Monday, October 15, 2007 

Itz a question of faith?

Faith has been such a sensitive topic, as over time, we have chosen to abide by the rules of respecting the other man's perspective. When controversies arise in such "tender" issues, there is an unparalleled consensus among these packs of diplomats iterating that issues of faith should not be scratched as they would hurt the religious sentiments of the masses.

We can never set forth an argument scrutinizing the basis of faith, for it can never be discussed under the umbrella of reasoning via logic. It is like the very many scientific theories which were built on the basis of axioms that are assumed to be true and out of which burgeon very many corollaries which form the basis of an entire vertical of knowledge. The good thing about scientific method of operation is the consistency of theories during the course of time and the process of feedback to accommodate new observations. Theories are dumped if they are proved to be false.

Religion is a different ball game; it is more of the morality syndrome which hacks the mind. It’s an unsaid rule, one should never dare to utter blasphemous statements, just becomes it hurts the religious sentiments. There has been a recent row regarding the Ram sethu issue, MK had a rationalistic attitude towards his remarkable question "Was Ram a engineer?", the response was even more thought provoking when one of the VHP senior head quoted a price for MK's head. My foot, If this is the dimension of morality that people of faith in Ram's principle come up with, I would rather screw Ramaology and his followers.

What would prudent Ram be happy about? an energy efficient route which can bring prospects of better economics to the people along the coastal line or congestion to the existing port capacities for a unused bride which was "built" some aeons back.Does'nt the BJP understand that it of vital military importance to us even if economic sense becomes bull shit. Leave along the contention that the Ram sethu is scientifically a natural sandbar formation which has been observed across many parts of the world. I would be happy to tinker a symbol created by a supreme hero if it helps some people improve their lives. If people with spiritual bent are willing to cite ecological reasons, let them first stop dumping idols of Ganesha into the shores. What moral courage do after they lent an idea to destroy an existing monument to create one, let us first stop reengineering mosques, churches and temples. If God is formless, why is there this hurray to confine the invisible to symbols?

A friend of mine who belongs to the Christian faith quoted this incident to me. A friend of his was quoting as to how Babaji is still in the Himalayas for about two thousand years now and is apparently breathing only once in a year. My friend exclaimed as to how it was so unbelievable. Somehow it instantly came out of me, I have the same doubt as to how Christ resurrected on Easter? What is believable to me might be unbelievable to somebody else. The consensus of something does not deny the human mind to inquire it. If god created me, it might be god's intention to question him thought me. Why is there a conglomeration of antagonism of people who reinforce faith? Let them either accept God's design as it or toggle to the rational wing. Why is there this partial subjection?.

I somehow cannot stand the hypocrisy imbibed into faith defined by morality without consistency. I pulled another argument with my Jain friend this time. He was quoting as to how he would not buy a bouquet, as it was reengineered by bidding floral lives to satisfy unnecessary human wants. My foot, where did their morality hide when they were charging exorbitant interest rates to real humans who were suffering in poverty? Were they seeking nirvana by evading huge tonnage of taxes? Were their morals convictions blinded from the fact that the taxes might help out the aam aadmi who were still suiciding due to lack of subsidy help when America was giving about $120 bn to their farmers.

Its is always this case of the creating deception of adhering to principles of faith which suits us. It is easy to sacrifice 50 cents 50 times and manifest selfishness only once when you were offered a dollar. We can still quote probability of self-discipline against selfishness and claim moral victory walking through the convoluted tunnels of faith!

Labels:

Saturday, December 30, 2006 

Ideology, Religion & Science

Let me start with the gross definitions for the above terms about which I shall put forth my views.

An ideology is an organized collection of ideas or a set of ideas proposed by the dominant class of a society to all members of this society. The main purpose behind an ideology is to offer change in society through a normative thought process (what the world ought to be). Ideologies tend to be abstract thoughts applied to reality.

Religion is the adherence to codified beliefs and rituals that (generally) involve a faith in a spiritual nature and a study of inherited ancestral traditions, knowledge and wisdom related to understanding human life. The term "religion" refers to both the personal practices related to faith as well as to the larger shared systems of belief.

Science is "knowledge attained through study or practice," or "knowledge covering general truths of the operation of general laws. It uses observation and experimentation to describe and explain natural phenomena. Science continually seeks to gain increased understanding and, where appropriate, the possibility for control of many specific aspects of the world.

Its time to take head-on on this bullshit. The BJP national council meeting concluded recently and the party had amended its constitution to induct RSS 'pracharaks' into important positions and reaffirmed one of its core ideology to build Ram temple in Ayodhya.Not that BJP is bad, our PM has recently remarked that minorities must have the first claim on the country’s resources and it was obviously a move to appease the Muslim community in large.

There was another comment which has been irritating me for sometime now, the Pope had reminded us of an earlier quote by Emperor Manuel II Paleologus "Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached”. I shall not delve on the atrocities of the Church to gain power during the 11-15th centuries.

I really can’t understand the vigor the saffron heads possess to build Ram temple when there are so many issues lined up against us and at least 30 % of our population is below poverty. It is a holy crap statement Mr. Singh when there is such a wide income disparity building in the society which may lead to a social oppression in the near future. I never expected such a naive remark from the pontiff who heads the one billion Catholics when there are signs of a religious cold war between Islam and Christianity.

I don’t know how long they are going to take the commons for a ride in the name of Ideology. There is nothing wrong in having faith and to practice it. I don’t know what sense it makes to provoke negative sentiments of other faiths by people who can make all the difference between life and death for a mass.

I shall take the liberty to distinguish the religion from ideology. Ideology involves the invoking of a superior attitude whereas religion may not encourage a condescending feeling. The classic case of BJP is to invoke the ideology of Hindutuva identity although Hinduism does not preach such a superior or narcissist attitude. There has been an inclination to collaborate faith (which is based on complete trust) with ideologies which is dictated by a pioneering group. As faith is completely decoupled from reasoning, a sect of the society try to invoke impulsive emotions for their own thirst for power.

There was another disturbing news item which was showed on Christmas eve in CNN-IBN.It had indicated how caste system has stayed intact in the churches. I can't sound more than "what holy crap!!”.Atleast my basic understanding about the basic principles of different faiths is that they teach us to live a god life in harmony with the world around us codifying different morals for them. I don’t know what justice we can provide to what is being done or instigated.

As I try to understand religion or science, I see both of them as a methodology to understand. Religions seeks to understand god whereas science seeks to understand the nature. Faith operates on trust whereas science seeks the truth through reasoning. Religions claim ultimate wisdom through god whereas sciences postulate theories to understand them.

At least I reasonably assume that both seek to understand the truth. I shall quote the recent issues such as stem cell research and the concept of intelligent design where both science and religion have tried to overwhelm their supremacy rather than seek co-existence. Both of them have their limitations; faith cannot be proved whereas science is limited to concurrent knowledge.

Science allows a feedback system where current theories can be challenged and the celebrated theories can be replaced by new theories which more accurately represent a phenomenon. Adaption is the cardinal rule for a theory to survive, if it cannot release a new version it becomes obsolete. At times both science and faith show arrogance and adamancy without any respect for its basic purpose of existence, to provide us a better life!!

Labels: ,

World as I Think is powered by Blogspot and Gecko & Fly.
No part of the content or the blog may be reproduced without prior written permission.
First Aid and Health Information at Medical Health