附註:Includes bibliographical references (pages 655-657) and index.
Ch. 1. The Three Philosophical Traditions -- Ch. 2. The Beginnings of Metaphysical Philosophy: Uddalaka, Yajnavalkya, Heraclitus, Parmenides -- Ch. 3. The Beginnings of Moral Philosophy: Confucius/Mencius, the Buddha, Socrates -- Ch. 4. Early Logical Relativism, Skepticism, and Absolutism: Mahavira, Chuang-tzu, Protagoras, Gorgias, Plato -- Ch. 5. Early Rational Synthesis: Hsun-tzu, Aristotle -- Ch. 6. Early Varieties of Atomism: Democritus/Epicurus/Lucretius, "Guatama," and Nameless Buddhists -- Ch. 7. Hierarchical Idealism: Plotinus/Proclus, Bhartrihari -- Ch. 8. Developed Skepticism: Sextus Empiricus, Nagarjuna, Jayarashi, Shriharsha -- Ch. 9. Religio-Philosophical Synthesis: Udayana, Chu Hsi, Avicenna, Maimonides, Aquinas -- Ch. 10. Logic-Sensitized, Methodological Metaphysics: Gangesha, Descartes, Leibniz -- Ch. 11. Immanent-Transcendent Holism: Shankara, Spinoza -- Ch. 12. Perceptual Analysis, Realistic and Idealistic: Asanga/Vasubandhu, Locke, Berkeley, Hume -- Ch. 13. Fideistic Neo-Skepticism: Dignaga/Dharmakirti, Kant.
摘要:A Comparative History of World Philosophy presents a personal yet balanced guide through what the author argues to be the three great philosophical traditions: Chinese, European, and Indian. The book breaks through the cultural barriers between these traditions, proving that despite their considerable differences, fundamental resemblances exist in their abstract principles. Ben-Ami Scharfstein argues that Western students of philosophy will profit considerably if they study Indian and Chinese philosophy from the very beginning, along with their own. This book is organized thematically, presenting in virtually every chapter characteristic views from each tradition that represent similar positions in the core areas of metaphysics and epistemology. At the same time, Scharfstein develops each tradition historically as the chapters unfold. He presents a great variety of philosophical positions fairly, avoiding the relativism and ethnocentrism that could easily plague a comperative presentation of Western and non-Western philosophies.
