Saying the Unsayable

Ho, Chien-hsing

doi:10.1353/pew.2006.0037

Cited by 7 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 10 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In response, I submit that the real, while ineffable in the sense of being directly inexpressible, is indirectly expressible. I have elsewhere (Ho 2006) understood the notion of indication as an indirect mode of expression that involves an imposition-cum-negation method. In the sentence 'X is ineffable,' the word 'ineffable' may be said to directly express ineffability (as a semantic correlate).…”

Section: Carving Up the Realmentioning

confidence: 99%

Can the World Be Indeterminate in All Respects?

2023

Ergo an Open Access Journal of Philosophy

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Especially over the past twenty years, a number of analytic philosophers have embraced the idea that the world itself is vague or indeterminate in one or more respects. The issue then arises as to whether it can be the case that the world itself is indeterminate in all respects. Using as a basis Chinese Madhyamaka Buddhist thought, I offer two reasons for the coherence and intelligibility of the thesis that all concrete things are themselves indeterminate with respect to the ways they are. The first reason draws on a notion reminiscent of the picture of reality as an amorphous lump, while the second reason makes use of the relativity of conceptual perspectives and determinations. Assuming that the world is the mere totality of all concrete things, I show that there is a genuine metaphysical possibility of the world’s being indeterminate in all respects.

show abstract

Section: Carving Up the Realmentioning

confidence: 99%

Can the World Be Indeterminate in All Respects?

2023

Ergo an Open Access Journal of Philosophy

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…As some philosophers have pointed out, a strong doctrine of ineffability which states that absolutely nothing can be said about the transcendent is in danger of becoming selfreferentially incoherent in seemingly asserting that the Transcendent is beyond all human categories. In response to this problem, Chien-Hsing Ho argues that when we state that the Real is 'unsayable' this word does not, on the one hand, touch the Real, for no words can encompass or circumscribe the Real, and, on the other hand, does indeed affirm its unsayability (Ho 2006). Ho's argument can be strengthened by noting how religious traditions such as Roman Catholicism and Advaita Vedānta both argue that the Real cannot be touched by human concepts and identify the Real from within a metaphysical system which provides patterns of argumentation as to why the Real is ineffable.…”

Section: The Ineffable In Hick and Advaitamentioning

confidence: 99%

Hick and Radhakrishnan on Religious Diversity: Back to the Kantian Noumenon

Barua

2015

SOPHIA

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Back to the Kantian Noumenon The ongoing debates over the religious pluralism of John Hick have highlighted what are, in effect, two primary modes of visualizing doctrinal and experiential diversity across the world's religious traditions. The traditional strategy, that spans the options labelled as 'exclusivism' and 'inclusivism' in the literature, is centred on the concrete focus of Christ, with other religions placed at varying distances of spiritual efficacy with respect to this foundational truth. The 'pluralist' strategy associated with Hick consists of re-imagining these religions, each with its distinctive focus such as Allah, Brahman, or Vishnu, as charged with transformational capacity not because they are literally accurate descriptions of the ultimate but because they are capable of metaphorically gesturing towards this ultimate. A vital debate emerges at this point between the defenders of this pluralist hypothesis and its detractors over whether these foci are metaphysically real or unreal. Hick's pluralism faces the following dilemmaif these foci are taken as absolutely real, their specific characterizations would be attributed to the ultimate which he argues is ineffable, but if they are taken as absolutely unreal, he would have accepted a naturalist interpretation of religious discourse which he otherwise rejects. With this conceptual background in mind, we shall pursue three primary objectives in this essay. First, we shall examine certain conceptual instabilities in Hick's pluralism in the light of S. Radhakrishnan's approach to religious diversity which is based on a reformulation of classical Advaita. Second, our analysis of Hick's and Radhakrishnan's views will illuminate the significance of ontology in certain proposed typologies of religious pluralism. Third, we will be able to revisit, through this dialogue between Hick and Radhakrishnan, the intensely vexed question of whether Hick's version of pluralism is in fact a form of covert exclusivism. The comparative perspective that we shall explore here would seem promising on at least three accounts. First, Hick himself often quoted Radhakrishnan's translations from the Upanishads in support of his own claims about divine ineffability, transformative experience, and religious pluralism. Indeed, Radhakrishnan's statements on the relation between the ultimate and the world's religions can often sound Hickian. For instance, emphasising that the religious traditions are diverse culturally-shaped attempts on the part of human beings to respond to the ultimate, he argued: 'Religious experience is not the pure unvarnished presentment of the real in itself, but is the presentment of the real already influenced by the ideas and prepossessions of the perceiving mind' (Radhakrishnan, 1927:24). Secondly, both Hick and Radhakrishnan operated with an appearance-reality distinction in developing their views on the significance of religious diversity. Thirdly, and crucially, while Hick adapted this distinction from Kant, Radhakrishnan derived it ultimately ...

show abstract

Conscious of Everything or Consciousness Without Objects? A Paradox of Nirvana

Kuan

2020

J Indian Philos

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Saying the Unsayable

Cited by 7 publications

References 10 publications

Can the World Be Indeterminate in All Respects?

Can the World Be Indeterminate in All Respects?

Hick and Radhakrishnan on Religious Diversity: Back to the Kantian Noumenon

Conscious of Everything or Consciousness Without Objects? A Paradox of Nirvana

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About