Simple Explanation of Realism, Structuralism in Contemporary Philosophy, and Buddhist Theory of Emptiness

Simple Explanation of Realism, Structuralism in Contemporary Philosophy, and Buddhist Theory of Emptiness

Introduction

My life’s work is to promote contemporary philosophy worldwide. From this perspective, two countries stand out uniquely: France and Japan. France has perfected modern philosophy, known as contemporary French philosophy. Notably, philosophy is mandatory in the Baccalaureate examination, regularly featuring philosophers like Derrida and Foucault.

When Thomas Piketty, author of “Capital in the Twenty-First Century,” lectured on Japan at the University of Tokyo, he appeared familiar with structuralism. Investigating this, I discovered that philosophy, including contemporary thinkers like Derrida and Foucault, is rigorously taught in French high schools—a unique feature. Although educational systems differ between France and Japan, it seems France is the only country teaching contemporary philosophy at the high-school level.

Other European countries, like Germany, focus primarily on national philosophers such as Heidegger. However, understanding philosophy without studying structuralism and post-structuralism lacks depth. Philosophy up to modern times is intuitive and easily understood naturally. Yet, disciplines that feel empirically unfamiliar—such as quantum theory in physics—could represent higher education compared to basic education. Even if teenagers don’t fully grasp these complex concepts, realizing early in life the existence of non-intuitive, non-experiential academic fields is highly valuable.

Currently, Japanese culture, especially anime, is globally popular, with France typically being the earliest to embrace this phenomenon. Historically, Japan absorbed continental culture primarily through Buddhism, making Japanese history essentially Mahayana Buddhist history. On the other hand, the endpoint of Western philosophy—contemporary philosophy—is fundamentally identical to Mahayana Buddhism. Though the starting points differ, once reached, they share common values. Therefore, when explaining structuralism, post-structuralism, Buddhist Madhyamaka theories of emptiness, or Tendai’s Threefold Truth theory, I aim to publish articles in French as well.

General Introduction Summary

The essence of contemporary philosophy is understanding structuralism. Structuralism aligns with Mahayana Buddhism’s theory of emptiness, with “emptiness” (空, kū) as its core concept. I will simplify structuralism and emptiness for clarity.

Western philosophy revolves around realism at its core, with competing theories interacting historically. Structuralism emerged in the final stage as a potent antithesis to realism, evolving into post-structuralism, synthesizing these theories at a higher level. Realism argues that “substances exist” or “something actually exists.” Structuralism, however, must provide alternatives to realism’s “substance” or “actually existing entity.” Various terms have been used in contemporary philosophy and Buddhism, but the most fitting seems to be Buddhism’s concept of “emptiness.”

Structuralism Developed to Critique Western Realism

To understand structuralism, one should consider what it addresses and why it emerged. Western philosophy primarily centers on realism, notably reinforced by Christianity, which necessitates the existence of God and creation as real entities. Modern philosophy couldn’t entirely detach from Christianity until Nietzsche declared “God is dead,” finally enabling philosophy independent from theological constraints.

Explaining the world through substances and realities is straightforward, intuitive, and natural. Just as classical physics is more comprehensible than quantum theory, realism aligns intuitively with human sensory experiences. Rejecting realism entirely may appear contrarian or unnatural, historically risking persecution for heresy.

However, while physical, sensory realities suit realism, abstract concepts or symbols—existing solely in one’s mind—cannot be physically manifested or easily communicated. Plato’s concept of ideas existing independently in an ideal realm appealed to medieval theology, showing that Western philosophy tends to polarize ideas, with realism at one extreme and opposing theories at the other.

Alternatives to Realist “Substance”

Common sense might consider outright rejection of realism unreasonable. Yet, mental images or concepts often feel more vivid and real than physical objects. Philosophy thus debates what constitutes “substance,” resulting in various theories through Western philosophical history. While realism is straightforward, alternatives may appear convoluted or contrarian, raising the question: what are these vivid, mentally perceived entities if not substance? Addressing this question defines Western and Eastern philosophical histories.

Eastern Philosophy

Around 2,600 years ago, Buddha proposed a groundbreaking theory that diverged significantly from Western philosophy. Buddhism uniquely lacks a central deity, which puzzles Westerners accustomed to deity-based religions. Although gods appear in Buddhist texts, they are secondary and non-essential—significant only in encouraging Buddha to spread his teachings after enlightenment. Buddhism remains indifferent yet friendly towards deities, eventually integrating with other religions, especially in Japan through syncretism like Esoteric Buddhism (Mikkyo).

Mahayana Buddhism, founded by Nagarjuna around the 2nd century CE, defined its central concept as “emptiness” (空). This explicitly alternative concept to realism’s “substance” became mainstream across Central and East Asia. Buddhism historically thrived across India, China, and Eurasia, notable for its coexistence with diverse cultures and religions.

Japan exemplifies Mahayana Buddhism’s influence, significantly shaping its culture and society. Japanese cultural traits, such as ambiguity or indirectness—often considered weaknesses—can also be strengths, potentially rooted in Buddhism.

Western Equivalents to Emptiness (空)

Western philosophy historically sought alternatives to realism’s “substance,” employing terms like “names” (nominalism), “ideas,” “phenomena” (phenomenology), “nihil” (Nietzsche), “differance” (Derrida), “simulacrum” (Baudrillard), and “rhizome” (Deleuze and Guattari). However, none fully capture the concept. Buddhism’s “emptiness” uniquely embodies profound historical and conceptual depth, making it the ideal term.

Non-Realism as Theory of Emptiness

Structuralism correctly identified an alternative to realism but failed in precise expression or naming. The Buddhist concept “emptiness” (空) offers the most accurate, nuanced formulation, shaped by centuries of philosophical refinement. Adopting “emptiness” into Western philosophy could significantly clarify structuralism’s ideas.

Conclusion

Spreading contemporary philosophy is crucial. Structuralism in Western philosophy and Mahayana Buddhism converge on a profound truth: the theory of emptiness. Integrating “emptiness” into Western thought may present a powerful alternative to current paradigms, fostering a balanced, sustainable future. France, teaching contemporary philosophy institutionally, and Japan, historically embedding emptiness, together exemplify cultural resonance that suggests a significant shared philosophical destiny.