GLOBALIZING JAPANESE PHILOSOPHY AS AN ACADEMIC DISCIPLINE. . Edited by Ching‐YuenCheung and Wing‐KeungLam. Global East Asia, 6. Göttingen: V&R Uni Press/National Taiwan University Press, 2017. . Pp. 285. Hardback, €45.00.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Japanese philosophy as an academic discipline has been steadily growing and developing worldwide during the past two-three decades; however, it has at all times stayed, without doubt, in the shadows of Chinese and Indian philosophies—to name the two most dominant Asian traditions. The present volume endeavors to acquaint the reader with both the difficulties and the advantages of teaching Japanese philosophy in an academic setting while also making clear that this particular tradition has a lot to offer not only by way of adding yet another supplementary body of literature to the Western canon, but by way of displaying a vast array of approaches, themes, and methodological solutions that are as innovative as they are exciting. The book is divided into two main parts. Part One details how Japanese philosophy has been taught and researched in academia, and it employs an international comparative approach to make its points. In other words, the six chapters of this section contrast how the tertiary education of Japanese philosophy has been carried out in countries like Japan, France, Belgium, Spain, Canada, and (other) English-speaking countries. Part Two of the book delves into various topics and authors that could be said to be partially representative of modern Japanese philosophical thought. These chapters explore the philosophies of such thinkers as Nishi Amane 西周 (1829–1897), Nishida Kitarō 西田幾多郎 (1870–1945), and Suzuki Daisetsu 鈴木大拙 (1870–1966), Tanabe Hajime 田邊元 (1885–1962), Miki Kiyoshi 三木清 (1897–1945), and Sakabe Megumi 坂部恵 (1936–2009), in addition to surveying the issues of environmental philosophy, logic, epistemology, ethics, hermeneutic phenomenology, as well as of mediation and religion. Among the authors of the volume, we find such illustrious contemporary philosophers as James Heisig, Mayuko Uehara, Shigeru Taguchi, Michiko Yusa, and Gereon Kopf, a fact that guarantees the quality of the work. Although the data that is presented in the first part of the volume is a bit dated now since it was gathered over a decade ago, most of the concerns involved in Japanese philosophy education and research remain relevant for the situation of today. Regarding the second part of the book, the chapters are competently written and provide a good general introduction to some of the more remarkable aspects of philosophizing the Japanese way. Lehel Balogh Hokkaido University
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.014 | 0.005 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".