This is continuation of my earlier blog on comments on article by Gentle Rain (GR).
I kind of agree with him when he says about the way the westerns and the easterns think (he has extended the courtesy of identifying the indians uniquely).
The ease with which we Indians have adopted to the western thinking is several times rightly attributed to English colonialism (Related Who is an Indian ) , I think it is more deeper than that. I am sure that the Chinese wouldnt transition to western thought or English, as easily as we did. My premise is language is culture and culture is language – existing in symbiosis.
Indian thought and languages have evovled over milleniums and is based on very logial constructs as much as abstractions. Sanskrit, the mother of almost 80% of Indian languages is considered the most(sic) perfect language. As logical as it gets, a good deal of abstraction and complex patterns are embedded in the works written over centuries.
English (proxy for western thought) joined this league as late as 15th century while rennaisance happened. Science and mathematics was suddenly revived after centuries of interlude between Pythagoras and Galileo. The language and hence the culture (or is it vice-versa) evolved both in logic and abstraction because of the increasing need to express things in a written format.
Indians follow the same thought pattern and it is easy to absorb the western culture (Do we need to do it? is a seperate question) and hence English (call centres, anyone?)
Its not gonna be a easy ride for the Chinese. I feel the Chinese (like their language) think very abtractly and less in logical patterns. Their structuring of though (and language) cannot be directly correlated to English. The fundamental fabric of the thought and culture is different, and it is going to be a challenge to adopt English language and western thought patterns.
Another angle of Chinese thought is that it is a Confusian society – top down. There is little room of individuality and relationships are very complex. It is unthinkable for the Chinese to challenge authority (on an average).
<Sorry for the abdrupt end>
mianmianxiyu said
> I think it is more deeper than that.
Absolutely. If one looks at the older Hindu and Buddhist texts (at least), there’s a kind of thought pattern there which is very familiar to us westerners, but it also long predates even the existence of the British (much less their colonization efforts). it isn’t the same, but it is easier to wrap our heads around. (it’s just different enough to seem “exotic” but not “inscrutable”!)
I sometimes think that there’s some key involved in comparing (say) the post newtonian/descartes-style sciences with the seemingly-calculated-to-the-millisecond accounts of the age of the universe in some Hindu texts (X person years is N vishnu years. N vishnu years is 1 Brahma year, etc). My point is not to compare the “reality” (whatever that means) of each, but to look at the way of thinking implied by each. Sometimes I think the westerners are fiercely logical, and the Indians are fiercely philosophical… both sometimes to a fault. (then compare this with the refreshingly, but almost bafflingly, pragmatic attitude of the Chinese). Of course, this characterization is simplistic, but it at least seems to point at something…
drae97 said
if you need some asnwers toward Taiwanese issues~
or learning Chinese, i can leave my msn~
I am in Canada as a wanderer too^_^
hopefully have chance to chat~
judy7697@hotmail.com~