Sydney Morrow

_In this first academic symposium on Hawaiʻi Philosophy, Michael David Kaulana Ing proposes using the term Philosophy as a bridge concept—one that enables culturally diverse communities to articulate their own philosophical traditions while engaging in shared dialogue. The dialogue that would ensue would allow them to discuss their shared interests in meaningful ways. Following up on his proposal, Ing develops an understanding of Hawai__ʻ__i Philosophy that includes the emic __ʻ__Ike Hawai__ʻ__i, the etic __Hawaiian Philosophy, __and K__ā__laimana__ʻ__o as a “thought-carving” middle space that enables Kānaka Hawaiʻi alongside others to search for resources far and wide to make meaning of the world we live in. __Highlighting that Hawai__ʻ__i Philosophy can only take place insofar as it is grounded in practice, Kaipulaumakaniolono Keala cautions about Kānaka __Hawaiʻi_ _demarcating the boundaries of a field when the journey has just begun, while Kamalani Johnson __argues that Hawai__ʻ__i philosophy must be rooted in a Kanaka-centered conceptualization of knowledge. Meanwhile, Bruce Ka__ʻ__imi Watson has chosen to remain visibly silent in this global forum for K__ā__naka, offering a loud but quiet withholding. __Tamara Albertini responds to Ing’s call for a distinctly Hawaiian framework of inquiry, which she describes as “philosophical wayfinding.” Writing as a non-Kanaka Maoli philosopher, she accepts this invitation in the spirit of the guest who does not arrive to consume but to tarry, perceive, and contribute with care. In so doing, she draws on her own methodology of bricolage and flânerie—approaches designed to resist the hierarchization and appropriation of philosophical traditions—in order to engage in a reflective exchange that foregrounds Indigenous knowledge systems. She particularly highlights genealogies of thought rooted in Native Hawaiian culture and embraces Ing’s notion of borrowing as a generative and creative contribution to the evolving landscape of World Philosophies. __Celia __Tagamolila_ _Bardwell-Jones argues that Hawai__ʻ__i__ Philosophy practitioners adopt an ethic of hard incommensurability. She encourages __K__ā__naka__ Hawaiʻi not to allow for integration, fusion or facile comparisons with Hawai__ʻ__i__ Philosophy. Sydney Morrow leans on Ing’s understanding of “bounded multiplicity” to develop an understanding of existential poverty afflicting post-contact __K__a__naka__ society. An alleviation of this poverty would require a different policy analysis as compared to standard economic-driven solutions, she holds. In his reply to his co-panelists, Ing reiterates that the practice of __Hawai__ʻ__i Philosophy must be guided by the principles of __positionality, epistemic humility, ho__ʻ__okama__ʻ__ā__ina, etc. and must support the __K__a__naka community for whom __Hawai__ʻ__i is their ancestral home__. _ _ _.

The philosophers discussed in this volume are exemplars of going “beyond comparison” and we think this captures a certain spirit of Ru. Incumbent upon this understanding is the notion that traditionally effective ideas are dynamic and continually evolve. Similar to Rosenlee, Sydney Morrow explores how we can philosophize about gender based on the work of Roger Ames. The work of these scholars is not only insightful, but also challenges us to break new ground on their shoulders. Morrow argues for letting the Confucian tradition speak on its own terms, including their sometimes heavily gendered vocabulary. However, we do not need to limit our understanding of it to some rigid, codified, and binary traditional interpretations. Working with Ames we can practice a more fluid, open, and contemporary Confucian engagement with gender that can be responsive and empathetic. Summarizing her view Morrow writes: “Confucian roles are best left gendered because they make space for women’s self-cultivation beyond their traditionally subservient, nei, and morally-undefined roles. Still, the way in which they are optimally gendered need not draw hard lines between masculine and feminine roles.”

This dissertation outlines comparative philosophical approaches to understanding the contemporary problem of homelessness in Hawaiʻi. It also offers a methodology for an applied comparative philosophical project. I provide examples of specific contributors to the problem of homelessness and bring in various Chinese and Western sources that contribute ways of understanding and contextualizing this issue. I build the themes successively from the necessity of constitutive interpersonal relationships, to the supportive and nurturing relationships among people and their natural surroundings, to the psychological response necessary to promote sympathy and solidarity, to a broad and inclusive awareness of the world. At each stage, I bring in my formulation of existential destitution to define and describe how these types of flourishing may fail to come about.