Based on the available literature on Francesca Ferrando’s work on philosophical posthumanism, including her articulation that “posthumaism is post‐dualism” (or that posthumanism is defined by a post-dualistic stance), she does not explicitly frame her discussion in terms of classical Indian nondual philosophies such as those developed by Nāgārjuna or Adi Shankara. Her focus is primarily on rethinking the human condition in relation to modern technology, ecology, and global networks, drawing on a range of thinkers—including Nietzsche, Derrida, Foucault, and Donna Haraway—rather than on traditional Buddhist or Vedantic sources.
Key Points
1. Ferrando’s Framework:
• In her work (e.g., Philosophical Posthumanism, 2019), Ferrando defines posthumanism along three interrelated axes: post-humanism, post-anthropocentrism, and post-dualism.
• Post-dualism for Ferrando is intended to undermine strict dualistic oppositions (such as mind/body, human/non-human), which she sees as foundational to many of Western humanist paradigms. This is part of her project to dismantle hierarchical and exclusionary conceptions.
2. Engagement with Tradition:
• While Ferrando’s genealogical approach to posthumanism does engage with the history of Western thought (for example, her discussion of Enlightenment humanism, postmodernism, and feminist epistemologies), her work generally does not delve into the classical nondual philosophies of India.
• There is some acknowledgment in her work that non-Western philosophies (including those from India) can offer alternative ways of conceiving relationality and the nature of subjectivity. However, when discussing post-dualism as a mode of thinking beyond rigid oppositions, Ferrando does not specifically cite Nāgārjuna or Adi Shankara as primary references.
3. The Role of Nāgārjuna and Shankara in Nondual Thought:
• Both Nāgārjuna (Mādhyamika Buddhism) and Adi Shankara (Advaita Vedanta) are seminal figures in the tradition of nondual thought in India, yet their philosophical projects are situated in very different historical and metaphysical contexts.
• Ferrando’s formulation of post-dualism emerges from a critique of Western humanism and dualistic thinking in contemporary contexts (technology, ecology, and bio-politics). While the spirit of nonduality resonates with the insights of Indian philosophy, Ferrando’s work does not specifically draw on Nāgārjuna’s or Shankara’s texts or arguments.
Conclusion
To answer the question directly: Francesca Ferrando, when stating that posthumaism (or philosophical posthumanism) is post-dualism, does not explicitly mention Nāgārjuna or Adi Shankara in that context. Her discussion of post-dualism is framed within a broader critique of Western anthropocentrism and dualistic thought rather than as a continuation or commentary on classical Indian nondual philosophies.
This conclusion is supported by reviews and summaries of her work, which emphasize her engagement with continental thinkers and modern critical theory, rather than with the classical texts of Nāgārjuna or Shankara.
If you’re interested in further exploring the connections (or potential differences) between Ferrando’s post-dualism and the nondual philosophies of India, it might be fruitful to compare how each tradition addresses dualistic thinking—but as for Ferrando’s own citations and references, there is no explicit mention of Nāgārjuna or Shankara in that particular claim.
