Today’s topic is not technical, but rather philosophical. It touches on sociology and the profound differences between the East and the West.
We have all heard the familiar adage that Western societies are more individualistic while Eastern societies are more collectivistic, but in what ways do they actually manifest? Today, I will explore this topic from the perspective of someone navigating their 20s, through two specific lenses: how we define our life purpose, and how we measure success.
Western teachings consistently emphasise self discovery: finding yourself and living the life you want to live as an individual. Here, the quality of your life is often tied to the person you eventually become, and so much of life is spent growing and becoming the best version of yourself. This mindset of advocating for every individual’s right for self discovery, to maximise their potential and push every boundary has historically paved the way for western societies to produce many extraordinary individuals.
This is perfectly captured in a quote by American philosopher Ralph Waldo Emerson, which says:
To be yourself in a world that is constantly trying to make you something else is the greatest accomplishment.
The Western philosophies we are most familiar with believe that the kind of person you are, and the kind of life you lead, is tied directly to who you are, your identity, and your sense of self.
In Eastern philosophy, however, the concept of "the best version of yourself" doesn't really exist.
Instead, Eastern teachings believe that the quality of your life is a reflection of the quality of your relationships. This includes relationships with parents, friends, partners, and children. Who you are and what kind of life you lead, is measured by how well you fulfilled your roles: what kind of father, child, or spouse you chose to be.
In The Analects, 12:11, in a conversation involving Confucius,
子曰： “君君，臣臣，父父，子子”
then
公曰: “善哉!信如君不君，臣不臣，父不父，子不子，虽有粟，吾得而食诸?”
translates to
Let the ruler be a ruler, the subject a subject, the father a father, the son a son.
This emphasises that everyone must live up to the responsibilities and duties of their designated roles.
Where the Western mind focuses on the individual, someone who was a relentless man, pursued his passions, and he achieved his goals, the Eastern mind focuses on a person’s roles and responsibilities to their community and loved ones, remembering instead that he was a devoted father, a supportive brother, and a filial son. Because of this, upbringing in the East often place an early emphasis on teaching children how to be cooperative citizens, reliable siblings, dedicated coworkers, nurturing parents, and to respect the harmony of a society.
As an example, consider the choice between staying near your family or moving to a distant city with better growth opportunities. A Western mind would almost always favour the better opportunity, while an Eastern mind would choose to stay in their hometown remain close to family.
So, who made the right choice?
The Western perspective would champion a life lived without regrets, urging you to see how far you can take yourself, while arguing that staying behind would only restrict your growth as a person. On the other hand, the Eastern mind might view leaving as selfish, as it neglects family duties and fails the standard of being a good son, brother, or husband.
To Westerners, Eastern teachings are often full of compromise, requiring a person to be a lesser version of yourself just to accomodate the environment and the people around you. Meanwhile, to Easterners, Western values are seen as too individualistic and self-centered, focusing only on the self and neglecting responsibilities in their communities.
Neither side is right or wrong, and neither should belittle the other. They are just very different schools of thought, life philosophies that have each, shaped their respective societies for thousands of years, producing vastly different human behaviors. Any blatant criticism along the lines of a cultural invasion is, in my view, is completely missing the point, and is simply a failure to understand and respect a different worldview.
I just find it so fascinating that despite both civilizations developing over a similar period of time, they have managed to evolve two completely opposite philosophies on what it actually means to lead a meaningful life.
Why do you think these societies developed such opposing mindsets?