Philosophers of all times have used philosophy as an intellectual compass, leading them to the understanding of the world, human relations, and the nature of existence. These philosophical currents have influenced the Western Philosophical Tradition of idealism, empiricism, and rationalism. In contrast, it is essential to consider non-Western Intellectual Traditions, which are equally rich although largely ignored. This comparative view is intended to question the biases and limitations of Western Cultural Traditions and to show how philosophies from the Global South offer alternative perspectives.

Idealism vs Eastern Views on the Nature of Reality

Western Idealism, as typified by Plato and Descartes, carries with it a certain emphasis on thinking and ideas. The world, from this point of view, is just a creation of the mind. Eastern Philosophies, such as Indian Vedanta and Buddhism, share some of this wariness about the material world but do so for very different spiritual reasons. For example, in Buddhism, the world of phenomena is an illusion (Maya), and the aim is to go beyond this illusion and reach enlightenment. In contrast, for Plato, the Ideas were eternal and objective aspects upon which less emphasis was placed; in the East, the teachings put more stress on non-duality, where the self and the world are not separable but interrelated.

Here, the questioning of Western Idealism arises from questioning the strict dichotomy between subject and object.

If Western Idealism established the basis of Western Metaphysics, then it was eternally dualistic. On the other hand, most Eastern Philosophies lead to the dissolving of dualism between the subject-object and thought-reality into a more non-dual view of the world in correspondence with the universality of interconnectedness. This remains one of the issues, particularly in our contemporary ecological and spiritual contexts, that is more relevant than ever before.

Spiritual Transformation in Empiricism and Knowledge

In the case of Empiricism, especially that of Locke and Hume, this philosophy is based on the experience of the senses as the only source of knowledge that laid the method for modern sciences. However, this complete philosophy goes against most indigenous and non-Western Epistemologies, where other sources of knowledge are usually held in high regard, such as oral tradition, myths, and spiritual visions. Cosmologies of the Dogon are known to encapsulate sophisticated cosmological knowledge passed down through tales of the ancestors. Even if these stories are very far from Western Empirical Measurements, they disclose a nearly sophisticated understanding of nature, cosmic cycles, and human life.

Comparatively, Empiricism has everything to do with observation and first-hand experience, whereas traditional knowledge is often interlaced with religion and culture. In the same manner, it would be misleading to assess them with any kind of Empiricist Criterion. Such epistemologies, mostly subaltern from the horizon of Western Science, raise questions related to the plurality of forms of knowledge and Epistemological Relativism. In a globalising world, the concept of knowledge cannot be delimited only to perspectives that are empirical and deeply rooted in collective experiences.

Conflict or Complementarity: Rationalism and Mysticism

While Descartes and Spinoza predominate in the Rationalist Tradition, rationalist thought, which divorces the body from the mind, comes into direct conflict with mystical approaches both in the East and the West. For example, in Islamic Sufism, special attention is given to the unity of the spirit and the body in the knowledge of self through inner searching. He acknowledged that reason was needed but was insufficient to penetrate the divine essence and the complexity of the universe.

While Rationalism insists on objectivity and logic, the Sufi or Hindu mystics regard reason as a stage on the path to truth but insist more on the importance of inner experience. The difference also highlights the lack of attention in Cartesian Rationalism to considerations of intuition, mystical ecstasy, or inspiration. In reality, both are complementary. Reason can guide a person only up to a certain truth. Still, there comes a point where further subjective experience, intuition, and spirituality must carry a person in order to delve into the understanding of existence.

Positivism and Relativism

In addition to being strict in its focus on measurable facts, Comte's Positivism rejects any sort of metaphysical speculation. Such a scientific model has brought unquestionable progress. Still, one also needs to raise questions within the Post-Colonial Context on the very basis on which this progress has been achieved. Often, Positivism provided the basis for justifying Eurocentrism and cultural hegemony in relation to societies outside the West, which were viewed as backward or irrational.

Therefore, the belief in some unseen phenomena in African societies seems trivial to Positivist Science. Such belief systems are often profound responses to cultural and environmental experiences. Herein lies one of the major differences: while the Positivistic Worldview claims universality, African philosophies embrace cultural relativity and the interrelation of the visible and invisible. There is great suspicion in making universality when modern science is assumed to hold a monopoly on truth. In this postcolonial period, the challenge has been finding a common denominator between these approaches in order to build systems of knowledge that would integrate local and global, as well as scientific and spiritual perspectives at the same time.

Ubuntu and the Existentialism of the Individual: Individual Freedom

Sartre's Existentialism is greatly focused on the empowerment of individual freedom to define one's being. In comparison, African communal philosophies like Ubuntu, which emphasise individualism and atomism, are most prominently seen in sub-Saharan Africa and are based on the philosophy "I am because we are," with further considerations to underline interdependencies between individuals and communities. Here, freedom does not seem to be in opposition to others but in terms of collaboration, sharing, and a kind of collective harmony.

Existentialism revels in the freedom of the individual to create meaning in a world without God, while Ubuntu implies that such freedom is only significant within a larger, collective context. To this degree, freedom tends to question the meaning attached to freedom in Existentialist Thought, where the meaning of freedom appears divorced from modes of living sociably and communally. In Postcolonial Terms, Ubuntu articulates a perspective that resonates more with the collective struggles for social justice, equality, and reconciliation.

Conclusion: Towards a Many-Sided Philosophy

A scrutiny of these philosophical currents shows that while they may have greatly influenced world thought, Western Doctrines are not universal and limitlessly valid. African, Asian, and Arab Philosophies are, in this respect, often more holistic than the perspectives offered by their Western Counterparts. In fact, what these non-Western philosophies emphasise is the relationship between cultural relativism and spiritual experience. The philosophy of tomorrow cannot be univocal. It will be pluralistic, hearing voices that for centuries have been muted and rising to the challenge of integrating diversified forms of knowledge. Only a globally comparative and inclusive way of thinking will stand to meet the needs of greatly changing contemporary ecological, social, and spiritual challenges.