Changinng Life Style Essay Example for Free

Changinng Life Style Essay Indian Culture is time tested and represented the progressively refined way of life, that had unfortunately suffered a set back, a sub culture process as it were, drifting from its salutary ways of living. Did not Lord Mecaulay say in the UK parliament how the Indians had such a perfect social harmony and faith in their way of life, that they can not be subdued unless they were weaned from their prestige and made to adore the alien way of life, to feel subordinated to a superior culture, wherefore they could be easily subdued and dominated for the best advantage of the colonial rule! That was perfectly achieved and Indians forgot their own merits in a strange infatuation with alien culture! Foreign culture was best for them, unique to them, deserved respect, but not fit for absorption into our own way of life! Apart from an initiation into new unfolding findings of secular science and technology which was absent in our nation under colonial subjugation we had gained least in other spheres, particularly in the social and ethical qualities. We became divided, in the names of religion and castes losing the force of harmony that united us under the princely states! The increasing divorce culture, night clubs and pub culture, promiscuity and desertions etc among youth, the divide and rule policy among the politicians, the aggressive conversions (against more benign missionary activities a century ago) are the only major impacts in the social domain. So except the technological inputs, even economic exploitations under free trade or repressive regimentation under socialist govts that came from the west, have least served the society to achieve equality. Social impacts have been worse. The break down of joint family system due to new life styles, uncontrolled deviancies in the name of liberty etc have made youth defy control of society and family in a big way. In a chapter on Consequences of Innovations in the book by Rogers and Shoemaker entitled, Diffusion and  Adoption of Innovations, it is discussed how any change made in any aspect of social sphere agriculture or medicine or arts or whatever may end up in unexpected side effects as well. The chaos in the aborigins of Australia after replacement of traditional stone tool etc make interesting reading! In India itself, the introduction of rural TV programme for education of people in modern agricultre, health care etc was studied in UP state when Indiraji was Minister of Broadcasting, in 100 villages. The study revealed significant increase in knowledge and attitude of people in modern techniques and the project was cleared for large scale introdcution across the country. After govt project was ended, many behavioural scientists took up studies in change of life pattern in the villages. They came across many critical adverse changes traceable to exposure of untreated entertainment programmes given by TV apart from the educatinal inputs! Like that our adoration for the modern knowledge gained from the west, had made us adopt their other life styles as well to the detriment of society. So the demerits have been devastating as we see from the increase of family courts to deal with increasing divorce cases, the skewed development of trade and industy at the cost of other primary enterprises, policy of social divide by politicians for vote bank advantage etc! In my opinion, we had paid a heavy price for all the technological good we received from the west, by our own unwise emulation of their social perceptions and political strategies as well! have a good day! TRADITIONAL CULTURE AND MODERNIZATION R. BALASUBRAMANIAN BACKGROUND This paper focuses upon three issues. First, I want to show that the perennial elements in traditional cultures like those of India and China are  relevant even today as they play an important role in the achievement, on the one hand, of harmony between the individual and society at the social level, and, on the other hand, of harmony of spirit, mind, and body at the individual level. Second, we should not lose sight of the distinction between knowledge and information, between wisdom and knowledge, and more importantly between life and living. The perennial elements in the traditional culture have helped us to care for life, knowledge, and wisdom, which are essential for spiritual development. Third, modernization as interpreted by the West has a narrow connotation and is, therefore, a distorted concept. Through science, it brings in the colonial attitude, the imperialism of the West. It is possible for one to be modern without accepting all that is implied by modernization. Culture, which comprises philosophy and religion, art and literature, science and technology, social organization and political administration, is the mirror of the theory and practice of a people. It is originated, developed and sustained by the people over a period of time. In turn, the perennial elements which constitute its core inspire and sustain the posterity to whom it is transmitted from time to time. Traditional cultures like those of China and India are undoubtedly ancient, but not antiquated; their ideals and practices, which are relevant in any situation, help the people to meet the new challenges which surface from time to time. As a result they not only survive, but are admired, adored, and accepted by the people. There cannot be a better explanation of the way a culture is able to hold the people and sustain them than the one given by Sri Aurobindo: The culture of a people may be roughly described as the expression of a consciousness of life which formulates itself in three aspects. There is a side of thought, of ideal, of upward will and the soul’s aspiration; there is a side of creative self-expression and appreciative aesthesis, intelligence, and imagination; and there is a side of practical and outward formulation. A people’s philosophy and higher thinking give us its mind’s purest, largest, and most general formulation of its consciousness of life and its dynamic view of existence. Its religion formulates the most intense form of its upward will and the soul’s aspirations towards the fulfillment of its highest ideal and impulse. Its art, poetry, literature provide for us the creative expression and impression of its intuition, imagination, vital turn and creative  intelligence. Its society and politics provide in their forms an outward frame in which the more external life works out what it can of its inspiring ideal and of its special character and nature under the difficulties of the environment. We can see how much it has taken of the crude material of living, what it has done with it, how it has shaped as much of it as possible into some reflection of its guarding consciousness and deeper spirit. None of them express the whole spirit behind, but they derive from it their main ideas and their cultural character. Together they make up its soul, mind, and body.1 Of the various components of culture the role of philosophy and religion is significant. Philosophy and religion can never be separated though they can be distinguished. It may be that in a particular culture, philosophy is in the forefront and religion in the background. It can also be the other way with religion at the surface and philosophy in the background. The point to be noted here is that philosophy and religion interact with, and influence each other. Philosophy is made dynamic by religion, and religion is enlightened by philosophy. If it is admitted that there is the need for a unity of theory and practice, p hilosophy cannot remain merely as a view of life; it must also be a way of life. In other words, philosophy has to become religious if it is to mold, organize and regulate life. Religion is not an untouchable; its need for life can neither be ignored nor underestimated. It will be helpful to contrast the pursuit of philosophy in Europe with that in India and China. Unlike the Europe of the Enlightenment where philosophy did not touch life at all, there was a tremendous impact of philosophy on life both in India and China. In the words of Sri Aurobindo: Philosophy has been pursued in Europe with great and noble intellectual results by the highest minds, but very much as a pursuit apart from life, a thing high and splendid, but ineffective. It is remarkable that, while in India and China philosophy has seized hold on life, has had an enormous practical effect on the civilization and got into the very bones of current thought and action, it has never at all succeeded in achieving this importance in Europe. In the days of the Stoics and Epicureans it got a grip, but only among the highly cultured; at the present day, too, we have some renewed tendency of the kind. Nietzsche has had his influence, certain French thinkers also in France, the philosophies of James and Bergson have attracted some amount of public interest; but it is a mere  nothing compared with the effective power of Asiatic philosophy.2 There is no doubt that the average European who draws his guidance not from the philosophic, but from positive and practical reason, puts the philosophical treatises on the highest shelf in the library of civilization. The situation is entirely different in India. Sri Aurobindo says: The Indian mind holds . . . that the Rishi, the thinker, the seer of spiritual truth is the best guide not only of the religious and moral, but [also of] the practical life. The seer, the Rishi is the natural director of society; to the Rishis he attributes the ideals and guiding intuitions of his civilizati on. Even today he is very ready to give the name to anyone who can give a spiritual truth which helps his life or a formative idea and inspiration which influences religion, ethics, society, even politics.3 The phenomenon known as modernization is a product of the one-sided pursuit of both philosophy and science — philosophy purely as an intellectual affair without any bearing on life and science as the most effective instrument for the possession of unlimited power, eliminating the sacred. I shall take up the problem of modernization later. It may be added here that what is said about the Indian mind is equally true of the Chinese mind. Confucius, Mencius, and others are the great Rishis of China, the seers who exhibited the most uncommon insight into men and matters, into the moral and social problems of human beings. Drawing a distinction between two kinds of philosophers, systematic and edifying, Richard Rorty characterizes Wittgenstein as an edifying philosopher, like Kierkegaard, Heidegger, and others. In a brief analysis of the spirit of Western civilization which is fully manifest in the industry, architecture, and music of our time, in its fascism and socialism, Wittgenstein openly admits that he has no sympathy for the current of European civilization, that he does not understand its goals, if it has any, and that it is alien and uncongenial to him.4 He goes on to say: A culture is like a big organization which assigns each of its members a place where he can work in the spirit of the whole; and it is perfectly fair for his power to be measured by the contribution he succeeds in making to the whole enterprise.5 Wittgenstein’s brief explanation of culture requires some elucidation. He says that culture is a whole, that every individual has a place in it, that every individual has to function as a member of the whole, and that what he does is significant socially as well  as morally. The two traditional cultures, Chinese and Indian, have recognized the importance of the ideas embedded in Wittgenstein’s explanation of culture. While the Indian culture appears to be predominantly spiritual and religious, the Chinese culture seems to be basically humanistic, with a clear emphasis on the moral and social dimensions of life. It must be pointed out in this connection that the difference between these two traditional cultures is only at the surface. Since the traditional culture comprehends the total life of a person, it provides a place for the different dimensions of life — spiritual, religious, moral, and social — which can be distinguished, but not separated. The spiritual and religious dimension of life presupposes the moral and social realm ; and the moral and social sphere of life points to the religious and spiritual goals. That the two realms, ethico-social and religio-spiritual, are complementary, has been recognized by both these cultures, even though the Indian culture lays emphasis on the spiritual and religious side of man while the Chinese culture focusses on the ethical and social side of man. The motif of the two cultures is the harmony of spirit, mind, and body; and it is to achieve this harmony that they take care of both realms of life. Once again what Sri Aurobindo says in this connection is worth quoting: A true happiness in this world is the right terrestrial aim of man, and true happiness lies in the finding and maintenance of a natural harmony of spirit, mind, and body. A culture is to be valued to the extent to which it has discovered the right key of this harmony and organized its expressive motives and movements. And a civilization must be judged by the manner in which all its principles, ideas, forms, ways of living work to bring that harmony out, manage its rhythmic play, and secure its continuance or the development of its motives.6 There is need to harmonize the eternal and the temporal, for the spirit works through mind and body, which belong to the temporal; and this is what every great culture has aimed at. There are four components in the traditional culture associated with India and China. They are: (1) the primal Spirit which is the source and support of the universe may be viewed both as transcendent to, and as immanent in, the universe; (2) this Spirit which is immanent in all human beings can be realized by every human being; (3) it lays down a discipline which is both moral and spiritual for realizing the Spirit; and (4) it has provided an organization of the  individual and collective life not only for the sake of the harmony between the individual and society, but also for the sake of the harmony of spirit, mind, and body. Each one of these components needs some explanation in the context of these two cultures. INDIAN CULTURE Though Indian culture as it is today is composite in character, comprising Hindu, Jaina, Buddha, Islamic, and Christian elements, it can be characterized as Vedic culture since not only Hinduism, which is predominant, but also Jainism and Buddhism, which originated in protest against Vedic ritualism, have been influenced by the Vedas, the basic and oldest scriptural text in the world. Islam and Christianity entered the Indian soil consequent on the invasion of India by the foreigners — by the Moghuls in the former case, and by the English, French, and Portuguese in the latter case. Though they try to retain their identity, the followers of these two religious traditions have been influenced by the Vedic culture. Kabir (1398-1518 AD), for example, who is a greatly respected personality in the religious history of India, is a product of both Hinduism and Islam. In recent times, Indian Christians talk about and practice inculturization, which is a new and growing phenomenon. The predominant Hindu culture which has a long and continuous history is the Vedic culture; and the Vedic culture, which has its beginning round about 2500 BC, may be characterized as primal culture, since it traces everything in the universe to the primal Spirit, which is variously called Brahman, Ä€tman, Being, and so on. Spirit or Being is the primal reality. It is that from which all beings arise; being supported by it, they exist; and all of them move towards it as their destination. In the language of T.S. Eliot, the beginning is the end. The Upanisad says: That, verily, from which these beings are born, that by which, when born, they live, that into which, when departing, they enter. That, seek to know. That is Brahman.7 Spirit or Brahman is primal in the sense that it is foundational. It is the sole reality; it is one and non-dual; and there is nothing else beside it. It is spoken of as the First Cause, Unmoved Mover, of the entire manifest universe. With a view to bring o ut the independent nature of the primal Spirit on which the manifest universe is dependent, it is referred to as the Ground. That which is independent is real; what is dependent is an appearance. The ground-grounded  relation brings out the reality of Spirit and the appearance of the universe. Ordinarily we distinguish the material cause from the efficient cause; the one is different from the other. The wood from which a table is made is the material cause; and the carpenter who works on the wood and makes a table according to a certain design is the efficient cause. The carpenter is different from the wood. What makes the primal Spirit unique is that it is both the material and efficient cause of the universe, because it alone existed in the beginning and nothing else beside it. Like wood, it is the material cause of the world; and like a carpenter, it is the efficient cause of the world. So, the Vedic culture traces all beings, living as well as non-living, to one source, viz. Spirit or Being. It may be pointed out here that in recent times quantum physics attempts to trace everything in the manifest universe to one source which is non-material or spiritual. Einstein declared: Everyone who is seriously involved in the pursuit of science becomes convinced that a spirit is manifest in the Laws of the Universe — a Spirit vastly superior to that of man, and one in the face of which we, with our modest powers, must feel humble.8 That Spirit or Brahman is the source, support, and end of everything in the universe, is the major premise of the Vedic culture. Derived from the major premise are two minor premises, one relating to living beings called jÄ «va and the other, to non-living beings called jagat. Since Spirit or Brahman is immanent in jÄ «va and jagat, neither jÄ «va nor jagat is isolated from the primal Spirit. It means that all living beings, whatever the y may be — humans, animals, birds, reptiles, and so on — are spiritual or divine. Non-living beings which are material constitute the physical universe. They are the products of the five elements — ether, air, fire, water and earth — which are material. The divine principle is present not only in living beings, but also in non-living beings, and so they are also divine. Characterizing Brahman as the indwelling Spirit (antaryÄ min), the BrhadÄ nrayaka Upanisad says that Brahman is present in all beings — the sun, the moon, and the stars, the elements which constitute the physical universe, and the organs of the jÄ «vas. Just as our body does not know the Spirit inside it, even so the beings, whatever they may be, do not know Brahman, the indwelling Spirit in them. The following text is relevant here: He [Brahman or Spirit] who dwells in all beings, yet is within all beings, whom no beings know, whose body is  all beings, who controls all beings from within, he is your Self, the inner controller, the immortal.9 That which dwells in material objects and controls them also dwells in all living beings and contr ols them. Just as all living beings are essentially divine, even so the entire physical universe is essentially divine. Whatever may be the differences among the species and within the individual members of a species, all are essentially one, because one and the same divine Spirit is present in all of them. The message conveyed by these two minor premises of the traditional culture deserves careful consideration. First of all, if the land and the water and the sky of the physical universe are divine, then we should take care of them in the same way as we take care of our body. The claim that human beings are rational, that they are superior to the physical world, and that they are, in the words of Descartes, the masters and possessors of nature resulted in the unscrupulous, cruel, and destructive despoliation of nature in the name of the quest for knowledge, scientific development, and technological progress. It is not nature that is red in tooth and claw, but the human being who is unabashedl y selfish and blatantly aggressive and makes nature bleed and scorch. Fortunately for us, there is a global awakening to the significance of the earth and the water and the sky as sources of sustenance and nourishment. Secondly, the application of this principle of the oneness to the human realm is of great consequence. The understanding that all human beings are essentially one and that differences of color and caste, of gender and race, of sharpness and dullness of mind, and so on are due to the mind-sense-body adjunct by which the Spirit is enclosed will help us to tackle the universally rampant problem of discrimination of all kinds — social, religious, economic, and political. VedÄ ntic philosophy, which is an important component of culture, tells us what a human being is, does, and should do in order to achieve the harmony of spirit, mind, and body. A human being (jÄ «va) is a complex entity consisting of Spirit and matter. The term used in VedÄ nta for Spirit is the Self or Ä€tman. Matter which is totally different from the Self i s referred to as not-Self, as other-than-the-Self. According to VedÄ nta, the not-Self, which is the material outfit of the human being, is made up of the mind, the senses, and the body. The Self in the human being requires a physical medium for its involvement in the day-to-day life as the subject of knowledge, the  agent of action, and the enjoyer of the consequences of action. The mind and the senses are the cognitive instruments. With the help of the mind, the five senses give us knowledge of the things of the external world. The work of the mind does not stop with the cognitive support it gives to the senses. As the internal organ (antahkaraa), the mind generates the knowledge of the subjective states such as pleasure and pain. It also does something more, which is very important from the moral and spiritual perspectives. It gives us knowledge of the right and the wrong, dharma and adharma as they are called. When chastened by the moral and spiritual discipline, it is the mind which helps us to realize the primal Spirit or Brahman. So the work of the mind is manifold. The mind is the most marvelous instrument that a human being possesses. The emergence of the mind has not only accelerated the evolutionary process in its upward movement, but also has given enormous powers to the human being, making him/her the crown of creation, unique among all living beings. In the course of his commentary on the scriptural account of the creation of the world, Sankara raises the question about the preeminence of the human being among all creatures and answers it by saying that the human being is preeminent because he alone is qualified for knowledge and the performance of prescribed duties (jnÄ na-karma-adhikÄ rah).10 Why is it that he alone has this competence? Sankara justifies the supremacy of the human on three grounds. First, he has the ability for acquiring knowledge not only of the things of the world, but also of the supreme Being, the primal reality. This is because he is equipped with the mind which, being inspired by the Self or Spirit in him is capable of comprehending everything including the highest reality. Secondly, he has the distinctive quality of desiring certain ends as a result of discrimination, deliberation, and choice. Thirdly, when he has consciously chosen an end, he is earnest about it, finds the right means for achieving the end, and persists in it till he reaches the goal. A scriptural text which is quoted by Sankara in this connection says: In man alone is the Self most manifest for he is the best endowed with knowledge. He speaks what he knows; he sees what he knows; he knows what will happen tomorrow; he knows the higher and the lower worlds; he aspires to achieve immortality through perishable things. He is thus endowed (with discrimination) while other beings have consc iousness of hunger and thirst only.11 According to  VedÄ nta, the Self in the human being is eternal, whereas his material outfit, the mind-sense-body complex, is temporal. The birth and death of a human being are connected with, and because of, the body. They are illicitly transferred to the Self with the result that we think of it as perishable and finite. The human being is caught in the cycle of birth and death because of ignorance (avidyÄ ) whose beginning is not known. The empirical journey of the Self through its association with the material adjunct is due to avidyÄ . It is avidyÄ  that pulls down the trans-empirical Self into the empirical realm, superimposes on it, which is non-relational, a relation with matter, and is thus responsible for the fall of the Self. What is above categorization is now categorized and made an object of knowledge; what transcends relation is now explained through the logic of relation; and what is beyond the scope of language is now brought within the grammar of language. Thus, just as a tree and a table are known through perception and other means of knowledge, even so Brahman or the Self, we claim, is known through the scriptural text called Sruti. The trans-relational reality is viewed as characterized by omniscience and other qualities and also as the cause of the world. What is trans-linguistic is now spoken of as real, knowledge, infinite, and so on. In other words, we employ the categories of substance and attribute, cause and effect, whole and parts for the purpose of understanding the highest reality. It will be of interest in this connection to refer to the views of two influential thinkers from the West — one belonging to the pre-sixth century and the other our own contemporary. Pseudo-Dionysius, who occupies an important place in the history of Western spirituality, observes: [The supreme reality] is neither perceived nor is it perceptible. It suffers neither disorder nor disturbance and is overwhelmed by no earthly passion. . . . It endures no deprivation of light. It passes through no change, decay, division, loss, no ebb and flow, nothing of which the senses may be aware. None of all this can either be identified with it nor attributed to it.12 Again, he says: It falls neither within the predicate of non-being nor of being. Existing beings do not know it as it actually is and it does not know them as they are. There is no speaking of it, nor name, nor knowledge of it. Darkness and light, error and truth — it is none of these. It is beyond assertion and  denial. We make assertions and denials of what is next to it, but never of it, for it is both beyond every assertion, being the perfect and unique cause of all things, and, by virtue of its preeminently simple and absolute nature, free of every limitation, beyond every limitation; it is also beyond every denial.13 Pseudo-Dionysius conveys in the most unambiguous terms the VedÄ ntic conception of Brahman or the Self. Instead of terms such as Brahman or the Self used by the VedÄ ntin, Wittgenstein uses terms such as the metaphysical subject, the I, the philosophical ‘I’ and contrasts it with the body. The human body, he says, is a part of the world among other parts , but the Self or the philosophical I is not a part of the world; it is outside the space-time-cause world. In the words of Wittgenstein: The subject does not belong to the world, but is a border of the world.14 The philosophical I is not the human being, not the human body, or the human soul of which psychology treats, but the metaphysical subject, the border — not a part — of the world.15 What is obvious from the foregoing account is that we have to make a distinction between two concepts, Brahman-in-itself and Brahman-in-relation-to-the-world, for the purpose of analysis. The latter concept is meaningful only on the presupposition of the fall of Brahman or the Self. When did this fall take place? No one knows, and no one can answer. Once there is the fall, the empirical journey of the Self goes on in different forms, conditioned by the space-time-cause framework. However, the promise of VedÄ nta is that the empirical journey of the lÄ «va can be put an end to, that the vicious cycle of birth and death can be broken by destroying avidyÄ  through knowledge of oneâ€℠¢s Self. That is why there is the scriptural instruction of Know thy Self. Not only does scripture say that the Self should be realized or seen, but it also suggests the means for realizing it. It will be difficult to understand the full significance of the distinction between Brahman-in-itself and Brahman-in-relation-to-the-world without a reference to the principle of standpoints which is enshrined in Indian culture. There are two sets of features, perennial and temporal, in Indian culture which contribute to its continuity as well as its change. While the basic doctrines constitute its perennial dimension, religious practices covering a wide range are temporal and transitory. Decadence sets in when the temporal and transitory features gain importance almost to the point of ignoring or sidetracking the  perennial features. Historical, social, and political changes call for modification, sometimes radical, sometimes minor, in the religious practices and social norms of the people, while the basic doctrinal side remains intact. Continuity of the essentials amidst the changing flow of life helps to preserve the cultural tradition. The essential structure which has endured through the vicissitudes of time contains the basic doctrines as stated in the major premise and the two minor premises to which reference was made earlier. The three basic doctrines are: primal Being or Spirit is the source, support, and end of everything, sentient as well as non-sentient; all living beings are divine; also, the physical universe which has originated from the primal Spirit is spiritual. The monistic vision, which is pervasive in the Vedic corpus, is a notable feature of Indian culture. The doctrine of levels or standpoints skillfully adopted by Indian culture helps to reconcile monism and polytheism as well as monism and pluralism. Though each pair contains two extremes in the religio-philosophical thinking, they have been accommodated as different standpoints at different levels. They are irreconcilable only when they are placed together at the same level. For example, one of the oft-quoted hymns of the Rg-veda provides a clue for reconciling the problem of one Godhead and many gods and goddesses. It says: What is but one, wise people call by different names — as Agni, Yama, MÄ tarisvan.16 Reference to gods, such as, Agni and Yama may be replaced by the well known gods of the Hindu pantheon such as Siva, Visnu, Sakti, and so on. Sankara explains the distinction between the supreme Godhead and its various forms such as Siva, Visnu, and so on, as the distinction between the unconditioned reality, what we referred to as Brahman-in-itself, and its conditioned forms such as Siva and Visnu, all of which can be brought under Brahman-in-relation-to-the-world. _iva, Viu, and other gods are conditioned beings endowed with a name and a form and other qualities, whereas the One is unconditioned, devoid of name and form, specifications and qualities and is, therefore, trans-empirical, trans-relational, and trans-linguistic. This mode of drawing the distinction between the supreme Godhead and its many forms for the purpose of worship and other religious practices of the devotees, which is unheard of in other religious traditions of other cultures, is of great consequence in the religious practice of the people.  Since it is the one reality that is worshipped in many forms such as Agni, Siva, and so on, one who worships Agni or Siva, should not quarrel with one who worships Yama or Visnu, because Agni, Yama, Siva, and Visnu are the conditioned aspects of the same reality. This significant idea of the Rg-Vedic hymn was accepted, fully elaborated, and further deepened by the Upanisads. It provides a theoretical framework for religious harmony, which is one of the characteristic features of primal culture and which has received special emphasis right from the beginning till this day. What makes primal culture valid for all times and in all places is its inclusiveness. It includes everything by providing a place for it in the whole. Religious, social, economic, scientific, and political activities are necessary and meaningful; but they must be made subservient to, and must be viewed and judged in the context of the spiritual goal of life. A culture which is mainly concerned with the bare economic necessities of life, social institutions, and political organization will be neither enduring nor elevating; it may look energetic and enterprising, but it is not worth the name, if it is not geared up to the spiritual side of life. Once again, what Sri Aurobindo says is worth quoting here: A mere intellectual, ethical, and aesthetic culture does not go back to the inmost truth of the spirit; it is still an ignorance, an incomplete, outward, and superficial knowledge. To have made the discovery of our deepest being and hidden spiritual nature is the first necessity and to have erected the living of an inmost spiritual life into the aim of existence is the characteristic sign of a spiritual culture. 17 The VedÄ nta philosophy solves the problem of monism versus pluralism on the basis of the distinction between two levels or standpoints called pÄ ramÄ rthika and vyÄ vahÄ rika, or absolute and relative respectively. The Upanisads make use of this distinction in the explanation of the epistemological, metaphysical, axiological, and soteriological problems. What is true at one level may not be so at another level. A dream-lion which is accepted as real in dream experience loses its reality at the waking level. What is accepted as a value at one time may turn out to be a disvalue at another time. The pluralistic universe which is accepted as real may cease to exist in the state of liberation following the spiritual ascent. The pÄ ramÄ rthika or absolute standpoint is higher, whereas the vyÄ vahÄ rika or the relative standpoint is lower. It must be borne in mind that the  higher standpoint which transcends the lower does not invalidate it. One who has moved from th e relative to the absolute standpoint knows the truth of the former; but one who is tied to the relative standpoint cannot understand the truth of the absolute standpoint. Consider the case of two persons who attempt to climb up a mountain in order to reach the highest peak. While one of them reaches the top, the other, due to some disability, is not able to proceed beyond the foothill. The person who has reached the summit knows what kind of experience is available to one at the foothill; but one who is at the foothill does not understand the kind of experience one has at the top. We have to apply this logic to the different kinds of experience without subverting the pÄ ramÄ rthika-vyÄ vahÄ rika hierarchy. The Upanisads describe the two levels as signifying higher wisdom and lower knowledge. Experience of plurality is quite common; it is quite natural; we have it in our daily life. No special effort or discipline is required for such an experience. But experience of oneness is uncommon. One does not get it without special effort or appropriate discipline. The transition is from the common to the uncommon. A text of the BrhadÄ rayaka Upanisad describes the two levels of experience as follows: For, where there is duality as it were, there one sees the other, one smells the other, one knows the other. . . . But, where everything has become just one’s own self, by what and whom should one smell, by what and whom should one know?18 Without disregarding the pragmatic value of day-to-day empirical knowledge, primal culture emphasizes the importance of higher wisdom. It will be of interest to quote Wittgenstein in this connection. He says: In religion every level of devoutness must have its appropriate form of expression which has no sense at a lower level. This doctrine, which means something at a higher level, is null and void for someone who is still at the lower level; he can only understand it wrongly and so these words are not valid for such a person. For instance, at my level the Pauline doctrine of predestination is ugly, nonsense, irreligiousness. Hence it is not suitable for me, since the only use I could make of the picture I am offered would be a wrong one. If it is a good and godly picture, then it is so for someone at a quite different level, who must use it in his life in a way completely different from anything that would be possible for me.19 The teaching of the VedÄ nta philosophy is positive. According to it, life in this world is meaningful  and purposive — meaningful for the reason that it serves as the training ground for one’s spiritual uplifting through the proper use of the objects of the world by the mind-sense-body equipment of which one is in possession, and purposive as one has to achieve freedom or liberation by overcoming the existential predicament. Freedom or liberation which is projected as the goal must be understood in the spiritual sense. It is true that human life is made difficult by economic constraints, political oppression, social hierarchy, and religious discrimination; and a situation of this kind points to, and calls for, freedom of different kinds so that a person can exist and function as a moral agent enjoying economic, political, social and religious freedom. However, the goal of life remains unfulfilled in spite of these different kinds of freedom. Though they are necessary, they are not sufficient. The highest freedom which is eternal and totally satisfying is spiritual freedom, which is called moksa in Indian culture. A socio-political system may ensure political freedom, social justice, economic satisfaction, and unrestricted religious practice; but still there is no guarantee of harmony of spirit, mind, and body which one can achieve only through the teaching of philosophy and religion. The socio-political machinery cannot be a substitute for religion and philosophy, though it can and should maintain a system of rights and obligations in which alone a human being can lead a moral life as formulated in religion and can pursue the goal of liberation as projected by philosophy. Sri Aurobindo says: The whole aim of a great culture is to lift man up to something which at first he is not, to lead him to knowledge though he starts from an unfathomable ignorance, to teach him to live by reason, though actually he lives much more by his unreason, by the law of good and unity, though he is now full of evil and discord, by a law of beauty and harmony, though his actual life is a repulsive muddle of ugliness and jarring barbarisms, by some law of his spirit, though at present he is egoistic, material, unspiritual, engrossed by the needs and desires of his physical being. If a civilization has not any of these aims, it can hardly at all be said to have a culture and certainly in no sense a great and noble culture. But the last of these aims, as conceived by ancient India, is the highest of all because it includes and surpasses all the others. To have made this attempt is to have ennobled the life of the race; to have failed in it is better than if it had never at all   been attempted; to have achieved even a partial success is a great contribution to the future possibilities of the human being.20 Excepting the CÄ rvÄ ka, which advocates a thoroughgoing materialism, all other philosophical systems in India accept the ideal of moksa. The Indian mind, right from the beginning, has accepted a hierarchy of values, ranging from the bodily and economic values at the bottom to the spiritual values of which liberation is at the top. The human being leads his life at two levels — organic and hyper-organic. Bodily and economic values which he pursues belong to the organic level. In so far as the pursuit of the organic values is concerned — values which are necessary for life preservation — his life and activities are in no way different from those of animals; at this level, hunger and sleep, shelter and sex are common to man and animals. Endowed as he is not only with the body, but also with the mind, he also lives at another level, pursuing higher values such as truth, beauty, goodness. The life-activity of man which is fully reflective of his cognition, desire, deliberation, and choice cannot stop short of the highest value called moksa. It is not necessary here to discuss the broad scheme of values accepted in the Indian tradition. Suffice it to say that, though artha and kÄ ma, which emphasize the importance of the material and hedonistic side of life, have been accommodated in the scheme of values, the moral and spiritual side of life has received special attention in Indian culture. That is why it has accepted two higher values, dharma and moksa, the former functioning as a moral guide, and also as a regulative principle of artha and kÄ ma pursued in our secular life, for the realization of the latter. All the philosophical systems, Vedic as well as non-Vedic, hold the view that moksa as the highest value is both ultimate and all-satisfying — ultimate since there is nothing else to which it can be the means, and all-satisfying since it comprehends all the higher values. Sankara says that one gets the feeling of the fulfillment of all values when one attains moksa.21 There are three questions that we have to consider in connection with the ultimate value. The first one is whether it can be realized at all. There is the view that the ultimate value is only an ideal to inspire and regulate our conduct and that it can never be attained. We can regulate our life so as to come nearer to it from time to time, from stage to stage; but we can never reach it. Suc h a view is untenable. Also, it goes against the spirit of Indian  culture. Realization of one’s true nature is liberation. We have already pointed out that the human being is a complex entity consisting of Spirit and matter. Spirit by its very nature is ever free and never bound. But it appears to be bound because of the material adjunct with which it is associated in the empirical life. Overwhelmed by ignorance, the human being does not realize that he is essentially Spirit and therefore free. When he attains the right knowledge and knows his real nature, he is no more under the limitation or bondage of the psycho-physical material outfit, because ignorance which conceals his real nature is removed by knowledge. It means that the ideal of moksa has a basis in the very constitution of the human being; also, the human being, not being satisfied with the material achievements, what the Upanisad calls preyas, longs for spiritual freedom, which is called Sreyas. The Upanisad says: Both the good and the pleasant approach a man. The wise man, pondering over them, discriminates. The wise chooses the good in preference to the pleasant. The simple-minded, for the sake of worldly well-being, prefers the pleasant.22 One cannot have both Sreyas and preyas. The pursuit of the former requires the renunciation of the latter. Spiritual illumination follows purgation. Speaking about the importance of the ideal and its close relation to human nature, Hiriyanna observes: Ideals are rooted in needs inherent in human nature. It is their reality that constitutes their true charm. Take this charm from them, and they reduce themselves but to pleasant fantasy. The reality of such a value may not be vouched for by common reasoning. But we should remember that neither is there any adequate proof for denying it. Not to admit the ideal would therefore be to be dogmatic in the sense that we deny it without adequate proof for the denial.23 The second question is wheth er the ideal of moksa can be realized by all. Here also the great philosophical traditions, Hinduism, Buddhism, and Jainism, are unanimous in their affirmative answer. There is nothing in human nature which either disqualifies or incapacitates him from attaining this ideal. Whatever may be the differences among human beings at the bodily, vital, and mental levels, everyone has the right and duty to aspire for the highest value by virtue of what he/she is. As every human being is endowed with the mind, the most precious and unequalled instrument through which one can look before and after, know the things given to him, and choose from them after  discrimination and deliberation, he is not in any way incapacitated from pursuing the ultimate value. Indian culture looks down on the doctrine of the chosen few. Since ignorance is the obstacle that stands in the way of realizing one’s divine nature, realizing one’s Spirit, which is liberation, it can be removed by knowledge which anyone can acquire through moral and spi ritual discipline. The philosophy of VedÄ nta, according to which every human being is divine, is opposed to the theory of privilege — of birth, intellect, spirituality, etc. It is anti-hierarchical. In everyone there is a sleeping Buddha, a hidden Brahman, to which everyone can have access. That the doors to the spiritual realm do not remain closed to anyone is conveyed in a forthright manner by Sri Aurobindo: A wider spiritual culture must recognize that the Spirit is not only the highest and inmost thing, but all is manifestation and creation of the Spirit. It must have a wider outlook, a more embracing range of applicability and, even, a more aspiring and ambitious aim of its endeavor. Its aim must be not only to raise to inaccessible heights the few elect, but to draw all men and all life and the whole human being upward, to spiritualize life and in the end to divinize human nature. Not only must it be able to lay hold on his deepest individual being, but to inspire, too, his communal existence. It must turn, by a spiritual change, all the members of his ignorance into members of the knowledge; it must transmute all the instruments of the human into instruments of a divine living. The total movement of Indian spirituality is towards this aim. 24 The third question, whether the ultimate value can be realized here in this life or only hereafter, is answered in two different ways. Some philosophical systems maintain that the proper preparation that a person undertakes for achieving this end will help him to realize it only after death, whereas some other systems hold the view that it can be realized in this life itself, if one follows the prescribed moral and spiritual discipline. The former view is called the eschatological conception of moksa while the latter is known as lÄ «van-mukti. LÄ «van-mukti means liberation-in-life. The person who has attained enlightenment or wisdom is free even while he is in the embodied condition. It is not necessary to discuss these two views of moksa in detail. It may be pointed out here that the view that it is possible to overcome bondage and attain liberation here and now deepens the significance of the present life. A  lÄ «van-mukta does not run away from society. He lives in societ y for the benefit of others; when he is engaged in activities, he has no sense of I and mine; his activities, that is to say, are impersonal. Also, he imparts spiritual instruction to others, for, having realized the truth, he alone is competent to do this. The life of a lÄ «van-mukta, as portrayed in the Hindu tradition, is comparable to that of a Bodhi-sattva as explained in the MahÄ yÄ na tradition. The ideal of life goes beyond self-perfection; it also includes work for the universal good. According to the Indian tradition, knowledge is different from information, and wisdom is different from knowledge. We may say that information, knowledge, and wisdom constitute a hierarchy. To know a thing is to know it in a determinate way, as such-and-such — as a substance possessing qualities, as a whole consisting of parts, as the cause or effect of something, and so on. Every object has two kinds of relations, internal and external. A lump of clay, for example, is internally related to its color, its parts of which it is made. It is also externally related to the ground on which it is placed, its immediate surroundings, and so on. No object remains isolated from other things; on the contrary, it has a network of relations with other things in such a way that it is what it is because of other things. When the poet says that, to know a flower seen in a crannied wall, one must know the plant, root and all, and also the wall, its location, and so on, he draws our attention to the fact that every object is an integral part of the cosmic system and that, to get an insight into the nature of a thing, one must know the whole of which it is an integral part. Bits of information do not constitute knowledge. Piecemeal information about the roots, the trunk, and the branches of a tree cannot be viewed as the knowledge of a tree. Just as knowledge is different from information, even so wisdom is different from knowledge. Though knowledge is superior to information, it cannot be a substitute for wisdom. The Vedic tradition draws a distinction between two kinds of knowledge, higher (parÄ ) and lower (aparÄ ).

How Music Effects Mood and Perception in Motion Pictures Essay

Music is a fundamental necessity in the world that we live in today. We all implement music in our everyday lives whether it’s professionally or solely for entertainment purposes. Some people build careers on music as musicians, composers, singers, or teachers while the latter of us just need music to get through the day whether we’re driving or at work or just need to relax. The need for music in our contemporary society affects us in a myriad of different ways--including the undeniable effect on our moods. The sound of just one note, one chord, can send an instantaneous message to the brain that, psychologically, can make us think or act in a certain way. These reactions can positively or negatively our moods depending on the composer’s intentions and our perceptions. Filmmakers implement the same idea using music to evoke a certain feeling or reaction/perception in their audience.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   Music in motion pictures is an indispensable tool filmmakers utilize to effect the mood of their audience. It often gets underrated as a predominant psychological force as it is employed subliminally by filmmakers under their narrative so that their audience is unaware of its presence. Nicholas Cook, author of Analyzing Musical Multimedia, states, â€Å"words and pictures deal primarily with the specific†¦while music deals primarily with responses--that is, with values, emotions, and attitudes†¦.†(22). However, there is certain music that is suppose to be heard by the audience as part of the cinematic diegesis. All sounds that are understood by characters in the narrative are referred to as diegetic; however, those sounds that are not part of the diegesis are referred to as nondiegetic. This would suggest that diegetic music is processed on the conscious level while nondiegetic music might remain on the subconscious level (Gorbman, 75). Although many people might be unaware of these two types of sounds while screening a film, it effects their reactions, interpretations, and moods significantly.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  The role of music in a motion picture is in direct relation to the level of ambiguity in a particular visual scene. The more ambiguous a scene is, the more filmmakers rely on their composers to develop a musical score that interprets the meaning of the scene for their audience. Therefore, music provides a cue for the listener to tell... ...t in a film and exactly how they felt in that moment. Most importantly, music sets the pace of a film to play on our emotions. Some films are slow and emotive that allow directors to incorporate music to influence the audience’s emotions; other are fast paced and exciting which can also exuded through the use of music. Where would the art of cinema be without the use of music today? I know for sure that films wouldn’t be as powerful and as captivating to the mind and soul of viewers without the use of this powerful tool.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   Works Cited Boltz, Michael. â€Å"Musical Soundtracks as a schematic influence on the cognitive processing   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  of filmed events.† Music Perception. Vol. 18 (4). 2001. Cook, Nicholas. Analyzing Musical Multimedia. Oxford University Press: New York,   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  1998. Gorbman, Claudia. Unheard Melodies: Narrative film music. Indiana University Press:   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Bloomington, Indiana, 1987. Langer, Suzanne. Feeling and Form. Prentice Hall: London, 1977. Whittall, Arnold. â€Å"Leitmotif† The New Grove Dictionary of Music Online. 2003. 20 Nov.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  2004. .

A Theory in Crisis Essay

People are naturally selfish, greedy and will always think about themselves especially during difficult times. That is even scientifically proven by Charles Darwin’s Theory of Evolution – Natural Selection, â€Å"Natural selection eliminates inferior species gradually over time. † It is the only way to survive. And yet there are still a few good men who would go out of their comfort zones to bring justice onto the table. Willie Stark had enjoyed his fair share of both the good and the bad. â€Å"Guilty of dishonest practices, as bribery; without integrity; crooked† (Stein, 1975, p. 302). Corruption can be a politician’s worst nightmare or his best friend. Sometimes, you do it against your will. But in the end, you are consumed by it, just like any other power hungry crazed individual, believing that they can make a difference. Willie Stark believed in it too. Willie was just like any ordinary farmer’s son. He grew up in the South and is employed as Mason City’s county treasurer. He wanted to make a difference by giving light into a controversy. He set out a campaign against an alleged county schoolhouse construction contract. He was working for Dolph Pillsbury, the County sheriff, who happened to favor the bid of a certain J. H. Moore over all the others. The fact that J. H. Moore did not have the lowest bid only brought more suspicion as to why he was chosen. Willie fought this, as he was on the side of Jeffers Construction, the one having placed the lowest bid. Eventually, the County sheriff got what he wanted and J. H. Moore won the contract, Willie lost his job. But he stood by his conviction and he was rewarded. Years later, the schoolhouse met a tragic fate due to the low quality construction materials that was used by J. H. Moore. The building collapsed, killing three and injuring several others. I believe this moment was one of the turning points of the story. It shows that when you stood by what you tried to fight for until the very end, the people would know of this and you will gain their sympathy. Hence, he ran for governor as planned by existing political figures. Although he did not win, this became his driving force to study law, and later to run again for the same position. Willie Stark’s character in Robert Penn Warren’s All the King’s Men is that of a governor surrounded by all the people mixed in a perfect concoction to produce the dictionary meaning of political differences powered by blackmail, alliances and corruption. I believe that a person’s morality is gravely affected by circumstances of everyday living. One day you believe in the political system, the next day you probably would not. Maybe you encountered a bully police officer, a person trying to blackmail you, or a pickpocket. A person can be as hard as a rock when he or she stands by his/her moral and ethical principles. But even the strongest rocks are destroyed especially by secrets that are meant to damage your public image and meant to shake the very foundation of your moral beliefs. I believe that Willie Stark was corrupted by the political system. And I would like to point out three reasons why. As I have mentioned, Willie wanted to correct what he thought was wrong with the schoolhouse bid event when he stood up for the Jeffers Construction. Unknown to him, the County sheriff will still be the one to call the shots since he has authority over every single thing that happens. I believe this showed how much Willie was not in favor of set-ups in the political hierarchy, and an honest man would accept losing his job rather than sticking up to the misdoings of his superior. Another circumstance pointing to the righteousness of Willie was when he gave his support to his opponent Sam MacMurfee during his first time to run for governor. He found out the plan when Sadie Burke revealed it to him and to the dismay of all those who worked for his campaign, he announced his support to his rival on his big speech. Lastly, his efforts to build a free-for-all hospital sum up his desire to help the needy. What I see is a person who believes in the morality of things but is just caught up in the immorality and corruption that is inevitable in politics. Right from the start he was good, and he never stopped being good even if he has to do bad to be good. References AllAboutScience. org. (2002). Darwin’s Theory of Evolution – A Theory in Crisis. Retrieved December 22, 2007, from http://darwins-theory-of-evolution. com Stein, J. (Ed. ). (1975). The Random House College Dictionary. New York: Random House, Inc.

A Brief Look at Aerospace Engineering - 542 Words

Discover Engineering: Aerospace Engineering According to Dictionary.com, engineering is a branch of science and technology that works with design and building. Also engineering is a career that focuses on solving problems by using the design process.Engineers work on the following: they solve, design, test and building things that humans use on a daily use. The Engineering Profession Chemical Engineering- According to Wikipedia.com chemical engineering is solve problems by using science, for example, creating new materials or try to make energy by connecting two diamonds, or making things that don’t damage the Earth or humans. Civil Engineering-According to Dictionary.com, civil engineering is a career that deals with design problems, or design something that we see in our regular day and we use. For example: roads, bridges, canals, and others builds that the humans use. Electrical Engineering- According to Wikipedia.com, electrical engineering works and solve problems related to electricity and electronics. Electrical engineering has started since the 19th century after the first telephone and electric power. Mechanical Engineering- According to Wikipedia.com, mechanical engineering applies to math and physics to analysis a design or to solve a problem. They products and operates machines and tools that a human use on a daily basis.This field type of en gineering also connects to electrical and civil engineering. My Engineering Profession TheShow MoreRelatedPersonal Branding1056 Words   |  5 PagesPersonal Branding Plan Paper MKT/421 7/20/15 Personal Brand Plan I am an IT Professional with over 8 years of experience working with hardware, software and network engineering. Throughout my career I have held various positions including several leadership roles. The IT industry is a very technical field where individual contributors are critical to the success of the organization. With the extensive leadership training and experience I have gained, has allowed me to standRead MoreAirline Safety Bill 2001 Essay1329 Words   |  6 Pagesfew actors in respect to interest groups and domestic airline safety. The interest groups come from varying backgrounds of business, labor, government and public interest. The actors that we are focused on are the domestic airline companies, the aerospace industry, private security firms, various labor groups, National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB), The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), Department of Transportation (DOT), Congress, The World Conference on Transportation Research SocietyRead MoreSmart Materials in Aerospace Industry6256 Words   |  26 Pages[pic] AE2009 Aerospace Materials Assignment Report Use of Smart Materials in Aerospace Industry List of Contents 1. Introduction 3 1. Purpose 4 2. Background 4 3. Scope 4 2. Types and Applications of Smart Materials 1. Piezoelectric Material 5 2. Shape Memory Alloys 14 3. Magnetostrictive Materials 20 4. Rheological Fluids 22 3. Discussion 25 4. Conclusion 26 5. References 27 Abstract This report will cover the different types of smartRead MoreA Case Of Airbus : The Key Drivers For Globalisation917 Words   |  4 Pages2009). Global presence Although the headquarter is in France, Airbus has developed on its solid European roots to push ahead on an international scale with fully-owned subsidiaries in the United States, China, Japan, India and in the Middle East; engineering and training centres in Toulouse, Miami, Wichita, Hamburg, Bangalore and Beijing; spare parts centres in Hamburg, Frankfurt, Washington, Beijing, Dubai and Singapore and more than 150 service offices around the world. Airbus key factor of businessRead MoreBmw : A Car Manufacturer1093 Words   |  5 Pagesurban electric car for road use. Moreover, in the 90’s BMW owned subsidiary of Rolls-Royce Motor Cars Limited, and the Rover Group from the British Aerospace, which also owned an iconic British small cars company called MINI. In 2000, Rover had a huge losses and BMW sold the combine while the MINI remained and developed by BMW until today. 1.1 A brief history of BMW Initially, the company BMW is a business entitiy from restructuring aircraft manufacturing firm named Rapp Motorenwerke. BMW hadRead MoreGuide to Implement As9100 Rev C5419 Words   |  22 Pages  this   will   help   you   in   a    long    run.    AS9100    is    necessity    if    you    are    planning    to    enter    aerospace       defence    industry   or   space   industry.   ISO9001   is   just   70%   of   AS9100.    Let   me   give   you   a   brief   introduction   about   various   types   of   Certification   you   can    go   ahead.    1.    ISO9001:   is   a   quality   standardRead MoreBasic Understanding Of Dark Matter4649 Words   |  19 Pagesa picture of Dark Matter composition. In some galaxy clusters, the void between galaxies is composed of gas so hot, scientists cannot see it using ordinary visible light telescopes. The gas can only be observed as X-rays or gamma rays. Scientists look at that gas and measure how much there is between galaxies in clusters. From this observation they realised there must be nearly five times the material in the clusters than we can detect and observe. It’s this undetectable matter, which is termedRead MoreBoeing Financial Analysis Essay6645 Words   |  27 PagesWilliam Boeing used his own financial resources to guarantee a loan to cover all wages, which was a total of about seven hundred a week. (Boeing History, n.d) In 1997, they merged with McDonnell Douglas and are currently the worlds largest aerospace company and leading manufacturer of commercial airliners and defense, space and security systems. With their headquarters in Chicago, Boeing employs more than 170,000 people in the United States and in over seventy countries. More than 140,000 employeesRead MoreNorthrop Grumman ( A Company4000 Words   |  16 PagesFIN 609A April 30, 2016 Purpose of Analysis: The purpose of this document is to provide our Client an in-depth analysis, (including recommendation) as to whether they should or should not invest in Northrop Grumman Company. Background and Brief History: Northrop Grumman s rich heritage includes almost two-dozen legacy companies which pioneered dramatic advances in technology that has changed the world. Some of their most notable highlights included transporting Charles Lindbergh acrossRead MoreCase Analysis : Northrop Grumman Corporation6339 Words   |  26 PagesReview This report will give a brief overview of strategic crucial perceptions of the business traits of the Northrop Grumman Corporation. Within the report analysis it will help management to define the organization?s plan for strategic decision making. The report includes a financial overview of the last five years from 2010 to 2014 and includes overviews of the organization?s total sales, net income, earning per share (EPS), and return on equity (ROE). Including a brief overview of the corporate governance