Kiyotaka Yoshimizu on “Semantics or Pragmatics?”
On September the 2nd and the 3rd, Kiyotaka Yoshimizu will be at the Austrian Academy of Sciences (Apostelgasse, 23, 1030, ground floor) for a workshop on “Semantics or Pragmatics?”. The workshop wil regard Dignāga’s and Kumārila’s distinction of semantics from pragmatics (an innovation both shared, if compared to Nyāya) and their different solutions to the issue (with Dignāga priviledging semantics and Kumārila focusing on pragmatics).
More in detail,
2.9: apoha in Dignāga (showing his focus on semantics over pragmatics)
3.9: Kumārila’s understanding of the grahakaikatvanyāya as an evidence of his focus on pragmatics
Texts to be read: PS and PSV 41-44; PS and PSV 50a (2.9). TV on 3.1.(7).13-15 (3.9).
References: Kiyotaka Yoshimizu “The Theorem of the Singleness of a Goblet (graha-ekatva-nyāya) : A Mīmāṃsā Analysis of Meaning and Context”, Acta Asiatica 90, 2006.
Kiyotaka Yoshimizu “How to Refer to a Thing by a Word: Another Difference between Dignāga’s and Kumārila’s Theories of Denotation”, in Journal of Indian Philosophy, 39(4-5), 2011.
Pāṇinian week in September with Saroja Bhate, M.P. Candotti, T. Pontillo
You can find here enclosed the provisional programme of the announced “Pāṇinian Week” which will be hosted at the Department of Philology, Literature, and Linguistics of the University of Cagliari (Faculty of Humanities, via Is Mirrionis, 1 – 09123 Cagliari).
We kindly ask to proceed with the registration not later than July 15th, 2014, by signalling the arrival date etc. to Dr. Pontillo (pontillo@unica.it).
I remind that no fee shall be requested but no financial assistance will be provided by the Department to support your travel or accomodation expenses.
Nevertheless, with regard to the accomodation, “Beni Benius” Bed and Breakfast (via Sassari 134, Cagliari) is under agreement with our University. For a Single Room with Bathroom (exclusive use), Breakfast, sheet and bad-towels, cleaning and Internet included, the Tarif is 30 Euros/per Night without breakfast, 35 breakfast included, double room 50/60 Euros, triple 75/65 Euros
http://www.benibenius.com/bb.html
http://www.bbplanet.com/bed-and-breakfast-beni-benius-cagliari_s35221/en/
Manager: Mr. Sergio BOCCHIERI
(Updated) PANINIGRAMMAR-Programme2014
Even if we are friends or pen friends or acquaintances, I will not be able to reach you with all my next Call for Papers. Please do not feel offended. I hold a blog exactly in order to reach out to the small community of people working philosophically on South Asian texts.
Did Indian authors forge their authorities? Did they need it, given the freedom commentators enjoyed (so that Śaiva texts have been used by Vaiṣṇava authors (see the Spandakārikā) and dualist texts by non-dualist authors (see the Paratriṃśikā) as their authorities)?
In post-Vedānta Deśika (traditional dates 1269-1370) Viśiṣṭādvaita Vedānta texts Hayagrīva seems to have assumed the function Gaṇeśa has in all other texts, namely he is invoked at the beginning as the God of learning, protecting the intellectual enterprise one is about to undertake.
(Musée Guimet, Cambodia)
Veṅkaṭanātha (also known as Vedānta Deśika) quotes relatively often from Buddhist texts, especially from Pramāṇavāda ones (as was possibly customary within Indian philosophical circles. Does it mean that he could still directly access Pramāṇavāda texts? Or does he depend on second-hand quotations?
I am still very busy with the corrections of the proofs of the volume I edited on textual reuse in Indian Philosophy (see here). This made me reflect on how to correct proofs.
If you use a South Asian script like Devanāgarī, then you will follow its conventions for hyphenation. If not, you might find the following rules helpful:
Finally an interesting blog-post saying some basic things about the relation between philosophy and physics, explaining that “being useful” is not tantamount to “being useful to my current calculations” and that, accordingly, many physicists criticising philosophy are just misunderstanding their target.
I would have added something more regarding the epistemology of the issue, but for that have a look at the interesting comments (e.g., one says that philosophy is useful for asking questions, but lousy for answering them…).