(The author's brief thoughts on generalisation is listed below today's main topic*) The de facto generalisation of Western and Asian culture is that Western culture tends to stand up against what they feel is wrong and argue the idea into you till you agree and its Asian counterpart tends to just follow what is the status quo and goes with the majority. The important difference here is that the Asian philosopher (in generalisation) literally walks away from the disagreeing party rather than argue it. Confucius, Mencius, etc. wandering China rather than implanting themselves in one spot hostile to their teachings to preach being an example. This particular trait and its positive qualities will be the topic of discussion for this post.
The standard thought of today's world people is no doubt mostly Western and with a whole internet of information as 'evidence'. Anyone can literally argue any point and believe in its righteous nature. Thus in essence, one is going to meet more people in this current world that would be less likely to change an opinion even after a convincing discussion. And to that end, it can be argued that one might as well never had that discussion and just taken that time to do something more productive.
This being said. the author is not implying non discussion, rather he is taking a position of efficiency. For example, debating a point with someone who has already a biased position is equivalent to listening to a person who is complaining about a situation that has already past. The result equates to nothing achieved and nothing solved. Your presence is just there as a tool for this person to finish a sentence and feel better about their own person. The efficient thing to do, either talk about a way to improve/solve the problem, move on from it or just leave and not listen to the problem.
The world is not perfect though and sometimes people will argue with you, whether you like it or not. In some cases, even with hostility in mind or action. And it was after discussing about one such hostile argument with a friend that he pointed out a very Confucian idea and solution to the issue : Just walk away. It was not meant literally in all cases but for example, sometimes, just agreeing with a biased person and ending the conversation is better than continuing to discuss it with him/her as it leads to the same result. The person still ends up only believing in their own point of view. Confucius and the like knew this and with the knowledge that there was literally a world of people willing to discuss/teach/learn about their issues better, why then stop at a dead end of a biased argumentative person when there is so much better to be had by just taking a step beyond said person.
In conclusion, one's life is so limited and the truth is we all do not know for sure what happens to us after death, thus life should be spent as efficiently as possible. To give an example, with a time limit, would you rather use a sledgehammer to pound down a brick wall or use one's untrained fist.
Till next word...
The standard thought of today's world people is no doubt mostly Western and with a whole internet of information as 'evidence'. Anyone can literally argue any point and believe in its righteous nature. Thus in essence, one is going to meet more people in this current world that would be less likely to change an opinion even after a convincing discussion. And to that end, it can be argued that one might as well never had that discussion and just taken that time to do something more productive.
This being said. the author is not implying non discussion, rather he is taking a position of efficiency. For example, debating a point with someone who has already a biased position is equivalent to listening to a person who is complaining about a situation that has already past. The result equates to nothing achieved and nothing solved. Your presence is just there as a tool for this person to finish a sentence and feel better about their own person. The efficient thing to do, either talk about a way to improve/solve the problem, move on from it or just leave and not listen to the problem.
The world is not perfect though and sometimes people will argue with you, whether you like it or not. In some cases, even with hostility in mind or action. And it was after discussing about one such hostile argument with a friend that he pointed out a very Confucian idea and solution to the issue : Just walk away. It was not meant literally in all cases but for example, sometimes, just agreeing with a biased person and ending the conversation is better than continuing to discuss it with him/her as it leads to the same result. The person still ends up only believing in their own point of view. Confucius and the like knew this and with the knowledge that there was literally a world of people willing to discuss/teach/learn about their issues better, why then stop at a dead end of a biased argumentative person when there is so much better to be had by just taking a step beyond said person.
In conclusion, one's life is so limited and the truth is we all do not know for sure what happens to us after death, thus life should be spent as efficiently as possible. To give an example, with a time limit, would you rather use a sledgehammer to pound down a brick wall or use one's untrained fist.
Till next word...
*Mencius (Mengzi**) taught that a man who tries to gather all knowledge will end up knowing nothing. Thus it would be clear to say that sometimes a person is forced to make generalisations to make sense of a world he can never fully understand. This being said, when generalisation is used as a discussion point, the importance comes in the fact that the user knows he is generalising and takes that point into account.
To be fair, there are those that prove such a generalisation wrong for today's post. Such as the life of Western philosopher Nietzsche***, leaving for a life of seclusion when others did not take to his philosophies well at the time. Thus the reason, generalisation is used in today's post is as a tool to help most get into the core idea of the post faster than if one was to write a long thesis length piece and thus certain liberties have to be taken.
**The link is to a animated list of Mencius core works (those with Book 1A, etc) told with English subtitles.
***A short documentary on Nietzsche's life and the application of his basic philosophy of hardship to everyday life.
No comments:
Post a Comment