Heraclitus was the original thinker of process rather than substance in western thought, anti-Platonism begins with Heraclitus who was CLEARLY inspired by Persian rather than Babylonian or Egyptian thinking.
Both Nietzsche, Heidegger and Rorty celebrate Heraclitus and define themselves both as anti-Platonists and porcess thinkers. Dewey and William James is even more so.
Kant was a philosopher of substance and the last major thinker of substance was Hegel.
Wittgenstein is interestingly both. He began as a thinker of substance ("Tractatus") and then spent his mature age reacting against his youtful writings (which is why the older Wittgenstein is the formidable thinker of process).
Zarathushtra is a process and not a substance thinker. The world is in constant flux according to the author of The Gathas, and this flux should be embarced, should be CELEBRATED.
This is summarized in the very term Mazdayasna.
2009/9/20 Special Kain
If I will ever have the time to do so, I won't hesitate to do so. Right now I'm terribly busy graduating at the University of Zurich. There is only little time left to pursue anything other than my studies.
Betreff: [Ushta] Re: Zoroastrian thinkers
Datum: Sonntag, 20. September 2009, 12:56
Have you considered putting together an "apology" of Zoroastrianism using the writings of these western philosophers to explain Z to western minds?
--- In Ushta@yahoogroups. com, Special Kain
> Dear friends,
> If we are to explain Zoroastrian thought in terms of western philosophy, I'd say that Baruch Spinoza, Alfred North Whitehead, John Dewey and - to a lesser extent - Richard Rorty and Friedrich Nietzsche are very close to what Zoroastrian thought is containing.
> Ushta, Dino