Keisuke Noda Ph.D. Assistant Professor of Philosophy Unification Theological Seminary, New York, USA

Transcription

1 Characteristics of Unification Thought within the Philosophical Environments in the 20 th and 21 st Century: toward the integral development of sciences for social change Keisuke Noda Ph.D. Assistant Professor of Philosophy Unification Theological Seminary, New York, USA Introduction This essay will explain the status and characteristics of Unification Thought within the philosophical environments of the 20 th and 21 st century. The essay first critically describes the characteristics of two major philosophical movements in the 20 th century, phenomenology and analytic philosophy, and continues to contrast these characteristics with those of Marxism. Furthermore, the significance of each ideological trend will be examined in the context of social impact. Then, after describing recent developments in applied ethics or applied philosophy, the essay will explore the characteristics of Unification Thought and its relationship with the sciences. The essay will conclude with the vision and task of Unificationist research. 1. Problems of 20 th century philosophy in Western Europe and America A. Methodological rejections of historical and systematic perspectives in philosophy: Phenomenology and analytic philosophy examined against Hegelian and Marxist ideologies Two major philosophical movements, phenomenology and analytic philosophy led the opening stage of the 20 th century and divided western philosophy into two camps. They developed different traditions and movements, one mainly on the European continent and another in the US and England. Phenomenology led the tradition of continental philosophy while analytic philosophy led the philosophical movements in the Anglo-Saxon world. 1

2 While these philosophical movements occupied higher institutions in western European and American countries, Marxism swept the world and made an enormous impact on the lives of people by initiating central ideas for social actions. Marxism did not remain within the boundaries of the ivory towers of academia and communities of intellectuals. Rather, Marxism became the core ideology to build nations, thus making impacts on social, economic, political, and historical spheres. While Karl Marx built his theory with the intention of building an ideal society and liberating people from oppression, other philosophical movements in the western democratic world did not have any clear goal or motive to take social actions. Founding thinkers of phenomenology and analytic philosophy such as Husserl and Wittgenstein made contributions only within the narrow sphere of specific philosophy communities. Husserl and Wittgenstein did not concern themselves with the construction of ideal societies, the liberation of people from misery and suffering, and other social issues for which Marx had a deep concern. The majorities of thinkers who have followed the paths of these founding thinkers have, respectively, shared similar concerns and have taken similar intellectual paths. The differences in concerns and approaches in developing a philosophy between Marx and Husserl/Wittgenstein are reflected in their view of philosophy and the architecture of their theoretical frameworks. Husserl, Wittgenstein, and those in the movements of phenomenology and analytic philosophy, shared one common view. They rejected two particular ideas held by Hegel and Marx: philosophy as a system and a theory of history. First, for Marx and his predecessor Hegel, philosophy is a comprehensive thought system which integrates all aspects of human life, i.e., social, political, economic, and cultural life. They intended to build a comprehensive systematic philosophy that can integrate diverse scientific endeavors including human, social, and natural sciences. Second, for both Hegel and Marx, theory of history is an essential part of philosophy. All human endeavors, social-political-economic-cultural activities including the creation of cultures, law-making, economic development, and the development of sciences and technologies are explained within the context of the theory of history. A theory of history gave them a perspective from which to see all human endeavors from a social-historical perspective. For Hegel and Marx, philosophy is not simply an intellectual activity which is remotely tied to social actions, but rather philosophy is meant to ignite social actions causing historical changes. When both phenomenology and analytic philosophy rejected Marxism, they also refused these two fundamental ideas: philosophy as a comprehensive system of thought and as a theory of history tied to social actions. Phenomenology and analytic philosophy became methodology oriented philosophy with a narrow scope and focus. Philosophy was conceived as a specialized discipline. Just as logic is universal to all human discourses, universality of philosophy was understood in its methodic character. Although philosophy was not exactly a part of the sciences, philosophy was conceived as a highly specialized discipline like mathematics, logic or physics, which was accessible only to professionals with specialized training and education. 2

3 The methodology oriented conception of philosophy can be largely attributed to the development of phenomenology and analytic philosophy, developed by Husserl and Wittgenstein, respectively. 2. Methodological orientation of phenomenology and analytic philosophy A. Husserlian phenomenology as the science of all sciences Husserl found the key area in philosophy in the phenomena of the consciousness. Realizing the narrow definition of experience in modern philosophy, 1 Husserl attempted to redefine experience. From Husserl s perspective, modern philosophers limited the primary sense of experience to sensory experience. Husserl thought this concept of experience to be too narrow and inadequate in being able to describe diverse kinds of experiences such as aesthetic, religious, perceptual, and so on. He attempted to establish a kind of philosophy that can faithfully describe all kinds of experiences as they show themselves. Rather than explaining experiences by a certain pre-given theory, Husserl tried to find the way to describe given experiences without presuppositions. Thus, he set a motto of presuppositionlessness. The idea of phenomenology emerged when Husserl sought to establish a new philosophical methodology that can describe phenomena without any presuppositions. 2 Husserl s motto to the things themselves indicates his spirit of presuppositionlessness. 3 One should note that there is no finality in the phenomenological quest. While one attempts to see experiences as they are given, one can discover layers of prejudices and presuppositions without end. In other words, even if one initially thought that one was faithfully describing experiences, one might have been holding un-recognized presuppositions. For this reason, the motto of presuppositonlessness describes an attitude or stance of phenomenology as there can be no claim for the finality of presuppositionlessness. Husserl examined essential principles or features that of a given kind of experience, such as the experience of time, experience of space, experience of perception, 1 Husserl refers to modern notion of experience within a context of epistemology. 2 Whether such a position as presuppositionlessness is possible or not is highly debatable. Heidegger, who was expected to succeed Husserl, refused Husserlian idea of presuppositionlessness and took a different path. Heidegger realized that there is always a dimension of interpretation in human knowledge and developed phenomenology as hermeneutical phenomenology in stead. Heidegger writes, the meaning of phenomenological description as a method lies in interpretation. (Heidegger, Being and Time, p. 61) For Heidegger, methodology means a method of interpretation or hermeneutics. G.H. Gadamer followed and developed Heidegger s path. 3 We can find affinity between Zen s enlightenment and Husserl s idea of presuppositionlessness. For Zen, enlightenment is an experience one can attain when one drops all presuppositions. While Husserl attempted to attain the state of presuppositionlessness by mental acts, Zen refuses this path. For Zen, enlightenment is a holistic mind-body experience rather than a mental state. For Dogen, for example, presuppositionlessness is achieved only as one s way of being or existence. See The way of learning through body-mind (translation is by the author) Shinsin-gaku-do) in Shobogennzo. 3

4 aesthetic experience, religious experience, and so on. For example, what are the essential characteristics or principles of the experience of time? How do we experience time? What are the essential features that distinguish our experience of time from other kinds of experiences? If one finds the essential principles or characteristics of the experience of time, one has a phenomenology of time experience. Likewise, we can develop all kinds of phenomenologies. 4 Husserl also attempted to establish transcendental phenomenology as the fundamental science that can encompass all sciences whatsoever. Husserl initially focused on the consciousness as the field of research in which our experiences are presented. At later part of his life, he developed a phenomenology of the life world. 5 Despite the shift and development in his approach, phenomenology remained as a methodology oriented philosophy. Husserl seems to be occupied with the idea that philosophy is a methodology. Why then was he preoccupied with presupposition? We can find an answer in his motive and initial conception for phenomenology. Husserl posed a question for the claim that scientific knowledge is neutral and objective. Husserl pointed out presuppositions and the hypothetical nature of science. For example, scientific reasoning presupposes the validity of logical reasoning. Sciences do not try to justify or give valid justification for the validity of logical reasoning itself. In Husserl s view, this attitude of science is not radical or rigorous enough. Husserl attempted to develop a kind of philosophy that can be as rigorous and radical as possible. For Husserl, philosophy must examine its own point of departure and process of reasoning. Thus, philosophy as rigorous science emerged from his idea.??? Here, phenomenology was conceived as a self-grounding science and as the science of all sciences in the sense that phenomenology alone can give justification to itself and all sciences whatsoever. Husserl s conception of phenomenology as the science that grounds all sciences already indicates his methodologist orientation. Why should philosophy just be an activity within the category of science as essentially a discipline, as a German Wissenshaft? Why not philosophy be a kind of wisdom comparable to embodied knowledge like Zen or a kind of art or an activity comparable to poetic activity? Modern science is a method-oriented discipline. Its highly methodic character distinguishes modern science from other types of knowledge. In the human intellectual tradition, philosophy has multiple roots and was immersed into diverse types of knowledge. Philosophy could be a prophetic wisdom as we can see in 4 For example, Husserl developed phenomenology of time consciousness (The Phenomenology of Time Consciousness) and Maurice Merleau-Ponty did phenomenology of perception (Phenomenology of Perception). 5 In his last work The Crisis of European Sciences and Transcendental Phenomenology, Husserl explained about his turn in phenomenology. He acknowledged that our discourses are deeply rooted and embedded in our social, historical, and cultural life in society. He attempted to develop a new phenomenology called a phenomenology of life-world. 4

5 Nietzsche s Zarathustra, a speculative system of knowledge as in Hegel s philosophy, and an existential realization as approached by Kierkegaard. When a philosopher conceives and defines philosophy, he or she can consciously apply a particular characteristic as the primary norm. Husserl s initial conception of phenomenology is categorized as Cartesian. Husserl in his initial formulation of philosophy made explicit references to Descartes. 6 Descartes took certainty as the primary characteristic of philosophical knowledge and tried to construct philosophy as certain as possible. For Descartes, geometry was the model of knowledge. Descartes quest for certainty led him to his inquiry into the indubitable ground and the point of departure for philosophic discourses, which he ultimately set as the cogito. Likewise, Husserl understood certainty as the norm of philosophic knowledge. Husserlian phenomenology made a series of transformations and modifications within Husserl s life time. Heidegger, who was expected to be his successor by Husserl himself, disagreed with Husserl s essentialism, his inclination to sciences, and definition of phenomenology as the science of sciences. Heidegger, Sartre, and other phenomenologists also opened different paths of phenomenology. Heidegger s hermeneutic phenomenology may not strictly be classified as a methodologism since Heidegger conceived philosophy as an activity comparable to poetic discourse. Nevertheless, phenomenologists in general shared a common trait of the deep concern for methodology and many still understand philosophy as a methodology in a broad sense of the term. B. Analytic philosophy: analyses of language Ludwig Wittgenstein is a key philosopher for the birth of analytic philosophy, and his insights also contribute to the focus of philosophy on its methodology. Two schools of thought, the ordinary language school and artificial language school emerged from Wittgenstein s insights, one in the earlier part and another in the later part of his life. Wittgenstein distinguished his concept of philosophy from those of philosophers before him. Wittgenstein argued that there had been confusions and pseudo problems in the philosophical tradition due to the vagueness of the meaning of philosophical vocabularies, confused usages of language, abuse or misuse of logic, and other confused manipulations of philosophical languages. In other words, Wittgenstein argued that confused uses of language by philosophers created philosophical problems, and those problems are pseudo problems. Thus, through a series of logical analyses of their languages, those problems of philosophy will disappear. In Tractatus 4.003, Wittgenstein writes: Most of the propositions and questions to be found in philosophical works are not false but nonsensical. Consequently we cannot give any 6 For Husserl s discourse on Descartes, see Cartesian Meditations. 5

6 answer to questions of this kind, but can only point out that they are nonsensical. Most of the propositions and questions in philosophers arise from our failure to understand the logic of our language. (They belong to the same class as the question whether the good is more or less identical than the beautiful.) And it is not surprising that the deepest problems are in fact not problems at all. 7 For Wittgenstein, therefore, the task of philosophy is to critically examine philosophers use of languages by employing logical analyses. Following the ideas of Wittgenstein (who is an Austrian), G. E. Moore, Bertrand Russell and other philosophers primarily in England and America formed a philosophical movement of analytic philosophy. They shared one common conviction: philosophy is a logical analysis of language. Logic is a primary tool of philosophy and its task is the analyses of languages philosophers used. In spite of diverse positions and developments within the movement of analytic philosophy, they continuously kept an exclusive methodologist orientation. C. Methodology: Conclusion Methodology in itself without content or substantive knowledge (God, man, society, and every conceivable item) has its weakness in its inability to cause social change and the inapplicability to real problems in society. Problems in society are real and they have deeper roots. On the other hand, Marxist ideology sought to reform society by its systematic and comprehensive nature based upon a consistent interpretation of the world, which includes a theory regarding human history. However, Marxism itself also has many problems and issues that hinder the development of society. 3. Failure of Marxism A. Strengths of Marxism Marxism made enormous impacts in terms of social change. There were certainly a variety of socio-political-economic reasons and a particular climate that allowed Marxism to expand, however Marxism as a theory has also several points that strengthen its palatability. This theory has the following characteristics: 1) A holistic perspective which encompasses diverse areas of study 2) Systematic expositions of fundamental issues of philosophy 3) A perspective for social action based upon a theory of history 4) Messianic idealism to liberate people from suffering 7 Ludwig Wittgenstein Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus p

7 In addition to above points, the failure of Christianity and other religions in liberating people from suffering is also to be noted. People s disappointment in religion fueled false dreams and hopes for Marxism, and those powerless individuals welcomed Marxism as a messianic liberating ideology. Disillusionment with the idea of God also influenced people to seek help in Godless messianic ideas. As explained in previous sections, major philosophical movements in the democratic world could not present any alternative views either. B. Problems of Marxism Marxism appeared to be a messianic thought that can liberate mankind from misery, end struggles among people (in particular, class struggles), and establish an ideal society. Some leading philosophers in democratic countries accepted basic assumptions of Marxism and became advocates of this thought with some modifications. Inherent problems of Marxism, however, became evident to the public eye when it was implemented. Totalitarian police states did not last long. The failure of Marxism is not only due to its practices, but also due to its mistaken assumptions. Marxist interpretation of being, knowledge, human nature, ethics, and view of history was built upon false assumptions. The Marxist emancipation theory of man, built into its messianic outlook, had false diagnosis and remedy. Marxist practices were doomed to fail because of the false views for the fundamental questions of philosophy. For a thorough critique and counterproposal to Marxism from Unificationist perspective, I refer to The End of Communism 8 by late Dr. Sang Hun Lee. 4. The ivory tower academism of philosophy and the new development of applied philosophy The overwhelming methodological orientation of philosophy, which stems from the trends of Husserlian phenomenology and analytic philosophy, inherently limits its view and scope to academic communities of philosophers and rejects a practical orientation in its goal and purpose. However, Unification Thought has a practical orientation in its goal and purpose. The aim of this thought is not simply to satisfy the curiosity of intellectuals but to make substantial impacts on societies and meet the urgent needs of the world. In this sense, Unification Thought shares the same practical goal that Marx held although their contents are radically different. Marx wrote in thesis 11 of Theses On Feuerbach, The philosophers have only interpreted the world, in various ways; the point, however, is to change it. 9 Unification Thought agrees with the Marxist intention to build a better world. 8 Late Dr. Sang Hun Lee pioneered the critique of Marxism from Unificationist perspective. See The End of Communism. 9 Karl Marx and Frederick Engels Feuerbach: Opposition of the Materialist and Idealist Outlooks. p

8 20 th century philosophers, both phenomenologists and analytic philosophers alike, did not hold this kind of radical and practical orientation. Philosophers took narrow paths of academism and formed own communities primarily within the spheres of academic institutions. They addressed and discussed issues pertinent only to small communities of professional philosophers who share similar philosophical orientations. Analytic philosophers formed their own communities and phenomenologists created their own academic circles. Some of them certainly made contributions beyond their communities, but the majority of them remained within their own group and within the boundaries of the ivory tower of academicians. Compared to Marxism, the range, scope, and degree of social impacts made by phenomenology and analytic philosophy were very limited. While Marxism failed to build a desirable society and Marxist theories disclosed inherent problems, those philosophies in the free world could not become viable alternatives to Marxism for social change. Likewise, post-modernism and deconstructionism are not serious ideological alternatives to build a desirable society. Some philosophers realized the limit of the narrow academism of philosophical communities and found their roles in areas of diverse disciplines or professional fields. Since late 20 th century, those philosophers developed a variety of applied ethics, applied philosophies, and sought to contribute to various areas or professional fields which are not necessarily traditional areas of philosophy. Those philosophers found philosophy to be an integral and necessary part of the sciences and disciplines. They went out of the boundaries of specific disciplines and investigated each disciplinary question within broader multi-disciplinary contexts. Ethical questions concerning human cloning and assisted suicides are some examples of applied ethics. Medical philosophy, environmental philosophy, legal philosophy, business philosophy, media ethics, philosophy of cyberspace, and others emerged. Ethics was a main topic in applied philosophies but the scope is now expanding beyond a traditional boundary of ethics. Applied philosophy today is becoming more and more a platform upon which multiple disciplines can come across. When we see the social impacts of each disciplinary development and professional field, we soon realize their cross disciplinary nature. This is where philosophy plays a role. For example, human cloning is a result of advances in medical technology. However, it raises ethical, legal, and socio-political questions. These issues cannot be resolved within the boundaries of sciences and technologies. Medical philosophy examines the issue of cloning within the broad scope of ethical-social-politicaleconomic perspectives, which requires us to consider multiple disciplinary fields. Oftentimes this examination requires the exploration of other fields such as social, human, and natural sciences. Those philosophers in applied fields understood philosophy as a dimension or an aspect which is an inseparable part of disciplines, professions, and social sectors. Philosophy for them is a discipline-based or a profession-based endeavor. Those philosophers working in discipline based works are not interested in a grandiose vision of philosophy, be it a Hegelian system, Marxist idealism, or even early 20 th century 8

9 methodologism. Philosophy is for them no longer a theory that can ground all kinds of disciplines as Husserl believed. It is neither a final methodological tool that will solve all problems of philosophy as Wittgenstein was convinced of, nor an ultimate theory that can build ideal world as Marx dreamed philosophy to be. These late 20 th century philosophers in applied philosophy do not pursue a claim for finality, ultimacy, or even universality. In the words of deconstructionists, anti-foundationalism is a trend in philosophy. This tendency enhances the diversification of the role of philosophy. As Richard Rorty phrased, philosophy is defined as what philosophers do. It is too diverse to define. 5. The Demand for a Systematic Philosophy that deals with Fundamental Questions Those philosophers in applied fields, however, are trapped in a dilemma. A simple question is often tied to deeper, fundamental questions he or she does not want to deal with. For example, the issue of human clones raises a whole series of questions. If reproduction is done without a sexual relationship between man and woman, why would it be necessary for men and women to have intercourse? Why would they marry and form a family? The meaning of sexuality, marriage, family, and other related issues must all be checked as a result of this medical development. A question in medical technology is linked to a series of fundamental questions in philosophy. When one tries to answer a single practical question in applied philosophy, one will be led to more fundamental questions such as questions regarding human nature, happiness, the meaning of human life, and so on. If one tries to delve deeper still, one will be led to the question of the origin and nature of human society, the meaning of religion, and even the question of the existence of God and life after death. Those questions that appear in professional and disciplinary fields are the tips of the iceberg and are deeply rooted in the more fundamental questions of philosophy. Since there are diverse, conflicting views and answers for these fundamental questions, philosophers in applied philosophy try to minimize their involvement into these fundamental questions. No matter how professionals try to avoid these unsettled fundamental questions, these questions remain everlasting issues in the background of practical philosophy. While recent developments in applied philosophy demonstrate how philosophy can be applied to social issues, these fragmented philosophies lack its own broader, systematically integrated outlook of the world which can serve as a general context of interpretation. There is a need for a systematic, holistic, and broader perspective in philosophy. In Philosophical Reasoning, Nicholas Rescher writes about this call for a holistic character in philosophy: However, this preoccupation with particularistic detail came to leave many thoughtful people deeply dissatisfied with its resulting 9

10 fragmentation and dissonance. And so there come to the foe again philosophers who cared for the big picture and yearned for a vision of wholeness.... The yearning for co-ordinative syntheses, for unifying integrations for an approach that is holistic rather than particularistic began to make something of a comeback. The lure of the idea of system has once again come to the foe. 10 While detailed contents of Unification Thought require substantial examination and expansion, this thought has a number of characteristics that can fulfill these today s needs in philosophy. 6. Essential Ideas and Principles of Unification Thought: An Outline A. Characteristics of Unification Thought. Unification Thought has the following characteristics. As I discussed in previous sections, major philosophical movements in democratic world rejected or lacked some or all of these tenets. Marxism embraced these tenets, but it was built upon false assumptions. 1) A holistic perspective which encompasses diverse areas of study 2) Systematic expositions of fundamental issues of philosophy 3) A perspective for social action based upon a theory of history 4) Messianic idealism to liberate people from suffering Unlike Marxism, Unification Thought has the above characteristics based upon a faith-based, theistic model of thought, thus, Unification Thought will have to answer a number of additional questions or challenges. Some issues include the view of man assumed by theories of evolution and Freudian psychoanalytic theories. Ideas of Unification Thought will be clarified in the process of answering these challenges and questions. B. Key concepts in Unification Thought The following is an incomplete list of key concepts in Unification Thought, which requires a more thorough exploration in collaboration with natural, social, and human sciences. There are many more key ideas to be added to this list. 10 Nicholas Rescher Philosophical Reasoning: a study in the methodology of philosophizing pp

11 1) Ontological principles 1-1. True love Altruism and True Love Conscience, spirituality, and true love Blood lineage and love Being and Love Rationality, moral principles, and love 1-2. Dual characteristics of SS/HS, Y/Y Harmony of Spirituality and Materiality a. Cosmology of the spirit world and earthly world b. Spirituality and Physicality of Human Nature c. Developments of sciences and technologies in harmony with social, cultural, and spiritual values d. Economical developments in harmony with moral, spiritual, and ecological value perspectives Marriage a. Spirituality of Love and Sexuality between Man and Woman: the sanctification of love b. Marriage as a covenant and an eternal partnership c. Harmony and beauty of masculinity and femininity as a cosmological principle Family a. Family as the base to nurture and cultivate true love b. Family as the base to develop sound moral character b. Family as the origin of one s existence c. Family as the fundamental social constituent 1-3. Give-and-take action Reciprocity of relations Harmony of relations Altruistic human relations 11

12 1-4. Dual purposes ( Connected-body ) Organic, teleological, holistic view of the world Alignment of purposes: peaceful co-existence within the world Harmony of intrinsic value and extrinsic value of beings 2) UT principles for social practices Ideals of interdependence, mutual prosperity, and universally shared values 2-2. Creation of the culture of heart Examination of the culture of mass consumption Joy, creativity, and the work environment Concept of the hobby industry 2-3. Pursuit of a social model Examination of: The free market economy and planned economy The concept of property and ownership in relation to creativity Concepts of labor in relation to joy City planning from a harmonious ecological-economic perspective 2-4. New world order World order from the past history: a religious, race based model (Europe, America, Asia, Africa, etc) New world order from the perspective of the relationship between land and ocean: federation of islands nations, peninsula nations, and continent nations. New time order: CGK, 8 days. 3) Unification Theory of History Self-identity, community, and history Shared origin, process, and goal of history 7. The Unity of Value Perspectives for the Integral Development of Sciences and Technologies A. Unity of value perspective and diversity of scientific methodologies Unification Thought has internal unity among its constituting components. It can serve as a general framework upon which diverse disciplinary developments can be made. Each science or discipline has its unique research methodology and its own 12

13 academic norms and rigors. Such questions as how information can be collected, how knowledge can be validated, and what the standard procedures are, are uniquely developed in each discipline. These research methodologies are also subject to change according to the development of each discipline. Creativity in disciplinary development is empowered only when the internal mechanism of scientific study is respected. Rules of each discipline should be determined by its own internal mechanism. Unification Thought may challenge philosophical assumptions of some theories. It is for the most part, however, not a challenge to scientific research methodology itself, but its philosophical assumptions. For example, Freudian theory of psychiatry was developed based upon particular philosophical assumptions about human nature. Unificationism can challenge his philosophical foundations for his interpretation of human nature, cosmology, and sex, and can address certain views and challenge his theories within a philosophical realm. If, for example, Unificationism challenges Freudian theory as a theory of psychiatry, Unificationist theorists have to bear the burden of proof based upon alternative studies of the human psyche. Likewise, contentions made against the theory of evolution and its assumption of its view of man must not remain in the realm of speculation, but rather become substantial elements for relevant studies in science. Unification Thought as a philosophy will serve as an inspirational source for the development of scientific studies in diverse areas and fields. Unification Thought gives its own perspective on fundamental questions of philosophy. It provides its unique view of being, God, man, universe, nature, society, and history. Although Unification Thought has its own unique perspective, it is not a science. Unificationism takes the position to fully respect unique research methodologies in each science, be it natural, social, or human. Conclusion: Future Task of Unification Thought Philosophy, by itself, has been unable to effectively contribute to the development of an ideal society in the 20the century. The exclusive focus on methodology causes some philosophical attempts to be ineffective in causing substantial social changes, while Marxist ideologies aimed at social reform were based upon fallible assumptions. The practice of applied philosophy aims to answer questions that arise in the development of various professional fields, especially in the development of human, natural, and social sciences. However, attempts by applied philosophy fall short in that ultimately each question requires the discussion of a more fundamental question of philosophy that has yet to be answered. Applied philosophy are particularized and fragmentized, and it lacks systematic, holistic view of the world. Unification Thought thus seeks to resolve different philosophical movements in a united undertaking by answering these fundamental questions based on a faith or a theistic model of thought, and by seeking to make changes and create an ideal society. 13

14 Unification Thought has a vision to establish an ideal society where true love flourishes within harmonious and peaceful social and natural environments. Thus, in order to implement this vision, we must scrutinize each component of this thought in dialogue with existing resources. Unification Thought researchers are faced with the challenge of developing Unification Thought from being an ideology in the sphere of speculative thought to the realm of action in social, economic, political, and cultural environments. In other words, in developing this ideology, Unificationists must make steady progress in turning the vision into the new reality, speculation into practice, general ideas into concrete disciplinary studies, conceptual knowledge into cultural change, and ideas into social action. By overcoming these difficulties and challenges, Unification Thought can be a foundational system of thought upon which we can accomplish the resolution of philosophical tensions in the development of sciences. Bibliography Dogen, Shobogennzo, vol.1, Tokyo: Iwanami Shoten, Heidegger, Martin, Being and Time, New York: Harper & Raw, Husserl, Edmund, trans. by Dorian Cairns, Cartesian Meditations, Hague: Martinus Nijhoff, The Crisis of European Sciences and Transcendental Phenomenology, Evanston: Northwestern Univ. Press, The Phenomenology of Internal Time-Consciousness, Bloomington: Indiana Univ. Press, Lee, Sang Hun, The End of Communism, New York: Unification Thought Institute, Ludwig Wittgenstein Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus, New Jersey: The Humanities Press, Marx, Karl and Frederick Engels Feuerbach: Opposition of the Materialist and Idealist Outlooks, London: Lawrence & Wishat, Merleau-Ponty, M, transl. by Colin Smith Phenomenology of Perception, New Jersey: The Humanities Press, Rescer, Nicholas, Philosophical Reasoning: a study in the methodology of philosophizing, Madlen, Mass: Blackwell,