Let me attempt an explanation...

There are two broad types of sculpture. One, such as stone carving, is where you take a large mass of material and remove the bits you don't want, to realise the image that you have imagined. The second, such as clay for casting, is to build up from small pieces, using armatures until the outer surface conforms to what you have imagined. Both processes, of course, involve a lot of feedback from interaction with the material.

Both, also, are about the process of resolving perceived figure/ground ambiguity - which appears to be a very basic 'talent' of the mind. Figure/ground is the same as saying what has meaning and what doesn't. Signal or noise? What is in the foreground (the figure), and what is merely background.

Our figure/ground mind  'talent' is largely dominated by our perception of visual phenomena ie those things that can be detected by human sight - which is a very narrow spectrum of radiation.

Were we to have able. through evolution,  to resolve atomic structures through sight, we would have been unlikely to make the same distinctions as we have. The thing I call a 'table', because I can see it as a discrete object (figure), lean on it, or tap it to confirm to myself its solidness, is, at an atomic level, no longer quite so discrete.

Now to Greek v Gestalt...

Occidental thought had its structured foundations in Greece - influenced by other cultures in contact with the Mediterranean coast. Those foundations are about giving things (even concepts) names, and how those names fit into a scheme. Like clay sculpture, it built out on an a series of armatures. It is an 'exploded view' of the world, that encourages people within it to worry more about how everything joins together in detail, and less about the whole thing - the sculptural surface.

Oriental culture seems to me to be more like stone carving - including contemplation of the 'ground' bits that need to be removed to achieve what has been imagined. It is this contemplation of the whole of the material before the vision is realised that makes the difference.

I do not know the exact reasons why this should be so. It could even be genetic, deep down, or evolved methods of mind-changing. I have taken an interest in all Eastern religions, philosophies and belief systems, and come to the conclusion that Oriental mysticism is quite different from Occidental mysticism. It is often expressed not in words, but in sensual experiences, such as music, or phenomena such as the 'darshan' (or the mystical experience of being in a vast multitude of people).

It is also more feminine: perhaps Occidental and Oriental are the yin and yang of the Earth? Perhaps they need to come into balance?

Perhaps we occidentals need to contemplate (not in words, but in experiences) the whole material, before splitting the stone.

You can't be me, I'm taken