Why do so many people think in terms that are Black and white?

[Free Trade is managed by the invisible hand.]

Philosophers who talk about mastering the self suggest that we must learn to look beyond our perceptions, beyond good and evil, beyond true and false. In the West this may almost be impossible because it seems that everyone must deem something to be good, bad, or a mix of both. Thus how can our world view even I evolve if we are constantly thinking in terms of Good vs Evil, Black or White and so forth?

Judea-Christian principles teach us to "be good to your neighbor",but eastern philosophies would be confused because to them " you are the neighbor". Thus it might be that our culture has created a system that makes it almost impossible to ascend our simple world view.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

You are, like, so totally deep, man.

[Free Trade is managed by the invisible hand.]

You are, like, so totally deep, man.

Not really this is a basic question.

[opebo]

Westerners do seem almost pathetically childish most of the time, HJ.

[minionofmidas]

It's easier. And thus very attractive to both the (even just somewhat) stupid - or just the old -  and to the merely intellectually lazy.
As to why it's easier, we're dealing with some very deeply ingrained principles here. This part of the question is neurology (and to an extent evolution theory), not philosophy. It probably helps survival if your brain just recognizes an item as a leopard or not a leopard rather than give an accurate assessment of what part of what's likely a leopard you've seen out of the corner of your eyes, and how likely exactly what you've seen is to have been a leopard.

Al was flippant because of the criticism of Christianity, of course. Or perhaps the idealized view of eastern religion, which in its everyday application is frequently just as bad.

[Free Trade is managed by the invisible hand.]

It's easier. And thus very attractive to both the (even just somewhat) stupid - or just the old -  and to the merely intellectually lazy.
As to why it's easier, we're dealing with some very deeply ingrained principles here. This part of the question is neurology (and to an extent evolution theory), not philosophy. It probably helps survival if your brain just recognizes an item as a leopard or not a leopard rather than give an accurate assessment of what part of what's likely a leopard you've seen out of the corner of your eyes, and how likely exactly what you've seen is to have been a leopard.

Al was flippant because of the criticism of Christianity, of course. Or perhaps the idealized view of eastern religion, which in its everyday application is frequently just as bad.

eastern philosophy challenges us to look beyond black and white thinking, and many eastern philosophies helped western philosophers to look beyond black and white thinking. The taoists suggest that the forces work against and with each other at the same time(Yin and Yang...Hegel was into taoism). Buddhism suggests that we should look beyond our perceptions and think less in terms of good vs evil(many existentialists were influenced by eastern schools of thought). These western philosophers and Philosophies were able to go beyond the common Dichotomy that has dominated western thought.

[Associate Justice PiT]

     People are attracted to strength in individuals. When you can phrase your views in absolute terms with absolute conviction, people are more likely to support you. Because of that, it is greatly to the advantage of people in positions of power to espouse world views that promise objective truth, such as saying Al Qaeda is evil & they want to destroy us because we support democracy & are good.

[Vepres]

It's easier. And thus very attractive to both the (even just somewhat) stupid - or just the old -  and to the merely intellectually lazy.
As to why it's easier, we're dealing with some very deeply ingrained principles here. This part of the question is neurology (and to an extent evolution theory), not philosophy. It probably helps survival if your brain just recognizes an item as a leopard or not a leopard rather than give an accurate assessment of what part of what's likely a leopard you've seen out of the corner of your eyes, and how likely exactly what you've seen is to have been a leopard.

Al was flippant because of the criticism of Christianity, of course. Or perhaps the idealized view of eastern religion, which in its everyday application is frequently just as bad.

eastern philosophy challenges us to look beyond black and white thinking, and many eastern philosophies helped western philosophers to look beyond black and white thinking. The taoists suggest that the forces work against and with each other at the same time(Yin and Yang...Hegel was into taoism). Buddhism suggests that we should look beyond our perceptions and think less in terms of good vs evil(many existentialists were influenced by eastern schools of thought). These western philosophers and Philosophies were able to go beyond the common Dichotomy that has dominated western thought.

Perhaps, but then of course you have things like the Mandate of Heaven and Confucianism.

[Bo]

Because it's easy and convenient.

[Gustaf]

Because it is more accurate. It is also more practical.

It always amuses me what a black view of viewing things in black and white some people have.

[k-onmmunist]

Because people are lazy and think in absolute terms.

[Joe Republic]

Because people are lazy and think in absolute terms.

Given what I saw from you in our most recent debate, I'm inclined to agree with this.

[minionofmidas]

Given what I saw from both of you in your most recent debate, I'm inclined to agree with this.

[Joe Republic]

[k-onmmunist]

Because people are lazy and think in absolute terms.

Given what I saw from you in our most recent debate, I'm inclined to agree with this.

How was that in any way relevant?

[Swing low, sweet chariot. Comin' for to carry me home.]

eastern philosophy challenges us to look beyond black and white thinking, and many eastern philosophies helped western philosophers to look beyond black and white thinking. The taoists suggest that the forces work against and with each other at the same time(Yin and Yang...Hegel was into taoism). Buddhism suggests that we should look beyond our perceptions and think less in terms of good vs evil(many existentialists were influenced by eastern schools of thought). These western philosophers and Philosophies were able to go beyond the common Dichotomy that has dominated western thought.

i think your yang has gone limp.  first off, Christianity only views God as good.  We call some certain people "evil" not to say that we ourselves are "good", but rather to point out that their intentions are only bent on evil.

[ilikeverin]

As to why it's easier, we're dealing with some very deeply ingrained principles here. This part of the question is neurology (and to an extent evolution theory), not philosophy. It probably helps survival if your brain just recognizes an item as a leopard or not a leopard rather than give an accurate assessment of what part of what's likely a leopard you've seen out of the corner of your eyes, and how likely exactly what you've seen is to have been a leopard.

   

I was going to post almost exactly the same thing, except in more black-and-white terms

[Free Trade is managed by the invisible hand.]

eastern philosophy challenges us to look beyond black and white thinking, and many eastern philosophies helped western philosophers to look beyond black and white thinking. The taoists suggest that the forces work against and with each other at the same time(Yin and Yang...Hegel was into taoism). Buddhism suggests that we should look beyond our perceptions and think less in terms of good vs evil(many existentialists were influenced by eastern schools of thought). These western philosophers and Philosophies were able to go beyond the common Dichotomy that has dominated western thought.

i think your yang has gone limp.  first off, Christianity only views God as good.  We call some certain people "evil" not to say that we ourselves are "good", but rather to point out that their intentions are only bent on evil.

I realize that you see god as good, but you also see the devil as evil. The taoist perspective would suggest that their is both a good and evil in both god and the devil, or they may say that God and the Devil are both one in the same. On the other hand the buddhist would say that god is neither good or evil.

[minionofmidas]

As to why it's easier, we're dealing with some very deeply ingrained principles here. This part of the question is neurology (and to an extent evolution theory), not philosophy. It probably helps survival if your brain just recognizes an item as a leopard or not a leopard rather than give an accurate assessment of what part of what's likely a leopard you've seen out of the corner of your eyes, and how likely exactly what you've seen is to have been a leopard.

   

I was going to post almost exactly the same thing, except in more black-and-white terms

You would have used a zebra instead of a leopard? Why?

[Swing low, sweet chariot. Comin' for to carry me home.]

eastern philosophy challenges us to look beyond black and white thinking, and many eastern philosophies helped western philosophers to look beyond black and white thinking. The taoists suggest that the forces work against and with each other at the same time(Yin and Yang...Hegel was into taoism). Buddhism suggests that we should look beyond our perceptions and think less in terms of good vs evil(many existentialists were influenced by eastern schools of thought). These western philosophers and Philosophies were able to go beyond the common Dichotomy that has dominated western thought.

i think your yang has gone limp.  first off, Christianity only views God as good.  We call some certain people "evil" not to say that we ourselves are "good", but rather to point out that their intentions are only bent on evil.

I realize that you see god as good, but you also see the devil as evil. The taoist perspective would suggest that their is both a good and evil in both god and the devil, or they may say that God and the Devil are both one in the same. On the other hand the buddhist would say that god is neither good or evil.

ok, thanks for the info

[opebo]

Because it is more accurate. It is also more practical. 

It is far less accurate, though it is more practical.

[Joe Republic]

Because people are lazy and think in absolute terms.

Given what I saw from you in our most recent debate, I'm inclined to agree with this.

How was that in any way relevant?

How on earth is it not relevant?  I was merely pointing out that your side of our debate helped to demonstrate the truth of your post in this thread.  For heavens' sake, I'm agreeing with you!

[ilikeverin]

As to why it's easier, we're dealing with some very deeply ingrained principles here. This part of the question is neurology (and to an extent evolution theory), not philosophy. It probably helps survival if your brain just recognizes an item as a leopard or not a leopard rather than give an accurate assessment of what part of what's likely a leopard you've seen out of the corner of your eyes, and how likely exactly what you've seen is to have been a leopard.

   

I was going to post almost exactly the same thing, except in more black-and-white terms

You would have used a zebra instead of a leopard? Why?

No, silly, just a snow leopard.  Because they're cooler.