Quote:
Originally Posted by komitsuki
It is because René Guénon is so-called an Orientalist. He was one of fewest Westerners who got the grasp of Asian philosophy and beliefs (Islamic, Indian, Chinese, etc) and saw the West beyond the Western scope.
Despite being very mystic about his own idea, he foresaw many social flaws of the Western society through very different inconvenient ways of spiritualism. Thus he was a vocal opponent of modernism in terms of criticizing some portion of aspects of the Western civilization (not all). He was not anti-Western, he wanted to improve the West by adapting non-Western thoughts uniquely.
But his importance is simple: he is one of the early people who presented the fact that the West views the world as a whole is very limited and need to be fixed.
|
Well being an orientalist is generally not considered to be a good thing (except in literature and art perhaps).
Furthermore, what sort of social flaws did he foresee? I mean I can't imagine what Eastern spiritualism could add that
human rationalism couldn't.
And what do you mean the West views the world as a whole? Are you saying that is a flaw to make the assumption that we are all human beings and have the same essential needs? Because the scientific community would have a bone to pick with you if you disagreed for a start.
(not that this is an inherently Western assumption. I hate the fact that ideas are often given nationalities or identities. Ideas in my opinion succeed or fail based on merit not origin.)