Quine’s indeterminacy thesis allows limited but real intercultural philosophical knowledge

Evidence

Oruka’s assertion gives the impression that Quine’s thesis is about impossi- bility. It is not. Rather, it is about indeterminacy, about the same distortion of representation, for example. A distorted picture of a person may still be recog- nized as representing that person. In addition, it cannot be the person because it is merely a representation. Furthermore, what Quine and Wittgenstein postulate has nothing to do with the contents of African philosophy, but with the possi- bility of its valid rendering in discursive academic French or English prose. It is not totally impossible to get intercultural knowledge. Even though that possi- bility is limited, it is there. — Frans Dokman, Beyond Bantu Philosophy_…, 573

Categorization

Category: Definitional Content

  • DEFINE: Clarifies that Quine’s underdetermination is about indeterminacy of translation, not impossibility of rendering African thought.
  • XREF: Connects to Quine’s ‘gavagai’ indeterminacy of translation and to the wider debate on whether African philosophy can be rendered in Western academic languages.