This study examines the problem of moral considerability and the Other and from two basic standpoints, namely, a phenomenological analysis of alterity and a hermeneutical-comparative encounter between the continental tradition and its "Other." This hermeneutical-comparative engagement places the phenomenological tradition in dialogue with the East Asian tradition concerning the intersection of knowledge and "moral disclosure." ;I argue that we confront the moral considerability of the Other horizontally, which is to say that the presence of knowing shades into the irreducible difference (...) of the situation occupied by the Other . Sincere attempts to identify with the Other realize a morally transformative confrontation with absolute alterity , namely, the direct phenomenological experience of the Other's autonomy, which constitutes the concrete sense of the Other as morally considerable. Moral relationships with the Other, therefore, are defined as those modes of comportment that allow the Other to be disclosed qua absolute alterity and not merely in terms of relative alterity. For example, relationships of intimacy, solidarity, and compassion, optimally disclose and shelter the absolute alterity of the Other. Hence, "intimation," rather than intentionality, defines the proper mode of directedness by which the Other qua Other is disclosed. ;The fundamental ethical question thus becomes the question of moral disclosure, i.e., the clarification of the domain of moral considerables, and, only secondarily, the question of "correct" moral action, i.e., the regulation of the domain of moral considerables. The project of ethics is thereby reconceived as an "inconceivable devotion" towards the Other, namely, a cultivated attention to alterity that situates us within a field of excessive moral obligation. In the end, an ethics of alterity requires an understanding of moral obligation as a commitment to a process of continually enacting new possibilities of intimacy, solidarity, and moral relation, which are rooted in the maturation of moral skill rather than in the refinement of moral theory. (shrink)

Japanese Philosophy in the Making 1: Crossing Paths with Nishida, by John C. Maraldo, is the first of three volumes collecting his essays in Japanese philosophy. This volume, which is divided into two sections, gathers together thirteen essays reflecting on the thought of Nishida Kitarō. The first section, “Pathways to Nishida,” is comprised of three essays clarifying some of the metatheoretical, intellectual and scholarly contexts around the study of Nishida’s thought. The remaining essays represent “Pathways Through Nishida,” which engage Nishida’s (...) philosophy from a variety of analytic, thematic, and comparative perspectives. These pathways are genuinely penetrating and unfold around a handful of fundamental... (shrink)

Building on his 2017 book, Japanese Philosophy in the Making 1: Crossing Paths with Nishida, John Maraldo continues to shepherd his readers through an encounter with Japanese philosophy in this second volume. Departing from Nishida as the presumptive center, Maraldo interrogates the "borderlines" in his engagement with the thinking of Watsuji Tetsurō, Tanabe Hajime, and Kuki Shūzō, in addition to confronting important issues pertaining to politics and ecology. To speak of "shepherding" here is intentional; but it is not meant to (...) indicate any kind of paternalism, either in form or content. Rather, it is meant to capture the tremendous care with which Maraldo leads his readers down the path of his thinking. In... (shrink)

This paper critically examines Heidegger’s 1959 dialogue, A Conversation from [von] Language – Between a Japanese and an Inquirer, across three distinct levels: as (1) a cross-cultural comparative exchange, (2) a meta-philosophical/ontological analysis of the fundamental relation between language and thought, and (3) a methodological inquiry into the phenomenology and hermeneutics of conversation. Despite the problematic nature of Heidegger’s explicit comparative engagement, I contend that his questioning of the possibility of “a conversation from house to house” provides a substantial clarification (...) of the meta-philosophical difficulties inherent in comparative and cross-cultural philosophy. At the same time, his thinking with respect to hermeneutics provides a methodological clue to the possibility of and the normative conditions for understanding across such cultural differences. (shrink)