Ashok Gangadean, Professor of Philosophy

Reflection on the Evolution of my Research, Scholarship and Teaching: Setting the Context for my Work

Four decades ago my early focus began in the areas of Logic, Ontology and the Philosophy of Language.  My primary concern over the years has been to seek to advance the perennial search for the fundamental grammars of thought (logic of consciousness), the grammars of reality (formal ontology) and the deep structures of language and discourse (logic of natural reason).  This quest has continued over the past forty years and has taken me on a remarkable journey across widely divergent philosophical traditions, east and west and other, on a global scale.  My encounter with the profound transformative dynamics of meditative intelligence expanded my quest dramatically and over three decades culminated in my twin volumes presenting my findings in Meditative Reason.

Very briefly, as I explored the rational dynamics of consciousness across and between widely diverse worldviews and philosophical grammars it became clear that there is and must be a fundamental Unifying Force that is the generative source and resource of all worldviews, cultural forms, ideologies, religious forms of life, philosophical narratives, disciplinary grammars and human perspectives.  It was also clear in this global context across worldviews that striking patterns in the evolution of consciousness became clear.  One remarkable finding is an emergent consensus across global traditions that how we humans use our minds, how we process our experience and our world makes all the difference to our living realities: we are as we mind. 

And a dramatic finding through the ages is that when we conduct our thinking in egocentic or monocentric patterns devastating consequences ensue.  In particular, it is found that such egocentric patterns of world making generate fragmentation, polarities, artificial dualities and divisions, which are harmful, even devastating to our human condition at the personal and collective dimensions.  So the technology of minding, or mental processing of our selves and our world is all-important and decisive in the living realities we co-create.

And equally striking is the finding that diverse philosophical and spiritual traditions, east and west have sought to diagnose these harmful effects of monocentric thinking and to prescribe alternative methods and technologies of minding which mature into more integral, holistic, non dualizing, dialogic patterns of human reason.  In this light, the most dramatic concern in philosophical discourse - the quest for the deep dynamics of Natural Reason-centers precisely here on the dynamics and technologies of how we conduct our minding.  And over the years in my research and teaching I found it natural, even inevitable, to introduce some simple yet potent notational devices to mark explicitly when we are minding in the patterns of egocentric thinking, and by contrast, when we cross over into the more coherent and integral patterns of holistic natural reason:

I use "single brackets"-  "/.../" to mark any word, term, concept, utterance, phenomenon, etc that is processed through /egocentric/ thinking: /X/

And I use "double brackets"- ((...)) to mark any word, term, concept, utterance, phenomenon, etc that is being processed in and through  ((integral reason)):  ((X))

So it becomes of the utmost importance in the conduct of our discourse, our hermeneutical practices, our world making, our experience processing to be critically and reflectively aware of whether we are /minding/ or ((minding)).  And in a real sense, the evolution of global thought may be seen as focusing precisely here on the life and death contrast between /minding/ vs ((minding)):  and a dramatic finding in that /egocentric discourse/ is not the long sought for ((space of natural reason)).  Thus, whenever we are using our minds, using language, critical, reflective and mindful rationality requires us to be keenly aware of whether we are minding is the /egocentric spaces/ of "consciousness" or in the ((integral patterns)) of Reason.

Perhaps the main drive in my four decades of research, scholarship and teaching has been to bring this fundamental finding out in the most potent way:  that /egocentric minding/ is not to be con-fused with the ((space of natural reason)).  And I have suggested in my work that there is a fundamental ((Logos))- a hitherto eclipsed ((Universal Grammar of Language, Thought, Reality))- that is the generative source of any possible worldview, perspective, culture, disciplinary narrative, religion or form of life.  My work has sought to show precisely how and why the hitherto dominant forces of /egocentric cultures/ have distorted, deformed, suppressed or eclipsed the clear disclosure of this fundamental global ((Logos)). 

And when we cross into this ((integral space of natural reason)) there is a dramatic ((inversion)) in our orientation through this ((global lens)). In the ((Space of Integral Reason)) we see that what is often fragmented or artificially /divided/ in discourse dominated by /egocentric patterns/ is found to be profoundly inter-connected and  ((dialogically inseparable)).  Thus, the ((fields)) of  ((Logic)), ((Ontology)), ((Logic of Language)), ((Phenomenology)), ((Ethics)), ((Epistemology))  ((Hermeneutical Philosophy))...all ((converge)) in profound ways that we could not ((see)) or ((experience)) within the /egocentric lens/..

So over the decades as my Research and Teaching matured into the Integral, Hologistic, Non-dual and Dialogic dynamics of ((Global Reason)) I found that it was increasingly /artificial/ to /categorize/ or /classify/ my research and teaching into the /rubrics/ that seem to dominate the fields of philosophy.  Accordingly, my courses in philosophy gradually matured into explorations in the ((Global Context of Natural Reason)) where diverse worldviews, paradigms, philosophical narratives and alternative grammatical forms co-originate, co-arise and find their ((dialogical common ground)).  For example, the investigation of "Logic" requires primary attention to the issue of ((logistic)) or the ((technology of minding)).  Again, the inquiry into "Being" or "Reality" likewise calls for reflection attention to ((dynamics)) of  ((natural reason)) through the ((global lens)), since any exploration of "Reality" is a function of our ((hermeneutical praxis)), our ((minding)) praxis.  Indeed, we begin to see that the depth of ((Ethics)) focuses precisely on this transformation into ((dialogic consciousness)) and the ((conduct of mind)). So too with the fundamental issues of ((Epistemology)), since ((É)) is the epistemic spaceÉand so on.

Thus, in this ((Global Space of Logos)) there is a profound renovation in the classical "labels" and "rubrics" of the field of "philosophy", and all of my courses have taken on this ((signature)) of critical explorations in this ((Global Context)):  "Buddhist Thought in Global Context"; "Metaphysics: The Philosophy of Reality and Worldviews in Global Context"; "Global Ethics", "Global Wisdom", "Philosophy of Logic and Language in Global Context", "Hindu Thought in Global Context", "Topics in the Philosophy of Language: Meaning & Metaphor" and so on.  This ((Global Context)) expands the challenge of critical thinking across and between diverse worldviews, paradigms, traditions and perspectives in the cultivation the deep dialogic dimensions of global rationality.

In sum, I feel that my journey over these past decades has taken me into the new frontier of ((Global Philosophy)) and ((Global Reason)) and this would be the best "designation" of my area of "specialization" and the ((context)) of my teaching and my courses..

Ashok Gangadean, Professor of Philosophy