I do not think so, just like I do not believe in other generic categories. Their use seems to me banalising more complex historical issues (à la “Men are from Mars, women are from Venus”).
The following one is an excerpt from a post by Dominik Wujastyk on the Indology mailing list (22.7.15):
I personally do not believe there is an east-west divide in intellectual ability or viewpoint. I do not believe in “The West” as a category of thought that has anything useful to offer, and certainly not as a method of categorization that has any intellectual reality or merit. It has been my observation through many decades of engagement in academic life that there is good and bad scholarship to be found in all parts of the world and at all times in history. Wouldn’t it be lovely if it scholarly excellence were so easy to establish! If scholars could be judged as good or bad because of being “western,” or “Jewish,” or “Hindu” or “Black,” “White,” “female,” or any other regional, racial or gender category. But it is not so. Whatever colour we are, whatever part of the world we live in, we all have to work very hard to understand difficult ideas, and to make judgements that demonstrate integrity and knowledge.
And this hard work involves much careful study, much discussion with friends and colleagues, the exposure of one’s ideas to teachers, peer reviewers, and at conferences. Intellectual work consists of composition, exposition, and debate, said Sa-Skya Pandita in the thirteenth century. This is what it means to be a worthwhile academic. It is not a matter of winning or losing, of being more insulting than the next person. It is not a political contest. It is a matter of developing more subtlety, deeper insight, and a finer sensibility towards truth. Even someone whose ideas are shown to be wrong is a “winner,” since we all strive for truth. Most important of all, intellectual life is not a matter of defending oneself. Good academics are very interested in ideas and knowledge; they are not much interested in personality and personal conflict, or in prestige or public perception.