Is it really our decisions that have landed us in the ‘crisis’ that is today?
May be it is time to navigate the alternative routes? Well, maybe not. It may be just another fabrication that doesn’t make much sense. Let’s examine.
Life is a sequence of bifurcations. Well, it’s not that simple. It is a sequence of events that take place and are all affected by a huge number of parameters, some of which depend upon the results of the first event, i.e. a chaos system. Of course, choice of one road is important but the event in the choice is a variable change. And it has to be accounted for. It’s non linear and it’s literally complex.
Background check on Francis of Assisi:
This person was actually a Saint in the Roman Catholic Church. And as all high up in the Church, life was a gift to them. They knew no vulgarities of nature, didn’t face the darker sides of life. They had to perform neither toil nor any hard work without their consent (slavery). The church took care that they lead a life like none other. And thus, all he had to do is preach. Preach. Preach.
Background check on Machiavelli:
This person was a practical, down to earth man. He did what his reason told him was right. He himself worked in his fields and did all that a common man would do. So, it may be said that he was in sync with the realities of the world back then. And whatever he claimed, he had actually put into practice or proved it. Hence, the masses accepted it.
Hence people followed Machiavelli and not the Francis of Assisi. That was the most logical thing to do in that context. I feel that it was the right thing that had been done then. Following the Francis of Assisi would have proved to be against the laws and order of nature, as it was imaginary.
Now about Giovanni Francesco Pico della Mirandola
This guy was a philosopher, who I would say, failed in actuating his real genius. A sorry tale for a person with such talents, but he had a right approach, though it was quit beyond the society of that time to understand.
One can go on questioning the people like the above believe or say or do. But the underlying principle is that a person and his beliefs are always a function of his intellect and the circumstances in which he is plus a small variable change (∂x) which is very critical in determining his entirety or completeness.
About Giordano Bruno
Bruno is known for his use and development of the art of memory, a mnemonic system based upon organized knowledge. He was also an early proponent of the idea of an infinite and homogeneous universe. It was for this reason that he was burnt at stake by the Roman Catholic Church. The official reason for the Roman Catholic Church was, of course, to retain the social order. But it was the fear of loss of authority that actually drove them to take such a step. Something we may claim to follow the principle of Machiavelli. Something which in later years was termed by scientists as “survival of the fittest” (NOTE – the term ‘pantheism’ was coined only after 1700s, long after Bruno’s execution)
Gothe’s science – well, it is more a philosophy, rather a great philosophy made to sound like science. More importantly, research (and hence, science) is still on in the fields related to feeling, intuition, consciousness etc. Research in these areas has partly led to the development of psychological warfare. A wrong application, but it’s the evidence that the fields are still of interest to the scientific community.
This world is now in confusion?? Is the universe or the nature ordered? These are all interlinked questions whose answer science is trying to work out – the Theory of Everything. Moreover, what we think is chaos is because we fail at the present point to understand the underlying pattern. Would there have been no confusion had we followed “the other/forgotten route”
“Knowledge is not the road to understanding.” Well, then what is?? Knowledge is formed from the innumerable steps we take with the view of attaining total understanding, some of which get a bit luckier and some get unlucky. So, it is always knowledge that is always the road to understanding; especially when the case is love. Can a person in love or who has been in love define it? More importantly, does he/she understand love; when it started and when it ended or may be quantify it?
There is nothing wrong in the dominant language if it copes up with the challenges of the period. And yes, it does shape the perception of the common man at the same time. But the phase transition from one language to another is a period in which several sub-languages emerge and try to come onto the main screen. It is in this phase when we are most likely to lose focus and control.
For example, the Wild Wild West or cow-boy type of culture that was once prevalent in US suddenly re-surfaced with Bush Junior taking up the reins at the White House and has made it clear that some privileged people can actually devastate the entire system. Changes like these are effected by the leaders of the masses, in which case, can it be said that Al Gore or the members of jury in the Supreme Court who ruled in favour of Bush Junior are to be blamed for failing?
The whole problem is with one new language coming over by replacing an old one. That, I dare say, led to all the problems in the first place. So, instead of actually trying to figure out and implement a completely new language, we should try to focus on the re-drawing of the perspectives and improvising or upgrading or optimizing the language. And, regrettably, this is no decision to make; it’s a path to be followed.
Sunday, August 3, 2008
Saturday, August 2, 2008
The Forgotten Map by Manfred Max-Neef: A Critique
The present is a reflection of the past. The state we are in today, whether good or bad, is a result of our actions of the past, the decisions that we made and the paths that we chose. Equally, the paths we choose today will determine our future.
The article is mainly concerned with the fact that the current state of spiritual vacuum and emotional turbidity that today’s generation finds itself in is a direct consequence of the ill-conceived decisions that were taken by the past generations. According to Max-Neef, human civillisation has chosen to bask in materialism and reason, while ignoring the spiritual. So while the world of brotherhood among all creations and nature introduced by St. Francis of Assisi was forgotten, we lapped up the principles of Machiavalli. Be it Pico Della Mirandola and Francis Bacon, or Giordano Bruno and Decartes, one point of view has always dominated, and shaped the perspective of people, the perspective of narrowness and mechanism.
In science, we have celebrated the doctrine of Galileo and Newton, who put reason and logic above all else. We have accepted mathematics and cold hard facts as the core of the so called scientific temperament. Goethe, at the same time had expressed the idea that the goal of science is spiritual enlightenment. That it is not possible to isolate the observer from the observed. That a spiritual dimension underlies everything physical. However his ideas have been obliterated by the sheer popularity of Galileo and Newton.
Thus, according to Max-Neef, our previous generations set humanity off on a downward spiral that has culminated in today’s world of unmitigated discontent and angst. As opposed to understanding, which is a holistic approach to learning, mankind has embraced knowledge, which is fragmented and incomplete. We are, therefore in a state of complete chaos, which is nothing but a result of the failure to take better decisions in the past.
The future, however does not have to be as hopeless. The decisions we will take today will present themselves in the future. We have to veer more towards harmony and true understanding as opposed to merely gathering knowledge. But for that to happen, a paradigm shift is required in the ‘language’ the governs this generation. According to the author, every generation has a dominant language the has to be consistent with the particular demands of that era. That was true until the present era, where ‘neo-liberalism’ has taken over the world. To change our approach to perception, we first need to change this language. Only then can the future generations escape the circle of spiritual poverty and detachment.
The article, although giving mostly one side of the argument, is not bereft of truth. Max-Neef feels quite strongly for the subject, as evident from his language and choice of words. It is true that for the most part, today’s generation is unsatisfied and frustrated. It can also be argued that such dissatisfaction is a result of the emotional bankruptcy and moral destituteness of present humanity as a whole. The decisions of the past, which included following the single-minded pursuit of knowledge leaving no room for spirituality has no doubt led to such a scenario.
Nevertheless, it is also true that such a pursuit has led to what we call progress. Perhaps if we had put more emphasis on spiritual upliftment, we would have been satisfied with whatever we had and not strived for a more convenient world. So while we can mourn all we want the loss of spiritual enlightenment, we have to accept that without the fruits of progress brought forth by the collective decisions that humanity took, living would have been a lot more difficult than it is today.
THE FORGOTTEN MAP
The article states that route taken by man all through these ages has led to the current global crisis. The author feels life would have been very different if man had taken the alternative route that had come across him though out his history. He tries to trace back in time, where man went terribly wrong in making decisions. He brings to notice few people from different periods of time whose ideas of love, spirituality, soul, hope are suppressed by ideas of fear, reasoning and mechanism and depression.
At first it feels like the author is trying to regret at whatever man has done. It feels like he is trying to convey that man has made some major blunders in making some major decisions, which is very true when we look back to history, but we don’t know under what circumstances those decisions were made. Sometimes situations have aroused in history like in wars where some decisions had to be made whether good or bad. The author tries to trace back an alternative route, by pointing at some decisive bifurcations which man can trace again to make the world a better place.
Man, through all the ages has always been selfish in all aspects. He feels it is safer to be feared than loved. People began to believe in only what they see, or was it people were brainwashed to believe only what they see. We see in history, how Christianism, during it upcoming shunned every other religious idea that was against it. Everything else was just suppressed or oppressed. Missionaries were sent all across the world to make people believe only on their ideals. As the author rightly points out the Christian virtues such as faith, hope and charity have metamorphosed into schizophrenia, depression and narcissism.
Man began to believe in reasoning and had the feeling that he was on his way to discover the truth which led to confusion on what was right and wrong. In this chaos, the ultimate truth of spirituality, god, love was lost somewhere. Man has progressed, but is it to just isolate himself from the society, lose his social identity and try to find virtual identities where he is someone else. Is it that man wants to escape from what is happening in the world or has he realized that some major blunders have been made in the past and its better not to indulge more. Or is he at just another bifurcation in life which he should not have taken.
I personally have always felt that we are in an age of ignorance because whatever is being done has no inner meaning or ultimate understanding. We are just happy in skimming through the surface and happy in collecting data and flaunting about it. Man has all the knowledge he wants about anything, all at the click of a button. The respect of value of knowledge is gone. Like the author says the journey in accumulations of knowledge has been great but where is all this leading to.
Every generations has its theme, the article says that man has been pretty good or successful in tackling the historical challenges prevalent in those periods by respective languages of those times. But isn’t this contradicting with earlier topics discussed in the article that man has failed in taking the decisions which could have led to a better world.
The author points out the emergence of neo-liberal discourse (a programme of methodical destruction) in the last three decades which has led to the doom and all the chaos. The result of which is a large gap between the rich and the poor. Money began making money. Rich became richer and poor became poorer. Bringing in a new theory that the rich are powerful and are the decision makers giving no place to huge mass of common people in any decision making. I sometimes wonder how the same man with money is so different from his counterparts with no money.
The article makes us realize we still have time to reflect back on what we have done and try to find an alternative map out of this confusion. The article is written in 1992, after which the map has gone much more complicated. One might feel how can an individual bring about a change or even think about bringing a change in this current world of chaos and confusion. But the problem is we begin to look at things largely and ignore all the small things. We’ll have to start out with bringing about changes in small things which sometimes can become a TIPPING POINT or may even become the new language of this period.
MUSHTAQ ANIS
mushtaq_a@nid.edu
TRANSPORTATION AND AUTOMOBILE DESIGN.
Friday, August 1, 2008
A Different World:
Why we ask questions at different phase of our lives?Why we remember our birthday? Why we remember dates? Why we remember accidents? It’s because something on that came into existence. Someone was born. Something happened that day which changed the way we live and think. The events that occur today will be a history of tomorrow. Today’s decision will certainly leave an impact on what we do tomorrow or in the near by future. The path we selected today will certainly lead us to a new direction tomorrow. A Direction, with its own thinking, lifestyle and challenges . But what if I do something today that will alter my direction tomorrow with the previous thought. We choose to be in love today that may give us a love tomorrow. But if we choose to stay away from love today then it will certainly be opposite to the one before.
So what is responsible for, what we really are now? The fact behind this is our behavior. Our thinking that is based on logic. Selection of what is right and what is wrong. Comparison of good and bad. And it is not only the single factor called “Conscious Mind” that determines our behavior. There are the ideologies, social thinking, education system etc. that leads and moulds us to accept, what has been accepted as truth and requirements in the past, in the history.We see all around us a web that has been confined within a thinking. A thinking, that was developed by some and which was accepted by all as a path to achieve social, political and economic growth and appreciation. We define our destiny at a point with two or many directions and we choose what we think is best considering all what we have have experienced in the past. But when something strange happens or something happens which was not expected to be, then we always think of what we had as an alternate path.
The thinking and theories of Giovanni Bernardone (Francis of Assisi), Giovanni Francesco Pico Della Mirandola, GiordanoBruno which were swept aside and now have become a history itself, explain the importance of existence of love and its meaning, spiritual renovation of humanity, life on earth. On the other hand , what we accepted were the behavior based on fear for love, hatred against nature , becoming automatic machines and the science of measuring that which can’t be measured.
Science is what that has defined and shaped us today.The way we walk, live, talk everything we measure in terms of science called technology, lifestyle. But when we look on the other side or better to say to the other path of science which we have swept aside then we see the knowledge we have to gain related to our existence, spirituality, our identity. The feeling like imagining god inside and outside. Science can help us to provide the knowledge of observing the other aspects of physical world.
When we talk about the knowledge, then we are not talking of this physical world but we are talking about the knowledge that has been taught to us through books, the daily practice of our society. The society which is far from what is reality. The habbits and learning of today’s world is influenced by the navigated route where we compare our success with success of others.Where we compare achievements of ours with what has been achieved earlier, with the same path followed as they did.But what happens when we come to a point where we have to compare our same level of success and achievements with two other unfamiliar paths.That point is what we called as the point where Confusion comes into action.This is the point where we ask ourselves and start believing on the virtual world that the science can take us into.
We read in the books and listen from outside the story of our past, like the story of our evolution but little we come to know about the same. Its because whatever has been told to us or written is based on the knowledge and facts that we have explored over some years. We take help of the same science to explore our story which in turn is again based on same theories. When we try to figure out the real reason of being then we cannot find a suitable answer to the query. Its where now the knowledge of real world comes into play. We have books, the theories, the sociological data, psychological data etc but still something we find is still missing. Its sooner or later we realize is the knowledge of love for that, which we want to understand .Knowledge is like an island for us , to reach we require a medium and that medium is love. Once we have love and we learn to fall in love, we will have the basic need. So what important to us is not the knowledge but how to attain it is what more important to have. This love can also be termed as understanding.
So now we realize that knowledge without understanding can’t be achieved.This understanding also has a medium we call as Language.Its the language through which our perception and hence our actions get shape.Evry ear , every age has its language as per the needs and perception.The language of 19th century was the language of nation considerations like political speeches by leaders.The language of 20th century was what have become the important domination of history, the language of war.And now is the 21st century having a language of economy.Whatever we think, do and write is in the terms of economic language.But also what came along was a mis conception, carelessness, disaster aginst nature, ecosystem etc.These are the disastrous effects of language.
So now what we need to really think about is what the various languages in histry has left for us which is still untouched.Its time to turn back the pages and search for what we called as true reality.What all we have discovered can now be used in other forms.The mathematics , science which have been used as tools for our development can also be used to discover the true value of being here.
Why we ask questions at different phase of our lives?Why we remember our birthday? Why we remember dates? Why we remember accidents? It’s because something on that came into existence. Someone was born. Something happened that day which changed the way we live and think. The events that occur today will be a history of tomorrow. Today’s decision will certainly leave an impact on what we do tomorrow or in the near by future. The path we selected today will certainly lead us to a new direction tomorrow. A Direction, with its own thinking, lifestyle and challenges . But what if I do something today that will alter my direction tomorrow with the previous thought. We choose to be in love today that may give us a love tomorrow. But if we choose to stay away from love today then it will certainly be opposite to the one before.
So what is responsible for, what we really are now? The fact behind this is our behavior. Our thinking that is based on logic. Selection of what is right and what is wrong. Comparison of good and bad. And it is not only the single factor called “Conscious Mind” that determines our behavior. There are the ideologies, social thinking, education system etc. that leads and moulds us to accept, what has been accepted as truth and requirements in the past, in the history.We see all around us a web that has been confined within a thinking. A thinking, that was developed by some and which was accepted by all as a path to achieve social, political and economic growth and appreciation. We define our destiny at a point with two or many directions and we choose what we think is best considering all what we have have experienced in the past. But when something strange happens or something happens which was not expected to be, then we always think of what we had as an alternate path.
The thinking and theories of Giovanni Bernardone (Francis of Assisi), Giovanni Francesco Pico Della Mirandola, GiordanoBruno which were swept aside and now have become a history itself, explain the importance of existence of love and its meaning, spiritual renovation of humanity, life on earth. On the other hand , what we accepted were the behavior based on fear for love, hatred against nature , becoming automatic machines and the science of measuring that which can’t be measured.
Science is what that has defined and shaped us today.The way we walk, live, talk everything we measure in terms of science called technology, lifestyle. But when we look on the other side or better to say to the other path of science which we have swept aside then we see the knowledge we have to gain related to our existence, spirituality, our identity. The feeling like imagining god inside and outside. Science can help us to provide the knowledge of observing the other aspects of physical world.
When we talk about the knowledge, then we are not talking of this physical world but we are talking about the knowledge that has been taught to us through books, the daily practice of our society. The society which is far from what is reality. The habbits and learning of today’s world is influenced by the navigated route where we compare our success with success of others.Where we compare achievements of ours with what has been achieved earlier, with the same path followed as they did.But what happens when we come to a point where we have to compare our same level of success and achievements with two other unfamiliar paths.That point is what we called as the point where Confusion comes into action.This is the point where we ask ourselves and start believing on the virtual world that the science can take us into.
We read in the books and listen from outside the story of our past, like the story of our evolution but little we come to know about the same. Its because whatever has been told to us or written is based on the knowledge and facts that we have explored over some years. We take help of the same science to explore our story which in turn is again based on same theories. When we try to figure out the real reason of being then we cannot find a suitable answer to the query. Its where now the knowledge of real world comes into play. We have books, the theories, the sociological data, psychological data etc but still something we find is still missing. Its sooner or later we realize is the knowledge of love for that, which we want to understand .Knowledge is like an island for us , to reach we require a medium and that medium is love. Once we have love and we learn to fall in love, we will have the basic need. So what important to us is not the knowledge but how to attain it is what more important to have. This love can also be termed as understanding.
So now we realize that knowledge without understanding can’t be achieved.This understanding also has a medium we call as Language.Its the language through which our perception and hence our actions get shape.Evry ear , every age has its language as per the needs and perception.The language of 19th century was the language of nation considerations like political speeches by leaders.The language of 20th century was what have become the important domination of history, the language of war.And now is the 21st century having a language of economy.Whatever we think, do and write is in the terms of economic language.But also what came along was a mis conception, carelessness, disaster aginst nature, ecosystem etc.These are the disastrous effects of language.
So now what we need to really think about is what the various languages in histry has left for us which is still untouched.Its time to turn back the pages and search for what we called as true reality.What all we have discovered can now be used in other forms.The mathematics , science which have been used as tools for our development can also be used to discover the true value of being here.
History of Design:
Why we ask questions at different phase of our lives?Why we remember our birthday? Why we remember dates? Why we remember accidents? It’s because something on that came into existence. Someone was born. Something happened that day which changed the way we live and think. The events that occur today will be a history of tomorrow. Today’s decision will certainly leave an impact on what we do tomorrow or in the near by future. The path we selected today will certainly lead us to a new direction tomorrow. A Direction, with its own thinking, lifestyle and challenges . But what if I do something today that will alter my direction tomorrow with the previous thought. We choose to be in love today that may give us a love tomorrow. But if we choose to stay away from love today then it will certainly be opposite to the one before.
So what is responsible for, what we really are now? The fact behind this is our behavior. Our thinking that is based on logic. Selection of what is right and what is wrong. Comparison of good and bad. And it is not only the single factor called “Conscious Mind” that determines our behavior. There are the ideologies, social thinking, education system etc. that leads and moulds us to accept, what has been accepted as truth and requirements in the past, in the history.We see all around us a web that has been confined within a thinking. A thinking, that was developed by some and which was accepted by all as a path to achieve social, political and economic growth and appreciation. We define our destiny at a point with two or many directions and we choose what we think is best considering all what we have have experienced in the past. But when something strange happens or something happens which was not expected to be, then we always think of what we had as an alternate path.
The thinking and theories of Giovanni Bernardone (Francis of Assisi), Giovanni Francesco Pico Della Mirandola, GiordanoBruno which were swept aside and now have become a history itself, explain the importance of existence of love and its meaning, spiritual renovation of humanity, life on earth. On the other hand , what we accepted were the behavior based on fear for love, hatred against nature , becoming automatic machines and the science of measuring that which can’t be measured.
Science is what that has defined and shaped us today.The way we walk, live, talk everything we measure in terms of science called technology, lifestyle. But when we look on the other side or better to say to the other path of science which we have swept aside then we see the knowledge we have to gain related to our existence, spirituality, our identity. The feeling like imagining god inside and outside. Science can help us to provide the knowledge of observing the other aspects of physical world.
When we talk about the knowledge, then we are not talking of this physical world but we are talking about the knowledge that has been taught to us through books, the daily practice of our society. The society which is far from what is reality. The habbits and learning of today’s world is influenced by the navigated route where we compare our success with success of others.Where we compare achievements of ours with what has been achieved earlier, with the same path followed as they did.But what happens when we come to a point where we have to compare our same level of success and achievements with two other unfamiliar paths.That point is what we called as the point where Confusion comes into action.This is the point where we ask ourselves and start believing on the virtual world that the science can take us into.
We read in the books and listen from outside the story of our past, like the story of our evolution but little we come to know about the same. Its because whatever has been told to us or written is based on the knowledge and facts that we have explored over some years. We take help of the same science to explore our story which in turn is again based on same theories. When we try to figure out the real reason of being then we cannot find a suitable answer to the query. Its where now the knowledge of real world comes into play. We have books, the theories, the sociological data, psychological data etc but still something we find is still missing. Its sooner or later we realize is the knowledge of love for that, which we want to understand .Knowledge is like an island for us , to reach we require a medium and that medium is love. Once we have love and we learn to fall in love, we will have the basic need. So what important to us is not the knowledge but how to attain it is what more important to have. This love can also be termed as understanding.
So now we realize that knowledge without understanding can’t be achieved.This understanding also has a medium we call as Language.Its the language through which our perception and hence our actions get shape.Evry ear , every age has its language as per the needs and perception.The language of 19th century was the language of nation considerations like political speeches by leaders.The language of 20th century was what have become the important domination of history, the language of war.And now is the 21st century having a language of economy.Whatever we think, do and write is in the terms of economic language.But also what came along was a mis conception, carelessness, disaster aginst nature, ecosystem etc.These are the disastrous effects of language.
So now what we need to really think about is what the various languages in histry has left for us which is still untouched.Its time to turn back the pages and search for what we called as true reality.What all we have discovered can now be used in other forms.The mathematics , science which have been used as tools for our development can also be used to discover the true value of being here.
Animesh Shrivastava
The Road Not Taken
Two roads diverged in a yellow wood,
And sorry I could not travel both
And be one traveller, long I stood
And looked down one as far as I could
To where it bent in the undergrowth.
Then took the other, as just as fair,
And having perhaps the better claim,
Because it was grassy and wanted wear;
Though as for that the passing there
Had worn them really about the same.
And both that morning equally lay
In leaves no step had trodden black.
Oh, I kept the first for another day!
Yet knowing how way leads on to way,
I doubted if I should ever come back.
I shall be telling this with a sigh
Somewhere ages and ages hence:
Two roads diverged in a wood, and I—
I took the one less travelled by,
And that has made all the difference.
And sorry I could not travel both
And be one traveller, long I stood
And looked down one as far as I could
To where it bent in the undergrowth.
Then took the other, as just as fair,
And having perhaps the better claim,
Because it was grassy and wanted wear;
Though as for that the passing there
Had worn them really about the same.
And both that morning equally lay
In leaves no step had trodden black.
Oh, I kept the first for another day!
Yet knowing how way leads on to way,
I doubted if I should ever come back.
I shall be telling this with a sigh
Somewhere ages and ages hence:
Two roads diverged in a wood, and I—
I took the one less travelled by,
And that has made all the difference.
LOOKING AT THE PAST
In our early discussions we talked about how history is not just a bunch of dates or a list of incidents and how an analysis of events in the past could illuminate the present and point towards actions to shape the future. We also talked about the idea that no analysis is value free. Here is an article from Resurgence which is thought provoking ...
The decisions humanity has taken in the past have led us to a place of global crisis. Perhaps we took the wrong path. Perhaps it is time to navigate the alternative routes, the ones we discarded in favour of our current language of reductionist science and neo-liberal globalisation.
Life is an unending sequence of bifurcations. The decision I take implies all the decisions I did not take. The route I choose is part of all the routes I did not choose. Our life is inevitably a permanent choice of one among an infinity of ontological possibilities. The fact that I was at a given place, at a very precise moment in time, when a given situation occurred or a given person appeared, may have had a decisive effect on the rest of my life. A few minutes earlier or later or a few metres away in any direction might well have determined a different bifurcation and, hence, a completely different life. As the great Spanish philosopher José Ortega y Gasset pointed out, “I am myself and my circumstance.”
What holds for individual lives holds for communities and whole societies as well. Our so-called Western (Judaeo-Christian) civilisation is the result of its own bifurcations. We in the West are what we are, but we could also have been something we are not. Let us then revise some of our decisive bifurcations.
Some time during the 12th century in Italy, a young man named Giovanni Bernardone, while still very young and very rich, decided to radically change his life. As a result of his transformation, we remember him today under a different name: Francis of Assisi. When he referred to the world, Francis spoke of brother Sun and sister Moon, of brother wolf; and of water, fire, trees and people as brothers and sisters as well. The world he described and felt was a world where love was not only possible but made sense and had a universal meaning.
Some time later, also in Italy, the resounding voice of the brilliant and astute Machiavelli could be heard, warning us that “it is much safer to be feared than to be loved.” He also described a world, but in addition he created a world.
The world we have today is not that of Francis. It is the world of Machiavelli. Francis was the route not navigated. The navigation we chose was that of Machiavelli, and inspired by it we have constructed our social, political and economic conceptions.
In 1487, at just twenty-three years of age, Giovanni Francesco Pico della Mirandola prepared himself for the public defence of his 900 theses about the concord between the different religions and philosophies. He refused to enclose himself within the narrowness of just one doctrine. Convinced that truths are multiple, and never just one, he longed for a spiritual renovation that could reconcile humanity.
Some years later, Francis Bacon, a fervent believer in absolute truth and in the possibilities of certainty, invited us to torture Nature so that through the delivery of her secrets we could extract the truth.
Again, two worlds, one representing the route we navigated, and the other the route we navigated not. We did not follow the way suggested by Pico della Mirandola. We opted for accepting Bacon’s invitation, and we continue applying his recipe with efficiency and enthusiasm. We continue torturing Nature in order to extract from her what we believe to be the truth.
In the year 1600, Giordano Bruno burned at the stake, victim of his pantheism, since he believed that the Earth is life and has a soul. Everything, for him, is a manifestation of life. Everything is life. Three decades later, René Descartes whispered in his Metaphysical Reflections: “What I see through my window are hats and coats covering automatic machines.” We did not navigate the route of Bruno. We chose that of Descartes, and as a result we have witnessed the triumph of mechanism and reductionism.
For Galileo and Newton, the language of Nature was mathematics. To them, nothing that cannot be measured is important in science. We and Nature, the observer and the observed, are separate entities. Science is the supreme manifestation of reason, and reason is the supreme attribute of the human being.
Goethe, whose scientific contributions have been (unjustly) overshadowed because of his colossal achievements in literature and the arts, felt upset with what he believed to be the limitations of Newtonian physics. For Goethe, “science is as much an inner path of spiritual development as it is a discipline aimed at accumulating knowledge of the physical world. It involves not only a rigorous training of our faculties of observation and thinking, but also of other human faculties which can attune us to the spiritual dimension that underlies and interpenetrates the physical: faculties such as feeling, imagination and intuition.” Science, as Goethe conceived and practised it, has as its highest goal the arousal of the feeling of wonder through contemplative looking (Anschauung), in which the scientist would come to see God in Nature and Nature in God.
Two worlds once more. Another bifurcation. We are still under the spell of the overpowering lustre of Galileo and Newton, and have chosen not to navigate the route of Goethean science. Feeling, intuition, consciousness and spirituality are still banished from the realm of science, some new enlightenment arising from the field of quantum physics notwithstanding. The teaching of conventional economics, which, as incredible as it may sound, claims to be “value free”, is a conspicuous case in point. A discipline where mathematics has become an end in itself instead of a tool and where only that which can be measured is important has generated models and interpretations that are theoretically attractive but totally divorced from reality.
That’s the way it is. A route not navigated remembered only by bookworms, and a navigated route to which we attribute spectacular successes and achievements. Universities in particular have chosen the routes of Machiavelli, Bacon, Descartes, Galileo and Newton. Meanwhile, Francis, Picot, Giordano Bruno and Goethe the scientist have remained as historical footnotes.
Because of the route we have navigated, we have managed to construct a world in which – as suggested by the Catalonian philosopher Jordi Pigem – the Christian virtues such as faith, hope and charity manifest themselves today metamorphosed as schizophrenia, depression and narcissism. The navigation, no doubt, has been fascinating and spectacular. There is much in it to be admired. However, if schizophrenia, depression and narcissism are now the mirror of our existential reality, it is because all of a sudden we find ourselves in a world of confusion; in a world of disenchantment where progress becomes paradoxical and absurd, and reality becomes so incomprehensible that we desperately seek refuge in a technology that offers us an escape into virtual realities.
We have arrived at a point in our human evolution characterised by the fact that we know a lot but we understand very little. Our chosen navigation has been piloted by reason, leading us into the port of knowledge. As such it has been an overwhelmingly successful navigation. We have never in all of our existence accumulated more knowledge than during the last 100 years. We are celebrating the apotheosis of reason, but in the midst of such a splendid celebration we suddenly have the feeling that something is missing.
Yes, we can achieve knowledge about almost anything we want. We can, for instance, guided by our beloved scientific method, study everything there is, from theological, anthropological, sociological, psychological and even biochemical perspectives, about a human phenomenon called love. The result will be that we will know everything that can be known about love. But once we achieve that complete knowledge, we will sooner or later discover that we will never understand love unless we fall in love. We will realise that knowledge is not the road that leads to understanding, because the port of understanding is on another shore, and requires a different navigation. We will then be aware that we can only attempt to understand that of which we become a part. That understanding is the result of integration, while knowledge has been the result of detachment. That understanding is holistic, while knowledge is fragmented.
At least we have reached a point in which (many conventional academics notwithstanding) those of us who, in Goethe’s perspective, are concerned with the relation between science and spirituality are finally becoming aware that knowledge is not enough, and that we have to learn how to attain understanding in order to achieve the completeness of our being and the completeness of our science.
We are, perhaps, beginning to realise that knowledge without understanding is hollow, and that understanding without knowledge is incomplete. We therefore need to undertake, at last, the navigation we have so far postponed. But in order to do so we must face the great challenge of a language shift.
Ortega, the Spanish philosopher already mentioned, used to say that “every generation has its theme.” We might add that every generation or historical period is dominated by or falls under the spell of a particular form of language. That is the way it is, and there is nothing wrong with it, as long as the dominant language of a given period is coherent with the challenges of that period. The important thing to keep in mind is that language influences our perceptions and hence shapes our actions. Let us go through some examples.
During the first three centuries of the second millennium of Western civilisation, the dominant language was of a teleological nature, meaning that human actions had to be justified in terms of a calling that was superior and beyond the needs of everyday life. That made possible the construction of the great cathedrals and monasteries, where time was no issue. The construction would take six hundred years? So what? Nobody was in a hurry. After all, they were constructing for eternity, and eternity is not infinite time, but timelessness. Thank God that the language of ‘economic efficiency’ had not yet been invented. The importance lay in the deed and not in the time it might take. It was a case of coherence between language and historical challenge.
The language dominating the 19th century was basically that of the consolidation of the nation-state. The great speeches of political leaders such as Disraeli, Gladstone and Bismarck are examples. Without going into details, we might also say that the dominant language of the century was coherent with the historical challenge of the times.
It was only in the 20th century that the dominant language became that of economics, especially during the second half. A quick overview shows some interesting perspectives. The late twenties and early thirties, the time of the so-called Great Depression, coincided with the emergence of Keynesian economics. The Keynesian language was in many ways the result of a crisis, having the capacity of interpreting the crisis as well as overcoming it. It is, again, a language (or rather sub-language) coherent with its historical period.
The next sub-language shift occurred during the fifties and sixties with the emergence of so-called developmental language. This was an optimistic, utopian and happy language. Economists writing in those days were mainly dominated by the feeling that, at last, we had discovered how to promote true development and overcome world poverty. However, what should be pointed out is that although the hoped-for goals were not fully achieved, many things during those decades changed in a positive manner. This was a language at least partially coherent with its historical challenges.
And then came the last three decades of the 20th century, with the emergence of the neo-liberal discourse: a language that is still dominating over a period in which global poverty has increased dramatically, debt burden has crippled many national economies and generated brutal over-exploitation of both people and natural resources, destruction of ecosystems and biodiversity have reached levels unknown in human history, and accumulation of financial wealth in ever fewer hands has reached obscene proportions. The disastrous effects of this language, absolutely incoherent with its historical challenges, can be clearly seen by anyone, although decision-makers and holders of power prefer to look in the opposite direction.
WE HAVE a tendency to perceive ourselves as members of a successful culture. However, the truth is that no matter how far we extend the concept of success, we are still incomplete beings, materially overdeveloped and spiritually poor. And it is most probably that incompleteness, that poverty, which is responsible for the uneasiness and anxieties that permeate our existence in the world today.
Perhaps the moment has arrived in which to rest and reflect. We have the opportunity now to analyse with true honesty the map of our navigation, with all its hazards and successes, and with all its tragedies and glories. And then it might be wise to unearth the alternative map of the route we did not navigated, and see whether we can find in it orientations that can rescue us from our existential confusion.
As a consequence of the unearthing of the forgotten map, perhaps it would make sense for us to start seeing brothers and sisters surrounding us. Perhaps it would be good to believe in the possibility of harmony between many possible truths. Perhaps it might be to our advantage to dare to imagine and believe that the Earth has a soul and that everything is life. Perhaps it would be good to realise that there is no reason whatsoever to banish intuition, spirituality and consciousness from the realm of science. Or, to put it in Goethe’s words, “If [we] would seek comfort in the whole, [we] must learn to discover the whole in the smallest part,” because “nothing is more consonant with Nature than that she puts into operation in the smallest detail that which she intends as a whole.”
Our passionate pursuit of knowledge has postponed our navigation towards understanding. There should be nothing to impede the undertaking of such a navigation now, were it not for an economics which, as practised under the spell of the neo-liberal discourse, increasingly distorts reality, thus contributing to our confusion and to the falsification of knowledge itself.
No sustainability (which obviously requires understanding) will or can be achieved without a profound language shift. We need a new language that opens the door of understanding: not a language of power and domination, but a language that may emerge from the depth of our self-discovery as an inseparable part of a whole that is the cradle of the miracle of life. If we manage to provoke such a shift, we may still experience the satisfaction of having brought about a new century worth living in. •
Manfred Max-Neef is an economist who received the 1983 Right Livelihood Award in recognition of his work for development alternatives in Latin America. He is co-author, with Paul Ekins, of Real-Life Economics: Understanding Wealth Creation, published by Routledge in 1992.
This article first appeared in the March/April 2008 issue of Resurgence magazine and is reproduced here with permission from the Resurgence team. For more information please visit www.resurgence.org.
THE FORGOTTEN MAP
MANFRED MAX-NEEF
The decisions humanity has taken in the past have led us to a place of global crisis. Perhaps we took the wrong path. Perhaps it is time to navigate the alternative routes, the ones we discarded in favour of our current language of reductionist science and neo-liberal globalisation.
What holds for individual lives holds for communities and whole societies as well. Our so-called Western (Judaeo-Christian) civilisation is the result of its own bifurcations. We in the West are what we are, but we could also have been something we are not. Let us then revise some of our decisive bifurcations.
Some time during the 12th century in Italy, a young man named Giovanni Bernardone, while still very young and very rich, decided to radically change his life. As a result of his transformation, we remember him today under a different name: Francis of Assisi. When he referred to the world, Francis spoke of brother Sun and sister Moon, of brother wolf; and of water, fire, trees and people as brothers and sisters as well. The world he described and felt was a world where love was not only possible but made sense and had a universal meaning.
Some time later, also in Italy, the resounding voice of the brilliant and astute Machiavelli could be heard, warning us that “it is much safer to be feared than to be loved.” He also described a world, but in addition he created a world.
The world we have today is not that of Francis. It is the world of Machiavelli. Francis was the route not navigated. The navigation we chose was that of Machiavelli, and inspired by it we have constructed our social, political and economic conceptions.
In 1487, at just twenty-three years of age, Giovanni Francesco Pico della Mirandola prepared himself for the public defence of his 900 theses about the concord between the different religions and philosophies. He refused to enclose himself within the narrowness of just one doctrine. Convinced that truths are multiple, and never just one, he longed for a spiritual renovation that could reconcile humanity.
Some years later, Francis Bacon, a fervent believer in absolute truth and in the possibilities of certainty, invited us to torture Nature so that through the delivery of her secrets we could extract the truth.
Again, two worlds, one representing the route we navigated, and the other the route we navigated not. We did not follow the way suggested by Pico della Mirandola. We opted for accepting Bacon’s invitation, and we continue applying his recipe with efficiency and enthusiasm. We continue torturing Nature in order to extract from her what we believe to be the truth.
In the year 1600, Giordano Bruno burned at the stake, victim of his pantheism, since he believed that the Earth is life and has a soul. Everything, for him, is a manifestation of life. Everything is life. Three decades later, René Descartes whispered in his Metaphysical Reflections: “What I see through my window are hats and coats covering automatic machines.” We did not navigate the route of Bruno. We chose that of Descartes, and as a result we have witnessed the triumph of mechanism and reductionism.
For Galileo and Newton, the language of Nature was mathematics. To them, nothing that cannot be measured is important in science. We and Nature, the observer and the observed, are separate entities. Science is the supreme manifestation of reason, and reason is the supreme attribute of the human being.
Goethe, whose scientific contributions have been (unjustly) overshadowed because of his colossal achievements in literature and the arts, felt upset with what he believed to be the limitations of Newtonian physics. For Goethe, “science is as much an inner path of spiritual development as it is a discipline aimed at accumulating knowledge of the physical world. It involves not only a rigorous training of our faculties of observation and thinking, but also of other human faculties which can attune us to the spiritual dimension that underlies and interpenetrates the physical: faculties such as feeling, imagination and intuition.” Science, as Goethe conceived and practised it, has as its highest goal the arousal of the feeling of wonder through contemplative looking (Anschauung), in which the scientist would come to see God in Nature and Nature in God.
Two worlds once more. Another bifurcation. We are still under the spell of the overpowering lustre of Galileo and Newton, and have chosen not to navigate the route of Goethean science. Feeling, intuition, consciousness and spirituality are still banished from the realm of science, some new enlightenment arising from the field of quantum physics notwithstanding. The teaching of conventional economics, which, as incredible as it may sound, claims to be “value free”, is a conspicuous case in point. A discipline where mathematics has become an end in itself instead of a tool and where only that which can be measured is important has generated models and interpretations that are theoretically attractive but totally divorced from reality.
That’s the way it is. A route not navigated remembered only by bookworms, and a navigated route to which we attribute spectacular successes and achievements. Universities in particular have chosen the routes of Machiavelli, Bacon, Descartes, Galileo and Newton. Meanwhile, Francis, Picot, Giordano Bruno and Goethe the scientist have remained as historical footnotes.
Because of the route we have navigated, we have managed to construct a world in which – as suggested by the Catalonian philosopher Jordi Pigem – the Christian virtues such as faith, hope and charity manifest themselves today metamorphosed as schizophrenia, depression and narcissism. The navigation, no doubt, has been fascinating and spectacular. There is much in it to be admired. However, if schizophrenia, depression and narcissism are now the mirror of our existential reality, it is because all of a sudden we find ourselves in a world of confusion; in a world of disenchantment where progress becomes paradoxical and absurd, and reality becomes so incomprehensible that we desperately seek refuge in a technology that offers us an escape into virtual realities.
We have arrived at a point in our human evolution characterised by the fact that we know a lot but we understand very little. Our chosen navigation has been piloted by reason, leading us into the port of knowledge. As such it has been an overwhelmingly successful navigation. We have never in all of our existence accumulated more knowledge than during the last 100 years. We are celebrating the apotheosis of reason, but in the midst of such a splendid celebration we suddenly have the feeling that something is missing.
Yes, we can achieve knowledge about almost anything we want. We can, for instance, guided by our beloved scientific method, study everything there is, from theological, anthropological, sociological, psychological and even biochemical perspectives, about a human phenomenon called love. The result will be that we will know everything that can be known about love. But once we achieve that complete knowledge, we will sooner or later discover that we will never understand love unless we fall in love. We will realise that knowledge is not the road that leads to understanding, because the port of understanding is on another shore, and requires a different navigation. We will then be aware that we can only attempt to understand that of which we become a part. That understanding is the result of integration, while knowledge has been the result of detachment. That understanding is holistic, while knowledge is fragmented.
At least we have reached a point in which (many conventional academics notwithstanding) those of us who, in Goethe’s perspective, are concerned with the relation between science and spirituality are finally becoming aware that knowledge is not enough, and that we have to learn how to attain understanding in order to achieve the completeness of our being and the completeness of our science.
We are, perhaps, beginning to realise that knowledge without understanding is hollow, and that understanding without knowledge is incomplete. We therefore need to undertake, at last, the navigation we have so far postponed. But in order to do so we must face the great challenge of a language shift.
Ortega, the Spanish philosopher already mentioned, used to say that “every generation has its theme.” We might add that every generation or historical period is dominated by or falls under the spell of a particular form of language. That is the way it is, and there is nothing wrong with it, as long as the dominant language of a given period is coherent with the challenges of that period. The important thing to keep in mind is that language influences our perceptions and hence shapes our actions. Let us go through some examples.
During the first three centuries of the second millennium of Western civilisation, the dominant language was of a teleological nature, meaning that human actions had to be justified in terms of a calling that was superior and beyond the needs of everyday life. That made possible the construction of the great cathedrals and monasteries, where time was no issue. The construction would take six hundred years? So what? Nobody was in a hurry. After all, they were constructing for eternity, and eternity is not infinite time, but timelessness. Thank God that the language of ‘economic efficiency’ had not yet been invented. The importance lay in the deed and not in the time it might take. It was a case of coherence between language and historical challenge.
The language dominating the 19th century was basically that of the consolidation of the nation-state. The great speeches of political leaders such as Disraeli, Gladstone and Bismarck are examples. Without going into details, we might also say that the dominant language of the century was coherent with the historical challenge of the times.
It was only in the 20th century that the dominant language became that of economics, especially during the second half. A quick overview shows some interesting perspectives. The late twenties and early thirties, the time of the so-called Great Depression, coincided with the emergence of Keynesian economics. The Keynesian language was in many ways the result of a crisis, having the capacity of interpreting the crisis as well as overcoming it. It is, again, a language (or rather sub-language) coherent with its historical period.
The next sub-language shift occurred during the fifties and sixties with the emergence of so-called developmental language. This was an optimistic, utopian and happy language. Economists writing in those days were mainly dominated by the feeling that, at last, we had discovered how to promote true development and overcome world poverty. However, what should be pointed out is that although the hoped-for goals were not fully achieved, many things during those decades changed in a positive manner. This was a language at least partially coherent with its historical challenges.
And then came the last three decades of the 20th century, with the emergence of the neo-liberal discourse: a language that is still dominating over a period in which global poverty has increased dramatically, debt burden has crippled many national economies and generated brutal over-exploitation of both people and natural resources, destruction of ecosystems and biodiversity have reached levels unknown in human history, and accumulation of financial wealth in ever fewer hands has reached obscene proportions. The disastrous effects of this language, absolutely incoherent with its historical challenges, can be clearly seen by anyone, although decision-makers and holders of power prefer to look in the opposite direction.
WE HAVE a tendency to perceive ourselves as members of a successful culture. However, the truth is that no matter how far we extend the concept of success, we are still incomplete beings, materially overdeveloped and spiritually poor. And it is most probably that incompleteness, that poverty, which is responsible for the uneasiness and anxieties that permeate our existence in the world today.
Perhaps the moment has arrived in which to rest and reflect. We have the opportunity now to analyse with true honesty the map of our navigation, with all its hazards and successes, and with all its tragedies and glories. And then it might be wise to unearth the alternative map of the route we did not navigated, and see whether we can find in it orientations that can rescue us from our existential confusion.
As a consequence of the unearthing of the forgotten map, perhaps it would make sense for us to start seeing brothers and sisters surrounding us. Perhaps it would be good to believe in the possibility of harmony between many possible truths. Perhaps it might be to our advantage to dare to imagine and believe that the Earth has a soul and that everything is life. Perhaps it would be good to realise that there is no reason whatsoever to banish intuition, spirituality and consciousness from the realm of science. Or, to put it in Goethe’s words, “If [we] would seek comfort in the whole, [we] must learn to discover the whole in the smallest part,” because “nothing is more consonant with Nature than that she puts into operation in the smallest detail that which she intends as a whole.”
Our passionate pursuit of knowledge has postponed our navigation towards understanding. There should be nothing to impede the undertaking of such a navigation now, were it not for an economics which, as practised under the spell of the neo-liberal discourse, increasingly distorts reality, thus contributing to our confusion and to the falsification of knowledge itself.
No sustainability (which obviously requires understanding) will or can be achieved without a profound language shift. We need a new language that opens the door of understanding: not a language of power and domination, but a language that may emerge from the depth of our self-discovery as an inseparable part of a whole that is the cradle of the miracle of life. If we manage to provoke such a shift, we may still experience the satisfaction of having brought about a new century worth living in. •
Manfred Max-Neef is an economist who received the 1983 Right Livelihood Award in recognition of his work for development alternatives in Latin America. He is co-author, with Paul Ekins, of Real-Life Economics: Understanding Wealth Creation, published by Routledge in 1992.
This article first appeared in the March/April 2008 issue of Resurgence magazine and is reproduced here with permission from the Resurgence team. For more information please visit www.resurgence.org.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)