Logical Meanderings between West and East.
If you're into logic, you might like this.In this short piece I want to make some remarks on the differences between Western and Eastern logic, focussing in particular on the difference between the logic of the Greek philosopher Aristotle and that of the Indian philosopher Nagarjuna. The reason I want to address the issue of logics is because I think this approach could offer a key to the understanding and appreciation of Roy Bhaskar' s current ontology and epistemology, as elaborated in his latest book: From East to West.
posted by M | 7:53 AM
2 Comments:
Very interesting. Although I am at work and could not read it all I will tonight. I have always found Aristotelian logic to be missing important concepts and tends to be too dogmatic at times. I much prefer the logic of eastern philosophy.
Now on Karmic syncronicity. I wrote this just before clicking on your link.
Nothing is true it is all perception.
Nothing is false it is all perception
Nothing is nothing
Nothing is not Nothing
-Ole Blue That Heretic
And read this right after.
Everything is real and is not real,
Both real and not real,
Neither real nor not real.
That would explain all the books on Buddhism by my bed. LOL
This is the teaching of the Buddha.
Nagarjuna
"I much prefer the logic of eastern philosophy" It does seem strange, to me at least, that having been born and bred into western logic, I find eastern logic/philosophy so much closer to home. Strange indeed.
Post a Comment
<< Home