Eastern Philosophy vs Western Philosophy

Do you prefer Eastern or Western Philosophy?


  • Total voters
    32
Aug 2010
16,022
Welsh Marches
#2
I once became quite interested in Chinese philosophy, but gave up because I realized that one cannot any proper knowledge of it without knowing the language. There are very different kinds of eastern philosophy of course.
 
Likes: Yôḥānān
Apr 2018
1,562
Mythical land.
#3
eastern,well because there is lot more content and variety(indian,chinese and by some extent i think even middle eastern philosphy is considered "eastern"),while in western philoisphy we have just greeco-roman and philosphy from modern times AFAIK.
 
Aug 2010
16,022
Welsh Marches
#6
Islamic philosophy of the golden age is in many ways a peculiar development of Classical Greek philosophy building on Aristotle, Plato etc., and can be compared to the Christian philosophy of the high Middle Ages, which did the same in a different way. So our neat schemes of classification always prove inadeqaute in the end. Personally I would set both western philosophy and classical Islamic philosophy against the wholly different philosphical traditions of India and China, which have completely separate roots and assumptions. I don't know anything about later Islamic or Middle Eastern thought. As western philosophy I would include anything ultimately derived from the European tradition, wherever it is practised (including in the East). There are complicated interactions between different philosophical traditons, e.g it is possible to take an analytic approach to eastern philosophies, while western thinkers have often found it fruitful to draw from eastern thought in approaching the philosophy of mind and consciousness for instance.
 
#7
Western.

I find Western philosophy is more practical, Eastern philosophy is fluffy and excessive.

A lot of trying to sound wise > true practicality.

Warfare and martial arts are two areas where this is very evident for me.

Eastern Martial arts for e.g has a lot of philosophy in it yet they avoid full contact sparring and competition which leads to a dilution in effectiveness.

Every Western Martial art is full contact, which means when you use it you know what works.

I find this is a good reflection of a lot of differences between East & West.
 
Mar 2012
4,340
#9
Western.


Eastern Martial arts for e.g has a lot of philosophy in it yet they avoid full contact sparring and competition which leads to a dilution in effectiveness.

Every Western Martial art is full contact, which means when you use it you know what works.

I find this is a good reflection of a lot of differences between East & West.
I don't know what martial arts you've came across, but not all western martial arts are full contact at all. Krav Maga for example, is not. Furthermore, I think you need to distinguish modern combat sports from traditional martial arts, they developed in a wholly different environment.

Even with combat sports, the vast majority of modern popular combat sports originated from Japan (and in extension China) or Thailand, which are eastern and full contact. Most striking arts today in MMA are either Kickboxing (which came from Karate and boxing) or Muaythai, boxing and wrestling being the only element of western combat present. Grappling are almost entirely dominated by Brazilian Jujitsu or Sambo, both of which ultimately originated from Judo. Kicking arts in the majority of combat sports today ultimately came from either Karate or Muaythai. Only the hands are from boxing.
 

Similar History Discussions