EPISTEMIC CONTEXTS AND PHILOSOPHIZING
Two incompatible tendencies persist in philosophy. The first is the tendency to undermine emerging philosophical traditions, with the sole aim of restricting them to the margins of the philosophical debate. The other is the tendency to embrace minor philosophical traditions. Both tendencies are well represented in philosophy and were on display at the Twentieth World Congress of Philosophy (1998). Organized around the broader theme of Paidia: Philosophy Educating Humanity, the congress organizers aimed for inclusivity by accommodating hitherto unrecognized philosophical traditions. This proposal was well received by one school of interpretation, and only cautiously received by another. The former school of thought's favourable disposition was quickened by the consideration that although the major philosophers have been influential none of them exhausted the philosophical discussion. Following from this, it advised openness to alternative approaches to philosophy. The latter, however, distinguished between philosophy and non-philosophy, contending that since the non-philosophical traditions do not take reason as the initial ground of their philosophical inquiry, they are merely advocacy paradigms, failing the philosophical test. The author identifies and reviews a selected available literature in order to determine where to locate his analysis. The present discussion will come down on the side of the former school of thought rather than the latter, and contends that theories grow out of contexts, even as they may not be reduced to their contexts. Obviously, it is the wish of every theory to attain certainty while seeking to eliminate error; however, this objective cannot be met in practice. Viewed against this background, theories could be shown to be products of their time and space, and, therefore, historically situated. Understood as such, the distinction between philosophy and non-philosophy should not arise, even as some theories enjoy notoriety over others. To be sure, theories enjoy notoriety over others not because they are necessarily normative but because they are part of the familiar or dominant discourse. In this way, therefore, the discussion acquires also elements of power and domination.
Keywords: