The Possibility or Impossibility of linguistic Incommensurability in Comparative Studies

Ahmadizade, Hasan

doi:10.22059/jop.2025.389819.1006884

Document Type : Scientific-research

Author

Hasan Ahmadizade

Associate Professor and Faculty Member of the Department of Religions & Philosophy, University of Kashan, Kashan, Iran.

https://doi.org/10.22059/jop.2025.389819.1006884

Abstract

Comparative studies scholars believe that the most difficult challenge facing researchers in this field, first and foremost, is the possibility or impossibility of comparability between different traditions, cultures, and schools of thought. This difficulty manifests itself most notably in the field of comparative research in philosophy and theology. Philosophers engaged in comparative explorations of texts and cultures of ancient philosophical traditions have found themselves confronted with a plethora of terms and vocabulary for which finding equivalents has been very difficult. In this essay, with reference to three types of incommensurability—fundamental, evaluative, and linguistic—we will address two general approaches regarding the possibility or impossibility of linguistic incommensurability. On the one hand, we will refer to the view of those like Davidson, who, in contrast to those like MacIntyre, defend the commensurability and reject the incommensurability between different traditions and cultures. On the other hand, we will critique and evaluate these two general approaches. In the issue of linguistic incommensurability, the emphasis is on whether it is still possible to compare cultures, traditions, and schools of thought arising from them, given the different terms, language, and contexts in which they are formed in different cultures.

Keywords

Main Subjects

philosophy

References

Kuhn, Thomas )1394). The Structure of Scientific Revolutions, translated by Saeed Zibakalam, Samt Publications (in Persian)

Benedict, Ruth, 2006, Patterns of Culture, Mariner Books Classics.

Davidson, Donald (1973). “On the Very Idea of a Conceptual Scheme.” Proceedings and Addresses of the American Philosophical Association 47: 5–20.

Davidson, Donald (1984). “Belief and the Basis of Meaning.” In Inquiries into Truth and Interpretation, New York, Oxford University Press, 141–54.

Hansen, Chad (1985). “Response to Bao Zhiming”, in Philosophy East and West, 35, 4: 419–24.

Hansen, Chad, (2014). “Principle of Humanity vs. Principle of Charity” In Moral Relativism and Chinese Philosophy: David Wong and His Critics, edited by Yang Xiao and Yong Huang, Albany: State University of New York Press, 71–101.

Havil, Julian (2012). The irrationals: a story of the numbers you can't count on, Princeton University Press.

Lloyd, G.E.R. (2007). Cognitive Variations: Reflections on the Unity and Diversity of the Human Mind, New York, Oxford University Press.

Ma, Lin, and Jaap van Brakel (2016). Fundamentals of Comparative and Intercultural Philosophy, Albany, State University of New York Press.

MacIntyre, Alasdair (1988). Whose Justice? Which Rationality? Notre Dame, University of Notre Dame Press.

McLeod, Gustavus Alexus (2009). “Moral Personhood in Confucius and Aristotle, ”PhD diss., University of Connecticut.

Mou, Bo (2020). Cross-Tradition Engagement in Philosophy: A Constructive-

Engagement Account, New York, Routledge.

Nietzsche, Friedrich (1966). Beyond Good and Evil: Prelude to a Philosophy of the Future, translated by Walter Kaufmann, New York, Vintage.

Reding, Jean-Paul (2004). Comparative Essays in Early Greek and Chinese Rational Thinking, Burlington, VT, Ashgate.

Rosemont, Henry, JR. (1988). “Against Relativism”, in the Interpreting Across Boundaries: New Essays in Comparative Philosophy, edited by Gerald James Larson and Eliot Deutsch, Princeton University Press.

Sapir, Edward (1949). “The Status of Linguistics as a Science” In Selected Writings in Language, Culture, and Personality, edited by David G. Mandelbaum, Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.

Taylor, Charles (2011). “Understanding the Other: A Gadamerian View on Conceptual Schemes” In Dilemmas and Connections: Selected Essays, Cambridge, MA, Harvard University Press, 2011.

Wong, David B. (1984). Moral Relativity, Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.

The Possibility or Impossibility of linguistic Incommensurability in Comparative Studies

References

References

Volume 23, Issue 2 - Serial Number 45February 2026Pages 27-47

Volume 23, Issue 2 - Serial Number 45
February 2026
Pages 27-47