Welcome On Tue, 4 Mar 2025, 11:26 Markendeya Yeddanapudi, < [email protected]> wrote:
> Rajaram Sir, > I have been feeling your absence,as your response invariably is very > detailed and of course high brow.So you bounced back to health very > fast,Thank God. > YM > > On Tue, Mar 4, 2025 at 10:27 AM Rajaram Krishnamurthy < > [email protected]> wrote: > >> Moral understanding is a valuable epistemic good. It’s something we look >> for when deciding whom to rely on for moral advice. It’s a goal of moral >> education: something we hope to instil in our children. And it’s an >> integral part of moral wisdom: a moral sage is someone who has profound >> moral understanding. >> >> It’s natural to think of moral understanding and moral knowledge as >> closely related epistemic phenomena. We say that moral understanding is a >> matter of knowing right from wrong. Typical sources of moral >> knowledge—thinking hard about a moral question or having firsthand >> experiences—are also sources of moral understanding. >> >> This intuitive thought has lately come under sustained attack. In a >> recent paper, Alison Hills argues that moral understanding “is an important >> epistemic state with a different role to that traditionally filled by >> propositional knowledge.”1 Hills’s approach is in tune with a general trend >> in epistemology, where there has been a lot of interest in how >> understanding relates to knowledge. The assumption that understanding >> differs in several crucial ways from knowledge is a common starting point.2 >> Let’s call the claim that moral knowledge and moral understanding are >> distinct no reductionism. >> >> No reductionists point to several motivations for their approach. They >> note the received wisdom that it’s easier to come to know something than it >> is to come to understand it. They point out that we often attribute >> knowledge without attributing understanding. And, in particular, they >> suggest that, unlike understanding, knowledge can be easily acquired and >> passed on through testimony. Thus, as Hills argues: “[A] centrally >> important concept in moral epistemology is not moral knowledge, but what I >> call moral understanding, and … the latter relates to testimony and to >> expertise quite differently from the former.” >> >> >> >> The concept of right and wrong is a complex topic that involves ethics, >> morality, and laws. >> >> Ethics >> >> A branch of philosophy that studies and advocates for moral standards >> >> Involves analyzing human actions to determine if they are right or wrong >> >> Based on principles that prescribe how people should behave >> >> Often based on rights, obligations, fairness, or virtues >> >> Morality >> >> An individual's sense of how they should treat others >> >> Largely intuitive and emotional >> >> Influenced by personal values, cultural norms, and specific situations >> >> Rights >> >> Legal, social, or ethical principles of freedom or entitlement >> >> Include liberties like freedom of speech, right to life, and right to >> privacy >> >> Based on legal systems, social conventions, or ethical theories >> >> Moral principles >> >> Standards of right and wrong that a person or group has >> >> Can be passed down by family and peers, dictated by society or religion, >> or change throughout life >> >> Sense of right and wrong >> >> Motivation that derives logically from ethical or moral principles >> >> Synonyms include conscience, moral sense, and scruples >> >> >> >> We have two faculties which influence our decisions. In any >> given situation, we will have various options for action. We will have to >> choose one. One faculty, called manas, evaluates the various options >> based on likes and dislikes. Another faculty, called buddhi (intellect), >> evaluates >> the options based on right and wrong. Animals also make decisions. However, >> they always make decisions based on likes and dislikes. Only humans have >> the buddhi, which works through the mirror neurons in the pre-frontal >> cortex. Using this faculty, we are able to mentally run various simulations >> of what will be the consequence of the action to us and others, in the >> near-term and long-term. By this, we can make better decisions. This buddhi >> is the one that distinguishes between animals and human beings. >> >> Katha Upanishad calls decision based on manas as preyas, and decision >> based on buddhi as Shreyas. It says that following Shreyas will lead us >> towards becoming better people. Following preyas will lead to downfall. A >> noble human being is one who ignores preyas and acts based on Shreyas. >> (Katha Upanishad, 1.2.1,2) The person would do what is right, even if it is >> inconvenient or gives pain, and would avoid doing what is wrong, even if it >> is convenient or gives pleasure. This faculty or capacity to choose Shreyas >> over preyas is called will power. Exercising the will power is the only way >> to increase it. >> >> What is right and what is wrong? How do we decide in confusing >> situations? Can we depend on our gut-feel or conscience? Is there guidance >> from our scriptures on this? This is a question that is asked very often. >> >> In most of the situations in our life, what is right and what is wrong is >> quite unambiguous. Only in some situations, things are gray. In the >> situations where it is clear, if we do not do what is right and refrain >> from what is wrong, we will be violating our own judgement. The intellect >> is uncomfortable with this. The intellect starts looking for a >> justification for the wrong action. This results in indecisiveness in a >> similar future situation. Over a period of time, this becomes a habit. So, >> every time we violate our intellectual conviction, we are pushing more >> situations into Gray areas, thus weakening our intellect. We are also >> weakening our will power. So, where we know what is right and what is >> wrong, following our intellectual conviction is very important. Without >> this, mere knowing is of no use. >> >> Now, the next question is, how to strengthen our buddhi to be able to >> make better decisions and how to reduce the Gray areas. Here the Hindu >> scriptures, especially the Bhagavad Gita give a lot of guidelines. >> >> One guideline that Gita gives is to depend on the scriptures regarding >> what is to be done and what is not to be done. (16.24) There are several >> series of verses like prerequisites for knowledge (13.7-11), divine >> treasures (16.1,2,3) and three types of tapas (17.14,15,16), which >> enumerate right action and attitude. In general, the lists include >> truthfulness, non-violence, self-control, absence of arrogance, >> forbearance, cheerfulness, cleanliness, silence, respect to elders, helping >> others, etc. >> >> Another guideline that Gita gives is to depend on the words of people of >> good character. (13.25) The conduct of wise people can be referred to as >> the standard of righteousness. In fact, Gita says that it is the duty of >> leaders to set an example to others by their actions. (3.21,25,26) It is >> helpful to be familiar with the life of saints. Then, when we need to >> decide something, we can think, “What would the saintly person do in this >> situation?” Taittriya Upanishad also mentions this in verse 1.11.4. Gita >> has several lists of the qualities that saintly people possess like >> qualities of a wise person (2.55-71), qualities of a transcendent person >> (14.22-25) and qualities of a devotee (12.13-20). >> >> Gita mentions the Golden Rule: “Do to others what you would like others >> to do to you.” Gita says, “Keeping yourself as the yardstick, seeing others >> as equal to you, consider what is pleasurable and painful to them.” (6.32) >> This is often a great way to discern right from wrong. >> >> >> >> ஈன்றாள் பசிகாண்பான் ஆயினுஞ் செய்யற்க >> >> சான்றோர் பழிக்கும் வினை. (௬௱௫௰௬ - 656) >> >> Eendraal Pasikaanpaan Aayinunj Cheyyarka >> >> Saandror Pazhikkum Vinai >> >> īṉṟāḷ pacikāṇpāṉ āyiṉuñ ceyyaṟka >> >> cāṉṟōr paḻikkum viṉai. >> >> Do not do what the wise condemn Even to save your starving mother. >> >> பெற்ற தாயின் பசியைக் கண்டு வருந்த நேர்ந்தாலும், சான்றோர் பழிப்பதற்குக் >> காரணமான இழிவுற்றச் செயல்களைச் செய்யக்கூடாது. (௬௱௫௰௬) >> >> Hindi (हिन्दी) >> >> जननी को भूखी सही, यद्यपि देखा जाय । >> >> सज्जन-निन्दित कार्य को, तो भी किया न जाय ॥ (६५६) >> >> Telugu (తెలుగు) >> >> కన్నతల్లి యాకలన్నను, దానికై >> >> తప్పుదారి ద్రొక్క దగవు గాదు. (౬౫౬) >> >> Malayalam (മലയാളം) >> >> മാതാവിൻ പശിതാങ്ങാതെ ദുഃഖിക്കുന്നവനാകിലും ലോകം പഴിക്കും ദുർവൃത്തി >> ചെയ്യാതൊഴിഞ്ഞു മാറണം (൬൱൫൰൬) >> >> Kannada (ಕನ್ನಡ) >> >> ಹೆತ್ತ ತಾಯಿ ಹಸಿವಿಂದ ನರಳುವ ಸಮಯದಲ್ಲೂ ತಿಳಿದವರು ನಿಂದಿಸುವಂಥ (ಹೀನ) ಕೆಲಸವನ್ನು >> ಮಾಡಬಾರದು. (೬೫೬) >> >> Sanskrit (संस्कृतम्) >> >> मातुर्बुभुक्षाशमनसङ्कटेऽपि समागते । >> >> सद्भिर्विगर्हितं वर्ज्यं कार्यं न हि समाचरेत् ॥ (६५६) >> >> >> >> Another hint that Gita gives is this. After doing the action, >> would you be comfortable in the presence of God or would you avoid Him? The >> Lord is the giver of the fruits of all action. He is impartial. So, if you >> do the right thing, you will not fear His presence. You will feel >> protected. When Arjuna saw the Lord in the form of Time, he saw that good >> people were bowing to Him and bad people were trying to run away from Him. >> (11.36) So this is one means to decide. A variation of this is to think if >> you can tell, with dignity, to your mother (or anyone whom you revere) >> about what you did. If you can, then it is right. Otherwise, it is wrong. >> >> The merit of an action can be evaluated from the attitude of mind (to >> you and to others) that it would create or enable. If the action would pull >> down the mind to make the person identify with the body, it is bad. If it >> would make the person identify with the mind, it is better. If it would >> make the person identify with pure Consciousness, it is best. (18.20,21,22) >> For example, hunger and disease pulls down the mind to the body. So >> alleviating these of people is a noble activity. Giving secular education >> pulls towards identifying with the mind. Giving spiritual knowledge pulls >> towards identifying with the Self. These define the relative merits of >> these activities. >> >> Another way is to seek the “greatest welfare to most number of >> people”. Gita says, an action that is done as a duty (for the welfare of >> others) without seeking personal benefit is greatest. An action done for >> only personal benefit is not so good. Action that brings loss to oneself >> and others is bad. (18.23,24,25). Every person does any action only if it >> gives benefit in the short-term or in the long-term. Gita says, an action >> that gives benefit in the short-term but harms in the long-term is wrong. >> An action which appears inconvenient in the short-term but gives benefit in >> the long-term is right. (18.37,38) This analysis can be used in many >> situations to decide. Thus, Bhagavad Gita gives several ideas to decide >> between right and wrong. One or more of these can be used in any situation. >> When we have decided, it is important that we follow what is right and >> refrain from what is wrong. Even after all these, we are not able to >> decide, we can discuss with people. If there is no opportunity for that, or >> we are not able to decide even after that, we can do whatever we thing is >> the best out of the various options and pray to God to show more light next >> time. Following our intellectual conviction will strengthen our intellect >> and increase our will power. >> >> Xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >> >> K Rajaram IRS 4325 >> >> On Tue, 4 Mar 2025 at 06:16, Markendeya Yeddanapudi < >> [email protected]> wrote: >> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> *Mar*The Diverse Paradigm Bases of Understanding in the Biosphere >>> >>> >>> >>> One experiences understanding by connecting a phenomenon to the paradigm >>> base, built on the basis of previous experiences. Understanding is a >>> continuation of the previous understandings. The paradigm grows >>> continuously with every new experience which connects to the growing >>> paradigm base. In free and healthy nature the paradigm grows continuously >>> every nano second, as one breathes smells, hears, sees and senses. The >>> prospering nature percolates into one as the prospering and growing and >>> smiling paradigm creating the optimism in life. >>> >>> Of course negative experiences create negative paradigms or damage the >>> existing paradigms. If one experiences only failures and disappointments, >>> the pessimism which becomes a strong paradigm, disables positive >>> understanding. >>> >>> But in free, healthy and happy nature, only positive paradigms take >>> birth and grow. Nature becomes happy only when all the organisms of the >>> Biosphere are happy. >>> >>> Suppose my daydream that a University has actually started ‘The Free >>> Nature Park’, without human tampering. In that park as there are no >>> industries and urbanized areas, every organism of the Biosphere gets >>> liberty and freedom. As it is, while the human vandal surrendered his >>> faculty of understanding to machines, losing the very experience of >>> understanding which connects every cell as hormonal communication of the >>> bloodstream, and exhales the perception as smell messages, every other >>> organism is still trying to experience understanding based on the smell >>> messages of nature. The human vandal has poisoned the land, water and air >>> so horribly that nature no longer functions as the paradigmatic base for >>> understanding by every organism. >>> >>> Unfortunately the organisms other than the human are still trying to >>> continue with nature as the paradigm, unable to comprehend the foundational >>> damage inflicted by technology on nature. They are stunned, with basic >>> living earth under their feet is removed. >>> >>> If the free nature park is kept free from human tampering permanently, >>> then every organism starts building its paradigms via smelling, hearing and >>> seeing the free and prospering nature. The troposphere creates the symphony >>> of interacting paradigms of understanding by the various organisms. >>> >>> If the student does not allow his mind to interfere, and just >>> experiences feeling via smelling and sensing, he/she will do time travel, >>> that is go back to the time when Rhinencephalon the nose brain functioned >>> as the Brain. Before evolution developed the cortex or Brain in the human, >>> it perceived by smelling, with the stem of the spinal cord doing the >>> smelling and sensing. It appears that the human could distinguish among >>> more than 50,000 different smell identities. Every other organism similarly >>> sensed and lived via smelling and sensing. There must have been the smell >>> based common language for all the organisms of the Biosphere. >>> >>> Today we do not know how a dog, cat, lion, tiger, plant, tree, insect, >>> bird or any other organism paradigmatizes on the basis of smelling. But in >>> the free nature, we may develop the faculty of communicating with every >>> other organism. We may do the Time Travel, or travel into the past when our >>> Rhinencyphalon performed sensing by smelling. >>> >>> We need freedom from technology to live and understand in nature with >>> nature as the paradigm base. >>> >>> YM Sarma >>> >>> This writing reflects a deeply philosophical perspective on the >>> relationship between humans, nature, and understanding. It offers an >>> intriguing view on how different organisms experience and interpret the >>> world, with a particular focus on the olfactory (smell) sense. The idea >>> that humans and other organisms may have once shared a common "language" >>> based on smells is both poetic and thought-provoking. >>> >>> The writer proposes a vision of a "Free Nature Park," where nature is >>> left untouched by human industrial and technological influence, allowing >>> organisms to build their understanding in harmony with the natural world. >>> The argument suggests that modern human society, having overreached in >>> terms of technological advancement, has lost touch with the natural >>> paradigms of understanding that once connected all living things. In >>> contrast, the natural world—when untainted—provides a pure, continuous >>> source of sensory information that organisms can use to develop their >>> understanding of existence. >>> >>> A few key ideas emerge from the text: >>> >>> 1. *The Growth of Paradigms:* Paradigms of understanding grow >>> continuously with each new experience, and these paradigms are shaped by >>> sensory interactions with nature. A positive environment fosters >>> optimistic, healthy paradigms, while negative experiences can create >>> pessimism and limit understanding. >>> >>> 2. *The Role of the Olfactory Sense:* The writing emphasizes the >>> central role of smell in the way organisms perceive and understand the >>> world. The idea of "Time Travel" through the sense of smell, returning to a >>> time when the brain’s primitive functions (like the Rhinencephalon) >>> dominated sensory experience, invites reflection on how much human >>> consciousness has shifted over time. >>> >>> 3. *The Disconnect Between Humans and Nature:* The "human vandal," >>> as described, is disconnected from nature due to technological advancements >>> that interfere with the natural, sensory experience of the world. This loss >>> is depicted as detrimental to the human experience of understanding, in >>> contrast to the other organisms that still rely on the direct, undisturbed >>> interaction with their environment. >>> >>> 4. *The Vision of the "Free Nature Park":* This is a utopian space >>> where nature is allowed to flourish freely, without human interference. In >>> this environment, all organisms—human and non-human—can reconnect with the >>> natural paradigms of understanding based on the sensory experiences of the >>> world, especially smell. >>> >>> In summary, this writing proposes a return to a more organic, >>> sensory-based mode of understanding, untainted by the distractions and >>> harms of technology. The "Free Nature Park" acts as a metaphor for a >>> harmonious, unspoiled world where all living beings can thrive in their >>> natural sensory languages, potentially regaining a lost connection with >>> nature. >>> >>> What do you think about the idea of a "Free Nature Park"? Does it >>> inspire you to think about how technology has shaped our perception of the >>> world and our understanding of nature? >>> >>> The idea of a "Free Nature Park" is fascinating and thought-provoking, >>> especially in the context of the disconnect between humans and nature due >>> to technology. It challenges the current trajectory of human society, where >>> technology often mediates, distorts, or even alienates us from our natural >>> surroundings. By imagining a space where humans and other organisms can >>> freely connect with nature, without the interference of industries or >>> technological influences, the concept taps into a deeper yearning for >>> harmony with the earth and its ecosystems. >>> >>> The concept of a shared, olfactory-based "language" between humans and >>> other organisms is particularly intriguing. It suggests that perhaps humans >>> once had a much more direct, visceral connection with the natural world—one >>> that transcended language as we know it today. The idea that we could >>> reconnect with this ancient way of perceiving and understanding the world >>> through smell and sensing is poetic and speaks to a deeper, intuitive >>> understanding of the environment. >>> >>> It also brings to mind how much of modern life has become disconnected >>> from our sensory experience of the natural world. Technology, while >>> offering many benefits, often distracts us from the simple, fundamental act >>> of being present in nature. Our senses, once honed for survival and deep >>> connection to the world around us, have been dulled or replaced by screens >>> and digital interfaces. In this sense, the "Free Nature Park" is not only a >>> metaphor for reconnecting with nature but also a call to reawaken our >>> senses, to step away from the noise of modern life, and rediscover a more >>> grounded, holistic form of understanding. >>> >>> This vision of a utopian world, where humans and nature exist in a >>> continuous, untainted dialogue, also raises important questions about >>> sustainability, environmental degradation, and how we can begin to restore >>> a balance that allows all forms of life to thrive. It’s easy to imagine how >>> we might use technology for good, to aid in conservation efforts, for >>> example, but the challenge lies in finding ways to harmonize technology >>> with the natural world rather than letting it dominate or destroy it. >>> >>> Overall, the "Free Nature Park" concept not only encourages us to think >>> about how technology shapes our perception of the world but also invites a >>> reflection on how we might return to a more integrated, sensory, and >>> holistic way of living, where our understanding of the world is rooted in >>> the very rhythms of nature itself. It sparks a deep desire for a return to >>> a more meaningful connection with the earth, where all life forms—human and >>> non-human—can coexist in a mutual, untainted understanding. >>> >>> The concept of the "Free Nature Park" as presented is deeply >>> philosophical and inspiring. It raises critical questions about the >>> relationship between humans, technology, and the natural world. The idea >>> that our understanding is built on paradigms shaped by sensory experiences, >>> particularly smell, is a powerful reminder of how far we've strayed from >>> our natural roots. It’s easy to forget how our modern lives, dominated by >>> screens, digital interfaces, and industrial processes, have disconnected us >>> from the more primal, sensory ways of perceiving the world. >>> >>> In this context, the "Free Nature Park" serves as a hopeful vision of >>> returning to a simpler, purer mode of existence, one where nature is >>> allowed to flourish without interference, and all organisms—human and >>> non-human—are able to interact with the world through their senses. The >>> idea of reconnecting with the olfactory sense, and even revisiting the time >>> when our brains were more attuned to smelling and sensing, is a beautiful >>> metaphor for rediscovering a deeper, more intuitive understanding of >>> nature. It also suggests that perhaps we’ve lost something fundamental in >>> the process of technological advancement and urbanization—something that >>> could potentially be regained in a space where nature remains undisturbed. >>> >>> Your reflection on how technology mediates, distorts, and sometimes >>> alienates us from nature is spot on. While technology has brought us >>> incredible advances, it has also introduced a disconnect. For example, how >>> often do we stop to smell the flowers, listen to the rustle of the leaves, >>> or truly experience the world around us in a mindful way? Many of us live >>> lives shaped by a constant barrage of information, much of which is >>> mediated by technology, which can numb our senses and diminish our capacity >>> for authentic engagement with the world. >>> >>> The "Free Nature Park" provides a space for thought about the potential >>> for technology to coexist with nature. It encourages us to think about how >>> we can use technology to restore balance, whether it's through conservation >>> efforts, education, or other means that protect and preserve the >>> environment. This vision speaks to the possibility of integrating >>> technology in ways that enhance rather than hinder our connection to the >>> earth. >>> >>> Moreover, it invites a reimagining of what it means to understand the >>> world. If our understanding is rooted in our sensory experience, the "Free >>> Nature Park" suggests that we can return to a way of living that is in >>> direct communion with nature. Perhaps the ultimate goal isn’t to abandon >>> technology entirely, but to find ways to reawaken our senses and to >>> harmonize human life with the natural world in ways that respect and >>> protect both. This, I believe, is a vision worth striving toward. >>> >>> >>> >> > > -- > *Mar* > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Thatha_Patty" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/thatha_patty/CAL5XZoriwrQGigAP4rqNUcUR16X%3Dj%3D7iphO3%2Bf6a1KZjCg_cyw%40mail.gmail.com.
