Medieval and renaissance philosophy

Non-western philosophy

These are my personal notes from Part 5 of the book The History of Philosophy by A.C. Grayling, and from episodes 7–9, 18, and 19 of the podcast Philosophize This! by Stephen West. This is by no means a comprehensive analysis of the philosophy of the rich Eastern cultures, but rather a quick overview of their most influential figures.

I introduce each philosopher in the format Name (Year, Place – Description). Year refers to the birth year (or approximate, as many dates are uncertain), and Place refers to the modern country of their birth city. In the Description, I highlight what I personally consider to be either their main contribution or a detail that helps me remember them.

In the case of Indian philosophy, it's more appropriate to group ideas into schools rather than discuss individual philosophers.

Suffering comes fast, but we are faster – Indian philosophy

• Samkhya School (liberated consciousness): There is a dualism between purusha (pure consciousness) and prakriti (everything that is not consciousness). Prakriti is stable when its three qualities—roughly light, darkness, and motion—are in balance. Purusha is ontologically superior to prakriti, and liberation is realizing this: we are not bound to prakriti because purusha has always been free.

• Yoga School (meditation): Adheres to Samkhya metaphysics but adds practical components: consciousness is the primary existent, and its deepest level of liberation can be accessed through posture, breathwork, and meditation techniques.

• Nyaya-Vaisheshika School (logic to categorize things): To exist is to be knowable and nameable via sensory perception, inference, comparison, and expert testimony. Everything is made of indivisible, eternal, and entirely distinct atoms, which combine to form impermanent substances. The relation binding a substance (a leaf) to a property (its color) is just as real as the components: inherence is something that lies between part and whole. Effects are not contained in causes but newly created by them.

• Purva Mimamsa / Karma Mimamsa School (ritualism): Scriptures are the only reliable source of knowledge; their authority is absolute and must be trusted without question. If rituals and sacrifices are not performed as required, the universe suffers adverse consequences.

• Vedanta / Uttara Mimamsa School (self-existence relation): The path to liberation lies in understanding the relationship between the individual self (atman) and ultimate reality (Brahman). Various sub-schools offer different interpretations: the two may be identical, one part of the other, or entirely distinct.

• Charvaka / Lokayata School (radical empiricism): Sensory perception is the only valid source of knowledge. It tells us nothing about reincarnation or the value of rituals, so there’s no reason to believe in them. The only real thing is the material world, so seeking pleasure and avoiding pain are good.

• Buddhism (ego suppression): The future isn’t controlled by supernatural gods—destiny is entirely self-dependent. Liberation of the soul shouldn't be sought, because there is no soul; the “self” is an illusion. Four noble truths exist:

  • 1: Suffering is universal, and dissatisfaction is the mind’s default state (satisfaction exists, but always fades).
  • 2: Dissatisfaction is caused by desire and expectations, which come from ego and the illusion of separateness.
  • 3: Suffering can be ended by eliminating desire—this requires eliminating the ego (achieving Nirvana).
  • 4: The path to Nirvana—and escape from the cycle of suffering and rebirth (samsara)—is through morality (speech, action, lifestyle), meditation (effort, awareness, concentration), and wisdom (understanding, resolve).

• Jainism (perspectivism): Liberation comes from escaping the cycle of rebirth through nonviolence, detachment, asceticism, and the belief that reality is multifaceted and infinitely complex. Because of this, no single or absolute description is fully true—multiple partial viewpoints exist.

Let it all flow, but please keep it tidy – Chinese philosophy

• Laozi (571 BCE, China – Daoism): There is a path to unlocking one’s life force, and it is the Dao. Language fails to describe it: “The Dao that can be spoken is not the eternal Dao.” The Dao transcends understanding: it is everything, the source of existence, the void around things, and also nothingness. One follows the Dao through wuwei: effortless action, letting things run their course. “The sage acts effortlessly, teaches without words, creates without claiming, gives without expecting, and thus has nothing to lose.”

• Confucius (551 BCE, China – respect for tradition): The ideal ruler leads by moral example, like a father to his children. A disciplined, benevolent life comes from respectfully following the rituals passed down by authority figures. To be good, one must first distinguish between good and bad people: “Don’t do to others what you wouldn’t want done to you.” The key is continual self-improvement, avoiding complacency.

• Mozi (468 BCE, China – utilitarian love): We should love and value others as ourselves to safeguard social harmony and peace. We must constantly weigh benefits and harms, avoiding the mistake of confusing what’s common with what’s right, and custom with correctness.

• Zhuangzi (369 BCE, China – the journey over the goal): We thrive when our lives are simple and close to nature. Life is short and knowledge is limitless, so chasing knowledge is futile. When pursuing knowledge, each day you add to your life; when following the Dao, each day you remove. But more important than following the Dao is experiencing it: the ideal is to wander through the path.

• Xun Zi (313 BCE, China – the standardizer): Humans are greedy by nature and inclined to selfishness, so goodness requires conscious effort. Goodness is artificial, a cultural product—education and moral role models are necessary for virtue. Since names are conventional and context-dependent, rulers must define them by decree to ensure law and order. Rituals, too, should be standardized to promote social discipline.

• Han Fei (280 BCE, China – legalism): A ruler’s priority is not the people’s wellbeing but maintaining order and power via law and punishment. The ruler should appear passive, hidden behind a wall of laws but always prepared and organized. To avoid personal favoritism, systems must regulate and monitor officials. This way, the state functions even under mediocre rulers. People are naturally selfish, so a wise ruler ensures they can’t do wrong rather than trusting they’ll want to do right.

Middle Ages 2: Islamic Boogaloo – Arab-Persian philosophy

• Al-Kindi (801, Iraq – reconciliation of philosophy and Islam): For a truth-seeker, nothing matters more than truth. Truth ennobles everything and should not be dismissed—nor should the person who speaks it. Plotinus’s “One” explains that reality is a unified fullness: the universe emanates from God, who is eternal and changeless.

• Al-Farabi (870, Kazakhstan – philosophy’s universality): Logic is universal, present in all languages and thought. This makes it superior to grammar—and thus to theology, which heavily depends on interpreting sacred texts.

• Avicenna (980, Uzbekistan – the universe as God's emanation): Philosophy’s role is “to determine the reality of things, as far as humanly possible.” Thus, philosophers have two tasks: theoretical (seeking truth) and practical (finding the good). Everything that exists does so because it was caused—contingent things must have a necessary, uncaused cause: God, the ultimate good and beauty, the most lovable being. Since God necessarily causes all else, everything else must necessarily exist.

• Al-Ghazali (1057, Iran – the incoherence of philosophers): Most people accept what authorities say without question. Philosophers claim to be free of dogma, but are still mentally imprisoned—now by reason. Reason is limited, and relying solely on it leads to a narrow truth: “Faith and prophecy are the acceptance of a realm beyond reason.” Cause-effect relationships are not necessary, just habitual expectations. Since scripture is symbolic and open to interpretation, any ideas not contradicting the core three teachings (monotheism, prophecy, and life after death) should be tolerated and judged on their merits—even if wrong.

• Averroes (1126, Spain – the incoherence of the incoherence): Not everyone is capable (or willing) to grasp philosophy, so religion offers a more digestible version of truth via faith. Few scriptural passages have fixed meanings; philosophy and religion must coexist. Al-Ghazali is wrong to forbid certain debates: scripture must always be interpreted symbolically when in conflict with philosophy. For instance, an eternal universe is compatible with a transcendent God if we accept that its form was imposed at a specific moment.

A ray of light amid colonial oppression – African philosophy

• Zara Yacob (1599, Ethiopia – the enlightened one in the cave): Rational, individual observation of the world and people is the method to reveal God's purpose—not doctrines or sacred texts. God made us imperfect, so divine reward is only worthy after a quest for perfection.

• Jordan Kush Ngubane (1917, South Africa – Ubuntu defender): We are social beings who need one another and should live accordingly. Duty is implied in being: to be human is to be bound in mutual responsibility, which connects and defines our humanity. Ubuntu means: “I am because we are.”