Adamson on the lack of a word for "philosophy" outside of European contexts

"I've had a couple of conversations recently in which people challenged the use of "philosophy" in contexts outside of the European tradition, like pre-modern India and China.* Basically the worry is that if these traditions didn't have the word "philosophy," or a word that can directly be translated with "philosophy," then it is illegitimate, and maybe culturally imperialist, to impose it on them."

"Rather we should talk more loosely about "intellectual traditions" or "thought," or something like that (at least I guess this would be the alternative). Obviously I don't agree with this; and since I have encountered the point quite a few times over the past years, I thought it might make sense to explain why."

Challenges to using "philosophy" for non-European traditions focus on the absence of an equivalent term and the worry that applying it could be illegitimate or culturally imperialist. Critics suggest alternatives like "intellectual traditions" or "thought." Comparable practices of conceptual analysis, argumentation, and reflective inquiry across cultures support using "philosophy" as a useful analytic category. Translation and comparative study make cross-cultural engagement possible. Refusing the term risks isolating traditions and obscuring substantive continuities, so explaining the rationale for its use clarifies aims and avoids unnecessary separation.

Read at Warpweftandway