This paper tries, first, to compare Nishida’s discussion of technique with Heidegger’s essay Die Frage nach der Technik, and second, to elucidate Nishida’s concept trio of ‘mokuteki-teki sayō’(teleogical action), ‘gyaku- sayō’(reverse action)and ‘mu-sayō’(non-action)both in its macro context of politics and in its micro context of individual practice of life and thinking, finally leading to a clinical philosophical moment of what I want to call ‘hakarai’ in Japanese, i. e. arrangement, or corresponding with various matters. As basis for discussion serve the essays published in volume nine of the new version of Nishida’s collected works. We have to note that Nishida designates as ‘technical’ not only the science and technology, but also the bottom-up – in Nishida’s term ‘mujun-teki jikodōitsu-teki’(contradictory and self-identical)- occurrence of various things in our ‘rekishi-teki sekai’ (historical world), as he calls it. Referring to Nishida’s concept of non- action, but mostly against his basic understanding of it, I want to suggest my own model of life and thinking in advocacy of clinical philosophy, which belongs to a new philosophical trend in Japan.

View full abstract

While Nishida critically engaged with the neo-Kantians (especially Cohen, Windelband and Rickert) in his earlier works, it was only later—in his 1926 essays, “Basho” and “The Neglected Problem of Consciousness”— that he engaged with Emil Lask’s philosophy. This article attempts to explicate the reason why Nishida referred to Lask during this period, viz. the period when the idea of “basho” was developed, and to clarify the nature of Lask’s influence on Nishida. The article begins with a general overview of the “last neo-Kantian”, Emil Lask’s philosophy, the focus being on the objectivist tendencies in his thought. Then, Nishida’s explicit references to Lask’s ideas—“transoppositional object”, the objectivism regarding form and the “domain category”—are analyzed. The article argues that Lask’s main influence on Nishida was not his idea of the “domain category” as such, as others have argued, but Lask’s logical objectivism, i.e. the anti-subjectivist tendencies in Lask’s thought. Finally, it is argued that Nishida appealed to Lask during this period because it resonated with one of the implications of the idea of basho—a complete turn away from the subjectivist tendencies of (neo-)Kantian philosophy.

View full abstract

Das Problem, als was für Zeit das gegenwärtige Zeitalter erkannt werden sollte, ist immer ernst für viele Denker. Während Japan in einer turbulenten Zeit zum Kriegsfeuer geworden ist, wird Kiyoshi Miki als einer der Philosophen erwähnt, die das Problem dieser Wahrnehmung der Zeiten ernsthaft angriffen. Es ist sicher, dass diese Fragestellung eine der ernstesten Sorgen von Miki, der auch die Philosophie der Geschichte mit der Logos-Pathos-Theorie und der Logik der Einbildungskraft befürwortet, war. Wenn Miki dieses Problem erwägt, benutzt er es als die Basis der Kritik an der Sicht von den fünf Einteilungen der Zeitwahrnehmung Fichtes und er entwickelt sein Argument. Fichte beschrieb diese fünf Einteilungen in dem Vortrag, den »Die Grundzüge des gegenwärtigen Zeitalters« von 1804 bis 1805 Winterperiode aufführte. Miki spricht in seiner Argumentation, die in seinem ganzen Leben geschrieben wurden, diesen Vortrag von Fichte viermal an. In dieser Arbeit untersuche ich diese vier Dokumente von Miki, beziehungsweise die Meinung über den Glauben vom Rückgang des Buddhismus, den Miki mit posthumen Werken »Shinran« erwog, und verifiziere die vorhandene Verbindung zwischen diesen Thesen mit einer Folge von Argumenten.

View full abstract

This paper discusses Nisida’s thought in the context of the relationship between technology and culture, in order to consider the techno-cultural dominance in a global world. We will refer to a critical consideration on Nishida presented by Andrew Feenberg, one of the representative philosophers of technology today. In “Technology in a Global World”(in Between Reason and Experience, The MIT Press, 2010), Feenberg proposes a new perspective in which he intertwines Nisida’s “theory of the global world(世界的世界論)”(one that considers cultural globalization), with the philosophy of technology. His sensitivity towards culture, ideology, and politics will be helpful in order to understand and clarify the questions of technology and culture in Nishida. His remarks, however, will need to be reconsidered and developed further.

View full abstract

[in Japanese]

View full abstract