Thursday, April 5, 2012

Heehs is a pseudo follower or perhaps not even a follower at all

Sri Aurobindo scholar may be asked to leave India: Tonight at 10 pm CNN-IBN's Deputy Editor Sagarika Ghose discusses with a panel of experts, are historians losing their Freedom of Expression?

Comment on "Calling Sri Aurobindo a terrorist": Dr Ryder. Posted to Savitri Era Open Forum at 11:03 AM, April 05, 2012
I am certainly a supporter of the freedom of speech. In this day and age to suppress or punish people who think or feel differently from you, is simply preposterous. That being said there is something more than meets the eye that is going on here. There is an inmate who presents the "human" and perhaps even frail side of Aurobindo whose follower he claims to be. Well, not a whole lot of common sense is needed to see that there is something not right here.
He is not a typical follower to say the least. Then the Ashram itself publishes his book. That is queer too and even a greater surprise. One has to take leave of common sense to not see that there is mischief at play here on the part of the author and that he is a pseudo follower or perhaps not even a follower at all. For those unfortunate ones who support the author and for whom therefore common sense has evidently been on leave of absence there is one way to invite it back.
Consider this, especially those who occupy important positions in an institution: Imagine for a moment someone wishes to comment on your founder's personality including both good and his/her "human" side. Would you enthusiastically approve the same? Now imagine further that one of your peers or inmates wishes to do the same. Would you encourage him or support that imbecility? If so, then certainly you or the peer need to be condemned or punished. Both need to be sent to a mental asylum. If there is no place for hopeless cases like yours then my practice is in NY. Dr Ryder. 

When reading the newspaper or surfing the net for  the “latest” news one most often lands on crazy horrible gut wrenching stories from around the world as well as stories taking place closer to home. This over intrusive abundance of information flooding our brains every day has an extremely negative affect. It also impacts how we as humans deal with daily life; above all how we interact with each other.
This deluge of negative news contradicts the advice we were given as kids, i.e.. to be honest, truthful and not hurt anyone?? Also to be kind and loving to everyone. ? -  Maybe this is only stories parents tell their children so that they believe that the world is a good place. With all these Grotesque stories that are all over the media one finds it hard to deal with everyday life. One tends to suspect people’s motives more, one tends to loose trust in the human spirit. One starts to see only the decay and depression that is gripping society. Where is that universal love and tolerance?  That love for all living things? What has happened in the last 20 years is a total new uncharted road of information that people are so happy to lap up.

I work with this particular Control Tower at LaGuardia NY this article is a must read for anyone who would like to know how the air traffic control systems works in America in its semi-dysfunctional state...r: … Every flight has people watching over it, guardian-angel style, every step of the way… Nearly 30,000 commercial flights thus zoom across America’s skies each day and never bash into each other. The “modern” air-traffic-control system, and the FAA itself, was created in the aftermath of one of the most dramatic commercial midair bashes, way back in 1956.

a sign of second-rate philosophy from Object-Oriented Philosophy by doctorzamalek (Graham Harman)
I’m just saying, it seems a bit absurd to use the question of someone’s belief or disbelief in God as one of the chef pillars of your judgment about that person’s intellectual caliber. To some extent, the parochialism of presumed atheism among Western intellectuals (i.e., everyone enters every conversation simply assuming that they can dump on religion from the first minute and everyone else will automatically agree with them) really bothers me…
Meillassoux makes an argument for the divine inexistence, after all, and that argument hinges on: (1) the non-existence for Meillassoux of probability at the level of the laws of nature as a whole, and (2) the view that the sudden appearance of God and justice would be no more astonishing than the previous contingent appearance of matter, then life, then thought…
It’s intellectually very important to be able to admire and utilize authors whose world-views are nothing like your own. Rejecting all theists as idiots on an a priori basis is not a promising sign of intellectual health. If that’s what you’re doing, then you need to get out a bit more and see more of the world. There really are some smart people out there who believe in God, and some of them might be able to crush you in an argument from time to time. On a related topic, have you ever noticed that the people who insist most that arguments are all that count are generally the first to resort to argument-free, hyper-emotional dismissals whenever the chips are down?
Harman on Garcia from Larval Subjects Harman has a terrific review of Garcia’s Forme et object here.

Is there something about religion that gives freedom of religion either a privileged or a peculiarly worrisome character different in kind from artistic, political, or sexual freedom? And to this list, why not add occupational, associational, or, say, economic freedoms? As the introductory remarks to this set of posts suggest, one thing that institutions of religious freedom commonly presuppose is a deep connection between religion (or at least some kinds of religion) and violence, such that religion requires specific kinds of juridical intervention or state neutrality…
Can religious freedom be understood as itself helping constitute an ethical lifeworld without posing it either as liberation from the moralities produced in religions or as protecting religions from secular threats to the moralities considered peculiar to them? And can it also be understood in such a way as to recognize those people whose ethical sensibilities are not grounded in religion? …
Although it may be misleading to base the legal protection or control of religion on the notion that religion taps into deep and potentially dangerous emotional sources, it may be right to recognize religion as one (if only one) organizing category for efforts to grapple with the limits of instrumental rationality as a full account of what people are up to.
The fiercest love of all from The Immanent Frame by Martin Kavka - Reading the entries posted at Frequencies, an online project that alleges to be “a collaborative genealogy of spirituality,” brings out the bitchy side of my temperament.

Today, it is vital that important “opinion makers” – especially those who call themselves “market liberals” – take up the ideological issue. Swaminathan Aiyar is just “playing politics.” 

Sri Aurobindo. One of the important faculties of human consciousness which was very much neglected in modem education and culture is the aesthetic sense ...

No comments:

Post a Comment