Eastern philosophy (e.g. Hinduism, Buddhism, and Taoism) and early Western philosophy are similar in their interest in matters of basic significance to human existence. There were, however, some important, interrelated, differences.
1). Early Western philosophy and science were influenced by the concept of 'God as King of the universe'. As King, God made laws that the natural world obeys (e.g. the 'law of gravity'). The role of philosophy and science was to discover the laws that govern the behavior of the universe.
In Eastern philosophy, however, the natural world does not follow laws, it simply 'is'. Humans can look for regularities and pattern in the flow of nature, but any 'laws' thus detected are the product of human conception, a way of organizing our experiences, and are not the underlying basis of the phenomena being observed.
2) Both the Western and the Eastern approach share a concept that a deeper understanding of reality is possible than is normally available in everyday experience. The approaches differ significantly, however, in how to develop that understanding.
The Western approach to a deeper understanding involves the application of symbolic thought (i.e. words and mathematics). In other words, the nature of reality can be discovered by thinking about it the right way. Science relies upon a specific thinking processes (logic) while faith relies upon specific thoughts (dogma).
In the Eastern approach, thinking moves us away from understanding reality. When we think we transfer our attention away from reality to the world of symbols, and an irretrievable difference lies between the symbol and what it represents. In the Eastern approach, the nature of reality is discovered by experiencing it directly, without thoughts. This is accomplished through a variety of meditative processes.
3) The third difference between the Western and Eastern approach is directly related to the first two, it involves the different roles of symbolic communication, In the Western approach, both religious and scientific, the verbal or mathematical models of reality are evaluated along the criterion of Truth. A model is expected to accurately express the true nature of reality.
In the Eastern approach, however, verbal models concern more
how to experience reality, and are much less concerned about how
to think about reality. They are evaluated on their effectiveness
rather than on their truth. The difference between verbal models
in the two approaches is essentially the difference between a
text book on organic chemistry and a cook book.