THE SELF IN WESTERN AND EASTERN THOUGHT

According to British philosopher Allan Watts, one of the most fascinating ways to
understand one’s self or answer the question “ who am I”? is to view it through the
eyes of others: to look at how the great civilizations of the world have attempted to
answer this question, the differences in their answers, and the similarities. In doing so,
one might be able to shed light on one’s own views of the Self, and perhaps arrive at
some inkling of the fundamental truths that unite them all. In few of his books, Allan
goes on to discuss the world’s two great myths of the self: Myth in the West and Myth
in the East. As one focuses on finding truth and meaning, the difference is the “I” of
the West, and the “We” of the East.

Western concept of self

COLLEGE OF ARTS AND SCIENCES Bayombong Campus

DEGREE

PROGRAM GE COURSE NO. GE SELF

SPECIALIZATION COURSE TITLE UNDERSTANDING THE SELF

YEAR LEVEL FIRST YEAR TIME FRAME 6 HRS WK NO. 6 IM NO. 1

The western tradition is generally acknowledged to be “imbued with a style of

thinking based on dichotomy and binary opposition” (Carr & Zanetti, 2000; Singhal,
2000). There is a clear distinction between the creator and the created, the godhead
and his creations, in the same way as a potter is distinct from pots, and a carpenter
from his constructions (Watts, 1965). That there is an essential distinction between the
notion of the thinking subject (observer) that stands in natural opposition to
observable reality (Singhal, 2000)

In the western sense, man is a distinct entity from his creator or creators. Man is in no
way merely an extension of his creator(s), but is rather a fundamentally different
entity made of entirely different substance. It is very clear that the idea of the Self is
perceived as distinct from God—the pot distinct from the potter, with Man as the
artifact of creation. The self is understood primarily as an autonomous ego whose
existence is distinct from that of others. The focus is always looking towards the self.

As to contemporary western discussions, psychiatrist and professor, Frank Johnson

(1985), outlined four categories on how the term “self” is used:
1. Analytical

2. Monotheistic – involved the tendency toward unitary explanations of phenomena

and a closed-system view of “self” as modeled after a unitary, omnipotent power
(Man was created by God, in his image).

3. Individualistic

4. Materialistic/rationalistic

According to Johnson, Analytic means the “tendency toward unitary explanations of

phenomena and a closed-system view of “self” as modeled after a unitary, omnipotent
power (Man was created by God, in his image).Monotheistic in the sense that it
involves the tendency toward unitary explanations of phenomena and a closed-system
view of “self” as modeled after a unitary, omnipotent power (Man was created by
God, in his image). The Western civilization is more individualistic, trying to find the
meaning of life with self at the center. Self-expression and self-actualization are
important ways of establishing who a person is, as well as finding satisfaction in the
world. Finally, materialistic /rationalistic western thinking tends to discredit
explanations that do not use analytical –deductive modes of thinking (Johnson, 1985;
Goldin, 2000).

Eastern concept of self

From the earliest Vedic text, a non-duality of existence is created that supports the
idea of the Self in the East presented by Alan Watts—a universe of non-duality, a
creation that is completely unified with the creator, with no distinction. In contrast
with the West, the idea of the Self is indeed one of complete unity with the creator—
Man is God, acted out in a multitude of different ways, as an actor plays a part in a
drama

A feature of the Eastern conception of self is its relationality. In the East, it is often
argued there is no meaning of self that is independent of our relations to others.
Meaning, the self is irreducibly social. In order to be liberated, the inner self must be
freed first in accordance to the world around it. The Eastern philosophy is drawn
much more into groups or society or people’s actions and thoughts as one in order to
find meaning in life.

Collectivism is more apparent in the sense that they ought to discover the true “self”
in relation to everything around them, or as part of a bigger scheme. The ideas such as
social obligation to moral righteousness. Things like helping people and respecting
other is a great reflect on Confucian and Taoist ideals. Taken from the Son of Heaven
text "...obligations to serve the ruler, obligations to work for the family, obligations to
obey elders, obligations to help relatives, obligations to do well to glorify the name of
ancestors, obligations to defend the country in times of trouble, and obligations to
oneself to cultivate one's own virtue.