Editors’ Preface: Narrow Spheres of the Greatest Matters

Comparative and Continental Philosophy was founded on the conviction that the traditional boundaries governing the exercise of philosophical thinking have been unduly constrained, and that for far too many, the constraints have been strangling. This exacting stranglehold has wrested the life from other conceptions of philosophical content and their styles of execution. Poets, playwrights, and writers of other scripts have been banished from philosophy’s republic. Rather than the nature of philosophical activity becoming one of philosophy’s most consequential and vital questions—questioning that would continuously open up new horizons of thought—the discipline has too often settled narrowly into traditional habits that reflect power imbalances, cultural arrogance, and the haughty assumption that philosophy is best reduced to how the chosen ones have practiced it.

But was this philosophia’s initial intent? In Book 1 of the Metaphysics (982b 13), Aristotle educates us about the nature of philosophizing, of doing philosophy: “For it is owing to their wonder that men both now begin and at first began to philosophize; they wondered originally at the obvious difficulties, then advanced little by little and stated difficulties about the greatest matters … ” (McKeon 1992, 261). To philosophize is to be committed to the slow, deliberate, and measured evolution of thinking. Nonetheless, overcoming power disparities, cultural presumptions, and the besotted thinking that anything the privileged philosophical class does is irrefutably what constitutes philosophy has seemed a sardonically slow process. The lagging strides toward openness, acceptance, and inclusion have resulted in the perception that what those others are doing is something other than philosophy. And this outcome has been habitually executed with exclusion, derision, and/or outright dismissal.

From its inception, Comparative and Continental Philosophy has committed itself to providing accessibility for readers from a range of disciplines and to presenting its content in thought-provoking styles—those favoring creative performance alongside customary philosophical allocutions. While moored in the open-region of the mother discipline, the journal’s founders wished to create a welcoming alcove for Continental philosophers to think outside the parameters of their probable practice. Starting originally with Asia as its focus region, the journal aspired to extend the East-West comparative axis to also include the North-South axis—and progress has been made. With our eyes set ultimately on more nuanced, distinct coordinates falling in between these axes on philosophy’s compass, we “wondered originally at the obvious difficulties, then advanced little by little and stated difficulties about the greatest matters”; and so, another aspiration is now in place.

As part of Comparative and Continental Philosophy’s ongoing experiments in widening the parameters of philosophical discourse, we invited Jason Mohaghegh to serve as guest editor of this issue. He is a philosopher whose works have been exemplary in opening new figures and locations of thought, as well as lifting up unexpected voices (including poets) as philosophical provocations. In so doing, he has also broadened the avenues for entering into contemporary Arabic and Persian philosophical discourses. In this special issue, Mohaghegh continues his experiments, this time by bringing together eight authors and enclosing them within the restraints of a metaphorical “soundproof room,” each accompanied by a single figure of thought. The constraints become paradoxical as they fail to limit simply, but rather give rise to new and unexpected dimensions of philosophical growth: Each soundproof room is a testament to the great modularity and expanse within seemingly narrow spheres.