How We Think Mādhyamikas Think Reply to Tillemans
نویسندگان
چکیده
In his paper in this Issue, ‘ “How do Mādhyamikas Think?” Revisited’, Tom Tillemans reflects on his paper “How do Mādhyamikas Think?” (2009), itself a reply to earlier work of ours (Deguchi, Garfield, and Priest 2008, Garfield and Priest 2003). There is much we agree with in these non-dogmatic and open-minded papers. Still, we have some disagreements. We begin with a response to Tillemans’ first thoughts, and then turn to his second thoughts.
منابع مشابه
Turning a Madhyamaka Trick: Reply to Huntington
Huntington (2007); argues that recent commentators (Robinson, 1957; Hayes, 1994; Tillemans, 1999; Garfield and Priest, 2002) err in attributing to Nāgārjuna and Candrakı̄rti a commitment to rationality and to the use of argument, and that these commentators do violence to the Madhyamaka project by using rational reconstruction in their interpretation of Nāgārjuna’s and Candrakı̄rti’s texts. Hunti...
متن کاملThe Impact of Israeli Think Tanks on Israel's Foreign Policy (2006-2017)
In the modern world, government policy makers engage in the decision making process to pursue the interests of their countries. Think tanks play a significant role in this complicated process by giving advice to decision makers. Since the beginning of the twentieth century, think tanks increasingly emerged in the world, especially in Western European countries and the United States of America (...
متن کاملSeeking Source Discourse Ideology by English and Persian Translators: A Comparative Think Aloud Protocol Study
Discourse audiences are susceptible to fall victims of the concealed ideological representations in discourses at the expanse of changing and modifying their mental models through which they act on the world. Translators as readers and at the same time intercultural mediators need to be equipped with the knowledge of how ideology is accommodated in discourse both not to fall victim to it and to...
متن کاملMistaking the Map for the Territory: What Society Does With Medicine; Comment on “Medicalisation and Overdiagnosis: What Society Does to Medicine”
Van Dijk et al describe how society’s influence on medicine drives both medicalisation and overdiagnosis, and allege that a major political and ethical concern regarding our increasingly interpreting the world through a biomedical lens is that it serves to individualise and depoliticize social problems. I argue that for medicalisation to serve this purpose, it would have to exclude the possibil...
متن کاملCognitive Style, Awareness, and Learners’ Intake and Production of Grammatical Structures
This study investigated how awareness affected learners’ intake and production in relation to their cognitive styles. It is assumed that learners’ cognitive styles may affect their ability to notice particular features in the input and, consequently, their intake and production. Adult learners of English were exposed to four English structures through four sets of problem-solving tasks, followe...
متن کامل