In an age marked by global crises, a transcultural understanding of the philosophical foundations of human thought—especially in epistemology and ethics—has become essential. Contemporary ecological crises unfold on a planetary scale, exceeding both the conceptual limits of nation-states and the historically constituted horizons of dominant Western paradigms. Addressing them requires normative frameworks grounded in global interdependence rather than any single civilizational matrix, emerging through sustained transcultural dialogue that integrates diverse philosophical traditions into a shared ecological perspective. As a major geopolitical actor, China demands serious philosophical engagement in this context. Yet traditional research on Chinese ecological thought has relied on close reading, which limits conceptual analysis. While hermeneutic methods remain indispensable for interpreting individual texts, they cannot systematically identify recurring conceptual patterns across extensive corpora spanning diverse discourses and long, diachronically differentiated periods. The result is a fragmentary interpretation focused on isolated authors, concepts, or epochs rather than reconstructed continuities and ruptures. This paper proposes a new model based on human–machine collaboration, employing self-supervised embeddings and large language models to generate empirical insights that complement qualitative analysis. By integrating theoretical and AI-driven approaches, it expands reflective capacities and establishes a framework for evaluating AI-generated philosophical insights, contributing to more robust transcultural ecological frameworks.
Jana S. Rošker, R. Pozzo, Marko Robnik Šikonja et al.· Asian Studies· 0 citations
This paper critically examines the challenges and methodological problems in Western interpretations of Confucianism and Chinese philosophy in general. It argues that many such studies are shaped by unreflective Western epistemological assumptions, rooted in historically specific paradigms and power relations. To overcome these limitations, the author advocates for a transcultural methodological framework that problematizes the alleged incommensurability of culturally conditioned worldviews and seeks to transcend the binary oppositions of “East” and “West”. The paper discusses the persistence of Orientalist and Eurocentric tendencies in Sinology and the emergence of reverse Orientalism within contemporary Chinese scholarship. It contends that both discourses are bound to unequal global power structures and that a genuine understanding of Confucian philosophy requires a dialectical approach that critically reflects on these asymmetries while avoiding the pitfalls of cultural relativism and essentialism. The study concludes that transcultural philosophy offers the most promising framework for reinterpreting Confucianism as a dynamic part of global philosophical discourse and as a potential contributor to a more inclusive and humane world.
The modern world is marked by a paradox. The values that once defined its normative horizon, such as human dignity, autonomy, critical rationality, and the moral equality of all people, are increasingly invoked as universal achievements, yet they are simultaneously challenged, hollowed out, and strategically instrumentalized in many parts of the globe, including Europe itself. The heritage of the European Enlightenment, with its insistence on the self-legislating subject and the emancipatory force of reason, is under pressure from authoritarian populisms, technocratic reductionisms, and the erosion of public spheres capable of sustaining critical debate.
In such a constellation, the reaffirmation of autonomous subjectivity is not only an academic endeavour. It is an ethical and political necessity. The defence of free subjectivity entails much more than the simple protection of individual choice; it presupposes the cultivation of reflective selfhood, moral accountability, and the courage to question inherited authorities. Yet in a world structured by global interdependence and all-embracing crises, such as ecological disasters, profit-driven economies, digital infrastructures, and transnational conflicts, no cultural region can (or should) claim exclusive custodianship over these ideals. Since today’s crises are global, their resolution can only emerge from an inclusive, transcultural dialogue capable of rethinking modernity beyond Eurocentric self-descriptions, and of listening to knowledge and ideas developed in diverse historical traditions.
This special issue proceeds from precisely this conviction.
Jana S. Rošker· Asian Studies· 0 citations
We use cookies to run the site and, with your consent, for analytics and to show ads.
See our Cookie Policy.
