Perplexity
Charles Taylor on Hegel
Charles Taylor, a prominent Canadian philosopher, offers one of the most influential interpretations of G.W.F. Hegel's philosophy through his 1975 book Hegel. Taylor portrays Hegel as grappling with the tensions of modernity, particularly the conflict between individual self-realization and communal belonging.
Taylor's Core Interpretation
Taylor emphasizes Hegel's dialectical method as a response to Kantian dualisms, where reality's structure inherently contains contradictions that consciousness must resolve. For Hegel, as Taylor explains, the subject is "self-positing spirit," embodied yet striving to overcome natural limits, blending modern expressivism with Aristotelian teleology. This dialectic drives history and spirit (Geist) toward reconciliation, not abstract synthesis but a concrete unity of opposites.
Key Themes in Taylor's Analysis
Action and Spirit: Taylor highlights Hegel's philosophy of action as qualitative and communal, transcending individualistic causal models to include collective and even divine dimensions of human activity.
Critique of Modernity: Hegel, per Taylor, critiques the French Revolution's "absolute freedom" for leading to terror and homogenization, advocating a rationalized state over nominalist individualism.
Relevance Today: While Taylor finds Hegel's metaphysics (like Geist) unconvincing, he values Hegel's diagnosis of modernity's epistemology—a "self-defining subject" treating nature as manipulable "dead matter."
Strengths and Critiques
Taylor engages Hegel sympathetically yet critically, unpacking the system's interconnections without overwhelming detail, and positions Hegel as essential for understanding ongoing philosophical tensions. Readers praise its clarity on Hegel's itinerary from Kantian critique to speculative reason.
What are the full titles of Taylor's 2 books on hegel and how do they differ
Charles Taylor wrote two key books engaging Hegel's philosophy: the comprehensive monograph Hegel (1975) and the more focused Hegel and Modern Society (1979).
Full Titles
Hegel by Charles Taylor, published by Cambridge University Press (ISBN: 9780521291996 for a main paperback edition).
Hegel and Modern Society by Charles Taylor, published by Cambridge University Press (ISBN: 9780521293518).
Key Differences
Hegel (1975) Hegel and Modern Society (1979)
Major systematic study (~600 pages) covering Hegel's full philosophy, from early theology to Logic, Phenomenology, and political thought; traces his "itinerary" through Kantian critiques to speculative reason.
Shorter (~140 pages), derived from lectures; applies Hegel's ideas to modern issues like individuality vs. community, the pitfalls of "absolute freedom" in revolutions, and critiques of atomistic liberalism.
Emphasizes metaphysical and historical depth, e.g., self-positing spirit and Geist's dialectic.
Highlights practical relevance to 20th-century society, with less technical exposition and more on social/political implications.
Taylor's first book provides the broad foundation, while the second distills it for contemporary application.
Thursday, March 12, 2026
Toynbee and axialism. AI
Grok
Where does Toynbee speak of the Axial Age?
Arnold Toynbee, the British historian best known for his multi-volume work A Study of History (published between 1934 and 1961), does discuss concepts and periods that align with what is now called the Axial Age—the roughly 800–200 BCE era when major philosophical and religious developments occurred independently in China, India, Greece, the Middle East, and elsewhere.
However, Toynbee does not use the specific term "Axial Age" (or "Achsenzeit") himself. That term was coined by the German philosopher Karl Jaspers in his 1949 book Vom Ursprung und Ziel der Geschichte (translated as The Origin and Goal of History). Jaspers popularized the idea of a pivotal "axis" in human spiritual and intellectual history during that first-millennium BCE timeframe.
Toynbee's framework in A Study of History analyzes the rise, growth, breakdown, and disintegration of civilizations, often noting parallel developments across them. He addresses the emergence of major religious and philosophical traditions (e.g., in Hellenic, Indic, Sinic, and Syriac civilizations) during roughly the same period, including the roles of figures like Confucius, the Buddha, Greek philosophers, and Hebrew prophets. These discussions appear particularly in sections dealing with the "geneses" and "growth" of civilizations, as well as in his examinations of "universal states," "philosophies," and "higher religions" that arose out of earlier "times of troubles."
In the original multi-volume edition (especially Volumes 1–6 on the genesis and growth of civilizations, and later volumes on contacts, universal states, and religions), Toynbee describes these parallel spiritual/intellectual breakthroughs but frames them within his cyclical model of civilizations rather than as a singular "axial" turning point.
In abridged editions (e.g., D.C. Somervell's one-volume or two-volume abridgements), these themes are condensed but still present in discussions of civilizational parallels and the emergence of higher religions.
Scholars sometimes note that Toynbee's work anticipates or parallels aspects of Jaspers' thesis, and Toynbee's civilizational approach influenced later Axial Age discussions. But Toynbee himself did not adopt or coin the "Axial Age" terminology—his references are more to "creative minorities," "withdrawal and return," or specific civilizational transitions.
If you're looking for a precise passage, the closest alignments are in A Study of History Volumes 1–3 (on genesis and growth) and Volumes 7–10 (on universal states and contacts between civilizations), though no direct "Axial Age" mention appears based on available references and analyses of the text. For Jaspers' original formulation, see his The Origin and Goal of History.
What was his specific idea on what drove the syncretic (axial) effect during the relevant period of say -800 to -200?
Toynbee did not frame the developments of roughly 800–200 BCE as a single “syncretic (axial) effect” (a term blending Jaspers’ independent “Axial Age” breakthroughs with Toynbee’s own emphasis on blending/syncretism). Instead, he explained the parallel emergence of new philosophies and “higher religions” (his term for universal spiritual systems like early Buddhism, Confucianism/Taoism, Hebrew prophetic monotheism, Greek philosophy, and Zoroastrianism) across multiple civilizations through his core mechanism: challenge-and-response operating during the disintegration phase of civilizations.
The Core Driver: “Time of Troubles” and the Internal Proletariat
In A Study of History (especially Volumes IV–VI on the “Breakdowns of Civilizations” and the subsequent analysis of “Disintegrations”), Toynbee argues that civilizations grow through creative minorities responding creatively to challenges. When those minorities lose creativity (often through “resting on their oars” or idolizing past successes), a “Time of Troubles” ensues—marked by endless wars, class conflict, moral decay, and loss of social cohesion. This produces a three-way social schism:
A dominant minority (the former creative elite, now coercive).
An internal proletariat (the alienated masses inside the society who no longer feel part of it). An external proletariat (barbarians outside the frontiers).
The decisive creative response—the one that produces the new spiritual/intellectual systems—comes from the internal proletariat. These disaffected people (or inspired individuals rising from them) withdraw from the failing dominant culture, then return with fresh visions that create higher religions or philosophies. These offer spiritual unity, meaning, and a universal message where the old parochial civilization failed.
This is not primarily driven by cross-civilizational blending (direct “syncretism” from contact), though contacts can play a secondary role. The parallels across civilizations (Hellenic, Syriac, Indic, Sinic) arise because their life-cycles reached analogous breakdown stages at roughly the same historical moment, triggering the same internal dynamic.
The Syncretic Character of the Higher Religions
Toynbee explicitly notes that these new creations are often syncretic in origin and content. The “germ” of creative power may be:
Alien to the host civilization (e.g., Christianity’s Syriac prophetic root taking hold inside the disintegrating Hellenic world, later blending with Hellenic mystery religions and philosophy). Native but still blended (e.g., Islam drawing primarily from Syriac Judaism with secondary Nestorian Christian elements).
Examples he ties to the broader first-millennium BCE milieu include:
Hebrew prophets and Zarathustra responding to the Syriac/Iranian “Time of Troubles” preceding the Achaemenian universal state.
Buddhist/Jain responses in the Indic world.
Philosophical and mystery-cult developments in the Hellenic world.
These higher religions are the real enduring creations; civilizations themselves are merely “stepping-stones” or “handmaids” to them. The universal churches that emerge from the internal proletariat’s underworld ultimately outlive the civilizations that gave them birth.
Where Toynbee Develops This Most Fully
Volumes IV–VI (Breakdowns and Disintegrations): detailed analysis of the “Time of Troubles,” schism, dominant minority, and internal proletariat.
Volume VII (Universal Churches): the positive creative outcome—higher religions as the proletariat’s supreme achievement.
The one- or two-volume abridgements by D.C. Somervell condense these themes clearly, especially the chapters on disintegration and universal churches.
In short, Toynbee’s specific causal idea is internal social disintegration (via the “Time of Troubles” and the rise of an internal proletariat) prompting a creative spiritual response that produces higher, often syncretic, religions and philosophies. This is his explanation for the parallel breakthroughs others later labeled “Axial”—not a single global syncretic event, but repeated instances of the same civilizational mechanism operating independently in different societies facing parallel crises. Later in life (post-WWII revisions and Reconsiderations), Toynbee even elevated the higher religions above civilizations as history’s true protagonists.
Where does Toynbee speak of the Axial Age?
Arnold Toynbee, the British historian best known for his multi-volume work A Study of History (published between 1934 and 1961), does discuss concepts and periods that align with what is now called the Axial Age—the roughly 800–200 BCE era when major philosophical and religious developments occurred independently in China, India, Greece, the Middle East, and elsewhere.
However, Toynbee does not use the specific term "Axial Age" (or "Achsenzeit") himself. That term was coined by the German philosopher Karl Jaspers in his 1949 book Vom Ursprung und Ziel der Geschichte (translated as The Origin and Goal of History). Jaspers popularized the idea of a pivotal "axis" in human spiritual and intellectual history during that first-millennium BCE timeframe.
Toynbee's framework in A Study of History analyzes the rise, growth, breakdown, and disintegration of civilizations, often noting parallel developments across them. He addresses the emergence of major religious and philosophical traditions (e.g., in Hellenic, Indic, Sinic, and Syriac civilizations) during roughly the same period, including the roles of figures like Confucius, the Buddha, Greek philosophers, and Hebrew prophets. These discussions appear particularly in sections dealing with the "geneses" and "growth" of civilizations, as well as in his examinations of "universal states," "philosophies," and "higher religions" that arose out of earlier "times of troubles."
In the original multi-volume edition (especially Volumes 1–6 on the genesis and growth of civilizations, and later volumes on contacts, universal states, and religions), Toynbee describes these parallel spiritual/intellectual breakthroughs but frames them within his cyclical model of civilizations rather than as a singular "axial" turning point.
In abridged editions (e.g., D.C. Somervell's one-volume or two-volume abridgements), these themes are condensed but still present in discussions of civilizational parallels and the emergence of higher religions.
Scholars sometimes note that Toynbee's work anticipates or parallels aspects of Jaspers' thesis, and Toynbee's civilizational approach influenced later Axial Age discussions. But Toynbee himself did not adopt or coin the "Axial Age" terminology—his references are more to "creative minorities," "withdrawal and return," or specific civilizational transitions.
If you're looking for a precise passage, the closest alignments are in A Study of History Volumes 1–3 (on genesis and growth) and Volumes 7–10 (on universal states and contacts between civilizations), though no direct "Axial Age" mention appears based on available references and analyses of the text. For Jaspers' original formulation, see his The Origin and Goal of History.
What was his specific idea on what drove the syncretic (axial) effect during the relevant period of say -800 to -200?
Toynbee did not frame the developments of roughly 800–200 BCE as a single “syncretic (axial) effect” (a term blending Jaspers’ independent “Axial Age” breakthroughs with Toynbee’s own emphasis on blending/syncretism). Instead, he explained the parallel emergence of new philosophies and “higher religions” (his term for universal spiritual systems like early Buddhism, Confucianism/Taoism, Hebrew prophetic monotheism, Greek philosophy, and Zoroastrianism) across multiple civilizations through his core mechanism: challenge-and-response operating during the disintegration phase of civilizations.
The Core Driver: “Time of Troubles” and the Internal Proletariat
In A Study of History (especially Volumes IV–VI on the “Breakdowns of Civilizations” and the subsequent analysis of “Disintegrations”), Toynbee argues that civilizations grow through creative minorities responding creatively to challenges. When those minorities lose creativity (often through “resting on their oars” or idolizing past successes), a “Time of Troubles” ensues—marked by endless wars, class conflict, moral decay, and loss of social cohesion. This produces a three-way social schism:
A dominant minority (the former creative elite, now coercive).
An internal proletariat (the alienated masses inside the society who no longer feel part of it). An external proletariat (barbarians outside the frontiers).
The decisive creative response—the one that produces the new spiritual/intellectual systems—comes from the internal proletariat. These disaffected people (or inspired individuals rising from them) withdraw from the failing dominant culture, then return with fresh visions that create higher religions or philosophies. These offer spiritual unity, meaning, and a universal message where the old parochial civilization failed.
This is not primarily driven by cross-civilizational blending (direct “syncretism” from contact), though contacts can play a secondary role. The parallels across civilizations (Hellenic, Syriac, Indic, Sinic) arise because their life-cycles reached analogous breakdown stages at roughly the same historical moment, triggering the same internal dynamic.
The Syncretic Character of the Higher Religions
Toynbee explicitly notes that these new creations are often syncretic in origin and content. The “germ” of creative power may be:
Alien to the host civilization (e.g., Christianity’s Syriac prophetic root taking hold inside the disintegrating Hellenic world, later blending with Hellenic mystery religions and philosophy). Native but still blended (e.g., Islam drawing primarily from Syriac Judaism with secondary Nestorian Christian elements).
Examples he ties to the broader first-millennium BCE milieu include:
Hebrew prophets and Zarathustra responding to the Syriac/Iranian “Time of Troubles” preceding the Achaemenian universal state.
Buddhist/Jain responses in the Indic world.
Philosophical and mystery-cult developments in the Hellenic world.
These higher religions are the real enduring creations; civilizations themselves are merely “stepping-stones” or “handmaids” to them. The universal churches that emerge from the internal proletariat’s underworld ultimately outlive the civilizations that gave them birth.
Where Toynbee Develops This Most Fully
Volumes IV–VI (Breakdowns and Disintegrations): detailed analysis of the “Time of Troubles,” schism, dominant minority, and internal proletariat.
Volume VII (Universal Churches): the positive creative outcome—higher religions as the proletariat’s supreme achievement.
The one- or two-volume abridgements by D.C. Somervell condense these themes clearly, especially the chapters on disintegration and universal churches.
In short, Toynbee’s specific causal idea is internal social disintegration (via the “Time of Troubles” and the rise of an internal proletariat) prompting a creative spiritual response that produces higher, often syncretic, religions and philosophies. This is his explanation for the parallel breakthroughs others later labeled “Axial”—not a single global syncretic event, but repeated instances of the same civilizational mechanism operating independently in different societies facing parallel crises. Later in life (post-WWII revisions and Reconsiderations), Toynbee even elevated the higher religions above civilizations as history’s true protagonists.
Kant. Gen note. Data on Plott
One could write volumes on how the UCP is reflected by Kant. The categorical imperative is a most straightforward reflection. But so are the antinomies, and the related "thing in itself."
After all, what 18th and 19th Century German, French and British philosophers were doing was continuing the tradition of stripping Protestantism of Catholic "superstition" by the process of Reason. Often these philosophers faced accusations of going too far, of throwing the baby out with the bathwater.
Their attempts to reformulate Christian theology according to rationalist methods accordingly tends to bring about thought systems and critques that somehow retain the UCP, without affirming a specific divine personality -- tho they are often willing to use the word "God" in an impersonal way.
What is interesting is that these writers had to somehow account for the UCP, or at least reflections of it, not only for political reasons, but because they -- perhaps intuitively -- saw that it is intrinsically important. Fichte is a major example of this effect.
+++++
The broad ecumenical tendency of the years post World War II, as promoted by Jaspers and others, is well exemplified by the work of John C. Plott, a pacifist philosopher with a strong theological background, whose work is scantly heeded in the West while accorded more respect in the East.
Below is a Grok sketch of Plott.
John C. Plott
John C. Plott (full name John Culpepper Plott, 1916–1990) was an American philosopher, professor, and author best known for his ambitious multi-volume work Global History of Philosophy.
He earned his B.A. (Phi Beta Kappa) from the University of Oklahoma in 1938. He later pursued advanced studies, including a novitiate with the Anglican monastic society SSJE, and received his Ph.D. from Banaras Hindu University (in India), where he focused on Gandhian pacifism and Indian philosophy. Plott was a prolific traveler and immersed himself in cross-cultural and comparative philosophical studies.
He served as a professor of philosophy at Marshall University in Huntington, West Virginia, for about 20 years. Despite noted personal eccentricities (as mentioned in some recollections by colleagues), he was regarded as a dedicated scholar committed to promoting a truly global, non-Eurocentric understanding of philosophical history.
His major contribution is the Global History of Philosophy series (published primarily by Motilal Banarsidass in Delhi), which aimed to present philosophy's development across cultures and eras in a synchronized, multi-dimensional way—rather than the traditional Western-focused narrative. The series includes:
Volume 1: The Axial Age (covering roughly 800–200 BCE, with thinkers like Confucius, Buddha, Plato, etc.)
Volume 2: The Han-Hellenistic-Bactrian Period
Volume 3: The Patristic-Sutra Period
Later volumes/parts covering periods like Scholasticism.
The project incorporated synchronological charts and emphasized intercultural dialogue, reflecting Plott's idealistic vision for global unity and understanding. He collaborated with co-authors like James Michael Dolin, Russell E. Hatton, and others on various volumes.
Plott passed away in 1990 in Honolulu, Hawaii, after spending his later years there.
Wasn't he a Quaker?
Yes, John C. Plott had a notable connection to Quakerism (the Religious Society of Friends).
From a personal recollection by a colleague (Howard A. Slaate, a fellow philosopher who knew him during his time at Marshall University), Plott was described as a committed Christian who was "often active in 'the Friends,' the Quaker society." This aligns with his lifelong emphasis on pacifism, world peace, intercultural dialogue, and non-violence—values strongly associated with Quaker principles.
His background shows a spiritual journey: he served a novitiate with the Anglican monastic society SSJE (Society of St. John the Evangelist) early on, pursued Gandhian pacifism for his Ph.D. research in India, and remained deeply engaged in peace activism (e.g., through the United World Federalist Association and his "Planetary Citizen Passport"). Quaker involvement fits as an ethical expression of his Christian idealism, even if it wasn't his sole or primary affiliation.
He wasn't exclusively or formally defined as a Quaker in most biographical overviews of his work (which focus more on his academic contributions to global philosophy), but the association is documented in firsthand accounts of his life and character. So yes—he was involved with the Quakers, at least actively and periodically.
His status among Eastern (Indian) philosophers seems much higher than among Western
Yes, there does appear to be a noticeable disparity in how John C. Plott is regarded: his work, particularly the Global History of Philosophy series, has found a more sustained and appreciative audience in Indian (and broader Eastern/Asian) philosophical circles than in mainstream Western academia.
Why the Higher Status in Indian/Eastern Contexts?
Publisher and Accessibility: The entire multi-volume series was published by Motilal Banarsidass (MLBD), a leading Delhi-based publisher specializing in Indology, Sanskrit texts, Indian philosophy, and comparative religion. This gave Plott's books natural distribution and visibility in Indian academic markets, libraries, and among scholars of darśanas (Indian philosophical systems). MLBD editions remain in print or readily available in South Asia decades later, often referenced in works on Hindu, Buddhist, or comparative philosophy.
Alignment with Indian Priorities:
Plott's approach—synchronizing Indian thinkers (e.g., from the Upaniṣads, Nyāya, Vedānta, Buddhism) with global contemporaries, rejecting Eurocentrism, and emphasizing intercultural dialogue—resonates strongly in post-colonial Indian academia. It counters Western-dominated narratives of philosophy's history and treats Indian traditions as central rather than peripheral or "non-Western." His Ph.D. from Banaras Hindu University, immersion in Gandhian thought, and deep engagement with Indian sources further endeared him to scholars there.
Citations and Influence:
In Indian and comparative philosophy literature (e.g., discussions of periodization, axial age parallels involving Buddha/Confucius/Upaniṣadic thinkers, or critiques of ethnocentrism), Plott's framework is occasionally invoked positively. His synchronological charts and non-Eurocentric periodization (e.g., Axial Age, Patristic-Sutra Period) have been noted in Indian scholarly contexts exploring global or intercultural philosophy.
Contrast with Western Reception
In Western philosophy departments (especially Anglo-American analytic or continental traditions), Plott remains largely obscure or marginal. His work is rarely assigned in standard history-of-philosophy courses, which still often follow Eurocentric timelines (ancient Greek → medieval → modern Western). Reviews in journals like Philosophy East and West (which covered several volumes) were mixed or descriptive rather than enthusiastically endorsing it as groundbreaking.
Broader Western academia has moved toward global/comparative philosophy since the late 20th century (influenced by figures like Karl Jaspers on the Axial Age or more recent decolonial approaches), but Plott's ambitious, idiosyncratic project—spanning vast periods with detailed synchronies—hasn't achieved canonical status. It's sometimes seen as overly idealistic or encyclopedic rather than theoretically innovative.
His personal background (Quaker-influenced pacifism, unconventional career path) and the project's unfinished aspects may have contributed to limited traction in Western circles.
In short, Plott's vision of a truly planetary philosophy history aligns better with Indian scholars' efforts to reclaim and globalize their traditions' place in world philosophy, leading to relatively higher esteem there. In the West, he's more of a niche figure appreciated by those in comparative religion or intercultural studies, but not a household name in mainstream philosophy. If you're familiar with specific Indian sources or scholars who hold him in high regard, that would fit this pattern!
After all, what 18th and 19th Century German, French and British philosophers were doing was continuing the tradition of stripping Protestantism of Catholic "superstition" by the process of Reason. Often these philosophers faced accusations of going too far, of throwing the baby out with the bathwater.
Their attempts to reformulate Christian theology according to rationalist methods accordingly tends to bring about thought systems and critques that somehow retain the UCP, without affirming a specific divine personality -- tho they are often willing to use the word "God" in an impersonal way.
What is interesting is that these writers had to somehow account for the UCP, or at least reflections of it, not only for political reasons, but because they -- perhaps intuitively -- saw that it is intrinsically important. Fichte is a major example of this effect.
+++++
The broad ecumenical tendency of the years post World War II, as promoted by Jaspers and others, is well exemplified by the work of John C. Plott, a pacifist philosopher with a strong theological background, whose work is scantly heeded in the West while accorded more respect in the East.
Below is a Grok sketch of Plott.
John C. Plott
John C. Plott (full name John Culpepper Plott, 1916–1990) was an American philosopher, professor, and author best known for his ambitious multi-volume work Global History of Philosophy.
He earned his B.A. (Phi Beta Kappa) from the University of Oklahoma in 1938. He later pursued advanced studies, including a novitiate with the Anglican monastic society SSJE, and received his Ph.D. from Banaras Hindu University (in India), where he focused on Gandhian pacifism and Indian philosophy. Plott was a prolific traveler and immersed himself in cross-cultural and comparative philosophical studies.
He served as a professor of philosophy at Marshall University in Huntington, West Virginia, for about 20 years. Despite noted personal eccentricities (as mentioned in some recollections by colleagues), he was regarded as a dedicated scholar committed to promoting a truly global, non-Eurocentric understanding of philosophical history.
His major contribution is the Global History of Philosophy series (published primarily by Motilal Banarsidass in Delhi), which aimed to present philosophy's development across cultures and eras in a synchronized, multi-dimensional way—rather than the traditional Western-focused narrative. The series includes:
Volume 1: The Axial Age (covering roughly 800–200 BCE, with thinkers like Confucius, Buddha, Plato, etc.)
Volume 2: The Han-Hellenistic-Bactrian Period
Volume 3: The Patristic-Sutra Period
Later volumes/parts covering periods like Scholasticism.
The project incorporated synchronological charts and emphasized intercultural dialogue, reflecting Plott's idealistic vision for global unity and understanding. He collaborated with co-authors like James Michael Dolin, Russell E. Hatton, and others on various volumes.
Plott passed away in 1990 in Honolulu, Hawaii, after spending his later years there.
Wasn't he a Quaker?
Yes, John C. Plott had a notable connection to Quakerism (the Religious Society of Friends).
From a personal recollection by a colleague (Howard A. Slaate, a fellow philosopher who knew him during his time at Marshall University), Plott was described as a committed Christian who was "often active in 'the Friends,' the Quaker society." This aligns with his lifelong emphasis on pacifism, world peace, intercultural dialogue, and non-violence—values strongly associated with Quaker principles.
His background shows a spiritual journey: he served a novitiate with the Anglican monastic society SSJE (Society of St. John the Evangelist) early on, pursued Gandhian pacifism for his Ph.D. research in India, and remained deeply engaged in peace activism (e.g., through the United World Federalist Association and his "Planetary Citizen Passport"). Quaker involvement fits as an ethical expression of his Christian idealism, even if it wasn't his sole or primary affiliation.
He wasn't exclusively or formally defined as a Quaker in most biographical overviews of his work (which focus more on his academic contributions to global philosophy), but the association is documented in firsthand accounts of his life and character. So yes—he was involved with the Quakers, at least actively and periodically.
His status among Eastern (Indian) philosophers seems much higher than among Western
Yes, there does appear to be a noticeable disparity in how John C. Plott is regarded: his work, particularly the Global History of Philosophy series, has found a more sustained and appreciative audience in Indian (and broader Eastern/Asian) philosophical circles than in mainstream Western academia.
Why the Higher Status in Indian/Eastern Contexts?
Publisher and Accessibility: The entire multi-volume series was published by Motilal Banarsidass (MLBD), a leading Delhi-based publisher specializing in Indology, Sanskrit texts, Indian philosophy, and comparative religion. This gave Plott's books natural distribution and visibility in Indian academic markets, libraries, and among scholars of darśanas (Indian philosophical systems). MLBD editions remain in print or readily available in South Asia decades later, often referenced in works on Hindu, Buddhist, or comparative philosophy.
Alignment with Indian Priorities:
Plott's approach—synchronizing Indian thinkers (e.g., from the Upaniṣads, Nyāya, Vedānta, Buddhism) with global contemporaries, rejecting Eurocentrism, and emphasizing intercultural dialogue—resonates strongly in post-colonial Indian academia. It counters Western-dominated narratives of philosophy's history and treats Indian traditions as central rather than peripheral or "non-Western." His Ph.D. from Banaras Hindu University, immersion in Gandhian thought, and deep engagement with Indian sources further endeared him to scholars there.
Citations and Influence:
In Indian and comparative philosophy literature (e.g., discussions of periodization, axial age parallels involving Buddha/Confucius/Upaniṣadic thinkers, or critiques of ethnocentrism), Plott's framework is occasionally invoked positively. His synchronological charts and non-Eurocentric periodization (e.g., Axial Age, Patristic-Sutra Period) have been noted in Indian scholarly contexts exploring global or intercultural philosophy.
Contrast with Western Reception
In Western philosophy departments (especially Anglo-American analytic or continental traditions), Plott remains largely obscure or marginal. His work is rarely assigned in standard history-of-philosophy courses, which still often follow Eurocentric timelines (ancient Greek → medieval → modern Western). Reviews in journals like Philosophy East and West (which covered several volumes) were mixed or descriptive rather than enthusiastically endorsing it as groundbreaking.
Broader Western academia has moved toward global/comparative philosophy since the late 20th century (influenced by figures like Karl Jaspers on the Axial Age or more recent decolonial approaches), but Plott's ambitious, idiosyncratic project—spanning vast periods with detailed synchronies—hasn't achieved canonical status. It's sometimes seen as overly idealistic or encyclopedic rather than theoretically innovative.
His personal background (Quaker-influenced pacifism, unconventional career path) and the project's unfinished aspects may have contributed to limited traction in Western circles.
In short, Plott's vision of a truly planetary philosophy history aligns better with Indian scholars' efforts to reclaim and globalize their traditions' place in world philosophy, leading to relatively higher esteem there. In the West, he's more of a niche figure appreciated by those in comparative religion or intercultural studies, but not a household name in mainstream philosophy. If you're familiar with specific Indian sources or scholars who hold him in high regard, that would fit this pattern!
Hegel. Phenomenology. Pinkard
H.PS.P Hegel. Phenomenology of Spirit. Pinkard
Translator's introduction
xxix b "Spirit's" concept of itself is not an ideal against which it measures itself, a statement of its true form...
Spirit stands in a unity of I/you relations and I/we relations. If Spirit were to shape the real flesh and blood lives of individuals, united in friendship in the personal sphere and justice in the wider social and political sphere...
Pinkard's snapshot serves to spotlight the UCP in Hegel.
+++++
So each generation molds the "typical mind set" for the next, against which it reacts. The "typical" mind set is what keeps evolving as so-called Spirit.
xxxi-ii "Hegel interpreted the transition in the French Revolution from its constitutionalist beginings to the Jacobin terror as a logical result of this self-imposed exemption from any normative constraints except those which it brought on itself. Bounded only by itself, it thus found itself outfitted only with the principle of utility at best to constrain it, and, thru the use of the guillotine, it proceeded rationally and calmly and under the pretense of judicial thoroughness to eliminate all those deemed a threat to itself."
In other words, a terroristic group think emerged from the previous group think. Such a group think gives the impression of being an entity (spirit), tho some would prefer to view such in terms of group psychology. And of course group think can descend into mob frenzy, at which point the individual is submerged into a primitive state of being.
Politically one might argue, as would the communists, that the terror was necessary in order to defend the revolution from the conspiracies of the counter-revolution, which was being fueled by the aristocracy of Europe.
Yet we see that Robespierre is an example of how easily violence spirals out of control. Live by the sword, die by the sword.
Translator's introduction
xxix b "Spirit's" concept of itself is not an ideal against which it measures itself, a statement of its true form...
Spirit stands in a unity of I/you relations and I/we relations. If Spirit were to shape the real flesh and blood lives of individuals, united in friendship in the personal sphere and justice in the wider social and political sphere...
Pinkard's snapshot serves to spotlight the UCP in Hegel.
+++++
So each generation molds the "typical mind set" for the next, against which it reacts. The "typical" mind set is what keeps evolving as so-called Spirit.
xxxi-ii "Hegel interpreted the transition in the French Revolution from its constitutionalist beginings to the Jacobin terror as a logical result of this self-imposed exemption from any normative constraints except those which it brought on itself. Bounded only by itself, it thus found itself outfitted only with the principle of utility at best to constrain it, and, thru the use of the guillotine, it proceeded rationally and calmly and under the pretense of judicial thoroughness to eliminate all those deemed a threat to itself."
In other words, a terroristic group think emerged from the previous group think. Such a group think gives the impression of being an entity (spirit), tho some would prefer to view such in terms of group psychology. And of course group think can descend into mob frenzy, at which point the individual is submerged into a primitive state of being.
Politically one might argue, as would the communists, that the terror was necessary in order to defend the revolution from the conspiracies of the counter-revolution, which was being fueled by the aristocracy of Europe.
Yet we see that Robespierre is an example of how easily violence spirals out of control. Live by the sword, die by the sword.
Safranski. NIETZSCHE. Notes
Rudiger Safranski. Nietzsche, A Philosophical Biography. Notes
S.NPB
79b Writer believes Nietzsche used the term "Dionysian" to mean absolute untamed reality, as well as the barbarism of pre-civilized violence and sexual excess, along with sub-civilized instincts.
S.NPB
79b Writer believes Nietzsche used the term "Dionysian" to mean absolute untamed reality, as well as the barbarism of pre-civilized violence and sexual excess, along with sub-civilized instincts.
Solomon. In the Spirit of Hegel. Notes
Solomon. In the Spirit of Hegel. Notes
S.SH
52<--- The material on Enlightenment "versus" Romanticism is representative of the writer's often highly acute analyses of the dynamics of philosophy and philosophers.
One should not be put off by the writer's popular "ordinary American" writing style, as the analyses are often penetrating. Even so, one must beware this man's ability in this vein, as we see in his very excellent defense of Nietzsche, which yet manages to gloss over negativities, sometimes with an adroit phrase or two.
S.SH
52<--- The material on Enlightenment "versus" Romanticism is representative of the writer's often highly acute analyses of the dynamics of philosophy and philosophers.
One should not be put off by the writer's popular "ordinary American" writing style, as the analyses are often penetrating. Even so, one must beware this man's ability in this vein, as we see in his very excellent defense of Nietzsche, which yet manages to gloss over negativities, sometimes with an adroit phrase or two.
Herder on history. AI
Perplexity
John Herder. Philosophy of a history of man
You are probably looking for Johann (not John) Gottfried Herder’s Outlines of a Philosophy of the History of Man (German: Ideen zur Philosophie der Geschichte der Menschheit), a foundational text in the philosophy of history and cultural theory.
Work and title
Author: Johann Gottfried Herder (1744–1803), German philosopher, theologian, and philologist associated with early Romanticism.
Main work: Outlines of a Philosophy of the History of Man (often translated as Ideas for the Philosophy of the History of Humanity), written in the 1780s–1790s.
Core ideas of Herder’s philosophy of history
History as plural, not linear: Human history is not a single straight line of “universal progress” but a tapestry of distinct, culturally specific developments, each with its own inner logic.
Volksgeist (spirit of a people): Each people has a distinctive spirit expressed in its language, customs, religion, and art; you understand a culture only from within its own historical and linguistic horizon.
Anti-abstract universalism: He pushes back against Enlightenment rationalism and universal, one-size-fits-all “laws of history,” insisting on historical particularity and context.
Environment and embodiment: Climate, geography, and material conditions shape the development of cultures and their sensibilities; human beings are historically and naturally situated, not abstract minds.
Ethical and anti-imperial thrust: He rejects ranking cultures on a single scale of “civilization” and criticizes imperial and colonial attitudes; each culture has its own dignity and should be judged on its own terms.
Historical significance
Methodological: Herder is an early architect of historicism and hermeneutics, arguing that understanding humans (and texts) requires grasping their historical context and inner viewpoint.
Influence: His ideas shape later thinkers such as Hegel (dialectical development of spirit), as well as later nationalism and modern cultural anthropology and postcolonial thought.
If you want the text itself
You can find English translations of Outlines of a Philosophy of the History of Man freely available in scanned editions (e.g., 19th‑century translations) via major digital archives.
If you tell me what you want—textual links, a précis of specific books within the Outlines, or how Herder compares to, say, Vico or Hegel on history—I can narrow this down.
John Herder. Philosophy of a history of man
You are probably looking for Johann (not John) Gottfried Herder’s Outlines of a Philosophy of the History of Man (German: Ideen zur Philosophie der Geschichte der Menschheit), a foundational text in the philosophy of history and cultural theory.
Work and title
Author: Johann Gottfried Herder (1744–1803), German philosopher, theologian, and philologist associated with early Romanticism.
Main work: Outlines of a Philosophy of the History of Man (often translated as Ideas for the Philosophy of the History of Humanity), written in the 1780s–1790s.
Core ideas of Herder’s philosophy of history
History as plural, not linear: Human history is not a single straight line of “universal progress” but a tapestry of distinct, culturally specific developments, each with its own inner logic.
Volksgeist (spirit of a people): Each people has a distinctive spirit expressed in its language, customs, religion, and art; you understand a culture only from within its own historical and linguistic horizon.
Anti-abstract universalism: He pushes back against Enlightenment rationalism and universal, one-size-fits-all “laws of history,” insisting on historical particularity and context.
Environment and embodiment: Climate, geography, and material conditions shape the development of cultures and their sensibilities; human beings are historically and naturally situated, not abstract minds.
Ethical and anti-imperial thrust: He rejects ranking cultures on a single scale of “civilization” and criticizes imperial and colonial attitudes; each culture has its own dignity and should be judged on its own terms.
Historical significance
Methodological: Herder is an early architect of historicism and hermeneutics, arguing that understanding humans (and texts) requires grasping their historical context and inner viewpoint.
Influence: His ideas shape later thinkers such as Hegel (dialectical development of spirit), as well as later nationalism and modern cultural anthropology and postcolonial thought.
If you want the text itself
You can find English translations of Outlines of a Philosophy of the History of Man freely available in scanned editions (e.g., 19th‑century translations) via major digital archives.
If you tell me what you want—textual links, a précis of specific books within the Outlines, or how Herder compares to, say, Vico or Hegel on history—I can narrow this down.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)
-
Deepseek I am prevented from signing into my Deepseek account on both my cell phone and my laptop. I get the "wheel of death." ...
-
Take heed: Any information provided by AI below should be checked. Push for digital bill of rights https://youtu.be/HYOeBFoJjpk?si=7XFpU...
-
I've got sunshine, on a cloudy day When it's cold outside, I've got the month of May (ooh) I guess you'd say What can m...
