What is Western?

Distinguishing "Western" from "non-Western" works isn’t as easy as you might think. Sometimes there is no problem at all; some traditions, e.g., those of South and East Asia, are long-standing, continuous, written, and obviously different. But distinguishing Western from non-Western works is not simply a matter of geography – it is not simply a matter of where the work was composed or arose, since a writer in the Western tradition might well happen to reside in what is usually considered a non-Western culture (and vice-versa). St. Augustine, a Christian (Western) philosopher, lived in north Africa, for example. It is not simply a matter of the author’s ethnic background, either. The works of the eminent Latin-American philosophers such as George Santayana (a defender of metaphysical naturalism), Joaquin Xirau Palau (a phenomenologist), and Ortega y Gasset (a neo-Kantian) are squarely within the Western tradition, and are read as a matter of course by students of Western philosophy. There is nothing distinctively "Latin-American" about them. "With the exception of the traditional forms of neo-Thomism, Marxism, and to some degree neo-Kantianism and Mexican existentialism, one cannot speak of philosophical schools in Latin America." That is why philosophers do not consider philosophy written by Latin-Americans to be non-Western. "Latin-American philosophers refer primarily to Western European sources and see themselves as participants in the European philosophical tradition."" (Bonevac vi)

Do we say that a philosopher’s specialty is determined by his or her race or gender then? This seems artificially limiting, not to mention insulting, and creates additional confusions. If Alberto Fujimora, the President of Peru, wrote philosophy, would it be Western or Asian? Frantz Fanon was a black male psychiatrist from the Caribbean who spoke French and was educated in European universities – Western or (as some anthologies say) African? What if Fanon had been female?

I will argue below that these problem emerge very clearly in trying to determine what, if anything, ought to count as "African philosophy" or "women’s philosophy". There is persistent and widespread muddle about both these areas.

The term "Native American" is also vague, since there are two American continents (North and South America). I will follow what seems to be standard usage in the multiculturalist writings, and restrict my focus to native North America, though I see no very clear reason for doing this: if the term "Latin-American" refers to both North and South America, why should "Native American" be different?

Thus, in summary, I have tried to make clear what counts as philosophy (distinct from literature, comparative religion, anthropology, and folklore) and what distinguishes Western from non-Western philosophy. I will follow current practice in my field and distinguish between philosophy and non-philosophy by reference to the existence of an ongoing philosophical tradition, in which beliefs are systematically analyzed over time in a culture, and there are clearly-recognized authoritative documents. Cultures without writing, then, are unlikely to have philosophy in this sense, since, as we have seen, oral traditions do not tend to develop systematic argumentation.

I will also follow Bonevac et al. in using the concept of an ongoing philosophical tradition to distinguish between Western and non-Western philosophy. "In general, we have tried to characterize works as Western or non-Western by appealing to the author’s conception of the work as a continuation of an ongoing philosophical tradition. To whom does the author refer?" (Bonevac, vi) Works that refer to non-Western sources and documents will be "non-Western"; works that refer to Western sources will be considered "Western".

Thus, for the purposes of this project

1. Latin American philosophy will be considered Western.

2. "Native American" will mean native North American.

3. Folklore will not count as philosophy. Philosophy will emerge in a culture to the extent that the cultures develop literacy. Literacy is a necessary but not sufficient condition for philosophy.

4. I will take for granted that in cultures where academic philosophy is practiced, philosophers prior to the 20th-century in every culture have almost universally been male and aristocratic, and thus that traditional academic philosophy has systematically excluded the perspectives of women and persons of lower socio-economic status. This exclusion has called into question, but has not overthrown, the definition of philosophical questions and philosophical method.

Go to next