亞洲分析哲學：本質、意涵與價值

Asian Analytic Philosophy: Nature, Significance, Value

針對「亞洲分析哲學」此一標籤之適用範圍，本文提出三類區分：（一）以分析哲學為視角對亞洲哲學進行的探討；（二）以亞洲語言或文化為比較對象之一的跨語言或跨文化分析哲學；以及（三）由亞洲語言所驅動的分析哲學，即以亞洲語言中的語詞之分析與討論為核心的分析哲學。本文分別為上述三類亞洲分析哲學提供範例，繼而討論其中若干類型的哲學意涵。在預設哲學術語有跨語言或跨文化分歧的前提下，本文探討此分歧是否，以及在何種程度上，可能導致哲學的碎裂化，使哲學理論的建構，在語義層面上相對於特定語言或文化。本文同時討論語義碎裂化對哲學理論在規範性、知識謙遜，以及哲學能否呈現任何實質統一性等議題上，可能具有的意涵。最後，本文指出這三種類型的亞洲分析哲學可能實現的價值。具體而言，它們或可拓展分析哲學的視野與範疇，有助於減少語言不正義（一種知識不正義的形式），並促進在亞洲的哲學學術社群之建立。

This paper introduces a distinction between three types of philosophy for which“Asian analytic philosophy”may be an apt label: (i) engagement with Asian philosophy through the lens of analytic philosophy, (ii) cross-linguistic or cross-cultural analytic philosophy where one part of the comparison is an Asian language or culture, and (iii) Asian language-driven analytic philosophy, i.e., analytic phi-losophy driven by philosophical analysis and discussion of expressions in Asian languages. The paper provides examples of each type of Asian analytic philosophy and then proceeds to discuss the philosophical significance of some of them. On the assumption that there is cross-linguistic or cross-cultural disagreement with respect to philosophical terms, it is discussed whether—or to what extent—this might lead to philosophical fragmentation, with philosophical theorizing being semantically rela-tivized to language or culture. It is likewise discussed what significance semantic fragmentation might carry for the normativity of philosophical theorizing, intellectual hu-mility, and the prospects of philosophy exhibiting any kind of substantive unity. The paper concludes by identifying certain kinds of value that might be realized by the three types of Asian analytic philosophy. Specifically, the paper suggests that these types of philosophy might serve to broaden the horizon and scope of analytic philosophy; may serve to decrease linguistic injustice (a certain species of epistemic injustice); and may help build the philo-sophical community in Asia.