- Why did everyone start to hate the Russians if the U.S. did the same thing in Afghanistan, Iraq?
- What needs to be corrected in the management of Russia first?
- Why did Blaise Pascal become a religious man at the end of his life?
- How do I know if a guy likes you?
- When they say "one generation", how many do they mean?
This is the first time I've heard of such a dichotomy. Perhaps, if you are the author of it, then you know better what these differences are.
But I can speculate hypothetically. The West, or rather-Ancient Greece gave, among other philosophical schools, such an offshoot as cynicism (Kinism, from “kinos” – dog, dog). As you know, the basis of this philosophy is the rejection of imposed values, the rejection of unnecessary, comfortable, provocative and rather rigid asceticism.
Later, in Europe, cynicism began to be contrasted with Romanticism, as a worldview position regarding the moral qualities of a person. If romantics in this vein idealized and overestimated the role of lofty and heroic motives on average, then cynics did the opposite – devalued all the so-called “higher” character traits and reduced everything to selfishness, self-interest, and so on.
Actually, now if someone uses the term “cynic” somewhere, it is in the latter meaning. As a philosophical school, Kinism was successfully integrated into stoicism, and many authors of this tradition revered cynicism and considered their method a “fast road to virtue”. However, not for everyone.
Elements of Kinism can be found in a fairly popular branch of Zen Buddhism. What is worth only the massively distributed statement of teacher Un Moon: when asked what the Buddha is, he answered, one might say, quite cynically – “Dried shit on a stick”. In principle, quite a large proportion of Zen teachings are about going beyond dogma, not having any stupid shrines, and using your mind where it is useful.