Jaganmohanlal Pandita Sadhuwad Granth

Author(s): Sudarshanlal Jain
Publisher: Jaganmohanlal Shastri Sadhuwad Samiti Jabalpur

Page 194

An Analysis and Evaluation of Eastern and Western Philosophical Approaches DONALD H. BISHOP Philosophy Department, Washington State University, Pullman, Washington, U. S. A.
One of the values of modern technology is that it has made the world into a global village, a place in which interaction between people is taking place on a scale hitherto unknown. Such a characterization must be qualified, however, for, if the world has become such a village in a physical sense, it has not to nearly the same degree psychologically. We still remain behind mental and cultural walls. There is a time lag in our understanding of how others perceive the world. This essay is but one attempt to level the walls or overcome the time lag.
I shall compare and evaluate Eastern and Western perspectives in regard to two areas especially, epistemology and metaphysics. A note of caution should be interjected at the beginning. Such comparisons necessitate a great deal of generalization, which is always hazardous. And it means that many perspectives within each tradition must be overlooked. Despite the inherent difficulties, however, comparative analysis of this type remains a commendable and fruitful one.
In actual experience, epistemology and metaphysics are not separate. How we think may well, determine what we assert reality is like. I shall discuss them separately, however, in part because it is more manageable to do so. Let us consider, first of all, some characteristics of the epistemological tradition which has dominated the West, especially in the Modern Period, i. e. 1500 to the present.
A major one is the tendency to think dualistically, that is, to see reality as consisting of pairs or sets of twos. Our language belies this. We use such terms as updown, here-there, soft-hard, heavy-light, black-white, right-wrong, good-bad, friend-enemy. As such terms demonstrate, we think dualistically not only in regard to the material world or the world of nature, but the world of persons as well.
Moreover, we think dialectically as well as dualistically. For if we were to repeat the terms above, or some of them at least, we would see that the connective in each case is the term "or", up or down, here or there, soft or hard, right or wrong, good or bad, friend or enemy. What we see happening is the introduction of the principle or law