Why don't we ever talk about Japanese philosophers?

The Japanese don't believe in anything post ww2

>>24521918 (OP)
>eastern philosophy
They have a lot of stuff, but isn't most of it basically the same as Greek shit with other names?

>>24521943
can you elaborate on what that means?

>>24521918 (OP)
>japanese philosophy probably: "WAAAH YOU DISRESPECTED ME YOU DISHONORABLE PERSON! I AM GOING TO STAB MY OWN STOMACH FOR THIS."
>"oh my god! He died honorably,I will cut off his head to shed my respect for this."

>>24521925
>The Japanese don't believe in anything
Let me correct you.

>>24521948
Read Gateless gate.

>>24521943
No, before modernism most of it was ontological. Europeans only realised Ontology's importance after Hegel: ie, in the modern. So it is basically just the same as Indian shit with other names.

>>24521946
A lot of Greek philosophers have in some way or another their own Eastern counterparts. I don't know about Japanese, but I remember reading some stuff on Ancient Indian philosophers and they have basically everything that the Greeks had, but it is all with some weird name. They are probably an interesting read if you are really into the pre-Socratics that are lost. Like this dude: Nagarjuna, would be somewhat like Heraclitus and so on. They have a lot of different metaphysicians just like the Greeks.

>>24521952
Yes, Indian, I said it wrong, because I was thinking about >>24521953, even Indian philosophers have in some way or another their own 'Greek counterparts', at least that was my impression by being a bit exposed to it. So I mixed things

>>24521952
>It would be misleading, however, if we were to think of the Kyoto School as merely putting a Western rational mask over Eastern intuitive wisdom. Nor would it be entirely accurate to think of them as simply using Western philosophical idioms and modes of thought to give modern expression to East Asian Buddhist thought. For not only is the Western influence on their thought more than skin deep, their philosophies are far too original to be straightforwardly equated with preexisting Asian thought. Insofar as they can be identified as East Asian or Mahāyāna Buddhist thinkers, this must be understood in the sense of having critically and creatively developed these traditions in philosophical dialogue with Western thought. It should be kept in mind that their primary commitment is not to a cultural self-expression, or even to a dialogue between world religions, but rather to a genuinely philosophical search for truth.
It does look like these guys are different.
https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/kyoto-school/#Intr

>>24521918 (OP)
Kitaro is well worth the read. If you separate out the ritual and meditation manuals, and I don't mean this in a pejorative way, there is still interest in Hegel, Heidegger, and a few other western thinkers inside even the most prestigious Zen schools. Shingon is still around which is a domestic Vajrayana school, it's interesting mostly due to their acceptance of instant enlightenment but they still have completely untranslated texts. They still impose things like 20 year waits for certain things and also have art from their aesthetic focus eras which are still kept entirely private. Death is just meditation insofar as they are concerned.

>>24521953
>>24521955
Indian metaphysics probably isn't real. Despite so much written about Eastern faith systems, we know very little about them. A lot of what we know has been through the anthropological endeavors of the British in the East. "Hinduism" is also a recent invention when in reality it's like a lot of religions which we systematized with our Western world view, and tried to jumble it all into one coherent thing. That's why people believe Easterners have "Greek" counterparts when in reality it's just our projections

>>24521946
Parmenides = Aurea vidya
Tibetan book of the dead = utilitarianism
Heraclitus = Nagarjuna

There’s really a limited amount of ways you can construct metaphysical beliefs and both continents got people who reached similar conclusions

>>24521946
Parmenides = Adaita Vedanta

I meant to say that

>>24522561
You forgot
Nyaya=Aquinas

>>24522600
Why do all these pseuds who claim to have "mastered" Indian philosophy never engage with Nyaya, the highest form of Indian science

>>24521918 (OP)
Well, sell them to me.

Isn't it purely German
Why would I waste time with imitators rather than go straight to the source?

>>24521918 (OP)
Because the Chinese philosophy mogs them

>>24522600
>three out of the four Aristotelian causes
>nine ways to God, to Aquinas' five ways
>also equates Being with intelligibility
impressive