Eastern vs Western Philosophy - Change Self vs World

[@alwaysgreatusa223]

Stoicism would appear to be an exception to this rule, as the stoic seeks to change himself by simply accepting the world, instead of trying to change it.

[@2Hesiod]

Western philosophy is just as much about changing as in know yourself, and the Stoics taught us to change oneself.

[@keanujasonreyes297]

Wow. This video is underrated.Thank you for sharing!

[@roadman_hanzi]

Note that not all eastern philosophies are the same Middle Eastern philosophy is based off islam and spirituality sure but it focuses on being righteous through helping your community and people and by doing good deeds , islam left an impact on Asian philosophies too , in a sense it focuses on the ummah a shared nation based on religion that everyone that is Muslim is your sibling and unity to do good deeds is an objective need , in islam a Muslim hero might fight evil but we still have the concept of qadar aka written faith and failures that God might written for you and you can't change unless God allows you , in islam our prophet didn't kill anyone except 1 dude in self protection yet he orchestrated strategical wars to protect his people and slowly islam spread by both conquest with minimum casualties or with peace (and most Muslim countries had islam exported to them by peace) ,also knowledge in islam is a way for heaven so even scientific theory might make you go up the sky after your death , the idea of our God is him having no son, and his relationship with his subjects is direct and shall be based on trust and love from the subject ,

[@bad8brains8]

Thank you🙏

[@sideshow00]

Great breakdown. Looking forward to more.

[@stevemcelmury4618]

Wonderful! Thanks so much... 😀

[@PhilosophyAnimal]

You are so welcome!

[@wasabichips933]

Great video! Can you point to certain books if any that you referenced in writing the script for this video?

[@ntang99]

A lot of intriguing ideas even though they are not scientifically verified. But it is very fun to chat about them

[@Khan_is_mongol]

You are east asian, what is this trend to change your name to Michael to sound more western? this is a very shameful act by chinese. Its embarassing..James Wong, John Lee, Alan Law, Mark Chang...I dont understand...Do you every see a white guy that's called Xi Johson, Li Kennedy or Mao Clarkson??? No so why do this?

[@BebeSensei]

Thank you for posting these high effort videos for us… just remember there are hundreds of us enjoying these videos, which by no means is a low viewer base in the grand scheme. Love your videos man

[@PhilosophyAnimal]

So nice of you

[@liltick102]

Fictionbeast? Sweet, glad to have found this channel.

[@chitown_chiraq]

I agree with Einstein the Universe doesn't need human existence to flourish

[@alwaysgreatusa223]

Before one can change the world, one must first come to accept it to some extent. The wisdom of Stoicism is that we must learn to distinguish between those things we can control and those things over which we have no control. Accepting the world, therefore, means simply accepting this reality of what we can and cannot control --that is, accepting that this is a real distinction. Since, it is a real distinction, to simply think we can completely change the world is as foolish a notion as it is to believe that nothing we do matters. We can control our own emotions, attitudes, and reactions to events, but we have less control over the events themselves, and even less control still over the emotions, attitudes, and reactions of other people to these same events. But having less control is not the same as having no ability to influence the outcomes of events and the attitudes of other people to some extent. We can make ourselves into leaders with influence, scientists with knowledge, organizers with plans, workers with skill and dedication, and philosophers, artists, and spiritualists with a passion for wisdom, art, and spirituality. In doing so, we can influence, and, thereby change the world to some extent (as did Jesus, Socrates, Gautama ). But it all begins with first having SELF-CONTROL !

[@urusledge]

I have a question.. In the latter third of this video you spoke a lot on Chinese and Indian philosophy focusing on being part of nature, being fatalistic, and moving around obstacles rather than overcoming them, and then indicated this mentality led to pacifism, or at least far less emphasis on conquering the world than conquering the self. But a look at the history of ancient and Medieval Chinese history reveals not one large, singular nation of pacifist rarely gong to war, but a massive labyrinth of kingdoms and dynasties nearly constantly at war, in some instances shedding more blood in decades than centuries of European conflicts of contemporary eras (the Three Kingdoms War, for example, saw death on a scale that Europe would not see until Napoleon's rise to power at the earliest, perhaps not until the trenches of WW1). How does this make sense given what you have stated in the video? I understand, again, that you had to make broad generalizations, but war, not just put of defense from raiding Mongol Hordes, but for the purpose of expanding kingdoms and dynasties seems to be closer to the rule than the exception in ancient and Medieval China.

[@PhilosophyAnimal]

Hey I’m no historian but my hypothesis was based on China never sending out armies to Europe or India as the Greeks and other Europeans did. It’s generalization on my part. I guess Chinese geography prevented them to do it.

[@sushanthkumar800]

I personally think that it is based on confusion idea of Mandate of Heaven. Which tells there is order in heaven which is maintained by king(Tianxia). The same order is to be replicated on earth though a single emperor who unify China in this case the Middle Kingdom. So all the wars in China even in some cases Korea and Japan is about unification and maintaining order. It is not about achieving anything great or exploring anything new but just replicating the order. That is the reason in some Chinese dynasties even reduce their kingdom size to maintain order. Their biggest architecture is Great Wall of china to keep barbarians out of the ordered kingdom.

[@urusledge]

Interesting video. While I realize you admitted to having to make broad generalizations, I think you underestimated just how much you are generalizing certain aspects of Western philosophy, especially when it comes to change taking place within the self and accepting circumstances. While there is definitely an emphasis on outward change when necessary, in particular when justice demands it, a great deal of focus is on changing the individual self. Aristotle spoke at length on what he referred to as "telos" which translates to "purpose." He constructed a sort of quasi-morality around it, which is now referred to as teleology. The idea is that the most moral way to act is by using reason to discern the purpose of a thing or person, then using that thing as true to its purpose as possible, or that person acting as true to his or her purpose as possible. But this does not mean that ny change over time is "progress." In fact, one could argue that a change that drives a person or thing from his or its purpose is not progress but an unwelcome change. I personally think that the rapid changes in technology since the mid-19th century have corrupted the idea of progress in that way. Each generation has been born and died in essentially different worlds. People who arrived to the American western territories in covered wagons as children could fly across the country in their 50s and 60s and watched men land on the moon in their 70s and 80s. People born when cars were little more than rickety motorized carriages grew to see motorsports involving cars that could travel hundreds of miles an hour become a regular part of entertainment. Even more recent generations have gone from fuzzy pictures on TV and video games and land-line phones and computers that take up a whole corner of the room to a device that performs all those functions dozens of times faster and clearer and fits in their pocket. And most of these changes in technology brought around better and better standards of living. This has led to the assumption of constant change and that change is almost always good. But I think many would argue is that the purpose of technology is to ease human suffering and struggle, and we are seeing many developments of technology bringing change that increasingly seems to go against that purpose. The Bible does tell the story of Jesus sacrificing himself to overcome the evil of the world, but the story doesn't end there. The idea of Christianity is that Jesus lived a perfect life, and we should strive to imitate him as much as possible by repenting of evil ways and habits. Jesus himself spoke against the false self-righteousness of many, saying "you must remove the log from your own eye before you can remove the speck from your brother's." The Apostle Paul, when referring to the struggle of reforming one's life and resisting temptation to fall back into sin, goes so far as to write in the Letters to the Corinthians: "...therefore I beat my body and make it my slave..." Even in more recent times, the American Founding Fathers, many of whom were very well educated men familiar with philosophical writings reaching as far back as Aristotle, through the New Testament and up through the Enlightenment (particularly Scottish Enlightenment) had a socio-political philosophy that greatly idealized the small, self-sufficient farmer. And while the Scientific Revolution over the last 400 years has seemed to slowly morph the idea of truth down to a simplistic reading of facts, that hasn't always been the case. Even today, people like Jordan Peterson put a great deal of effort into reestablishing the importance of different kinds of truth (not necessarily that truth is subjective, but that not all truth can be ascertained by "scientific," cold, dry observation).

[@alwaysgreatusa223]

The only problem with this analysis is that Greek and Roman philosophy is, for the most part, not really about trying to change the world, as much as it is about trying to change the self by understanding the world and the self, thus becoming wise -- or, at least, wiser than before. During the Middle Ages, the focus of philosophy was mainly to serve as a handmaiden for theology and scripture -- i.e the focus was on going to Heaven, and not on this world ! Again, this involved changing oneself to be worthy of God's mercy and salvation. It is only later, during the Renaissance and the Enlightenment that Europeans as a whole focus more on changing the world in a materialistic way. But, even here, and into the Industrial Revolution to the present, it is hard to find any philosophy (outside of Marx, and Utilitarianism) that is strictly focused more on changing the world, than it is on trying to simply understand it. Empiricism and Pragmatism are definitely outward-looking philosophies, but on the whole, they are more concerned with the proper way to understand the world than they are with trying to change it. For a reaction to the Renaissance and Enlightenment that is not simply a Christian rebuttal, see Rousseau's 'Discourse on the Arts and Sciences'

[@gracefitzgerald2227]

Great POV on geographical locality.

[@lorinapetranova2607]

What a combo! It's a shame the West seems to barely know Tagore. Amongst others...blessings.

[@deacudaniel1635]

"Westerners are more materialistic and Easterners are more spiritual".I have to strongly disagree on this.For example in China religion is all about money: they even have a god of money, they burn paper cash to send them to dead people, they have a lot of methods to attract "good luck and prosperity" which is mostly material.The West may have been materialistic before Christianity, but then Christianity came with the idea that you should renounce striving for material abundance and concentrate on redeeming your soul, while Chinese culture doesn't care that much about afterlife and even in some exceptions, they see afterlife as a reflection of the present material life, that's why European kings invested a lot in building cathedrals to please God so their souls can be saved, while Chinese emperors like Qin Shihuang built copies of their earthly life and possessions in massive tombs so they can continue to enjoy them in their afterlife.There is also the Taoist cult of immortality, which is basically using alchemy and other methods to extend the time of your earthly life, because there's no such thing as an eternal conscious soul after dead as in Western thought.Now China is one of the most atheistic countries, followed closely by other East Asian countries.That's also why East Asian parents force their kids into studies and jobs that make more money while Western parents tend to encourage kids to follow their own talents and passions.

[@Thou-Art_Objective-Rock]

Brilliant! 👏 Just Brilliant! I like how both sides reflect the opposite, but the end goal is opposite. The west really is more individualistic and the east oneness, both achieved by the opposite way. The hybrid would be the Bible. In the Bible you have a clash of both worlds 🌎 😉 The only answer is love with passion ❤ and flow 🏄‍♂️ as one. In other words maximize love and at the same time just love. The perfect example is Christ.

[@jahin8386]

12:40

[@Brata19]

What about stoicism? Was that materialistic? And philosophy of legalism from China that was used by the Chin dynasty. You conflate the trends in society as if it's constant throughout history. You can see now in east asia they even become materialistic & atheistic. I don't see many differences other than culture especially how it manifest in semantic, trends, and different gods. Most of history Asia was the centre and high on materialistic civilization too. How you got your spices, silk, etc then? Through river? I mean river vs sea kinda ridiculous... Also the culture of individualism is still quite recent phenomenon, even through the western standard. You really need to go outside that orientalist & new age bubble.

[@forestgrumpy119]

Make ur own video den

[@heavenlypath1065]

Bro shut up and make a video

[@leonstenutz6003]

Love your efforts and all you put into these videos. That said, i strongly recommend you take a deeper and more systemic and whole-perspective look into eastern philosophy, culture, and religion. You present a number of broad generalizations, some of which are inconsistent with the true essence, nature, and realities of vastly important and complex cultures, philosophies, and religions which you may be inaccurately portraying. Don't mean to offend or downplay the value of your work -- on the contrary, because i value your efforts, productions, and their influence, i urge you to look deeper into Buddhism, Daoism, Jainism, Vedanta, and so on... each is a vast universe. For a different & more accurate view of buddhism for example, i suggest listening carefully to Ajahn Jayassaro & Thich Nhat Hahn. Their interpretation of Buddhism is quite different than the perspective you share. One was a buddhist monk for 70+ years and the other is going on 40+ years; i've been diving ever deeper for 15+ years now and feel like i am only now beginning to understand the enormous significance and positive power of this profound, vast worldview. Some westerners have grossly misunderstood & misinterpreted what is probably one of the most advanced, nuanced, and perfected cosmovisions ever developed by humans. It helps to go directly to the source. Cheers. Light & Love.

[@MysterEarl]

India and China would have gained nothing much by invading other countries, even though their ships were of better quality and larger size than the European ships. Dharmic religions also teaches ahimsa.

[@SezzzSimon]

Perhaps you should read the Mahabarata, it and the Gita puts your arguments in the toilet...

[@flockoturtles]

Came here to say this. Te Greeks learned from India.

[@dingding4898]

Can somewhere here explain this further with some specific points?

[@_VISION.]

Western philosophy

[@sayujgyawali9259]

Buddha was born in nepal bro not india. U focus on india and show pic of buddha . Just do some more research bro

[@ullintalulna7066]

Hi, I have to disagree on some points: 1 it's not true that Greeks had a linear conception of time, since they always thought it cyclical; The linear time is a difference neither established by profetism since the Messiah will return. Time was considered linear by some interprets of Christianity which waited for christ to come and then not RETURN to paradise, but proceed further in the life scale (hierarchy of creatures). This thought is nowadays a basic thought of anyone who studies science, since time, as defined byour instruments to correctly predict all physical phenomena we are able to define , IMPLIES an asymmetry, and precisely BTW premises and conclusions. 2 Greek culture is very much connected to farm, as you can see reading the poetic tradition, from which philosophy arises. The fact that oriental people trade with Greeks was the reason why the east brought their mathematics into place. Now, this is the only relevant and distinctive feature. Math for East was always something misterious, algebraic. Greeks, instead, thought math to be geometric, so no number/equation had meaning unless linked to a geometrical figure. Now, at the start (Pitagora, Tales etc) philosophy was very much the same: initiatic, misteric or a figure BTW poet and mystic. When someone began to profit on this knowledge (sophists) the West made a step further, which east never did before us. The west searched a way to test publicly knolwwdge. (Greek agora). So the test of truth became a public trial. THIS intersection BTW Law and mysterious knoedge gave rise to a result which is 100 % west and without which knowledge is just religion, "a question of power and war" or a fraud. It came out Logic. Now there was an interest to demonstrate, INDEPENDENTLY from your behavior that you knew something. Prejudice of East was: sage man= truth. And being sage can be a huge masquerade, as we see still nowadays in the various guru. In knowledge there is something which is right and something which is not. THIS is the real meaning of "end, scope". Because if you establish an end, then either a plan reach it or no, and the most plain intellect can judge this. No mystery. No wonder that the "critics" are intellectual types of the west (-; 3 Pacifism is not a difference, since China, Japan etc knew some of the most brutal wars and cold general, I cite just two: Sun Tzu and Gengis Khan, the most ferocious general ever been. Also, in Japan there was the order of Samurai, as you know. So it is rather a different approach to war. In the west science had been financed by lords to win wars, while in the east the war machines came out more from a transgression from a code, since War was more linked to Swords and similar arms. Now there are a lot of people. Back then Asia was simply bigger, with more resources and less populated (density). But humans are and were everywhere warmongers. CONCLUSIONS You are talking about America VS rest of the world, perhaps, since America made a product from the figure of genius. "America" thinks that school is an industry and students are products. That's the whole problem. America is contagious on us Europeans more than on the east because east is not economically dependent. That's the story. For the rest Einstein is talking about Logic, Tagore doesn't know it. And there is a 10 seconda easy and 100% accurate reason to answer the question: which is the difference BTW east and west philosophy? Answer is: Logic. In these times everyone search an equal sharing of merits, but the reality is that science, as we know today, is due to Europe, because European invented logic, while in the east knowledge remained something not very well distinguished from mistery and religion. That some crap industrialists ruined the world is of course true, but philosophy and science are not implied (rather "philosophers and scientists"). I'd rather call materialistic a philosophy with a lot of vague terms (beauty, etc etc) which makes nothing but adepts, than call that way a science which actually promoted and caused a better condition to live better, then with more possibilities of peace. Progress is an airplane, not a vegetarian old man with sandals who speak slowly and calmly. Thank you for your work, Best regards

[@forestgrumpy119]

Make ur own video den

[@ullintalulna7066]

@@forestgrumpy119 hi good morning, If I see a video of a channel I like, which contains some wrong information I think it is better to say what is wrong. Your attitude towards corrections is intelligible only if you think my comment was offensive or implicative of me being better of the author of the video. Thus I have to correct you as well, because that is not the case.

[@RS-zh2md]

Re: "Progress is an airplane, not a vegetarian old man with sandals who speak slowly and calmly." Progress in physical world maybe an airplane today, however the east (Buddhist, Jain, Hindu paths....) regard ultimate progress as mastery over consciousness itself (for e.g. transcending impermanence, unsatisfactoriness and ego of Buddhism and its many variants in other paths). However ancient world was not lacking in mastery of the physical as the Ellora Cave Temples show. No engineer knows how those things were built. Also re: "European invented logic," there were schools of logic in other areas besides the greeks. e.g. indian/china regions.....according to scholars.

[@ullintalulna7066]

@@RS-zh2md Hi, good morning, 1 you distinguish BTW physical and spiritual progress. I would say that to understand the physics necessary to build an airplane is necessary a spiritual domain of oneself to apply to studies. As you can see, in this case, spiritual is necessary but not sufficient. In the context of that division, spirituality is a way to physical progress, insofar as this progress is peaceful, I. E. Obtained through cooperation and study, in alternative to mere competition for resources. 1.1Even if it is true that no today's engineer know how something ancient was build, it is certain that nothing near wifi or airplanes were built back then. 2 About logic I am sure that there is nothing in the east which let anyone even suspect any formal interest in logic, I. E. An intersection BTW Algebra an grammatic as you see In the semi-formal theory of syllogism by Aristotle and, even more, in the formal theory developed in the 20th century based on the work made by Boole, Frege, and then Russell-Withehead (and a special mention for the Characteristica Universalis by Leibniz back in the 17th century ). Best regards

[@RS-zh2md]

​@@ullintalulna7066 Greetings! Re: "it is certain that nothing near wifi or airplanes were built back then." Ancient world has many accounts of flying machines. The absence of those machines today is analogous to the mystery of the tools used to build those ancient structures. None of the ancient tools of machinery have been found. We only have evidence of their existence via the granite etc. structures built. To say they never had wifi or planes is a modern assumption. Given that they were able to do things with rock far in advance of any technology today implies that flying and wifi would have been something far easier to achieve. BTW spiritual mastery such as OBE travel here, would make use of flying machines irrelevant: rarehistoricalphotos.com/the-burning-monk-1963/ (OBE tavel is a standard by-product of Buddhist samatha meditation which is how the monk is able to sit still in flames. Eastern spirituality looks at the bigger picture of life and aims to develop that which is indestructible - consciousness, rather than waste time developing physical world which ends in old age, loss, and death for every individual). However not all in east embraced this spirituality which is attested to by the architectural/engineering feats of ancient worlds. Re: "About logic I am sure that there is nothing in the east which let anyone even suspect any formal interest in logic" Logic was part of formal study in India. But it seems it also was in China and other parts: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indian_logic en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_logic

[@lovelife1867]

Orthodox Christian dogma is also about accepting your fate thru God's plan / wisdom.