Abstract
The purpose of this paper is to compare Radical empiricism
developed by William James (1843-1910) and the “pure experience(純粋
経験)” of Kitaro Nishida (西田幾多郎, 1870-1945) and to identify the
character of facts of experience in both.
Many studies comparing James and Nishida argue that James
emphasized the “stuff” of experience, in contrast Nishida emphasized the
fundamental system of experience. However, this view is not accurate,
because it does not follow James’s intent. The original purpose of Radical
empiricism is to reject the abstract methods argued by rationalism and to
reveal the structure of “conjunctive relation” in experience. In this
attempt, James argues that the “agent” is based on the “activity” of “the
individual” or “the part” and mediates various conjunctive relations. And
each “agent” can be a support for our lives without contradicting the other
“agents.” This is because James had his own ideas about facts of
experience. This paper compares this point with Nishida’s pure
experience and discusses the causes of the difference between James’
worldview and the idea of “solo reality(唯一実在)” as Nishida thought.
https://ror.org/0496p0503 
