Critical Essay on _Absence: On the Culture and Philosophy of the Far East_

This article critiques Byung-Chul Han's Absence: On the Culture and Philosophy of the Far East (2023), arguing that its central distinction between Western "essence" and Far Eastern "absence" relies on a flawed comparative method. The essay contends that Han conflates philosophy with cultural practice, reducing complex traditions to a homogeneous whole. It advances three criticisms: first, this conflation overlooks internal philosophical debates—particularly within Confucianism and Legalism—and diverse social realities; second, selective readings of Daoist texts reduce the dao to "absence," ignoring its generative dynamism and the interplay of presence and non-being in the Daodejing and Zhuangzi; third, the analysis neglects Western thinkers such as Heraclitus, Nietzsche, and Derrida, who also contested fixed essences. Drawing on Chinese art theory, the article further shows that artistic "emptiness" functions as relational potential rather than mere lack. The article concludes that Han's framework, despite its accessible prose, reproduces essentialist and Orientalist tendencies that compromise comparative philosophical inquiry.