Eastern and Western Philosophers Comparison Paper
Gillian DiCara
PHI/105
Friday, 2 October 2010
Phil McGowan

Eastern and Western Philosophers Comparison I chose to compare Kant and Buddha, with a leaning more to the Indian Buddha, rather than the Chinese form of Buddha. The comparison of these two philosophers may seem a little strange but I found that they share a similarity of thought. Kant’s moral law, which can be simplified to (Palomo-Lamarca, Palmquist 2001), “The moral law is a law I make for myself and apply to myself”. Strangely enough this is also the first step in Buddha’s teaching of morality; “The first being I hurt with my unhealthy behavior is not the other(s) to whom my action is directed, but my own self.” (Palomo-Lamarca, Palmquist 2001). I think it was this particular comparison that led me to choosing Kant and Buddha as comparison philosophers. Kant and Buddha have similar thoughts, one in particular is “Ding an sich”, the thing itself. Kant tells us that form is created by our body (mind), as did Buddha. When we see a form we see areas of black separated from white. Buddha tells us that they are one and the same, connected and that the form is created by us. Buddha tells us that our bodies may die, but the actions we committed whilst inhabiting those bodies continue on after the death. If freewill was a more tangible element, then the cause of the action could be stopped by the freedom of our will, curiously though Buddha also said that everything was dependant on something. How can something be free and dependant at the same time? Kant didn’t exactly give a viewpoint on free will except to say that it was an illusion that was a necessity to mankind in order to live. (Stanford encyclopedia of Philosophy). Buddha and Kant agreed on basic ideas about things, I think that Kant and Buddha argue from similar standpoints, with regard to personal identities to human actions. They both make their claims from different perspectives, as well as different eras and continents. Kant uses the third person perspective to provide us with the content for the idea of duty. Buddha uses the first person perspective to show us how to be free from desires. There is nothing wrong with different perspectives; they allow us to see different results for any given implication. I was surprised at how much Kant and Buddha where in agreement with each other, that I couldn’t find anything that they disagreed on. I think the major issue was they came from different continents as well as different centuries. In some ways I would say that Kant formed many of his ideas and opinions based on Buddha’s teachings. Kant formed his theories around Buddha’s to a certain extent, taking into account the differences in technology and human advancement.
I find myself more inclined to agree with the Eastern philosophers. I find the simplicity, with which they approached life found its way into their teachings and writings. I think that the idea of combining philosophy with religion, is an ideal that more religions should adopt; I don’t see this co-mingling as a bad thing. In some ways, Eastern philosophy is a religion of its own, in fact Taoism, is one such Eastern Philosophy, complete with monks and other religious trappings. I think what truly appeals to me about Eastern philosophy is its ability to be understood, it says what it needs to say, without taking any side trips into something more in depth. I still find their way of thinking more agreeable than that of Western philosophers.
In my opinion Western philosophers are more prone to over thinking an idea, than accepting something at face value. They take an idea, that has a simple premise and turn it into something complicated, as an example Kant’s view that to seek immediate gratification from something, leads to an unhealthy life. Kant’s viewpoint was that morality is the key to happiness. ((Palomo-Lamarca, Palmquist 2001). Western philosophers are very difficult to read and understand it seems like they have a pre-requisite to be as difficult to understand and read, as Eastern philosophers are easy to read and understand; at least in my opinion.

References Palomo-Lamarca, A.; Palmquist, S. (2001). Kant, Buddhism and the moral metaphysics of medicine. Hong Kong Baptist University. Retrieved from http://www.hkbu.edu.hk/-ppp/srp/arts/KBMMM.html
http://plato.stanford.edu