What is the origin of the irrationality inherent in Western rationalism?

Sueki,Takehiro, Rational Thought in the East, November 15, 2021, Hozokan Library

　This book is a paperback version of a book of the same title published by Hozokan (March 20, 2001). That book is also a revised and expanded new edition, and the original book is as follows.

　Sueki,Takehiro, "Rational Thought in the East," August 16, 1970, Kodansha Gendai Shinsho No.235

　Therefore, the book is actually half a century old. According to the introduction page of the 2001 edition of the book on the Kinokuniya bookstore website, the original 1970 edition of the book, Kodansha Gendai Shinsho, was translated into Chinese and Korean, and has had a wide impact internationally. The remarkable feature of this book is that, half a century ago, in order to compete with the Western rational thought, it did not seek anti-rational (or non-rational) thought in the East, but rather described the original rational thought nurtured in the classical antiquity of the East, using modern logical symbols as a means of expression, with the Western rational thought as a frame of reference. This is a remarkable feature of this book, and I think it is why it was highly regarded as opening up an area where no similar book existed at the time.

　However, what I would like to focus on now that I am unpacking this book is the "Conclusion" section. It is a long book, but I would like to quote the entire text on my blog.

◆Citation of this book (Library version pp. 301-5)

2. What is the basis of Western rationalism, then? And what are its defects?
　First of all, the basis of rationalism is the law of contradiction. The law of contradiction is the principle that A and non-A cannot exist simultaneously. In other words, it is the elimination of contradiction and the preservation of non-contradiction. Strict and thorough adherence to this law of contradiction is the basis of Western rationalism.

　Not only formal logic, which pursues non-contradictory forms, but also various dialectics, which develop using contradiction as a mediator, must adhere to the law of contradiction as their basis. And to adhere to the law of contradiction means to eliminate contradictions thoroughly. Western culture has always maintained its self-identity by thoroughly eliminating anything that contradicts itself. Thanks to this, science has developed, technology has been developed, democracy has taken root, the economy has grown, and a glorious modernity has emerged in the West.

　However, this incomparably powerful Western rationalism has its natural limitations and flaws. The Crusades, the bitter religious trials, the uncompromising religious wars between the new and old religions, and so on, how can we explain the repetition of unreasonable struggles that have emerged time and again in the rational Western world? Such bellicose tendencies continued into the twentieth century and finally led to the first and second world wars, which, apart from the war against Japan, were the quarrels of the West and the inevitable consequence of the self-contradictions of its rationalism.

　What, then, is the origin of the irrationality inherent in Western rationalism? Originally, rationalism was to eliminate contradictions thoroughly and maintain non-contradiction. But why is it that in eliminating contradictions, we fall into contradictions and end up in a state of self-destruction? Western rationalism must have some fundamental flaw within it. Otherwise, it would not have fallen into contradictions by eliminating them. What is this fundamental flaw? It seems to me that the fundamental flaw lies in the fact that Western rationalism is an ego-centric rationalism. Its rationality is ego-centered and non-contradictory, and it thoroughly eliminates anything that turns its back on the ego. Descartes started from the "I think" to illuminate the existence of God, and Kant used the "I think" as a witness to guarantee the validity of science. In this way, Western rationalism is a way of thinking that uses the ego as a standard, excluding what contradicts it and preserving what does not. Hegel's dialectic, which at first glance seems to allow for contradiction, is also a system in which the ego, named "absolute spirit," develops itself while eliminating what contradicts itself, and is a typical example of ego-centric rationalism. This ego-centric rationalism can be summed up in one sentence: "To rationally defeat that which opposes the ego. If this principle is faithfully adhered to, violent revolution can be justified and ethnic extermination can be justified. Herein lies the pathology of Western rationalism. The Eastern rational thought collected in this book may provide some examples of such non-ego-centered rationalism.

3. Unlike the ego-centered rationalism of the West, the ancient rational thought of the East in this book is non-ego-centered. Eastern rational thought is also a kind of rational thought, and to that extent, it follows the law of contradiction and eliminates contradictions (the "theory of contradiction" in the Han Hui Tzu and the concept of "difference" (viruddha) in Indian logic are clear expressions of this). In this respect, there is nothing different from Western rationalism. However, unlike the case in the West, in the East, the condition of ego-centeredness is not attached.

　As is typical in the dialectic of yin and yang in Zhou Yi, we do not set up a single pole of the ego and exclude what is contrary to it, but rather we set up two contradictory poles that complement each other and establish a relationship that mutually affirms the other. What mutually negates mutually affirms. This may seem like a contradiction, but it is not. For example, consider the relationship between a husband and wife. The same person cannot be both husband and wife, so in that sense (i.e., as far as the same person is concerned) the concepts of husband and wife are contradictory and mutually negating. However, in the case of two different persons, A and B, if A is the husband of B, then B is the wife of A, and vice versa, and the concepts of husband and wife are mutually necessary conditions for each other. mutually affirm each other as a necessary condition for the other. And vice versa. This is what I mean when I say that what mutually negates mutually affirms, and there is no contradiction there. In other words, two concepts that are contradictory or contradictory with respect to one subject mutually become necessary conditions for the other with respect to two separate subjects, and mutually affirm each other. This is a structure similar to an ellipse, where the periphery is determined by the union of two focal points, so we may tentatively call it "elliptical thinking. Then, the Yin and Yang of Zhou Yi is a typical example of elliptical thinking. And many of the Eastern dialectics introduced in this book (whether Buddhist or not) share this elliptical thinking structure, which is what distinguishes them from the ego-centric rationalism of the West.

　Western ego-centric rationalism stems from the idea of the ego as an independent entity. The "thinking self," which Descartes arrived at after methodical skepticism, is a single entity that is independent of any "extended entity. If the ego is such an independent entity, then it cannot depend on anything other than itself, and therefore there can be no interdependence between the two poles of self and other, which means that there is no room for elliptical thinking. On the contrary, Eastern rational thought does not recognize the ego as an independent entity. On the contrary, Eastern rational thought does not recognize the ego as an independent entity, but says that everything is not an independent entity and must depend on other things. This idea of non-substantial interdependence is particularly prominent in Buddhism, but it also underlies Yin and Yang in Zhou Yi and Lao Tzu's theory of emptiness and nature, even if it is yin and yang. And it is on the basis of this non-substantial interdependence of all things that the non-ego-centered rational thought is established and the elliptical thinking rational thought is established. And this, I believe, implies the only way to transcend the "war of all against all" of the Western way.

◆Table of Contents (Library Edition)

Foreword to the New and Expanded Edition
Foreword to the Old Edition
Introduction to Eastern Thought and Logic
Part I. The Logic of Enlightenment: The Logical Thought of India
1 The Rational Mind of Early Buddhism
2 Logic of Old Causality
3 The Logic of New Causality
4 The Indian Dialectic
Part II: The Logical Thought of Chinese Buddhism
1 Affirmation of Reality
2 Totalitarian view of truth
3 The Unity of Diversity
Part III Rationality and Irrationality: The Logic of Ancient Chinese Thought
1 Complete Elimination of the Irrational
2 The Crystallization of the Rational Mind and the Discovery of Contradictions
3 The Conclusion of Formal Logic
4 The Dialectic of Harmony
5 Nature and Man in the East
Conclusion
Commentary by Shigeki Noya

◆Introduction to the Kinokuniya Web Store
Rational Thought in the Orient / Takehiro Sueki [Book] - Kinokuniya Web Store｜Online Book Store｜Original Japanese Books, Magazines and E-books Store

This famous book, which has been widely influential internationally for its vivid elucidation of the unique rational thought of the East, has been supplemented with a transcript of a discussion of "elliptical thinking. It suggests the possibility of overcoming the ego-centric rationalism of the West.

Takehiro Sueki
Born in Kofu City, Yamanashi Prefecture in 1921. Graduated from the Department of Philosophy, Faculty of Letters, Tokyo Imperial University in 1945. After working as an assistant professor at Tokyo Imperial University, an associate professor at the University of Electro-Communications, an associate professor at the University of Tokyo, a professor at the University of Tokyo, and a professor at the Faculty of Letters, Toyo University, he is currently a professor emeritus at the University of Tokyo. His research focuses on logic, analytic philosophy, and comparative thought, and he aims to establish a new rationalism that makes use of the spirit of the East. The first edition of this book, Rational Thought in the East (1970), was translated into Chinese, Korean, and other languages, and has had a wide impact internationally. His major works include Symbolic Logic (1962), Introduction to Logic (1969), and Studies in Wittgenstein's Philosophy of Logic. His major works include "Symbolic Logic" (1962), "Introduction to Logic" (1969), "Studies in Wittgenstein's Philosophy of Logic" (1976-77), and "Kitaro Nishida" (1983-88). Mathematical Analysis of Logic' (1977), 'Comparative Philosophy' (1997), and others. Comparative Philosophy ('97) and many other articles.