In Western philosophy, every belief one holds is scrutinized.

However, it seems to me that there is more room for accepting seemingly self-evident philosophical beliefs in Eastern philosophy.

Can you suggest me places to look for this sort of acceptance? I am talking about the primacy of intuition over reasoning.

  • 1
    Not very clear... what is the opinion considered? Commented Apr 1, 2021 at 12:55
  • 1
    @MauroALLEGRANZA to answer my question this detail does not matter, as I said in the question. You can consider my view to be some arbitrary philosophical belief that is not a basic belief (to use the jargon of Western philosophy).
    – user42828
    Commented Apr 1, 2021 at 12:57
  • 1
    The use of the term 'shelter' is confusing. Are you trying to shelter an ostensibly self-evident view from critical analysis? I suggest a big rewrite of the question. If you don't think the particular view matters, then don't mention it; just start with 'can an abstract philosophical idea' and ask your question. Commented Apr 1, 2021 at 16:14
  • 1
    @TedWrigley I think the same thing, so I have rewritten the question entirely.
    – user42828
    Commented Apr 1, 2021 at 16:53
  • 1
    It seems u hope to grasp a philosophy which has "primacy of intuition over reasoning"? But isn't this itself need reasoning to explain why? This is like many people think no need to learn philosophy, but when pressured upon a reason, they still need to invoke some kind of personal informal or immature "philosophy". Intuition is not at odds with reasoning at all, instead reasoning is required in any sound philosophy, be it internalism or externalism... Commented Apr 2, 2021 at 2:39

3 Answers 3


Generally speaking, Eastern philosophy isn't about intuition per se. It's more at apperception. Western philosophy tries to put the world into language; Eastern philosophy starts from the idea that language is unsuited to the task, and reaches for a more direct understanding of the world.

In the Eastern worldview, what we call 'intuition' would arise from that direct understanding of the world. There's nothing particularly special about it; it's just a clear understanding of how this affects that, without relying on some mathematical or linguistic approximation.

  • 2
    Adding some observation based on your above sensible logic expressed out of language, eastern philosophers tend to say less (intentionally with the understanding public language is like 2-edge sword and philosophy's ultimate goal is private improvement anyway), while western philosophers tend to write and say a lot cautiously (with the emphasis of logic and want to get criticized and learn from others via innately developed and shared concepts)... Commented Apr 5, 2021 at 1:07

I think you will find advocacy for abandonment of views rather than acceptance of them.

Paramatthaka Sutta: On Views

That brahmana who does not grasp at a view, with what could he be identified in the world?

The Vagrakkhedikâ or Diamond-Cutter VII.

As I, O Bhagavat, understand the meaning of the preaching of the Bhagavat, there is nothing that was known by the Tathâgata under the name of the highest perfect knowledge, nor is there anything that is taught by the Tathâgata.

  • Are you implying there is nothing like what I'm looking for in Eastern thought?
    – user42828
    Commented Apr 1, 2021 at 18:47
  • I guess so. In this way, views are not scrutinized; you are peacefully unbadgered. It might look like something has been accepted but perhaps no one is really taking anything to heart in the samsara of views. Commented Apr 1, 2021 at 22:31
  • 1
    "One learns that all is mere fluff, that nothing is worth adhering to, nothing is worth clinging to, as what one adheres to and clings to gains consistency by that very adhering to it by one and that very clinging to it by one, but that that consistency is quite fluffy and doesn't hold, that it slips away as one tries to adhere to it, to cling to it. So one learns to deal with everything as fluff and nothing more." - Tang Huyen (alt.zen) Commented Apr 3, 2021 at 8:56
  • 1
    "Fluff, fluff, all is fluffy and a striving after the mind."
    – Scott Rowe
    Commented Jan 6 at 16:16

Might you mean something like Taoism?

Opening lines of the Tao Te Ching by Lao Tzu:

"The Tao that can be told is not the eternal Tao. The name that can be named is not the eternal name. The nameless is the beginning of heaven and earth. The named is the mother of ten thousand things. Ever desireless, one can see the mystery. Ever desiring, one can see the manifestations. These two spring from the same source but differ in name; this appears as darkness. Darkness within darkness. The gate to all mystery."

From the poem 'Xinxin Ming', (Verses on Faith in Mind) by Third Chinese Zen Patriarch Jianzhi Sengcan:

"The Great Way is not difficult for those who have no preferences. When love and hate are both absent, everything becomes clear and undisguised. Make the smallest distinction, however, and heaven and earth are set infinitely apart. If you wish to see the truth, then hold no opinions for, or against, anything. To set up what you like against what you dislike is the disease of the mind. When the deep meaning of things is not understood, the mind's essential peace is disturbed to no avail.

"The Way is perfect, like vast space where nothing is lacking and nothing is in excess. Indeed, it is due to our choosing to accept or reject that we do not see the true nature of things. Live neither in the entanglements of outer things, nor in inner feelings of emptiness. Be serene in the oneness of things, and such erroneous views will disappear by themselves. When you try to stop activity to achieve passivity, your very effort fills you with activity. As long as you remain in one extreme or the other, you will never know Oneness.

Those who do not live in the single Way fail in both activity and passivity, assertion and denial. To deny the reality of things is to miss their reality; to assert the emptiness of things is to miss their reality. The more you talk and think about it, the further astray you wander from the truth. Stop talking and thinking, and there is nothing you will not be able to know."

I fear though that you are orientalising, mistaking mystic thinking like this, as being without 'scrutiny', whatever you mean by that. These foundational texts above embody sophisticated reactions to ongoing debates and practices, just like Western philosophical and religious treaties. This article draws parallels between the thinking of Buddhist philosopher Nagarjuna, and more recent Western philosophers, in regard to a kind of non-dual using thinking to escape thinking, eg 'Wittgenstein's Ladder'.

Mysticism has been part of Western thinking, such as Anchorite practices and the Desert Fathers, and hesychasm chanting in the Eastern Orthodox church, and Sufism which started in Turkey. But the rise of centralised militaristic states, and of technology and science, pushed these strands to the margins in a way that did not happen in India & China. In contrast, China institutionally suppressed their school of logic, Mohism.

  • This is an interesting read, but not an answer to my question. I made my question clearer.
    – user42828
    Commented Apr 1, 2021 at 22:20
  • @Alex: Have you looked at moral & mathematical intuitionism?
    – CriglCragl
    Commented Apr 1, 2021 at 22:26
  • I have not, no.
    – user42828
    Commented Apr 1, 2021 at 22:27

You must log in to answer this question.