Vol. 6, Issue 2, Part C (2024)

The self is not just a concept at the base of philosophy, but also of political theory, where it influences how societies perceive individuals, communities, justice, governance, and their relationships with nature. This essay discusses the convergent and divergent epistemologies of selfhood in Indian Knowledge Systems (IKS) and the Western paradigm within the larger contexts of Comparative Political Theory (CPT) and Global Epistemology. The self (ātman) in IKS is relational, ecological, and ethical, and at the same time is situated within the cosmic order (RTA) and collective obligations (dharma). Conversely, the Western model—particularly since Descartes and Locke—constitutes the self as sovereign, rational, and antecedent to society and nature. Consequently, these two epistemologies yield different political imaginaries: rights-oriented liberal individualism in the West, whereas duty-oriented, relational politics emerges in IKS.
Based on classical texts and modern scholarship (Taylor, 1989; Macpherson, 1962; Radhakrishnan, 1995; Shiva, 2005; Santos, 2014), the article contends that IKS offers a critical epistemology that subverts Western dualisms and simultaneously provides alternative conceptual resources in rethinking democracy, justice, and survival ecologies. It insists that selfhood is not only metaphysical but also has politico-implications of direct consequence to political institutions, global discourses, and ecological futures. By examining the “self-versus others” debate in the Western tradition and by contrasting it with the harmony-based politics of IKS, the paper develops a pluriversal conception of selfhood. Thus, such a framework acknowledges multiple epistemologies of being, thereby expanding the horizons of political theory and enriching global debates on human rights, sustainability, and justice in the 21st century.