Philosophy, religion and theology; Communication and the arts; Social sciences; Language, literature and linguistics; James, William; Japan; Nishida, Kitaro
關鍵詞
Philosophy; religion and theology; Communication and the arts; Social sciences; Language; literature and linguistics; James, William; Japan; Nishida, Kitaro
摘要
This dissertation examines the close relationships between the ideas of self, language (particularly personal pronouns), and metaphysics. The relationship is not a causal one but involves semiotic mediation. If the idea of self differs in different cultures, is it not the case that the idea of the divine also differs? In order to shed some light on this correlation between the ideas of God and self, the author focuses on the ideas of "pure experience" of William James and Kitaro Nishida as well as a new typology of subject-prominent and topic-prominent languages. Although Nishida took the term "pure experience" from James, the content of this idea differs significantly in the work of each. The reason is partly related to their different understandings of unity.
Behind the different interpretations of "pure experience" the author sees the two different types of culture, language, and the idea of self as semiotic differences. These different types of culture are: "Divine type A" (God the mother) which is characterized by the mother-child relationship as a principal symbolization of its culture (Japan and the topic-prominent language) and "Divine type B" (God the father) which is characterized by the father-child relationship as a principal symbolization of its culture (the United States and the subject-prominent language). The former tends to foster a metaphorical understanding of self as a place or a field, while the latter tends to foster a metaphorical understanding of self as a substance or will. The author argues that both James and Nishida tried to incorporate both "Divine type A" and "Divine type B" in their philosophies. Nevertheless, Nishida and James are still influenced by their culturally defined ideas of God.
Nishida recognizes two directions of self-transcendence: the one involves external transcendence (in Christianity) and the other immanent transcendence (in Buddhism). The author argues that these two different directions of self-transcendence are closely related to the different metaphorical understandings of self (thus the different self-reflexivity). Consequently, the author suggests that there are considerable interactions between theology, semiotics, and rhetoric.
