself would no longer appear as singular — it would clearly be someone’s reason.1 And second, once Reason was pluralized, there would be no easy way to compare intellectual traditions, let alone declare one superior to all others. This, not in the name of some flabby liberal tolerance that declares everything equal and nothing subject

Journal

Social TextDuke University Press

Published: Mar 1, 2004

There are no references for this article.