Tags

Philosophy is like trying to open a safe with a combination lock: each little adjustment of the dials seems to achieve nothing, only when everything is in place does the door open.

Ludwig Wittgenstein

HOW TO CONTRIBUTE

Please contribute your opinion on existing debates or suggest a completely new one by entering Comments at the bottom of the page! Please note that all comments are moderated, so you will have to wait 1-2 days before you see your comment showing in the page! Let’s debate!

> Use Comments to start a new Debate! <

Philosophy Debates Definition & Rules

Scope

The scope of this Knol (article) is to host philosophical debates. It does not promote specific views in any subject. Everyone is accepted and encouraged to enter his/her opinion and contribute knowledge, while respecting the opinions of others. As a new version of Platonic Dialogues, this page offers the insight of modern thinking on questions that troubled philosophers for thousands of years.

How to add a New Debate

Make certain the subject you propose is not already under discussion.
Create a new debate by writing a mew comment “Debate NNN”, where NNN = the number of the debate. Please follow the numbering of the other debates.

Please send any suggestions or comments to me or post them as comments here. I suggest the latter, because that would give other fellow knollers to post their thoughts on your comments as well.

Thanks in advance for your contributions!

How to Participate in a Debate

Write a comment and state the number of the Debate in which you want your answer to be listed in. I will moderate the comment and then place what you wrote inside the main body of the pade in the Debates Section below.

Rules

  1. Choose a short nickname to enter at the beginning of each of your comments so that others know who wrote what. Choose a unique nickname. Post your nickname and your full name in the comment you send to me and I will add it to the section “Nicknames List” at the end of the Knol.
  2. Do not delete or alter other posts.
  3. Try to keep each of your posts at a logical length. For example a 3-pages answer to a debate does not offer much to the discussion since it would be very difficult for other to answer everything you say. Try to keep in mind that this is something like a dialogue and not a place to post whole articles. In that context a 5-10 line posting is what is expected (like a real dialogue).
  4. Post small and wait for the reply of other to post back an answer (like a real dialogue).
  5. If you think a new Philosophy Debate should be opened, send me a comment to do so. It is better to have more philosophy debates with well-defined subjects than having few large and hard-to-manage debates.
  6. State references in case you have them by using the References tool of the page. In that way we will avoid any confusion.
  7. Refrain from personal comments. Remember that no matter how intense the debate might be, we are all fellow-writers trying to do something good together.
  8. Please do not color or highlight text inside your writings. Everything posted should be plain text with no headings or colours. Just write your name in the beginning of your posting with bold.

ACTION REQUIRED: Dear all! The Philosophy Debates need more participants if they are to be real debates after all! We have some knowledge, we have some questions, we have some answers. But we need the feedback of others as well in order to debate and start our journey to truth. So please, whenever you find an author or fellow blogger who looks as a person with intellectual insight do invite him/her to join the debate!

DEBATES SECTION

Debate 1 – On the nature of “IS”

SKS – Every philosophical article uses the word “is” many times. But how can we discuss about anything at all if we do not know what “is” is? How can we talk about what we humans “are” if we do not know exactly what “to be” actually means? The big philosopher Heidegger noticed that and tried all his life to answer what “is” is. He failed. Can we do something more?

SK – “It is remarkable concerning the operations of the mind, that though mostly intimately present to us, yet whenever they become the object of reflection, they seem involved in obscurity. “- D. Hume.

Philosophy is the search for the truth concerning life that is still a mystery. Philosophy is the science of answering the unanswered mega questions of life. The most important question is the truth of things; the very nature of things; the very essence of the reality behind life and every thing in it. The most important question related to “is/am” is – what is the very nature of my own self?. Who is I – who am I ? “Is” represents the very nature of ‘being’ of persons and things. “Is” means the very fundamental reality of any phenomena including humans. Philosophy tries to help in making sure that we know exactly what the fundamentals are that compose each and every aspect of life.
My own work is devoted to finding what the destination of each life should be; as well as how to get there. The “is” of any aspect of life can be uncovered only by means of the brain. The quality of the brain determines the quality of how close to the truth the “is” is perceived. The comprehension level of “is” for each brain level is different. For a premature brain the omnipotent self image distorts the meaning of “is” and as a result the life of a -2 premature brain is also -2. Only the +2 super mature brain is able to perceive “is” as “is”. Thus my work, my philosophy, is devoted to making available on a mass scale brain education that ensures a brain that perceives the self just as it “is”.

SKS – I have read that the “self” is actually a line every person draws between him/her-self and everything else in the cosmos. Where you will put that line and where you will draw the limit between “you” and the “others” depends on the person. Does that fit anywhere in the -2/+2 scale you mention? What is that scale exactly? Has anyone reached the level of perceiving the self as it “is”?

SK – All human behavior stems from the brain and the quality of the behavior depends upon the quality of the brain. Where the person draws the line also depends on the brain level. For a premature brain it is all me, me and me. It is me and everyone else. For an immature mind it is mostly me and my family. And everyone else. For a mature brain me and my family comes first and then everyone else is just as equal. For a super mature brain there is no line. The whole world is one family where everyone else is # 1 irrespective of class or creed.

I have quantified the mind/brain development into four basic stages as follows:

1) Premature mind of a new born child quantified with a value of negative 2.
2) Immature mind of a teenager quantified with a value of negative 1.
3) Mature mind of an adult quantified with a value of positive 1.
4) Super mature mind of a master quantified with a value of positive 2.

Those who develop their minds to the +2 super mature level are able to know, understand and become their true self just the way the self “is”.

My rough guess is that about 4 – 5 % of entire societies are -2. In third world countries the % is probably 60% -1, 20% +1 and 15% +2. In countries like America 50% is +1, 30% -1 and 15% +2. This is all due to lack of proper emotional intelligence education. Most people can be educated into becoming +2.

Yes my guess is that there are quite a few people who perceive their self just the way it “is”. However even in +2 there are levels. For instance Jesus is the Field Marshal of +2. Gandhi is a 5 star general. President Obama is a 3 star general!

SKS -I think that the most insightful result of your reasoning is that the highest level of maturity results in a human perceiving himself as “one thing” with the whole cosmos itself. Thus “is” for humans becomes equal to the “is” for the cosmos. However does it define “is” or it just transforms the question to another?

SK – Super maturity creates the brain power to actualize the real self. It enables each person to become what he really is – a selfless and humble part of the whole cosmos. It truly defines who one is. It is the quality of the brain that determines the quality of the is/am. The highest level of emotional maturity is well recognized since the ancient times – it is called wisdom. What they could not figure out is what is wisdom exactly. Wisdom is the natural potential in every human being. It flowers when the emotional brain becomes super mature. When the full potential of the brain is actualized then the brain projects wisdom automatically. Since the ancients discovered wisdom they have been trying to define the very nature of wisdom in scientific terms. Thus when researching wisdom; the conventional mega question is ‘What is wisdom? The mega question for me is: are we interested ultimately in defining wisdom or in developing superior minds that sprout wisdom? Would you rather know what wisdom is or would you rather have wisdom? Just as would you rather know what it means to be a millionaire or would you prefer owning millions?Wisdom it is clear is almost as complex as the human mind. It is also clear that a person becomes wise when the very physical nature of the human brain develops into a very superior quality, super mature brain. In other words if one develops a super mature brain, the super mature brain projects a +2 mind which generates wisdom. Compare the researching of the mind with researching water. The researchers seeking to know water took a different route. They did not ask why water is water or what is water. They researched the qualities of water and how these qualities could be harnessed. Today from the water wheel we have gone to harnessing the energy of the hydrogen atom. Imagine if the scientists were only researching why water is water where would the water industry be today. Even if we do know why water is water we will still only be able to harness its properties. Harnessing the properties is what counts in terms of actual benefits. Shouldn’t we take the water route to researching wisdom?

CQ – I like the starting premise, “The Nature of is” but I’m not quite ready for the level of debate and complexity that SKAKOS and SK have already plunged into. To me, “is” first denotes “existence” in raw experience. Next, “is” may represent a connection between something like a term and its definition, for example “Philosophy is an affection for wisdom”. Then ‘is’ may attach a quality to a value in a generalization, for example “Simple is better” or it can join a cause and effect together into a statement like “Wisdom is born of pain.” ‘Is’ might also be used in a specification such as “That is about all I have to say on this point, at least for now.”SK – CQ’s defining of is in different shades/contexts of meanings is beautiful. While in the context of philosophy, where philosophy is the quest for uncovering the fundamental nature of the truth behind reality/life; is/am is about expressing the true nature of mans existence/life and everything else in it. Is is about helping to connect the dots and arrive at the truth.

It is about explaining reality just as it’s is is. The other synonym of is is truth. Is connects the subject to its true meaning or state.

SKS – I agree that CQ stated some extremely interesting points! Indeed “is” can be used to denote “being” and to note characteristics of things. And the more simply you think about “is” the better, since “is” is a “primitive” notion that is encapsulated in everything. One thing Parmenides (Greek philosopher) stated about “being” is that a thing can either “be” or “not be”. Is that something we agree upon? He also said that we cannot talk about something that “does not exist”. We cannot talk or analyze something that “is not”. Again, what are your opinions on that?
I believe that “existence” is a notion inherent in everything and that, because of its “primitive” nature, it cannot be easily defined. Maybe we can only “feel” its meaning. It seems to be one of those notions that are beyond science scope and more in metaphysics scope…

TEM – “is” can not be defined by anyone who has an opinion, as “is” with opinion can be anything it wishes as long as the brain determines it is. For the brain without having the ability to be absolute can not answer.
SKS -Buddhists try to describe what things are NOT, instead of what things are. They claim that since describing “is” is difficult, we can at least describe what things are “not”.

TEM- To descried everything which “is” is not would go on for eternity, for if “is” is only one thing everything else that exist can not be “is” and without an absolute in ones thinking, what one thinks “is” is NOT may actually be “is”. There for without describing what “is” is one can not describe what “is” is not, for if one thinks to understand what something is NOT has in his own mind determined what “is” is”.
MB- If ” is ” is the truth why doesn’t it reveal itself. Why does it remain clothed in the physical body.Is it scared to face the truth.?

SKS – The “is” of things, as Heidegger said, is an attribute of things that “are”. So actually every thing that exists entails the “being” as an attribute. If “is” also entailed this attribute of “being” then it would just be another of the many things which exist. In that way “is” is not.

MB- As you say …” is” is not…means it is God or creator ?TEM – if “is” IS and “is” is NOT, to me it seems ‘is” is all things. if “is” is being all things you can never you could never say what it “is” or is “not” it just “is”

MB – ( ^_^ )

MALCO – “IS” is Existence + Knowledge of the Existence + knowledge that “Existence” & “Knowledge” are the same.

MB- WOW !
Yes I have the knowledge that I exist.

DEBATE 2 – About the purpose of philosophy

Debate 2.1 – What are the most important questions in philosophy?

SKS – I believe one of the basic questions of philosophy is “what is the nature of reality”. A question so basic that we have almost forgotten it nowadays.

SK – All those questions about the fundamental nature of life and every thing in it that cannot be answered by science philosophy tries to answer. Yes the basic question of philosophy is “what is the nature of reality behind every phenomena of life. The most important being ‘What is the self?’ ‘Is it eternal?’ ‘Is it the same in everyone?’ ‘Is it part of Gd?’ I believe philosophy wastes too much time trying to answer the eternal questions of life. Perhaps trying to prove anything connected with Gd is beyond the scope of our human mind and we may never be able to answer this question within the paradigm of science. Perhaps we should ask the question ‘What is the self in human terms, in the terms of reality. What is the truth about the self that can be explained in scientific terms’.
One property/reality of the self is very clear. The self in each individual develops to a different quality. Only those who get a very healthy upbringing get to develop their self to the super mature level. Why can’t we ensure that each and every self gets the chance to develop to the super mature level. The first step would be to focus on defining the self not in eternal terms but in terms of quality. We can ask ‘What is the best quality self and how can this self be actualized?’
So instead of seeking the ultimate answers we must seek the best possible answers that give us real scientific results that can be quantified and measured and thus placed firmly in the domain of science. This way we can take a short cut to making the goal of philosophy practical: by answering all the unanswerable questions not in eternal terms but in benefit terms and thus placing them in the domain of science.

CQ – A prioritized list of questions in academic philosophy probably exists in many forms (as many probably as there are schools). There is also practical philosophy for critical thinking and problem-solving. My own questions begin in the physical realm, having to do with natural philosophy – physics, chemistry… science. But when pursuing solutions to human needs problems, they almost always turn metaphysical – moral, spiritual even mystical. I think that philosophy needs to find itself useful to the Human Community. So the questions asked depend on the following question: what is the purpose?

SKS – Many materialists deny the existence of any purpose. On the other hand I see than everything we do has a purpose, so our lives as a whole must have a purpose also. In that context, I believe philosophy is one of the tools we can use to find out what our purpose is.

TEM – I believe when searching and questioning ones outlooks, beliefs and progress, one must ask why. Why am I questioning.Is what I do who I am or who I am what I do. If I do not want to be who I am or do not want to do what I do, am I… am I what I want to be though I am not?

SKS – Wow! These are a lot of questions! Maybe clarify a little bit more the “who I am” parts? They look promising as potential questions.

TEM – Are the actions I actually make (DO) in a giving circumstance WHO I AM: is this truly me that is coming out in this situation or is there something else inside that is trying to get out, is it the true me which I am representing or is it something or someone else, is the something else or someone else that is trying to get out truly me? Do you walk away and think why did I do that? I wish I would have done this? Or I wish I could do this or that but never do?

SKS – Are you “changed” after a traumatic experience or do you remain the same person? What is that makes you “you”? A person changes after a shock. What tells us that he remains the same person?

TEM – what does tell us if he remains the same person? is it his thoughts? is it his actions?

does he want to be the same but can not? if he can not be the same is what he now is who he is?

or is who he is what he wants to be, “the same as he was”

Debate 2.2 – What is the sole purpose of philosophy?

CQ – If philosophy’s purpose is singular, as proposed by SK, I assert that this purpose would be to meet human needs inclusively to the last person and the most fundamental need is for understanding.

SK – Dinitia Smith while reviewing Simon Critchely’s book, ‘The Book of Dead Philosophers’ says in The NY Times, “Philosophy, he says has abandoned its original purpose, which is to give us wisdom and help us achieve happiness,” and again, “Philosophy has tried to mimic science in its constant striving toward the perfection of ideas and its quest for absolute truth. Gradually philosophy has been abstracted from the concerns of everyday life…”
The problem with main stream philosophers is that they have abandoned the quest to define wisdom. They has tried and tried throughout history to define wisdom in absolute truth terms. Because they couldn’t pin down a precise scientific definition of wisdom they have more or less abandoned the quest to use wisdom to help us achieve happiness. At least the ancient philosophers did not give up the quest for they saw that wisdom is real and that it does make a real difference in the lives of those who have it. When they could not define wisdom they started to define its attributes. So they taught how to cultivate the attributes of wisdom. Even teaching the attributes of wisdom seemed an impossible task. So wisdom and its attributes gradually became the the quest of spiritual institutions, abandoned by main stream science.

SKS – For some people the purpose of philosophy should be the improvement of humans and human life. For others the purpose of philosophy should be the quest for the truth. I agree with both. Indeed we need philosophy to improve our every day lifes. But we should also stick to the effort of discovering the “truth” in every thing, even if that thing does not affect our lifes now, since the truth is what will finally set us free (of our ignorance). I believe all people have the inherent tendency to seek the truth and the answers to questions. And I believe that philosophy should serve that goal also.

JT – I cannot find argument with the statements above, so I hope I can add value with some context. When Kant expressed his model of the subject between the phenomenal and the transcendental, the boundaries were redrawn. Before Kant, philosophers believed they knew truth because they saw the works of God through the relationship of an author to his audience. It was practical to pursue Truth, because Truth was God. Truth was out there, and wisdom, or the ability to discern truth, brought you closer to it. This dichotomy between practical philosophy and philosophy seeking absolute truth did not exist. It is the concept of subjectivity as the only source of perception that created it. Truth, and by extension wisdom, was put into the category of other. It was outside of the domain of the subjective. If perception is solely based in subjective observations of either the phenomenal or the transcendental, how can we perceive objective truth with lays outside that domain? Philosophers have not gotten beyond Kant’s model (most recent arguments seem to be about which side of the model is better), and therefore have no way to create a practical pursuit of absolute truth. If you are looking for a practical application of philosophy (not necessarily one I completely endorse) try Michel De Certeau’s book “The Practice of Everyday Life.” If you are looking for a recent philosopher to discuss absolute truth and wisdom…well so am I. I agree strongly with the thought that humanity has a need for understanding in an absolute sense, not just in a practical sense.

TEM – Very well said JT.

SKS – Philosophy also tries to make us understand the limits of our language. When you say that “something cannot be red and black at the same time”, you do not actually say something “metaphysical”. You just raise questions about the limits of the notions of “Red” and “Black” as we have defined them and as we are using them with specific language and grammatical rules.

Debate 3 – What is love?

SK
Love is… not self-seeking… – 1 Corinthians 13:4-5
– Love is the power of the brain. It is the function of the developed emotional brain power. It determines the quality of life. Love is the most beautiful force of human nature. Love is the most destructive force of human nature. Love is not innate. Love is totally learned. Love determines ones level of happiness. Culture affects love. Tradition affects love. Education affects love. Economics affects love. Above all upbringing affects love. Love at -2 destroys individuals, groups and countries. Love at -1 keeps individuals, groups and countries struggling for survival. Love at +1 brings much prosperity for all while keeping everyone on their toes for more and more. +1 love causes restlessness and depression. It makes people over ambitious. It boosts defense budgets. Seminars and night classes must be held to develop love from +1 to +2 which is not that difficult.

CQ – Love is God.

MB – Who has seen God ?

SKS – Love is something you cannot prove as a mathematical proposition. Saying “I love you” means asking from the other person to trust you and believe in your feelings – something which is very difficult to happen in todays materialistic and “hard-evidence based” society.

MB–Love can’t be expressed in words.If one is expressing it then it is not a true love.

SKS – I totally agree. And what kind of thing is something that cannot be expressed in words? I believe it is something more “metaphysical” than “physical”…

MB – It is a personal experience , much above the physical.

SKS – I agree it is a personal experience. Although I do not clearly understand what you mean by “above the physical”. You mean “metaphysical”? I would agree with that too.
But SK, what do you mean by “love is learned”? And I do not totally agree with you on that education or anything else can affect love. I believe it is the other way around: love can affect everything else.

MB – hmm…..Yes true love never dies that means it is not physical.

ZS – Love is the willingness to give, without expecting a reward.
SKS – I think I agree with that. But now that you define it in such a way, I am thinking…what is the difference between love and altruism?

MB – Sympathy is involved in altruism where as in love there is no sympathy.

MM – There are clearly countless definitions of love: romantic love, love of family, love of ice cream, etc. What do all of these forms of love have in common? A driving force; Could Love be the very “thing” that animates atoms and electrons. What better proof of undying love; a force that will always be there. And so, in a larger sense, might Love be the driving force behind the universe? The force that holds everything together? As composer, lyricist Bob Merrill suggested in his famous song from the early sixties. “Love Makes the World go ‘round.”

TEM – Love in its truest form does not depend on nor is it effected by anything else around it, love in and of itself produces love and nothing else. This is unconditional love.

SKS – I agree. And actually there is no such thing as “conditional love”. Love under conditions is not love.

Debate 4 – What is time?

CQ – Time is …

of essence
money
tight
running out
up
on our side 🙂

MB – Time is the biggest winner in this world.No one can win time.There is only one stage when a person can win it———at the end of his lifespan.

SKS – Time could be seen as another dimension, along with x-y-z in a cartesian system. In the same way you are not in Athens, Greece right now, you are also not in 2900 AD right now.

MB – You are talking of metaphysics now.Yes I do believe in this theory.Suppose a person is alive in Athens must have escaped an accident only by few second in India .Suppose what we are seeing is a dream and same things are happening in parallel universe.But how does it make a difference ? What I am seeing is the truth and I am not Hermoine of Harry Potter who goes back in time machine. I have seen births and deaths very closely.That is the ultimate truth.I really don’t know what made me open this knol and why I am explaining such simple things

PG – Time is the denominator of speed. As speed has a maximum limit according to Einstein, time cannot be compressed under a minimum limit. Honestly, I don’t know what philosophy I can draw from this, except to be wary of syllogisms ;-).
Oh by the way, apart that joke, time is also
* an asset: time is money, time management…
* a decision horizon: preference for / arbitrage between short term horizon and long term horizon.
* an income / cost factor: salaries, interests, rents are linked to the time “spent”.

SK – As time is a component of consciousness we can understand the true nature of time just as well as we can understand the true nature of consciousness. Though it will be great to know the true nature of time, we do know that time is a limited quantity and as humans we can use time wisely, maturely, immaturely and prematurely based on the four levels of our minds. It is essential that we know and make use of what time really stands for. It stands for an exceptional opportunity to learn to master our life and become the masters of our destiny and a master of our time. To master time is to use it wisely.

SKS – You tend to be much more practical than other people. Instead of wandering “what time is” in a theoretical way, you pose questions and practical implications of the use of time instead. I like that. And via that practical analysis something about the theoretical nature of time may come out too. What is the most efficient way to use time from a practical point of view according to your theory?

SK – Spending time in the now is the key to a happy and wise life. It is the most efficient way to spend time. I have found that the return for your time spent is the highest when you pay full attention in the now. It is one of the fundamental laws of Mother Nature that what ever you respect the most will respect you back ten fold. For example you respect your studies; you pay full attention and study, study, study and the subject you study will make you an expert depending on how much respectfully you studied it. It may be lifeless yet knowledge is knowledge and it pays you back. If you cheat with your studies and pay little respect to your studies (spending your time not in the now with your studies) then all your life your knowledge of the subject will also be phony and superficial and thus the subject you disrespected will disrespect you back! You will have half baked knowledge and the return from this knowledge will also be half baked!

Debate 5 – Does the color “red” exist?

SKS – We can see red apples. We know “Red” as a color. However does that color actually “exist”? Some people cannot see red color? Are they “right” or are we? Most animals cannot see “Red” color. Does that mean that humans see something that does not exist?

MB – Perception of the color depends upon the emotional behavior of different individuals and animals in different ways at different wavelengths.Emotions are linked to hypothalamo-pitutiory axis.Colours outside are body are present in the form of ”aura”.
”Leshya” is the practice of color therapy in Jainism.White color is considered a most intense colour and red , a less intense color.People who do spiritual practice try to see white color inside.
So the existence of color depends upon the human and animal behavior and neuromotor responses as there are micro-vibrating stimulus linked to the hormonal changes.What a man can see an animal can’t see or what they are seeing we can’t see as both the groups are having different anatomical structure and different emotions.
Colors play a very important role in our lives.
There is saying in Folk philosophy….
Blue is true,
Yellow’s jealous,
Green’s forsaken,
Red’s brazen,
White is love,
And black is death !

SK -This is a very fundamental question of philosophy regarding the very nature of reality. Do we know reality the way it is or is our knowledge restricted/altered due to the infrastructure of our brains? How we see the color red depends on the properties of our eyes as well as the properties of our physical brain as well as the reality behind the color red. One thing is clear what we call the color red is a distinctive color but does it really exist in the form we see it; or do we see it the way we see it because of the way our brain interprets it for us. This is a very intriguing question that makes us understand the relationship between reality and our perception capacity.
To me it shows the limitations of knowing the truth about the very nature of reality. Understanding the context of this very important question/answer is a humbling experience. It shows how hard it is for philosophy to answer all the mega questions of life. At a more subtle level it shows that all interpretations for man are different shades of grey; each object of reality may be exactly black or white but we will always perhaps see it as grey…

MB – What about rods and cones in the retina ? There are three types of cones near fovea centralis which is connected to the optic nerve. If these cones receive the light of same wavelength then we see white color , otherwise we see blue, green and red at different wave lengths.If there is retinal hemorrhage ( ischaemic, non reversible type ) then you just forget about the colors.Then there is only one color and that is black.
So one can not think of philosophy without science as colors are definitely linked with cerebral cortex and retina.
I can see red color so for me it exists.

SK -Philosophy is about finding the science of things. The sentence ‘…colors are definitely linked with cerebral cortex and retina’. To this I will also add ‘The perception of color is dependent on and gets ‘colored by’ the cerebral cortex and the retina’. I am talking about the philosophy of perception and MB is correctly pointing out the science of perception.

SKS – You said “I see red color so for me it exists”. What if you see a chair. Does it exist? And what if a crazy person sees dozens of chairs where you see absolutely nothing? Who is “right” and who is “wrong”? What if all people on Earth are “crazy” and see chairs everywhere, except you who is “sane” and does not see those chairs. Would that make those chairs “real”? What is most people did not see red color, except you? Would that mean that red colour did not exist? Is reality actually a thing the majority dictates?

MB – Yes for me it exists as I see it daily in the form of blood while conducting deliveries or transfusing the blood and during cesarean section. Can you change the color of the blood ? I believe in what I see.
Can a person who is blind from the birth, differentiate between blood and glucose ? He has not seen this color so it doesn’t exist for him.
I treat the condition of postpartum hemorrhage because I know what is red color , definitely I am not a crazy person to let my patient die of excessive blood loss thinking that red color doesn’t exist and it is water because some crazy philosophers think like that.

CQ – Indeed yes red quite exists especially in Human experience. To me it represents the low side as in frequency and a lower wavelength. The spectral properties of red put it on the “top” (actually the ‘outside’) of the rainbow where violet is in the opposite position in the visible light spectrum. The rainbowis a great gift!

SKS – So we come back to the example of the “crazy person” who sees all red things as deep blue. The frequency you refer to is detected with the eye or specific scientific organs. What if those organs worked differently? Would that change the “Reality” of the red color’s “existence”?

MB – What if you give the heart the work of liver and to lungs the work of the heart.?
What we see is the ultimate truth as this moment of time is the truth.What I am seeing at present is the light yellow color of this page is the truth, what I am writing is the truth.I don’t want to know anything else beyond
that.

SKS – So there is no objective reality?

MB – Of course there is an objective reality.Any normal person can see red color except a person who is colour blind.The defect is in the organ not in the object.

SKS – Really? And how do you know that your organ is functioning good and not the other person’s? What if the “colour blind” person is actually the person with good eye-sight and you can see “Red” because of a mulfunction in your eye nerves?

MB – I am quite sure of what I am seeing as majority of persons can see red colour so it’s normal.
Majority always wins.

SKS -There was a time when everyone in a specific village saw “witches” everywhere…Do you think that was right, that that was the “reality”?

MB – There was a ” time” when in a ” specific” village——See you are mentioning a particular moment and a place when this magic happened but I am talking of the truth which is not time related.Are we doctors fools that we are using cauteries to seal the blood vessel ? Why there are so many instruments like bipolar , harmonic scalpel , ligasure etc …..just to minimize that red color of yours and to save the life of the patient.
We believe in what wee see not in what other people say.
In India I think all the ladies are also fool that they apply vermilion or ” sindoor ” if they are married .I think they should apply blue , green or yellow ” sindoor” because what they are seeing is the color which doesn’t exist.
Poor ladies they are just wasting their time.
I feel pity for the rose flower also thinking that it is not red but black in reality.

SKS – Again I remind you that most animals do not see red. Does that make them the majority? And does that make that “reality”? I agree with you that we all see red and that red “must” exist, but I somehow find holes in the whole syllogism.

MB – They must be a having different pattern of their retina that’s why they are not able to see what we can see and what they are seeing we are not able to see.You may be right that reality is different but what I want to say is that how does it make a difference ? We are able to see moon that means it exists for us and we are able to see sky that means it exists but what is there beyond sky we still don’t know.
You are a philosopher so try to find out what is right and what is wrong.

SKS – You used the right words: “it exists for us”. Indeed reality can be objective or subjective and we will never know it. You are totally right in saying that since we see the moon, all it matters for our existence is that fact and not the “theory” of what it “is” and what is “is not”. Imagine though so many things that do exist and we cannot “see” them. Do they “exist”? Sure they do. Should we look up for them? Yes, even though we do not see them with our eyes. And the other way around: there are things we see but our eyes deceive us. Should we look out for these cases? Sure we should.

MB – Yes , shouldn’t we look for the God because we know he exists ? Sure we should.
Shouldn’t we look for the circulation of blood when we are 100 % sure that it circulates ? Sure we should.
That’s what exactly the philosophy is.Try to see the things beyond our reach.There is nothing wrong in it , after all we all are human beings , very restless people and it’s a good thing.

SKS – I believe we should continuously look for the truth in every field – that is an inherent thing to humans. However I cannot easily visualize how a colour-blind man would have the urge/need/thirst to search the truth for colours. Maybe he has the urge to seek the truth for the world in general and, thus, for colours also.

MB -Not only colour blind , think of a man who is totally blind.Just imagine how he is living his whole life without colours — totally black.
Life is very precious so live each and every moment of it.Don’t waste it just like that.Do something constructive for the society, nation and the whole world.

Debate 6 – What is the significance of our times?

CQ – Some say we are living at the “end of the world” (as we know it) based on prophecies in ancient texts. Others say that December 23, 2012 is a special date perhaps marking a changing to a “new age”. Others predict the approach of a “singularity” of some sort. Yet others believe it’s just going to be “business as usual” and it’s just another day. What are your thoughts?

SKS – The world has “seen” many “ends of the world”. I was recently reading about the panic that was aroused during the last days of 999 AD, a time when all thought the world would be destroyed.

MB – How does it make a difference.Once you are not in this world and suppose you take a rebirth, will you remember that you were SKS and CQ in your previous births ? So live in your present and enjoy every moment of life as the life keeps on moving even without you.

SKS – Mayas had their diary end at 2012 because – some people say – at 2012 there will be a major alignment between all the planets of the solar system. For me the weird thing is not any apocalypse mambo jumbo about the end of the world, but how on earth did those people so many years ago predict such an alignment!
As far as the debate title-question is concerned, I believe we live in very critical times: we live in an era where philosophy is criticized and technology is the new god of people. People with education must be careful not to fall into the trap of materialism and remember that there are some things that cannot be measured, as some hardcore materialistic scientists today tend to believe…
If materialism prevails with “no prisoners taken”, then indeed this could be the end of the world as we know it.

MB–Suppose a problem is diagnosed by philosophy as you are saying, can it be prevented ?
If you come to know there is going to be an earthquake tomorrow you have no choice except leaving that place. Isn’t it ?
We are not living in Newton’s era where we can just sit and look at the tree and wait for an apple to fall down.
Try to accept the facts.

SKS -To what facts exactly are you referring to?

MB – All facts are lying behind the curtain of time . If time doesn’t want, you can not raise the curtain and find the answers.Everything finishes except the time.Can you subtract a single moment from time ? The answer is NO.If your time is bad all your efforts will fail.You never know of your future moment.I have seen six emergencies today , all crushed injuries involving both femurs and head injuries.All of them are serious.So try to live in present moment because you never know what is in store for you. It can be positive also if your time is good.Life is a mystery.Let the problem come then we will face it. Why think of it just now and suppose it doesn’t come then ? Aren’t you spoiling your future as well as your present.

SKS – So, living for the moment?

MB – Yes definitely.

Debate 7 – What is the philosophy of money?

SKS – I believe money and the whole idea of “giving and taking based on money” is based on materialism, although I admit I haven’t thought about it much.

MB–Ask the person the importance of money who sells his only piece of agricultural land for the operation of his wife, ask the person who has to pay EMI for the flat and there is no increment in the salary or any promotion.Sitting in AC rooms and offices you people can think of philosophy, not the common man..Ask a person about philosophy, who is surviving on one meal a day so that his children can have some milk.
A person who can not afford fat packages for medical and other higher studies , ask him the importance of money as the paid seat for Radiology costs rupees I0 million or more.
I think you people are living in false world or you don’t have any other thing to do as you have lots of money and now you don’t know what to do of your life and money that’s why you keep on thinking who am I ? Where will I go after death ? When the world is going to finish ? What is philosophy of money ?
Better think of something for the current problems like climatic change, racism , terrorism and recession
etc which are the realities of life.

PG- Money is a social tool and an element of culture.
Together with commerce, it was one of the important inventions of mankind. It also took part in the advent of mathematics and writing (the Mesopotamian clay tablets, 7,000 years ago, were made for exchange and accounting purposes).
Money is one of the things that contribute to link people together.
It can be used ethically, wisely and usefully, or immorally, unwisely and harmfully, like any tool.
Many philosopher expressed their attitude towards money, or towards the way money is made or used. The same that they expressed their attitude, positive or negative about how other widely used human artefacts and institutions with social effects are made and used.
There can be therefore an ethic of money but I don’t think that there is a full philosophy of money (there is no philosophy of tools to my knowledge),
What is specific about money is that it is more widely present and more abstract than the other artifacts / tools. Maybe more emotional also.
Therefore, some might fantasize by considering it as a god (or a rival of god) or a demon (or an instrument of the demon). I don’t go for such metaphysical approaches, or for such spiritual adoration or aversion. A tool is a tool, period.
Materialism might have relations with money except that modern money is …immaterial.
It is a potential intermediary between all goods, assets and services that can be exchanged.
It is “fungible”, a kind of chameleon / substitutable / interchangeable asset, that can be “transformed” in any other economic goods, assets and services. And also a reference of (economic) value for all of them.
Some might see some mystic in it, or chemistry, or alchemy.
Money is also a power, the power to acquire things, even rent people (employees).
Money is sought out by people, whether for itself or for what it allows.
Some radical talk about the “commoditization of mankind”, a buzzword which I consider a reductive and politically extremist slogan / mantra.

KS – i saw an interesting structure of merchandise without money (6 wares – 15 relations) and with money (7 wares – 6 relations (where money is a ware, but a special ware)) : structure-of-money
so money is a practical tool, as PG and SK said.
btw. if one of the wares is common (e.g. salt) it might serve also as currency for the other wares .
there is another root of money, with philosophical impacts :
if i have no wares, i can give a clay tablet or another promissory note .
if i give it to A, A can give it to B, B to C and so on, till e.g. F gives it back to me .
now i have payed my dept and can destroy the promissory note .
if i do not and moreover make some new promissory notes then i have invented money out of nothing – and that’s the mechanism of every financial crises .
the question is : can we make a better money ?

SK – When it comes to money there are two fundamental aspects that have to be taken into account. As PG pointed out money is a tool. With any tool there are two factors involved. The tool itself has to be as efficient and practically beneficial as possible and the user of the tool must be a master at using the tool. As I am no economist I will focus on how to become a master of using money where others may focus on how to improve the fundamentals of money itself.

Again when it comes to mastering money there are two different bodies of knowledge that have to be mastered. One is the very technical knowledge of money, the bottom line of the so called ropes of money. It is to know everything about the rules of the game of dealing with money. The other is to be a master of one’s own self! It is only when you are a master of your own human nature; master of your own attitude towards money, that you can handle money successfully.The bottom line being how you respond to money emotionally.

CQ – Money is a convenient abstraction of value used as a medium of exchange. It represents a measure of worth for physical objects and substances. When money is seen as an end rather than a means, illogical phenomena such as inflation, recession and financial ruin occur. Money, especially printed currency and financial instruments, is not a source and has no source, but is purely a psychological device. The only real system of exchange and trade is barter involving both goods (substances and objects) and services (work, labor, expertise) with a way of determining relative worth. The fallibility of monetary systems is that there is no resilient consensus on what things are worth.

SKS – And we should not forget that most of the “strange” phenomena related to money is based on the complexity of human psychology.

Debate 8 – What is the most important quotation of all times?

SK – Philosophy is the quest to understanding life and everything in it. The fundamental pillar of understanding life is understanding one’s own self. The key to understanding one’s own self is to know what one needs to do to be able to truly know one’s self. The biggest insight of all times comes from Gd Himself when He says to Moses, ‘I am who I am’. He is not His self image. There is nothing phony about Him. He is His full potential. Not only does He know who He is; He is His full actualized Self. It is very clear from this that man needs to find ways through science and philosophy to be able to say about one’s own self, ‘I am who I am”. Thus the quest of philosophy must be to enable every individual, group and country to know, understand and become their true self.
Just imagine the chaos if like most of us; Gd was His self image!

CQ – “It’s necessary to learn the truth. Then you can stretch it all you want.” Mark Twain

MB -” Philosophy is the art of living.”…………Plutarch

SKS – “Εν οίδα ότι ουδέν οίδα” (The only thing I know is that I don’t know anything) [Socrates]

Debate 9 – Concerning life

Debate 9.1 – What is the biggest secret of life?

MB -Biggest secret of life is life itself.Today there was an emergency bell ringing and all the RMO’s and other staff came out to see what kind of emergency what there, whether a MVA or something else.I was just passing by and saw a middle aged man was in the car and our staff was shifting him to the stretcher.One of the male nurse called one Dr to see whether that man was there or not means whether the pulse was there or not.It wasn’t there.I think it must be case of acute MI.
Only for 2-3 minutes we felt sad and everybody went for their lunch.

SK – Life indeed is the biggest secret yet the key to this secret is another more important secret – the real ‘me’, the real ‘I’; The fully actualized self. Unless we are able to become and fully know and understand our own self how can we comprehend anything else fully? If I don’t know who I am how will I relate to others and to life itself?

MB – Can your ‘real me’ and ‘real I’ and ‘understanding our own self ‘ can prevent death ?

SKS – You never know. Maybe the real “I” will be something completely untouchable by things like “death”, “change” or “decay”. Maybe the real “us” is something eternal.

MB – Yes you may be right, we all are the part of universe but when we die it is the death of physical body by which we are recognized in this world.Our soul and spirit never dies it takes the form of another shape.
Now tell me one thing that if we die will our soul or real ” I ” recognize that who were we in our previous births?
Once a person gone means he is gone forever by losing his identity which is the physical body not the soul .

SKS – I cannot say I agree totally with that. Indeed the body is part of our selfs, but I consider it part of our physical selfs. Consider for a moment the brain. If you reproduce all chemical reactions happening inside your brain in a test tube, will that mean that this tube is “you”? I do not think so.

MB – Spirit can exist independently of matter , but matter can not exist independently of spirit.
Spirit is absolute but matter is relative.

PG – Maybe life is a superior state of organisation, in which physical components get organized into something that is superior to a purely physical state.

MB – Of course life is much above the physical state that’s why we all die and life keeps on moving, It never ends.

Debate 9.2 – What is the fundamental aim of life for all human beings at the individual and group level?

SKS – I believe the aim of life for humans is to increase knowledge and reduce ignorance.

SK – ‘…increase knowledge and reduce ignorance’ is indeed the path one must take to achieve the fundamental aim of life. The tragedy is that there are two distinct , though interdependent paths that we must all take. One path is to educate ones self on the ropes of life including ways to earn a living. The other path is to develop ones emotional intelligence to the level where it becomes wisdom. The aim of life is to become a self master, the Holy Grail of education; to know, understand and become ones true self and become a maven of ones chosen profession. The first path we are well focused on, the second path we don’t know how to achieve.

MB – Fundamental aim of all the individuals is to gain higher education, name, fame and money.

SK – This beautifully demonstrates the fundamental aim of Americans! This over ambitious agenda springs from a +1 mature emotional intelligence brain.

MB – Why Americans only ? I am an Indian but what’s wrong in it ? We have got life only once , why not to have the best out of it . Best education , best house , best car and everything best.If I have money then only I can do some charity for my patients.I am educated enough to perform cesarean section and when a lady comes in distress and I deliver out the baby then I forget all your philosophy that who am I and the real self.I only look at the mother and baby and that is the ultimate truth for me . When I see a person dying no one can prevent it and that is the ultimate truth for me.

SK – You are right when I say American I should really say all over the world the attitude is the same. Thanks.
Aiming for the best is fine. But aiming for your own best possible is even better. Doing my best and being happy with it is better than achieving the best for its own sake; for in most cases it never happens.

SKS – Wanting money as a means to an end is another thing than wanting money as the ultimate goal in life.
MB – Yes you are right but unfortunately universal measure of our achievements is money.The purpose of money should be commodity -money -commodity not money-commodity -money.
If a person has worked hard then only he has got money and if he starts his small scale industry , I think he is doing a great job by creating employment for so many and contributing towards society.
Our ultimate goal is to become famous.We all are common man , we are not Mahatma Gandhi, Hillary Clinton or media persons like Emma Watson who has bought million dollar house at the age of 17.
If we want to publish our work we need money for that, if we want to make a film or documentary to show our talent we need money for that.If we want to do research we want money for that.
Ultimate goal in life is to have satisfaction and happiness and happiness comes from inside when you are satisfied with your life and for that inside happiness certain external factors also work, money is one of these factors.You can not make your five senses work till you have your sixth sense and that is money.
I think I am getting carried away with this topic and I am sorry for the longer post.

SK – Your approach is so practical and real. This is the way it is because society has the majority of people who are +1. Just like in some third world countries the majority is -1 and so corruption is the ruling factor of life.

SKS – I will just repeat what others have said: money is a tool not an end. You can produce happiness to others every day by just smiling and having positive energy. Money of course solve many problems. And they can make you happy if the problems you have are only “money problems”. However the biggest problems one might have are mostly related to love, having someone to talk to, understanding the world etc.

MB – Yes you are right. One can dance with raindrops, can sing with rustling leaves and can talk with whispering trees.Look at the flower , feel its fragrance , just think of mountain peaks , butterflies, stars , moon , everyone has got a piece of sky in his hands. Some people are lucky to get a bigger piece of it along with rainbow and some are happy with a smaller piece without rainbow.One has to draw a line of satisfaction.
There is a ward lady in our hospital who serves water and tea but she is always happy. She distributes her
lunch which she brings from her home in a tiffin ( lunch box ) to the other staff members as she is a very good cook and sometimes remain hungry but she is happy that way. She is uneducated and she knows that she can’t get more than what she is getting, so she is happy. She doesn’t have any ambition, as she is widow having a son who is well settled.
When I see a rickshaw-wala ( tree wheeled cart for the public transport ) sleeping on the rickshaw in hot summers under the tree I sometimes feel jealous but don’t you think he must be wanting to see and enjoy all those things which we are enjoying.
As you mentioned ” understanding the world ”—don’t you need money to buy the air ticket if you want to see the whole world and to stay in a hotel.
So money doesn’t buy happiness but it definitely makes your life more comfortable and if one is comfortable that means he is happy.Isn’t it ?

PG – Maybe our fundamental aim is to find out if we have a fundamental aim. Just because we hate uncertainty and it is so comfortable to believe we have a fundamental aim. Also, that never ending quest keeps us busy. Cynical, isn’t it ? 😉

MB – I will be the most happiest person on this earth if someone tells me to sit under a tree and do meditation,
but I can’t do that because I have certain responsibilities towards my family , towards my patients , towards my country who has given me everything.To sit under a tree closing your eyes in the search of fundamental aim ” who am I ” and dreaming about tandoori chicken and pudding ?
No , that is not our fundamental aim.You know what.. ” the biggest enemy of our happiness is our self created so called ego” .
Ask yourself , you will find the answer.

Debate 10 – Concerning human goals

Debate 10.1 – Is self mastery, the Holy Grail of education, possible to achieve?

SKS – I would prefer the term “self-knowledge”.

SK – It is interesting that you prefer self-knowledge. When it comes to emotional intelligence it is not enough to know it, it is essential to understand and integrate the understanding into the brain structure. It is not enough to know who you are. This is just the first step. You must also understand and become your true self. Understanding and being your true self means your understanding is being generated automatically by the electro-chemical actions in your brain. There is no stress or control of behavior. In case of mere knowledge you need to manage yourself. It is like the same example I give what is more effective? Would you prefer knowledge of what it is to be a millionaire or would you like to be one. The ancients were very knowledgeable when it came to wisdom; that is why the Holy Grail of education has always been self mastery.

SKS – What do you mean by “become your true self”? Aren’t you already your self?

SK – Who you think you are and who you really are is not the same person. Almost each and every person is born with a potential to become a pure human being. However because our brain works in images we even perceive our own true self in the form of a self image. The first self image is created by the feed back from the womb environment. When the next stage of post natal life is happy then the womb-conditioned self image gradually dissolves and a new self image starts to form. If the post natal life is unhappy the child as it cannot escape from the pain it escapes in the mind and so clings to the earlier self image. And so on. When the womb life and post natal life is happy and healthy then the pure self is gradually actualized. In fact the road to wisdom is set more or less by the time the child reaches the age of six. People stuck with earlier self images struggle all their lives trying to achieve the agenda of their self image. Americans are a good example. Our self image is stuck at +1. Thus we perceive our self as a trophy. ‘I am the best’. So no amount of success is enough and true happiness is beyond our grasp. Many of us try to seek it through drugs and alcohol. Thus it is very important to actualize our full humanness potential and then we will be living our authentic lives.

Because people live their entire lives believing themselves to be their self image society is composed of four levels of people. From criminals and emotionally dependent people on the -2 level to selfless and altruistic people on the +2 level. You can even classify whole groups and countries into four levels based on the majority self image. This is a self image driven world. This is what I am trying to wake up the world to: It need not be this way. It can all be changed through proper education.

So lets get back to answering question # 12.

MB – It is a very difficult question to understand and to answer but I will try my best.This reminds me of Claude Bernard, if Nobel prize existed at that time he would have got at least 4.One of his self mastery was on the external and internal environment ( millieu interieur ).He said that the external environment keeps on changing but that doesn’t affect much our bodies as there is a community of living cells and water and they get adapted to the climate.In hot weather body sweats out and the temperature is maintained by the natural mechanism of body.
In the same manner Paracelsus was centuries ahead of his time.He detested poly pharmacy and he insisted that anatomy should be taught in relation to the living body and he was the one who gave surgeons the status of physician at that time…1493.
But talking of these philosophers and scientists doesn’t answer this question.Self mastery ? Why not ? It can be achieved as you are seeing so many advanced technologies like nanotechnology , laser techniques, so many newer equipments like endoscopes , robotic surgeries etc.
Self mastery is achieved but whether it is a holy grail or not there is a question mark on it.Everything is commercial now a days and just wait –one question is coming in my mind that if it is ‘self mastery’ then what is the use of this holy grail education ? ‘Self ‘ word itself is indicating that there is no need of this kind of education.But another point is if you don’t teach children right things from the beginning they might deviate to a wrong path.I don’t think there are much faculties who can give this kind of education.
This post is again becoming longer so I better stop writing as I am not sure of this type of education.

SK – As the self is considered divine so self mastery is considered a holy quest. But I am not using the term Holy Grail in terms of divineness. I am using the term Holy Grail as in terms of the ultimate quest of education to find the path to self mastery.
MB – I have been working with CSR. I have seen parents giving more attention to a boy than a girl in rural areas..We go to villages where we have employed teachers from that village and we motivate the parents to send the girls to school.In some remote areas children sit under the tree on a carpet as we are always lacking the funds.On the other hand in urban areas conditions are deteriorating day by day .Teenager girls buy abortifacient drugs directly from chemist shop. Homosexuality, taking drugs , live in relationships , designer babies (ART) , artificial sperms , throwing away the left over embryos while doing IVF techniques , where is the morality ? Aren’t we playing with nature and disturbing the genetic structure of the society ? do you think the goal is easy to achieve ? I don’t think so.

SK -Most of the problems you mentioned can be traced to lack of emotional intelligence education. All the more reason that main stream education should take up wisdom education on a mass scale. Wisdom education is not only needed it is 50% of essential education. The vital question is can we afford to and should we continue to create -2, -1 and +1 minds; when we can strive to create +2 minds en mass. In spite of all the material successes a vast section of people are still struggling with unhappiness and depression. Just because an essential goal is daunting does not mean we have to give it up. -2, -1 and even +1 upbringing can be gradually eliminated. Wisdom education can be introduced as a compulsory subject just like math and science. Other problems like homosexuality are a matter of opinion and culture.
‘where is the morality’ indeed morality is lacking precisely due to lack of wisdom generating brain power. Cultivate wisdom through proper education and we will not have this problem of lack of morality. We can produce a selfless and altruistic society.

Yes the goal is not easy, and it is even more so because of the main stream fuzziness about wisdom. But I have figured out that wisdom is a very real byproduct of a squeaky clean brain. There are lots of well established ways to clean the brain. So far we use these ways to make the subnormal normal. We can use the same ways to make the so called normal – super normal. And above all we can wake up the world to stop putting -2, -1 and +1 values in the future generations.

I am very excited about your focus on these issues. It is people like you who can take my work to the next level.

SKS – In case someone has low emotional intelligence, can’t he build it and improve it? I think yes. So does that mean that he/she changes his/her nature and self?

SK – The true nature of the self in everyone is the same: it is pure humanness. The problem is that the true self is hidden under the cloak of the self image which is generated by the EBG. And as you remove the EBG the cloak dissolves and the real self gradually emerges. So the false self gets dissolved and the authentic self/nature emerges. Theoretically it looks very simple, however it is very hard because EBG physically changes the brain.

SKS – Physically changing the brain means you become actually a different person? Or do you remain the same? What is that makes you “you” and me “me”? If your brain is changed through a traumatic experience, are you the same person you were before that? If you somehow experience everything that I have experienced, do you become “me”?

Debate 10.2 – What is the most difficult question one must answer and cannot avoid?

SKS – One of the most important questions I believe we must answer is WHY we are here in this life. But now that I think about it, I believe that debate is part of the “What is most important question of philosophy” above, or at least could be. I would rather not have two debates with similar content. Tell me what you think.

SK – You are right. So I have changed the question. As for ‘why we are here’ this question has an answerable sub question – we are here for a purpose, which we must find individually and collectively.

MB- Why we are here on this earth ? Certainly not by our choice.Did God ask us that which religion we want or in which country we want to take birth ? No nobody asked us this question.
But once we have come on this earth, do not be a burden on it. Avoid terrorism , war , stop hurting others.
When we were not given the chance to choose a religion or country then why we are fighting unnecessarily.
Most important question one must ask –What I want to achieve ultimately, what is my goal of life ?
Have I cheated anybody today ?
Have I hurt anybody ?
Why did I tell lie ? Was it necessary ?
Am I useful for the society ?
Will people remember me when I die ?
Why did I waste my time today ?
Am I being honest to myself ?
What kind of fears I am carrying in my subconscious mind………etc etc…Start asking yourself you will find so many questions and answers, you decide which one is the most difficult question to answer which one can not avoid.

SKS – I think SK was referring to the most difficult question we “must” answer and not to the most difficult question we “decide to” answer.

MB – I am not able to decide which one is the most difficult question.

SK -The question every human has to answer and cannot avoid is ‘Who am I?’

MB- We are the image of the universe.Death is inevitable as whatever is born is bound to die.
We have two importnat parts , one is physical body and other one is consciousness or mind.Mind is like ocean where lot of currents and tides , low and high flow daily and body is like a sea shell who listens to these currents.When we are born there is no material possession but gradually we become materialistic.
we are always restless. Impulses , emotions and passions increase our restlessness.We are inalienable part of society so we should try to maintain the balance between the invidualistic approach and combined approach.
”We exist” is the only truth for me.”

TEM- Is there life after death and if there is are there different levels of which I may go. If this is true what must I do to be at the highest level one can achieve.

SKS – I hope I knew a definite answer for that one. The only thing I “feel” that we must do is try to decrease our ignorance of things as much as we can. I can feel that as an internal, inherent purpose. And I see that purpose existing in the whole human kind as well: we all continuously try to learn new things, to explore the unexplored. I do not think this is random or accidental. And the first thing to explore is our self.

MB – Yes there is life after death because spirit , the purest form never dies , it takes the form of another shape.I have written a true story of trance in one of my knols.To achieve the highest level one must do spiritual practices to elevate the spirit from third level to the second or first level.

Debate 11 – Will robots ever become human in terms of emotions and thinking?

SKS – I think not. Robots with their AI will never be able to think like humans. Robots think and act by applying specific rules according to which they are programmed. Humans have free will.

SK- Definitely in thinking but may be never in terms of emotions.

MB – I totally agree with the above statement.

SKS – If they can simulate human thinking, why not emotions? Is it because human emotions are something different? If you believe robots will eventually think like humans, do you include “Free Will” in that?
MB- When a child is born he doesn’t have any emotions but they develop gradually by the sense of touch. speech and hearing.When he goes to school he passes through emotions of pleasure and pain.
If he gets less marks there is a negative feeling.I mean to say that emotions are not developed in a single day.
If your robot can pass through the trauma of natural birth then only he can have emotions.

SKS – Your putting the birth shock as a vital differentiation between us and robots is something I have never encountered before in similar discussion. I find it interesting. You mean that the miracle is life is what makes us who we are?

MB – Try to make male and female robots so that they can marry and give birth to baby robot.Start thinking on these lines, maybe this discussion turns out to be fruitful and we succeed by putting emotions in a robot’s brain.

SKS – What you propose could be actually happening. I know that in Tokyo there is a factory where robots produce other robots with minimal (if any) human intervention. Is that the beginning? I do not think so. Giving birth – i.e. starting “existence” is something more than putting various parts together. Human life has an embedded mystery I cannot easily define. What I DO know is that it has no resemblance to the process of robots putting together the gear for other robots.

MB – Original is always original.

SKS – With the term “original” you refer to what exactly?
MB – Original means who takes natural birth , composed of living cells , breathes naturally, grows naturally , having emotions of pain and pleasure both and dies a natural death.

Debate 12 – What is the borderline between science and philosophy?

SKS – Philosophy sometimes deals with things that at a later point in time go into the scope of science. I believe the distinction between the two is fuzzy.

SK – What ever is important for understanding the fundamental unknown mysteries of life is under the scope of philosophy. What ever mysteries that have been solved come under the scope of science. What ever we can measure and define in mathematical terms is science. Whatever we cannot measure and is fuzzy is philosophy.

MB – Questions in this debate are becoming tougher day by day.Mr Rao please come and contribute in this knol .I have read your comment— ‘ Philosophy of science ‘
Let me explain it by giving an example.
Harvey’s greatest work was on the heart and it’s circulation.Galen said that the purple blood in the veins is enriched with ‘ vital spirit.’ Galen’s opinion were only philosophical for doctors.Leaonardo recognized the heart as a muscle but no one thought that it pumps blood.
Harvey carefully reasoned and then demonstrated by experiment that it pumps blood..Philosophers think and observe but when they prove it by experiment they become scientists.
In the Harvey’s time science was called natural philosophy.Not even Descartes , the best philosopher since Aristotle, was fully aware of the difference between philosophical argument and scientific experiment.
So the difference is that one has to prove by repeated demonstrations.
Harvey said-‘-I am of opinion that our first duty is to inquire whether the thing be or not , before asking wherefore it is.’ He did countless experiments on snakes and mammals and convinced people that heart pumps the blood.He said—‘ First I shall show that this may be so , and then I shall prove that it is so in fact.’
A pure scientist who is not a doctor can reject all theories and can start fresh ones but a scientific physician can not do this as he has to treat patients and they can not wait for the new theories to develop.
Conclusion of the whole story is that philosophers are theoretical while scientists are more practical but remember one thing that a scientist is always a philosopher and a philosopher can be a scientist also.

SKS – If science proves by “repeated demonstrations”, that means that it cannot deal with events occuring only one time (e.g. the Big Bang or a miracle). Is that the field of philosophy?

MB – Maybe , I am not sure of this as I have not seen a miracle but I think both of them can work together in this field.

SKS -If some scientist saw Christ walking on water would he believe it? No. He would like to see the experiment repeated. If he didn’t see it again, then he would deduce that this thing cannot happen and cannot be verified as a scientific “fact”.

MB – But someone must have seen it that’s why he has written it.I have read that the prophet Muhammad
ascended the sky on his horse Buraq , which bifurcated the moon in the course of his ascent and then got the glimpse of dazzling flame.The proof is found in the holy books.For a layman it’s a miracle but for spiritual science Buraq is the highest form of the spiritual current which corresponds to the sixth ganglia which is
called the ”pind ”.

Debate 13 – Has modern technology deprived us of our “responsibility for our actions” and of our “control over our actions”?

SKS – Modern cars, airplanes and spacecrafts have specialized software that makes instant nano-second decisions without the interference of the user. For example in case imminent collision is detected, a modern luxury car can start braking on its own. However what if the driver of the car wants to have a collision in order to commit suicide? GPS systems tells us where to go. If we get used to them, we will loose the ability to decide on our own about the route we will take: “My GPS told me” will be the answer to someone asking us why we took “that route” and not “the other”. In modern warfare, we use remotely-controlled weapons or – even worse – totally automatic weapons. Modern cruise missiles and UAVs can detect enemy targets on their own and “decide” to hit them. Those developments alienate us from the consequenses of our actions. We “act” without ever seeing and feeling the results.

SK – This whole issue of loosing control over our actions due to dependence on modern technology brings out the importance of what I am trying to wake up the world to: make yourself so emotionally strong that your ‘inside out’ actions remain a master of all ‘out side in’ perceptions. Make sure your out side reality does not take control of your inside decisions and behavior. In other words just because we have a calculator we must not ignore to learn math for our self. Responsibility for our actions also boils down to how much responsible we are emotional intelligence wise.

MB – Four friends , 3 scientists and one layman were walking together in a forest , there they found a skeleton of a lion. They started experimenting on it.One said I will provide the skin and flesh to it.Second one said –I will make the blood flow in it.The third one said ” I shall breathe life into it ”, Fourth one was not a scientist but a wise man so he said–”Very good, Let me first climb up a tree.”
The modern technology is good as with the advancement of so many medical techniques , very big brain tumours can be removed , open by pass surgeries can be done, minimal invasive surgeries can be done but one has to be wise enough while using these techniques having control on our actions.Perception should not be one sided, partial view would not do.Have control on your actions and impulses while using them.

SKS -And imagine what might happen when medical robots become more “automated”…I recently read some article about “bio-secutiry”: scientists are concerned with the more and more extensive use of electronic devices directly connected to the brain. They think that if a paralyzed person uses an implant in his brain to control a computer and if that computer has access to the Internet, then maybe we can see hackers hacking their way into human mind! That seems really bad even as a scenario!

MB – It is only the man who feeds data so man is at fault if he is feeding wrong data and trying to hack the information.Machine is not at fault.

SKS -So when man follows what the machine tells him and the machine is fed with the wrong data, whose fault is that? And what happens with machines programmed to make decisions on their own advanced AI?

MB – Why man is scared to face the consequences of what he has created .Be prepared to face the music then.

Debate 14 – Concerning suicide

SKS – Why do people commit suicide? Is it because they are “mentally ill” or can someone commit suicide while being sane? Some people say that committing suicide is the ultimate prove of our unique nature – no robot can do that. Some say that committing suicide is the ultimate expression of our free will. If we did not have free will, we would never be “programmed” or destined to kill our selfs. Eagerly waiting for your thoughts!

SK – For me personally bringing up the question of suicide is a very personal topic. Being in a hundred and one emotional holes I have seriously thought of suicide myself. Why would I want to commit suicide? Being extremely shy, nervous and as a result depressed. On top of that once in a while feeling alone and a separate entity who has to face these emotional holes day in and day out without any escape would literally terrify me. While in school in the early grades I would worry all year for the one day I would have to give a speech to my own class, people I met every day and some of whom were my friends. I couldn’t tell a joke. I was always afraid what if in the middle of it I got nervous. I dreaded any occasion where people were telling jokes. There were constant insignificant irrational fears eating me inside out. I thought there is no escape from this living hell. This drove me to suicidal thoughts often. On top of that my grandmother told me stuff that made me more miserable; I was forced out of my mothers womb. So I was convinced no one loves me! I can go on and on…
As some one said all happy families are alike and all unhappy families are unhappy in their own way. So suicide can be a powerful incentive to escape the emotional bondage of an emotionally miserable and often physically painful life, especially if the life circumstances cannot be changed. Fortunately for me I got inspired by Durga Mata, a Hindu goddess and I discovered that my irrational emotional holes were generated by my EBG. I thus turned my dark clouds into my silver lining and created my hypothesis that covers half of ignored and essential human intelligence!
I disagree that suicide is a demonstration of free will. Suicide is a perfect demonstration of your inside out behavior succumbing to the misery of your out side in life circumstances. Free will means to act independent of the outside circumstances; not let your will be colored by outside forces. Its like someone abuses you and you abuse him back. This means he is controlling your reaction. You must never react and in spite of his abuse you still should act from +2.
Suicide is now becoming more and more acceptable when faced with excruciating pain and terminal illness and now even huge financial medical bills. Thus even sane people can think of suicide.

SKS – I didn’t mean to make it personal. I just wandered about how one such person might think. I understand what you say that being miserable could be the main factor behind such a dramatic decision. But to my mind it remains a decision.

SK – I try to give inside-out information when ever I can because this way one gets a better understanding of what goes on and why people even think of suicide. It is just not just being miserable. It is being helpless and even in awful pain and knowing that there is nothing at the end of the tunnel except the same frustrating life. Of course it can be a well thought over sane decision or an insane decision forced on by a sick mind.

TEM – I believe that the inward evil to do what it wills is meet with the outward forces of good that truly touches the soul and brings a conviction that is beyond ones understanding as it is to see red for the first time which is good and pleasing to the soul but out of the ordinary for the evil that lurks within.

SKS – I am not really able to say I understand.

TEM – when all you know is evil and then you see a truly outward unconditional love (one that would transform ones life if allowed) brings on a state of confusion by the evil within, which cries out, you are not worth living because evil delights in death and any life (Love) that may enter is meet with the full forces of the evil.

Debate 15 – Concerning human mind

Debate 15.1 – What is the difference between knowing and understanding?

SKS – Knowing to me means something less than understanding.

MB- It is just like the difference between knowing and seeing with your own eyes.
We are seeing life that means we have enough knowledge of it but do we understand the real meaning of life ?
The answer is NO.
Knowledge is like a bulb and understanding is like an electric current.

SK – Knowledge is the tool but understanding is the process that improves the brain to develop to a higher level of expertise and competence. It is focus and repeated exposure to knowledge that turns knowing into understanding. Mastering knowledge creates understanding. Understanding is the king. But the king cannot function without his staff. Without new knowledge the brain becomes stale and knowledge is always needed because the brain has to be a perpetual learner. Mathematics is knowledge and when this knowledge gets integrated in to the brain it becomes understanding. It is the understanding of the knowledge of mathematics that changes the student from a student of mathematics to a mathematician.
It is crucial we know the difference between the two. It is interesting that when we come out of a university with knowing we get a BA or MA degree. When knowing turns into understanding we come out as a Dr.! Because understanding changes our brain so much that our integrated knowledge becomes part of us; we become a physician or an engineer etc. Our understanding becomes us!
Where/when we go to a university for knowledge we must aim for understanding!

READ ALSO:
Stop arguing.

PG – Understanding is to make a mind representation of a phenomenon. That representation might or not match fully the phenomenon. Sometimes we really understand, sometimes we just give a subjective interpretation. It might be better in some cases to assume we don’t fully understand than to believe we understood. There is a danger to confuse understanding and belief. Our interpretation of things should always be considered as only practical assumptions.
Of course those assumptions are needed to guide our choices if not we would shun actions (except those driven by emotions when it overrides reasoning). But we have to recognise that they are bets. That is what is noble in human beings, they are able to “speculate”, to take risks in front of uncertainty, which I’m not sure is the case for an animal which just follows some instinct. But they should be conscious that they take them.
This is the individual aspect, but this true also for common paradigms which are collective interpretations of realities. A better paradigm can always surge, and encounter resistance as the old paradigm tend to be anchored in the collective mind.
Understanding should be flexible, things are rarely clearcut, and binary Aristotelian logic which considers that statements can only be either 100 % true or 100 % false is the mother of dogmas.

Debate 15.2 -What is awareness?

MB – It is a voice from our internal constitution : responses at the mental plane which give rise to thought and attention currents by means of which our thoughts are projected to their objectives and we get associated with them.As I gave the example in ” wisdom is our main sense ” that if we are sitting in a bus we know it’s moving, we think about it or not but in our subco nscious mind we know that it is moving.We are aware that the sky is above us and earth beneath our feet, we don’t have to look at the sky again and again that it exists or not ?
We are aware that we are in which city and at which place and whether it is day or night , we don’t have to remind ourselves of these things. Am I right ?

SK – Awareness is the ability to assess ones total life context inside out and outside in just the way it is. Awareness is a thinking exercise that reveals the actual reality about ones own self in the context of being. Awareness helps reveal the good, the bad and the ugly about any life situation, especially ones own self. Awareness reveals ones place in life. Its knowing ones own self from the self’s perspective as well as at the same time from the perspective of others. It enables one to assess objectively the quality of ones given life and any situation in it. It is knowledge used to uncover the truth from all possible angles. It is a tool that enables one to free the brain of EBG. It is also a brain exercise that strengthens the brain physically as well as emotionally. To be fully aware of ones life context is to live in the now. Awareness is pondering upon the interior of the self from an exterior perspective and vice versa. It enables one to venture into ones own psyche. The unknowns of life become known and are put in their proper place. Awareness is an exercise that examines the underlying factors in one’s own thinking as well as of others and also of different life situations.

And self awareness is your true self looking at your true self in the context of your brain and your mind and being fully aware of being fully aware that your consciousness is looking at your self/self image.

Debate 15.3 – What is mindfulness?

MB – Newton’s discovery was not the result of an intellectual exercise. It was a case of direct vision , this is what is called mindfulness.

SK – Being mindful is emptying your mind of any opinions of what ever you are experiencing, and just observing in silence what ever you are experiencing. And also observing the emotional attachments of these thoughts with your body’s physical state like your tenseness in certain parts or some kind of pain.

Debate 16 – Science and Religion

Debate 16.1 – Are science and religion compatible?

SKS -For me, religion and science are two sides of the same coin. They both help us reach knowledge of the truth, but each with a different way.

MB- Religion is based on faith and science is based on observation and reasoning.I don’t think they are compatible.
Faith never changes but science keeps on progressing.

SKS – Not everything in religion is based on blind faith. Consider the “First Cause” for example. There are plenty of logical arguments in favor of the existence of a First Cause and actually it was Aristotle (a person who you cannot blame to be religious blinded) who first proposed it. And I can offer many other examples.

MB – What is the definition of religion ? You first answer this question then I will give the answer to your question.

SK – The ultimate goals of science and religion are one and the same: the emancipation of man. They are not only the two sides of the same coin; they are two paths describing the same coin: the ultimate context of human beings in our universe. Religion seeks to teach us the truth and science works to uncover reality. Reality and truth are the same entity.Thus the goals of both are the same. At least as far as the mind sciences are concerned both seek the same goal. Religion seeks to give man wisdom. Science seeks to give man emotional intelligence. At the most developed level of emotional intelligence the brain’s quality is wisdom. So the words may be different but the truth and the reality is the same. Even the paths may be different but the destination is the same; to give man wisdom/emotional intelligence.
In one word religion wants you to be good and do good, to know and follow the truth. Science wants nothing but the same. They both want man to actualize his full emotional intelligence/wisdom potential. It is clear that when it comes to how to live your life, religion boldly tells you to follow the ways of the wise. No wonder religion wants you to follow the wise path as law! Because main stream science won’t even define wisdom; and has more or less abandoned the research of wisdom. I think religion is the winner here. Perhaps the Prophets knew that till mankind is able to find out and define wisdom, wisdom ways must be enforced by law! And who can blame religion for this?

MB – First tell me who made religion and what was it’s purpose ? What is the definition of religion ?
Don’t you feel that the religion should be a ‘scientific religion’ as all the matters related to religion are mostly shrouded in mysticism , dogmatic faith and sentimentality and there should be a more practical approach ?

TEM – MD you state “Faith never changes but science keeps on progressing” could you give me your bases for why you think faith never changes? And define what you believe faith to be…

SKS -I believe that religion deals with many things that are not measurable while science deals with measurable things. Religion has God as its starting point, while science has God as a final goal. Both religion and science use logic and evidence. Jesus Christ called people to “reason” with him. Jesus also provided evidence to Thomas so that he believed his resurrection. Most religious claims about the existence of a creator or a purpose have very logical foundations also, as I mentioned above.

MB – Tracy, religion was basically made for the discipline in the society, for the benefit of society not to destroy it.People are in great trouble now a days facing many problems like poverty, diseases, quarrels, caused by jealousy and enmity, truly speaking they do not know what a religion is .They are blindly following it, they have not carefully studied their own scriptures. They develop their faith by seeing what their elders are doing or other persons around them are doing. This kind of faith is nominal faith, that’s why evil is flourishing day by day in this world. This faith they have developed in the childhood so it remains in their heart, mind and blood throughout their life, it never changes. There are so called pandits, maulvis who are their leaders.This is a very superficial form of worship and knowing religion superficially.
I see daily around me people who are sick and about to die, must have Gangajal in their mouth. Do you know that the water of river Ganga is so much polluted, when one is putting ashes of dead persons, flowers of a dead person and you are having the same water.Is that a faith based on true religion.? No.
We all go to temples , mosques and churches because we all are scared to die or loose something..
I come across ladies who take some medicines or ashes given to her by a so called baba or sadhu, they don’t believe in doctors. Is that not a blind faith ?
Take the example of toady’s eclipse, newspaper is in front of me, …Kanika Malhotra from Delhi..says we don’t want our child born on the day of eclipse, because astrologer says that it may create the disharmony in the baby’s life. Ask the astrologer about his life ? Is that in harmony ?..No It is only a way to earn money.
But the ladies are having faith in him not in science. So many of them come to us who say in our religion we can’t go for tubectomies as our religion doesn’t allow it.
So the ” faith never changes and science keeps on progressing.”
It has crossed more than 10 lines , Spiros, I am sorry for that.I will talk about the creation and the creator later on.

BOB – Perhaps there is a difference between the fundamental truth of something and the way humans interpret or pervert that truth. For instance, at the time it was thought the Earth was the center of our system, that “truth” didn’t match the truth of reality. In Mathematics, the concept of adding and subtracting always existed, we just needed to create a “language” to communicate the concepts. Gravity existed before we created the formula to calculate it. In science today there are complex concepts that already exist in nature, but that we may still be interpreting incorrectly. So, our reality as we understand it and the reality as it truly exists aren’t the same. So, perhaps the “religion” which was “made for the discipline in the society” is the reality as we perceive it. However, the deeper truth might be “why do we hold survival to be so important”? Evolution, survival of the fittest, science, wars, politics… the end goal is ultimately to survive. Why? What would be so wrong if everything vanished? To me, the only reason “survival” would be so ingrained into life is that there must be an ultimate purpose. We must survive in order to accomplish the purpose. Religion, in its ultimate truth is mankind seeking that purpose. Religion, in the outward appearance, is mankind perverting that purpose through selfishness.

MB – Yes, we must find out the truth behind ‘survival’. ”We exist” is the truth , sun is the truth, moon is the truth, there is light everywhere , in the fire , in the lamp , in the sun , in the moon but because we are not able to find out the truth that means there is no light in our eyes.
The iron tonic which can not raise the level of hemoglobin is useless.
The food which can not enhance the immunity of the body is not a complete food.
The religion which is destroying society is a dead religion.
Science without a purpose is a paralyzed science, it is of no utility, it is a burden on us.

SKS -But science does not deal with the existence of purpose or not. Science deals only with the explaining of “how” things happen. Questions about “why” or “purpose” are out of its scope.

MB – Why out of it’s scope ? That’s what I want to ask.I am giving you the example of ‘ageing.’
There is no apparent reason why cells should not live more than 100 years if they are being provided with oxygen , water , amino acids , glucose etc.They should live up to 100 million years according to science.
The science which can not prevent death is useless , that means there is some force in the universe which is beyond the reach of science.

SKS – I do not believe that religion is the way to explain things which are not currently explained by science. This is the “God of the Gaps” argument and I am not very fond of it. I strongly see that religion and science see the world from a very different perspective. Science tries to analyze the how things operate, the mechanics of the world. On the other hand religions deals with things like the purpose of life or why does the world exist, which are beyond the reach of science: even if we find out what caused the Big Bang, we will again have to find out the cause of that cause and so on…the question “why the universe exists” will remain.
Problems with science start when science attempts to answer such questions that are out of its scope.

MB – Yes I totally agree with the above statement.

Debate 16.2 – Can a scientist believe in God?

SKS – For me a scientist can believe in God and at the same time practice his/her science.

MB- Yes I believe in God.

SK -As Gd cannot be defined within the paradigm of science, scientists who believe in Gd and those who do not believe in Gd are on the same shaky ground as Gd’s existence cannot be proved or disapproved. As far as science is concerned both are wrong. So scientists who believe in the existence are taking a 50-50 chance. Considering the fact that if there is a Gd then your actions have consequences and so it is better to be safe then sorry. On a personal level I have had some spiritual experiences and firmly believe that there is a Gd.

SKS – However the existence of a First Cause is something that has good logical arguments in favour, from the time of the Aristotle philosophy.

Debate 17 – Human Nature (the basic character traits that are the cause of the human personality; the very substance that generates the fundamental personality traits of human beings): is it fixed or can it be changed?

SKS – I would first have to ask “what do you consider as human nature”?

SK – Your human nature is what defines you. As the basic dark side of our nature is considered to be natural, a part of our construction, we try to do the best we can, we try to learn to cage the beast. We learn to control our dark feelings. But controlling the animal part of our nature is like we have a tiger that we have to keep in check it still needs to be fed and taken care of. For instance the part that defines our greed forces us to work work work to prove to our self that we are the best. So we are always worried of loosing what we have and always planning what more we can have. In the meantime time is slipping away. Suddenly we awaken to a lot of riches. We genuinely feel rich. (this is due not to the accumulation of wealth but because time makes us wiser). But we are also in for a shock, for the time has taken a toll on our bodies. We suddenly realize that riches cannot bring back our youth, our peak life. So we join seminars, listen to the advice of the likes of Deepak Chopra and read books by Steven Pinker. We try to live wisely and in the present. Before we pass away it all comes to us. We finally get it. Our human nature has become wise. OUR HUMAN NATURE HAS ACTUALLY CHANGED. (SO WHY DOES IT CHANGE IF IT IS SUPPOSED TO BE STRUCK IN STONE?).*We finally know what life is. But alas no amount of money will bring our peak life back. Why can’t we see that wisdom changes our human nature and that human nature is not cast in stone?

MB -70% of it can’t be changed , 30% can be changed if willingness is there.

PG – Even if I don’t know if it is the best position of the cursor; I like that answer, as I dislike Aristotelian statements which are 100 % yes or 100% no

MB – 🙂

Debate 18 – Human Psychology issues

Debate 18.1 – Is the id (the fundamental human desires/drives) real?

SK – The so called id is our basic unconscious urge to have the best of everything, a life of total pleasure.Freud called it as our sex drive. Adler called it a mastery drive and Jung called it the desire to belong. I strongly suspect that the id is our unconscious drive to recapture and recreate to the extent possible our life as we experienced it in the womb. In the womb we had a constant life of feeling love, warmth and security. This constant positive feed back 24/7 created in us feelings of omnipotence. At birth we were well acquainted with a life of effortless pleasure. Especially we got used to these feelings of love, warmth and security. Your id is your basic desire to recreate womb-reality, your 24/7 womb life. Your unconscious desire to regain womb life. Its like a dethroned emperor trying to get his kingdoms back.
To the extent possible we seek love by trying to get as famous and as popular as possible. To recreate warmth we try to make our life as comfortable as possible; we try to acquire as many comforts as possible. To recreate security we try to have as much wealth as possible.

Debate 18.2 – What is the ego and the super ego and what is the relationship between them?

MB – Ego is ‘self-love’
I have never heard of this word…” super ego”.
Self love brings pride which ultimately leads to hatred and jealousy.

SK – Your so called ego is really your self image. Your ego has a face. It has a personality. It has dreams and desires. Your ego when stuck at the birth level is your premature self image. At the teenage level it is your immature self image. At the adult level it is stuck at the mature level as your mature self image. At the super mature level your ego has evolved into you.

Since the ancient times man has believed that the super ego is our conscience. I strongly suspect that our so called superego is our true self. I have found that the human qualities of the true self and those of a person of conscience are exactly the same. Both are selfless, humble, altruistic, graceful, honest, loving, sacrificing, respectful etc. The true self is the very embodiment of the human conscience. For all practical purposes they are both one and the same entity.

Thus our ego is our phony self image and our super ego is our true self.

Debate 18.3 – Is spiritual excellence possible?

MB – Yes it is possible but a very difficult task.

SK – What is the self? Is it immortal? Is it the same in all of us? Is it divine? These are questions that are outside the paradigm of science but I can say that the qualities of the divine self and the qualities of a self master are exactly the same! They are both humble and selfless and sacrificing etc. No wonder since time immemorial man has been trying to create self masters; man has been trying to create wise human beings. And as wisdom = super mature emotional intelligence, to create self masters we need to create super mature emotionally intelligence human beings. The qualities of a divine self apart from it being eternal are the same as that of a super normal self. Thus to achieve spiritual excellence all we need to do is to develop the self to the super mature emotionally intelligent level.

MB – There are three levels of the creation..
Uppermost–Purely spiritual
Second level –Universe –spirit predominates matter
Third level —Earth –Where matter predominates the spirit.
So it’s a long journey from lowest level to the highest.
We can’t reach that level , if we reach that we will become God.

Debate 18.4 – What is the difference between brain and mind?

MB – In brain the thinking dominates while in mind emotions predominate.

SK @ MB – The mind/self/self image decides the thinking and starts the thinking process but the brain quality determines the thinking quality that is the brain decides how much emotional coloring the thinking will have; how much the entrenched brain patterns will alter the current reality.

The brain and mind are two separate though inter dependent entities. Where the brain is the projector and the mind is the image. The difference between the brain projector and the regular film projector is that the brain projector projects a ‘live’ self conscious mind. Its like the film being projected has not just images but self conscious images that are aware of their own self and are aware of the context of their surroundings; as well as they can look back at the projector…The mind is the true ‘I’, the ‘me’ of each individual. However for most people the ‘I’ is cloaked by the self image. As a result for most individuals the self image is the mind. The self image is projected by a polluted brain. The more pure the brain, the closer to the real self the person is.

To take out the emotional brain garbage (EBG) one must identify the self with the mind (as your mind is th real you ) and focus with contextual mindfulness on the brain garbage as in:
1) I am not my brain.
2) My brain is an organ of my body, just like my hands. As I have full control of my hands I must have full control of my brain.
3) I must focus on my self image and understand why my self image has cloaked my real self – my real mind.
4) As my mind is in the grip of my brain, I must realize it is like my body is dictating my behavior.
5) It is a big handicap that our brain remains in charge of our true self – our mind.
6) The bigger handicap is that we are not even crystal clear about this problem and as a result we are confused about our self and we don’t even know where to begin.
7) So begin by becoming aware that ‘I am my mind’.
8) Once you know who you are in your mind, identify with your true ‘I’ and start the process of changing not only your self image of your mind but also focus on how to change the infrastructure of your brain. It is not an easy task as your brain is hardware and software (not just hardware ) that is programmed to generate electro chemical reactions that project your false self – your false mind. Your phony self image – your phony mind is backed with and powered by a physically altered brain. So be patient as the needed physical changes of the brain will take time. But once you start on this journey, remember time will keep passing anyway, you will awaken one day as your true mind – as your true ‘I’!
I can go on and on…

But please realize that you have the power to change into your true self – your true mind and above all please make sure your future generations grow up into pure beings with no EBG fuel to power a polluted brain.

MB -@SK , Can you tell me where exactly the ‘ mind’ is located in our body ?

PG – Neurosciences, by using scanning equipments, try to identify what areas of the brain and what chemicals intervene in the brain. There are big conflicts between the limbic system (emotions) and the neocortex (reasoning). Dopamin, adrenalin, cortisol, testosterone and plenty other secretions are joining the fight. Pleasure seeking and pain avoiding seems to be the main drives. That would be consistent with the quest for comfort that SK explained. But that knowlege is evolving so fast that there is no definite answer to the question.
MB – Like water , mind flows in each and every cell of our body.

SK @ MB – The mind is a projection as a result of the physical and emotional actions/reactions of the brain. In religion the mind ‘manifests’ itself while in science it is a by product of the electrochemical actions/reactions of the brain. As I said the brain is the projector and the mind is the image. So its location would be in the brain.

@ PG – Thanks for joining this crucial debate.
MB – @PG ” But that knowledge is evolving so fast that there is no definite answer to the question.”
I agree with this statement.

@SK – Tell me one thing which always bothers me that all the Yoga gurus like baba Ramdev , AOL Ravishankar teach only one thing and that is ” how to control our mind.” They are teaching ” Sudarshan kriya”
” Pranayaam ” ” kapaalbhati ” , ” vipasanna” and so many other things.I always think that what is the need of controlling your mind , just don’t originate it , don’t let it take the birth.
It’s cost is very less than the desires.Poor mind costing $ 1 and bearing the weight of $ 100 million desires.
But I simply don’t understand why a person should control his desires by controlling the mind.Let him have ice cream if he wants to have it, let him go for shopping and watch movie if he or she wants to.
I agree that they decrease the level of anxiety and reduce high blood pressure and I am totally aware of their medical benefits and other aspects in detail., but God has made our mind or what you call it ” image” in a way that it works according to the normal physiology of the brain. If It wanders like monkey what is the harm in it.?
Within seconds I am able to take the trip of your NY and so many countries so why should I suppress it.?

SK @ MB
Sages teach mind/self control because there is no limit to fulfilling your desires. It is better to control your desires then to let them run amok; as you said, ‘Poor mind costing $ 1 and bearing the weight of $ 100 million desires.’

MB -@SK That’s what I am asking , the world is so beautiful why one should be deprived of this ? When God has given us this beautiful mind why are we playing with its nature ?
Normal man has normal desires like at present I had the desire of writing in this knol and I am writing.

Debate 19 – Why do humans think?

SKS – What is the reason which makes us think?

MB – We think because our brain structure is made like that.

SK- We think because we have a self conscious brain.
MB – Yes but self conscious brain is due to it’s structure only including the pineal gland.

SKS – How do you “know” you now think? You observe your self? And who observes that self so as to “know” that you “know you think”? Another “higher” self?

MB-When I was born I didn’t know anything but gradually with the help of sensory currents and my five senses I started developing my memory power as nature has given me a remarkable piece of equipment and that is called—BRAIN.It has 100,000,000,000,000 brain cells.It can store 2,000,000,000,000,000,000 bits of any data or equal to 13 million CD’S .I have heard that Einstein was using only 5% of his brain , I am a normal person so must be using only 2% but that 2% is sufficient enough to tell me to ” know” that I know that ”I think” .Its not another self, its me because when I die my future thoughts will die along with me.May be my present thoughts can be preserved in this knol.

SKS – And if a time machine is invented you can go back and correct any mistakes you did… 🙂 For me the bottom line is that we know so little about consciousness…

Debate 20 – Do you believe in determinism of free will?

SKS – Exact science is based on the assumption that universal physical laws apply. But if laws apply to everything, they also apply to our mind. If we know the exact starting position of every particle in the universe and all the laws which govern theirs movements, that would mean that we can predict anything in the future. Would that mean that we could predict our thoughts also? After all, our brain is comprised of electrons and protons, all moving based on the same universal laws…I believe that this is not correct and that we do indeed have free will. I do not know how this can be explained, but this is what I feel: every time I decide for something everything in me says that “I” decided that.

MB – No Idea.

SK – Free will is real. However free will is as real as the ‘I’ is real; as much as our mind is real. Imagine free will in a -2 mind. Yes you have free will but it is a chained potential in most lives. If you want to know what free will really is become your true ‘you’/self/mind and then you can taste free will 24/7.

PG – I would say that we have some latitude and autonomy to decide, whatever the “mechanical” part in us. Btw, “predictability” might not be the best criterion as even a mechanical system can bring surprises and not be fully predictable as bifurcations make it non linear (the famous butterfly effect, the percolation theory and its “critical steps”…).

SKS – I believe I have free will because I feel that I decide everything I do. However I recognize that society affects my decisions. But within my boundaries, I decide what to do and say. I do not know how that can be compatible with scientific determinism, but I cannot ignore my feeling.

Debate 21 – Can psychology/philosophy ever become a pure science?

MB – Philosophy can become a science but not ‘ pure ‘ science as pure science wants decisions and act.Things can’t be taken for granted.Take the example of my field that is Obstetrics, which is pure science as well as an art of conducting deliveries.One has to take the decision of doing caesarean section immediately.We can’t have philosophical approach , think for more than 10 minutes and the baby is gone.

SK -Pure science requires real evidence, evidence that can be defined within the paradigms of science and can also be measured. As long as we humans will continue to seek ultimate answers to the fundamental questions of life. As long as we try to find answers to the very nature of Gd and how it was all created we will keep missing the real boat of the meaning of life itself. We will perhaps never be able to make psychology/philosophy a pure science. However it is possible that if we focus our quest not on how it was made, or what it is but on; now that we have it how we can best use it. If we redefine our quest to how to improve the quality of life then our goals of making psychology/philosophy a purer science can be achieved.

MB – Give me one practical example.

SK – Researching water is a good example. All those who have been researching why water is water, why it has the qualities it does have not gotten much success. Just like many topics of philosophy their knowledge is still fuzzy. Those who devoted their time to researching how to take advantage of the properties of water have gone from harnessing the force through the water wheel to harnessing the force in the water molecule. Again in your medical field trying to figure out the cause of cancer is much harder, even though in this case it is necessary, than trying to experiment with various drugs and other therapies to prevent, control, reduce and even eliminate cancer. Take gold, since ancient times man has tried to make gold with little success. Those who tried to take advantage of its properties have succeeded handsomely. Knowing why gold is gold is like our current attitude toward philosophy. We must focus on how to refashion gold, how to make better gold jewelery. We must turn philosophy into the science of making life heaven on earth by focusing on how to improve the quality of life rather than on whether life is eternal or not.

Here is a quote from one of Cleas Johnson’s knols (my favorite knoller, winner of the current top knol award), ‘Of course, usefulness helps understanding and vice versa, while non-usefulness implies not understandable and vice versa.’ So why does philosophy have to focus exclusively on non-understandable and non-useful research?

MB – As you mentioned that cause of cancer is much harder , I think philosophy will be helpful in Health Education : to avoid the known causes like smoking and chronic irritation or repeated simple injury , these are certain known factors which definitely cause cancer.Then regular exercise and diet are certain factors which
definitely play an important role but without doing experiments on chemotherapeutic drugs , radiotherapy , nano-magnetic particles, how philosophy is going to help ? I still fail to understand.
Pure science needs calculations and experiments so in my opinion it can help only in prevention not in complete cure.
Regarding quality of life , Yes you are right that we can definitely improve the quality so both the fields complement each other but philosophy can become a pure science I still disagree with the statement.

SK- I did not say that philosophy can become a pure science, I said it can become a ‘purer’ science ,that is ,it can become a more useful science, a more practically beneficial science. Also’ How philosophy is going to help, I still fail to understand.” A more usefulness driven philosophy will help us focus on the understandable and easier achievable goals that have practical benefits, rather than wasting money and brain power on non understandable and thus non beneficial goals.

MB – See the difference between two sentences………’ Can philosophy ever become a pure science’.
and ………’.Can philosophy ever become a purer science.’
Now the meaning is totally changed.
Why not ? Yes the philosophy can become a purer science.
Science itself can become a purer science.

SKS – You said that pure science requires evidence. Aren’t there things that do not present them as evidence? Like things related to human consiousness for example? What evidence do you have to prove that I thought of what I now write on my own and that I was not brain-washed by an alien who took control of my mind and made me write these things?

MB -Of course I have an evidence.Can a person in coma think of writing on his own ? Brain is required for consciousness which is proved by science not by philosophy.Regarding brain -washed by an alien , studies are going on it.Can you imagine what will be life in 2050 ? Your virtual friends will out number your real friends.
and brain implants will be very common.

SKS – Science is not only very far away from explaining human consciousness, but it also seems that this will be one of its “last frontiers”. Consciousness cannot be explained because first of all we have not clearly understood what it is even though we experience it day by day. Consciousness is not the sum of our cells or neurons. It is something more than that.

MB – May be.

Debate 22 – Can moral values be defined within the paradigm of science?

MB – Yes.

SK – Moral values have mainly come from religion and/or from the assumption that as we are superior human beings we are obliged to have moral values. Thus morale values are based on faith and assumption s which do not lie within the paradigm of science. However it is possible to base moral values on solid hard facts that lie within the paradigm of science.
As there are four levels of the mind there are four levels of character traits in any given society. The moral values of a -2 premature mind are the same as that of a snake. The moral values of a -1 immature mind are those of a corrupt person. The moral values of a +1 mature mind are those of responsible, law respecting but unrealistically over ambitious person. The moral values of a +2 super mature mind are those of a selfless, humble and wise human being. A super mature mind is the very personification of Moses’ Ten Commandments. He does not need the love of heaven or the fear of hell to act selflessly and to treat every one else as #1 and his own self last.
Thus the character traits of a +2 super mature mind can be the basis of the moral values of /for all mankind – be merciful, kind, giving, loving, sacrificing, helpful etc because it is the super mature thing to do.

MB – As the science is advancing moral values are deteriorating.
News from ‘ Hindustan times ‘ Aug 3 , Monday …….Dr Duru Shah , researcher of Federation of Obstetrics and Gynecological society of India ( FOGSI ) , surveyed 3,500 young girls aged between 15-25 years from roughly 10 metros and towns. One in four girls , young unmarried were found to be sexually active barely using some contraception.41% said that the media had been their only source of information.One in five said their mother had not given them any information.
One more article I read was on trans-music parties and rave parties on face book.One police inspector made a fake profile and reached at the site where they were selling drugs.

SK – I believe that many of the current ills of society are due to lack of emotional intelligence education. It is a trophy self image driven society where the East is copy catting the West. Even the movies are sending the wrong messages.
Especially for Indian women sex is an embarrassing topic. Mothers must be woken up to the importance of sex education which must also be made a compulsory subject from at least 8th grade onwards for both boys and girls.

MB – 8th grade ? By that time they start using Twitter and fb , what mothers can do ? They hardly listen to them.It’s not that easy as you are thinking.

SK – I am thinking that sex education must start before they hit puberty. Perhaps 6th/7th grade may be more appropriate?

MB – The world has totally changed , there are already +2 kind of children in India who compete for higher studies like IIT-JEE , AIEEE, CPMT examinations and get through them by putting labour and intelligence.
In my opinion they are +3 ….do you think these kind of children can indulge in such unsocial activities ?
And do you think it is a practical thing to give them lessons on sex education ?
If they are so intelligent they must be knowing already about it and must be knowing what is good and what is bad for them.These things doesn’t come by teaching in the classes but what they see around them , it’s the environment which is responsible for it.
The society is changing day by day , they don’t want to get married till they earn and buy a flat and a car for themselves.They want to live like free birds and by that time they cross the age of 30 and at this stage of life you can’t tell them what is good and what is bad for them.SK things have become different so think practically.

SK -Just because a significant number of students, though still a small percentage are on the right track it does not mean we should ignore the vast majority that is still on the wrong track.

SKS – And will science or philosophy or art get them on the right track?

SK – Yes the correct science which at its highest form can become art will get them on the right track.

MB –This is a very difficult situation and I really don’t know how to implement it.Media like television is promoting these tablets—Unwanted-72 and I-Pill .Unmarried girls take them directly from chemist without knowing the side effects.
We can not ignore them who are on the wrong track but it’s not that easy the way you are thinking.

SK – Yes it is not easy but if we can get our ideas/insights into the main cirriculum arround the world then we can make a big difference in the right direction.

Debate 23 – Why is peace so hard to achieve?

SK – Peace is a component of wisdom. Only wise action from both sides will produce peace.
There are two kinds of basic forces in this world: negative and positive, good and bad. There are two kinds of actions good and bad. As far as human behavior is concerned it is all powered by just two forces ignorance and wisdom where ignorance produces pain, suffering, loss and damage; and wisdom produces pleasure, profit, enjoyment and prosperity. When it comes to war and peace, war is produced by ignorance and peace is produced by wisdom. Pease is an all or nothing entity.

MB – So, how you are going to convert negative forces into positive , theoretically it sounds good but is that so easy ? Will people listen to you ? Why should they listen to you , what are you giving them except good thoughts and do you think they will read this and change their heart ?

SK – The whole idea of knol is to place the inside information of any phenomina you know of so others can learn from it. It is the duty of us knollers to take out as much fuzzyness from knowledge as possible. We can hope to gradually turn arround the mind set of the movers and shakers so they know that repeating the same mistakes for 1000s of years will not bring peace. Even today there is no genuine peace between even Western Europe countries. Look at their defence budgets. Each is trying to be the strongest in their own neighborhood. Look at their rivalries in commerce. Therfore if I think I know something and it can lead to improvement in any sphere it is my duty to put it up as a knol.

MB -SK you are doing a very good thing by writing and contributing something towards society.At least you have thought of it as you are really concerned and I appreciate that.There are only few people who understand that it’s their duty, but what I want to say is….What is the end result of it ? Is there any newspaper or any other media in which you are not reading or hearing the news regarding crime.? Have you heard of peace anywhere in the world ?

SK @ MB – Just because news from around the world is discouraging does not mean we should stand on the sidelines and not try to wake up the world to the real causes why peace is so elusive. I am hoping that one day our efforts will pay off and knols like this one will become part of the curriculum in schools. So more people will become wise.

MB – Let’s hope for the best.

GDB @ SK- May I ask you a couple of questions regarding your first post?
You said there are two forces, “two forces ignorance and wisdom.” Then you
said, “ignorance produces pain, suffering, loss and damage; and wisdom
produces pleasure, profit, enjoyment and prosperity.” My first question is
this, “Of what does this ignorance consist of? and, Of what does this Wisdom
consist of?” Then as to your observation of, “ignorance…pain,
wisdom…pleasure” Where in the history of the world is this most evident?.

SKS – Can you please elaborate SK? I think the most recent example of ignorance and wisdom misuse was the Second World War…A lot of lessons to be learnt from there exist…

Debate 24 – What is happiness and how can it be achieved?

SK – Pure happiness is a function of the pure and fully actualized humanness in you.
As in every thing else you are the source of all your attributes of emotions! It is just like you are a tree and the emotions are your fruit. The quality of the tree will determine the quality of its fruit. The quality of your happiness will depend on the quality of your actualized humanness which is the real you. It is the fully developed potential of the Christ in you that can experience pure happiness. And I am not talking of The Christ as The Son of Gd; I am talking of Christ as in pure knowledge.
This pure humanness, this Christ is the real currency of life. An authentic life you can buy only with authentic currency!

MB -Definition of happiness varies from person to person.A person who is a farmer , for him happiness would be good rainfall and a good crop ( In India there is hardly any rain this season that’s why this came in my mind )For a student who is appearing in competitive exams , happiness would be if he gets his choice of subject in top university.For a housewife happiness would be if she can go out for dinner on weekends with the family.
For some persons it is merely small gift which can be exchanged on special occasions.
For a surgeon happiness lies in doing neat and bloodless surgery with good results.
How it can be achieved is up to you.It comes from within , can’t be bought from the market.( sorry can be bought from the market in the form of handbags , shoes , new cell phone etc etc )
For a big industrialists it’s share market , for a film star it’s the success of the film which gives them happiness…..Like wise………

SK – When happiness is defined by success as you suggest, it is like outside results determine happiness. Pure happiness comes from within. It comes from living a pure life, in doing a selfless job, it comes from a job well done. Happiness is the journey of life, it is the cake of a good honest life where happiness from success is just the icing on the cake.

MB- That means we are not doing our job properly ? Poor farmer is not asking for big things like icing on the cake.He is concerned for his family.We are not saints or monks , for us meaning of pure life is doing our duties and if we are getting some happiness due to our so called ” real self ” by going out for dinner once in a while and buying small small things which give us happiness why should we get deprived of these ?
We must have worked hard that’s why we are getting the cake and if we are getting icing on the top , I don’t see any reason not to enjoy that.
We are not hurting anyone or not doing any crime that means we are living a pure life.

SK – Living a pure life is benificial all around to self and everyone else. Pure happiness comes with every breath, in every moment of life and the icing is a well deserved extra. Yes we are not doing our job properly because we are not raising our kids properly. We are errecting barriers not only by blocking their true self but also by errecting walls of prejudice above all against our childrens own self and against other castes and creeds.

MB- You said happiness is not defined by success.In my opinion happiness is defined by success only.
Raising kids is a different issue , I can write a whole book on that.
Film star Shilpa Shetty is a very spiritual person , I read her interview in Sunday’s Hinustan Times.She believes in all religions , goes to Church , Haji Ali , Siddhi Vinayak temple , Tirupati Bala ji etc etc but simultaneously enjoys eating outside Chinese food also .She is successful , famous and happy.
She is enjoying double or triple layer of icing— spirituality plus—religion—plus–contributing towards society by giving donations to cancer patients.

SK – I do not know Ms. Shetty but it seems that she is a +2 person. She enjoys physical pleasures as well as spiritual pleasures. And this is how it should be; pleasuers must come from the inside as well as from the outside. For the best life and many layers of icing one must be a +2 person which she seems to be.

MB- You don’t know Shilpa Shetty ? the one who was in ” Big Brother ” show in UK and cried due to racial comments made by Jade Guddy who is no more in this world.Now don’t tell me that you don’t know who was Jade Guddy….The one who died of carcinoma cervix few days back in front of camera.
I wanted to ask a question…………Can a person be happy even if he is sad ?

Debate 25 – Is there a single formula for success in life?

MB – Time management is very important.In our life opportunities come but we are not bale to recognize them and we are afraid to take risk.Take risk , come on the road and you will see a new life which is much better than your previous one.Live life like Mahatma Gandhi if you really want to achieve something.No belongings and you have time for the bigger goals.
So for me a single formula for success is …Take risk.

SK – Our minds work in images. We form an image of our self, of others and how the world is, and how it works. It is our ‘inside out’ reality which I call our personal reality (P-R) that dicides for us how we percieve the ‘out side in reality’, which I call (A-R). When A-R matches P-R then the chances for success are the most. Thus the formula for success is A-R divided by P-R must equal 1.
Success= A-R divided by P-R = 1!

SKS – Each time you encounter a problem, think about that: how will you think back to that problem some decades in the future just being old, with grandchildren and ready to die having lived a full life? If you see that problem under that filter, you will see that it is not so important as it looks…

MB -Yes life is full of problems and nobody is interested in your problems.You have to solve them on your own.

@SK..I am a layman , I didn’t understand your formula of success.How will you explain this formula to a person with normal IQ ?

SK – In laymen’s terms it is the same as the bible says, ‘Know the truth and it will make you free.’ Know, understand and become your true self in order to percieve actual reality as actual reality. When you understand your self and your life and everything else in it the way life truthfully is then your chances of success are the maximum. In my formula what I am expressing is this: develop the capacity of your brain power to make your personal reality match the actual reality of life. Thus success = when A-R and your P-R are both the same. When your out side in perception is understood just as it is outside; you insure success.

MB – Actual reality of life outside is full of corruption , dishonesty , untrustworthiness , selfishness , that means we also become the same so that our PR matches the AR and we become famous and successful ?

SK – We become the same when our ‘inside out’ P-R ( I choose not to use PR because PR stands for public relations ) scums to the ‘out side in’ A-R only when our mind/brain level is -2, -1 or +1. When our brain level is +2 our P-R is on rock solid ground and is not affected by A-R. In fact for +2 individuals their P-R will match the A-R on their own honest terms, inspite of the prevelant A-R being corrupt, selfish etc.

MB – If we are becoming the same so as to match the A-R that means we are also full of corruption , selfishness , dishonesty.Isn’t it ? That means ”Tit for Tat ” .If a person in front of us is about to kill us , kill him
before he kills us. Now I know the answer of question……. Why is peace so hard to achieve?

Debate 26 – What is the biggest mistake books (without exception) on self hep make?

[We have many questions about self. We could add a more specific question on the mistake that the knoller who wrote the question thinks books on self help make – Spiros Kakos]

SK – All books written on self management are addresed to the individual as if the individual is his full potential. Notice how they all say – ‘you do this, you dream big, you have full confidence in your self!’ The biggest problem is that those who need self help, really, for all practical purposes are just their self image. The self image has its own agenda and the real ‘I’/’me’ is not in a position to do much. So when the advice is to dream big it is the self image that does the dreaming, while the guidiance is to the real ‘you’. No wonder these books do not have as much success as they claim. The single top agenda of all self help books must be to first make the self image dissapear and the real self emerge. Then and only then will self help books become affective.

MB – All persons are not of + 2 category that’s why they read these books so that they can cultivate some mango trees of wisdom and remove the tree of ignorance.The writers must be of +1 category doing mistakes because they are not aware of their real self image.

SK – The problem is that all those aspects of knowledge that matter when it comes to our true self are still fuzzy. When we talk of wisdom for instance main stream science continues to define it by its attributes. They do not realize that the ‘you’ that they are addressing the book to is being read by and understood by a -2, -1 and mostly +1 self image! This is why inspite of reading most self improvement books there is little real change.

Debate 27 – What is the most common mistake people make repeatedly?

SKS – That they believe they know something.

SK – Most people do not learn from their mistakes. They keep using the same approach and each time they expect a different result.

MB – Is it a mistake if they know something ?
I think they should learn from other’s mistakes but the question you asked is different I suppose.

SK – Not knowing is the biggest mistake. And not knowing the best way is a close second. Yes learning is the key to avoid making the same mistake. Learning includes learning form one’s own failed experiences and/or learning from the insights/experiences/lessons of others.

JA – equating the mass production of technology & materialism with human progress. There is no evidence to suggest modern technology along with materialism is tied to [qualitative] progressive human development and evolution.

Debate 28 – Is life a science or philosophy?

MB – It is the combination of both.

SK – The biggest tradgey is that for most people life is a philosophy when it can be a science. When people become their full humanness potential they become the scientist of their life. When their potential humanness is thwarted they remain philosophers of their life! For most people life is fuzzy because their own humanness to themselves is fuzzy. However it can be a mixture of both as some parts can be fuzzy and other parts of life clear.

MB- Yes you are absolutely right.

SKS – But what about art? Aren’t some things in life similar to art? Isn’t life similar to art also? Don’t we like living, but without knowing exactly why, in the same way we like a painting without being able to articulate specific things that make us like it?

SK – Living life like we appriciate art is a beautiful way of taking care of one’s own self/life. In fact expressing life in art form and becomming an artist of life itself is the highest goal of the artist? An artist expresses his interpretation of reality/life in his own unique way and if we can do the same with our life it would be more than a miricale! It is like enjoy the mango without trying to find out how the mango grows on the tree. Indeed for some aspects of life it is more benificial to enjoy it as art rather than to try to understand its unanserable mystries.

MB- Like we say ignorance is bliss. I wish I was uneducated and ignorant.

SKS – I don’t know…I want to be happy, but at the same time I want to reduce my ignorance. Ignorance also results in no-responsiblity. “I don’t know, so I cannot be held responsible for anything…”. But I don’t like that. I am responsible for what I do and for my decisions.

Debate 29 – What is the most important event in a person’s life and what are its implications?

SKS – Two very important events in a person’s life that I can think of are birth and death.

MB – But when you are born that means it’s life. I think the meaning of this question is different.

SK – The most important event in every individuals life is the sperm race. It is a very real life and death race! If you don’t win the sperm race you do not win the right to be born. The implications of this are very huge. It means that Gd/Mother Nature gives you the chance to be born and it is up to you to make the right effort to get the right to life. Thus it is you who is responsible for your life! Also the fact that you are here means that you won your sperm race, whichmeans you are a champion of champions; one in hundreds of millions! Thus indeed you are extreemly special…

MB – I am hearing it for the first time.I have heard of the rat race but not sperm race.You mean to say that ” birth” is a special event in our life ?

SKS – Death is also an event of life. It is part of life. Only after death you stop existing.

MB – Death race ? What’s that ? It’s me who is responsible for my life ? I don’t think so.When I was born I didn’t even know the meaning of existence.
What about the test tube babies ? In those cases it is the race of Ova instead of sperm.We induce ovulation by giving drugs and then do fertilization with our choice of sperm in vitro.That means they are not champions ?

SK – Death is indeed an event that ends life. It is the last event in the closing chapter of life.
Test tube babies are an unnatural way of birth. Yes they are not champions. It will be interesting for you or anyone else to research/experiment and see if you can recreate the conditions where a sperm race cab be possible out side the womb. If it is successful then test tube babies must be subjected to a sperm race.

MB – ” Death is the last event of life ” that everyone knows.I am asking about the ” death race” ?
We are not sperm or ova so how can we see what’s happening to us, we are the end product of fertilization , which is blastocyst and then embryo.I am not getting your point what are you trying to convey? Are you talking about this world’s race or the race before the stage of ” blastocyst.”
I can prove that the test tube babies are as intelligent as the natural ones who have gone through the ” sperm race” .It is not the race but the genetic structure which is responsible for the ” champions.”

SK – I am talking of the sperm race which takes place before the blastocyst. There is no such thing as a death race where did you get this idea from? The race is a fact of life, a natural way of life. And if we can produce the natural way out side the womb all the better. The sperm race does not produce just more intelligent children. The sperm race produces the healthiest children. The survival of the fittest.

MB – What an imagination that sperm race produces healthiest children.It’s not the race which produces champions but chromosomes and genes which produce champions.What about the diseases like cystic fibrosis , haemoglobinopathies and other sex linked disorders where X chromosome of the father and of the mother carry recessive genes and the children are carriers of the disease, that means the sperm was slow , if it was running slow then how come it reached the ova faster than the others ? Now the children of these children can get affected if both of them carry recessive genes. How come the defective sperm reaches over there ? After all it’s sperm race where only healthy sperms can run.
In IVF , ART techniques we can identify the best sperm and can get it fertilized. Tell me which technique is better ? natural or artificial ?

SK – Given other things being equal the physically strongest wins the sperm race. In any given sperm race all the sperm come from the same gene and chromosomes pool. If all the sperm taking part in the race are slow then the best amongst them will win. I think the natural way is better. Of course there are exceptions to all rules.

MB – Then why people go for pregenetic counseling ?

SK – Because defective genes are also part of life and people want to make sure that they have healthy progney.
I can prove that the test tube babies are as intelligent as the natural ones who have gone through the ” sperm race” .It is not the race but the genetic structure which is responsible for the ” champions.”

SK – I am talking of the sperm race which takes place before the blastocyst. There is no such thing as a death race where did you get this idea from? The race is a fact of life, a natural way of life. And if we can produce the natural way out side the womb all the better. The sperm race does not produce just more intelligent children. The sperm race produces the healthiest children. The survival of the fittest.

MB – What an imagination that sperm race produces healthiest children.It’s not the race which produces champions but chromosomes and genes which produce champions.What about the diseases like cystic fibrosis , haemoglobinopathies and other sex linked disorders where X chromosome of the father and of the mother carry recessive genes and the children are carriers of the disease, that means the sperm was slow , if it was running slow then how come it reached the ova faster than the others ? Now the children of these children can get affected if both of them carry recessive genes. How come the defective sperm reaches over there ? After all it’s sperm race where only healthy sperms can run.
In IVF , ART techniques we can identify the best sperm and can get it fertilized. Tell me which technique is better ? natural or artificial ?

SK – Given other things being equal the physically strongest wins the sperm race. In any given sperm race all the sperm come from the same gene and chromosomes pool. If all the sperm taking part in the race are slow then the best amongst them will win. I think the natural way is better. Of course there are exceptions to all rules.

MB – Then why people go for pregenetic counseling ?

SK -Because defective genes are also part of life and people want to make sure that they have healthy progney.

SKS – Naming the sperm race as the most important event in one’s life, seems like a category mistake to me. We are not responsible for what our sperm does. And is it “our” sperm? Does that sperm is “us”?

MB- @SK Exactly.That’s what I wanted to hear from you , that means if it was a natural race the progeny would have been a defective progeny and in ART there is no sperm race but the progeny is healthy.
Even I am surprised to hear that sperm race is the most important event in our life.You must be knowing that sperm knows in advance that it is his Y chromosome which is going to get fertilized if he runs faster than the others.

SK @ SKS – My sperm is the earlist, crudest part of me! Whether I was going to be born or not depended on my sperm ( the earliest me ) winning the race where the prize is life itself. No winning this race means no birth. So birth is dependent on winning the sperm race.

@ MB – Defective progney is only a small % of the whole. So ART helps in case of this small percentge. I am talking of the majority. I don’t know if the sperm knows , ‘that his Y chromosome…’. However when sperm from two different males enter the falopian tube then some sperm race on and other sperm try to prevent the other gene pool sperm from reaching the egg! Rivals from same father race against each other but rivals from different fathers fight to ensure that their own sibling wins the sperm race! Do they know what they are doing or if it is instinctive and part of their genitic blue print: who knows.

MB – @SK ” Birth is dependent on winning the sperm race ” , you are forgetting the other part. This race is of no use if there is no ovulation.Both are equally important.Suppose the sperm is very very fast and reaches the fimbria of the fallopian tube before ovulation then what is the use ? The life of ovum is not more than 24-48 hours while sperm’s is 72 hours if I am not forgetting my subject after reading your statements.
Either it has to wait or it will die.So the timing is more important than the race.
” Sperm from two different males ” ….now what’s this ? I can hardly understand one theory and you have come out with another.Just forget it.Shall I tell you one thing before closing this topic that if not the first , then second , if not second , then the third one , if not third then the fourth one…..total number of sperms are normally 60-120 million/ml…….even if it is 120th million …the last one , then also the fertilization will occur and normal male or female babies are born who have the strength to fight till death.
”So birth is dependent on winning the sperm race.”
I totally disagree with you.

SK – As I said given all the other factors are in place, then the sperm race victory is essential for birth. But you are right that some one has to win. But in reality it does not happen that the top one does not win. So lets close this topic and move on.
JA – parenting: the event of diminished or an absence of parenting can have catastrophic outcomes for the person. Conversely the event of being parents could be regarded as the most important event in a person’s life.

Debate 30 – Is nature subject to man or is it the other way around?

SKS – Man is part of nature. You cannot seperate the two.

GDB – Man was originally put here to care for the earth and enjoy the fruit of the land. But as time went on we have learned to abuse the land and it’s wildlife (small and great), thus in my opinion the land or “nature” is beginning to reject us more and more. I am also persuaded of a higher reason for all of this. The problem is that as we have abused the land we have several examples of “nature” rising up and taking control, destroying man (and other inanimate objects). These examples throughout the world are not done by mere chance or arbitrary reasons. There is purpose and design in all. That’s my observation.

MB – Yes we are the part of nature and by disturbing it we are destroying our beautiful planet.

Debate 31 – Is half a glass of water half full or half empty?

SK – Half a glass of water is never ever just half full nor is it ever just half empty. It is always half full and half empty at the same time. So when we see half a glass of water as just half full we are basing our observation on a half truth. Basing our behavior on a half truth has consequences. Optimists run out of money faster than pesimists. We do not need to be any one of them. We need to be realists! Who see the full truth!

MB – You tell me which portion of glass you like ,The upper one which is empty or the lower one which is full ?
When you see this type of glass , on which part you concentrate more or your attention is directed to which part ?
Are you scared to drink that half glass of water ?

SK – Half a glass of water represents the actual reality/truth about what is your finiancial position. Your bottom line economic and other asset status. So what is meant by looking at the half glass means is: are you focused on what you have or on what you don’t have/can have. Looking at the half full glass means that you are an optimist feeling good for what you still have. And as a result you are not focused on the empty part. It is always wise to look at the whole truth. This way you will want to drink/spend what you need while at the same time working to fill up the empty part! So be focused on both. Be prudent with your spending and efficient with your refilling the glass of life.
For any behavior let alone for spending your assets you should not be scared. You should be wise.

MB – Very well explained.
Water is related to thirst….The thirst of knowledge , the thirst of life , the thirst of love , the thirst of knowing the truth.Never let it die.I don’t like half glass of water lying on the table as it represents stagnation, either drink it or throw it or fill it again with fresh water.

SK – Look at how America and much of the world looks at half a glass! We are encouraged to look at it as half full. Look at the result of this on the American economy. By being optomistic about what we have, we tend to be irresponsible with spending money. In another context look at how a wise person looks at the knowledge he has. He does not sit on it and feel he has enough. He focuses on the empty part; on what he does not know and as a result he is a perpetual learner.

@ MB
Water is used just as a metefor. What this statement is saying is if you have a life that is 50% good and 50% bad. Will you consider your life bad or good? I do not look at it as good or bad, I look at it as 50% good as my security and the 50% bad as an opportunity to make it 100% good.
However what I find really interesting/exciting is how you explain, ‘I don’t like half glass of water lying on the table as it represents stagnation.’ This is a very intreguing statement. It explains how the American stock market works. I am taking the water lying in the glass to mean more and more dollars are poured into the stock market where the trillions of dollars are used within the confines of the stock trading. So all this money is kept stagnent within stocks that produce no goods, create no jobs and make no difference to the larger market place. Imagine if this same money was used to build new factories, or more effecient factories. Look at the amount of new jobs that would have been created!

MB @SK – I wrote it just like that as I don’t like unprogressive things, everything should flow……..like river water.
You are absolutely right ……..money is like arm or leg, use it or lose it by disuse atrophy.

Debate 32 – Can we prove within the paradigm of science, if there is a higher purpose of life?

SKS – Every thing we do in life, we do it for a purpose. That is why it is most logical to say that life itself has a purpose! And logic is one of the tools of science.

MB – Higher purpose of life ? I think it should be ” to know the truth” .We hardly know about this universe.We don’t know how many universes are there ? What is life after death ? What is soul ? Whether there is transmigration of the soul or not ?
I think I am unable to understand the meaning hidden behind this question.

SK – I want to know if you can prove a higher purpose explaining it within the paradigm of science; without explaining it in terms of Gd’s will etc.

MB – What higher purpose ? I am not able to get your point.
I hope you are not thinking on the lines of wisdom tree ?

SK – What is life about? For ones own selfish purposes or is there a selfless calling? Can we have humantarian goals even if there is no Gd?

MB – How this is related to science ?

SK – Can science provide the answers to this question or do we need Gd to define a higher calling?

MB – Yes we need some higher force to define the higher purpose of life.

Debate 33 – Does a falling tree in a world void of living beings make a sound as it hits the ground?

SKS – Every sound exists because we hear it. If there is no one to hear, then no “sound” – as we have defined the word – actually “exists”.

MB -Yes because it cries when it is falling.How can it be happy without it’s roots ?
Wait a minute …” World void of living beings ” ……….that means you are not talking of this world ?
Are you talking of space or something else ?

SK if you are making these questions then hat’s off to you.You are really sounding like a wise man now 🙂
I give you +2 for making these questions.

SK – This question has now been solved. A tape recorder, recorded sound of a small man made timed explosion in the forest where there was no one to hear it!

@ MB – I am not making all the questions. Q – 33 is also not from me. There are lots of wise people in this debate, including you.

MB – Tape recorder ? don’t be silly , who kept the tape recorded in the forest ? It must be a living thing who kept the tape recorder and the question is……. ” the world void of living things.”
If it is a tree then it’s a living thing, how can it be a world void of living beings if there is a tree ?
Second thing there is a very thin line between silence and sound.Both overlap each other.There is no importance of sound if there is no silence and vice versa.

SK – Actual-reality is actual-reality. If an event happens then all the repurcussions of that event will also happen. If a tree falls then it will make noise. However if there is no human there, then the actual-reality of the human is that as far as the personal-reality of the human is concerned there is nothing. No tree – no tree falling and no noise. The ‘out side in’ reality is still there but there is no one to experience it! For all practical purposes you are right only 50%.

MB- That means tree is not a living being ?

SK – All scientific evidence points to the fact that trees are alive. They breath, they reproduce etc. Infact some trees even eat insects. I remember reading that there is even a tree that as a sapling has a crude brain and it moves around to find a suitable spot to put down its roots and then as it settles down the brain disolves!

MB – If trees are alive then your question is wrong.

SKS – Indeed. If trees have consciousness then its falling would automatically “exist” since the tree itself would sense it and give meaning to it. But without any consciuousness “watching” how can something “be”?

Debate 34 – What is common between Science, Philosophy and Religion?

SK -Philosophy, religion and science are much more connected then we realize! At the highest stage of the mind/brain development the quality of the character traits (as defined by religion, philosophy and science) of every person are all one and the same!!! Religion wants you to be altruistic, philosophy wants you to be wise/altruistic and science/education wants you to be emotionally super mature which is the same! So ethics education is the common thread in all of them. Thus we need philosophers, religious leaders and scientists/educationists all working together to create ethics education that transforms the brain to +2.

MB – Science , philosophy and religion are the three strong pillars of our society.Fourth pillar is man himself. Imbalance between the four pillars results in disturbed society as we are seeing today.

Debate 35 – Can man create consciousness?

MB – Yes the man who is in a sleeping condition can awaken himself.

SKS – How?

MB- With the help of meditation.

SK – There was some extreemly exciting news. A scientist in England was able to show that certain ameno acids had the same molecular ingriedients as some basic living organisms! The only difference was their bonding, their amalgamation was structured differently. Perhaps we may one day be able to restructure the bonding of similar molecular ingriedients and turn amino acids into living organisms. But whether we can create a human being is quite another matter…

Debate 36 – What is friendship?

MB- Friendship is a language , expression of the language in different forms and colors.It’s like a relationship between flower and it’s fragrance, between desert and oasis , sea shore and sea waves.Look at the four directions –east-west , north and south, can’t you see the friendship between the four ?Can you hear the music of the water fall , it’s saying something….the story of sorrows and happiness of the mountain peaks.See the tired sun sleeping on the shoulder of the mountain.See the earth and sky meeting at one line. Can you differentiate the line between the two ? See the stars taking care of the moon till morning.Look at the dew drop, it’s so pure and tiny but it is the mirror of friendship between the night and the universe.You touch it and it will disappear.You…The Man ……….spoiling the nature.You will always remain thirsty with dry heart , a heart full of hatred , blood , war and terrorism , you will never understand the meaning of friendship.

SKS – Friendship is trust.

MB- yes you are absolutely right.

SK – Friendship is selfless love. I wish I could show the world how to achieve universal selfless love. Selfless love is a quality that can be understood and genertaed by the pure humanness, the pure Christ, the pure Buddha in us. It is a direct function of a super mature emotional intelligence. It is like pure gold. Just as you cannot create pure gold jewelery with impure gold ore, you cannot create friendship with a lower level mind. Let alone create you cannot even understand pure friendship from a lower level mind. Lower level brain generated friendships have an element of acting and disguising; an element of phoniness… and friendship is based on pure honesty. The true bonds of friendship come from the pure original feelings that originate from the authentic self.

Debate 37 – When is knowledge mere information?

SK – Knowledge is mere information when infromation is not reviewed, cross referenced, researched and organized. When information is ready to be understood in its full context then it is knowledge.

MB – It is as if a cadaver is lying in front of me and I have read the Anatomy and I know the origin and insertion of the nerves but till I dissect them out it is merely an information for me.When I complete the dissection then it’s not an information but understanding the subject.

SKS – A computer program acquired data without understanding it. Doing that does not create “knowledge”. Knowledge entails the activity of understanding.

Debate 38 – What is the biggest paradox in philosophy and can unscientific notions be true?

SK – The human mind is the most complex to understand yet it is clear (and I have made it quite clearer ) how it can be mastered. Thus the paradox is that the human mind can be mastered without being fully understood! A very unscientific notion, yet true! One does not need all the answers regarding the mind to be able to master it.

SKS – Quantum mechanics are full of paradoxes. One of the most known is the electron being able to pass through two different slits at the same time at the infamous two-slit experiment. Another one is the fact that the observation of a particle seems to affect the result of the measurement.

Debate 39 – What are the aims of psychology and why do they need to be changed?

“The four goals of psychology are the description, explation, prediction and control of behavior and mental processes”. – From the book ‘The World of Psychology by Samuel E’. Wood. The aim must be changed from ‘control of behavior and mental processes’ to ‘mastering behavior and mental processes’.

Debate 40 – What specific steps can we take to get out of the current mess in the world?

SK – We have to optimize the very quality of our own self. The self is a process that is projected by the brain. The human brain is an equipment, a physical organ that defines the quality of each individual self. Thus to improve our self we will have to optimize the very physical nature of our brain. We will have to improve our conscious and uncounscious neural networks and make our brain equipment super mature.

Debate 41 – What is the mind?

SKS – I understand the mind as something “higher” than its physical container – the brain.

MB- I think we have discussed it earlier also.In brain ‘ thinking’ predominates while in mind ’emotions’ predominate.I agree with Sajid khan that mind is the image of brain.

SK – The mind is the human body’s means of becoming self conscious. It is the brains path to creating self consciousness for the self. It is the tool that the brain creates to figure out its own being, to make sense of others and of the way the world is and how it works.The human mind is the result of a process. A process that takes place in the brain. The quality of this process determines the quality of the mind. The quality of the brain determines the quality of this process. The mind is a projection of the brain. The miracle part is that the mind is self conscious. The mind runs on emotional intelligence that the brain creates and supplies. It is like the brain writes the script and the mind acts out this script.

Debate 42 – Why do some people snap?

RA- Profilers try to develop a system by which potential serial killers may be flagged. There are more than 20 seperate life factors that seem to create a serial killer and if they can check off most or all of the se factors in an individual’s life, there is a high possibility that they will have the prepensity to be a serial killer. However, some individuals may have most of these determining factors and grow up quite normal. What makes one person snap and take one path while another remains normal?

MB -Pre-destination and free will go hand in hand.One is not inconsistent with the other.There is a free-will within narrow limits for instance , a cow is tied to a pole by a rope.The length of the rope is Pre-destination and the circle in which she moves is Free-will.The cow has full freedom movement within that circle of the length of the rope.But she can not go beyond that length of the rope.

I have seen serial killers only in the movies.I think they break this rope.Our thinking is instrument dependant.The person is not pre-destined to become a serial killer , some untoward action in his life makes to deviate him from his normal path.One thing is sure that the person kills in the same manner and leaves behind some evidence or code.It indicates what ? He wants to show the world his revenge.
Someone might have tortured him or his family that’s why he has turned into a serial killer.Any normal person , XYZ , you and me can become a future serial killer.Biologically speaking there is some role of acetylcholine and hypothalamo-pitutiary axis behind it.
Their trouble seems to arise from emotional isolation in childhood.But in some cases there may also be a constitutional defect.A significant number of habitual criminals have abnormal sex chromososmes ( an additional X chromososme ), and some show a characteristic anomaly in the electroencephalogram.

SK – This is a very good question. It throws light on the fact that emotions and behavior spring from not just one single source, mostly what we consider as the self, the ‘I’. Emotions and behavior are a smooth blend when the brain, the mind and the true self are all on the same page. This happens when the brain/mind complex are developed to the highest emotional intelligence stage. When the brain is developed and is stuck at a lower level it projects a lower level mind. Thus there is a disconnect between the brain and mind and the real self.
As behavior depends on the current feedback, the feedback to the brain, the mind and the self is all different at the lowest premature level. The person with the premature emotional brain is most likely to snap. The immature stage is the next likely to snap. The mature stage is the least likely to snap while the super mature stage is unlikely to snap unless it is perhaps physically on drugs which create their won cause for snapping. The snapping mostly takes place in the subconscious brain. This is why at the conscious level people mostly don’t understand why they snapped.
This also demonstrates that we still have a long way to go to uncovering and understanding the different functions of the brain and mind, what they are and how they develop and what is the relationship between them and what is their relationship to the self.

Debate 43 – How can we expand our levels of awareness?

Debate 44 – What is the use of philosophy in daily life?

SKS – Philosophy can liberate us through the revelation of the truth.

Nicknames List

CQ – Charley Quinton
KS – Kalle Schwarz
MB – Minoo Bhagia
MM – Matt
PG – Peter Greenfinch
SK – Sajid Khan
SKS – Spiros Kakos
ZS – Zvi Shkedi
TEM – Tracy Miller
BOB – Peter Sitterly
GDB – Greg Barron
RA- Robert Allen
JA – Jackamarra

READ ALSO:
Einstein's God Letter - A translation, a fool, the truth.

Philosophy Debates Definition & Rules
Scope
The scope of this Knol is to host philosophical debates. It does not promote specific views in any subject. Everyone is accepted and encouraged to enter his/her opinion and contribute knowledge, while respecting the opinions of others. As a new version of Platonic Dialogues, this page offers the insight of the 21st century on questions that troubled philosophers for thousands of years.

Rules

Choose a short nickname to enter at the beginning of each of your posts so that others  know who wrote what. Choose a unique nickname. Post your nickname and your full name in the section “Nicknames List” at the end of the Knol.
Post new posts below the existing posts in a section. Think of it as a collaborative book on philosophy. The reader would like to read from top to the bottom as in a real book.
Do not delete or alter other posts.
Try to keep each of your posts at a logical length. For example a 3-pages answer to a debate does not offer much to the discussion since it would be very difficult for other to answer everything you say. Try to keep in mind that this is something like a dialogue and not a place to post whole articles. In that context a 5-10 line posting is what is expected (like a real dialogue).
Post small and wait for the reply of other to post back an answer (like a real dialogue).
If you think a new Philosophy Debate should be opened, open a new category and clearly note it by using Format => Heading (H2). It is better to have more philosophy debates with well-defined subjects than having few large and hard-to-manage debates.
State references in case you have them by using the References tool of the page. In that way we will avoid any confusion.
Refrain from personal comments. Remember that no matter how intense the debate might be, we are all fellow-writers trying to do something good together.
Please do not color or highlight text inside your writings. Everything posted should be plain text with no headings or colours. Just write your name in the beginning of your posting with bold.

ACTION REQUIRED: Dear all! The Philosophy Debates need more participants if they are to be real debates after all! We have some knowledge, we have some questions, we have some answers. But we need the feedback of others as well in order to debate and start our journey to truth. So please, whenever you find an author who looks as a person with intellectual insight do invite him/her to join the debate!

How to add a new debate
The process of adding a new debate is as follows:

Make certain the subject you propose is not already under discussion.
Create a new debate headline (Format => Heading H2) by writing “Debate NNN”, where NNN = the number of the debate. Please follow the numbering of the other debates.
Use green highlight colour to mark new debates and light blue color to mark new sub-debates.
If you are having difficulties, you can always copy-paste an existing debate heading and change it.
IN ANY CASE I will fix the format details. Just make sure you mark new debates as headings and with the proper numbering.
Please send any suggestions or comments to me or post them as comments here. I suggest the latter, because that would give other fellow knollers to post their thoughts on your comments as well.

Thanks in advance for your contributions!

DEBATES SECTION

Debate 1 – On the nature of “IS”
SKS – Every philosophical article uses the word “is” many times. But how can we discuss about anything at all if we do not know what “is” is? How can we talk about what we humans “are” if we do not know exactly what “to be” actually means? The big philosopher Heidegger noticed that and tried all his life to answer what “is” is. He failed. Can we do something more?

SK – “It is remarkable concerning the operations of the mind, that though mostly intimately present to us, yet whenever they become the object of reflection, they seem involved in obscurity. “- D. Hume.

Philosophy is the search for the truth concerning life that is still a mystery. Philosophy is the science of  answering the unanswered mega questions of life. The most important question is the truth of things; the very nature of things; the very essence of the reality behind life and every thing in it.  The most important question related to “is/am” is – what is the very nature of my own self?. Who is I – who am I ?  “Is”  represents the very nature of ‘being’ of persons and things. “Is” means the very fundamental reality of any phenomena including humans. Philosophy tries to help in making sure that we know exactly what the fundamentals are that compose each and every aspect of life.
My own work is devoted to finding what the destination of each life should be; as well as how to get there. The “is” of any aspect of life can be uncovered only by means of the brain. The quality of the brain determines the quality of how close to the truth the “is” is perceived. The comprehension level of “is” for each brain level is different. For a premature brain the omnipotent self image distorts the meaning of “is” and as a result the life of a -2 premature brain is also -2. Only the +2 super mature brain is able to perceive “is” as “is”. Thus my work, my philosophy, is devoted to making available on a mass scale brain education that ensures a brain that perceives the self just as it “is”.

SKS – I have read that the “self” is actually a line every person draws between him/her-self and everything else in the cosmos. Where you will put that line and where you will draw the limit between “you” and the “others” depends on the person. Does that fit anywhere in the -2/+2 scale you mention? What is that scale exactly? Has anyone reached the level of perceiving the self as it “is”?

SK – All human behavior stems from the brain and the quality of the behavior depends upon the quality of the brain. Where the person draws the line also depends on the brain level. For a premature brain it is all me, me and me. It is me and everyone else. For an immature mind it is mostly me and my family. And everyone else. For a mature brain me and my family comes first and then everyone else is just as equal. For a super mature brain there is no line. The whole world is one family where everyone else is # 1 irrespective of class or creed.

I have quantified the mind/brain development into four basic stages as follows:

1) Premature mind of a new born child quantified with a value of negative 2.
2) Immature mind of a teenager quantified with a value of negative 1.
3) Mature mind of an adult quantified with a value of positive 1.
4) Super mature mind of a master quantified with a value of positive 2.

Those who develop their minds to the +2 super mature level are able to know, understand and become their true self just the way the self “is”.

My rough guess is that about 4 – 5 % of entire societies are -2. In third world countries the % is probably 60% -1, 20% +1 and 15% +2. In countries like America 50% is +1, 30% -1 and 15% +2. This is all due to lack of proper emotional intelligence education. Most people can be educated into becoming +2.

Yes my guess is that there are quite a few people who perceive their self just the way it “is”. However even  in +2 there are levels. For instance Jesus is the Field Marshal of +2. Gandhi is a 5 star general. President Obama is a 3 star general!
SKS -I think that the most insightful result of your reasoning is that the highest level of maturity results in a human perceiving himself as “one thing” with the whole cosmos itself. Thus “is” for humans becomes equal to the “is” for the cosmos. However does it define “is” or it just transforms the question to another?
SK – Super maturity creates the brain power to actualize the real self. It enables each person to become what he really is – a selfless and humble part of the whole cosmos. It truly defines who one is. It is the quality of the brain that determines the quality of the is/am. The highest level of emotional maturity is well recognized since the ancient times – it is called wisdom. What they could not figure out is what is wisdom exactly. Wisdom is the natural potential in every human being. It flowers when the emotional brain becomes super mature. When the full potential of the brain is actualized then the brain projects wisdom automatically. Since the ancients discovered wisdom they have been trying to define the very nature of wisdom in scientific terms. Thus when researching wisdom; the conventional mega question is ‘What is wisdom? The mega question for me is: are we interested ultimately in defining wisdom or in developing superior minds that sprout wisdom? Would you rather know what wisdom is or would you rather have wisdom? Just as would you rather know what it means to be a millionaire or would you prefer owning millions?Wisdom it is clear is almost as complex as the human mind. It is also clear that a person becomes wise when the very physical nature of the human brain develops into a very superior quality, super mature brain. In other words if one develops a super mature brain, the super mature brain projects a +2 mind which generates wisdom. Compare the researching of the mind with researching water. The researchers seeking to know water took a different route. They did not ask why water is water or what is water. They researched the qualities of water and how these qualities could be harnessed. Today from the water wheel we have gone to harnessing the energy of the hydrogen atom. Imagine if the scientists were only researching why water is water where would the water industry be today. Even if we do know why water is water we will still only be able to harness its properties. Harnessing the properties is what counts in terms of actual benefits. Shouldn’t we take the water route to researching wisdom?
CQ – I like the starting premise, “The Nature of is” but I’m not quite ready for the level of debate and complexity that SKAKOS and SK have already plunged into. To me, “is” first denotes “existence” in raw experience. Next, “is” may represent  a connection between something like a term and its definition, for example “Philosophy is an affection for wisdom”. Then ‘is’ may attach a quality to a value in a generalization, for example “Simple is better” or it can join a cause and effect together into a statement like “Wisdom is born of pain.”  ‘Is’ might also be used in a specification such as “That is about all I have to say on this point, at least for now.”SK – CQ’s defining of is in different shades/contexts of meanings is beautiful. While in the context of philosophy, where philosophy is the quest for uncovering the fundamental nature of the truth behind reality/life; is/am is about expressing the true nature of mans existence/life and everything else in it. Is is about helping to connect the dots and arrive at the truth.

It is about explaining reality just as it’s is is. The other synonym of is is truth.  Is connects the subject to its true meaning or state.
SKS –  I agree that CQ stated some extremely interesting points! Indeed “is” can be used to denote “being” and to note characteristics of things. And the more simply you think about “is” the better, since “is” is a “primitive” notion that is encapsulated in everything. One thing Parmenides (Greek philosopher) stated about “being” is that a thing can either “be” or “not be”. Is that something we agree upon? He also said that we cannot talk about something that “does not exist”. We cannot talk or analyze something that “is not”. Again, what are your opinions on that?
I believe that “existence” is a notion inherent in everything and that, because of its “primitive” nature, it cannot be easily defined. Maybe we can only “feel” its meaning. It seems to be one of those notions that are beyond science scope and more in metaphysics scope…
TEM   –   “is” can not be defined by anyone who has an opinion, as “is” with opinion can be anything it wishes as long as the brain determines it is.  For the brain without having the ability to be absolute can not answer.
SKS -Buddhists try to describe what things are NOT, instead of what things are. They claim that since describing “is” is difficult, we can at least describe what things are “not”.
TEM-  To descried everything which “is” is not would go on for eternity, for if  “is” is only one thing everything else that exist  can not be “is” and without an absolute in ones thinking, what one thinks “is” is NOT may actually be “is”. There for without describing what “is” is one can not describe what “is” is not, for if one thinks to understand what something is NOT  has in his own mind determined what “is” is”.
MB- If ” is ” is the truth why doesn’t it reveal itself. Why does it remain clothed in the physical body.Is it scared to face the truth.?

SKS – The “is” of things, as Heidegger said, is an attribute of things that “are”. So actually every thing that exists entails the “being” as an attribute. If “is” also entailed this attribute of “being” then it would just be another of the many things which exist. In that way “is” is not.
MB- As you say …” is” is not…means it is God or creator ?TEM – if “is” IS and “is” is NOT, to me it seems ‘is” is all things. if “is” is being all things you can never you could never say what it “is” or is “not” it just “is”
MB – ( ^_^ )
MALCO – “IS” is Existence + Knowledge of the Existence + knowledge that “Existence” & “Knowledge” are the same.
MB- WOW !
Yes I have the knowledge that I exist.
DEBATE 2 – About the purpose of philosophy

Debate 2.1 – What are the most important questions in philosophy?
SKS – I believe one of the basic questions of philosophy is “what is the nature of reality”. A question so basic that we have almost forgotten it nowadays.

SK – All those questions about the fundamental nature of life and every thing in it that cannot be answered by science philosophy tries to answer. Yes the basic question of philosophy is “what is the nature of reality behind every phenomena of life. The most important being ‘What is the self?’ ‘Is it eternal?’ ‘Is it the same in everyone?’ ‘Is it part of Gd?’ I believe philosophy wastes too much time trying to answer the eternal questions of life. Perhaps trying to prove anything connected with Gd is beyond the scope of our human mind and we may never be able to answer this question within the paradigm of science. Perhaps we should ask the question ‘What is the self in human terms, in the terms of reality. What is the truth about the self that can be explained in scientific terms’.
One property/reality of the self is very clear. The self in each individual develops to a different quality. Only those who get a very healthy upbringing get to develop their self to the super mature level. Why can’t we ensure that each and every self gets the chance to develop to the super mature level. The first step would be to focus on defining the self not in eternal terms but in terms of quality. We can ask ‘What is the best quality self and how can this self be actualized?’
So instead of seeking the ultimate answers we must seek the best possible answers that give us real scientific results that can be quantified and measured and thus placed firmly in the domain of science. This way we can take a short cut to making the goal of philosophy practical: by answering all the unanswerable questions not in eternal terms but in benefit terms and thus placing them in the domain of science.

CQ – A prioritized list of questions in academic philosophy probably exists in many forms (as many probably as there are schools). There is also practical philosophy for critical thinking and problem-solving. My own questions begin in the physical realm, having to do with natural philosophy – physics, chemistry… science. But when pursuing solutions to human needs problems, they almost always turn metaphysical –  moral, spiritual even mystical. I think that philosophy needs to find itself useful to the Human Community. So the questions asked depend on the following question: what is the purpose?
SKS – Many materialists deny the existence of any purpose. On the other hand I see than everything we do has a purpose, so our lives as a whole must have a purpose also. In that context, I believe philosophy is one of the tools we can use to find out what our purpose is.
TEM – I believe when searching and questioning ones outlooks, beliefs and progress, one must ask why. Why am I questioning.Is what I do who I am or who I am what I do. If I do not want to be who I am or do not want to do what I do, am I… am I what I want to be though I am not?
SKS – Wow! These are a lot of questions! Maybe clarify a little bit more the “who I am” parts? They look promising as potential questions.

TEM – Are the actions I actually make (DO) in a giving circumstance WHO I AM: is this truly me that is coming out in this situation or is there something else inside that is trying to get out, is it the true me which I am representing or is it something or someone else, is the something else or someone else that is trying to get out truly me? Do you walk away and think why did I do that? I wish I would have done this? Or I wish I could do this or that but never do?

SKS – Are you “changed” after a traumatic experience or do you remain the same person? What is that makes you “you”? A person changes after a shock. What tells us that he remains the same person?

TEM – what does tell us if he remains the same person? is it his thoughts? is it his actions?

does he want to be the same but can not? if he can not be the same is what he now is who he is?

or is who he is what he wants to be, “the same as he was”

Debate 2.2 – What is the sole purpose of philosophy?
CQ – If philosophy’s purpose is singular, as proposed by SK, I assert that this purpose would be to meet human needs inclusively to the last person and the most fundamental need is for understanding.
SK – Dinitia Smith while reviewing Simon Critchely’s book, ‘The Book of Dead Philosophers’ says in The NY Times, “Philosophy, he says has abandoned its original purpose, which is to give us wisdom and help us achieve happiness,” and again, “Philosophy has tried to mimic science in its constant striving toward the perfection of ideas and its quest for absolute truth. Gradually philosophy has been abstracted from the concerns of everyday life…”
The problem with main stream philosophers is that they have abandoned the quest to define wisdom. They has tried and tried throughout history to define wisdom in absolute truth terms. Because they couldn’t pin down a precise scientific definition of wisdom they have more or less abandoned the quest to use wisdom to help us achieve happiness. At least the ancient philosophers did not give up the quest for they saw that wisdom is real and that it does make a real difference in the lives of those who have it. When they could not define wisdom they started to define its attributes. So they taught how to cultivate the attributes of wisdom. Even teaching the attributes of wisdom seemed an impossible task. So wisdom and its attributes gradually became the the quest of spiritual institutions, abandoned by main stream science.
SKS – For some people the purpose of philosophy should be the improvement of humans and human life. For others the purpose of philosophy should be the quest for the truth. I agree with both. Indeed we need philosophy to improve our every day lifes. But we should also stick to the effort of discovering the “truth” in every thing, even if that thing does not affect our lifes now, since the truth is what will finally set us free (of our ignorance). I believe all people have the inherent tendency to seek the truth and the answers to questions. And I believe that philosophy should serve that goal also.
JT – I cannot find argument with the statements above, so I hope I can add value with some context.  When Kant expressed his model of the subject between the phenomenal and the transcendental, the boundaries were redrawn.  Before Kant, philosophers believed they knew truth because they saw the works of God through the relationship of an author to his audience.  It was practical to pursue Truth, because Truth was God.  Truth was out there, and wisdom, or the ability to discern truth, brought you closer to it.  This dichotomy between practical philosophy and philosophy seeking absolute truth did not exist.  It is the concept of subjectivity as the only source of perception that created it.   Truth, and by extension wisdom, was put into the category of other.  It was outside of the domain of the subjective.  If perception is solely based in subjective observations of either the phenomenal or the transcendental, how can we perceive objective truth with lays outside that domain?  Philosophers have not gotten beyond Kant’s model (most recent arguments seem to be about which side of the model is better), and therefore have no way to create a practical pursuit of absolute truth.  If you are looking for a practical application of philosophy (not necessarily one I completely endorse) try Michel De Certeau’s book “The Practice of Everyday Life.”  If you are looking for a recent philosopher to discuss absolute truth and wisdom…well so am I.  I agree strongly with the thought that humanity has a need for understanding in an absolute sense, not just in a practical sense.

TEM – Very well said JT.
SKS – Philosophy also tries to make us understand the limits of our language. When you say that “something cannot be red and black at the same time”, you do not actually say something “metaphysical”. You just raise questions about the limits of the notions of “Red” and “Black” as we have defined them and as we are using them with specific language and grammatical rules.

Debate 3 – What is love?
SK
Love is… not self-seeking… – 1 Corinthians 13:4-5
– Love is the power of the brain. It is the function of the developed emotional brain power. It determines the quality of life. Love is the most beautiful force of human nature. Love is the most destructive force of human nature. Love is not innate. Love is totally learned. Love determines ones level of happiness. Culture affects love. Tradition affects love. Education affects love. Economics affects love. Above all upbringing affects love. Love at -2 destroys individuals, groups and countries. Love at -1 keeps individuals, groups and countries struggling for survival. Love at +1 brings much prosperity for all while keeping everyone on their toes for more and more. +1 love causes restlessness and depression. It makes people over ambitious. It boosts defense budgets. Seminars and night classes must be held to develop love from +1 to +2 which is not that difficult.
CQ – Love is God.
MB – Who has seen God ?
SKS – Love is something you cannot prove as a mathematical proposition. Saying “I love you” means asking from the other person to trust you and believe in your feelings – something which is very difficult to happen in todays materialistic and “hard-evidence based” society.
MB–Love can’t be expressed in words.If one is expressing it then it is not a true love.
SKS – I totally agree. And what kind of thing is something that cannot be expressed in words? I believe it is something more “metaphysical” than “physical”…
MB – It is a personal experience , much above the physical.
SKS – I agree it is a personal experience. Although I do not clearly understand what you mean by “above the physical”. You mean “metaphysical”? I would agree with that too.
But SK, what do you mean by “love is learned”? And I do not totally agree with you on that education or anything else can affect love. I believe it is the other way around: love can affect everything else.
MB – hmm…..Yes true love never dies that means it is not physical.
ZS – Love is the willingness to give, without expecting a reward.
SKS – I think I agree with that. But now that you define it in such a way, I am thinking…what is the difference between love and altruism?
MB – Sympathy is involved in altruism where as in love there is no sympathy.
MM – There are clearly countless definitions of love: romantic love, love of family, love of ice cream, etc.  What do all of these forms of love have in common?  A driving force;  Could Love be the very “thing” that animates atoms and electrons. What better proof of undying love; a force that will always be there.  And so, in a larger sense, might Love be the driving force behind the universe? The force that holds everything together? As composer, lyricist Bob Merrill suggested in his famous song from the early sixties. “Love Makes the World go ‘round.”
TEM – Love in its truest form does not depend on nor is it effected by anything else around it, love in and of itself produces love and nothing else. This is unconditional love.
SKS – I agree. And actually there is no such thing as “conditional love”. Love under conditions is not love.

Debate 4 – What is time?
CQ – Time is …

of essence
money
tight
running out
up
on our side 🙂

MB – Time is the biggest winner in this world.No one can win time.There is only one stage when a person can win it———at the end of his lifespan.
SKS – Time could be seen as another dimension, along with x-y-z in a cartesian system. In the same way you are not in Athens, Greece right now, you are also not in 2900 AD right now.
MB – You are talking of metaphysics now.Yes I do believe in this theory.Suppose a person is alive in Athens must have escaped an accident only by few second in India .Suppose what we are seeing is a dream and same things are happening in parallel universe.But how does it make a difference ? What I am seeing is the truth and I am not Hermoine of Harry Potter who goes back in time machine. I have seen births and deaths very closely.That is the ultimate truth.I really don’t know what made me open this knol  and why I am explaining such simple things
PG – Time is the denominator of speed. As speed has a maximum limit according to Einstein, time cannot be compressed under a minimum limit. Honestly, I don’t know what philosophy I can draw from this, except to be wary of syllogisms ;-).
Oh by the way, apart that joke, time is also
* an asset: time is money, time management…
* a decision horizon: preference for / arbitrage between short term horizon and long term horizon.
* an income / cost factor: salaries, interests, rents are linked to the time “spent”.
SK – As time is a component of consciousness we can understand the true nature of time just as well as we can understand the true nature of consciousness. Though it will be great to know the true nature of time, we do know that time is a limited quantity and as humans we can use time wisely, maturely, immaturely and prematurely based on the four levels of our minds. It is essential that we know and make use of what time really stands for. It stands for an exceptional opportunity to learn to master our life and become the masters of our destiny and a master of our time. To master time is to use it wisely.

SKS – You tend to be much more practical than other people. Instead of wandering “what time is” in a theoretical way, you pose questions and practical implications of the use of time instead. I like that. And via that practical analysis something about the theoretical nature of time may come out too. What is the most efficient way to use time from a practical point of view according to your theory?

SK – Spending time in the now is the key to a happy and wise life. It is the most efficient way to spend time. I have found that the return for your time spent is the highest when you pay full attention in the now. It is one of the fundamental laws of Mother Nature that what ever you respect the most will respect you back ten fold. For example you respect your studies; you pay full attention and study, study, study and the subject you study will make you an expert depending on how much respectfully you studied it. It may be lifeless yet knowledge is knowledge and it pays you back. If you cheat with your studies and pay little respect to your studies (spending your time not in the now with your studies) then all your life your knowledge of the subject will also be phony and superficial and thus the subject you disrespected will disrespect you back! You will have half baked knowledge and the return from this knowledge will also be half baked!

Debate 5 – Does the color “red” exist?
SKS – We can see red apples. We know “Red” as a color. However does that color actually “exist”? Some people cannot see red color? Are they “right” or are we? Most animals cannot see “Red” color. Does that mean that humans see something that does not exist?
MB – Perception of the color depends upon the emotional behavior of different individuals and animals in different ways at different wavelengths.Emotions are linked to hypothalamo-pitutiory axis.Colours outside are body are present in the form of ”aura”.
”Leshya” is the practice of color therapy in Jainism.White color is considered a most intense colour and red , a less intense color.People who do spiritual practice try to see white color inside.
So the existence of color depends upon the human and animal behavior and neuromotor responses as there are micro-vibrating stimulus linked to the hormonal changes.What a man can see an animal can’t see or what they are seeing we can’t see as both the groups are having different anatomical structure and different emotions.
Colors play a very important role in our lives.
There is saying in Folk philosophy….
Blue is true,
Yellow’s jealous,
Green’s forsaken,
Red’s brazen,
White is love,
And black is death !

SK -This is a very fundamental question of philosophy regarding the very nature of reality. Do we know reality the way it is or is our knowledge restricted/altered due to the infrastructure  of our brains? How we see the color red depends on the properties of our eyes as well as the properties of our physical brain as well as the reality behind the color red. One thing is clear what we call the color red is a distinctive color but does it really exist in the form we see it; or do we see it the way we see it because of the way our brain interprets it for us. This is a very intriguing question that makes us understand the relationship between reality and our perception capacity.
To me it shows the limitations of knowing the truth about the very nature of reality. Understanding the context of this very important question/answer is a humbling experience. It shows how hard it is for philosophy to answer all the mega questions of life. At a more subtle level it shows that all interpretations for man are different shades of grey; each object of reality may be exactly black or white but we will always perhaps see it as grey…
MB – What about rods and cones in the retina ? There are three types of cones near fovea centralis which is connected to the optic nerve. If these cones receive the light of same wavelength then we see white color , otherwise we see blue, green and red at different wave lengths.If there is retinal hemorrhage ( ischaemic, non reversible type ) then you just forget about the colors.Then there is only one color and that is black.
So one can not think of philosophy without science as colors are definitely linked with cerebral cortex and retina.
I can see red color so for me it exists.

SK -Philosophy is about finding the science of things.  The sentence ‘…colors are definitely linked with cerebral cortex and retina’. To this I will also add ‘The perception of color is dependent on and gets ‘colored by’ the cerebral cortex and the retina’. I am talking about the philosophy of perception and MB is correctly pointing out the science of perception.
SKS – You said “I see red color so for me it exists”. What if you see a chair. Does it exist? And what if a crazy person sees dozens of chairs where you see absolutely nothing? Who is “right” and who is “wrong”? What if all people on Earth are “crazy” and see chairs everywhere, except you who is “sane” and does not see those chairs. Would that make those chairs “real”? What is most people did not see red color, except you? Would that mean that red colour did not exist? Is reality actually a thing the majority dictates?
MB – Yes for me it exists as I see it daily in the form of blood while conducting deliveries or transfusing the blood and during cesarean section. Can you change the color of the blood ? I believe in what I see.
Can a person who is blind from the birth, differentiate between blood and glucose ? He has not seen this color so it doesn’t exist for him.
I treat the condition of postpartum hemorrhage because I know what is red color , definitely I am not a crazy person to let my patient die of excessive blood loss thinking that red color doesn’t exist and it is water because some crazy philosophers think like that.

CQ – Indeed yes red quite exists especially in Human experience. To me it represents the low side as in frequency and a lower wavelength. The spectral properties of red put it on the “top” (actually the ‘outside’) of the rainbow where violet is in the opposite position in the visible light spectrum. The rainbowis a great gift!
SKS – So we come back to the example of the “crazy person” who sees all red things as deep blue. The frequency you refer to is detected with the eye or specific scientific organs. What if those organs worked differently? Would that change the “Reality” of the red color’s “existence”?
MB – What if you give the heart the work of liver and to lungs the work of the heart.?
What we see is the ultimate truth as this moment of time is the truth.What I am seeing at present is the light yellow color of this page is the truth, what I am writing is the truth.I don’t want to know anything else beyond
that.
SKS – So there is no objective reality?
MB – Of course there is an objective reality.Any normal person can see red color except a person who is colour blind.The defect is in the organ not in the object.
SKS – Really? And how do you know that your organ is functioning good and not the other person’s? What if the “colour blind” person is actually the person with good eye-sight and you can see “Red” because of a mulfunction in your eye nerves?
MB – I am quite sure of what I am seeing as majority of persons can see red colour so it’s normal.
Majority always wins.

SKS -There was a time when everyone in a specific village saw “witches” everywhere…Do you think that was right, that that was the “reality”?
MB – There was a ” time” when in a ” specific” village——See you are mentioning a particular moment and a place when this magic happened but I am talking of the truth which is not time related.Are we doctors fools that we are using cauteries to seal the blood vessel ? Why there are so many instruments like bipolar , harmonic scalpel , ligasure etc …..just to minimize that red color of yours and to save the life of the patient.
We believe in what wee see not in what other people say.
In India I think all the ladies are also fool that they apply vermilion or ” sindoor ” if they are married .I think they should apply blue , green or yellow ” sindoor” because what they are seeing is the color which doesn’t exist.
Poor ladies they are just wasting their time.
I feel pity for the rose flower also thinking that it is not red but black in reality.
SKS – Again I remind you that most animals do not see red. Does that make them the majority? And does that make that “reality”? I agree with you that we all see red and that red “must” exist, but I somehow find holes in the whole syllogism.
MB – They must be a having different pattern of their retina that’s why they are not able to see what we can see and what they are seeing we are not able to see.You may be right that reality is different but what I want to say is that how does it make a difference ? We are able to see moon that means it exists for us and we are able to see sky that means it exists but what is there beyond sky we still don’t know.
You are a philosopher so try to find out what is right and what is wrong.
SKS – You used the right words: “it exists for us”. Indeed reality can be objective or subjective and we will never know it. You are totally right in saying that since we see the moon, all it matters for our existence is that fact and not the “theory” of what it “is” and what is “is not”. Imagine though so many things that do exist and we cannot “see” them. Do they “exist”? Sure they do. Should we look up for them? Yes, even though we do not see them with our eyes. And the other way around: there are things we see but our eyes deceive us. Should we look out for these cases? Sure we should.
MB – Yes , shouldn’t we look for the God because we know he exists ? Sure we should.
Shouldn’t we look for the circulation of blood when we are 100 % sure that it circulates ? Sure we should.
That’s what exactly the philosophy is.Try to see the things beyond our reach.There is nothing wrong in it , after all we all are human beings , very restless people and it’s a good thing.
SKS – I believe we should continuously look for the truth in every field – that is an inherent thing to humans. However I cannot easily visualize how a colour-blind man would have the urge/need/thirst to search the truth for  colours. Maybe he has the urge to seek the truth for the world in general and, thus, for colours also.
MB -Not only colour blind , think of a man who is totally blind.Just imagine how he is living his whole life without colours — totally black.
Life is very precious so live each and every moment of it.Don’t waste it just like that.Do something constructive for the society, nation and the whole world.

Debate 6 – What is the significance of our times?
CQ – Some say we are living at the “end of the world” (as we know it) based on prophecies in ancient texts. Others say that December 23, 2012 is a special date perhaps marking a changing to a “new age”. Others predict the approach of a “singularity” of some sort. Yet others believe it’s just going to be “business as usual” and it’s just another day. What are your thoughts?
SKS – The world has “seen” many “ends of the world”. I was recently reading about the panic that was aroused during the last days of 999 AD, a time when all thought the world would be destroyed.
MB – How does it make a difference.Once you are not in this world and suppose you take a rebirth, will you remember that you were SKS and CQ in your previous births ? So live in your present and enjoy every moment of life as the life keeps on moving even without you.

SKS – Mayas had their diary end at 2012 because – some people say – at 2012 there will be a major alignment between all the planets of the solar system. For me the weird thing is not any apocalypse mambo jumbo about the end of the world, but how on earth did those people so many years ago predict such an alignment!
As far as the debate title-question is concerned, I believe we live in very critical times: we live in an era where philosophy is criticized and technology is the new god of people. People with education must be careful not to fall into the trap of materialism and remember that there are some things that cannot be measured, as some hardcore materialistic scientists today tend to believe…
If materialism prevails with “no prisoners taken”, then indeed this could be the end of the world as we know it.
MB–Suppose a problem is diagnosed by philosophy as you are saying, can it be prevented ?
If you come to know there is going to be an earthquake tomorrow you have no choice except leaving that place. Isn’t it ?
We are not living in Newton’s era where we can just sit and look at the tree and wait for an apple to fall down.
Try to accept the facts.

SKS -To what facts exactly are you referring to?
MB – All facts are lying behind the curtain of time . If time doesn’t want, you can not raise the curtain and find the answers.Everything finishes except the time.Can you subtract a single moment from time ? The answer is NO.If your time is bad all your efforts will fail.You never know of your future moment.I have seen six emergencies today , all crushed injuries involving both femurs and head injuries.All of them are serious.So try to live in present moment because you never know what is in store for you. It can be positive also if your time is good.Life is a mystery.Let the problem come then we will face it. Why think of it just now and suppose it doesn’t come then  ?  Aren’t you spoiling your future as well as your present.
SKS – So, living for the moment?
MB – Yes definitely.

Debate 7 – What is the philosophy of money?

SKS – I believe money and the whole idea of “giving and taking based on money” is based on materialism, although I admit I haven’t thought about it much.
MB–Ask the person the importance of money who sells his only piece of agricultural land for the operation of his wife, ask the person who has to pay EMI for the flat and there is no increment in the salary or any promotion.Sitting in AC rooms and offices you people can think of philosophy, not the common man..Ask a person about philosophy, who is surviving on one meal a day so that his children can have some milk.
A person who can not afford fat packages for medical and other higher studies , ask him the importance of money as the paid seat for Radiology costs rupees I0 million or more.
I think you people are living in false world or you don’t have any other thing to do as you have lots of money and now you don’t know what to do of your life and money  that’s why you keep on thinking who am I ? Where will I go after death ? When the world is going to finish ? What is philosophy of money ?
Better think of something for the current problems like climatic change, racism , terrorism and recession
etc which are the realities of life.
PG- Money is a social tool and an element of culture.
Together with commerce, it was one of the important inventions of mankind. It also took part in the advent of mathematics and writing (the Mesopotamian clay tablets, 7,000 years ago, were made for exchange and accounting purposes).
Money is one of the things that contribute to link people together.
It can be used ethically, wisely and usefully, or immorally, unwisely and harmfully, like any tool.
Many philosopher expressed their attitude towards money, or towards the way money is made or used. The same that they expressed their attitude, positive or negative about how other widely used human artefacts and institutions with social effects are made and used.
There can be therefore an ethic of money but I don’t think that there is a full philosophy of money (there is no philosophy of tools to my knowledge),
What is specific about money is that it is more widely present and more abstract than the other artifacts / tools. Maybe more emotional also.
Therefore, some might fantasize by considering it as a god (or a rival of god) or a demon (or an instrument of the demon). I don’t go for such metaphysical approaches, or for such spiritual adoration or aversion. A tool is a tool, period.
Materialism might have relations with money except that modern money is …immaterial.
It is a potential intermediary between all goods, assets and services that can be exchanged.
It is “fungible”, a kind of chameleon / substitutable / interchangeable asset, that can be “transformed” in any other economic goods, assets and services. And also a reference of (economic) value for all of them.
Some might see some mystic in it, or chemistry, or alchemy.
Money is also a power, the power to acquire things, even rent people (employees).
Money is sought out by people, whether for itself or for what it allows.
Some radical talk about the “commoditization of mankind”, a buzzword which I consider a reductive and politically extremist slogan / mantra.
KS – i saw an interesting structure of merchandise without money (6 wares – 15 relations) and with money (7 wares – 6 relations (where money is a ware, but a special ware)) : structure-of-money
so money is a practical tool, as PG and SK said.
btw. if one of the wares is common (e.g. salt) it might serve also as currency for the other wares .
there is another root of money, with philosophical impacts :
if i have no wares, i can give a clay tablet or another promissory note .
if i give it to A, A can give it to B, B to C and so on, till e.g. F gives it back to me .
now i have payed my dept and can destroy the promissory note .
if i do not and moreover make some new promissory notes then i have invented money out of nothing – and that’s the mechanism of every financial crises .
the question is : can we make a better money ?

SK – When it comes to money there are two fundamental aspects that have to be taken into account. As PG pointed out money is a tool. With any tool there are two factors involved. The tool itself has to be as efficient and practically beneficial as possible and the user of the tool must be a master at using the tool. As I am no economist I will focus on how to become a master of using money where others may focus on how to improve the fundamentals of money itself.

Again when it comes to mastering money there are two different bodies of knowledge that have to be mastered. One is the very technical knowledge of money, the bottom line of the so called ropes of money. It is to know everything about the rules of the game of dealing with money. The other is to be a master of one’s own self! It is only when you are a master of your own human nature; master of your own attitude towards money, that you can handle money successfully.The bottom line being how you respond to money emotionally.

CQ – Money is a convenient abstraction of value used as a medium of exchange. It represents a measure of worth for physical objects and substances. When money is seen as an end rather than a means, illogical phenomena such as inflation, recession and financial ruin occur. Money, especially printed currency and financial instruments, is not a source and has no source, but is purely a psychological device. The only real system of exchange and trade is barter involving both goods (substances and objects) and services (work, labor, expertise) with a way of determining relative worth. The fallibility of monetary systems is that there is no resilient consensus on what things are worth.

SKS – And we should not forget that most of the “strange” phenomena related to money is based on the complexity of human psychology.
Debate 8 – What is the most important quotation of all times?

SK – Philosophy is the quest to understanding life and everything in it. The fundamental pillar of understanding life is understanding one’s own self. The key to understanding one’s own self is to know what one needs to do to be able to truly know one’s self. The biggest insight of all times comes from Gd Himself  when He says to Moses, ‘I am who I am’. He is not His self image. There is nothing phony about Him. He is His full potential. Not only does He know who He is; He is His full actualized Self. It is very clear from this that man needs to find ways through science and philosophy to be able to say about one’s own self, ‘I am who I am”. Thus the quest of philosophy must be to enable every individual, group and country to know, understand and become their true self.
Just imagine the chaos if like most of us; Gd was His self image!

CQ – “It’s necessary to learn the truth. Then you can stretch it all you want.” Mark Twain

MB -” Philosophy is the art of living.”…………Plutarch

SKS – “Εν οίδα ότι ουδέν οίδα” (The only thing I know is that I don’t know anything) [Socrates]

Debate 9 – Concerning life

Debate 9.1 – What is the biggest secret of life?

MB -Biggest secret of life is life itself.Today there was an emergency bell ringing and all the RMO’s and other staff came out to see what kind of emergency what there, whether a MVA or something else.I was just passing by and saw a middle aged man was in the car and our staff was shifting him to the stretcher.One of the male nurse called one Dr to see whether that man was there or not means whether the pulse was there or not.It wasn’t there.I think it must be case of acute MI.
Only for 2-3 minutes we felt sad and everybody went for their lunch.

SK – Life indeed is the biggest secret yet the key to this secret is another more important secret – the real ‘me’, the real ‘I’; The fully actualized self. Unless we are able to become and fully know and understand our own self how can we comprehend anything else fully? If I don’t know who I am how will I relate to others and to life itself?
MB – Can your ‘real me’ and ‘real I’ and  ‘understanding our own self ‘ can prevent death ?

SKS – You never know. Maybe the real “I” will be something completely untouchable by things like “death”, “change” or “decay”. Maybe the real “us” is something eternal.
MB – Yes you may be right, we all are the part of universe but when we die it is the death of physical body by which we are recognized in this world.Our soul and spirit never dies it takes the form of another shape.
Now tell me one thing that if we die will our soul or  real ” I ” recognize that who were we in our previous births?
Once a person gone means he is gone forever by losing his identity which is the physical body not the soul .
SKS – I cannot say I agree totally with that. Indeed the body is part of our selfs, but I consider it part of our physical selfs. Consider for a moment the brain. If you reproduce all chemical reactions happening inside your brain in a test tube, will that mean that this tube is “you”? I do not think so.
MB – Spirit can exist independently of matter , but matter can not exist independently of spirit.
Spirit is absolute but matter is relative.
PG – Maybe life is a superior state of organisation, in which physical components get organized into something that is superior to a purely physical state.
MB – Of course life is much above the physical state that’s why we all die and life keeps on moving, It never ends.
Debate 9.2 – What is the fundamental aim of life for all human beings at the individual and group level?

SKS – I believe the aim of life for humans is to increase knowledge and reduce ignorance.
SK – ‘…increase knowledge and reduce ignorance’ is indeed the path one must take to achieve the fundamental aim of life. The tragedy is that there are two distinct , though interdependent paths that we must all take. One path is to educate ones self on the ropes of life including ways to earn a living. The other path is to develop ones emotional intelligence to the level where it becomes wisdom. The aim of life is to become a self master, the Holy Grail of education; to know, understand and become ones true self and become a maven of ones chosen profession. The first path we are well focused on, the second path we don’t know how to achieve.
MB – Fundamental aim of all the individuals is to gain higher education, name, fame and money.

SK – This beautifully demonstrates the fundamental aim of Americans! This over ambitious agenda springs from a +1 mature emotional intelligence brain.
MB – Why Americans only ? I am an Indian but what’s wrong in it ? We have got life only once , why not to have the best out of it . Best education , best house , best car and everything best.If I have money then only I can do some charity for my patients.I am educated enough to perform cesarean section and when a lady comes in distress and I deliver out the baby then I forget all your philosophy that who am I and the real self.I only look at the mother and baby and that is the ultimate truth for me . When I see a person dying no one can prevent it and that is the ultimate truth for me.

SK – You are right when I say American I should really say all over the world the attitude is the same. Thanks.
Aiming for the best is fine. But aiming for your own best possible is even better. Doing my best and being happy with it is better than achieving the best for its own sake; for in most cases it never happens.

SKS – Wanting money as a means to an end is another thing than wanting money as the ultimate goal in life.
MB – Yes you are right but unfortunately universal measure of our achievements is money.The purpose of money should be commodity -money -commodity not money-commodity -money.
If a person has worked hard then only he has got money and if he starts his small scale industry , I think he is doing a great job by creating employment for so many and contributing towards society.
Our ultimate goal is to become famous.We all are common man , we are not Mahatma Gandhi, Hillary  Clinton or media persons like Emma Watson who has bought million dollar house at the age of 17.
If we want to publish our work we need money for that, if we want to make a film or documentary to show our talent we need money for that.If we want to do research we want money for that.
Ultimate goal in life is to have satisfaction and happiness and happiness comes from inside when you are satisfied with your life and for that inside happiness certain external factors also work, money is one of these factors.You can not make your five senses work till you have your sixth sense and that is money.
I think I am getting carried away with this topic and I am sorry for the longer post.

SK – Your approach is so practical and real. This is the way it is because society has the majority of people who are +1. Just like in some third world countries the majority is -1 and so corruption is the ruling factor of life.

SKS – I will just repeat what others have said: money is a tool not an end. You can produce happiness to others every day by just smiling and having positive energy. Money of course solve many problems. And they can make you happy if the problems you have are only “money problems”. However the biggest problems one might have are mostly related to love, having someone to talk to, understanding the world etc.
MB – Yes you are right. One can dance with raindrops, can sing with rustling leaves and can talk with whispering trees.Look at the flower , feel its fragrance , just think of mountain peaks , butterflies, stars , moon , everyone has got a piece of sky in his hands. Some people are lucky to get a bigger piece of it along with rainbow and some are happy with a smaller piece without rainbow.One has to draw a line of satisfaction.
There is a ward lady in our hospital who serves water and tea but she is always happy. She distributes her
lunch which she brings from her home in a tiffin ( lunch box ) to the other staff  members as she is a very good cook and sometimes remain hungry but she is happy that way. She is uneducated and she knows that she can’t get more than what she is getting, so she is happy. She doesn’t have any ambition, as she is widow having a son who is well settled.
When I see a rickshaw-wala ( tree wheeled cart for the public transport ) sleeping on the rickshaw in hot summers under the tree I sometimes feel jealous but don’t you think he must be wanting to see and enjoy all those things which we are enjoying.
As you mentioned ” understanding the world ”—don’t you need money to buy the air ticket if you want to see the whole world and to stay in a hotel.
So money doesn’t buy happiness but it definitely makes your life more comfortable and if one is comfortable that means he is happy.Isn’t it ?
PG – Maybe our fundamental aim is to find out if we have a fundamental aim. Just because we hate uncertainty and it is so comfortable to believe we have a fundamental aim. Also, that never ending quest keeps us busy. Cynical, isn’t it ? 😉
MB – I will be the most happiest person on this earth if someone tells me to sit under a tree and do meditation,
but I can’t do that because I have certain responsibilities towards my family , towards my patients , towards my country who has given me everything.To sit under a tree closing your eyes in the search of  fundamental aim ” who am I ” and dreaming about tandoori chicken and pudding ?
No , that is not our fundamental aim.You know what.. ” the biggest enemy of our happiness is our self created so called ego” .
Ask yourself , you will find the answer.
.

Debate 10 – Concerning human goals
Debate 10.1 – Is self mastery, the Holy Grail of education, possible to achieve?

SKS – I would prefer the term “self-knowledge”.
SK – It is interesting that you prefer self-knowledge. When it comes to emotional intelligence it is not enough to know it, it is essential to understand and integrate the understanding into the brain structure. It is not enough to know who you are. This is just the first step. You must also understand and become your true self. Understanding and being your true self means your understanding is being generated automatically by the electro-chemical actions in your brain. There is no stress or control of behavior. In case of mere knowledge you need to manage yourself. It is like the same example I give what is more effective?  Would you prefer knowledge of what it is to be a millionaire or would you like to be one. The ancients were very knowledgeable when it came to wisdom; that is why the Holy Grail of education has always been self mastery.

SKS – What do you mean by “become your true self”? Aren’t you already your self?

SK – Who you think you are and who you really are is not the same person. Almost each and every person is born with a potential to become a pure human being. However because our brain works in images we even perceive our own true self in the form of a self image. The first self image is created by the feed back from the womb environment. When the next stage of post natal life is happy then the womb-conditioned self image gradually dissolves and a new self image starts to form. If the post natal life is unhappy the child as it cannot escape from the pain it escapes in the mind and so clings to the earlier self image. And so on. When the womb life and post natal life is happy and healthy then the pure self is gradually actualized.  In fact the road to wisdom is set more or less by the time the child reaches the age of six. People stuck with earlier self images struggle all their lives trying to achieve the agenda of their self image. Americans are a good example. Our self image is stuck at +1. Thus we perceive our self as a trophy. ‘I am the best’. So no amount of success is enough and true happiness is beyond our grasp. Many of us try to seek it through drugs and alcohol. Thus it is very important to actualize our full humanness potential and then we will be living our authentic lives.

Because people live their entire lives believing themselves to be their self image society is composed of four levels of people. From criminals and emotionally dependent people on the -2 level to selfless and altruistic people on the +2 level. You can even classify whole groups and countries into four levels based on the majority self image. This is a self image driven world. This is what I am trying to wake up the world to: It need not be this way. It can all be changed through proper education.

So lets get back to answering question # 12.
MB – It is a very difficult question to understand and to answer but I will try my best.This reminds me of Claude Bernard, if Nobel prize existed at that time he would have got at least 4.One of his self mastery was on the external and internal environment ( millieu interieur ).He said that the external environment keeps on changing but that doesn’t affect much our bodies as there is a community of living cells and water and they get adapted to the climate.In hot weather body sweats out and the temperature is maintained by the natural mechanism of body.
In the same manner Paracelsus  was centuries ahead of his time.He detested poly pharmacy and he insisted that anatomy should be taught in relation to the living body and he was the one who gave surgeons the status of physician at that time…1493.
But talking of these philosophers and scientists doesn’t answer this question.Self mastery ? Why not ? It can be achieved as you are seeing so many advanced technologies like nanotechnology , laser techniques, so many newer equipments like endoscopes , robotic surgeries etc.
Self mastery is achieved but whether it is a holy grail or not there is a question mark on it.Everything is commercial now a days and just wait –one question is coming in my mind that if it is ‘self mastery’ then what is the use of this holy grail education ? ‘Self ‘ word itself is indicating that there is no need of this kind of education.But another point is if you don’t teach children right things from the beginning they might deviate to a wrong path.I don’t think there are much faculties who can give this kind of education.
This post is again becoming longer so I better stop writing as I am not sure of this type of education.

SK – As the self is considered divine so self mastery is considered a holy quest. But I am not using the term Holy Grail in terms of divineness. I am using the term Holy Grail as in terms of the ultimate quest of education to find the path to self mastery.
MB – I have been working with CSR. I have seen parents giving more attention to a boy than a girl in rural areas..We go to villages where we have employed teachers from that village and we motivate the parents to send the girls to school.In some remote areas children sit under the tree on a carpet as we are always lacking the funds.On the other hand in urban areas conditions are deteriorating day by day .Teenager girls buy abortifacient drugs directly from chemist shop. Homosexuality, taking drugs , live in relationships , designer babies (ART) , artificial sperms , throwing away the left over embryos while doing IVF techniques , where is the morality ? Aren’t we playing with nature and disturbing the genetic structure of the society ? do you think the goal is easy to achieve ? I don’t think so.

SK -Most of the problems you mentioned can be traced to lack of emotional intelligence education. All the more reason that main stream education should take up wisdom education on a mass scale. Wisdom education is not only needed it is 50% of essential education. The vital question is can we afford to and should we continue to create -2, -1 and +1 minds; when we can strive to create +2 minds en mass. In spite of all the material successes a vast section of people are still struggling with unhappiness and depression. Just because an essential goal is daunting does not mean we have to give it up. -2, -1 and even +1 upbringing can be gradually eliminated. Wisdom education can be introduced as a compulsory subject just like math and science. Other problems like homosexuality are a matter of opinion and culture.
‘where is the morality’ indeed morality is lacking precisely due to lack of wisdom generating brain power. Cultivate wisdom through proper education and we will not have this problem of lack of morality. We can produce a selfless and altruistic society.

Yes the goal is not easy, and it is even more so because of the main stream fuzziness about wisdom. But  I have figured out that wisdom is a very real byproduct of a squeaky clean brain. There are lots of well established ways to clean the brain. So far we use these ways to make the subnormal normal. We can use the same ways to make the so called normal – super normal. And above all we can wake up the world to stop putting -2, -1 and +1 values in the future generations.

I am very excited about your focus on these issues. It is people like you who can take my work to the next level.

SKS – In case someone has low emotional intelligence, can’t he build it and improve it? I think yes. So does that mean that he/she changes his/her nature and self?

SK – The true nature of the self in everyone is the same: it is pure humanness. The problem is that the true self is hidden under the cloak of the self image which is generated by the EBG. And as you remove the EBG the cloak dissolves and the real self gradually emerges. So the false self gets dissolved and the authentic self/nature emerges. Theoretically it looks very simple, however it is very hard because EBG physically changes the brain.

SKS – Physically changing the brain means you become actually a different person? Or do you remain the same? What is that makes you “you” and me “me”? If your brain is changed through a traumatic experience, are you the same person you were before that? If you somehow experience everything that I have experienced, do you become “me”?
Debate 10.2 – What is the most difficult question one must answer and cannot avoid?

SKS – One of the most important questions I believe we must answer is WHY we are here in this life. But now that I think about it, I believe that debate is part of the “What is most important question of philosophy” above, or at least could be. I would rather not have two debates with similar content. Tell me what you think.
SK – You are right. So I have changed the question. As for ‘why we are here’ this question has  an answerable sub question – we are here for a purpose, which we must find individually and collectively.
MB- Why we are here on this earth ? Certainly not by our choice.Did God ask us that which religion we want or in which country we want to take birth ? No nobody asked us this question.
But once we have come on this earth, do not be a burden on it. Avoid terrorism , war , stop hurting others.
When we were not given the chance to choose a religion or country then why we are fighting unnecessarily.
Most important question one must ask –What I want to achieve ultimately, what is my goal of life ?
Have I cheated anybody today ?
Have I hurt anybody ?
Why did I tell lie ? Was it necessary ?
Am I useful for the society ?
Will people remember me when I die ?
Why did I waste my time today ?
Am I being honest to myself ?
What kind of fears I am carrying in my subconscious mind………etc etc…Start asking yourself you will find so many questions and answers, you decide which one is the most difficult question to answer which one can not avoid.
SKS – I think SK was referring to the most difficult question we “must” answer and not to the most difficult question we “decide to” answer.
MB – I am not able to decide which one is the most difficult question.

SK -The question every human has to answer and cannot avoid is ‘Who am I?’

MB- We are the image of the universe.Death is inevitable as whatever is born is bound to die.
We have two importnat parts , one is physical body and other one is consciousness or mind.Mind is like ocean where lot of currents and tides , low and high flow daily and body is like a sea shell who listens to these currents.When we are born there is no material possession but gradually we become materialistic.
we are always restless. Impulses , emotions and passions increase our restlessness.We are inalienable part of society so we should try to maintain the balance between the invidualistic approach and combined approach.
”We exist” is the only truth for me.”

TEM-  Is there life after death and if there is are there different levels of which I may go. If this is true what must I do to be at the highest level one can achieve.
SKS – I hope I knew a definite answer for that one. The only thing I “feel” that we must do is try to decrease our ignorance of things as much as we can. I can feel that as an internal, inherent purpose. And I see that purpose existing in the whole human kind as well: we all continuously try to learn new things, to explore the unexplored. I do not think this is random or accidental. And the first thing to explore is our self.
MB – Yes there is life after death because spirit , the purest form never dies , it takes the form of another shape.I have written a true story of trance in one of my knols.To achieve the highest level one must do spiritual practices to elevate the spirit from third level to the second or first level.

Debate 11 – Will robots ever become human in terms of emotions and thinking?

SKS – I think not. Robots with their AI will never be able to think like humans. Robots think and act by applying specific rules according to which they are programmed. Humans have free will.

SK- Definitely in thinking but may be never in terms of emotions.
MB – I totally agree with the above statement.

SKS – If they can simulate human thinking, why not emotions? Is it because human emotions are something different? If you believe robots will eventually think like humans, do you include “Free Will” in that?
MB- When a child is born he doesn’t have any emotions but they develop gradually by the sense of touch. speech and hearing.When he goes to school he passes through emotions of pleasure and pain.
If he gets less marks there is a negative feeling.I mean to say that emotions are not developed in a single day.
If your robot can pass through the trauma of natural birth then only he can have emotions.

SKS – Your putting the birth shock as a vital differentiation between us and robots is something I have never encountered before in similar discussion. I find it interesting. You mean that the miracle is life is what makes us who we are?
MB – Try to make male and female robots so that they can marry and give birth to baby robot.Start thinking on these lines, maybe this discussion turns out to be fruitful and we succeed by putting emotions in a robot’s brain.
SKS – What you propose could be actually happening. I know that in Tokyo there is a factory where robots produce other robots with minimal (if any) human intervention. Is that the beginning? I do not think so. Giving birth – i.e. starting “existence” is something more than putting various parts together. Human life has an embedded mystery I cannot easily define. What I DO know is that it has no resemblance to the process of robots putting together the gear for other robots.
MB – Original is always original.

SKS – With the term “original” you refer to what exactly?
MB – Original means who takes natural birth ,  composed of living cells , breathes naturally,  grows naturally , having emotions of pain and pleasure both and dies a natural death.

Debate 12 – What is the borderline between science and philosophy?

SKS – Philosophy sometimes deals with things that at a later point in time go into the scope of science. I believe the distinction between the two is fuzzy.

SK – What ever is important for understanding the fundamental unknown mysteries of life is under the scope of philosophy. What ever mysteries that have been solved come under the scope of science. What ever we can measure and define in mathematical terms is science.  Whatever we cannot measure and is fuzzy is philosophy.
MB – Questions in this debate are becoming tougher day by day.Mr Rao please come and contribute in this knol .I have read your comment— ‘ Philosophy of science ‘
Let me explain it by giving an example.
Harvey’s greatest work was on the heart and it’s circulation.Galen said that the purple blood in the veins is enriched with ‘ vital spirit.’ Galen’s opinion were only philosophical for doctors.Leaonardo recognized the heart as a muscle but no one thought that it pumps blood.
Harvey carefully reasoned and then demonstrated by experiment that it pumps blood..Philosophers  think and observe but when they prove it by experiment they become scientists.
In the Harvey’s time science was called natural philosophy.Not even Descartes , the best philosopher since Aristotle, was fully aware of the difference between philosophical argument and scientific experiment.
So the difference is that one has to prove by repeated demonstrations.
Harvey said-‘-I am of opinion that our first duty is to inquire whether the thing be or not , before asking wherefore it is.’ He did countless experiments on snakes and mammals and convinced people that heart pumps the blood.He said—‘ First I shall show that this may be so , and then I shall prove that it is so in fact.’
A pure scientist who is not a doctor can reject all theories and can start fresh ones but a scientific physician can not do this as he has to treat patients and they can not wait for the new theories to develop.
Conclusion of the whole story is that philosophers are theoretical while scientists are more practical but remember one thing that a scientist is always a philosopher and a philosopher can be a scientist also.

SKS – If science proves by “repeated demonstrations”, that means that it cannot deal with events occuring only one time (e.g. the Big Bang or a miracle). Is that the field of philosophy?
MB – Maybe , I am not sure of this as I have not seen a miracle but I think both of them can work together in this field.

SKS -If some scientist saw Christ walking on water would he believe it? No. He would like to see the experiment repeated. If he didn’t see it again, then he would deduce that this thing cannot happen and cannot be verified as a scientific “fact”.
MB – But someone must have seen it that’s why he has written it.I have read that the prophet Muhammad
ascended the sky on his horse Buraq , which bifurcated the moon in the course of his ascent and then got the glimpse of dazzling flame.The proof is found in the holy books.For a layman it’s a miracle but for spiritual science Buraq is the highest form of the spiritual current which corresponds to the sixth ganglia which is
called the ”pind ”.

Debate 13 – Has modern technology deprived us of our “responsibility for our actions” and of our “control over our actions”?
SKS – Modern cars, airplanes and spacecrafts have specialized software that makes instant nano-second decisions without the interference of the user. For example in case imminent collision is detected, a modern luxury car can start braking on its own. However what if the driver of the car wants to have a collision in order to commit suicide? GPS systems tells us where to go. If we get used to them, we will loose the ability to decide on our own about the route we will take: “My GPS told me” will be the answer to someone asking us why we took “that route” and not “the other”. In modern warfare, we use remotely-controlled weapons or – even worse – totally automatic weapons. Modern cruise missiles and UAVs can detect enemy targets on their own and “decide” to hit them. Those developments alienate us from the consequenses of our actions. We “act” without ever seeing and feeling the results.

SK – This whole issue of loosing control over our actions due to dependence on modern technology brings out the importance of what I am trying to wake up the world to: make yourself so emotionally strong that your ‘inside out’ actions remain a master of all ‘out side in’ perceptions. Make sure your out side reality does not take control of your inside decisions and behavior. In other words just because we have a calculator we must not ignore to learn math for our self. Responsibility for our actions also boils down to how much responsible we are emotional intelligence wise.
MB – Four friends , 3 scientists and one layman were walking together in a forest , there they found a skeleton of a lion. They started experimenting on it.One said I will provide the skin and flesh to it.Second one said –I will make the blood flow in it.The third one said ” I shall breathe life into it ”, Fourth one was not a scientist but a wise man so he said–”Very good, Let me first climb up a tree.”
The modern technology is good as with the advancement of so many medical techniques , very big brain tumours can be removed , open by pass surgeries can be done, minimal invasive surgeries can be done but one has to be wise enough while using these techniques having control on our actions.Perception should not be one sided, partial view would not do.Have control on your actions and impulses while using them.

SKS -And imagine what might happen when medical robots become more “automated”…I recently read some article about “bio-secutiry”: scientists are concerned with the more and more extensive use of electronic devices directly connected to the brain. They think that if a paralyzed person uses an implant in his brain to control a computer and if that computer has access to the Internet, then maybe we can see hackers hacking their way into human mind! That seems really bad even as a scenario!
MB – It is only the man who feeds data so man is at fault if he is feeding wrong data and trying to hack the information.Machine is not at fault.

SKS -So when man follows what the machine tells him and the machine is fed with the wrong data, whose fault is that? And what happens with machines programmed to make decisions on their own advanced AI?
MB – Why man is scared to face the consequences of what he has created .Be prepared to face the music then.
Debate 14 – Concerning suicide
SKS – Why do people commit suicide? Is it because they are “mentally ill” or can someone commit suicide while being sane? Some people say that committing suicide is the ultimate prove of our unique nature – no robot can do that. Some say that committing suicide is the ultimate expression of our free will. If we did not have free will, we would never be “programmed” or destined to kill our selfs. Eagerly waiting for your thoughts!
SK – For me personally bringing up the question of suicide is a very personal topic. Being in a hundred and one emotional holes I have seriously thought of suicide myself. Why would I want to commit suicide? Being extremely shy, nervous and as a result depressed. On top of that once in a while feeling alone and a separate entity who has to face these emotional holes day in and day out without any escape would literally terrify me. While in school in the early grades I would worry all year for the one day I would have to give a speech to my own class, people I met every day and some of whom were my friends. I couldn’t tell a joke. I was always afraid what if in the middle of it I got nervous. I dreaded any occasion where people were telling jokes. There were constant insignificant irrational fears eating me inside out. I thought there is no escape from this living hell. This drove me to suicidal thoughts often. On top of that my grandmother told me stuff that made me more miserable; I was forced out of my mothers womb. So I was convinced no one loves me! I can go on and on…
As some one said all happy families are alike and all unhappy families are unhappy in their own way. So suicide can be a powerful incentive to escape the emotional bondage of an emotionally miserable and often physically painful life, especially if the life circumstances cannot be changed. Fortunately for me I got inspired by Durga Mata, a Hindu goddess and I discovered that my irrational emotional holes were generated by my EBG. I thus turned my dark clouds into my silver lining and created my hypothesis that covers half of ignored and essential human intelligence!
I disagree that suicide is a demonstration of free will. Suicide is a perfect demonstration of your inside out behavior succumbing to the misery of your out side in life circumstances. Free will means to act independent of the outside circumstances; not let your will be colored by outside forces. Its like someone abuses you and you abuse him back. This means he is controlling your reaction. You must never react and in spite of his abuse you still should act from +2.
Suicide is now becoming more and more acceptable when faced with excruciating pain and terminal illness and now even huge financial medical bills. Thus even sane people can think of suicide.

SKS – I didn’t mean to make it personal. I just wandered about how one such person might think. I understand what you say that being miserable could be the main factor behind such a dramatic decision. But to my mind it remains a decision.

SK – I try to give inside-out information when ever I can because this way one gets a better understanding of what goes on and why people even think of suicide. It is just not just being miserable. It is being helpless and even in awful pain and knowing that there is nothing at the end of the tunnel except the same frustrating life. Of course it can be a well thought over sane decision or an insane decision forced on by a sick mind.

TEM – I believe that the inward evil to do what it wills is meet with the outward forces of good that truly touches the soul and brings a conviction that is beyond ones understanding as it is to see red for the first time which is good and pleasing to the soul but out of the ordinary for the evil that lurks within.

SKS –  I am not really able to say I understand.

TEM – when all you know is evil and then you see a truly outward unconditional love (one that would transform ones life if allowed)  brings on a state of confusion by the evil within, which cries out, you are not worth living because evil delights in death and any life (Love) that may enter is meet with the full forces of the evil.

Debate 15 – Concerning human mind

Debate 15.1 – What is the difference between knowing and understanding?
SKS – Knowing to me means something less than understanding.

MB- It is just like the difference between knowing and seeing with your own eyes.
We are seeing life that means we have enough knowledge of it but do we understand the real meaning of life ?
The answer is NO.
Knowledge is like a bulb and understanding is like an electric current.
SK – Knowledge is the tool but understanding is the process that improves the brain to develop to a higher level of expertise and competence. It is focus and repeated exposure to knowledge that turns knowing into understanding. Mastering knowledge creates understanding. Understanding is the king. But the king cannot function without his staff.  Without new knowledge the brain becomes stale and knowledge is always needed because the brain has to be a perpetual learner. Mathematics is knowledge and when this knowledge gets integrated in to the brain it becomes understanding. It is the understanding of the knowledge of mathematics that changes the student from a student of mathematics to a mathematician.
It is crucial we know the difference between the two. It is interesting that when we come out of a university with knowing we get a BA or MA degree. When knowing turns into understanding we come out as a Dr.! Because understanding changes our brain so much that our integrated knowledge becomes part of us; we become a physician or an engineer etc. Our understanding becomes us!
Where/when we go to a university for knowledge we must aim for understanding!
PG – Understanding is to make a mind representation of a phenomenon. That representation might or not match fully the phenomenon. Sometimes we really understand, sometimes we just give a subjective interpretation. It might be better in some cases to assume we don’t fully understand than to believe we understood. There is a danger to confuse understanding and belief.  Our interpretation of things should always be considered as only practical assumptions.
Of course those assumptions are needed to guide our choices if not we would shun actions (except those driven by emotions when it overrides reasoning). But we have to recognise that they are bets. That is what is noble in human beings, they are able to “speculate”, to take risks in front of uncertainty, which I’m not sure is the case for an animal which just follows some instinct. But they should be conscious that they take them.
This is the individual aspect, but this true also for common paradigms which are collective interpretations of realities. A better paradigm can always surge, and encounter resistance as the old paradigm tend to be anchored in the collective mind.
Understanding should be flexible, things are rarely clearcut, and binary Aristotelian logic which considers that statements can only be either 100 % true or 100 % false is the mother of dogmas.

READ ALSO:
How to win a Religion vs. Science debate! (for both...)

Debate 15.2 -What is awareness?

MB – It is a voice from our internal constitution : responses at the mental plane which give rise to thought and attention currents by means of which our thoughts are projected to their objectives and we get associated with them.As I gave the example in ” wisdom is our main sense ” that if we are sitting in a bus we know it’s moving, we think about it or not but in our subco nscious mind we know that it is moving.We are aware that the sky is above us and earth beneath our feet, we don’t have to look at the sky again and again that it exists or not ?
We are aware that we are in which city and at which place and whether it is day or night , we don’t have to remind ourselves of these things. Am I right ?
SK – Awareness is the ability to assess ones total life context inside out and outside in just the way it is. Awareness is a thinking exercise that reveals the actual reality about ones own self in the context of being. Awareness helps reveal the good, the bad and the ugly about any life situation, especially ones own self. Awareness reveals ones place in life. Its knowing ones own self from the self’s perspective as well as at the same time from the perspective of others. It enables one to assess objectively the quality of ones given life and any situation in it. It is knowledge used to uncover the truth from all possible angles. It is a tool that enables one to free the brain of EBG. It is also a brain exercise that strengthens the brain physically as well as emotionally. To be fully aware of ones life context is to live in the now. Awareness is pondering upon the interior of the self from an exterior perspective and vice versa. It enables one to venture into ones own psyche. The unknowns of life become known and are put in their proper place. Awareness is an exercise that examines the underlying factors in one’s own thinking as well as of others and also of different life situations.

And self awareness is your true self looking at your true self in the context of your brain and your mind and being fully aware of being fully aware  that your consciousness is looking at your self/self image.

Debate 15.3 – What is mindfulness?
MB – Newton’s discovery was not the result of an intellectual exercise. It was a case of direct vision , this is what is called mindfulness.

SK – Being mindful is emptying your mind of any opinions of what ever you are experiencing, and just observing in silence what ever you are experiencing. And also observing the emotional attachments of these thoughts with your body’s physical state like your tenseness in certain parts or some kind of pain.

Debate 16 – Science and Religion

Debate 16.1 – Are science and religion compatible?

SKS -For me, religion and science are two sides of the same coin. They both help us reach knowledge of the truth, but each with a different way.
MB- Religion is based on faith and science is based on observation and reasoning.I don’t think they are compatible.
Faith never changes but science keeps on progressing.

SKS – Not everything in religion is based on blind faith. Consider the “First Cause” for example. There are plenty of logical arguments in favor of the existence of a First Cause and actually it was Aristotle (a person who you cannot blame to be religious blinded) who first proposed it. And I can offer many other examples.
MB – What is the definition of religion ? You first answer this question then I will give the answer to your question.

SK – The ultimate goals of science and religion are one and the same: the emancipation of man. They are not only the two sides of the same coin; they are two paths describing the same coin: the ultimate context of human beings in our universe. Religion seeks to teach us the truth and science works to uncover reality. Reality and truth are the same entity.Thus the goals of both are the same. At least as far as the mind sciences are concerned both seek the same goal. Religion seeks to give man wisdom. Science seeks to give man emotional intelligence. At the most developed level of emotional intelligence the brain’s quality is wisdom. So the words may be different but the truth and the reality is the same. Even the paths may be different but the destination is the same; to give man wisdom/emotional intelligence.
In one word religion wants you to be good and do good, to know and follow the truth. Science wants nothing but the same. They both want man to actualize his full emotional intelligence/wisdom potential. It is clear that when it comes to how to live your life, religion boldly tells you to follow the ways of the wise. No wonder religion wants you to follow the wise path as law! Because main stream science won’t even define wisdom; and has more or less abandoned the research of wisdom. I think religion is the winner here. Perhaps the Prophets knew that till mankind is able to find out and define wisdom, wisdom ways must be enforced by law! And who can blame religion for this?
MB – First tell me who made religion and what was it’s purpose ? What is the definition of religion ?
Don’t you feel that the religion should be a ‘scientific religion’ as all the matters related to religion are mostly shrouded in mysticism , dogmatic faith and sentimentality and there should be a more practical approach ?

TEM – MD you state “Faith never changes but science keeps on progressing” could you give me your bases for why you think faith never changes? And define what you believe faith to be…

SKS -I believe that religion deals with many things that are not measurable while science deals with measurable things. Religion has God as its starting point, while science has God as a final goal. Both religion and science use logic and evidence. Jesus Christ called people to “reason” with him. Jesus also provided evidence to Thomas so that he believed his resurrection. Most religious claims about the existence of a creator or a purpose have very logical foundations also, as I mentioned above.
MB – Tracy, religion was basically made for the discipline in the society, for the benefit of society not to destroy it.People are in great trouble now a days facing many problems like poverty, diseases, quarrels, caused by jealousy and enmity, truly speaking they do not know what a religion is .They are blindly following it, they have not carefully studied their own scriptures. They develop their faith by seeing what their elders are doing or other persons around them are doing. This kind of faith is nominal faith, that’s why evil is flourishing day by day in this world. This faith they have developed in the childhood so it remains in their heart, mind and blood throughout their life, it never changes. There are so called pandits, maulvis who are their leaders.This is a very superficial form of worship and knowing religion superficially.
I see daily around me people who are sick and about to die, must have Gangajal in their mouth. Do you know that the water of river Ganga is so much polluted, when one is putting ashes of dead persons, flowers of a dead person and you are having the same water.Is that a faith based on true religion.? No.
We all go to temples , mosques and churches because we all are scared to die or loose something..
I come across ladies who take some medicines or ashes given to her by a so called baba or sadhu, they don’t believe in doctors. Is that not a blind faith ?
Take the example of toady’s eclipse, newspaper is in front of me, …Kanika Malhotra from Delhi..says we don’t want our child born on the day of eclipse, because astrologer says that it may create the disharmony in the baby’s life. Ask the astrologer about his life ? Is that in harmony ?..No It is only a way to earn money.
But the ladies are having faith in him not in science. So many of them come to us who say in our religion we can’t go for tubectomies as our religion doesn’t allow it.
So the ” faith never changes and science keeps on progressing.”
It has crossed more than 10 lines , Spiros, I am sorry for that.I will talk about the creation and the creator later on.
BOB – Perhaps there is a difference between the fundamental truth of something and the way humans interpret or pervert that truth. For instance, at the time it was thought the Earth was the center of our system, that “truth” didn’t match the truth of reality. In Mathematics, the concept of adding and subtracting always existed, we just needed to create a “language” to communicate the concepts. Gravity existed before we created the formula to calculate it. In science today there are complex concepts that already exist in nature, but that we may still be interpreting incorrectly. So, our reality as we understand it and the reality as it truly exists aren’t the same. So, perhaps the “religion” which was “made for the discipline in the society” is the reality as we perceive it. However, the deeper truth might be “why do we hold survival to be so important”? Evolution, survival of the fittest, science, wars, politics… the end goal is ultimately to survive. Why? What would be so wrong if everything vanished? To me, the only reason “survival” would be so ingrained into life is that there must be an ultimate purpose. We must survive in order to accomplish the purpose. Religion, in its ultimate truth is mankind seeking that purpose. Religion, in the outward appearance, is mankind perverting that purpose through selfishness.
MB – Yes, we must find out the truth behind ‘survival’. ”We exist”  is the truth , sun is the truth, moon is the truth, there is light everywhere , in the fire , in the lamp , in the sun , in the moon but because we are not able to find out the truth that means there is no light in our eyes.
The iron tonic which can not raise the level of hemoglobin is useless.
The food which can not enhance the immunity of the body is not a complete food.
The religion which is destroying society is a dead religion.
Science without a purpose is a paralyzed science, it is of no utility, it is a burden on us.

SKS -But science does not deal with the existence of purpose or not. Science deals only with the explaining of “how” things happen. Questions about “why” or “purpose” are out of its scope.
MB – Why out of it’s scope ? That’s what I want to ask.I am giving you the example of ‘ageing.’
There is no apparent reason why cells should not live more than 100 years if they are being provided with oxygen , water , amino acids , glucose etc.They should live up to 100 million years according to science.
The science which can not prevent death is useless , that means there is some force in the universe which is beyond the reach of science.

SKS – I do not believe that religion is the way to explain things which are not currently explained by science. This is the “God of the Gaps” argument and I am not very fond of it. I strongly see that religion and science see the world from a very different perspective. Science tries to analyze the how things operate, the mechanics of the world. On the other hand religions deals with things like the purpose of life or why does the world exist, which are beyond the reach of science: even if we find out what caused the Big Bang, we will again have to find out the cause of that cause and so on…the question “why the universe exists” will remain.
Problems with science start when science attempts to answer such questions that are out of its scope.
MB – Yes I totally agree with the above statement.

Debate 16.2 – Can a scientist believe in God?
SKS – For me a scientist can believe in God and at the same time practice his/her science.
MB- Yes I believe in God.

SK -As Gd cannot be defined within the paradigm of science, scientists who believe in Gd and those who do not believe in Gd are on the same shaky ground as Gd’s existence cannot be proved or disapproved. As far as science is concerned both are wrong. So scientists who believe in the existence are taking a 50-50 chance. Considering the fact that if there is a Gd then your actions have consequences and so it is better to be safe then sorry. On a personal level I have had some spiritual experiences and firmly believe that there is a Gd.
SKS – However the existence of a First Cause is something that has good logical arguments in favour, from the time of the Aristotle philosophy.
Debate 17 – Human Nature (the basic character traits that are the cause of the human personality; the very substance that generates the fundamental personality traits of human beings): is it fixed or can it be changed?
SKS – I would first have to ask “what do you consider as human nature”?

SK – Your human nature is what defines you. As the basic dark side of our nature is considered to be natural, a part of our construction,  we try to do the best we can, we try to learn to cage the beast. We learn to control our dark feelings. But controlling the animal part of our nature is like we have a tiger that we have to keep in check it still needs to be fed and taken care of. For instance the part that defines our greed forces us to work work work to prove to our self that we are the best. So we are always worried of loosing what we have and always planning what more we can have. In the meantime time is slipping away. Suddenly we awaken to a lot of riches. We genuinely feel rich. (this is due not to the accumulation of wealth but because time makes us wiser). But we are also in for a shock, for the time has taken a toll on our bodies. We suddenly realize that riches cannot bring back our youth, our peak life. So we join seminars, listen to the advice of the likes of Deepak Chopra and read books by Steven Pinker. We try to live wisely and in the present. Before we pass away it all comes to us. We finally get it. Our human nature has become wise.  OUR HUMAN NATURE HAS ACTUALLY CHANGED. (SO WHY DOES IT CHANGE IF IT IS SUPPOSED TO BE STRUCK IN STONE?).*We finally know what life is. But alas no amount of money will bring  our peak life back. Why can’t we see that wisdom changes our human nature and that human nature is not cast in stone?
MB -70% of it can’t be changed , 30% can be changed if willingness is there.
PG – Even if I don’t know if it is the best position of the cursor; I like that answer, as I dislike Aristotelian statements  which are 100 % yes or 100% no
MB – 🙂

Debate 18 – Human Psychology issues

Debate 18.1 – Is the id (the fundamental human desires/drives) real?
SK – The so called id is our basic unconscious urge to have the best of everything, a life of total pleasure.Freud called it as our sex drive. Adler called it a mastery drive and Jung called it the desire to belong. I strongly suspect that the id is our unconscious drive to recapture and recreate to the extent possible our life as we experienced it in the womb. In the womb we had a constant life of feeling love, warmth and security. This constant positive feed back 24/7 created in us feelings of omnipotence. At birth we were well acquainted with a life of effortless pleasure. Especially we got used to these feelings of love, warmth and security. Your id is your basic desire to recreate womb-reality, your 24/7 womb life. Your unconscious desire to regain womb life. Its like a dethroned emperor trying to get his kingdoms back.
To the extent possible we seek love by trying to get as famous and as popular as possible. To recreate warmth we try to make our life as comfortable as possible; we try to acquire as many comforts as possible. To recreate security we try to have as much wealth as possible.

Debate 18.2 – What is the ego and the super ego and what is the relationship between them?
MB – Ego is ‘self-love’
I have never heard of this word…” super ego”.
Self love brings pride which ultimately leads to hatred and jealousy.

SK – Your so called ego is really your self image. Your ego has a face. It has a personality. It has dreams and desires. Your ego when stuck at the birth level is your premature self image. At the teenage level it is your immature self image. At the adult level it is stuck at the mature level as your mature self image. At the super mature level your ego has evolved into you.

Since the ancient times man has believed that the super ego is our conscience. I strongly suspect that our so called superego is our true self. I have found that the human qualities of the true self and those of a person of conscience are exactly the same. Both are selfless, humble, altruistic, graceful, honest, loving, sacrificing, respectful etc. The true self is the very embodiment of the human conscience. For all practical purposes they are both one and the same entity.

Thus our ego is our phony self image and our super ego is our true self.

Debate 18.3 – Is spiritual excellence possible?
MB – Yes it is possible but a very difficult task.

SK – What is the self? Is it immortal? Is it the same in all of us? Is it divine? These are questions that are outside the paradigm of science but I can say that the qualities of the divine self and the  qualities of a self master are exactly the same! They are both humble and selfless and sacrificing etc. No wonder since time immemorial man has been trying to create self masters; man has been trying to create wise human beings. And as wisdom = super mature emotional intelligence, to create self masters we need to create super mature emotionally intelligence human beings. The qualities of a divine self apart from it being eternal are the same as that of a super normal self. Thus to achieve spiritual excellence all we need to do is to develop the self to the super mature emotionally intelligent level.
MB – There are three levels of the creation..
Uppermost–Purely spiritual
Second level –Universe –spirit predominates matter
Third level —Earth –Where matter predominates the spirit.
So it’s a long journey from lowest level to the highest.
We can’t reach that level , if we reach that we will become God.

Debate 18.4 – What is the difference between brain and mind?
MB – In brain the thinking dominates while in mind emotions predominate.

SK @ MB – The mind/self/self image decides the thinking and starts the thinking process but the brain quality determines the thinking quality that is the brain decides how much emotional coloring the thinking will have; how much the entrenched brain patterns will alter the current reality.

The brain and mind are two separate though inter dependent entities. Where the brain is the projector and the mind is the image. The difference between the brain projector and the regular film projector is that the brain projector projects a ‘live’ self conscious mind. Its like the film being projected has not just images but self conscious images that are aware of their own self and are aware of the context of their surroundings; as well as they can look back at the projector…The mind is the true ‘I’, the ‘me’ of each individual. However for most people the ‘I’ is cloaked by the self image. As a result for most individuals the self image is the mind. The self image is projected by a polluted brain. The more pure the brain, the closer to the real self the person is.

To take out the emotional brain garbage (EBG) one must identify the self with the mind (as your mind is th real you ) and focus with contextual mindfulness on the brain garbage as in:
1) I am not my brain.
2) My brain is an organ of my body, just like my hands. As I have full control of my hands I must have full control of my brain.
3) I must focus on my self image and understand why my self image has cloaked my real self – my real mind.
4) As my mind is in the grip of my brain, I must realize it is like my body is dictating my behavior.
5) It is a big handicap that our brain remains in charge of our true self – our mind.
6) The bigger handicap is that we are not even crystal clear about this problem and as a result we are confused about our self and we don’t even know where to begin.
7) So begin by becoming aware that ‘I am my mind’.
8) Once you know who you are in your mind, identify with your true ‘I’ and start the process of changing not only your self image of your mind but also focus on how to change the infrastructure of your brain. It is not an easy task as your brain is hardware and software (not just hardware ) that is programmed to generate electro chemical reactions that project your false self – your false mind. Your phony self image – your phony mind is backed with and powered by a physically altered brain. So be patient as the needed physical changes of the brain will take time. But once you start on this journey, remember time will keep passing anyway, you will awaken one day as your true mind – as your true ‘I’!
I can go on and on…

But please realize that you have the power to change into your true self – your true mind and above all please make sure your future generations grow up into pure beings with no EBG fuel to power a polluted brain.
MB -@SK , Can you tell me where exactly the ‘ mind’ is located in our body ?
PG – Neurosciences, by using scanning equipments, try to identify what areas of the brain and what chemicals intervene in the brain. There are big conflicts between the limbic system (emotions) and the neocortex (reasoning). Dopamin, adrenalin, cortisol, testosterone and plenty other secretions are joining the fight. Pleasure seeking and pain avoiding seems to be the main drives. That would be consistent with the quest for comfort that SK explained. But that knowlege is evolving so fast that there is no definite answer to the question.
MB – Like water , mind flows in each and every cell of our body.
SK @ MB – The mind is a projection as a result of the physical and emotional actions/reactions of the brain. In religion the mind ‘manifests’ itself while in science it is a by product of the electrochemical actions/reactions of the brain. As I said the brain is the projector and the mind is the image. So its location would be in the brain.
@ PG – Thanks for joining this crucial debate.
MB – @PG ” But that knowledge is evolving so fast that there is no definite answer to the question.”
I agree with this statement.
@SK – Tell me one thing which always bothers me that all the Yoga gurus like baba Ramdev , AOL  Ravishankar  teach only one thing and that is ” how to control our mind.” They are teaching ” Sudarshan kriya”
” Pranayaam ” ” kapaalbhati ” , ” vipasanna” and so many other things.I always think that what is the need of controlling your mind , just don’t originate it , don’t let it take the birth.
It’s cost is very less than the desires.Poor mind costing $ 1 and bearing the weight of $ 100 million desires.
But I simply don’t understand why a person should control his desires by controlling the mind.Let him have ice cream if he wants to have it, let him go for shopping and watch movie if he or she wants to.
I agree that they decrease the level of anxiety and reduce high blood pressure and I am totally aware of their medical benefits and other aspects in detail., but God has made our mind or what you call it ” image” in a way that it works according to the normal physiology of the brain. If It wanders like monkey what is the harm in it.?
Within seconds I am able to take the trip of your NY and so many countries so why should I suppress it.?

SK @ MB
Sages teach mind/self control because there is no limit to fulfilling your desires. It is better to control your desires then to let them run amok; as you said, ‘Poor mind costing $ 1 and bearing the weight of $ 100 million desires.’
MB -@SK That’s what I am asking , the world is so beautiful why one should be deprived of this ? When God has given us this beautiful mind why are we playing with its nature ?
Normal man has normal desires like at present I had the desire of writing in this knol and I am writing.

Debate 19 – Why do humans think?
SKS – What is the reason which makes us think?

MB – We think because our brain structure is made like that.

SK- We think because we have a self conscious brain.
MB – Yes but self conscious brain is due to it’s structure only including the pineal gland.
SKS – How do you “know” you now think? You observe your self? And who observes that self so as to “know” that you “know you think”? Another “higher” self?

MB-When I was born I didn’t know anything but gradually with the help of sensory currents and my five senses I started developing my memory power as nature has given me a remarkable piece of equipment and that is called—BRAIN.It has 100,000,000,000,000 brain cells.It can store 2,000,000,000,000,000,000 bits of any data or equal to 13 million CD’S .I have heard that Einstein was using only 5% of his brain , I am a normal person so must be using only 2% but that 2% is sufficient enough to tell me to ” know” that I know that ”I think” .Its not another self, its me because when I die my future thoughts will die along with me.May be my present thoughts can be preserved in this knol.
SKS – And if a time machine is invented you can go back and correct any mistakes you did… 🙂 For me the bottom line is that we know so little about consciousness…

Debate 20 – Do you believe in determinism of free will?
SKS – Exact science is based on the assumption that universal physical laws apply. But if laws apply to everything, they also apply to our mind. If we know the exact starting position of every particle in the universe and all the laws which govern theirs movements, that would mean that we can predict anything in the future. Would that mean that we could predict our thoughts also? After all, our brain is comprised of electrons and protons, all moving based on the same universal laws…I believe that this is not correct and that we do indeed have free will. I do not know how this can be explained, but this is what I feel: every time I decide for something everything in me says that “I” decided that.
MB – No Idea.

SK – Free will is real. However free will is as real as the ‘I’ is real; as much as our mind is real. Imagine free will in a -2 mind. Yes you have free will but it is a chained potential in most lives. If you want to know what free will really is become your true ‘you’/self/mind and then you can taste free will 24/7.
PG – I would say that we have some latitude and autonomy to decide, whatever the “mechanical” part in us. Btw, “predictability” might not be the best criterion as even a mechanical system can bring surprises and not be fully predictable as bifurcations make it non linear (the famous butterfly effect, the percolation theory and its “critical steps”…).
SKS – I believe I have free will because I feel that I decide everything I do. However I recognize that society affects my decisions. But within my boundaries, I decide what to do and say. I do not know how that can be compatible with scientific determinism, but I cannot ignore my feeling.

Debate 21 – Can psychology/philosophy ever become a pure science?
MB – Philosophy can become a science but not ‘ pure ‘ science as pure science wants decisions and act.Things can’t be taken for granted.Take the example of my field that is Obstetrics, which is pure science as well as an art of conducting deliveries.One has to take the decision of doing caesarean section immediately.We can’t have philosophical approach , think for more than 10 minutes and the baby is gone.

SK -Pure science requires real evidence, evidence that can be defined within the paradigms of science and can also be measured. As long as we humans will continue to seek ultimate answers to the fundamental questions of life. As long as we try to find answers to the very nature of Gd and how it was all created we will keep missing the real boat of the meaning of life itself. We will perhaps never be able to make psychology/philosophy a pure science. However it is possible that if we focus our quest not on how it was made, or what it is but on; now that we have it how we can best use it. If we redefine our quest to how to improve the quality of life then our goals of making  psychology/philosophy a purer science can be achieved.
MB – Give me one practical example.

SK – Researching water is a good example. All those who have been researching why water is water, why it has the qualities it does have not gotten much success. Just like many topics of philosophy their knowledge is still fuzzy. Those who devoted their time to researching how to take advantage of the properties of water have gone from harnessing the force through the water wheel to harnessing the force in the water molecule. Again in your medical field trying to figure out the cause of cancer is much harder, even though in this case it is necessary, than trying to experiment with various drugs and other therapies to prevent, control, reduce and even eliminate cancer. Take gold, since ancient times man has tried to make gold with little success. Those who tried to take advantage of its properties have succeeded handsomely. Knowing why gold is gold is like our current attitude toward philosophy. We must focus on how to refashion gold, how to make better gold jewelery. We must turn philosophy into the science of making life heaven on earth by focusing on how to improve the quality of life rather than on whether life is eternal or not.

Here is a quote from one of Cleas Johnson’s knols (my favorite knoller, winner of the current top knol award), ‘Of course, usefulness helps understanding and vice versa, while non-usefulness implies not understandable and vice versa.’ So why does philosophy have to focus exclusively on non-understandable and non-useful research?
MB – As you mentioned that cause of cancer is much harder , I think philosophy will be helpful in Health Education : to avoid the known causes like smoking and chronic irritation or repeated simple injury , these are certain known factors which definitely cause cancer.Then regular exercise and diet are certain factors which
definitely play an important role but without doing experiments on chemotherapeutic drugs , radiotherapy , nano-magnetic particles, how philosophy is going to help ? I still  fail to understand.
Pure science needs calculations and experiments so in my opinion it can help only in prevention not in complete cure.
Regarding quality of life , Yes you are right that we can definitely improve the quality so both the fields complement each other but philosophy can become a pure science I still disagree with the statement.

SK- I did not say that philosophy can become a pure science, I said it can become a ‘purer’ science ,that is ,it can become a more useful science, a more practically beneficial science. Also’ How philosophy is going to help, I still  fail to understand.” A more usefulness driven philosophy will help us focus on the understandable and easier achievable goals that have practical benefits, rather than wasting money and brain power on non understandable and thus non beneficial goals.
MB – See the difference between two sentences………’ Can philosophy ever become a pure science’.
and ………’.Can philosophy ever become a purer science.’
Now the meaning is totally changed.
Why not ? Yes the philosophy can become a purer science.
Science itself can become a purer science.
SKS – You said that pure science requires evidence. Aren’t there things that do not present them as evidence? Like things related to human consiousness for example? What evidence do you have to prove that I thought of what I now write on my own and that I was not brain-washed by an alien who took control of my mind and made me write these things?
MB -Of course I have an evidence.Can a person in coma think of writing on his own ? Brain is required for consciousness which is proved by science not by philosophy.Regarding brain -washed by an alien , studies are going on it.Can you imagine what will be life in 2050 ? Your virtual friends will out number your real friends.
and brain implants will be very common.
SKS – Science is not only very far away from explaining human consciousness, but it also seems that this will be one of its “last frontiers”. Consciousness cannot be explained because first of all we have not clearly understood what it is even though we experience it day by day. Consciousness is not the sum of our cells or neurons. It is something more than that.
MB – May be.

Debate 22 – Can moral values be defined within the paradigm of science?
MB – Yes.

SK – Moral values have mainly come from religion and/or from the assumption that as we are superior human beings we are obliged to have moral values. Thus morale values are based on faith and assumption s which do not lie within the paradigm of science. However it is possible to base moral values on solid hard facts that lie within the paradigm of science.
As there are four levels of the mind there are four levels of character traits in any given society. The moral values of a -2 premature mind are the same as that of a snake. The moral values of a -1 immature mind are those of a corrupt person. The moral values of a +1 mature mind are those of responsible, law respecting  but unrealistically over ambitious person. The moral values of a +2 super mature mind are those of a selfless, humble and wise human being. A super mature mind is the very personification of Moses’ Ten Commandments. He does not need the love of heaven or the fear of hell to act selflessly and to treat every one else as #1 and his own self last.
Thus the character traits of a +2 super mature mind can be the basis of the moral values of /for all mankind – be merciful, kind, giving, loving, sacrificing, helpful etc because it is the super mature thing to do.
MB – As the science is advancing moral values are deteriorating.
News from ‘ Hindustan times ‘ Aug 3 , Monday …….Dr Duru Shah , researcher of Federation of Obstetrics and Gynecological society of India ( FOGSI ) , surveyed 3,500 young girls aged between 15-25 years from roughly 10 metros and towns. One in four girls , young unmarried were found to be sexually active barely using some contraception.41% said that the media had been their only source of information.One in five said their mother had not given them any information.
One more article I read was on trans-music parties and rave parties on face book.One police inspector made a fake profile and reached at the site where they were selling drugs.

SK – I believe that many of the current ills of society are due to lack of emotional intelligence education. It is a trophy self image driven society where the East is copy catting the West. Even the movies are sending the wrong messages.
Especially for Indian women sex is an embarrassing topic. Mothers must be woken up to the importance of sex education which must also be made a compulsory subject from at least 8th grade onwards for both boys and girls.

MB – 8th grade ? By that time they start using Twitter and fb , what mothers can do ? They hardly listen to them.It’s not that easy as you are thinking.

SK – I am thinking that sex education must start before they hit puberty. Perhaps 6th/7th grade may be more appropriate?

MB – The world has totally changed , there are already +2 kind of children in India who compete for higher studies like IIT-JEE , AIEEE, CPMT examinations and get through them by putting labour and intelligence.
In my opinion they are +3 ….do you think these kind of children can indulge in such unsocial activities ?
And do you think it is a practical thing to give them lessons on sex education ?
If they are so intelligent they must be knowing already about it and must be knowing what is good and what is bad for them.These things doesn’t come by teaching in the classes but what they see around them , it’s the environment which is responsible for it.
The society is changing day by day , they don’t want to get married till they earn and buy a flat and a car for themselves.They want to live like free birds and by that time they cross the age of 30 and at this stage of life you can’t tell them what is good and what is bad for them.SK things have become different so think practically.

SK -Just because a significant number of students, though still a small percentage are on the right track it does not mean we should ignore the vast majority that is still on the wrong track.
SKS – And will science or philosophy or art get them on the right track?
SK – Yes the correct science which at its highest form can become art will get them on the right track.
MB –This is a very difficult situation and I really don’t know how to implement it.Media like television is promoting these tablets—Unwanted-72 and I-Pill .Unmarried girls take them directly from chemist without knowing the side effects.
We can not ignore them who are on the wrong track but it’s not that easy the way you are thinking.
SK – Yes it is not easy but if we can get our ideas/insights into the main cirriculum arround the world then we can make a big difference in the right direction.
Debate 23 – Why is peace so hard to achieve?
SK – Peace is a component of wisdom. Only wise action from both sides will produce peace.
There are two kinds of basic forces in this world: negative and positive, good and bad. There are two kinds of actions good and bad. As far as human behavior is concerned it is all powered by just two forces ignorance and wisdom where ignorance produces pain, suffering, loss and damage; and wisdom produces pleasure, profit, enjoyment and prosperity. When it comes to war and peace, war is produced by ignorance and peace is produced by wisdom. Pease is an all or nothing entity.
MB – So, how you are going to convert negative forces into positive , theoretically it sounds good but is that so easy ? Will people listen to you ? Why should they listen to you , what are you giving them except good thoughts and do you think they will read this and change their heart ?
SK – The whole idea of knol is to place the inside information of any phenomina you know of so others can learn from it. It is the duty of us knollers to take out as much fuzzyness from knowledge as possible. We can hope to gradually turn arround the mind set of the movers and shakers so they know that repeating the same mistakes for 1000s of years will not bring peace. Even today there is no genuine peace between even Western Europe countries. Look at their defence budgets. Each is trying to be the strongest in their own neighborhood. Look at their rivalries in commerce. Therfore if I think I know something and it can lead to improvement in any sphere it is my duty to put it up as a knol.
MB -SK you are doing a very good thing by writing and contributing something towards society.At least you have thought of it as you are really concerned and I appreciate that.There are only few people who understand that it’s their duty, but what I want to say is….What is the end result of it ? Is there any newspaper or any other media in which you are not reading or hearing the news regarding crime.? Have you heard of peace anywhere in the world ?
SK @ MB – Just because news from around the world is discouraging does not mean we should stand on the sidelines and not try to wake up the world to the real causes why peace is so elusive. I am hoping that one day our efforts will pay off and knols like this one will become part of the curriculum in schools. So more people will become wise.
MB – Let’s hope for the best.
GDB @ SK- May I ask you a couple of questions regarding your first post?
You said there are two forces, “two forces ignorance and wisdom.”  Then you
said, “ignorance produces pain, suffering, loss and damage; and wisdom
produces pleasure, profit, enjoyment and prosperity.”  My first question is
this, “Of what does this ignorance consist of? and, Of what does this Wisdom
consist of?” Then as to your observation of, “ignorance…pain,
wisdom…pleasure” Where in the history of the world is this most evident?.
SKS – Can you please elaborate SK? I think the most recent example of ignorance and wisdom misuse was the Second World War…A lot of lessons to be learnt from there exist…

Debate 24 – What is happiness and how can it be achieved?
SK – Pure happiness is a function of the pure and fully actualized humanness in you.
As in every thing else you are the source of all your attributes of emotions! It is just like you are a tree and the emotions are your fruit. The quality of the tree will determine the quality of its fruit. The quality of your happiness will depend on the quality of your actualized humanness which is the real you. It is the fully developed potential of the Christ in you that can experience pure happiness. And I am not talking of The Christ as The Son of Gd; I am talking of Christ as in pure knowledge.
This pure humanness, this Christ is the real currency of life. An authentic life you can buy only with authentic currency!
MB -Definition of happiness varies from person to person.A person who is a farmer , for him happiness would be good rainfall and a good crop ( In India there is hardly any rain this season that’s why this came in my mind )For a student who is appearing in competitive exams , happiness would be if he gets his choice of subject in top university.For a housewife happiness would be if she can go out for dinner on weekends with the family.
For some persons it is merely small gift which can be exchanged on special occasions.
For a surgeon happiness lies in doing neat and bloodless surgery with good results.
How it can be achieved is up to you.It comes from within , can’t be bought from the market.( sorry can be bought from the market in the form of handbags , shoes , new cell phone etc etc )
For a big industrialists it’s share market , for a film star it’s the success of the film which gives them happiness…..Like wise………
SK – When happiness is defined by success as you suggest, it is like outside results determine happiness. Pure happiness comes from within. It comes from living a pure life, in doing a selfless job, it comes from a job well done. Happiness is the journey of life, it is the cake of a good honest life where happiness from success is just the icing on the cake.
MB- That means we are not doing our job properly ? Poor farmer is not asking for big things like icing on the cake.He is concerned for his family.We are not saints or monks , for us meaning of pure life is doing our duties and if we are getting some happiness due to our so called ” real self ” by going out for dinner once in a while and buying small small things which give us happiness why should we get deprived of these ?
We must have worked hard that’s why we are getting the cake and if we are getting icing on the top , I don’t see any reason not to enjoy that.
We are not hurting anyone or not doing any crime that means we are living a pure life.
SK – Living a pure life is benificial all around to self and everyone else. Pure happiness comes with every breath, in every moment of life and the icing is a well deserved extra. Yes we are not doing our job properly because we are not raising our kids properly. We are errecting barriers not only by blocking their true self but also by errecting walls of prejudice above all against our childrens own self and against other castes and creeds.
MB- You said happiness is not defined by success.In my opinion happiness is defined by success only.
Raising kids is a different issue , I can write a whole book on that.
Film star Shilpa Shetty is a very spiritual person , I read her interview in Sunday’s Hinustan Times.She believes in all religions , goes to Church , Haji Ali , Siddhi Vinayak temple , Tirupati Bala ji etc etc but simultaneously enjoys eating outside Chinese food also .She is successful , famous and happy.
She is enjoying double or triple layer of icing— spirituality plus—religion—plus–contributing towards society  by giving donations to cancer patients.
SK – I do not know Ms. Shetty but it seems that she is a +2 person. She enjoys physical pleasures as well as spiritual pleasures. And this is how it should be; pleasuers must come from the inside as well as from the outside. For the best life and many layers of icing one must be a +2 person which she seems to be.
MB- You don’t know Shilpa Shetty ? the one who was in ” Big Brother ” show in UK and cried due to racial comments made by Jade Guddy who is no more in this world.Now don’t tell me that you don’t know who was Jade Guddy….The one who died of carcinoma cervix few days back in front of camera.
I wanted to ask a question…………Can a person be happy even if he is sad ?

Debate 25 – Is there a single formula for success in life?
MB – Time management is very important.In our life opportunities come but we are not bale to recognize them and we are afraid to take risk.Take risk , come on the road and you will see a new life which is much better than your previous one.Live life like Mahatma Gandhi if you really want to achieve something.No belongings and you have time for the bigger goals.
So for me a single formula for success is …Take risk.
SK – Our minds work in images. We form an image of our self, of others and how the world is, and how it works. It is our ‘inside out’ reality which I call our personal reality (P-R) that dicides for us how we percieve the ‘out side in reality’, which I call (A-R). When A-R matches P-R then the chances for success are the most. Thus the formula for success is A-R divided by P-R must equal 1.
Success= A-R divided by P-R = 1!
SKS – Each time you encounter a problem, think about that: how will you think back to that problem some decades in the future just being old, with grandchildren and ready to die having lived a full life? If you see that problem under that filter, you will see that it is not so important as it looks…
MB -Yes life is full of problems and nobody is interested in your problems.You have to solve them on your own.
@SK..I am a layman , I didn’t understand your formula of success.How will you explain this formula to a person with normal IQ ?
SK – In laymen’s terms it is the same as the bible says, ‘Know the truth and it will make you free.’ Know, understand and become your true self in order to percieve actual reality as actual reality. When you understand your self and your life and everything else in it the way life truthfully is then your chances of success are the maximum. In my formula what I am expressing is this: develop the capacity of your brain power to make your personal reality match the actual reality of life. Thus success = when A-R and your P-R are both the same. When your out side in perception is understood just as it is outside; you insure success.
MB – Actual reality of  life outside is full of corruption , dishonesty , untrustworthiness , selfishness , that means we also become the same so that our PR matches the AR and we become famous and successful ?
SK – We become the same when our ‘inside out’ P-R ( I choose not to use PR because PR stands for public relations ) scums to the ‘out side in’ A-R only when our mind/brain level is -2, -1 or +1. When our brain level is +2 our P-R is on rock solid ground and is not affected by A-R. In fact for +2 individuals their P-R will match the A-R on their own honest terms, inspite of the prevelant A-R being corrupt, selfish etc.
MB – If we are becoming the same so as to match the A-R that means we are also full of corruption , selfishness , dishonesty.Isn’t it ? That means ”Tit for Tat ” .If a person in front of us is about to kill us , kill him
before he kills us. Now I know the answer of question……. Why is peace so hard to achieve?
Debate 26 – What is the biggest mistake books (without exception) on self hep make?
[We have many questions about self. We could add a more specific question on the mistake that the knoller who wrote the question thinks books on self help make – Spiros Kakos]
SK – All books written on self management are addresed to the individual as if the individual is his full potential. Notice how they all say – ‘you do this, you dream big, you have full confidence in your self!’ The biggest problem is that those who need self help, really, for all practical purposes are just their self image. The self image has its own agenda and the real ‘I’/’me’ is not in a position to do much. So when the advice is to dream big it is the self image that does the dreaming, while the guidiance is to the real ‘you’. No wonder these books do not have as much success as they claim. The single top agenda of all self help books must be to first make the self image dissapear and the real self emerge. Then and only then will self help books become affective.
MB – All persons are not of + 2 category that’s why they read these books so that they can cultivate some mango trees of wisdom and remove the tree of ignorance.The writers must be of +1 category doing mistakes because they are not aware of their real self image.
SK – The problem is that all those aspects of knowledge that matter when it comes to our true self are still fuzzy. When we talk of wisdom for instance main stream science continues to define it by its attributes. They do not realize that the ‘you’ that they are addressing the book to is being read by and understood by a -2, -1 and mostly +1 self image! This is why inspite of reading most self improvement books there is little real change.
Debate 27 – What is the most common mistake people make repeatedly?
SKS – That they believe they know something.
SK – Most people do not learn from their mistakes. They keep using the same approach and each time they expect a different result.
MB – Is it a mistake if they know something ?
I think they should learn from other’s mistakes but the question you asked is different I suppose.
SK – Not knowing is the biggest mistake. And not knowing the best way is a close second. Yes learning is the key to avoid making the same mistake. Learning includes learning form one’s own failed experiences and/or learning from the insights/experiences/lessons of others.
JA – equating  the mass production of technology & materialism with human progress. There is no evidence to suggest modern technology along with materialism is tied to [qualitative] progressive human development and evolution.
Debate 28 – Is life a science or philosophy?
MB – It is the combination of both.
SK – The biggest tradgey is that for most people life is a philosophy when it can be a science. When people become their full humanness potential they become the scientist of their life. When their potential humanness is thwarted they remain philosophers of their life! For most people life is fuzzy because their own humanness to themselves is fuzzy. However it can be a mixture of both as some parts can be fuzzy and other parts of life clear.
MB- Yes you are absolutely right.
SKS – But what about art? Aren’t some things in life similar to art? Isn’t life similar to art also? Don’t we like living, but without knowing exactly why, in the same way we like a painting without being able to articulate specific things that make us like it?
SK – Living life like we appriciate art is a beautiful way of taking care of one’s own self/life. In fact expressing life in art form and becomming an artist of life itself is the highest goal of the artist? An artist expresses his interpretation of reality/life in his own unique way and if we can do the same with our life it would be more than a miricale! It is like enjoy the mango without trying to find out how the mango grows on the tree. Indeed for some aspects of life it is more benificial to enjoy it as art rather than to try to understand its unanserable mystries.
MB- Like we say ignorance is bliss. I wish I was uneducated and ignorant.
SKS – I don’t know…I want to be happy, but at the same time I want to reduce my ignorance. Ignorance also results in no-responsiblity. “I don’t know, so I cannot be held responsible for anything…”. But I don’t like that. I am responsible for what I do and for my decisions.
Debate 29 – What is the most important event in a person’s life and what are its implications?
SKS – Two very important events in a person’s life that I can think of are birth and death.

MB – But when you are born that means it’s life. I think the meaning of this question is different.

SK – The most important event in every individuals life is the sperm race. It is a very real life and death race! If you don’t win the sperm race you do not win the right to be born. The implications of this are very huge. It means that Gd/Mother Nature gives you the chance to be born and it is up to you to make the right effort to get the right to life. Thus it is you who is responsible for your life! Also the fact that you are here means that you won your sperm race, whichmeans you are a champion of champions; one in hundreds of millions! Thus indeed you are extreemly special…

MB – I am hearing it for the first time.I have heard of the rat race but not sperm race.You mean to say that ” birth” is a special event in our life ?

SKS – Death is also an event of life. It is part of life. Only after death you stop existing.

MB – Death race ? What’s that ? It’s me who is responsible for my life ? I don’t think so.When I was born I didn’t even know the meaning of existence.
What about the test tube babies ? In those cases it is the race of Ova instead of sperm.We induce ovulation by giving drugs and then do fertilization with our choice of sperm in vitro.That means they are not champions ?

SK – Death is indeed an event that ends life. It is the last event in the closing chapter of life.
Test tube babies are an unnatural way of birth. Yes they are not champions. It will be interesting for you or anyone else to research/experiment and see if you can recreate the conditions where a sperm race cab be possible out side the womb. If it is successful then test tube babies must be subjected to a sperm race.

MB – ” Death is the last event of life ” that everyone knows.I am asking about the ” death race” ?
We are not sperm or ova so how can we see what’s happening to us, we are the end product of fertilization , which is blastocyst and then embryo.I am not getting your point what are you trying to convey? Are you talking about this world’s race or the race before the stage of ” blastocyst.”
I can prove that the test tube babies are as intelligent as the natural ones who have gone through the ” sperm race” .It is not the race but the genetic structure which is responsible for the ” champions.”

SK – I am talking of the sperm race which takes place before the blastocyst. There is no such thing as a death race where did you get this idea from? The race is a fact of life, a natural way of life. And if we can produce the natural way out side the womb all the better. The sperm race does not produce just more intelligent children. The sperm race produces the healthiest children. The survival of the fittest.

MB – What an imagination that sperm race produces healthiest children.It’s not the race which produces champions but chromosomes and genes which produce champions.What about the diseases like cystic fibrosis , haemoglobinopathies and other sex linked disorders where X chromosome of the father and of the mother carry recessive genes and the children are carriers of the disease, that means the sperm was slow , if it was running slow then how come it reached the ova faster than the others ? Now the children of these children can get affected if both of them carry recessive genes. How come the defective sperm reaches over there ? After all it’s sperm race where only healthy sperms can run.
In IVF , ART techniques we can identify the best sperm and can get it fertilized. Tell me which technique is better ? natural or artificial ?

SK – Given other things being equal the physically strongest wins the sperm race. In any given sperm race all the sperm come from the same gene and chromosomes pool. If all the sperm taking part in the race are slow then the best amongst them will win. I think the natural way is better. Of course there are exceptions to all rules.

MB – Then why people go for pregenetic counseling ?

SK – Because defective genes are also part of life and people want to make sure that they have healthy progney.
I can prove that the test tube babies are as intelligent as the natural ones who have gone through the ” sperm race” .It is not the race but the genetic structure which is responsible for the ” champions.”

SK – I am talking of the sperm race which takes place before the blastocyst. There is no such thing as a death race where did you get this idea from? The race is a fact of life, a natural way of life. And if we can produce the natural way out side the womb all the better. The sperm race does not produce just more intelligent children. The sperm race produces the healthiest children. The survival of the fittest.

MB – What an imagination that sperm race produces healthiest children.It’s not the race which produces champions but chromosomes and genes which produce champions.What about the diseases like cystic fibrosis , haemoglobinopathies and other sex linked disorders where X chromosome of the father and of the mother carry recessive genes and the children are carriers of the disease, that means the sperm was slow , if it was running slow then how come it reached the ova faster than the others ? Now the children of these children can get affected if both of them carry recessive genes. How come the defective sperm reaches over there ? After all it’s sperm race where only healthy sperms can run.
In IVF , ART techniques we can identify the best sperm and can get it fertilized. Tell me which technique is better ? natural or artificial ?

SK – Given other things being equal the physically strongest wins the sperm race. In any given sperm race all the sperm come from the same gene and chromosomes pool. If all the sperm taking part in the race are slow then the best amongst them will win. I think the natural way is better. Of course there are exceptions to all rules.

MB – Then why people go for pregenetic counseling ?

SK -Because defective genes are also part of life and people want to make sure that they have healthy progney.
SKS – Naming the sperm race as the most important event in one’s life, seems like a category mistake to me. We are not responsible for what our sperm does. And is it “our” sperm? Does that sperm is “us”?

MB- @SK Exactly.That’s what I wanted to hear from you , that means if it was a natural race the progeny would have been a defective progeny and in ART there is no sperm race but the progeny is healthy.
Even I am surprised to hear that sperm race is the most important event in our life.You must be knowing that sperm knows in advance that it is his Y chromosome which is going to get fertilized if he runs faster than the others.
SK @ SKS – My sperm is the earlist, crudest part of me! Whether I was going to be born or not depended on my sperm ( the earliest me ) winning the race where the prize is life itself. No winning this race means no birth. So birth is dependent on winning the sperm race.
@ MB – Defective progney is only a small % of the whole. So ART helps in case of this small percentge. I am talking of the majority. I don’t know if the sperm knows , ‘that his Y chromosome…’. However when sperm from two different males enter the falopian tube then some sperm race on and other sperm try to prevent the other gene pool sperm from reaching the egg! Rivals from same father race against each other but rivals from different fathers fight to ensure that their own sibling wins the sperm race! Do they know what they are doing or if it is instinctive and part of their genitic blue print: who knows.
MB – @SK ” Birth is dependent on winning the sperm race ” , you are forgetting the other part. This race is of no use if there is no ovulation.Both are equally important.Suppose the sperm is very very fast and reaches the fimbria of the fallopian tube before ovulation then what is the use ? The life of ovum is not more than 24-48 hours while sperm’s is 72 hours if I am not forgetting my subject after reading your statements.
Either it has to wait or it will die.So the timing is more important than the race.
” Sperm from two different males ” ….now what’s this ? I can hardly understand one theory and you have come out with another.Just forget it.Shall I tell you one thing before closing this topic that if not the first , then second , if not second , then the third one , if not third then the fourth one…..total number of sperms are normally 60-120 million/ml…….even if it is 120th million …the last one , then also the fertilization will occur and normal male or female babies are born who have the strength to fight till death.
”So birth is dependent on winning the sperm race.”
I totally disagree with you.
SK – As I said given all the other factors are in place, then the sperm race victory is essential for birth. But you are right that some one has to win. But in reality it does not happen that the top one does not win. So lets close this topic and move on.
JA – parenting: the event of diminished or an absence of parenting can have catastrophic outcomes for the person. Conversely the event of being parents could be regarded as the most important event in a person’s life.
Debate 30 – Is nature subject to man or is it the other way around?
SKS – Man is part of nature. You cannot seperate the two.
GDB – Man was originally put here to care for the earth and enjoy the fruit of the land.  But as time went on we have learned to abuse the land and it’s wildlife (small and great), thus in my opinion the land or “nature” is beginning to reject us more and more.  I am also persuaded of a higher reason for all of this.  The problem is that as we have abused the land we have several examples of “nature” rising up and taking control, destroying man (and other inanimate objects).  These examples throughout the world are not done by mere chance or arbitrary reasons.  There is purpose and design in all.  That’s my observation.
MB – Yes we are the part of nature and by disturbing it we are destroying our beautiful planet.
Debate 31 – Is half a glass of water half full or half empty?
SK – Half a glass of water is never ever just half full nor is it ever just half empty. It is always half full and half empty at the same time. So when we see half a glass of water as just half full we are basing our observation on a half truth. Basing our behavior on a half truth has consequences. Optimists run out of money faster than pesimists. We do not need to be any one of them. We need to be realists! Who see the full truth!
MB – You tell me which portion of glass you like ,The upper one which is empty or the lower one which is full ?
When you see this type of glass , on which part you concentrate more or your attention is directed to which part ?
Are you scared to drink that half glass of water ?
SK – Half a glass of water represents the actual reality/truth about what is your finiancial position. Your bottom line economic and other asset status. So what is meant by looking at the half glass means is: are you focused on what you have or on what you don’t have/can have. Looking at the half full glass means that you are an optimist feeling good for what you still have. And as a result you are not focused on the empty part. It is always wise to look at the whole truth. This way you will want to drink/spend what you need while at the same time working to fill up the empty part! So be focused on both. Be prudent with your spending and efficient with your refilling the glass of life.
For any behavior let alone for spending your assets you should not be scared. You should be wise.
MB – Very well explained.
Water is related to thirst….The thirst of knowledge , the thirst of life , the thirst of love , the thirst of knowing the truth.Never let it die.I don’t like half glass of water lying on the table as it represents stagnation, either drink it or throw it or fill it again with fresh water.
SK – Look at how America and much of the world looks at half a glass! We are encouraged to look at it as half full. Look at the result of this on the American economy. By being optomistic about what we have, we tend to be irresponsible with spending money. In another context look at how a wise person looks at the knowledge he has. He does not sit on it and feel he has enough. He focuses on the empty part; on what he does not know and as a result he is a perpetual learner.
@ MB
Water is used just as a metefor. What this statement is saying is if you have a life that is 50% good and 50% bad. Will you consider your life bad or good? I do not look at it as good or bad, I look at it as 50% good as my security and the 50% bad as an opportunity to make it 100% good.
However what I find really interesting/exciting is how you explain, ‘I don’t like half glass of water lying on the table as it represents stagnation.’ This is a very intreguing statement. It explains how the American stock market works. I am taking the water lying in the glass to mean more and more dollars are poured into the stock market where the trillions of dollars are used within the confines of the stock trading. So all this money is kept stagnent within stocks that produce no goods, create no jobs and make no difference to the larger market place. Imagine if this same money was used to build new factories, or more effecient factories. Look at the amount of new jobs that would have been created!
MB @SK – I wrote it just like that as I don’t like unprogressive things, everything should flow……..like river water.
You are absolutely right ……..money is like arm or leg, use it or lose it by disuse atrophy.
Debate 32 – Can we prove within the paradigm of science, if there is a higher purpose of life?
SKS – Every thing we do in life, we do it for a purpose. That is why it is most logical to say that life itself has a purpose! And logic is one of the tools of science.
MB – Higher purpose of life ? I think it should be ” to know the truth” .We hardly know about this universe.We don’t know how many universes are there ? What is life after death ? What is soul ? Whether there is transmigration of the soul or not ?
I think I am unable to understand the meaning hidden behind this question.
SK – I want to know if you can prove a higher purpose explaining it within the paradigm of science; without explaining it in terms of Gd’s will etc.
MB – What higher purpose ? I am not able to get your point.
I hope you are not thinking on the lines of wisdom tree ?
SK – What is life about? For ones own selfish purposes or is there a selfless calling? Can we have humantarian goals even if there is no Gd?
MB – How this is related to science ?
SK – Can science provide the answers to this question or do we need Gd to define a higher calling?
MB – Yes we need some higher force to define the higher purpose of life.
Debate 33 – Does a falling tree in a world void of living beings make a sound as it hits the ground?
SKS – Every sound exists because we hear it. If there is no one to hear, then no “sound” – as we have defined the word – actually “exists”.
MB -Yes because it cries when it is falling.How can it be happy without it’s roots ?
Wait a minute …” World void of living beings ” ……….that means you are not talking of this world ?
Are you talking of space or something else ?
SK if you are making these questions then hat’s off to you.You are really sounding like a wise man now 🙂
I give you +2 for making these questions.
SK – This question has now been solved. A tape recorder, recorded sound of a small man made timed explosion in the forest where there was no one to hear it!
@ MB – I am not making all the questions. Q – 33 is also not from me. There are lots of wise people in this debate, including you.
MB – Tape recorder ? don’t be silly , who kept the tape recorded in the forest ? It must be a living thing who kept the tape recorder and the question is……. ” the world void of living things.”
If it is a tree then it’s a living thing, how can it be a world void of living beings if there is a tree ?
Second thing there is a very thin line between silence and sound.Both overlap each other.There is no importance of sound if there is no silence and vice versa.
SK – Actual-reality is actual-reality. If an event happens then all the repurcussions of that event will also happen. If a tree falls then it will make noise. However if there is no human there, then the actual-reality of the human is that as far as the personal-reality of the human is concerned there is nothing. No tree – no tree falling and no noise. The ‘out side in’ reality is still there but there is no one to experience it! For all practical purposes you are right only 50%.
MB- That means tree is not a living being ?
SK – All scientific evidence points to the fact that trees are alive. They breath, they reproduce etc. Infact some trees even eat insects. I remember reading that there is even a tree that as a sapling has a crude brain and it moves around to find a suitable spot to put down its roots and then as it settles down the brain disolves!
MB – If trees are alive then your question is wrong.
SKS – Indeed. If trees have consciousness then its falling would automatically “exist” since the tree itself would sense it and give meaning to it. But without any consciuousness “watching” how can something “be”?
Debate 34 – What is common between Science, Philosophy and Religion?
SK -Philosophy, religion and science are much more connected then we realize! At the highest stage of the mind/brain development the quality of the character traits (as defined by religion, philosophy and science) of every person are all one and the same!!! Religion wants you to be altruistic, philosophy wants you to be wise/altruistic and science/education wants you to be emotionally super mature which is the same! So ethics education is the common thread in all of them. Thus we need philosophers, religious leaders and scientists/educationists all working together to create ethics education that transforms the brain to +2.
MB – Science , philosophy and religion are the three strong pillars of our society.Fourth pillar is man himself. Imbalance between the four pillars results in disturbed society as we are seeing today.
Debate 35 – Can man create consciousness?
MB – Yes the man who is in a sleeping condition can awaken himself.
SKS – How?
MB- With the help of meditation.
SK – There was some extreemly exciting news. A scientist in England was able to show that certain ameno acids had the same molecular ingriedients as some basic living organisms! The only difference was their bonding, their amalgamation was structured differently. Perhaps we may one day be able to restructure the bonding of similar molecular ingriedients and turn amino acids into living organisms. But whether we can create a human being is quite another matter…
Debate 36 – What is friendship?
MB- Friendship is a language , expression of the language in different forms and colors.It’s like a relationship between flower and it’s fragrance, between desert and oasis , sea shore and sea waves.Look at the four directions –east-west , north and south, can’t you see the friendship between the four ?Can you hear the music of the water fall , it’s saying something….the story of sorrows and happiness of the mountain peaks.See the tired sun sleeping on the shoulder of the mountain.See the earth and sky meeting at one line. Can you differentiate the line between the two ? See the stars taking care of the moon till morning.Look at the dew drop, it’s so pure and tiny but it is the mirror of friendship between the night and the universe.You touch it and it will disappear.You…The Man ……….spoiling the nature.You will always remain thirsty with dry heart , a heart full of hatred , blood , war and terrorism , you will never understand the meaning of friendship.
SKS – Friendship is trust.
MB- yes you are absolutely right.
SK – Friendship is selfless love. I wish I could show the world how to achieve universal selfless love. Selfless love is a quality that can be understood and genertaed by the pure humanness, the pure Christ, the pure Buddha in us. It is a direct function of a super mature emotional intelligence. It is like pure gold. Just as you cannot create pure gold jewelery with impure gold ore, you cannot create friendship with a lower level mind. Let alone create you cannot even understand pure friendship from a lower level mind. Lower level brain generated friendships have an element of acting and disguising; an element of phoniness… and friendship is based on pure honesty. The true bonds of friendship come from the pure original feelings that originate from the authentic self.
Debate 37 – When is knowledge mere information?
SK – Knowledge is mere information when infromation is not reviewed, cross referenced, researched and organized.  When information is ready to be understood in its full context then it is knowledge.
MB – It is as if a cadaver is lying in front of me and I have read the Anatomy and I know the origin and insertion of the nerves but till I dissect them out it is merely an information for me.When I complete the dissection then it’s not an information but understanding the subject.
SKS – A computer program acquired data without understanding it. Doing that does not create “knowledge”. Knowledge entails the activity of understanding.
Debate 38 – What is the biggest paradox in philosophy and can unscientific notions be true?
SK – The human mind is the most complex to understand yet it is clear (and I have made it quite clearer )  how it can be mastered. Thus the paradox is that the human mind can be mastered without being fully understood! A very unscientific notion, yet true! One does not need all the answers regarding the mind to be able to master it.
SKS – Quantum mechanics are full of paradoxes. One of the most known is the electron being able to pass through two different slits at the same time at the infamous two-slit experiment. Another one is the fact that the observation of a particle seems to affect the result of the measurement.
Debate 39 – What are the aims of psychology and why do they need to be changed?
“The four goals of psychology are the description, explation, prediction and control of behavior and mental processes”. – From the book ‘The World of Psychology by Samuel E’. Wood. The aim must be changed from ‘control of behavior and mental processes’ to ‘mastering behavior and mental processes’.
Debate 40 – What specific steps can we take to get out of the current mess in the world?
SK – We have to optimize the very quality of our own self. The self is a process that is projected by the brain. The human brain is an equipment, a physical organ that defines the quality of each individual self. Thus to improve our self we will have to optimize the very physical nature of our brain. We will have to improve our conscious and uncounscious neural networks and make our brain equipment super mature.
Debate 41 – What is the mind?
SKS – I understand the mind as something “higher” than its physical container – the brain.
MB- I think we have discussed it earlier also.In brain ‘ thinking’ predominates while in mind ’emotions’ predominate.I agree with Sajid khan that mind is the image of brain.
SK – The mind is the human body’s means of becoming self conscious. It is the brains path to creating self consciousness for the self. It is the tool that the brain creates to figure out its own being, to make sense of others and of the way the world is and how it works.The human mind is the result of a process. A process that takes place in the brain. The quality of this process determines the quality of the mind. The quality of the brain determines the quality of this process. The mind is a projection of the brain. The miracle part is that the mind is self conscious. The mind runs on emotional intelligence that the brain creates and supplies. It is like the brain writes the script and the mind acts out this script.
Debate 42 – Why do some people snap?
RA- Profilers try to develop a system by which potential serial killers may be flagged. There are more than 20 seperate life factors that seem to create a serial killer and if they can check off most or all of the se factors in an individual’s life, there is a high possibility that they will have the prepensity to be a serial killer. However, some individuals may have most of these determining factors and grow up quite normal. What makes one person snap and take one path while another remains normal?
MB -Pre-destination and free will go hand in hand.One is not inconsistent with the other.There is a free-will within narrow limits for instance , a cow is tied to a pole by a rope.The length of the rope is Pre-destination and the circle in which she moves is Free-will.The cow has full freedom movement within that circle of the length of the rope.But she can not go beyond that length of the rope.

I have seen serial killers only in the movies.I think they break this rope.Our thinking is instrument dependant.The person is not pre-destined to become a serial killer , some untoward action in his life makes to deviate him from his normal path.One thing is sure that the person kills in the same manner and leaves behind some evidence or code.It indicates what ? He wants to show the world his revenge.
Someone might have tortured him or his family that’s why he has turned into a serial killer.Any normal person , XYZ , you and me can become a future serial killer.Biologically speaking there is some role of acetylcholine and hypothalamo-pitutiary axis behind it.
Their trouble seems to arise from emotional isolation in childhood.But in some cases there may also be a constitutional defect.A significant number of habitual criminals have abnormal sex chromososmes ( an additional X chromososme ), and some show a characteristic anomaly in the electroencephalogram.
SK – This is a very good question. It throws light on the fact that emotions and behavior spring from not just one single source, mostly what we consider as the self, the ‘I’. Emotions and behavior are a smooth blend when the brain, the mind and the true self are all on the same page. This happens when the brain/mind complex are developed to the highest emotional intelligence stage. When the brain is developed and is stuck at a lower level it projects a lower level mind. Thus there is a disconnect between the brain and mind and the real self.
As behavior depends on the current feedback, the feedback to the brain, the mind and the self is all different at the lowest premature level. The person with the premature emotional brain is most likely to snap. The immature stage is the next likely to snap. The mature stage is the least likely to snap while the super mature stage is unlikely to snap unless it is perhaps physically on drugs which create their won cause for snapping. The snapping mostly takes place in the subconscious brain. This is why at the conscious level people mostly don’t understand why they snapped.
This also demonstrates that we still have a long way to go to uncovering and understanding the different functions of the brain and mind, what they are and how they develop and what is the relationship between them and what is their relationship to the self.
Debate 43 – How can we expand our levels of awareness?

Debate 44 – What is the use of philosophy in daily life?
SKS – Philosophy can liberate us through the revelation of the truth.

Nicknames List
CQ – Charley Quinton
KS – Kalle Schwarz
MB – Minoo Bhagia
MM – Matt
PG – Peter Greenfinch
SK – Sajid Khan
SKS – Spiros Kakos
ZS – Zvi Shkedi
TEM – Tracy Miller
BOB – Peter Sitterly
GDB – Greg Barron
RA- Robert Allen
JA – Jackamarra

Advertisements