Western Science

[David Casseres]

Indeed there are huge differences between "eastern" and "western"
(gotta find a less fucked-out dichotomy) views of Life and Death and
how to die and live them, respectively.  Because those are a matter of
Religion, if you please, or at least of upbringing.  Not of science. 
But your Chinese farmer knows that water always boils at 100 degrees
C, just as Westerners do, and your Japanese Nobel prize winner in
Physics... well you get the idea.

On 10/4/05, Rcfchess at aol.com <Rcfchess at aol.com> wrote:
>
>
> Yes, toast is toast, as science is science; I'm not saying that everything's
> different...but, for instance - to take a huge example - the Eastern
> attitude towards matters such as death is quite different; their
> understanding and philosophy about life as a whole is different. Perception,
> in the sensory sense - no, I'd suspect not much difference there; but the
> big picture...!
>
> RF
>
>
> In a message dated 10/04/2005 7:47:39 P.M. Eastern Standard Time,
> tristero69 at yahoo.com writes:
> Yes; science is science, wherever or whomever does
> it....but..." appear to partake of a non-linear mode
> of perception" is crucial - the whole problem, as I
> see it, is that yes certain schools of thought,
> perhaps having their provenance East of the former
> Berlin Wall ( to take a somewhat arbitrary demarcation
> line ) have figures of speech, metaphors and similes
> that SEEM....SEEM to be indicating a very different
> kind of way of looking at the world...but...are they
> in fact doing so? Do people who claim to "think" that
> "way" get up in the morning to make toast by "seeing"
> reality very much differently than WE Westerners do? I
> mean, picture it; how would such people have evolved
> or even aquired such radically differnt "modes" of
> perception, and not get eaten by the Lion, or be able
> to recall where the wheat has been stored for winter?
> In speculative writing - which encompasses all
> religious script as far as I'm concerned - sure you
> can use all sorts of mind-bending or brain-stopping
> metaphors; that doesn't mean it reflects a state of
> perception at large...no way....
>
> --- Rcfchess at aol.com wrote:
>
> > The differences between "Western" and "Eastern"
> > thinking have nothing to do
> > with science. Science is science, wherever. They
> > have to do with philosophical
> >  frameworks and spiritual outlooks: basically,
> > dualism vs. oneness; either-or
> > vs.  holistic. The only way this impinges on
> > scientific outlook is that an
> > individual  - such as a scientist - may also have an
> > individual perspective
> > which is  influenced by his/her origin or upbringing
> > in either tradition; but that
> > is  outside the bounds of science, which remains the
> > same.
> >
> > The only other common ground I can think of would
> > pertain to areas such as
> > in quantum mechanics, wherein there are apparently
> > scientifically proven (or,
> > at  least, postulated hypothetically) phenomena
> > which appear to partake of a
> > non-linear, non-Euclidean mode of perception, and
> > thus would be more amenable
> > to  understanding in terms of an "Eastern" way of
> > understanding the world
> > (e.g.,  Heisenberg; the Tao of Physics; the Dancing
> > Wu Li Masters; the Roots of
> > Coincidence [Koestler], etc.)
> >
> > RF
> >
>
>
>
>
> __________________________________
> Yahoo! Mail - PC Magazine Editors' Choice 2005
> http://mail.yahoo.com
>
>
>