Both Western and Chinese philosophers have enriched the existential sphere, each in their own unique way. The difference lies in their approach to metaphysical questions, particularly those concerning time and being. These distinctions may stem from various factors, such as cultural perceptions, societal understandings, psychological structures, national traditions, and philosophical beliefs.

A prominent figure in Western philosophy, Martin Heidegger explores the existential depth of time and being. He builds his arguments around an important concept, Dasein, or human existence. Heidegger views Dasein as central to understanding being, emphasizing how humans relate to the surrounding world, objects, and nature. He highlights the finite nature of human existence, observing that being is constrained by temporality and defined by the awareness of mortality.

One of the greatest thinkers of Chinese philosophy, Confucius, sees time as something evolving, being changed or renewed. As he said, “At fifteen, I set my heart on learning; at thirty, I took my stand; at forty, I was free from doubt; at fifty, I knew the decrees of Heaven; at sixty, my ear was obedient; at seventy, I could follow my heart’s desire without transgressing what was right.” Another Chinese thinker, Laozi, also contributed to the concepts of time and being. He views time in its dynamic nature, as something far from static.

When comparing Western and Chinese philosophy, we find fundamentally different but equally meaningful interpretations of time and being. To some extent, Western philosophy delves deeper into human existence, analyzing the multidimensional layers of being.

Time was not a philosophical topic in the West until very recently, the end of the 19th century and it was of a consequence of the importance it had in physics. The mathematical concept of time changed drastically around that time but the importance of time as a philosophical topic has greatly diminished since then.

Being has been a central philosophic topic since the beginning of philosophy in the West although the importance of this topic greatly diminished in the anglo world with the empiricist trend which is anti-metaphysic and thus anti-philosophical and scientistic. Since the american empire wan the WWII it has been the master of founding universities and thus philosophy has been eclipse in favor of a superficial scientistic surface approach. Most scientists, even the most celebrated have zero philosophical background and are basically philosophical moron and they brag about it.

Knowing only the most basic chineese classical philsophical concepts I am not in a good position to compare the notion of being in chinese philosophy with the notions of being in western philosophy. That it is different is not surprising since I do not expect very different civilisation to think the same although reality or truth is ONE but truth is never grasped directly but mediate from the civilisational lense from which it is perceived.

Thanks Louis Brassard and Amalya Sukiasyan for your thoughtful inputs. I think I'll need more time to process your lines of thoughts.

To me, I am still trying to make the linkages with several observations.

Amalya Sukiasyan you are spot on with your reference to Heidegger.

Yes I did intend this question to stage my critique of Heidegger. BTW, I have been told reading Heidegger in German is like having a root canal. Truth be told, reading German Philosophy is not a pleasant experience. Though I will make an attempt with Marx one day because I suspect there's something loss in translation. Otherwise, German is a TURGID LANGUAGE when it comes to non-fictional writing.

Louis Brassard and Amalya Sukiasyan maybe you could help me to think through these observations.

Drazen Pehar

HISTORICISM IS A GERMAN INVENTION COUCHED IN 19TH NATIONALISM. AND IT'S OFTEN COUCHED IN ARCHITECTURE, FAIRY TALES, MUSIC, AND OBJECTS.

THANK YOU Drazen Pehar

There's lots that I agree with you. But which parts, lets just keep that obscure for the TIME BEING. Mainly, you've given me much food for thought.

About REHABILITATION, it does BEG THE QUESTION: WHY SHOULD SOMETHING/ SOMEONE BE RESURRECTED?

Drazen Pehar

Indeed these 2 CONSTITUTIONS ARE GREAT DECLARATIONS. But as META NATIONAL NARRATIVES, do they NEED RE-CONSTITUTIONS? Least we ARE DEALING WITH MAYHEMS... I vouch that this is RELATED TO MY WORKING INTEREST IN WHAT I CALL VAPOUR MODERNITY...

Speaking of religious analogies, WHY MUST WE MOVE FORWARD BEYOND GERMAN's REASON OF STATE AS SELF FLAGULATION?

About VON DER(R)/ DIE/ LAID, was she FLIRTING WITH JUSTIN in THAT NATO ROUND TABLE ABOUT PUTIN's TURKEY CHEST?

Tieu-Tieu Le Phung Thank you for your insightful reflections. Here are my thoughts on your mentioned points:

1.

German doesn't really have a direct way to express the continuous past tense. How should one talk about time as a continuum? Despite some grammatical limitations, German represents the historical and cultural richness of philosophy, psychology, and literature. Being the native language of Wolfgang Goethe, Erich Maria Remarque, Heidegger, and many other influential figures, German rewards the world for its linguistic challenges. As for the past continuous tense, the movement of time is expressed through existential means rather than grammatical ones.

2.

History as a continuum: Philosophy introduces various aspects of cause-and-effect relationships, referring to the metaphysical concepts of induction and deduction. That is to say, the interconnectivity of things, as evidence of cosmological unity, helps us perceive history as a continuum. As in the case of literature, we can see history as a chronological text where the whole is dependent on the parts and vice versa.

3.

What are the implications that motion is couched in the differences between the accusative and dative case? Motion, as the progress of time and human existence, is not constrained by lexico-grammatical barriers. It is viewed and perceived through the lens of deep reflection, philosophical argument, and unconventional thinking.

4.

How is the conception of spatial relativity from the Übermensch related to being? Nietzsche's spatio-temporal understandings are complex, multifaceted, and intellectually challenging. The character of the Übermensch represents a person who pushes his limitations, finds the meaning of his existence, challenges societal perceptions, and reaches self-empowerment. Nevertheless, the Übermensch does not accept all traditional values, which may be found conflicting in the context of ethics. Despite these moral contradictions, his enigmatic nature goes far beyond conventional simplicities and finds the code of life's true meaning.

Amalya Sukiasyan

Thanks for such excellent elaborations.

Please note I had written about NON FICTIONAL GERMAN.

To me the UBERMENSCH (sorry no umlaut, just want to commit some GERMAN LINGUISTIC CRIMES 😉...)

What I would like to do with that is to link it to the DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE LUOPAN (the ORIGINAL "COMPASS" with a HUMAN POINT OF VIEW IN RELATION TO CHINESE NOTIONS OF TIME & SPACE) and the WESTERN COMPASS (used for CONQUEST OF TIME & SPACE, not least with that VERY CONQUEST CULMINATING IN "SPACE EXPLORATIONS" (once GOD'S POINT OF VIEW).

Dear Tieu-Tieu Le Phung,

''Truth be told, reading German Philosophy is not a pleasant experience. ''

I have read Heideiger Being and Time in English and it was not pleasant at all. I have read Marx Capital in French and it was not pleasant at all. I do not think it is a language problem at all but a conscious or sub-conscious intention of not being easily understood . A kind of toxic academic elitism. In the enlightments, French philosophers intended to be understood by the many litterate people and they adopt a litterary style that was very elegant and clear. The modus vivandi of these philosophers was to express their ideas as simply and concisely as possible. The Kant broke with this european enlightment tradition when he wrote ''The Critique of Pure Reason''. The early Kant was written to be understood by the many, the late Kant was not. He wrote for an academic philosopher class and started inventing new technical words and one has to learn painfully these new languague and earn painfully the access to his ideas. And things just came worse from them. Kant is not one philosopher among other but a paradigm shifter in european philosophy so it encourage a lot of other philosopher to use his cryptic languages and to even be more cryptic and double down on this cryptic technical language. Bergson which by the way put the question of time at the core of his philosophy complained about the toxic habit of german philosophers to be cryptic and contrasted this with the clarity the French philosophical tradition and British tradition . His ''Creative Evolution'' book won the Nobel in litterature. Unfortunatly Bergson was the last French philosopher who wrote elegantly and to be understood. The post WWII French intellectual imitated the german tradition and especially Heidegger but they created a much worse murky one since at least the german philosophers intented to be clear once you manage to go throw years of painfull decryptions but post war French philosophers were cryptic for hiding the utter vacuous of their meaningless bla bla bla. Substance evaporated behing the cryptic curtain. I painfully read the critique of pure reason and find no reason for making so cryptic nor find no reason for Heidegger to make his ideas so cryptic. After ''Being and Time'', I found the essences of these ideas expressed by for example: the biologist von Uexküll which Heidegger read and it was clear and much more general and not limited to humans.

Regards,

- Louis

Louis Brassard

Pleeeaase, don't get me STARTED ON DERRIDA... he wanked, and wanked, but why couldn't the guy simply put it in a simple and elegant equation like this:

It's NOT ABOUT OR, IT'S ALL ABOUT AND when it comes to WESTERN BINARIES.

Tieu-Tieu Le Phung Thank you too.