In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:

P A R T VII Comparing Philosophies ‘‘Bhante Nagasena, will you converse with me?’’ ‘‘Your majesty, if you will converse with me as the wise converse, I will, but if you converse with me as kings converse, I will not.’’ ‘‘Bhante Nagasena, how do the wise converse?’’ ‘‘Your majesty, when the wise converse, whether they become entangled by their opponents’ arguments or extricate themselves, whether they or their opponents are convicted of error, whether their own superiority or that of their opponents is established, nothing in all this can make them angry. Thus, your majesty, do the wise converse.’’ ‘‘And how, bhante, do kings converse?’’ ‘‘Your majesty, when kings converse, they advance a proposition, and whoever opposes it, they order his punishment saying, ‘Punish that fellow.’ Thus, your majesty, do kings converse.’’ —Questions of King Milinda The generative questions and metaphors stretching between and among differing contexts and approaches function as conceptual monorails that allow for comparison without obliterating philosophical difference. Like the tightrope walker of Nietzsche’s Zarathustra, however, the philosopher, swaying between alternatives, risks falling by confusing similarity and difference, inside and outside, and negation of the other as soon as she or he stations her- or himself at a terminal point of the monorail. Illustration: Old country bridge. Photograph by Meggie Wyschogrod. ...

Share