define the euro-centric and asian-centric perspective on asia?

Question

asia, how did it come to be? the origin of the word not the land mass

Answer 1

For starters, and this is an incomplete answer, but the Eurocentric perspective does not see Europe as a western peninsula of Asia, but actually as its own continent. Europe is it's own continent according to the Eurocentric perspective.

Basing its world-view on Platonic essentialism, there is something "European" about Europe and its peoples, animals, climate, etc, so that there must be something "Asian" about Asia's people, animals, climate, etc.

Actually, it's all pretty much the same. Europeans are really Asians, but at around 1450, they were the most backwards region of the planet--they were the furthest from the great Asian empires of the time. So they had to rally around their religion, Christianity, and become "superior" by virtue of their belief in Christ.

Later, they believed themselves superior because of their race, intellect, rationality, peaceful nature--all the stuff that makes them see themselves as the pinnacle of humanity.

Asians see Europeans as pink, hairy barbarians. OK, maybe I'm overgeneralizing a bit, but Asians see themselves as a more ancient people, and not really "asians" at all. There are Chinese, Koreans, Thai, Indians, Sikh, Japanese, Khmer, Pilipino (no "h"), Samoan, etc., each with a vast (if untold) history. Each radically different from each other as German is to French, but still having religious and cultural roots.

So, where did the term come from? From Europeans, of course.
In the Platonic world view, rocks are rocks because of their "rockness." In the Socratic worldview, rocks are rocks because of their relationship to papers and scissors, for example, because of their connections to other things.

Not all rocks are the same or course. Diamonds are much more expensive compared to ordinary pebbles, but not because of their "diamondness," (the Platonic/essentialist view) but rather because it's related to market demand, war in the Congo, sellers and resellers each trying to make a buck, TV commercials, weddings and so on (the Socratic-Hegelian/dialectical worldview).

So it goes that Asians are Asians, but this really doesn't make us understand Asians, but makes an easy definition to "Europeans" and around 1450 and the coming rise of Europe, the Europeans needed to figure things out the quick and easy way. They were going from bottom of the barrel in civilization, to masters of the universe, for good and bad.

So if you see the world from an essentialist perspective, then Europe (or Asia) is the center of the world, and everything else revolves around it. If you see the world from the dialectical perspective, then you see the world as related to each other. Europe would not be Europe without Asia, and vice-versa. Each needs the other, the way diamonds need middlemen to become valuable.

When it comes to economic integration, IJapan, India and China, to a certain degree are fostering cooperation over competition, because of the need to compete with Europe over markets and create new markets. In other words, if India and China do good with each other, Chinese people will buy Indian products rather than European products. This fosters an Asia-first perspective.

To read more--a tough but good read, read "The Myth of Continents" by Martin W. Lewis and Karen Wigen.

Answer 2

Define Eurocentric

Answer 3

Eurocentric Definition

Answer 4

I have no idea what this means. Explain.