Jana Rošker: “Transcultural Approaches in Chinese Philosophy and the Method of Sublation.”

On February 6th 2023, Jana Rošker, professor of Asian Studies at the University of Ljubljana gave an online lecture under the title, “Transcultural Approaches in Chinese Philosophy and the Method of Sublation.” This was the seventh lecture in the “Collaborative Learning” (Si Hai Wei Xue 四海为学) series hosted by the Philosophy Department at ECNU. The lecture was chaired by Prof. Tea Sernelj (University of Ljubljana), and comments were provided by Prof. Mathew A. Foust (Appalachian State University) and Prof. Ann Pang-White (University of Scranton).

Professor Jana Rošker in action!

To begin with, she differentiated the common existing terms “cross-cultural” and “intercultural” philosophy with the term she prefers to use: “transcultural” philosophy. The former both imply essentialist modes of viewing “cultures” as distinct entities. By contrast, “transcultural” philosophy implies a fluid continuity between one culture and another. This is not to deny that people are different, nor that our frameworks of reference differ from one another and that this impacts how we understand the world. What Rošker does disagree with, however, is that we are essentially different in such a way that would prevent mutual understanding between two cultural groups. No two groups, according to this transcultural framework, are absolutely and essentially distinct; people within any two groups can therefore come to understand one another. From this perspective, culture is not static but mobile.

Parallels can be found in the work of other Western theorists, most notably in considering the history of scientific theory. Rošker points to Thomas Kuhn and his understanding of the impact on our modes of thinking made by Copernicus. Copernicus was thought to be mad when he suggested that the earth moved, because the very meaning of the term “earth” then implied a fixed position. In this light, Copernicus’ contribution was not so much the assertion that the earth is a moving object, but that movement should be thought of as relational. The earth is fixed when considered only in relation with itself, but moving when considered in relation to other planetary objects. Copernicus thereby effectively reimagined both the terms “earth” and “movement.” In Rošker’s work of transcultural philosophy, we see a reimagining not only of terms like “culture” or “tradition,” but also of activities like “comparison.” It is not only concepts that we need to reconsider, but our very ways of thinking.

The term “sublation” was introduced into the English language to translate Hegel’s use of the term Aufheben. When no English word could be found to carry all connotations of this term, the Latin verb sublatio was found to be suitable. This term carries the three meanings of to “eliminate,” “preserve” and “arise.” Accordingly, this combined meaning was represented by the new English term, the noun “sublation.” Rošker finds this term most useful in describing her work of transcultural philosophy. Through treating philosophies from diverse traditions alongside one another, she preserves what is of value in the philosophies, while also identifying inconsistencies within traditions thereby performing an act of elimination, and finally causing something new to arise from this activity.

Professor Ann Pang-White responding

In just one hour, it was impossible for Rošker to fully demonstrate her method of sublation. She could only point us towards instances of her work that substantiate this method. Some examples of sublative works include those with the following pairs of thinkers: Theodor W.Adorno and Gongsun Long, Zhang Gongsun and Bertrand Russell, and Augustinus and Mozi. The basic process includes six steps: 1.) finding similarities, 2.) finding differences within these similarities, 3.) identifying inconsistencies within the philosophies, 4.) establishing mutual complementarity between them, 5.) sublation (raising to a “higher level”) and 6.) finding a new insight or proposition. The aim of all this is to attempt to simultaneously balance two frameworks of doing philosophy, rather than only working within the default framework of science which, despite the process of globalization, Rošker argues is still predominantly Western.

Professor Mathew Foust responding

Rošker’s lecture was followed by lively discussion. Methodology being a subject that each of us deals with, no matter what our area of research, this topic gives rise to many responses and questions. Prof. Ann Pang-White was interested in the imbalance that Rošker identified as occurring between the Western and Eastern sides of the field of transcultural philosophy. There is a tendency for Western frameworks to dominate, and Pang-White wondered whether the method of sublation could help to overcome this problem. Rošker agreed that it is important to consider these imbalances, and that our considerations can help to improve the problem. However, she is not necessarily prescribing her method for others to use. She provides insight into the way she works, but each person must find their own ways of working. Prof. Mathew A. Foust identified some likenesses between Rošker’s work and the work of Tim Connolly, who also considered different ways of doing comparative philosophy. While the works of these two scholars have their differences, they share a common goal of broadening the framework in which academic philosophy is done.

Report by Rory O’Neill