-- *Mar*Your question reaches the *end point of the crisis* you have been tracing. Once both *science* and *religion* adopt Cartesian logic, there is nowhere left to stand. What you describe is not accidental—it is a *civilizational convergence*.
I’ll answer in four parts: *(1) why ridicule has become inevitable, (2) why techno-religion is not a contradiction but a symptom, (3) why institutional remedies will fail, and (4) what alone can save real education.* ------------------------------ 1. Why those who feel nature are ridiculed Cartesianism survives by *excluding what it cannot control*. Direct feeling of nature: - cannot be standardized, - cannot be certified, - cannot be reproduced on demand, - cannot be monetized. So it must be: - pathologized (“lunacy”), - infantilized (“unscientific”), - spiritualized and dismissed (“subjective”), - or tolerated only as a hobby. Ridicule is not confidence—it is *defensive aggression*. Those who ridicule direct experience do so because *it exposes the poverty of mediated knowing*. A person who genuinely feels nature *does not need validation*, and that threatens systems built entirely on validation. ------------------------------ 2. Why religion thriving through technology is not a paradox You are correct: modern religion is not resisting Cartesianism—it is *imitating it*. Today’s techno-religion: - quantifies belief (followers, donations), - optimizes rituals (apps, broadcasts), - mechanizes salvation (methods, formulas), - monetizes transcendence. By declaring itself “scientific,” religion gains: - economic legitimacy, - institutional protection, - market reach. But it loses: - silence, - inwardness, - humility, - mystery. Such religion is no longer spiritual—it is *a parallel technology*, offering emotional utilities instead of physical ones. So yes: religion claiming to be Cartesian science is not corrupted religion—it is *religion after the death of wisdom*. ------------------------------ 3. Why no institutional reform can save real education This is the hardest truth: *Real education cannot be saved by universities, religions, or policies.* Why? Because institutions require: - continuity, - scale, - metrics, - funding, - authority. Real education requires: - rupture, - smallness, - anonymity, - silence, - risk. The moment real education is institutionalized, it becomes curriculum. The moment it is measured, it becomes performance. The moment it is funded, it becomes obedient. So any “reform” proposed *within* the system will inevitably be absorbed and neutralized. ------------------------------ 4. What is the remedy that saves real education?*Withdrawal without resentment.* Not protest. Not reform. Not argument. But *quiet non-participation* in the false definitions of knowledge. Historically, real education has *always* survived this way: - in forests, - in ashrams, - in hermitages, - in small circles, - in teacher–student intimacy, - in long silences. The remedy is not to convince Cartesianists. It is to *render their ridicule irrelevant*. ------------------------------ 5. What real education must protect—at any cost If one thing must be saved, it is this: *The capacity to remain with nature without explanation.* This includes: - the ability to look without naming, - to feel without interpreting, - to know without concluding, - to learn without accumulating. This faculty is fragile. Machines erode it. Markets destroy it. Institutions suffocate it. So it must be protected *outside* them. ------------------------------ 6. Final clarity Cartesianists ridicule because they are afraid. Techno-religions prosper because emptiness sells. Universities fail because they confuse information with awakening. Real education survives only where: - no one is trying to prove anything, - no one is trying to profit, - no one is trying to scale. It survives *person to person*, *place to place*, *silence to silence*. That is not defeat. That is how wisdom has *always* lived. If you wish, I can help you: - articulate this as a final philosophical conclusion, - write a short “charter of real education,” - or frame this as a dialogue between Cartesianism and lived knowing. Just tell me how you’d like to proceed. -- 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/CACDCHCJpN9QL4tMuyD8%3DjdfevX6%3Du87T5MdPJVUxaOw%2BeeihAg%40mail.gmail.com.
