Interpretation of time
As a congregation of moments
Lasting in memoirs of oneself and other
Encapsulating notions of a forever
Agelessly inspire the nature of I
For granted, in the mortal frenzy takes
The self-seeking being
From birth to its finale, desiring
A narrative etched into his belief
Time moves at a motionless pace
As if still, it continues
Lost moments from such congregation
Whisper the sudden change of
Their own attire
The rehearsal is over
As retrospective preparation
Life becomes,
An ageless memoir of an aged self
Friday, August 27, 2010
Saturday, August 7, 2010
The Distinction Between Morality and Ethics (Part I)
To begin simply, Ethics is the disciplined reflection of morality. Traditionally, ethics is divided in to two major categories:
1. Metaethics: which is concerned with discovering the nature of moral principles and judgments.
2. Normative Ethics: which is the branch of ethics that is concerned with establishing moral principles.
If someone were to ask questions then, from the perspective of metaethics, then they could inquire: whether the nature of morality is conventional or universal; subjective or objective. Could morals be true or false? Could they be grounded in natural benefits and harms, or not?
Whereas, if someone were practicing the same exercise from the perspective of Normative Ethics, then they would aim to discover what the fundamental moral principles are; how they are applied to specific situations (also known as applied ethics)- like abortion, capital punishment, euthanasia- and whether there are any absolute moral principles which apply in every case.
So if metaethics is concerned with discovering the nature of morals, and normative ethics is there to establish general rules of moral behavior- then the distributor of morality (the normative ethicist- lawmakers), must have already chosen their metaethical stance to conclude an objective right or wrong; a truth or false. But can lawmakers be fallacious?
Consider now the following cases where particular communities hold ethical or moral beliefs which others do not share. Does the agreement amongst the members of these communities that their beliefs are right make those beliefs correct? What is the basis of your response to these cases?
(a) The Hare Krishna's belief that gender differences are ordained by God and, as a result, girls and boys should not follow the same curriculum at school.
(b) The Eskimo and Laplander belief that frail, elderly people should be left in the snow to die when then can no longer follow the group.
(c) A Rifle Club's belief that shooting animals and birds is sport.
(d) The belief of some tribal groups in Africa and elsewhere that young girls should be circumcised so that they may become adult women and get married.
(e) The belief of groups like the Palestinian Liberation Organization, Al-Qaeda and radical environmentalists that terrorist acts are necessary to achieve their political goals.
(f) The Orthodox Jewish belief in male circumcision.
(g) Amsterdam's leniency towards recreational cannabis usage.
(h) The Catholic Christian belief that using contraceptives during sexual-intercourse is a sin.
(i) The practice of polygamy in Islam.
(j) The Nazi's belief that the Aryan race is superior.
If you've lasted this long, then now take the time to think about the following cases where individuals feel that certain actions are morally justified. Does the feeling that the action is right, make it right? What is the basis of your response to these cases?
(a) Sara feels that any sexual acts between consenting adults which give the partners pleasure is OK.
(b) Tashfin feels that writing a second part to "this" at his convenience is OK.
(c) Kamil feels that prostitution is OK.
(d) Alina thinks that gossiping about her friends private lives is OK.
(e) Ali feels that stealing small items from large stores is OK.
...to be continued (at my convenience)
1. Metaethics: which is concerned with discovering the nature of moral principles and judgments.
2. Normative Ethics: which is the branch of ethics that is concerned with establishing moral principles.
If someone were to ask questions then, from the perspective of metaethics, then they could inquire: whether the nature of morality is conventional or universal; subjective or objective. Could morals be true or false? Could they be grounded in natural benefits and harms, or not?
Whereas, if someone were practicing the same exercise from the perspective of Normative Ethics, then they would aim to discover what the fundamental moral principles are; how they are applied to specific situations (also known as applied ethics)- like abortion, capital punishment, euthanasia- and whether there are any absolute moral principles which apply in every case.
So if metaethics is concerned with discovering the nature of morals, and normative ethics is there to establish general rules of moral behavior- then the distributor of morality (the normative ethicist- lawmakers), must have already chosen their metaethical stance to conclude an objective right or wrong; a truth or false. But can lawmakers be fallacious?
Consider now the following cases where particular communities hold ethical or moral beliefs which others do not share. Does the agreement amongst the members of these communities that their beliefs are right make those beliefs correct? What is the basis of your response to these cases?
(a) The Hare Krishna's belief that gender differences are ordained by God and, as a result, girls and boys should not follow the same curriculum at school.
(b) The Eskimo and Laplander belief that frail, elderly people should be left in the snow to die when then can no longer follow the group.
(c) A Rifle Club's belief that shooting animals and birds is sport.
(d) The belief of some tribal groups in Africa and elsewhere that young girls should be circumcised so that they may become adult women and get married.
(e) The belief of groups like the Palestinian Liberation Organization, Al-Qaeda and radical environmentalists that terrorist acts are necessary to achieve their political goals.
(f) The Orthodox Jewish belief in male circumcision.
(g) Amsterdam's leniency towards recreational cannabis usage.
(h) The Catholic Christian belief that using contraceptives during sexual-intercourse is a sin.
(i) The practice of polygamy in Islam.
(j) The Nazi's belief that the Aryan race is superior.
If you've lasted this long, then now take the time to think about the following cases where individuals feel that certain actions are morally justified. Does the feeling that the action is right, make it right? What is the basis of your response to these cases?
(a) Sara feels that any sexual acts between consenting adults which give the partners pleasure is OK.
(b) Tashfin feels that writing a second part to "this" at his convenience is OK.
(c) Kamil feels that prostitution is OK.
(d) Alina thinks that gossiping about her friends private lives is OK.
(e) Ali feels that stealing small items from large stores is OK.
...to be continued (at my convenience)
Friday, July 30, 2010
Be Roused!
The chains of the courageous
Shackles of time and habit, resentful
A recluse lost between
Choices that play frivolously with thoughts
An ignorant being
How such pointless bounding seems
In security spent with oneness
Of nature born this timeless miracle
Mocks his own presence
Where does the intention figure?
In the limbo of the imprisoned
The straggler struggling to find the self
True in nature; ONE
Yet lost in the journey of projections
Of himself and
The voiceless beneath
Ethically correct, morally impartial
To each except himself
His own journey caught in flights
And fights
Of the consciousness of the other
As a reflection
For truth lost in ignorance’s security
Caution! Tread slowly soldier
The war is within
So surrender the badge, ageless
Not lost but found
By your own self
For the first time
Embrace!
Shackles of time and habit, resentful
A recluse lost between
Choices that play frivolously with thoughts
An ignorant being
How such pointless bounding seems
In security spent with oneness
Of nature born this timeless miracle
Mocks his own presence
Where does the intention figure?
In the limbo of the imprisoned
The straggler struggling to find the self
True in nature; ONE
Yet lost in the journey of projections
Of himself and
The voiceless beneath
Ethically correct, morally impartial
To each except himself
His own journey caught in flights
And fights
Of the consciousness of the other
As a reflection
For truth lost in ignorance’s security
Caution! Tread slowly soldier
The war is within
So surrender the badge, ageless
Not lost but found
By your own self
For the first time
Embrace!
Tuesday, July 27, 2010
Nihil ad rem
Understanding of phenomena
That reaps insignificant tales
Reminiscing,
Shuttling between moments
Eternally significant as such
A play of memory
Lost in translation of emotions
Of an origin unknown
The drudgery of such significance
Of insignificant tales
Lets me know once again
Existing and the existence of
Phenomena calculating
Origins from conclusions
Deriving once again
A belief
The inhabitant of thy self
Must it necessarily flee?
From its own natural fate
Into the unknown frontiers of
The acquired,
Knowledge, experience, relations
Within comparisons
I am a translation of
Memorials- Insignificant
That reaps insignificant tales
Reminiscing,
Shuttling between moments
Eternally significant as such
A play of memory
Lost in translation of emotions
Of an origin unknown
The drudgery of such significance
Of insignificant tales
Lets me know once again
Existing and the existence of
Phenomena calculating
Origins from conclusions
Deriving once again
A belief
The inhabitant of thy self
Must it necessarily flee?
From its own natural fate
Into the unknown frontiers of
The acquired,
Knowledge, experience, relations
Within comparisons
I am a translation of
Memorials- Insignificant
Saturday, July 24, 2010
Gestapo
Sublime forms of the ludicrous
An apology surrenders them to thou
Questions of the bewildering notions
Of a tragedy once bygone
Crucial scenario, isn’t it dear ones
The art of war that resides within
Manifested in sounds and blares
Of thus physical
Balancing the chaotic and the calm
Leaders here once bygone
Born into the cemetery of ghosts
Kept in shadows of,
Some in memories of
And some in the pyre
Emoting within, the resentful war
As an expression
The needy and the abandoned
In the unclaimed corner
The manifestation of perceptions
What resides within,
Expressed in its artistic form
An apology! I must bestow
Now surrender my pallet
Colorful illusions
Expressions and art forms
Not as the creator
But as a creation once born
An apology surrenders them to thou
Questions of the bewildering notions
Of a tragedy once bygone
Crucial scenario, isn’t it dear ones
The art of war that resides within
Manifested in sounds and blares
Of thus physical
Balancing the chaotic and the calm
Leaders here once bygone
Born into the cemetery of ghosts
Kept in shadows of,
Some in memories of
And some in the pyre
Emoting within, the resentful war
As an expression
The needy and the abandoned
In the unclaimed corner
The manifestation of perceptions
What resides within,
Expressed in its artistic form
An apology! I must bestow
Now surrender my pallet
Colorful illusions
Expressions and art forms
Not as the creator
But as a creation once born
Friday, July 23, 2010
An early diary entry worth sharing..
Now that this pen is flowing and I'm done cleaning ink stains, I can begin writing about the 'cause' of this radical change in routine.
I had been thinking for some time now that I would start taking notes. You see, I suffer from an extremely blessed state; a kind of forgetfulness- a state akin to a sort of "preference amnesia" (usually induced chemically)- wherein thoughts intriguing are procreated. However, it is the nature of this condition that demands that I take notes, if not to know myself a bit better, then rather to have a chuckle or two.
Amidst the daily 'surfing' activities, a thoughtful delight came to me. An observation that had escaped me previously; an observation pertaining to eugenics. It seems that eugenics or the act of selective breeding and the exaltation of certain "superior" beings, which is looked down upon in colloquial understandings in this progressive age, is still quite the norm. Whether politics instigates it or not, eugenics is practiced quite explicitly in multi-cultural societies. I say multi-cultural because these societies are projected to be more tolerant than the others.
When a child is rared at school, a special value is always attributed to the alpha-student. The ones that excel at sports or academia for instance. Authorities are willing to excuse the talented gene pool. Whether we like it or not, a rational system leads to class divisions. But is it irrational to distribute favors without such eugenicist discrimination?
Perhaps this thought is a mere seed; that needs the suns rays of enlightenment to sprout.
I had been thinking for some time now that I would start taking notes. You see, I suffer from an extremely blessed state; a kind of forgetfulness- a state akin to a sort of "preference amnesia" (usually induced chemically)- wherein thoughts intriguing are procreated. However, it is the nature of this condition that demands that I take notes, if not to know myself a bit better, then rather to have a chuckle or two.
Amidst the daily 'surfing' activities, a thoughtful delight came to me. An observation that had escaped me previously; an observation pertaining to eugenics. It seems that eugenics or the act of selective breeding and the exaltation of certain "superior" beings, which is looked down upon in colloquial understandings in this progressive age, is still quite the norm. Whether politics instigates it or not, eugenics is practiced quite explicitly in multi-cultural societies. I say multi-cultural because these societies are projected to be more tolerant than the others.
When a child is rared at school, a special value is always attributed to the alpha-student. The ones that excel at sports or academia for instance. Authorities are willing to excuse the talented gene pool. Whether we like it or not, a rational system leads to class divisions. But is it irrational to distribute favors without such eugenicist discrimination?
Perhaps this thought is a mere seed; that needs the suns rays of enlightenment to sprout.
Thursday, July 22, 2010
I think..
The narrative of a person always seems to be in search of a conclusion. It is much like a being the author of a story that changes its outlook and perception with each experience. Thus the split of oneness - the author, the story and the change; here it is the fallacy of what in Hinduism is called the MAYA. The illusion of perception as the defining line for the self where questions such as “who am I” bewilder the human essence.
So what is the outcome of the story? Am I the story or am I the author? Moreover, am I the perception of me as the story or the author or am I the perception of me at the hands of the all pervasive “change”? To thread each of the above questions I must find in me equilibrium much like the perfection of nature. Be the painter, paint and the canvas away form the illusion.
Retrospectively speaking our narrative becomes a juxtaposition of finales that must rise to the occasion as created by us. Yet do they equate to us as our own or does that find itself caught up in deciphering the coded language of desires and wants. Such notions bring us to the tipping point where the self from its basic nature of oneness moves towards the split – as pieces of the puzzle incomplete without the other parts and without the whole. This is the search of such narrative, isn’t it- the whole being?
It is such perception that leads to notions and beliefs that an inconsistency to this general narrative finds us encapsulated in thoughts. Where I am as I thought I was, yet the real seems to address me in a different fashion. The act of playing GOD becomes the very essence of such narratives that pervade the global life. So what is this perception that drives me away from the basic nature of my being?
It is not to address such intricacies in a definitive manner – one cannot explain – yet can derive from the process. It may not be the end that our being struggles for it may be the process. With each experience we find ourselves imprisoned and attached to it, for the purpose of the very narrative. Can I just be; and not search for the definite, the exact – literally the finite? Does it set us free?
I am – am I not?
So what is the outcome of the story? Am I the story or am I the author? Moreover, am I the perception of me as the story or the author or am I the perception of me at the hands of the all pervasive “change”? To thread each of the above questions I must find in me equilibrium much like the perfection of nature. Be the painter, paint and the canvas away form the illusion.
Retrospectively speaking our narrative becomes a juxtaposition of finales that must rise to the occasion as created by us. Yet do they equate to us as our own or does that find itself caught up in deciphering the coded language of desires and wants. Such notions bring us to the tipping point where the self from its basic nature of oneness moves towards the split – as pieces of the puzzle incomplete without the other parts and without the whole. This is the search of such narrative, isn’t it- the whole being?
It is such perception that leads to notions and beliefs that an inconsistency to this general narrative finds us encapsulated in thoughts. Where I am as I thought I was, yet the real seems to address me in a different fashion. The act of playing GOD becomes the very essence of such narratives that pervade the global life. So what is this perception that drives me away from the basic nature of my being?
It is not to address such intricacies in a definitive manner – one cannot explain – yet can derive from the process. It may not be the end that our being struggles for it may be the process. With each experience we find ourselves imprisoned and attached to it, for the purpose of the very narrative. Can I just be; and not search for the definite, the exact – literally the finite? Does it set us free?
I am – am I not?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)