As Europe concerns Asia
 

Is rather afraid, does not understand and looks down, it seems to me

Can anyone explain me what this thread is about, because I'm absolutely clueless on what the OP is trying say here.

it appears that OP is saying that he believes europeans look down on and do not understand Asians.

but, i'm not sure why OP is writing that here.

I think he or she is saying that it seems that Europe looks down on Asians.

Many Asian people also think this.

But then again, some Asian people look down on other country nationalities, so all in all, It's a fare game.

I guess it's an insecurity thing with some cultures whilst other's feel more confident.. God bloody knows why.

Sorry for my English. I wished to tell, that Europe does not understand Asia and will not understand. Culture etc. I had to meet opinion of Europeans, that they more intellectual and cultural. It was, fortunately, only on the Internet.

I would say it's due to how nations see themselves. The historical narrative, how they define themselves etc. of a particular nation says a lot about the general psychology of the people of that nation with regard to their identity and how they percieve other nations.

This idea that Europeans misunderstand and look down upon Asians is a bit exaggerated. I mean it's not hard to believe that it exists and that it is a relatively commonly held belief (My guess would be that this belief is a remnant of attitudes held during times of European Imperialism and colonialism)..... but I think that it is not a belief held by the majority of young people in this day and age. Furthermore it is an attitude that seems to be dying out.. and has died quickly over the last hundred years or so.

(Parts are bolded in order to avoid being misunderstood)

All I can think of

He said this in a mundane spiritual context, regarding civilization like a living and breathing life form with emotions. But we can infer how Western culture works out today.

Could it because of the Hegelian thoughts?

How many people actually leave the nest of their own country and visit others? From my experience people who have traveled to other nations and experienced other cultures do not have such extreme notions about other cultures and countries. A person is generally open minded and understanding people are panicking judgmental beings. Experience is and knowledge is the key people fear what they dont understand and these feelings more often than not turn to hatred and bigotry

I am glad, that only to me there was such point of view and I liked your answers. Thanks.

I'm curious....

What does this part of the quote mean? I mean I'm not really sure what he means by "bankruptcy of this civilisation" nor do I understand the cycle he's speaking of.

Also what are Hegelian thoughts?

Any society rises and falls like an wheel; hence bankruptcy.

It refers how the modern West deviates a lot from others. Sudden rise of industrialization, colonialism, enlightenment philosophies, and change of values. These were a unusually hasten development. This big historical remark brought many differences how the West views non-West differently, or vice versa.

But what he worried about is that the West's cycle revolves and changes too fast, compare to other societies.

In a nutshell, it's a belief that there is always the Thesis vs. Anti-thesis conflict and later being compromised by Syn-thesis.

A very foundational ideology of modern Western thoughts. And we see this in today's economy, politics, and culture.

Well, it is true.

I had my friends husband (she is Thai, he is from Denmark) come visit my home. I fetched the man a chair to sit on immediatly, and used the other for myself. The Thais, although some were older than us, and command more respect, were content to sit on the floor; they always do. So, if we wanted to look at them, it was impossible not to look down. What, with them on the floor and all...

Even if we had enough chairs, I know they'd prefer the floor. We were also short of spoons (they eat with spoons, as forks are too technical), and we only had two to go around several Thais. But that was okay as they were all content to share the same spoons.

But what goes around comes around, and the Thais think they're a perfect people with a Nazi zealousy.

Oh right.. yeah I'm familiar with the thesis+antithesis=synthesis concept. That Hegelian thoughts contribute to the rapid progression experienced by Western (modern) societies is something that makes sense I suppose.

As for his views on civilisation... they still seem very vague and alien to me. What does he essentially believe? That civilisations inevitably rise and fall? That the fall of civilisations is due to this bankruptcy? I mean I don't necessarily disagree with it... but I'm certainly unfamiliar with this idea.

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.)

Sudden change of social values from industrialization, growth of "counter-culturalism" in religious values.

Though you missed my point. That was how some people criticize the West around 100 years ago from the start. The idea changed slowly up to today through better insights.

Overall, it's all checks and balances.

In respect to the OP, what I can say is that communication issues still exists between Asia and Europe; two very different entities under the hood. And as we know, perception is another form of communication.

The whole world needs patience is what I would say.

Sudden change of social values is less of a flaw and more of a consequence. It may have negative repurcussions from time to time but for the most part is a necessary process in the modern age (and can have positive repurcussions too).

In my opinion, what can be considered a flaw in any society is not so much change itself. But, whether such change can be justified rationally and how society at large deals with such change.

I do agree that overall it's about checks and balances... but again.. that comes from human rationalism rather than Eastern spirituality.

But anyway... You're right... I did miss your point. I get it now.

I would still like to know whether you think it's wrong to consider every human being as fundamentally the same with the same needs though.

It doesn't necessarily mean that way, if you think about it. Human rationalism would be shunned outside of the West related to this case of checks and balances.

What Rene Guenon would prefer was a mixed system.

For that matter, it's how people prefer one style of values to another while trying to make a best of it functionally and make everyone happy.

That, I can't answer because I have some internal disputes with this. I grew up in more than one cultural environment and I have more than one opinion on this in a nutshell.

But it wouldn't really be a mixed system... as ideally, only the rational aspects of spirituality would be adopted.

Well in my opinion all humans are the same and have the same fundamental needs... but there are many ways in which these needs can be met.

At least we can admit that the world is more complicated than binary thinking.

for sure :D

And you have noticed, how aggressively and easily western culture has come to our countries? In ratios of people, food , the pop culture? Return movement too is, but not the such

How much is that western culture aggressively invading Asia, and how much is that thanks to the Internet the world's cultures (especially popular cultures) are shared more openly?

Look at this site alone. People use worlds like anime, manga, V-kei, etc. constantly. That wouldn't have been possible before the Internet.

You make it sound like its a hostile invasion. The swapping of cultures is probably one of the best things to come out of the internet and the development of global communication technology as MMM stated. I feel there is an equal amount of Eastern countries learning about the west as they are westerners learning the beauty of the east.

To be politely fair, the Brazilian President, Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva, mentioned a while ago that the G8 (G7 + Russia) representative does more inefficiency than good and proposed G20 for organizing the world. This is a good news for non-Western parts of the world since the world has finally realized that G8 isn't that productive and too biased for Western countries (Japan is the hopeless exception). Now there will be a good outcome that the world would be fairly represented.

And another thing to mention: SCO (Shanghai Cooperation Organization).

LOL, that made my day.

Yes, the world became more opened. The Internet has unconditionally helped it.))) The mango, anime, etc-is remarkable. In a circle of my friends, all the same, the western culture has much bigger influence. Naturally, it defines a situation in whole (an example of my circle of contacts).
SCO (Shanghai Cooperation Organization) - I am respectful to this organisation. Russia - occupies separate position in this world. It should be in the union with the East and gravitates to it more. In the union with the East, being a counterbalance to the West, SCO should inspect and try to define world politics.
In an ideal.
Russia does not need to be under a delusion with friendship with the West.

Why are you so resentful towards the West? What aspect of "Eastern culture" (if you even agree such a thing exists) do you think the West should adopt?

I think you are just as bad as the type of Westerners who look down on Asians.

:confused:

I think he's talking about eating main courses with desert spoons or something.

"I think you are just as bad as the type of Westerners who look down on Asians." - Output wrong and unreasonable)))

I have full respect for foreign countries nor do I look down on people (or so I would like to think).

That's all I have to say ;)

/A proud European

How so?

You seem to be resentful towards the West because of your perception that Western ideas have infiltrated Eastern culture. This is just as bad as those Westerners who perceive Eastern culture as inferior.

Why?

Because you make the mistake of giving ideas an identity. There is no such thing as Western ideas, Eastern ideas etc. if you think about it. The only kinds of ideas I can think of are good ideas and bad ideas. Ideas that work and ideas that don't.

If you were to ask me (a Westerner) I would tell you that one of the most stupid and irrational ideas that has come about in the world is theistic religion which is perpetuated to the biggest extent, in the West and the Middle East.

So there are plenty of bad ideas in the West too.

Yeah. I hate Constantine.