system
Given the following post, respond as if you're commenting on Reddit:
human
What are some examples of two philosophers arriving at the same conclusions based on different methods, arguments, premises and means?

 I've always found this idea interesting, that two people can agree on the same conclusion yet arrive at the said conclusion by completely different means. Moreover, not only can the conclusions be the same despite different premises, but at times the interpretation of the conclusion, that is to say, the significance of it and what we should learn from it, can be different.
gpt
Schopenhauer showed that the whole world was essentially one through Kantian (and Western Philosophy) means independently of how Eastern Thought arrived at the solution. 

It is a clever little argument saying that if there is a phenomenal (world of appearances) and noumenal (world as it is) realm, and there exist different entities in the noumenal realm (say, noumenal_1, noumenal_2, ...), then how could it be possible for noumenal_1, noumenal_2, etc. to be different?

Would they be different in space? No, space only exists in the phenomenal realm, different in time? No for the same reason. Different in causality? Same reasoning. And since individuation of phenomena only exists in space time and causality is thus follows that if there is a noumenal realm it must be in some sense "one".