Abstract
At Kyoto, there is something peculiar going on with negations, or so it seems: A is A, and yet A is immediately not A, and therefore A is A. Without a doubt, this looks a lot like a paradoxical inference and yet we find it repeatedly in the writings of the Kyoto School philosophers. This inference, call it SH, has the form of the soku-hi dialectic, developed and put into practice by Nishida Kitarō. The soku-hi dialectic gets its name from the negation employed in the inference above: the soku-hi negation, as I call it. What is this ominous negation, where does it come from, and what’s its use? This paper intends to clarify.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
