Philosophy Discussion Forums | A Humans-Only Club for Open-Minded Discussion & Debate

[Tegularius]

Where are the justifications for these opinions of yours? Can we see them?

History of which a majority of Americans know nothing! Also, I'm not American.

I'm not American either, but you didn't answer the question. What is this history, unknown or otherwise, that justifies your position?

What justifies this position is another question already asked. What did the Chinese accomplish in their over 4000 years of history besides a few inventions? Already during the Roman Empire period western science was already considerably in advance of theirs. Had it not been for Christianity as Carl Sagan mentioned we could have been on the moon already by 10th or 11th century. I'm not about to give a history lesson. There's plenty out there as to how China became sinocentric starting in the 15th century and its consequences. Chinese arrogance, which seems to be a constant in their history assumed everything external to their borders consisted of barbarians. If it weren't for the West where would China be today?

When you look at those countries and the shape they're in most famed for wisdom which fooled even C.G. Jung among others, one wonders what does all of this vaunted wisdom amount to.

[Ket]

More and more the model of reality envisioned by quantum physicists looks more like those envisioned in the Tao Te Ching and other "Eastern" works than the probabilistic mechanical system based in "Western" logic. Ambiguity, chaos, state-changes, multiple universes, 85% an unknown simply labeled "dark", etc. I learned to swim in a white water river where reading the current as you were swept downstream is a skill that holds value in getting through life. Having a sense of being in the "zone" of life means sensing the flows that push and pull us "downstream" toward our final demise. That sense cannot come through formulaic prescription, but must allow for avoiding the boulders and submerged trees almost through intuition. I much prefer this holistic approach that combines logic, experience, training, and intuition.

[Ket]

I'm not sure what is being debated here. The yardstick being used to measure the success of a philosophy or religion seems to be material success--the number of inventions, etc. The discussion has devolved into a comparison of Chinese success vs "Western" success. I see many problems with this approach. First and foremost, it begs such questions as: what is Eastern or Western philosophy--what is actually being evaluated? How does one measure success in life--whoever dies with the most things wins? Is Universal Success measured in anthropocentric terms? Seems to me that humanity is coming perilously close to self annihilation what with nuclear arms and climate catastrophe. Is the "West" (including all the world's countries--including China--as they become more and more industrialized) really winning? I am not optimistic.

Maybe what should be compared is a religion that gives humanity dominion over all the rest of nature, and a religion that is based on the interrelatedness of all things in the universe. I'll take the latter.

[AmericanKestrel]

Maybe what should be compared is a religion that gives humanity dominion over all the rest of nature, and a religion that is based on the interrelatedness of all things in the universe. I'll take the latter.

A clarifying distinction between Easter and Western thoughts. The respect for other religious traditions, as noted in another post, also, I think, makes secularism more natural in the regions where these religions are practiced. It did not require a constitutional amendment to impose separation of church and state, they were naturally considered separate spheres of life - the world, unreal and ephemeral, and Brhman, the only Truth.

[Ket]

Agreed. The "problems"with religions arise when they become formalized, when form takes precedence over substance. The underlying humanism of all religions devolves into tribalism and the original truth becomes lost in ritual and discourse over minutia.

[AmericanKestrel]

Agreed. The "problems"with religions arise when they become formalized, when form takes precedence over substance. The underlying humanism of all religions devolves into tribalism and the original truth becomes lost in ritual and discourse over minutia.

Yes.
I think a lot is lost when the original texts are translated and interpreted. English lacks the shades of meaning and context that Sanskrit imparts to a word. Even practitioners within the religion do not always have access to the original thought. It is quite awe inspiring to see how similar the thoughts are when you get close to the actual text, they all say the same thing at a fundamental level. It is always the interpretation that causes chaos.