- Parable about Dr.

Motokawa’s perspective on cultural differences in approaches to food

o Western – emphasis on the preparations of the ingredients and the skill and techniques
of the chef, extensive preparation and alteration of ingredients. Larger quantity. Focus
on nutritional characteristics of individual ingredients.
o Eastern (mostly Japanese) – emphasis on the freshness and essential characteristics of
ingredients and preserving those characteristics. Simple, subtle preparations that let the
ingredients star.
o Tokyo has 314 Michelin stars, more than double that of Paris at 141, with the next two
being Kyoto at 134 and Osaka at 121
- Differences in religion
o Although many scientists are not religious and those that are often separate those
personal beliefs from their work very effectively (and I think that Dr. Motokawa is
mistaken in his later characterization of the three types of scientists in the West),
religion is one of the most influential factors on the norms, customs, social scripts and
mindsets of cultural schemas
o Western – singular God, creator with a purpose and design
▪ God is transcendent and removed from man
▪ God is a transcendent reflection – God has an ‘I’
▪ The world, our lives, everything has purpose
▪ Salvation is individual – emphasis on the ‘I’
▪ ‘I’ must believe, ‘I’ am responsible, ‘I’ will be saved or damned
▪ Fractious exceptionalism – psychological importance to think that we’ve been
chosen to be saved
▪ Linear salvation with endpoint
▪ Transcendent, ultimate reality is another realm – (Heaven)
▪ Words create facts – words describe and characterize the world
▪ Western poetry – descriptive, common themes: romantic love, what is
happening around or to the poet, journeys, loss, death
▪ Similar to vernacular or everyday spoken language
▪ Linearity of time and cause and effect
▪ Western mode of thought – essentialism – stems from Plato’s idealism (things
have ‘essence’ – objects are more than their components – there is something
about a mountain that makes it a mountain
▪ Dichotomy of mind and body – eternal unchanging soul and fundamental self
o Eastern (mostly Zen Buddhism, but applies to other eastern religions) – many gods, no
purpose or design
▪ Gods are not creators, there are as many Buddhas as there are enlightened
people
▪ No gap between god and man – unity and harmony
▪ What is transcendent in Hinduism, Daoism, Shin’to – akasha, wuji – beyond our
imagination, void, nothingness, emptiness
▪ What is
▪ Purpose is an internal, subjective concept
▪ Salvation is achieved through denial of ego and self
 ▪ Transcendent reality is here – this world is the real one – salvation is mindset
▪ Words cannot be trusted – objective reality is indescribable
▪ Words limit us, imposes barriers to concepts
▪ Chinese and Japanese poetry – minimalism, concision, brevity, evocative,
harmonious – aims to create states of mind
▪ Rejection of dichotomies of material and conceptual, rejection of dichotomies of
essential ‘self’ and body
▪ No real concept of an eternal soul – ideas like the hun and po souls of Daoism
and four souls of Shinto are not equivalent
▪ Buddhism – anatta – non-self – there is no unchanging, permanent self
▪ No transmigration, individual is an illusion – called veil of maya
- Differences in science
o Dr. Motokawa then attempts to fill those boxes we previously used for differences in
religion for science.
o Western science
▪ Basis is that the world is reasonable and uniform, with laws and causality that
humans can understand
• Parsimonious rules
• Deduction and induction are valid, even to a universal scale
• Apparently complex, diverse rules can be reduced
• Grand design
▪ I interpreted the next box as this: paradoxically, at the same time, the
subjectivity of the human mind makes reaching any kind of absolute truth
impossible. My other view on this section is that Dr. Motokawa feels that
Western scientists have a tendency to think of themselves as external observers
– as we are cut off from nature to observe and understand nature objectively,
there is a gap between the scientist and the world
▪ In the next box, Dr. Motokawa covers how interpretation is essential to Western
science. We live inside our brains – our perception is not our senses, but a
distorted illusion, senses mediated by past memories and present emotions.
Because we are limited to our subjective perceptions of the world, we must fall
back upon words, which build, describe, and bring reality to our interpretations,
concepts and ultimately rules
▪ All of this leads to Dr. Motokawa’s conclusion – science in the West is question
and hypothesis oriented due to the above. Hypotheses are situational
interpretations of universal rules. Good hypotheses must be generalizable and
predictive. Hypotheses are not absolute, and their value is measured by both
their accuracy and how they drive other people to research. We value basic
science in the West due to this.
o Eastern science
▪ In contrast, Dr. Motokawa states that Eastern science begins with the premise
that there are many rules. Just as there is no absolute God, singular date of
creation or one path to salvation, there are many potential rules. Scientists in
 the East begin with a focus not on uniformity or similarity, but differences,
specificity and situationism.
▪ Again, paradoxically, there is no gap between humans and nature, and it’s thus
possible to obtain an objective, absolute truth through emptying the mind
• Traditional emphasis on meditation and removal of the ‘I’
▪ Focus on a lack of interpretation
• Interpretation closes off observations, limits them to the ‘I’
▪ Fact, or observation oriented rather than interpretation-oriented science –
specificity and objectivity are the goals
▪ Eastern scientists, implicitly or explicitly attempt to avoid hypotheses or
interpretations, because the discursiveness of human intellects conceals reality
▪ This leads to Dr. Motokawa’s conclusions on science in the East – instead of a
focus on basic research and the natural sciences, there is a focus on applied,
more practical science. Instead of building a support or tearing down a
hypothesis, science in the East attempts to make applied, situational
discoveries. Disciplines such as psychology are rarer. Instead of biology, there
are departments of environmental engineering, agriculture and medicine. In
2016, 16.9% of R&D expenditures in the USA went to basic research, compared
to only 5.2% in China.
o Dr. Motokawa then moves on to his fourth figure, a second science panel which
attempts to apply the shape of Western and Eastern societies to the mentality, goals
and ultimately career paths of scientists
▪ The first box goes over how Western societies value equality. Equality is good is
almost axiomatic in our society. Our metrics of human quality of life often
include income inequality. There is also a focus on independence and freedom.
Because of this ‘I’ orientation, emphasis on freedom and lack of hierarchy, gaps
develop between individuals, which must be bridged with words. Dr. Motokawa
supports his assertion with how people communicate in the US compared to
Japan – overt displays of affection are traditionally more common in the West
▪ Due to this focus on the individualism and freedom, scientists in the West are
elevated by how distinguished they are from other scientists. Success is driven
by novelty, differences, and loud voices. Scientists must advertise their
hypotheses and persuade other scientists. There is an emphasis on the clash of
ideas.
▪ In contrast, Eastern societies begin with the premise of inequality. Examples of
this include the four noble truths of Buddhism, the first of which is that suffering
occurs and is unavoidable, and the caste systems in Hinduism.
▪ Eastern societies thus view hierarchies as natural. Instead of an emphasis on
individuality and independence, members of society in the East are parts of the
whole. There is a focus on anonymity and harmony.
▪ Therefore, scientists in the East are not focused on advertising their differences.
Instead of being elevated by their individuality, scientists often work their way
up the ranks slowly and methodologically, gaining prestige through seniority
and connections
 ▪ Instead of a clash of ideas, of competing and falsifying hypotheses, scientists let
nature and their findings about the natural world speak for themselves
- Merits and Demerits
o Dr. Motokawa goes on to state what he feels are the flaws and strengths of the two sets
of worldviews
▪ Science in the East is technology focused and often not hypothesis driven
▪ Accumulation of facts is not predictive and cannot lead in new directions
o Western science demerits
▪ Emphasis on words and concepts – I am reminded of the cautionary tale of N-
rays
▪ Aims to find unique, general rules – can neglect differences and complexities
▪ Ego-centric science – emphasis on competing hypotheses causes scientists to
promote their theories and ideas even when the data does not support them
▪ Gap between man and nature
• Anecdote – processing of natural sounds occurs differently in Japanese
compared to Westerners – product of Japanese language and not
genetic
- Differences in Logic
o Dr. Motokawa then goes on to talk about differences in logic between East and West
o Western logic is structured, tightly connected and linear, pointing towards an evident
conclusion
o Japanese logic rarely state a conclusion, moving on to another, seemingly unrelated
topic, attempting to describe a fact from different points of view
o No syllogism (All men are mortal, Socrates is a man, Therefore, Socrates is mortal)
o No deductive or inductive reasoning because universal laws cannot be contained in
words or concepts
o Linear logic is dichotomous and illuminates one side clearly
o Eastern logic is dialectic, like a hollow net that embraces one fact
o Atmosphere that vaguely surrounds the fact
o Many points of view
o States a general direction or possibility rather than a conclusion
- Dr. Motokawa feels that Western science is a series of closed systems – each scientist makes
their own, closed off world that others can only join or destroy
- Eastern philosophy attempts to eliminate the subjectivity and boundaries of the individual
- Dr. Motokawa concludes his essay with a description of Renku – series of Haiku by different
poets that are connected through imagery and impressions rather than clear logic. The
development of science with open logic and non-linear, non-dichotomous systems may be
worthwhile
- If nature is totally connected, then we should prefer those languages or systems which show the
highest connection, not because they do in fact show the connections in nature, but because
they are coming closest to it
- One must acknowledge that the richest aspects of any large and complicated system arise in
factors that cannot be measured easily, if at all. For these, the artist's approach, uncertain
 though it inevitably is, seems to find and convey more meaning. Some of the biological and
engineering sciences are finding more and more inspiration from the arts.

His description of Western Science is, I think, a reasonable analysis of Western Scientists' unconscious
biases and impulses.

His description of Eastern Science, on the other hand, is a decent example of Eastern Scientists'
conscious rationalizations of their unconscious biases and impulses.

Do you agree with this essay, or do you feel that the author is writing from the author’s subconscious
Japanese essentialism and exceptionalism (Nihonjinron)?

Are the generalizations about the West accurate? Do you feel they apply to us?

Do the generalizations about the East apply to other East Asia countries?

Can science be independent of the cultural paradigm that it’s conducted in?

Are these paradigmatic concept maps of cultural worldviews and the mindset behind science meaningful
and useful tools? Can we apply them to bridge cultural gaps between us and first nations communities?