Display:
I'm not sure it's a useful distinction.

The obvious difference for me is that Western beliefs are based on static abstract principles. (I know I've mentioned this twice already, but the static part seems to be really important.)

Eastern ideas seem much more dynamic. Male and female are dynamics of change that transform into each other, rather than being fixed states of being. The movement is as important as the description - hence the idea that any line in a hexagram can potentially be moving.

Everything is in dynamic equilibrium, and tiny changes can have very significant results. This is very different to the Western view, where - effectively - everything is made of blocks that can be nested and stacked and don't change, except to a limited extent in combination.

That's why we have big hulking words like 'government' and 'job' and 'marriage' and struggle with the idea that these are mutable processes, not fixed things.

by ThatBritGuy (thatbritguy (at) googlemail.com) on Tue Oct 17th, 2006 at 04:09:20 PM EST
[ Parent ]
If you go far back in Western thought you can find a Greek philosopher suggesting just about any idea you like. Quite a few of them were dualistic in a sense not unlike the Eastern one, and on whether principles are static or dynamic you have Heraclitus' Panta Rei (Everything flows and nothing is left unchanged) versus Parmenides' aletheia (the reality of the world is 'One Being': an unchanging, ungenerated, indestructible whole).

Those whom the Gods wish to destroy They first make mad. -- Euripides
by Migeru (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Tue Oct 17th, 2006 at 06:28:55 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Display:
Login
. Make a new account
. Reset password
Occasional Series