I took a comparative philosophy class in the undergraduate years. One uneasiness that I remember having was the idea of “comparing” east and west “philosophies.” David Wong wrote an encyclopedia entry on “comparative philosophy east and west” you might find that useful. Basically, what i found uneasy about comparative philosophy or comparative anything is that anything, seems to me, is comparative already. language is said to be a uniquely human capacity because of its reflexivity. this means that things are already comparative on the very ground of how or consciousness works (c.f.phenomenology). I wonder what would a phenomenology of communication would be like, and if we could “compare” (comparing on the ground of the difficult concept of experience of various kinds of culturally/historically grounded activities), instead of social concept such as hierarchy and harmony…they are too abstract, it seems to me, to be useful as analytical tools (derived from theoretical groundings) for “comparing” explicitly.

look at the comments above, especially “dominate”, it is still the Western eyes on East, for “dominate” equals to power, anyway, harmony could never came into power in “domination” per se.