Nagarjuna and the Limits of Thought

TLDR

Nagarjuna is portrayed as a rational thinker who embraces contradictions through reductio arguments, aligning his approach with both Buddhist and Western dialectical traditions. The paper argues that Nagarjuna, like many Western and Buddhist philosophers, investigates true contradictions that arise at the limits of thought. The study finds that Nagarjuna rejects all philosophical positions—including his own—asserting nothing.

Abstract

Nagarjuna seems willing to embrace contradictions while at the same time making use of classic reductio arguments. He asserts that he rejects all philosophical views including his own-that he asserts nothing-and appears to mean it. It is argued here that he, like many philosophers in the West and, indeed, like many of his Buddhist colleagues, discovers and explores true contradictions arising at the limits of thought. For those who share a dialetheist's comfort with the possibility of true contradictions commanding rational assent, for Nagarjuna to endorse such contradictions would not undermine but instead confirm the impression that he is indeed a highly rational thinker. It is argued that the contradictions he discovers are structurally analogous to many discovered by Western philosophers and mathematicians.