Dec. 24, 2002

 

The Seeker of Knowledge - The Scientist, the Scholar

 

v      Knowledge is to know to know what we do not know.

Seeking is NOT to confirm what we already know.

v      Seeking is outside, for something we do not have.

Seeking is NOT in the past, unless it is for the essence.

v      Now that the 20th century is over, is it not right for the world to standardise the QUEST? Without such standarisation of norms, it is unconscious seeking, casual QUEST, which will not be the right role of the QUEEN of knowledge.

v      Most of the quests, physical, social, etc. have some standards before them that are generally acceptable, if not agreed upon and enforceable.

v      Mental seeking should be rigorously logical and reasonable.

Saying so, we should define logic and reason and in practice enumerate what is NOT logic or reason.

v      Science arose with one significant aim of ousting superstition. A movement that is against an ideal subconsciously becomes a victim to what it fights. To define superstition, classify it into its varieties, and explain its origin theoretically will offer us enough field of inquiry. Superstition is to

-         believe what is not a fact.

-         take a sense impression as a physical fact.

-         accept a one time experience as a valid fact forever.

-         grant credibility to social opinion.

-         concede scientific validity when an eminent person endorse an unproven fact.

-         be illogical.

-         be unreasonable.

-         validate the rule of another plane in this plane.

-         believe what one likes.

-         hesitate to examine a proposition as rigorously as it requires.

v      To grant practical value to a theoretical fact or theoretical value to a practical occurrence is neither knowledge nor Science.

v      Seeking should be based on a philosophy that is valid.

v      To insist that Mind's perception is ultimate is to insist on partial knowledge. Partial knowledge or knowledge of the part cannot claim to be pure knowledge or a valid one.

v      Absence of courage to adhere to KNOWLEDGE will inevitably lead to superstition.

v      Mind believing the experience of the body is either ignorance or superstition.

v      Mind that believes its own clarity as a valid fact of life is in a world of illusion.

v      Pleasant experience is not a proven fact of practical or theoretical value.

v      Validity, scientific validity, valid knowledge:

-         Man thinks with his mind, feels with his senses, acts with his body, combines the thinking, feeling and acting in his embodied being in a complete experience when he finds it true and valid forever in his own experience as well as the experience of others. Then he grants it the validity of a Law, if it passes the tests of logic and reason.

-         If satyagraha had been successful from 1920 to 1947 and moved to the culmination of freedom, it cannot claim the above validity. Success alone does not qualify for validity.

-         Skill for scientific experiments, capacity for theorizing together or each by itself should not or cannot make one a scientist or scientific worker. The scientist should be incapable of being an evil personality in his consciousness to qualify to be a scientist. Science, in the sense of knowledge that is capable of action that is beneficial demands it.

-         Not only should governments be prevented from making weapons of mass destruction, the scientist should be someone incapable of discovering or designing such weapons or their theory.

-         Validity is for knowledge that is LAW, not for the person, nor the organisation, and not even for the society as a whole.

-         Science should search for a valid theory, valid philosophically before it can apply for its own credentials.

-         That body of knowledge which does not take its standing on such a theoretically valid philosophy cannot pass for knowledge or scientific status.