What's new

The Roots of Western Fundamentalism & Religious Dogma and the Destruction of Thought

2 Jan 2008
47
2
18
Philosophy is the science of wisdom, if you can classify it as such. Actually, the literal meaning of philosophy is love of wisdom, love meaning "philo" wisdom "sophy." But why I chose philosophy as a precursor for this discussion is because modern day academia regards philosophy as a western convention only ! No eastern philosophy has ever been recognized as a true philosophy by western academics which could be taken to mean that people in Greater East Asia have either a different type of interpretation of wisdom and or a lack thereof …. It is because of this assumption by western academia that I believe the spread of western fundamental thought has done more harm than good in the evolution of thought through-out Europe and eventually asia minor. Had the West been more flexible in its interepretation of philosophical dogma and how it related to reality centuries ago, the way present day thinkers interepret thought today, the western world would be far more refined in terms of depth & scope and less imposing on others. For example: Chinese philosophers ( again,most western academics do not recognize eastern philosophy as real philosophy) tended towards humanism rather than spiritualism; rationalism rather than mysticism; and syncretism rather than sectarianism ! Western philosophy ,however, ultimately sought to define the ' absolute' and to make sense of our world and how it related to judeo christian values rather than practical and ethical ideals.


Around 1897, Western philosophy had appeared in China through translations, and in the next decade many Western philosophical ideals were brought to China by students returning from North America and Europe. The Western philosophies most influential in 20th-century China have been "pragmatism" and "materialism" which is the anti-thesis of idealism. One such Western Philosopher that appeared in Chinese print was John Dewey who was a thought reformist whose teachings emphasized the individual, not the government. Remember, the teachings of Confucius was based off of virtues: kindness, uprightness,decorum, wisdom, and faithfulness which constitute the whole of human duty. Reverence for parents, living and dead and a paternalistic government. He also admonished individuals to observe carefully their duties toward the state whereas western teachings corrupted the State and the family nucleus by putting the individual before government. These were the seeds of Western imperialism which ushered in an era of destruction for the Chinese.


The fact that western philosophy is so fundamentally ingrained in today's thinking make it a very rigid doctrine that has produced some of 20th centuries greatest Nazi thinkers who have shaped our world through their perceptions. One such man is Martin Heideggar, regarded as the most original and influential 20th century philosopher of our time, was a supporter of Hitler and the pro Nazi movement. Can you believe that ? He was the definitive genius of our time. Gees, how fundamentally western can you be ? And we esteem this man in the highest regard as an original thinker, a man who supported one of the most evil tyrants of our time, a man who murdered six million Jews and millions more Slavs ! Even Aristotle justified slavery was he even better ? Subsequently, western philisophical thoughts have been the defining element in how people have been defining the world we live in even today.


All of Man has been searching for the absolute for centuries, some may call that the absolute, others, some strange force working behind the scenes. What I hope to clear up in this essay is the enormous gap between those who speak for the world, in terms of what true thought is and how that thought is interpreted vs. those that seek the ultimate truth or the greater good for all man. The existentialist were the anti-philosophers and the philosophers were always anti-existentialist who were constantly arguing amongst themselves.. For example: Pascal was anti-Dakar; Kierkegaard was anti-Hegel; Nietzshe was anti-Socrates; Albert Camus was merely a Pagan and was perhaps the most enlightened of them all for he sought neither to unify god nor man, but rather to discard all forms of Judeo Christian thought completely. This is the crux of my argument and this is where I feel Camus was on to something – get rid of the middle man. Sure, the West Asians had Allah and Europe had Jesus Christ, but Christianity only gave man spiritual equality whereas Islam gave man universal brotherhood regardless of color or ethnicity. The West entertained this notion too, but never took it seriously. Today, Muslim nations are perhaps some of the most diverse nations on the planet.


Many great thinkers and philosphers have come out of west asia and one such great teacher was a man by the name of Mevlani, a muslim scholar who was a 13th century mystical philosopher, who proved that the earth rotated on its axis in the 14th century through the first construction of a globe. Unfortunately for Europe, though, during this time many of Europe's greatest thinkers were being persecuted for going against western philosophical thought and religion and for their beliefs in science which to me sounds a bit odd since Europe is/was regarded as the cradle of civilization by many present day academics when in fact they were more backward thinking than any other civilization in history, but yet they produced some of the finest thinkers in history ??? That doesn't make any sense whatsoever considering the disparity between the real scientist and the religious zealots who dictates how the world was supposed to be understood. China, before Mao, was a marvellous civilization with advanced technology even more so than the Roman Empire. Even Ghengis Khan, ruler of the Mongols, was advanced in so many ways and partly why is because he practices tolerance by allowing Chinese engineers ( who he conquered) serve in his armies. These men were responsible for building catapults and flame throwers and refining the Mongols attack capabilities. In addition to that, the Mongols had no written language, no libraries, no organized religions, no sciences, no philosophy, but yet they came to rule more land and territory than the Roman Empire ! Traditionally Ghengis Khan would've killed all of his enemies, but he became enlightened.


In the case of the United States, which has been a traditionally Christian nation, slave and master served the same god. When African Americans were getting beaten and lynched they were praying to their masters(slave owners) god for mercy. White slave owners worshipped and served the Judeo Christian god on Sunday and then Monday through Saturday they enslaved and sold human beings like chattel and live stock. No other idiocy existed to that degree in history ! How can a slave and a master serve the same god ? How can a slave love his master and his master's god even to his last breath ? (" Maybe god loves some and hates the other").


Western religion, philosophy, and history mixed together can be a volitile and reckless combination of scholarly aggrandizing that has arguably done more harm than good. Moreover, western countries have been the only civilizations on earth to ever merge all three of these concepts into one things: Western Fundamentalism. I think, though, that this is changing. The world has been waking up to more humanistic ideals , and a lot of what that really means is that nations are becoming more empathetic towards other nations and nationalities. It's the U.S. unilateral foreign policy that's exclusionary and terror oriented and illogical bringing instability to the world that we all live in and share with one another, thus a flagarant and ugly display of western fundamentalism through religious dogma, distortions of history and philosophy – from a western point of view from as far back as antiquity.
 
Last edited:
There is so much wrong with this post from sheer ignorance to downright prejeduce. Do you actually believe half of what you are saying?


Sure, the West Asians had Allah and Europe had Jesus Christ, but Christianity only gave man spiritual equality whereas Islam gave man universal brotherhood regardless of color or ethnicity. The West entertained this notion too, but never took it seriously. Today, Muslim nations are perhaps some of the most diverse nations on the planet.

Because as we all know, Muslims are the most welcoming, forgiving, and accepting people you are ever likely to meet, especially in comparison to the West. Give me a break.
This is the most ignorant and laughable statement, you have no idea.

In the case of the United States, which has been a traditionally Christian nation, slave and master served the same god. When African Americans were getting beaten and lynched they were praying to their masters(slave owners) god for mercy. White slave owners worshipped and served the Judeo Christian god on Sunday and then Monday through Saturday they enslaved and sold human beings like chattel and live stock. No other idiocy existed to that degree in history !

I completely disagree with the last statement but I do have this to say. Are you black? Do you know anybody who is African American? Have you ever sat down and truly talked to the decendants of those slaves? Well, as one of those decendants I'll say this, don't bring up issues you know nothing about (and it's quite obvious you do no nothing on the subject) and especially not as an example used for the purpose of spreading intolerence.

It's the U.S. unilateral foreign policy that's exclusionary and terror oriented and illogical bringing instability to the world that we all live in and share with one another, thus a flagarant and ugly display of western fundamentalism through religious dogma, distortions of history and philosophy – from a western point of view from as far back as antiquity.

Funny, if it's so exclusionary than why are we all closer than in any previous time in history? And, please, tell me, how are you feeling terrified by the West, you can't be to terrified to be talking about hating the West so openly and honestly. Doesn't terror usually mean fear, you are anything but fearful, that is obvious.
Instability...is the US the only country running the world? If I'm not mistaken other countries like to give their input every once in a while so if there is instability, it's a group effort.

Maybe you should travel and see reality for what it is because you seem to live a very sheltered and ignorant life.
 
Last edited:
I have moved this here from All Things Japanese, since the OP was hardly related to Japan, in content. I strongly urge careful and factual argumentation. By factual here, I mean arguments which are built on valid and as testable as possible evidence.

If a person gives an opinion without any data or evidence to back that opinion (which I will take to be an argument of debate), at least be honest enough to admit that said opinion is nothing more than opinion, and is not a demonstrateable fact.

I would like to see more terms used in the OP defined more concretely here, please.
 
There is so much wrong with this post from sheer ignorance to downright prejeduce. Do you actually believe half of what you are saying?
Because as we all know, Muslims are the most welcoming, forgiving, and accepting people you are ever likely to meet, especially in comparison to the West. Give me a break.
This is the most ignorant and laughable statement, you have no idea.
I completely disagree with the last statement but I do have this to say. Are you black? Do you know anybody who is African American? Have you ever sat down and truly talked to the decendants of those slaves? Well, as one of those decendants I'll say this, don't bring up issues you know nothing about (and it's quite obvious you do no nothing on the subject) and especially not as an example used for the purpose of spreading intolerence.
Funny, if it's so exclusionary than why are we all closer than in any previous time in history? And, please, tell me, how are you feeling terrified by the West, you can't be to terrified to be talking about hating the West so openly and honestly. Doesn't terror usually mean fear, you are anything but fearful, that is obvious.
Instability...is the US the only country running the world? If I'm not mistaken other countries like to give their input every once in a while so if there is instability, it's a group effort.
...You are a rare (or maybe not so rare) sort of fool. Maybe you should travel and see reality for what it is because you seem to live a very sheltered and ignorant life.
Slavery and Christianity have always been interlinked even historically and was even established by decree of Almighty God and it was sanctioned in the Bible, in both testaments from Genesis to Revelations. African Americans were the ideal example for this since even before they arrived on America's shores. There's tons of evidence to support this part of my claims. Here's a piece of evidence for you:
Christianity and slavery
Slave owner and slave served the same god. Sure the same could be said about other civilization too, I'm just merely making a point here.
MadamePapillon said:
Funny, if it's so exclusionary than why are we all closer than in any previous time in history? And, please, tell me, how are you feeling terrified by the West, you can't be to terrified to be talking about hating the West so openly and honestly. Doesn't terror usually mean fear, you are anything but fearful, that is obvious.
Instability...is the US the only country running the world? If I'm not mistaken other countries like to give their input every once in a while so if there is instability, it's a group effort.
That depends on how you define 'WE' ? And it goes without saying that the U.S. is creating an unstable, fear oriented climate all over the world.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
In not necessarily a believer, but still, no matter what I do, Im of Christian roots.
Now, you come and say to me, and to loads of other chaps that we suck.
Ownage, thats ownage. Well you'll never get a "yes" from me.
A religion that gives men whatever blah-blah spiritual whatever can still be a failure, that is not the deciding factor.
Religion must solidify its "herd" as one, which Christianity did with a more devastating result than ever before, but from our aspect those roughly 1700 years that we truly prospered was a success.
WHOA! I must say.
Enslaving people obviously is bad, but it had nothing to do with religion. The line you drew is rather thin, really it has nothing to do with Christianity. It was the doing of a different god, his name is "Wealth".
 
About slavery... Religion has nothing to do with it, eh! Do you know where slavery originated? Actually it's origins came around as a way to prosper... and the slaves were given the money for room and board. They were given food. Sometimes they were given a bonus and they would splurge on an ale at the local wet spot. Their purpose at times was to be a messenger or to run errands, or to clean, etc... They gave up their names and became numbers. They no longer had an identity and became tools. Slavery exists to this day... who works at McDonalds? Who does the dishes in a restaurant. Are these people payed as much as people who sit at desks and count numbers... of course not... obviously, nai? In Canada, people who work at McDonalds for a living make enough to pay for rent, bills, food and a little on the side, eh?
 
Annibus & General response to everybody.

About slavery... Religion has nothing to do with it, eh! Do you know where slavery originated? Actually it's origins came around as a way to prosper... and the slaves were given the money for room and board. They were given food. Sometimes they were given a bonus and they would splurge on an ale at the local wet spot. Their purpose at times was to be a messenger or to run errands, or to clean, etc... They gave up their names and became numbers. They no longer had an identity and became tools. Slavery exists to this day... who works at McDonalds? Who does the dishes in a restaurant. Are these people payed as much as people who sit at desks and count numbers... of course not... obviously, nai? In Canada, people who work at McDonalds for a living make enough to pay for rent, bills, food and a little on the side, eh?

Dear Annibus, that was a stirring and heralding account of slavery...thank you. Sarcasm aside. Religion is a noun. It means faith, creed, or convictions. Religion had a lot to do with slavery and very little to do with working someone then paying them a monthly stipend; like at McD's or indentured servitude. Slavery at its worst was the destruction of persons language, culture, and religion and ultimately identity. That's slavery. To say that christianity had nothing to do with slavery is a dishonest representation of history. Slavery is: bondage, oppression, repression, forced labor,captivity and servitude. And though, just about every society practiced it, christianity took it to a spiritual level that destroyed an entire race of people.

There is/are christian religions in North America that believe black americans cannot go to heaven because of the color of their skin ! Has nothing to do with economics.
 
Annubis,

The emperor Hirohito, was God in Japan.
The Japanese imperial army made me a slave without being paid, with very little to eat, and sleeping on the floor of a cell, when I was 17/18 years old.
I had to lug heavy stones, and heavy bags with sugar and flour every day for almost two years long. As a slave I had to be grateful.
Every morning I had to bow deep for emperor Hirohito, the God from Japan.
 
Sensationalist said:
Religion is a noun. It means faith, creed, or convictions.

I think this would have to better qualified. While the word religion is a noun, it would best be seen as a far broader definition than merely belief-system. This can especially be seen in the adjective form of the root word.

When we talk about faith (as in dogma delivered thinking) in such close context as creed, we are talking about a belief-system much more than anything else, so it would be more specifically accurate (regardless of pragmatic concerns at this point) to assign this to religious-belief system rather than 'religion.'

Christianity is a belief-system which stems from the nature of religiosity (religion as a notion of mind).

I'd like to hear a more specific explanation of the term 'slavery' as you are using it, along with source material and specific examples...if you have any. (the one given is too vauge...when are you talking about? What race of people? What group of Christians?


ps: There is/are christian religions in North America that believe . . . You mean belief-system (cult) here, right?
 
Mars Man

I think this would have to better qualified. While the word religion is a noun, it would best be seen as a far broader definition than merely belief-system. This can especially be seen in the adjective form of the root word.
When we talk about faith (as in dogma delivered thinking) in such close context as creed, we are talking about a belief-system much more than anything else, so it would be more specifically accurate (regardless of pragmatic concerns at this point) to assign this to religious-belief system rather than 'religion.'
Christianity is a belief-system which stems from the nature of religiosity (religion as a notion of mind).
I'd like to hear a more specific explanation of the term 'slavery' as you are using it, along with source material and specific examples...if you have any. (the one given is too vauge...when are you talking about? What race of people? What group of Christians?
ps: There is/are christian religions in North America that believe . . . You mean belief-system (cult) here, right?

I'm referring to African American slavery. According to the Church of Latter Day Saints ( Mr. Mikawa provided a source) is a legitmate religion that has been around for decades. Their belief system is ingrained within their teaching and that is African Americans are cursed for ever because they are descendents of Ham. This is a religious believe which is their religious conviction and has been since this churches inception until legal action was taken back in 78'(?). This is not a cult like the Branch Davidian of Wacco Texas. This is a real religious institute that indirectly teaches racism and inequality based off of a persons skin color.
 
HAHA! LDS? The mormons... interesting...haha... though they seems to be a little pushy, hunh! He's refering to the cananites... in the old testament... Christians are not the only ones that believe that black people will not go to heaven. Those men who's skin color were changed... yadda yadda yadda because of their sin against God. In Christianity, if you don't get baptised and believe in Christ, you will not be saved from your sins.... In the old testament, everyone is born guilty, since Adam ate the apple. Christ came to save us and if we believe in him, we will definately go to heaven, because he has laid the down the straight and narrow path... that is the danger of Christianity, period. That is if you believe in heaven and that we could possibly be guilty of someone elses mistakes... if it was even a mistake. Mormons beleieve that there is a hell and that there are three types of heaven... One for those who are searching... who have not been baptised, but who have done very good things in the sight of God. This is the telestial kingdom. The second is the terrestrial kingdom (kingdom is a very shovanistic word in my opinion, but it gets the idea accross) where one goes if they have been baptised, but have not been able to keep the comandments, and the Celestial kingdom is for those who are perfect in the sight of God. The mormon religion does not judge according to race or skin colour, why do you think they have missions all over the world? They just want everyone to return to Heavenly Father (again shauvanistic... but good for the general idea), who resides in the celestial kingdom.
 
You know, I have to be honest about something.... your explanation of philosophy is incorrect. I have studied philosophy in many manners quite extensively... Philosophy is broken up into many sections, Eastern philosophy, Western philosophy, physical phylosophy, political phylosphy... etc. It is not true that Phylosophy only considers Western phylosophy. And what about Madanna. She says "Music is her religion". Love is mine!

In my opinion, philosophy has helped the world become critical of human existance. Experimentation and the practice of different philosophies has contributed to the growth of this world and each nation within it. As the age of ethics is upon us, the plights of such former experiments, will not ppen again. We touched the fire.... and perhaps in some cases continue to do so, but we are now learning our lesson, as a global nation, sharing ideas and philosophies.
 
We touched the fire.... and perhaps in some cases continue to do so, but we are now learning our lesson, as a global nation, sharing ideas and philosophies.

I hope so Annubis,
I really hope that we are now learning our lesson, as a global nation.

TV helps, Internet too, we come closer towards each other.
Speaking for myself, I learn a lot from the people in this Forum coming from all the corners of the world.
 
Mikawa Ossan said:
I believe he's referring to the Church of Latter Day Saints.

Nice to see you 'round ! I had been hoping he would have had something else, though, you see. Taking a careful look at the original phrase we will find the word religion pluarized. However, Sensationalist san had been using that word in its more generic form, which would have meant more than one religious belief-system. Let's see what happens.

If, Sensationalist san, you had only be referring to the LDS, then why did you chose to add the plural? I'll take this one point at a time in order to help keep a low white noise threshold on the discussion.

I'll get back to slackness in definitions evidenced in your wording later.
 
??

HAHA! LDS? The mormons... interesting...haha... though they seems to be a little pushy, hunh! He's refering to the cananites... in the old testament... Christians are not the only ones that believe that black people will not go to heaven. Those men who's skin color were changed... yadda yadda yadda because of their sin against God. In Christianity, if you don't get baptised and believe in Christ, you will not be saved from your sins.... In the old testament, everyone is born guilty, since Adam ate the apple. Christ came to save us and if we believe in him, we will definately go to heaven, because he has laid the down the straight and narrow path... that is the danger of Christianity, period. That is if you believe in heaven and that we could possibly be guilty of someone elses mistakes... if it was even a mistake. Mormons beleieve that there is a hell and that there are three types of heaven... One for those who are searching... who have not been baptised, but who have done very good things in the sight of God. This is the telestial kingdom. The second is the terrestrial kingdom (kingdom is a very shovanistic word in my opinion, but it gets the idea accross) where one goes if they have been baptised, but have not been able to keep the comandments, and the Celestial kingdom is for those who are perfect in the sight of God. The mormon religion does not judge according to race or skin colour, why do you think they have missions all over the world? They just want everyone to return to Heavenly Father (again shauvanistic... but good for the general idea), who resides in the celestial kingdom.


Sure lots of religions practiced racism and slavery, the point I would like to reiterate is that, philosophy and judeo christian dogma(christianity) are purely western ideologies.
 
??

You know, I have to be honest about something.... your explanation of philosophy is incorrect. I have studied philosophy in many manners quite extensively... Philosophy is broken up into many sections, Eastern philosophy, Western philosophy, physical phylosophy, political phylosphy... etc. It is not true that Phylosophy only considers Western phylosophy. And what about Madanna. She says "Music is her religion". Love is mine!
In my opinion, philosophy has helped the world become critical of human existance. Experimentation and the practice of different philosophies has contributed to the growth of this world and each nation within it. As the age of ethics is upon us, the plights of such former experiments, will not ppen again. We touched the fire.... and perhaps in some cases continue to do so, but we are now learning our lesson, as a global nation, sharing ideas and philosophies.

Western philosophy recognizes the "existence" of Eastern Philosophy, but does not recognize it as a "true" philosophy. You don't hear Plato and Socrates quoting Confucious and Xunzi, but in China you hear names like John Dewey and Socrates. You also have to remember that Chinese philosophy has been around since before the pre-Socratics started writing text. It cannot be argued that Western Philosophy and Eastern Philosophy are the anti-thesis of each other. Plain and simple. The focus of my essay was to highlight this disparity and to bring closer attention as to why Western philosophy has done more harm than good in mainstream society.
 
Nice to see you 'round ! I had been hoping he would have had something else, though, you see. Taking a careful look at the original phrase we will find the word religion pluarized. However, Sensationalist san had been using that word in its more generic form, which would have meant more than one religious belief-system. Let's see what happens.
If, Sensationalist san, you had only be referring to the LDS, then why did you chose to add the plural? I'll take this one point at a time in order to help keep a low white noise threshold on the discussion.
I'll get back to slackness in definitions evidenced in your wording later.

I didn't want to name organizations directly. There are other religions that practiced and sanctioned slavery as well. Islam is another but their slaves were from the spoils of war.
 
ok... I would like to hear the pros of Estern philosophy... and the cons of Western philosophy... perhaps under headings. In point form... don't spend too long... with reasoning for the catigorizations. I hope this isn't too much to ask. I look forward to understanding the comparative division of your argument.
 
I would argue that you would have to name organizations directly in order to validate your claim...otherwise anyone can counter-claim without having to show their data either. A poker game where no one has to show their cards...it just wouldn't work.

Also, it is true that you had said North America in that sentence, so it is delimited to that degree.
 
I didn't want to name organizations directly. There are other religions that practiced and sanctioned slavery as well. Islam is another but their slaves were from the spoils of war.
and christian slaves weren't? rome, Constantine? chinese capturing koreans and even just treating their own peasants like slaves? isn't it amazing how people simply overlook other cultures issues just so they can lambast the US for stuff it didn't do or just hate on our culture. jews had slaves and they were treated far better than slaves in east asia. in fact a roman general suggested jews need to be wiped out because our slaves may give their peasants idea's. so i really don't see how the worlds most successful culture is so flawed and evil.
 
Well, how to put it? The topic name: "The Roots of Western Fundamentalism & Religious Dogma and the Destruction of Thought" already suggests that its utter rubbish.
Simply, what does it mean?
The Roots of Western Fundamentalism?
What kind of fundamentalism if I may ask? Most western countries are rather liberal, they don't enforce a thing.
Religious Dogma?
Again, we don't enforce any kind of dogma, you're free to think whatever the hell you wish.
Destruction of Thought?
Now this ain't that clear, actually this is pitch black to my eyes.
What do you mean by destruction of thought?
You're trying to determine what is right or wrong, but in all honesty, how can one person decide it? You alone declare something, and expect us to believe it.
Now, Im a Hungarian citizen, so I share some cultural traits with other western countries on this continent, and with the USA. Why should I go look for other roots denying my own? My ancestors did what they did, im not necessarily proud of it, but I can say that im not ashamed either, and they aren't inferior to anyone, nor do I consider anyone inferior to them. Its this plain.
I like my culture, I was raised in it, and even though im among the open minded people, there's no way im going to abandon what raised me.
As for this whole case there's a saying I often heard from Armenian people.
It goes like this: "The caravan is going, and the dogs are barking. The caravan has already passed, but the dogs are still barking."
Its the same with this issue, there will always be a bunch of folks to blackmouth everything and anything the west does.
 
This thread and the idea behind it is absolutely pointless. I'm still trying to understand what is the point of what you are saying.

Are you trying to say that Western philosophy is evil and destroying the world and if so what leads you to believe this? You haven't given us any sort of hard proof of this other than bringing up long past atrocities. Give us some recent and relevant examples of how the West is bringing terror, instability and destruction to the world.

Are you saying Eastern Philosophy should be more recognized among the Western world or are you saying that we should abandon our own philosophies in favor of Eastern ones because they are better? Again, give me proof that Eastern philosophy is better. While it all may sound good on paper, so far our own Western means have been enough to give us a foundation with which to rise above slavery, poverty, hate, discrimination, exclusion, and any number of social problems. We are doing far better than the East in terms of human rights and acceptance with our own philosophies so give me a good reason to believe it isn't working and we should do it your way instead?
 
Just a tidbit here. Western philosophy placed emotions and reason as seperate, as it was reasoned that emotions get in the way of reason. Some Eastern philosphies categorized everything in terms of whether it brought them closer to a calm inner state or not. Neoruscience and increasingly psychology are beginning to agree a lot with some Eastern philosphies, such now recognizing that thoughts and emotions come up intertwined, whereas western ideas were that thoughts and emotions were seperate somehow.
 
Back
Top Bottom