XPost: alt.philosophy.taoism, alt.buddha.short.fat.guy, alt.philosophy.zen   
   From: kittyp2060@hotmail.com   
      
   "Tang Huyen"  wrote in message   
   news:579f63b4-3cf1-7f4b-d4f1-038ead63b753@gmail.com...   
   >   
   > On 11/16/2016 2:50 PM, noname wrote:   
   >   
   > > What is the book you are attempting to have published, and how long has   
   > > it   
   > > been completed?   
   >   
   > I started it some decades ago, with an eye on Buddhism,   
   > but gradually my focus shifted to pure reason, in the   
   > strict Kantian sense, the a priori domain, independent of   
   > experience, though I still keep quite some attention to   
   > Buddhism, and extend it to Daoism and Stoicism. I take   
   > pure reason, the a priori domain, independent of   
   > experience, as the explaining scheme which explains   
   > Buddhism, Daoism, Stoicism, and the Greats in European   
   > philosophy, Plato, Aristotle, Plotinus, Augustine, Thomas,   
   > Kant, Hegel, Husserl, Heidegger, etc. One crucial witness   
   > to the universality of pure reason happens to be a   
   > Frenchwoman of low nobility, with little formal education,   
   > who writes in popular (and not academic, not learned)   
   > French with a street flavour, Madame Guyon. She reintuits   
   > much of ancient Stoicism, and also of Buddhism and   
   > Daoism, at a time when almost nothing is known of   
   > Oriental philosophy and religion. In rational history, she   
   > bequeaths the main lines of thought to the German   
   > Greats, Kant, Hegel, also to a lesser extent Heidegger,   
   > though of them, only Kant mentions her unfavourably in   
   > an unpublished note. Leibniz knew of her and wrote a   
   > negative letter about her. Hegel and Heidegger probably   
   > never heard of her.   
   >   
   > My ambition is to write a rational history of philosophy,   
   > from the point of view of pure reason, covering East and   
   > West, antiquity and modernity, which includes theology   
   > and mysticism (not the experience per se, but the   
   > theoretical justification of it). Much of it has been written,   
   > but I keep rewriting it, as my thinking goes more deeply   
   > and I find more shared patterns amongst the above. And   
   > all the fancy talk of methodology aside, my main tool is   
   > pattern-matching, which is the revealing factor of   
   > commonality, if the patterns can be found that bridge all   
   > apparent divisions, like time, space, language, culture,   
   > religion, etc., and if such patterns can be made to   
   > harmonise together, which makes them a system, in the   
   > Greek sense of what stands together.   
   >   
   > So, my manuscript has not been completed, but much   
   > has been written, and I hope to complete it and get it   
   > published, though it is not going to get accepted easily,   
   > seeing that it is revolutionary, in that it turns upside   
   > down much of white scholarship, even in the domain of   
   > European philosophy alone. This domain of pure reason   
   > is mostly a virgin forest, with scarcely any probing,   
   > surely not in depth, even if the expressions "pure reason"   
   > and "a priori" have been heralded for over two centuries.   
   > White scholars talk about it in awe, but don't quite know   
   > what it is, as if it was God, no less.   
   >   
   > Tang Huyen   
      
   We may be in the time and space where a different way of looking at history   
   and philosophy would be more accepted. Academic programs sometimes have   
   their own unique death grips on both.   
      
   Kitty   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)