Universalizing or Contextualizing? Two Strategies for Diversifying Philosophy

Abstract This article critically examines the increasing advocacy for diversifying the philosophical curriculum over recent decades. By analyzing the discourse on the cultural diversification of philosophy, we observe that the debate revolves around a dual premise: (1) philosophy exists within a specific cultural context, and (2) it can transcend this context. We relate two strategies for diversifying philosophy to this premise, which emphasize either the first or the second part: contextualizing and universalizing, respectively. The strategy of universalizing is prevalent in comparative and intercultural philosophical discourse and focuses on philosophy’s ability to convey context-independent meaning. Recently, however, critical social epistemology and decolonial discourses have highlighted the risks of prematurely adopting a universal perspective and have advocated for greater contextualization instead. After outlining the arguments and potential downsides of both strategies, we argue that both approaches converge on a critical insight: (intercultural) philosophy should be viewed primarily as a transformative practice. We therefore propose an understanding of universality as a continual process of becoming, rather than a static, abstract category. In line with this view, we argue that diversifying philosophy should aim to cultivate a new type of philosopher, rather than merely develop another theory.