THE SELF IN WESTERN AND

ORIENTAL THOUGHT
Philosophical viewpoints arise from insights on human experience,
which is universal. A person who is of any origin can study philosophies of
any culture and have the possibility of gaining insight from that course of
study. But it is only a possibility. One can read without comprehension. It
takes a spark of intuition, often arising from life experience and an open
mind, to gain anything from reading philosophy or even from a good
teacher. Often, the axioms of these philosophies are quite embedded in
the mem ethics, the sort of painted in symbology and assumptions, of their
native cultures. This means that for a westerner, western philosophy us
easier to learn, but provides less of a sensation, often enough, of ground
shattering insight since the foundational assumptions are quite familiar
from subtle assumptions permeating the student's birth culture.

Eastern philosophy can seem, in contrast, exotic and romanticized

to the western mind even become “Orientalized” because the base
cultural assumptions require (dare I say) a re-orientation from early
axioms and building blocks, for the western student. So, for the western
student the east seems superior, until as a mature scholar he or she can
examine native traditions in a new perspective as truly human, not
parochial western, having learned what is global in philosophical thought.
And it is similar for the eastern student with one variation: western
philosophy is the imperial philosophy of dominant scientific/capitalist
culture. So it is never the same to return to your philosophy, denigrated by
the dominant culture.

This does not make western philosophy better, any more than it
made the British Empire better than its colonies, when it held so many in
dominance. Britain considered this, and presented it as natural law; the
colonies, including our main Quora countries of origin of India and the US,
both disagreed, in their times. ;) It is always the unconscious assumption
of a dominant culture that their cultural artifacts are superior, and that
“going native” is attractive but to be avoided, it seems.

But I believe that philosophers, east and west, and theologians,

struggle to describe subtle problems of human experience that are basic
to all humans in all cultures. Whether you describe this as reality, God, the
dharma, god head — it is as though we are seeing a nearly perfectly
transparent gem, and the great teachers of every tradition shine a beam of
light on one face of this barely translucent gem. By examining enough of
these beams of light, we can eventually intuit something of its vast
geometry and beauty. And that is a path of a life worth living.

The similarities between eastern and western philosophy are

greater than any differences cited by modern-day writers and lecturers on
the topic. The most often cited difference is that western philosophy is
'fragmentary' while eastern philosophy is 'holistic'. Western philosophy is
mainly used in the Western parts of the world, such as in the European
countries, while the Eastern philosophy is prevalent in Asian countries.
Western philosophy deals with Individualism while Eastern Philosophy is
related to Collectivism.

For my own opinion Western philosophy and Oriental

philosophy contribute differently to human life. Western thought has
shown that science is intersubjective, value-free, and involves a. spirit of
critical thinking. Oriental philosophy focuses upon the problem of human.
finitude and the notion of wisdom. Meanwhile Western philosophy refers to
the philosophical thought and work of the Western world. Historically, the
term refers to the philosophical thinking of Western culture, beginning with
the ancient Greek philosophy of the pre-Socratics.