142
BOOK REVIEWS
In matters of mutual understanding, as in every real dialogue, mutual respect is essential. In the search for self-understanding, whether for Europeans or Asians, a certain self-respect is primary also. That requires a degree of self-acceptance, the acceptance of one's own past history and present limitations. This would, it seems, qualify the demand for "parity of esteem." (Cf. Joseph Levenson's bold thesis on modern Chinese response to the West and evaluation of Chinese tradition.) Although it is clear, as one gathers from this book, the time of Western arrogance and Asian "colonial or semi-colonial mentality" is past, it is not clear that the time of Western dominance is in fact over, at least for the immediate future. An Asian can certainly agree with Joseph Needham in his essay on "The Dialogue between Asia and Europe" when he warns the man of the West that "before it is too late, let him take one at least of the essential steps towards self-knowledge, that is to say, knowledge of others. Let him study the words of their saints and sages as well as those of his own. Let him experience his own humanity in the image of theirs" (p.289). This is, however, a moral demand. To be fair, it should be made equally of the man of the East. Comparatively little is suggested in this direction by this book, outside of Robert L. Slater's essay on "Living Religions and World Community."
"Western science and technology, Eastern religion and ethics" — this idea has been developed in the response to Western predominance and self-esteem on the part of many Asians. This is expressed in the 'i-yung formula of the Chinese: Chinese learning for substance, Western for function. It in fact constitutes a dominant pattern in the Glass Curtain itself. And one finds this pattern present also in the book, in a variety of ways. The Englishman who, in presenting his view on the uniqueness of Asia, idealizes the East and deprecates the West partly for its science and technology represents a curious inversion of the more typical Western arrogance. One wonders whether anyone who seems to be so lacking in sympathy for his own tradition is really capable of appreciating others'. Then, in another essay, the uniqueness of Europe is identified by a Malaysian Chinese to be science — the spirit of science, to be sure, but quite distinct from religion meaning the spirit of dogmatism. The highly autobiographical nature of this essay (the shortest of the twenty con-
142
BOOK REVIEWS
In matters of mutual understanding, as in every real dialogue, mutual respect is essential. In the search for self-understanding. whether for Europeans or Asians, a certain self-respect is primary also. That requires a degree of self-acceptance, the acceptance of one's own past history and present limitations. This would, it seems, qualify the demand for "parity of esteem." (Cf. Joseph Levenson's bold thesis on modern Chinese response to the West and evaluation of Chinese tradition.) Although it is clear, as one gathers from this book, the time of Western arrogance and Asian "colonial or semi-colonial mentality" is past, it is not clear that the time of Western dominance is in fact over, at least for the immediate future. An Asian can certainly agree with Joseph Needham in his essay on "The Dialogue between Asia and Europe" when he warns the man of the West that "before it is too late, let him take one at least of the essential steps towards self-knowledge, that is to say, knowledge of others. Let him study the words of their saints and sages as well as those of his own. Let him experience his own humanity in the image of theirs" (p.289). This is, however, a moral demand. To be fair, it should be made equally of the man of the East. Com- paratively little is suggested in this direction by this book, outside of Robert L. Slater's essay on "Living Religions and World Community."
"Western science and technology, Eastern religion and ethics" this idea has been developed in the response to Western pre- dominance and self-esteem on the part of many Asians. This is expressed in the 'i-yung formula of the Chinese: Chinese learning for substance, Western for function. It in fact constitutes a dominant pattern in the Glass Curtain itself. And one finds this pattern present also in the book, in a variety of ways. The Englishman who, in presenting his view on the uniqueness of Asia, idealizes the East and deprecates the West partly for its science and technology represents a curious inversion of the more typical Western arrogance. One wonders whether anyone who seems to be so lacking in sympathy for his own tradition is really capable of appreciating others'. Then, in another essay, the uniqueness of Europe, is identified by a Malaysian Chinese to be science the spirit of science to be sure, but quite distinct from religion meaning the spirit of dogmatism. The highly autobio- graphical nature of this essay (the shortest of the twenty con-
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.