Papers by Agnieszka Rostalska
Journal of Buddhist Philosophy, 2022
Bilimoria, Purushottama, Rostalska, Agnieszka. “Diversity in Philosophy”, in, S. Flavel and Ch. Robbiano (eds.). Key Concepts in World Philosophies: A Toolkit for Philosophers. London, Bloomsbury, pp. 355–64., 2023
There are two ways of looking at the strategy for “diversity” in philosophy in a higher instituti... more There are two ways of looking at the strategy for “diversity” in philosophy in a higher institutional setting.
The first one entails changing the color and gender of the faculty by appointing scholars of color and ethnically divergent background, but—and here is the rub—expect, indeed demand, of them that they continue to be compliant with the status quo, and therefore in heavily analytic departments do just that and do not stray outside of the Anglophone perimeters or be lured into divergences. Female and non-binary appointees are neither expected nor encouraged to stray into current feminist and deconstructive fads perpetrated by what are seen as mostly French feminist philosophers with a few Australian and North American female philosophers.
The second approach takes as its objective the diversification of the curriculum content so that there is increasingly a recognition of the diversity of the contemporary world we live in; this moves away from what in politics might be called “partisan lines.” Here, the philosophical academy recognizes that systems of thinking and reasoning, in short, philosophizing, not the one confined to the alleged roots of Greece and developed in Europe and the West.
There might be a third position which combines both approaches and diversifies in terms of both colour, ethnicity, gender as well as the subject matter (drawn from across several globally representative traditions). This is how the journal Sophia has diversified (as will be examined later). Although this case only impacts on the diversification of philosophy journals – still a vital instrument for dissemination of knowledge and for shaping particular disciplines—an exemplary model has been carved out of which the world of philosophy might just wish to take note. And to consider as a possible response in the face of various threats from without that face philosophy departments in these trying times when questions of application as well as of global relevance are asked.
Journal of Buddhist Philosophy, 2021
Journal of South Asian Languages and Linguistics
Kervan. International Journal of Afro-Asiatic Studies, 2017
In the Nyāyasūtras (NS), the fundamental text of the Nyāya tradition, testimony is defined as a s... more In the Nyāyasūtras (NS), the fundamental text of the Nyāya tradition, testimony is defined as a statement of a reliable speaker (āpta). According to the NS, such a speaker should possess three qualities: competence, honesty and desire to speak. The content of a discourse, including the prescriptions, is also considered reliable due to the status of a given author and the person that communicated it.
The Polish philosopher J.M. Bocheński similarly stresses the role of a speaker; he holds that an authoritative source (whose discourse is called testimony) should be competent and truthful. The conditions of trust and superiority also apply. According to Bocheński, being an authority entails a special relation—it has a subject, object and field. Notably, Bocheński develops his own typology of testimony by distinguishing between what he calls epistemic and deontic authority. He asks questions such as: Who can be the subject of an authoritative statement? Which features should the speaker possess? How is authority recognised? Is there a universal or an absolute authority? What is the field of authority? Moreover, which qualities should the listener possess?
The Nyāya philosophers, both the ancient ones, like Akṣapāda Gautama, Vātsyāyana, Vācaspati Miśra, and the contemporary scholars of Nyāya, such as B. K. Matilal and J. Ganeri, were also concerned with these issues.
The aim of this paper is to discuss the above points in a comparative manner. I will argue that both Bocheński’s and the Nyāya accounts share very similar perspectives and encounter analogous problems.
Argument: Biannual Philosophical Journal, 2014
[in Polish]
Richard Swinburne, one of the most prominent representatives of dualism in the 20th century, form... more Richard Swinburne, one of the most prominent representatives of dualism in the 20th century, formulated his modal argument for the existence of the soul (Swinburne and Shoemaker 1984; Swinburne 1986) as an improvement of Descrates’ analogous argument. Roughly speaking, Swinburne argues that human beings currently alive have non–bodily immaterial parts called souls using the assumption that it is logically possible that a human being survives the destruction of their body (and a few additional supposedly quite innocent premises). The modern twist to the argument which makes it technically interesting is that it employs a quantified propositional modal logic. The argument raises also a general philosophical interest like all seemingly simple and correct philosophical arguments for strong conclusions.
Richard Swinburne (Swinburne and Shoemaker 1984; Swinburne 1986) argues that human beings current... more Richard Swinburne (Swinburne and Shoemaker 1984; Swinburne 1986) argues that human beings currently alive have non{bodily immaterial parts called souls. In his main argument in support of this conclusion (modal argument), roughly speaking, from the assumption that it is logically possible that a human being survives the destruction of their body and a few additional premises, he infers the actual existence of souls. After a brief presentation of the argument we describe the main known objection to it, called the substitution objection (SO for short), which is raised by Alston and Smythe (1994), Zimmerman (1991) and Stump and Kretzmann (1996). We then explain Swinburne's response to it (1996). This constitutes a background for the discussion that follows. First, we formalize Swinburne's argument in a quantified propositional modal language so that it is logically valid and contains no tacit assumptions, clearing up some notational issues as we go. Having done that, we explain why we find Swinburne's response unsatisfactory. Next, we indicate that even though SO is quite compelling (albeit for a slightly different reason than the one given previously in the literature), a weakening of one of the premises yields a valid argument for the same conclusion and yet immune to SO. Even this version of the argument, we argue, is epistemically circular.
Argument. Biannual Philosophical Journal, 2011
Książka Geoffreya Samuela stanowi oryginalny i interesujący wykład historii religii Indii. Autor ... more Książka Geoffreya Samuela stanowi oryginalny i interesujący wykład historii religii Indii. Autor wyjaśnia genezę praktyk i technik tradycji jogi oraz tantry w kontekście rozwoju społeczeństwa indyjskiego. Samuel, który z wykształcenia jest antropologiem, stara się łączyć perspektywę historyczną z socjologiczną, ilustrując wysuwane tezy interesującymi odniesieniami kulturowymi. W tym celu opiera się na najnowszych publikacjach z dziedziny historii i kultury Azji Południowo-Wschodniej (m.in. P. Oliviella, J. Bronkhorsta, R. Gombricha, A. Sharmy, M. Witzela i A. L. Bashama), wybierając najbardziej przekonujące hipotezy i interpretacje, potwierdzone przez odkrycia archeologiczne (zwłaszcza epigraficzne, numizmatyczne i ikonograficzne).
Philo, 2009
This paper evaluates Richard Swinburne’s modal argument for the existence of souls. After a brief... more This paper evaluates Richard Swinburne’s modal argument for the existence of souls. After a brief presentation of the argument, we describe the main known objection to it, which is called the substitution objection (SO for short), and explain Swinburne’s response to that objection. With this as background, we formalize Swinburne’s argument in a quantified propositional modal language, modifying it so that it is logically valid and contains no tacit assumptions, and we explain why we find Swinburne’s response to SO unsatisfactory. Next, we indicate that, even though SO is quite compelling, a weakening of one of the premises yields a valid argument for the same conclusion which is immune to SO. This version of the argument, however, is epistemically circular.
Books by Agnieszka Rostalska
Nathan R. B. Loewen and Agnieszka Rostalska (eds.), Diversifying Philosophy of Religion: Critiques, Methods and Case Studies. Expanding Philosophy of Religion Series, London: Bloomsbury Academic, 2023
Much philosophical thinking about religion in the Anglophone world has been hampered by the const... more Much philosophical thinking about religion in the Anglophone world has been hampered by the constraints of Eurocentrism, colonialism and orientalism. Addressing such limitations head-on, this exciting collection develops models for exploring global diversity in order to bring philosophical studies of religion into the globalized 21st century.
Drawing on a wide range of critical theories and methodologies, and incorporating ethnographic, feminist, computational, New Animist and cognitive science approaches, an international team of contributors outline the methods and aims of global philosophy of religion. From considering the importance of orality in African worldviews to interacting with Native American perspectives on the cosmos and investigating contemplative studies in Hinduism, each chapter demonstrates how expertise in different methods can be applied to various geographical regions, building constructive options for philosophical reflections on religion.
Diversifying Philosophy of Religion raises important questions regarding who speaks for and represents religious traditions, setting the agenda for a truly inclusive philosophy of religion that facilitates multiple standpoints.
Oxbow, 2019
Volume 5 proceedıngs of the seventh ınternatıonal ındology graduate research symposıum (september... more Volume 5 proceedıngs of the seventh ınternatıonal ındology graduate research symposıum (september 2017, ghent)
Teaching Documents by Agnieszka Rostalska
Sample Syllabus, 2019
Course Description This course introduces students to the philosophical analysis of contemporary ... more Course Description This course introduces students to the philosophical analysis of contemporary global issues. We are going to discuss complex, societal problems in an international context and from the wide range of perspectives raised by modern thinkers for a globalised 21st century: the aspects of globalisation, such as: cosmopolitanism, environmental philosophy and global feminism; ethical issues, such as: good life, non-violence, vegetarianism, toleration and terrorism; socio-political issues, like: gender, race, authority, freedom, money and debt, famine, education, community, democracy, media news. The topics will incorporate content from outside the contemporary Anglo-American philosophy, i.e, the voices of thinkers belonging to a wide variety of cultures and traditions. Typical questions include: Do all human beings belong to a single community, based on a shared morality? Is the world increasingly interconnected as a result of massively increased trade and cultural exchange? How does globalisation has increased the production of goods and services? What is money and what is the nature of debt? Can debt and money be eliminated? What is democracy? Is it a form of government, a value, an ideal, a political system, a form of life, a bit of all this? Is democracy always the best political solution (in the context of starvation?) What are the ideas behind the notions of communism and humanism? Is tolerance and/or free speech necessary for democracy and how far can it go? What is the nature of authority? Do non-violent political actions and 'terrorism' meet in the ethics of self-sacrifice that underpin them? What is the relationship between living well and being moral? What is happiness and how is it best achieved? Is climate change caused by humans and which actions would help to increase sustainable management? What are the key arguments in favour of vegetarianism and against animal experimentation?
Book Reviews by Agnieszka Rostalska
Journal of South Asian Languages and Linguistics, De Gruyter , 2020
Uploads
Papers by Agnieszka Rostalska
The first one entails changing the color and gender of the faculty by appointing scholars of color and ethnically divergent background, but—and here is the rub—expect, indeed demand, of them that they continue to be compliant with the status quo, and therefore in heavily analytic departments do just that and do not stray outside of the Anglophone perimeters or be lured into divergences. Female and non-binary appointees are neither expected nor encouraged to stray into current feminist and deconstructive fads perpetrated by what are seen as mostly French feminist philosophers with a few Australian and North American female philosophers.
The second approach takes as its objective the diversification of the curriculum content so that there is increasingly a recognition of the diversity of the contemporary world we live in; this moves away from what in politics might be called “partisan lines.” Here, the philosophical academy recognizes that systems of thinking and reasoning, in short, philosophizing, not the one confined to the alleged roots of Greece and developed in Europe and the West.
There might be a third position which combines both approaches and diversifies in terms of both colour, ethnicity, gender as well as the subject matter (drawn from across several globally representative traditions). This is how the journal Sophia has diversified (as will be examined later). Although this case only impacts on the diversification of philosophy journals – still a vital instrument for dissemination of knowledge and for shaping particular disciplines—an exemplary model has been carved out of which the world of philosophy might just wish to take note. And to consider as a possible response in the face of various threats from without that face philosophy departments in these trying times when questions of application as well as of global relevance are asked.
The Polish philosopher J.M. Bocheński similarly stresses the role of a speaker; he holds that an authoritative source (whose discourse is called testimony) should be competent and truthful. The conditions of trust and superiority also apply. According to Bocheński, being an authority entails a special relation—it has a subject, object and field. Notably, Bocheński develops his own typology of testimony by distinguishing between what he calls epistemic and deontic authority. He asks questions such as: Who can be the subject of an authoritative statement? Which features should the speaker possess? How is authority recognised? Is there a universal or an absolute authority? What is the field of authority? Moreover, which qualities should the listener possess?
The Nyāya philosophers, both the ancient ones, like Akṣapāda Gautama, Vātsyāyana, Vācaspati Miśra, and the contemporary scholars of Nyāya, such as B. K. Matilal and J. Ganeri, were also concerned with these issues.
The aim of this paper is to discuss the above points in a comparative manner. I will argue that both Bocheński’s and the Nyāya accounts share very similar perspectives and encounter analogous problems.
Books by Agnieszka Rostalska
Drawing on a wide range of critical theories and methodologies, and incorporating ethnographic, feminist, computational, New Animist and cognitive science approaches, an international team of contributors outline the methods and aims of global philosophy of religion. From considering the importance of orality in African worldviews to interacting with Native American perspectives on the cosmos and investigating contemplative studies in Hinduism, each chapter demonstrates how expertise in different methods can be applied to various geographical regions, building constructive options for philosophical reflections on religion.
Diversifying Philosophy of Religion raises important questions regarding who speaks for and represents religious traditions, setting the agenda for a truly inclusive philosophy of religion that facilitates multiple standpoints.
Teaching Documents by Agnieszka Rostalska
Book Reviews by Agnieszka Rostalska
The first one entails changing the color and gender of the faculty by appointing scholars of color and ethnically divergent background, but—and here is the rub—expect, indeed demand, of them that they continue to be compliant with the status quo, and therefore in heavily analytic departments do just that and do not stray outside of the Anglophone perimeters or be lured into divergences. Female and non-binary appointees are neither expected nor encouraged to stray into current feminist and deconstructive fads perpetrated by what are seen as mostly French feminist philosophers with a few Australian and North American female philosophers.
The second approach takes as its objective the diversification of the curriculum content so that there is increasingly a recognition of the diversity of the contemporary world we live in; this moves away from what in politics might be called “partisan lines.” Here, the philosophical academy recognizes that systems of thinking and reasoning, in short, philosophizing, not the one confined to the alleged roots of Greece and developed in Europe and the West.
There might be a third position which combines both approaches and diversifies in terms of both colour, ethnicity, gender as well as the subject matter (drawn from across several globally representative traditions). This is how the journal Sophia has diversified (as will be examined later). Although this case only impacts on the diversification of philosophy journals – still a vital instrument for dissemination of knowledge and for shaping particular disciplines—an exemplary model has been carved out of which the world of philosophy might just wish to take note. And to consider as a possible response in the face of various threats from without that face philosophy departments in these trying times when questions of application as well as of global relevance are asked.
The Polish philosopher J.M. Bocheński similarly stresses the role of a speaker; he holds that an authoritative source (whose discourse is called testimony) should be competent and truthful. The conditions of trust and superiority also apply. According to Bocheński, being an authority entails a special relation—it has a subject, object and field. Notably, Bocheński develops his own typology of testimony by distinguishing between what he calls epistemic and deontic authority. He asks questions such as: Who can be the subject of an authoritative statement? Which features should the speaker possess? How is authority recognised? Is there a universal or an absolute authority? What is the field of authority? Moreover, which qualities should the listener possess?
The Nyāya philosophers, both the ancient ones, like Akṣapāda Gautama, Vātsyāyana, Vācaspati Miśra, and the contemporary scholars of Nyāya, such as B. K. Matilal and J. Ganeri, were also concerned with these issues.
The aim of this paper is to discuss the above points in a comparative manner. I will argue that both Bocheński’s and the Nyāya accounts share very similar perspectives and encounter analogous problems.
Drawing on a wide range of critical theories and methodologies, and incorporating ethnographic, feminist, computational, New Animist and cognitive science approaches, an international team of contributors outline the methods and aims of global philosophy of religion. From considering the importance of orality in African worldviews to interacting with Native American perspectives on the cosmos and investigating contemplative studies in Hinduism, each chapter demonstrates how expertise in different methods can be applied to various geographical regions, building constructive options for philosophical reflections on religion.
Diversifying Philosophy of Religion raises important questions regarding who speaks for and represents religious traditions, setting the agenda for a truly inclusive philosophy of religion that facilitates multiple standpoints.