Why is there such a rigid division between the Western Tradition of philosophy and Eastern philosophy? Early and Medieval Indian philosophy was just as rich, and varied, and deep as the Greek tradition. They addressed similar problems, often with slightly different trajectories of thought. And we now have justification to believe that there was cross-cultural intellectual "pollination" between the two. So when I read something from the Western canon that presents itself as novel, I stop and say to myself "Gee, I thought Dharmakirti said that a few hundred years ago." Sure, the Western philosopher may have done a more thorough exploration of the idea, but it's hard to resist the urge to go, "Duh!"
One piece of advice that someone once gave me as encouragement to study philosophy was no matter how brilliant or novel or unique something I was thinking about seemed to me, someone else has probably already thought of it. So to rephrase my question, in an age where information and communication are global,...
