Abstract

A comparison of the dialectical worldviews of Nishida and Hegel is made by developing the notion of dialectical ontology as concrete philosophy in which logic is understood to extend beyond the level of discourse to the point where knowledge and experience cease to be opposed. The differences between their dialectical methods are outlined, highlighting Hegel's emphasis on the actualization of self-consciousness and historical progress in contrast to Nishida's concepts of the dialectal universal "place," the external now, and the self as expressive monad. It is argued that neither thinker is able to fulfill his own demand for a maximally concrete philosophy. However, by performing a dialectic of their dialectics, the pursuit of concrete philosophy is furthered. Takahashi Satomi's notion of "inclusive dialectics" is introduced to aid in articulating the comparative standpoint through which such a dialectic may be conceived