Category: philosophy

Indian Philosophy and Independent thought

Today we mark the 75th anniversary of Indian independence from the British colonial rule. For a country of our population and size, it is indeed a great achievement that we have sustained to be a democratic nation. We continue to be a work in progress and there is a lot to learn and look forward to.

India today is awash in the tri-colour flag, which marks a symbol of our identity.

This symbol has a deeper philosophical meaning, and it has been wonderfully described by one of the great Indian philosopher Sarvepalli Radhakrishnan (also first vice-president of India, and subsequently President of India) as follows :

“Bhagwa or the saffron colour denotes renunciation of disinterestedness. Our leaders must be indifferent to material gains and dedicate themselves to their work. The white in the centre is light, the path of truth to guide our conduct. The green shows our relation to soil, our relation to the plant life here on which all other life depends. The Ashoka Wheel in the center of the white is the wheel of the law of dharma. Truth or satya, dharma or virtue ought to be the controlling principles of those who work under this flag. Again, the wheel denotes motion. There is death in stagnation. There is life in movement. India should no more resist change, it must move and go forward. The wheel represents the dynamism of a peaceful change.”

Dr. S. Radhakrishnan, Constituent Assembly of Independent India

The metaphor of wheel to go forward is noteworthy. It essentially states that we as a society should be forward-looking and evolve our thoughts as we make progress. Such a call for evolution of thought and progress is not alien to our civilization.

Lest we forget – Indian philosophy is not just a spiritual literature, it has immense depth and discussion on rationality and logic, and places emphasis on debates and arguments. So much so, that even our great, ancients poets such as Kalidasa uphold this rational spirit in their writings. To quote from his famous Malavikaagnimitram :

पुराणमित्येव न साधु सर्वंन चाऽपि काव्यं नवमित्यवद्यम्।

सन्तः परीक्ष्यान्यतरत् भजन्तेमूढ्ः परप्रत्ययनेयबुद्धिः ॥

-मालविकाग्निमित्रम् (महाकवि कालिदास)

The translation (source) from Sanskrit means :

All poems are not good only because they are old. All poems are not bad because they are new. Good and wise people examine both and decide whether a poem is good or bad. Only a fool will be blindly led by what others say.

-Malavikaagnimitram (Great Poet Kaalidaas)

My hope is that we as a society get inspired by these calls for rationality, and adapt empathy, humility, logical and scientific thinking as some of the core principles our lives. This is not only for a better India, but also for a better world.

After all, as one of ancient Indian philosophical text (Maha Upanishad, 6.71–75) says :

अयं निजः परो वेति गणना लघुचेतसाम्!!

उदारचरितानां तु वसुधैव कुटुम्बकम् !!

which is transliterated as :

This is mine, that is his, say the small minded,

The wise believe that the entire world is a family.

Dear Indian people….Happy 75th Independence Day !

Scientific Philosophy and Mental Health

Many a times, we are oblivious to the impact that Science has on an individual mind. It gets drowned in the collective impact. Curiosity is probably the most natural feeling of humans. If done right, Science cultivates and elevates this feeling. It may positively impact mental well-being too.

Increasingly, in Indian academia, mental well-being of all the stakeholders (students, faculty, admin etc.,) has emerged as an urgent and important issue that needs attention. Especially in a country such as India, where a loose order emerges out of chaos in almost all aspects of life, it is important to stay connected with oneself. Scientific curiosity may cater to this vital need.

The connection with oneself via science, or broadly speaking with any form of curiosity (arts/sports), is something we must harness. A major part of human development is to connect with oneself AND with the society. In this age of social media, sometimes, we may forget the former and focus only on the later. We will have to remind ourselves that being curious about anything is not being ‘childish’ but being human. Scientific curiosity and questioning is fundamental to our living, and this affects everything we do in our life.

To conclude let me quote from Bertrand Russell’s The Value of Philosophy :

“Philosophy is to be studied, not for the sake of any definite answers to its questions, since no definite answers can, as a rule, be known to be true, but rather for the sake of the questions themselves; because these questions enlarge our conception of what is possible, enrich our intellectual imagination, and diminish the dogmatic assurance which closes the mind against speculation; but above all because, through the greatness of the universe which philosophy contemplates, the mind also is rendered great, and becomes capable of that union with the universe which constitutes its highest good.”

Science as in philosophy, does cater to the highest good of humanity. What we under-appreciate is that it goes beyond the call, and impacts an individual’s mind. Academia should be a place to foster such an impact at various levels: individual, local and global. Perhaps that is the meaning of an “University”.

Connection between science and empathy

Apart from ideas, and the utilitarian, materialistic benefits,what can science offer to the society? This is a question I repeatedly ask myself in understanding a related question: ‘why I do what I do?’. This question, in my opinion, is also at the heart of social relevance of the pursuit of science.

A vital aspect which scientific research can indirectly teach and train its practitioners and its beneficiaries is the ability to empathize.

Empathy towards a fellow living creature, and not just human beings, requires oneself to suspend ones ego and understand something from a different perspective. This act needs patience, and the result is almost always enriching.

A quote (mis?)attributed to Plato puts it succinctly:

“The highest form of knowledge is empathy, for it requires us to suspend our egos and live in another’s world. It requires profound purpose larger than the self.”

One of the interesting aspects of scientific research is to study an idea or an object of interest from various different viewpoints. This ability to look at a particular thing from various conceptual angles enriches the understanding, and concomitantly clarifies the purpose.

Many a times one would be able to obtain an unexpected insight by looking at something from a different viewpoint.

The pursuit and the spirit of scientific enquiry essentially requires the same attributes as empathy, and hence the connection.

It is astonishing fact that we are witnessing a war among human beings in this day and age. Human beings are the most dominant creatures of our planet. This domination has already caused a severe problem in the form of climate change, and has drastically affected our own well being. War is the last thing you want at any circumstance.

If we have to overcome these problems,  we cannot ignore science or empathy. In an essense, ignoring them is like reversing the benefits of human intellectual evolution.

We humans can do far better than this…

64. Susskind’s view on philosophical Feynman

Since my student days, I have been studying various things Richard Feynman wrote. His 3 volumes of lectures in physics have been one of the ‘go-to sources’ on basic physics. I have also enjoyed reading his lectures on advanced topics, including nanotechnology and computing. Apart from all this, I have also been impressed by Feynman’s viewpoint on science, society and human living.

In the passing, I have read that he did not like philosophers, but I always felt that Feynman’s thoughts were deeply philosophical without the frills of sophisticated language.

Recently, I came across a wonderful conversation with Leonard Susskind, a close friend of Feynman and an accomplished physicist himself. In this video (around 40.18 min), Susskind highlights that Feynman was deeply philosophical. He emphasizes that Feynman did not like the way philosophical discourse was conducted, especially in the context of the philosophy of science. This point kind of reinforced my impression of Feynman and was heartening.

I admire Feynman for making science interesting, but I am also very well aware that Feynman has been criticized for being sexist. Feynman was a scientific genius, but he had his flaws.

Anyway, the whole conversation with Susskind is educative. The best part is when he talks about why he likes teaching (around 1.06 hours in the video), which is worth watching.