Dear Damodar , I understand the main point of discussion in your first mail so I do not want to deviate from from the original topic of discussion . But I have some points with respect to the below mail which I want to quote here . I do not have much idea about the technical details of the Chandrayan launch because I was not interested in this project as this project has not many things to do from the viewpoint of improving the life in this planet . As per my understanding , a man of practical reason has no interest in alien objects . as you have mentioned , there is nothing innovative about this project but the success of Indian private sector and the government bodies . Earlier the technology was not accessible to us but now we have developed that indigenously. And as you know most of our space projects are like that only . But my point was that still it remains an achievement of science only . But science also has had dramatic failures .As you know the space shuttle Columbia ( kalpana chawla was part of it ) failed because of this uncertainty in science . There is some risk associated with scientific pursuits also . this risk can be categorized as Real risks , ignorance or uncertainties. Leaving the earth orbit and entering into it is one of these scenarios where the Columbia also failed . So people of true scientific spirit understand this uncertainty and believe in it . So I think this is the point where G Madhavan Nair’s confidence became low . And talking about belief , The real reasons of our belief are concealed from ourselves as well as from others . As we grow up , we simply adopt the ideas presented to us in regard to such matters as religion , family relations , including our state . We unconciously absorb them from our environment . They are persistently whispered in our ears by the group we happen to live . So we develop a kind of "primary certitude " with respect to this belief systems . this is the enemy of rational and scientifc thinking. The fact that an idea is ancient and that it has been widely received is no argument in its favour . in general , those ideas which are still almost universally accepted in regard to man's nature , his proper conduct , and his relations to God are far more ancient and far more critical than those which have to do with the movement of stars , the stratification of rocks and the life of plants and animals . I think still we posses a primitive mind .This is one of the reason why I think claiming a status of knowledge and going to places of worship are not different things for me . I agree with you on that there must be a congnitive explanation for many things . But is it time that we need to distinguish between intellect and emotions as separate entities ? I want this discussion to continue on the two points suggested by you in the previous mails. 1." incommensurability" of belief in God and being rational in everyday business of life 2. Going to place of worship and claiming a status for knowledge, for me, are two different things Sreenivas
--- On Wed, 4/2/09, damodar prasad <[email protected]> wrote: From: damodar prasad <[email protected]> Subject: [GreenYouth] Re: Oh my GOD To: [email protected] Date: Wednesday, 4 February, 2009, 11:03 AM Hello sreenivas, Well, speaking of rocket science and technology, I think you are a better expert. Of course, we need not split out hair over he obvious fact that rocket science is also science per se. But what I understand from the reports is that the launch of Chandrayaan is posed as achievement of Indian science establishment. Since I don't know much abt this science, may I ask you: 1. What is so ground-breaking invention in Chandrayaan launch? 2. What incremental innovation except the cost-effectiveness has the chadrayaan lauch added to science, let alone the issue of new discovery? 3. How has Chandrayaan added new values to the body of knowledge called Science? On astrology and science , this is an oft repeated analogy to prove the "rationality" of scientifc knowledge? My argument was on the "incommensurability" of belief in God and being rational in everyday business of life. My posting was not on scientific knowledge. Hope you know the significance of the term, "incommensurable" since you have used "falsifiability". On the questions of science and pseudo-science, I request you to start another thread bcoz for me the issue is very different what we were/are discussing. And pls. bear in mind that falsibiality is corrolarly of inductive method. So we may have to see our arguments in the light of scientific method or methods? But I will leave with a question for you may to start a thread or think: 1. Is falsifiable - falsifiable ;-) ? 2. Has g.madhavan nair, in any occassion preached/ put on record that astrology is superior knowledge compared to space science? I have not seen. Pls. report. Then the issue needs a different look. (Going to place of worship and claiming a status for knowledge, for me, are two different things) and on your last question, I was talking abt my limitation?Very critical limitation!! pls.bear with my limitations. finally, for fun, let me add a few things on what I felt since yrday evening: There must be a cognitive explanation for many things. It can overwhelm over cultural denotations of a problem/issue. Like for example, cognitive science must one day be able to explain why one is ardent believr of God, another an athiest? Why two are differently wired? What impulses gets activated when a believer feels about God? Like wise... However, cultural explanation do matter when we have to describe the "quality" of belief. One is believer of a ideology and another one of God etc etc... This came to me thinking of political brains. We need actually close-look at politcal brain and how they are wired. How they "time" things from other persons. Actually they are not so hghly "qualified" people, but somethings work. We need a lot exposure to cognitive appartus of political leaders. well.. don't ask me anything on human 'wiring"...I will never know about such GOD's handiwork!! d.Prasad. On Mon, Feb 2, 2009 at 7:40 PM, sreenivas v.p <[email protected]> wrote: "It is exactly not a victory of science since there is nothing innovative in the endeavor except the fact the space exploration has been made more cheaper": i did not understand what u mean by this . can u please clarify ? "It may also have happened that the scientist in the concerned project have decided the launch time according to Hindu astrology concerning rahukalam": This is exactly why they are being criticised . There is something called 'falsifiability " to refer to a charecteristic any theory must have if it is to be considered truly scientific .Basically , to be truly scientific , a theory must be falsifiable .That is to say that it must be so formulated that it must be possible to predict under what circumstances it could be proven false .Taking the case of astrology , it is obviously not possible to prove or disprove the influence of heavenly bodies on the fates of human beings . this is the reason why astrology is considered to be a pseudo -science . and including G Madavan nair , nobody can be a preacher of science and pseudo science simultaneously . So we average people expect some some sort of morality from them in this regard. "this unclarity is that God is not graspable at least in my words and terms. I don't about yours." ; Did you mean to say that god exists but it is incomprehensible to human mind .?when i say god is incomprehensible , it is incomprehensible to others , but not my mind . sreenivas --- On Mon, 2/2/09, damodar prasad <[email protected]> wrote: From: damodar prasad <[email protected]> Subject: [GreenYouth] Oh my GOD To: "Greenyouth" <[email protected]> Date: Monday, 2 February, 2009, 6:56 PM I put my comments in this thread only bcoz I find the discussion on God somewhat uneasy in a thread on 3 establishments as I have mentioned before. Nonetheless, my response is shaped by that discussion. After the successful launch of Chadrayaan, a scientific victory of Nation-State and Scientific establishment. ( It is exactly not a victory of science since there is nothing innovative in the endeavor except the fact the space exploration has been made more cheaper), G.Madhavan Nair, the ISRO Chief, went to Guruvayur for offering a Tulabaram ( don't know whether there is an English word for it). Those scientific temper enthusiasts would have frowned at it as they saw the picture of G.Madhavan Nair "weighing" himself to God. It may also have happened that the scientist in the concerned project have decided the launch time according to Hindu astrology concerning rahukalam etc. Anyway that is classified information, which we may not have access to. While working on the project they must have appealed to the GOD for the success of launch. However, the science- the actual process, the rational calculations, technological design- behind the whole enterprise was not based on a theological text or a scripture. God actually did not have a role in the process. They very well-know these two are incommensurable logics. But these does not annihilate each other as the distance between both are never closed. But there are others who would like to "reconcile each other". Here the God is absent but it is material tradition that is called forth. The problem with this new enthusiasts of India's scientific tradition and hardened traditionalist like the Gopalakrishnan type people are that they want to depict the scientific endeavors in terms of tradition. And in turn the static tradition is legitimized in terms of science. The vedic mathematics are all part of this grand scheme, as I understand. ( Goapalakrishnan's "Valluvadan" Malayalam oration is also specifically designed to communicate the purity of Hindu scientific tradition) Its a political act. when an average ( in the sense of "sadarana") human goes to places of worship, no one actually cares. This is bcoz we do not endow the average with 'scientific" intelligence. It is when Madhavan Nair or P.Govinda Pillai goes to places of worship, we have a problem. For that matter, the media concerns itself with religion in public life when Abdulla Kutty stress the significance of religion or when the church authorities say that late Mathai Cahcko has baptized his son at church. Here there is a moral expectation of how the public personalities should behave. The society imposes certain moral codes on them. And some times, interestingly. the same public persons are criticized for their firmness of commitment to the ideology they profess. Why should we impose such moral codes on public persons as long it does not hamper civil life? This is perhaps bcoz the so-called public always doubted about science and rationalism or bcoz publci persons are considered as automatons to behave one-dimensionally. The media deny them alternatives for explorations, possibilities of new inquiries. We can also see that media tends to highlights that some hardcore Hindutvadi is an atheist or inon- spiritual etc. I have seen reports communicating that in Advani's home there are no photos of any gods. Again, the religious politics little concerns itself with spiritual or the GOD. As a believer I have failed to "understand" what God is. And that's bcoz the very notions of "understanding" is premised on different theories of ontology. God fails me in that. Its better to unthink GOD. I don't know whether am making clear. One reason, apart from others, for this unclarity is that God is not graspable at least in my words and terms. I don't about yours. Oh!My god. what a blashpemy!! Add more friends to your messenger and enjoy! Invite them now. Download prohibited? No problem. CHAT from any browser, without download. Go to http://in.webmessenger.yahoo.com/ --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Green Youth Movement" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/greenyouth?hl=en-GB -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
