East or West, West is the Best!

When I picked up the book 'The History of Western Philosophy' by Bertrand Russell, I was all excited. One, I felt it would help me learn and understand different schools of thought, in philosophy, but more importantly I felt it would help me understand the schools of thought in context of the era in question. And that I felt would give me a more rounded perspective.

I haven't progressed beyond four chapters and I don't know if I would also. The book is well written and it keeps you engrossed. Paragraphs with differing contexts and perspectives on the same theme mesh nicely into one another. However every now and then, you come across a statement that makes you squirm.

The first statement that put me off came right on the second page.

'Philosophy as different from theology began in Greece in 6th century BC'.

I always thought that the Vedas were dated to 1500-2500 BC if not further back in time. Many Upanishads are dated pre 6 century BC. And its not just Vedas and Upanishads but Buddha and Confucius were contemporaries in 6 century BC. So what about their philosophy? And if we were to assume that their philosophies could have been influenced by the prevalent ideas and beliefs then philosophy in Eastern hemisphere can definitely be dated to pre-6 century BC. But how is he so sure of 6 century BC for Greece itself? Anyways according to Mr. Bertrand Russell western philosophy began in 6 century BC. Fine granted. Let us move ahead.

And just when I was settling back, he comes up with this gem.

'Now almost all the hypotheses that has dominated modern philosophy was first thought of by the Greeks; their imaginative inventiveness in abstract matters can hardly be too highly praised. What I have to say about the Greeks will be from this point of view; I shall regard them as giving birth to theories which have had an independent life and growth, and which though at first somewhat infantile, have proved capable of surviving and developing throughout more than two thousand years.

Yes, I know that the title of the book is History of Western Philosophy but the above statement seems dismissive of non- Greek philosophies. Isn't it naive to assume that there was absolutely no knowledge transfer between the Greeks and Mesopotamians and between Mesopotamians and the people of Swat (Suvastu in Rig Veda) of the Indus- Saraswathi Valley civilizations?

So I decided to Google on the fact whether there has been any documented record of Indian influence on Greek philosophy. And by chance, before Googling, I came across Offstumped's post on the same topic today. He quotes from the book - 'The study on Ancient Thought - comparative Studies in Greek and Indian Philosophies' by Thomas McEvilley. To quote from his post -

…The massive transfer of ideas or methods of thinking, first from India to Greece in the pre-Socratic period and again back from Greece to India in the Hellenistic period

Since the ideas in question remain fundamental elements of Greek thought for a thousand years, it is time to acknowledge that one of the major strains of Greek thought was Indian Influenced - that it might even be called the Indianized or Greco-Indian lineage

I am going to be lenient to towards Bertrand Russell, given the fact that he wrote his book in 1945 and was ill-informed in developments in archaeology and the fact that Indus-Saraswathi civilisation was discovered in 1924-31. Not to mention the fact that Sir William Jones downwards had translated many Samskrit treatises. right from 1750's. Anyways, the good news is that Mr. Russel has clarified his undying appreciation for the Greeks and their thinking, so I now know what to expect when I read further.

So while I was expecting the superlative treatment of Greek thought, I did not imagine that he would overlook facts.

... But certain elements had been lacking [ in civilisations of Egypt and Mesopotamia] until Greece supplied them. What they achieved in art and literature is familiar to everybody, but what they did in purely intellectual realm is even more exceptional. They invented mathematics (deductive reasoning) and science and philosophy; they first wrote history as supposed to annals; they speculated freely about the nature of the world and ends of life, without being bound in the fetters of inherited orthodoxy. What occurred was so astonishing, that until recent times, men were content to gape and talk about the Greek mystical genius.

Well, given that the book was written in 1945, it was well established by then that Chinese and Indians had developed art, philosophy, mathematics and science too. Greek civilisation is credited with inventing Mathematics and Science? Really? Isn't that a little far fetched.

By now I have come to believe that Mr. Russell’s undying love for Greece and its ancient wisdom has clouded his judgment and he is no longer a dispassionate narrator. And then he fires his next salvo, by when I decided to close the book.

.. But in Plato, St. Augustine, Descartes, Spinoza and Kant there is an intimate blending of religion and reasoning, of moral aspiration of logical admiration of what is timeless, which comes from Pythagoras, which distinguishes the intellectualised theology of Europe from the more straightforward mysticism of Asia'.

Think Mr. Thomas McEvilley is bang on when he says

In response to the 19th century imperialist view … this investigation has shown that every mystical element in Indian thought can be found in Greek thought too and every rational element in Greek thought in Indian as well.

It is not to say Indian thought and civilisation was more advanced or better than its western counterparts. What ticks me off, is that this book is one of the revered books studied as a primer to Western Philosophy which could influence readers wrongly. The fact that, in the light of new evidence which is quite opposite to the long accepted belief of western supremacy, not much is being done to correct this imperialistic view point is a little worrying. I think we need more sub-continental and east Asian scholars writing about the sub-continent and Eastern Asia ourselves. And till we get to that point Orientalism by Edward Saeed should be a compulsory read for all.