Past Continuous or Present Perfect? Continuity and Change in Contemporary Indian Philosophy

Contemporary Indian philosophy is a distinct genre of philosophy that draws both on classical Indian philosophical sources and on Western materials, old and new. It is comparative philosophy without borders. In this paper, I attempt to show how contemporary Indian philosophy works through five instances from five of its protagonists: Krishnachandra Bhattacharyya (his new interpretation of the old rope-snake parable in his essay “Śaṅkara’s Doctrine of Maya”, 1925); Daya Krishna (I focus on the “moral monadism” that the theory of karma in his reading leads to, drawing on his book Discussion and Debate in Indian Philosophy, 2004); Ramchandra Gandhi (his commentary on the concept of Brahmacharya in correspondence with his grandfather, the Mahatma, in his essay “Brahmacharya”, 1981); Mukund Lath (on identity through—not despite—change, with classical Indian music, Rāga music, as his case-study, in his essay “Identity through Necessary Change”, 2003); and Rajendra Swaroop Bhatnagar (on suffering, in his paper “No Suffering if Human Beings Were Not Sensitive”, 2021). My aim is twofold. First, to introduce five contemporary Indian philosophers; and second, to raise the question of newness and philosophy. Is there anything new in philosophy, or is contemporary philosophy just a footnote—à la Whitehead—to the writings of great thinkers of the past? Is contemporary Indian philosophy, my protagonists included, just a series of footnotes to classical thinkers both in India and Europe? Footnotes to the Upaniṣads, Nāgārjuna, Dharmakīrti and Śaṅkara, as much as (let us not forget colonialism and Macaulay) to Plato, Aristotle, Kant and Hegel? Footnotes can be creative and work almost as a parallel text, interpretive, critical, even subversive. However, my contention is that contemporary Indian philosophy (I leave it to others to plea for contemporary Western philosophy) is not a footnote, it is a text with agency of its own, validity of its own, power of its own. It is wholly and thoroughly a text worth reading. In this paper, I make an attempt to substantiate this claim through the philosophical mosaic I offer, in each instance highlighting both the continuity with classical sources and my protagonists’ courageous transgressions and innovations.

“You can't read your way out of racism”: creating anti-racist action out of education in an academic library

PurposeUnder the transformational leadership of the University Librarian, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill University Libraries shifted from having an education- and programming-based “diversity committee” to a council of librarians advocating for action, anti-racism and social justice, both within our organization and across campus. As our University Librarian noted, “you cannot read your way out of racism.”Design/methodology/approachWith support from library leadership, the Inclusion, Diversity, Equity, and Accessibility (IDEA) Council has advanced anti-racism work in the libraries by serving as facilitators for a book discussion series, organizing a 21-day racial equity challenge, supporting staff in integrating anti-racism practices into their daily work through brown bag conversations, and facilitating the development of inclusion-focused performance management goals.FindingsWhat does an anti-racist library look like, and how does our organization envision this future? These questions anchor the IDEA Council's strategies. The libraries have witnessed a positive shift in staff participation: two-thirds of library staff participated in a Racial Equity Institute Groundwater presentation and in a library-wide book discussion series; approximately half the staff committed to our 21-day racial equity challenge. Participants were asked to reflect in conversation and through surveys.Originality/valueThe first wave of a newly established grant program funded eight staff-led projects to advance social justice in the libraries. Additional steps included caucusing by racial identity, staff-wide discussions about racial equity, and a second wave of funding for the grant program. The authors approach this work with cultural humility: seeking to learn from one another, our peers and fellow activists.

Genres of History and the Practice of Loss

This book discussion essay addresses critical questions concerning historical methodologies when working with the archives of Atlantic-world slavery. Thinking with Hazel V. Carby’s Imperial Intimacies: A Tale of Two Islands, the essay considers the power of historical memoir to narrate the violence of the British empire through family stories. The long-intertwined histories of England and the Caribbean inevitably lead to slavery’s archives, and in the final section of the book, Carby describes the lives of her earliest ancestors on a Jamaican coffee plantation. In response, the essay author revisits her hesitations regarding slavery’s archive and the stakes of approaching the silences of enslaved people in the records. Drawing on pivotal work in black feminist studies, this essay rearticulates the nuances of Saidiya Hartman’s “critical fabulation” to bring attention back to archival boundaries and the limits of historical methodologies that make certain imaginings most difficult.

Social ontology: Butler via Arendt via Loidolt

This short contribution is written on the occasion of the book discussion of Sophie Loidolt?s Phenomenology of Plurality: Hannah Arendt on Political Intersubjectivity (2018) at the Institute for Philosophy and Social Theory. It presents an attempt to read the two key notions Loidolt elaborates in her book - spaces of meaning and spaces of the public and private - from a critical perspective offered by Judith Butler?s taking up of Arendt?s work. Offering Butler?s conception of social ontology through several major points of contestation with Arendt, I argue against an all too simple reduction of her understanding of the political and normativity to poststructuralist ones.