|
law of nature
n.
a law or body of laws that derives from nature and is believed to be binding upon human actions apart from or in conjunction with laws established by human authority.
1. (philosophy) an empirical truth of great generality, conceived of as a physical (but not a logical) necessity, and consequently licensing counterfactual conditionals
2. (philosophy) a system of morality conceived of as grounded in reason
laws of man
religious and state dictates governing the ways to live in a given country
sometimes it is easier to explain something by negating what it is not. nothing ever happens in absence of natural law, even including the absurdities of conflicting kind in manmade laws. nature’s laws are the nature of things. more often than not, man’s perception of things is distorted by the given explanations of how things are. so things happen according to their self-nature, and not as erroneously expected them to move. much of what is written about it in european languages is based upon the judeo-christian thoughts about the world created by a whimsical god who contradicts himself being insecure about himself. and as a consequence his believers, too, contradict themselves.
the proof of this is observed in the laws of man. they are as many as many are nations. there are some 186 member nations of the united nations organization. each nation has its own book of laws, which, unlike the laws of nature are valid and practiced as belief or forced upon, within a given nation’s borders. the european scientists were trying to master nature by the way of observing how nature works, and using that knowledge to manage the supremacy of the european regal man. now this did not happen out of any direct knowledge. it was the byproduct of earlier fragmentary observations of how certain things move. galileo’s mistake was not in seeing the earth revolve around the sun, but that he failed to see his own practical life revolved around the papal comforts of leisure.
pope was the reigning supreme being whose interpretation of the biblical god’s commandments was the law of the christian land. just outside of his domain was the law of islam. though an off-spring of the jewish notion of god, islamist perception did not accept the rabbinic or the papal interpretation, nor accepted the notion that jesus could be the literal son of god, since the allah did not manifest in physical, human form; and it was the common knowledge that in order to conceive a child a woman did indeed need to have her fertile egg be impregnated with male sperm. unlike the vengeful merciless biblical god, who said, “vengeance is mine,” the islamic allah is called merciful, but some of his believers themselves have lifted up the notion of revenge to the familial honour that the following generations must carry on.
the middle ages of europe and the middle east were thus dominated by the two domains that were at war to eliminate each other. and that intention to obliterate the other’s interpretation is even now at work, except that, now in the globalized existence of every nation, the old world of europe extends in both camps making “ an enemy of an enemy is a friend”, who is also an enemy simultaneously . rudyard kipling’s poem, “the white man’s burden” reads like a 21st century pseudo apologist professor’s politically correct lecture of political science, not really apologizing, being certain that his students would not quite get the gist of it in a foreign thought pattern in a foreign tongue. the u.s. is nothing but the england enlarged in thought, speech and action -- in a joint statement for the ‘wasington post’ newspaper the british premier and the u.s. president, before their meeting in early spring of 2012, stated, that the partnership between the u.k. and u.s. was “a partnership of the heart, bound by the history, traditions and values we share.”
so the american politbureaugh has carried on with this “white man’s burden” perceiving the rest of the human populace as “half wild and half child”. and it does indeed correspond with an early 1900s indian expression regarding the nehru’s generation as “the first mental sons of the english.” nehru’s westernized education and up-bringing made india a member of the british commonwealth nation, as gandhi’s non violent india was cremated with gandhi. among the former european colonies india was called the “jewel of the crown” made so possible by the 533some different set of laws of that many domains each vying for the dominance supreme. the english achieved power in india not so much by exploding the gun powder, as the east india company played the two feuding kingdoms against each other by supplying weapons, and thus obtained a domain of their own.
it is what a u.s. president bill clinton had stated: “it is economy, stupid!” and that was a simplification of president eisenhover’s complaint about the power of the military industrial complex. but he was the supreme commander of the allied forces at one time in the second world war. it was only when he became the u.s. president, that he found it to be bothersome, that the weapon makers were using the sale of weaponry as a power with which to buy the u.s. congress.
this international and national political maneuvering has nothing to do with the right and wrong in terms of the natural law. but it has something to do with the biblical notion of god placing man above all creatures. anybody who is somebody in position of power separates himself from the rest of the mankind, and treats and trains the rest of them as pawns in his “god given” right to play with some similarly “chosen” man’s pawn-like subjects. it was thus that in the libyan and the first and second world wars both sides were of the same race; in the american civil war the feud was between the immediate blood relatives, and they fought and killed each other; the islamic “honour killings” are done by siblings.
if you observe the rules of the game of chess, you will notice that, the king is only the figurehead, an ideal that must be defended. the power to maneuver is assigned to, in sliding order from the minister to the foot soldiers. the king can be killed only by the surprise attack by any of the enemy pawns; but otherwise, when two opposing kings come close, they only dance their steps to avoid each other in draw. hitler accepted his loss by suicide; gaddhafi was thus killed; and the americans and russians are dancing around each other neither yet knowing whether any of the two have the title of the grandmaster secured. and as in the chess, there is always a new contender; china seems waiting for its turn. the english trained indians are yet happy to play the second fiddle. the briazilian, rusian, indian, chinese and south african bricks (“brics”) not being baked yet, crumbles with the slight pressure.
the early european science was based upon the four basic elements of the greek kind: earth, water, air and light. they were perceived by the four senses of perception: the tactile, smell, taste and visual. almost every discovery and invention made in the west concerns these four senses of perception. the fifth element, the space, though perceived directly by the huddled up masses in the very experiencing of their being huddled up in absence of space, was not noticed by the elite seers of both camps, the scientific and religious. their brains were all too filled up with the theories, and more beliefs to support their respective explanation of the laws of nature and laws of manmade god. there, the ten biblical commandments were laid out simply as the codes of conduct for the ruled conducting their interactions. and that kept the laity preoccupied with doing the mundane chores to make ends meet.
the conflict of interests among nations is just a façade behind which is hidden the struggle for the biblical thought of “chosen” man’s supremacy over god’s other creations, including women and children. edger rice burroughs’ ‘tarzan’ depicts this mindset in the popular long running novel and hollywood movie series. in it, though barely out of the teenage, the character tarzan guides the black tribe to fight addressing them as “my children”. this and other books for the european/american children nurtured the idea that “father knows best.” and for father to know best are required two unnatural things: children must never grow up, and the living must be repetitively tradition bound; nothing new must ever happen. the compulsory education from 6 to 16 years of age is not enough, nor is four year college is sufficient. there are post graduate, doctoral, post doctoral, the ‘lifelong learning’ to extend the time of the studentship, which is a carefree time of the childhood in which children learn to memorize the printed and spoken words of authority.
the european science of life is thus hung up on the perpetual youth, constantly striving to invent lotions and potions to retain the youth, not unlike tarzan, who acquires such elixir in one of his raids on the primitives of the dark africa. like tarzan and other heroes of stories, real or imagined, the real men placed in the father of nation/ president position, are only striving to make their subjects feel materially content enough to retain the elite’s position of power. none of the heroes has ever strived to even experience when enough is enough. this is so, simply because in their thought out existence, the thought not having the biological body, can only want more, but can never experience the element of satisfaction, which, not being an object, but an effect of the right action, can’t be seen, but experienced like the sense of quench arising after the physical need for water experienced as thirst is responded to with a drink of water. people, who go to the gas station to put gasoline in their cars, know that any more gasoline pumped beyond the capacity of the tank runs down to the ground. there is a point of saturation at which instance the sense of satisfaction, the quench is achieved. beyond that is simply wasted effort, which one cannot benefit from, and keeps others from having it. but people with this lifelong learning are led to consider this inability to see that as waste; they see it as a sign of achievement rather than as retarded growth. kings and kings by their current name: rich-reich-rex, are really sick people, who need to be helped to grow up rather than be impressed with their unspendable accumulations. when one stops praising a child for its undesirable acts, not finding such acts rewarding, the child stops. and since the element of life is not subject to manmade laws, at least some of the children do break loose and do grow up, and they see that nothing remains the same.
likewise, space is needed to be experienced in all human interactions. and that is also the rule of the stage: after one’s line is spoken, the actor must vacate the stage to make room for the next character to play its part. so, too, the elderly politicians, some of whom are more dead than alive, must let the next generation to do their part of the human evolution, instead of trying to choke their growth with the traditional perception of life nobody can really live except in a pretended way.
tradition bound, everyone wants to live forever, like the characters of bible, which lived for hundreds of years. the human intelligence is effective when it comes to studying everything else except knowing oneself. and one’s self in the european intellectual perception is best expressed in descartes’ statement: “I think, therefore I am.’” the earlier notion of man’s superiority over other creatures was that only man could think. and think he did, and wrote laws to subjugate others who were not thinking of the existence as the survival of the fittest. some of them were observing the interdependence as nature of being in relation with the cause and effect, which would have been accepted as pure science of the human minding – cognizing mind as a verb: to mind, and not a memory box, had not buddha and lao-tsu been classified as spiritual beings. it is a ploy of the ruling elites to promote buddha as such, for it helps them to reject that perception as an alien religious belief, and also for the intellectuals to accept it as another thought. buddhist perceptions are admired by the western intellectuals; but just as descartes’ sustenance was not dependent upon what he thought, but rather was such, that he had nothing else to do but to muse, the modern believers of the buddha maintain a dual existence, one for the habitual comforts of the physical nature, and the other for the idle thinking of the ample leisure time afforded by making others do their physical labours.
also during the time of british raj, the buddha was transformed into the tenth incarnation of vishnu, and thus deified he was placed on the altar; thus creating the distance necessary to excuse themselves from having to live in awareness of the ever evolving being. to praise someone is a ploy to not to have be do what one admires in thoughts. so the buddhist wheel, which is motion, change, impermanence, constance, is adopted in the indian seal and in the flag, and rightly so, for a pictured wheel does not go anywhere. gandhi’s hindu conditioning prevented him from accepting that they were all buddhist/jain ways, and not hindu laws that he promoted -- the non violence, simple living, equality, etc. instead, gandhi’s hero was a god-king of the hindu mythology, who was also racist and sexist; he promoted violence both as sport and settling disputes. but that, the buddhist way was exported out of india by the warring fiefdoms by the 8th century, gandhi’s contemporary indian masses would not have accepted gandhi as their spiritual leader who, as a buddhist, would not regard any of the indian hindu idols.
the modern science stresses the need for the demonstrable ways to prove what is theorized to be true. once conceived a thought about something, if one proceeds developing the thought to be a matter of fact before finding out if the thought itself is a justifiable response to that which caused the thought, all one gets is further thoughts. that is what are the theoretical physics and the multitudes of religious beliefs. thus before anyone has really perceived god or the big bang of the exploding pea, there are verbal and physical disapproval of each other’s thoughts. and anything observed to be true by the other side is denounced as beliefs. there is an old saying: often repeated word becomes the verdict of god. and academic educational institution is the best place to develop such mindset. what is attributed to george bernard shaw, “those who can, do; those who can’t, teach; and those who cannot teach, teach teachers” is also similar to shaw’s contemporary indian saying: “those who cannot do anything else, either become policeman or teachers.” the jest is that in either of the two professions one needs no discerning brains, only following the dictates. the british raj did indeed flourish in india with the drilling of the english thought in the children of the elite, and with the use of the police lathi (long stick) on others. and the contemporary india still practices both these means of control.
it is not just the police and teachers who are trained not to know the right from wrong, but almost every walk of life between the religious beliefs and the respective national laws, too, that earn them a comfortable living as teachers, preachers, politicians and bureaucrats, is all a programmed living. in the commerce controlled way of life they all are required to not know what is not given to them in religious and academic texts, and in bureaucratic and commercial memos. this taking the written page as the matter of fact makes the bible holy, and constitution as the undeniable wisdom of the nation’s founding fathers.
an abusive father fears the thought of the grown children doing unto him what he did to them; and since there was nothing of the compassionate co-existence instilled in children through practice, that fear of the patriarch is justified. the violent overthrow of regimes depicts that. gandhi’s was an exception to the norm. and his transformation from an english-like gentleman to a cooperatively co-existing being took place in south africa, inspiring nelson mandela to verify non violence. but what gandhi and nelson mandela perceived to be the right response to the oppressive rule, was not a general knowledge among their companions of the cause, nor is non violence still anything more than a cherished thought. barack obama, who is the commander in chief of a fighting army can be given a nobel peace prize by the nobel committee which is composed of men like obama, not gandhi and mandela. and, too, the very founder of the nobel foundation found his money in the military industrial complex, through selling the dynamites.
“guns do not kill people, people kill people”, true. but people who know what the dispute is about, do also search for the right response, and not form an army to eliminate the people with problem. people with guns kill people, but not the problem. then, people who make a living by selling weapons, see to it that the problem persists, for no problems,, no wars; and no wars, no commander in chief, reigning in glory of the survival of the fittest.
|
