Is ʻIke Hawaiʻi (Hawaiian Knowledge) Philosophy? A Symposium on the Possibilities of Hawaiʻi Philosophy

Abstract

In this first academic symposium on Hawaiʻi Philosophy, Michael David Kaulana Ing proposes using the term Philosophy as a bridge concept—one that enables culturally diverse communities to articulate their own philosophical traditions while engaging in shared dialogue. The dialogue that would ensue would allow them to discuss their shared interests in meaningful ways. Following up on his proposal, Ing develops an understanding of Hawaiʻi Philosophy that includes the emic ʻIke Hawaiʻi, the etic Hawaiian Philosophy, and Kālaimanaʻo as a “thought-carving” middle space that enables Kānaka Hawaiʻi alongside others to search for resources far and wide to make meaning of the world we live in. Highlighting that Hawaiʻi Philosophy can only take place insofar as it is grounded in practice, Kaipulaumakaniolono Keala cautions about Kānaka Hawaiʻi demarcating the boundaries of a field when the journey has just begun, while Kamalani Johnson argues that Hawaiʻi philosophy must be rooted in a Kanaka-centered conceptualization of knowledge. Meanwhile, Bruce Kaʻimi Watson has chosen to remain visibly silent in this global forum for Kānaka, offering a loud but quiet withholding. Tamara Albertini responds to Ing’s call for a distinctly Hawaiian framework of inquiry, which she describes as “philosophical wayfinding.” Writing as a non-Kanaka Maoli philosopher, she accepts this invitation in the spirit of the guest who does not arrive to consume but to tarry, perceive, and contribute with care. In so doing, she draws on her own methodology of bricolage and flânerie—approaches designed to resist the hierarchization and appropriation of philosophical traditions—in order to engage in a reflective exchange that foregrounds Indigenous knowledge systems. She particularly highlights genealogies of thought rooted in Native Hawaiian culture and embraces Ing’s notion of borrowing as a generative and creative contribution to the evolving landscape of World Philosophies. Celia Tagamolila Bardwell-Jones argues that Hawaiʻi Philosophy practitioners adopt an ethic of hard incommensurability. She encourages Kānaka Hawaiʻi not to allow for integration, fusion or facile comparisons with Hawaiʻi Philosophy. Sydney Morrow leans on Ing’s understanding of “bounded multiplicity” to develop an understanding of existential poverty afflicting post-contact Kanaka society. An alleviation of this poverty would require a different policy analysis as compared to standard economic-driven solutions, she holds. In his reply to his co-panelists, Ing reiterates that the practice of Hawaiʻi Philosophy must be guided by the principles of positionality, epistemic humility, hoʻokamaʻāina, etc. and must support the Kanaka community for whom Hawaiʻi is their ancestral home.