THE USE AND MIS-USE OF SCIENCE

THE USE AND MIS-USE OF SCIENCE  by  Cyril Garbett

The history of civilization shows how to choose between making the right and wrong use of the discoveries of science. In a very short period amazing discoveries have been made and applied to practical purposes. There have been more scientific discoveries in our own age than in any previous period of history. They have caused so many changes so quickly that it has been like a revolution. So, people say that they are living in an age of revolution.

In fact, Science is a great boon to mankind. Science has brought  many advantages to mankind and improved life for people.  It has helped to fight malnutrition, hunger and disease. It has lengthened life and has also increased its quality. Fields of knowledge, experience and recreation are now available to millions of people. Now we must accept the fact that science has done and is doing a lot for the welfare of our race.

But the gifts of modern science can be misused. The motor driven vehicle makes business easy and gives harmless enjoyment to many. But it can also kill many people. Similarly, the cinema is a means of instructions and recreations but it is also a channel of vulgarity and false values. The wireless (radio) can link the world together in the moment of time, but it can also be the instrument of spreading propaganda. Likewise, the airplane makes travel rapid and easy but it can also be used as weapon of destruction.

Now the question arises as to how far it is morally justifiable to make  perfect discoveries and inventions which can be used for purpose of destruction.  In other words, Scientists must think about whether it is morally right to create things that can do harm even though they can also do good. This was the question raised by Professor Hill. 'If we think it is wrong to achieve something good by first doing evil, then isn't it also wrong to achieve something good by a method that we know could be used later to cause evil?'

He discusses two problems in relations to this question. The first was taken from the development of nuclear physics. It has greatest value to mankind if used rightly. But at present the main object of the development of this science is to produce weapons such as the atomic and hydrogen bomb of the great destructive power. Is it right, therefore, to continue research on it? The other problem arises from the success of science in overcoming disease and lengthening life. Science has increased birth rate and life expectancy by controlling hunger and disease. But the supplies of world food are not increasing at the same rate. In this case, the world becomes divided into two groups: "Haves" and “Have-nots". The struggles to get food will lead to a situation where the rich and privileged will be able to obtain enough and the poor and powerless people will be unable to do so. People will fight wars to get possession of food resources. In the attempt to produce more food, the land will be overworked, erosion will take place and the soil will become like dust.  So, is it right to continue improving world health and reducing mortality if it is evidently clear that by doing so future famine and disorder are sure? These types of question are really a great challenge to thoughtful men.

 

Read more

THE USE AND MIS-USE OF SCIENCE NOTES

1.What does the history of civilization show?

               The history of civilization shows how to choose between making the right and wrong use of the         discoveries of science. Man always has to choose between the right and wrong use of science.               Man has either used the inventions and discoveries of science or misused them.  It shows that in      whatever way man uses inventions and discoveries of science, there is a big effect in the life because science has developed so rapidly in the modern time. There have been more scientific                discoveries in our own age than in any previous period of history. They have caused so many                changes so quickly that it has been like a revolution. So, people say that they are living in an age        of revolution.

              

2.  How may the pursuit of knowledge be protected from being harmful?

Knowledge alone cannot be so useful. There have been many bad effects of knowledge due to                lack of enough wisdom. So, knowledge should be essentially combined with wisdom. It can help any specialist to understand what evil consequences his achievement can have, outside his field. The teaching of wisdom can prevent the pursuit of knowledge from being harmful. It has become more difficult than it used to be owing to the extent and complexity of the specialized knowledge required of various kinds of technicians. 

Read more

The story of an hour

SUMMARY OF "THE STORY OF AN HOUR"

Louise Mallard has heart trouble, so she must be informed carefully about her husband’s death. Her sister, Josephine, tells her the news. Louise’s husband’s friend, Richards, learned about a railroad disaster when he was in the newspaper office and saw Louise’s husband, Brently's name, on the list of those killed. Louise begins sobbing when Josephine tells her of Brently’s death and goes upstairs to be alone in her room.

Louise sits down and looks out an open window. She sees trees, smells approaching rain, and hears a peddler yelling out what he’s selling. She hears someone singing as well as the sounds of sparrows, and there are feathery white clouds in the sky. She is young, with lines around her eyes. Still crying, she gazes into the distance. She feels anxious and tries to suppress the building emotions within her, but can’t. She begins repeating the word Free! to herself over and over again. Her heart beats quickly, and she feels very warm.

Louise knows she’ll cry again when she sees Brently’s dead body. She reflects back when Brently was alive. His hands were tender, and he always looked at her lovingly. But then she imagines the years ahead, which belong only to her now, and spreads her arms out joyfully with anticipation. She will be free, on her own without anyone to oppress her. She thinks that all women and men oppress one another even if they do it out of kindness. Louise knows that she often felt love for Brently but tells herself that none of that matters anymore. She feels ecstatic(overjoyed)with her newfound sense of independence.

Josephine comes to her door, begging Louise to come out, warning her that she’ll get sick if she doesn’t. Louise tells her to go away. She fantasizes about all the days and years ahead and hopes that she lives a long life. Then she opens the door, and she and Josephine start walking down the stairs, where Richards is waiting.

The front door unexpectedly opens, and Brently comes in. He hadn’t been in the train accident or even aware that one had happened. Josephine screams, and Richards tries unsuccessfully to block Louise from seeing him. Doctors arrive and pronounce that Louise died of a heart attack brought on by happiness. 

Read more

The story of an hour NOTES

1.What is the internal conflict in "The Story of an Hour"?

 

The internal conflict in this text is Louise Mallard's.  She learns at the beginning of the story that her husband has been killed in a train accident, and immediately after hearing this, she retires, alone, to her room.  There, she begins to notice all the signs of "new spring life."  She hears the "countless sparrows twittering," smells the "delicious breath of rain," sees the "tops of trees all excited."  It is unexpected that she would be so aware of signs of life when she has just learned of this important death.  However, Louise begins to reflect on her new freedom, a monstrous joy that held her."  We would likely expect a woman who has just learned of her young husband's death to be quite sad, and, instead, she seems to be, well and happy. 

 

However, she knew that she would weep again when she saw the kind, tender hands folded in death; the face that had never looked save with love upon her, fixed and gray and dead.  But she saw beyond that bitter moment a long procession of years to come that would belong to her absolutely. Thus, she is conflicted between her grief -- it will be relatively short-lived, but she will grieve nonetheless -- and her joy at her new found freedom as a widow, who no longer has to bend her will to suit her husband's.  Louise knows that her husband loved her, and she is sad for him, but she relishes the idea of a life that can now be hers alone.

 

2.  What is the "joy that kills" in "The Story of an Hour" by Chopin?

At the end of this story Louise Mallard dies of "heart disease -- the joy that kills," according to her doctors.  However, after reading the story, readers can ascertain Chopin's irony: Louise did not die of joy; she died of the terrible shock of seeing her husband alive when she'd believed him to be dead.

 

When she learned of her husband's death in a train accident, she locked herself in the room, sat on a chair for sometimes and started repeating the word, "'free, free, free,'" again and again. She rejoices that his death would supply to her "a long procession of years to come that would belong to her absolutely."  She awaits the independence she would possess as a widow.  The narrator describes her feelings as "monstrous joy". it was only yesterday that she had thought that life might be long and boring with her husband." 

 

Therefore, when her husband, Brently Mallard, opens the front door and steps through, just as Louise descends the stars, her husband's friend tries to shield Brently from Louise's sight, but she sees  her husband. When she collapses, doctors believe it to be not connected to her apparent "heart trouble” but a joy upon finding Brently to be alive that kills her.

 

3.  Feminist Analysis of “The Story of an Hour”

 In the story “The Story of an Hour” Mrs. Mallard is overcome with grief with the loss of her husband.  This shows that the female is an emotional person compared to men.  It was natural to know that she would be upset with the death of her husband.  Mrs. Mallard has heart problems which can make the reader see her as a weaker person right at the beginning of the story.  So, her husband’s death has to be told not directly.

 

 Another way to make Mrs. Mallard appear as a weaker person was when she went to her room alone to continue her grief.  After she enters her room she goes to the chair and the story says, “Into this she sank, pressed down by a physical exhaustion that haunted her body and seemed to reach into her soul.”  This shows us that her strong emotions caused her physical exhaustion.  Not only was she emotional, but now the story shows that Mrs. Mallard can’t even handle it physically either. 

 

After she sits down, Mrs. Mallard begins to appear as a stronger woman which is where the feminist theory takes effect.  She looks out of the house through the large open window which could also signify the open opportunities available to her now.  She begins to see how her marriage made her a weak person.  She realizes that she has been living her life through limitations caused from being married.  Mrs. Mallard knows that she can begin to live for herself. It shows the feminist theory that it was assumed women were oppressed and shows the patriarchal ideology.  She was bending her will and freedom to a white man that held all of the control in the relationship.  Marriage, in this story, appears to be the male having complete control over the woman. 

 

Mrs. Mallard goes on to realize how much she really didn’t love her husband.  She doesn’t feel the need to have guilt over it since he is already gone.  She finally breaks away from the role forced onto her as the perfect wife.  I think that the story also shows how Mrs. Mallard develops her own identity.  As a reader, we are told that her name is Mrs. Mallard at the beginning.  Through her grief of losing her husband she is still Mrs. Mallard to us.  This shows that her title is really just the name given to her with her husband’s last name.  She has no identity as her own; she is just a woman that belongs to Mr. Mallard.  After she realizes how free she is, we begin to see her as an actual person.  Her emotions and thoughts aren’t about her dead husband anymore; instead it’s about her living alone without limits.  She comes into her own individual person. 

 

“The Story of an Hour” also shows how the thoughts of a woman can change without the limitations.  Mrs. Mallard thinks of time differently after the death of her husband.  The death of her husband gave her a new look of life in her future.  Now that she could live for herself. She desires to have a long time to enjoy it.  When she was forced into the role of timid and obedient wife, she didn’t see a point in living.  She would have rather died young then to have to obey her husband for the rest of her life. She finally allowed herself to think of her life as living for herself since she was forced to live her life for her husband.  Finally, when her husband comes home safely, she realized that she did not get freedom from married life.  In the end, this weakness is what everyone thinks killed her.

Read more

Road Foundation NOTES

1.  How do you lay the foundation of the road?

or  What are the process of road foundation?

 Before constructing the road, planners must decide and determine the route for the road. After that,    the suitability of the soils in the area must be checked and examined. It is done to find out how much earth (soil) will be required to move from the site and what quantities of surfacing or refilling materials will be needed. In other words,  site should be excavated and unsuitable soil should be replaced. In order to do that various machines can be used depending on the depth of the cut and how much space is at the given site. Next, final compacting is done with the roller until it is firm. This completes the sub-grade. Then, a sub-base layer- normally composed of granular material, is added depending on what thickness of concrete is to be laid. Here, we need to be careful. The material should be suitable so that water drains easily. This layer must be compacted with a roller carefully so that density is uniform all over the road. Finally, these layers must be sealed either with a sealing coat of tar or with rolls of waterproof paper. It completes the process of road making.

 

2.  Why are surveys necessary? Explain four main reasons.

In planning a road extensive preliminary survey must be carried out.  First, the main reason behind doing this is to determine the precise or exact line of the road. Second, it is done  to calculate how much earth will require to be excavated and moved and what quantities of surfacing material will be needed. Third, it is done to find out the amount of surfacing materials required to refill the surface. Finally, it is done to see the quality of the soils so that it has properties of high load bearing capacity.  Soil should be permeable for good drainage and easily compacted for good bearing capacity. Otherwise, the road surface will not be durable.

Read more

Letter from the Foreign Grave

"Letter from the Foreign Grave " D B GURUNG

Summary of the Poem

The poem " Letter from the  Foreign Grave"  is written by D.B Gurung. It highlights the  lamentations of a Gurkha soldier who is killed in foreign land. The speaker in the poem sends his mother massage not to weep for him regretting that he couldn't do anything for her and his motherland.

 

Every year, hundreds of Nepalese young men join in foreign army.  Nepalese youth  started to join   British Army after Anglo-Nepal war from 1814 to 1816. They are famous worldwide for their fearlessness in war and honesty. They scarce their enemies with   'Khukuri' (traditional Nepali knife). Gurkhas took part in many war fronts like Burma, Ladhakh, NEFA, Malaya, Kargil, Germany, Italy, Tunisia, Falkland, Kosovo, Afghanistan etc. Nepalese youths are also working in Indian Army and Singapore Police. Being a 'Lahure' (a foreign soldier) is a popular culture in some communities in Nepal. 'Lahures' enjoy better economic status and respect in societies. Many youths dream   joining foreign army. However, there  is dark side of being a 'Lahure'. Family disintegration, home sickness, lack  of self dignity, exploitations are some of dark sides of being 'Lahure'.

 

The poem is a letter written by a dead son from the foreign grave to his mother in Nepal. It had depicted the reality of "Gorkhali" British soldier i the foreign land. It requests us not to sacrifice ourselves for the sake of other. Also  the poem teaches us  to live in total harmony in a community as everyone should do it after his/her death.

 

In the poem, the son asks his mother not to be sad in his absence because he is fine in the valley of shadows and he is free from all mundane (everyday routine),avarice (greed), misery and tears. He is resting now in peace and harmony forever. His flesh that was smooth, shiny and elegantly dressed body has turned into dust. Nothing remained except few bones. He still clearly remembers the painful and sorrowful moment of his departure when the black cloud over the valley and his dog "Pangrey's whimpers", wagging its tail, were clearly predicting that it was his final departure forever. He also remembers his mother's eyes full of tears and blessings "to be always brave". He says that he was deputed to different war fronts and had shown his bravery. Until a bullet pierced his heart, he was regarded as a hero.

 

Now his fate is ruined. It is confined within foreign grave because he is no more now. He is buried among his friends and his enemies. They have everything common there. They live in total harmony in a community of true brotherhood. They are the lost citizens of the world. He asks his mother not to weep for him because his war is over and he has no danger of gunshots and shells. He doesn't have to go to the fronts of battlefield and shout the native expression "Ayo Gorkhali" which was used to frighten the enemy. The same word has snatched away lots of Gorkhalis' lives. He says that his dreams, youth and life is sacrificed and the slow fat generals are making medals on young Gorkhalis' blood.

 

Finally, he asks his mother to forgive him for he could not make up for her milk but he sacrificed his life for the cause of others in war of no glory (victory). He regrets his mother's words "to be brave" while leaving his house are also kept. So, he requests her not to weep for him but ruminate (think about) for those who are still involved in wars.

 

Read more

Letter from the Foreign Grave NOTES

1.  What is the central theme of the poem?

The poem " Letter from the  Foreign Grave"  is written by D.B Gurung. It highlights the  lamentations of a Gurkha soldier who is killed in foreign land. The speaker in the poem sends his mother massage not to weep for him regretting that he couldn't do anything for her and his motherland.

 

Every year, hundreds of Nepalese young men join in foreign army.  Nepalese youth  started to join   British Army after Anglo-Nepal war from 1814 to 1816. They are famous worldwide for their fearlessness in war and honesty. They scarce their enemies with   'Khukuri' (traditional Nepali knife). Many youths dream   joining foreign army. However, there  is dark side of being a 'Lahure'. Family disintegration, home sickness, lack  of self dignity, exploitations are some of dark sides of being 'Lahure'.

 

The poem is a letter written by a dead son from the foreign grave to his mother in Nepal. It had depicted the reality of "Gorkhali" British soldier i the foreign land. It requests us not to sacrifice ourselves for the sake of other. Also  the poem teaches us  to live in total harmony in a community as everyone should do it after his/her death.

 

2.  What does the poet try to say in the poem " Letter from the foreign Grave"?

In the poem, the son asks his mother not to be sad in his absence because he is fine in the valley of shadows and he is free from all mundane (everyday routine),avarice (greed), misery and tears. He is resting now in peace and harmony forever. His flesh that was smooth, shiny and elegantly dressed body has turned into dust. Nothing remained except few bones.

Now his fate is ruined. It is confined within foreign grave because he is no more now. He is buried among his friends and his enemies. They have everything common there. They live in total harmony in a community of true brotherhood. They are the lost citizens of the world. He asks his mother not to weep for him because his war is over and he has no danger of gunshots and shells. He doesn't have to go to the fronts of battlefield and shout the native expression "Ayo Gorkhali" which was used to frighten the enemy. The same word has snatched away lots of Gorkhalis' lives. He says that his dreams, youth and life is sacrificed and the slow fat generals are making medals on young Gorkhalis' blood.

 

Finally, he asks his mother to forgive him for he could not make up for her milk but he sacrificed his life for the cause of others in war of no glory (victory). He regrets his mother's words "to be brave" while leaving his house are also kept. So, he requests her not to weep for him but ruminate (think about) for those who are still involved in wars.

 

Read more

KNOWLEDGE AND WISHDOM

KNOWLEDGE AND WISDOM by  Bertrand Russell (1872-1970)

• A British philosopher, logician, mathematician, historian, social reformer, socialist and pacifist.

• Russell led the British "revolt against idealism" in the early 1900s and is considered one of the founders of analytic philosophy. He was a prominent anti-war activist, championing free trade between

nations and anti-imperialism.

 

Knowing a tomato is a fruit is KNOWLEDGE…. Knowing not to put it in a fruit salad is WISDOM

 

What is the difference between a clever man and a wise man? And how can one become wise?

A wise person possesses both insight and foresight while a clever person may not necessarily do so. A clever person can seize the here and now, but a wise person can go beyond that. A clever man responds to the exterior changes quickly, but a wise man can penetrate the changes and make the right decision. It takes a broad vision and an unbiased mind to make one wise, and one can gain a lot of wisdom through constant thinking and experiencing.

 

This text is an argumentation. Russell holds that several factors contribute to wisdom. A wise man has comprehensive vision, who is capable of taking into account all the important aspects of problem and gives due weight to each of them. In addition, a wise man is aware of the end of his life.

It is considered unwise to pursue an end if it is impossible of achievement. Russell also points out that one factor of wisdom is emancipation, as far as possible, from your personal prejudice.

As your thoughts and feelings become less personal, you may gain wisdom.

 

Q.1.       What message does the writer try to convey with the example of technicians? (para 2)

The writer tries to tell us knowledge itself cannot save the world. Knowledge without wisdom will not benefit the world and in some cases will even pose a serious threat to humanity. So a wise person has to have a comprehensive view.

 

Q.2.       How can wisdom help one in his/her pursuit of a life-long career? (para 4)

Wisdom can help one in his choice of a lifelong pursuit. When one has to make a major career decision, he has to consider whether it is possible to achieve what he aims at. If it is too high to be achieved, he should learn to give it up and turn to an attainable goal.

Q.3.       What, according to Russell, is the essence of wisdom? And how can one acquire the very essence?

According to Russell, the essence of wisdom lies in impartiality, the ability to defy the physical world.

Russell believes the process of growing wise is that of tearing oneself away from the physical and emotional worlds and moving into a  higher stage, the spiritual world.

The first paragraph serves as an introduction.

 The author introduces the topic about the correlation between knowledge and wisdom.

 

Paragraph 1

Most people believe that knowledge is not equal to wisdom as history has suggested that the acquisition of knowledge does not necessarily lead to the increase of wisdom. He states the purposes of the

writing, making it clear that he would like to discuss what contributes to wisdom and how to teach wisdom.

Paragraph 2

This part is the main body of the essay. The four paragraphs tell us what wisdom is.

What factors contribute to wisdom according to Russell?

Russell holds that these factors contribute to wisdom: a sense of proportion, an awareness of the ends of human life and emancipation from personal prejudice.

What does "sense of proportion" mean?

The writer explains what "sense of proportion" means ― the ability to take account of all the important factors in a problem and to attach to each its due weight, or the comprehensive view of the

situation of a problem. In other words, it refers to the ability to get a comprehensive view of a problem, and in the meantime, note which aspect is more important and which is less.

 

Is it easy to get a right sense of proportion?

No. It has become more difficult than it used to be owing to the extent and complexity of the specialized knowledge required of various kinds of technicians.

What has become of the specialized knowledge? Why has it become more difficult for technicians to obtain a sense of proportion? How many examples does Russell provide to support his idea about the importance of “a sense of proportion?

Two. One is about a research in scientific medicine. The other is a study on the composition of the atom.

As human knowledge becomes more and more extensive and specialized, one who is engrossed in the study of his specific field may fail to foresee the outcome of the knowledge he is pursuing. (L 7, para 2)

 

In Para. 2 Russell stresses the importance of comprehensiveness. Why is comprehensiveness an important factor that constitutes wisdom?

As human knowledge becomes more and more extensive and specialized, one who is engrossed in the study of his specific field may fail to foresee the outcome of the knowledge he is pursuing. That’s why Russell stresses the importance of comprehensiveness.

What does "the ends of human life" refer to? It refers to the goals of human life.

Many eminent historians have done more harm than good ... (L2, Para.3)

What many eminent historians have done is more damaging than help…

 

Why is wisdom needed when we choose the end we want to pursue?

We should be wise enough to realize that some ends are not attainable inherently even though they may be noble. So to consider the feasibility of the noble ideas is important.

I think the essence of wisdom is to free oneself from the confinement of the physical world and the emotional world and look beyond.

 

What does “tyranny of the here and now” mean?

The writer suggests that people cannot avoid being partial. The difference between a wise man and an unwise man is the former has a lesser degree of partiality. As one becomes more impartial, his wisdom grows

It is possible to become increasingly impartial by gaining knowledge about the history and the future, and about other parts of the world, and by showing due respect and interest to different things.

 

 

 

 

 

SUMMARY

Knowledge and wisdom are different things. According to Russell, knowledge is defined as the acquisition of data and information, while wisdom is defined as the practical application and use of the knowledge to create value. Wisdom is gained through learning and practical experience, not just memorization. Knowledge and Wisdom defines the various ways of achieving Wisdom. He laments that though vast knowledge has been acquired; there has been no corresponding increase in wisdom. Russell defines wisdom by telling us about things which contribute to wisdom.

 

The first is a sense of proportion. It is the capacity to consider all important factors in a problem carefully. Specialization makes it difficult. For example scientists discover new medicines but they do not know what impact these medicines will have on the life of the people. The medicines may reduce the infant death rate. But it may lead to increased population. In poor countries it may lead to shortage of food. If there are more people, it may lower the standard of life. The knowledge of the composition of the atom could be misused by a lunatic to destroy the world. If misused, knowledge of atom can lead human to destruction by manufacturing nuclear weapon.

 

Knowledge without wisdom can be harmful. It should be combined with the total needs of mankind. Even complete knowledge is not enough. It should be related with certain knowledge of the purpose of life. The study of history can illustrate it. For example Hegel wrote with great knowledge about history, but made the Germans believe that they were a master race. It led to war. It is necessary therefore to combine knowledge with feelings. Men who have knowledge and have no feelings lack wisdom. We need wisdom both in public and private life. We need wisdom to decide the goal of our life. We need it to free ourselves from personal prejudices. We may follow even a novel thing unwisely if it is too big to achieve. Man may attempt to achieve the impossible, he may do harm to himself in the process.

 

 In personal life, says Russell, wisdom is needed to avoid dislike for one another. Two persons may remain enemies because of their prejudice. One may dislike the other for imaginary faults. If they can be told that we all have flaws (faults) then they may become friends. We can avoid hatred if we are wise. Wisdom lies in freeing ourselves from the control of our sense organs. Our ego develops through our senses. We cannot be free from the sense of sight, sound and touch. We know the world primarily through our senses. As we grow we discover that there are other things also. We start recognizing them. Thus we give up thinking of ourselves alone. We start thinking of other people and grow wiser. We give up on our ego. It is difficult to completely get rid of selfishness, but we can think of things beyond our immediate surroundings. Wisdom comes when we start loving others.

 

Russell feels that wisdom can be taught as a goal of education. The message in the parable of the Good Samaritan is that we should love our neighbour whether friend or foe. Many a time we miss the message in this parable (story/fable)because we fail to love those who cause harm to the society.  In brief Russell tells us not to hate anybody. The author draws out examples from the history of Queen Elizabeth I, Henry IV and Abraham Lincoln, who were free from the errors committed by other eminent people in the past.

 

The danger of hatred and narrow-mindedness can be pointed out in the course of giving knowledge. Russell feels knowledge and wisdom can be combined in the scheme of education. People should be educated to see things in relation to other things of the world. They should be encouraged to think of themselves as world citizens.

 

Read more

KNOWLEDGE AND WISHDOM NOTES

1.  How does knowledge become harmful to us?

 

               Knowledge without wisdom can be harmful. It should be combined with the total needs of                mankind. Even complete knowledge is not enough. It should be related with certain knowledge          of the purpose of life. The study of history can illustrate it. For example Hegel wrote with great           knowledge about history, but made the Germans believe that they were a master race. It led to      war. It is necessary therefore to combine knowledge with feelings. Men who have knowledge          and have no feelings lack wisdom. We need wisdom both in public and private life. We need      wisdom to decide the goal of our life. We need it to free ourselves from personal prejudices. We         may follow even a novel thing unwisely if it is too big to achieve. Man may attempt to achieve                the impossible, he may do harm to himself in the process.

 

               2.  Define Knowledge and Wisdom. Can wisdom be taught?

               or  What is the basic difference between knowledge and wisdom?

 

Knowledge and wisdom are different things. According to Russell, knowledge is defined as the                acquisition of data and information, while wisdom is defined as the practical application and use          of the knowledge to create value. Wisdom is gained through learning and practical              experience, not just memorization. Wisdom does not come immediately with knowledge. A     wise person possesses both insight and foresight while a clever person may not necessarily          do so. A clever person responds to the exterior changes quickly, but a wise man can                penetrate the changes and make the right decision. It takes a broad vision and an unbiased                mind to make one wise and one can gain a lot of wisdom through constant thinking and                experiencing. When the person's thoughts and feelings become less personal, they may                gain       wisdom. Wisdom is the fitting application of knowledge. Knowledge understands the                light       has turned red; wisdom applies the brakes. Knowledge sees the quicksand; wisdom walks     around it.

Russell feels that wisdom can be taught as a goal of education in schools. Wisdom should be                planted and nursed in one's mind. We should love our neighbour whether friend or enemy. We                should not hate anybody. The danger of hatred and narrow-mindedness can be pointed out in                the course of giving knowledge. We should be free from selfishness.  The writer feels knowledge          and wisdom can be combined in the scheme of education

3.  What do you mean by "Sense of proportion"?

               "Sense of proportion"  is the capacity to consider all important factors in a problem carefully.  In        other words, it refers to the ability to get a comprehensive view of a problem, and in the         meantime, note which aspect is more important and which is less. Specialization makes it                difficult. For example scientists discover new medicines but they do not know what impact these     medicines will have on the life of the people. The medicines may reduce the infant death rate.                But it may lead to increased population. In poor countries it may lead to shortage of food. If                there are more people, it may lower the standard of life. If misused, knowledge of atom can lead       human to destruction by manufacturing nuclear weapon.

 

 4.  What are the factors that contribute to wisdom?

 

               Russell holds that these factors contribute to wisdom: a sense of proportion, an awareness of       ends of human life, choice of ends to be pursued and emancipation from personal prejudice.

               I think the essence of wisdom is to free oneself from the confinement of the physical world and        the emotional world and look beyond. The writer suggests that people cannot avoid being                partial. The difference between a wise man and an unwise man is the former has a lesser degree of partiality. As one becomes more impartial, his wisdom grows. It is possible to become                increasingly impartial by gaining knowledge about the history and the future, and about other                parts of the world, and by showing due respect and interest to different things.

 

               We start thinking of other people and grow wiser. We give up on our ego. It is difficult to                completely get rid of selfishness, but we can think of things beyond our immediate                surroundings. Wisdom comes when we start loving others.  In personal life, says Russell, wisdom                is needed to avoid dislike for one another. Two persons    may remain enemies because of their                prejudice. One may dislike the other for imaginary faults. If they can be told that we all           have      flaws (faults) then they may become friends. We can avoid hatred if we are wise.

 

Read more

FREEDOM

FREEDOM by G.B Shaw

The text is a broadcast address by G. B. Shaw  on 17 June 1935. Here he has challenged the old order, the present order, and that which is still to come. It raised the storm of argument and controversy. George Bernard Shaw, the Irish-born writer, is regarded as the most significant British dramatist since Shakespeare. George Bernard Shaw was gifted with a very broad, insightful and creative mind. He excelled in literature, political thoughts, sociology, philosophy and science. As a novelist and playwright, he stands shoulder to shoulder with Shakespeare. He was a compassionate socialist, and a very compulsive debater. His radio talks dealing with philosophical and social issues often kicked up furious debates among listeners. He was awarded the Nobel Prize for Literature.  .

Now remember, ladies and gentlemen, I have no time to talk the usual old nonsense about freedom, tonight. ………………………………………..it is their religious duty to sacrifice their freedom to yours.

Simplified version:

George Bernard Shaw is quite dismissive(indifferent) about the way the humans perceive (recognize) freedom. He debunks (throws light on) the lofty opinion about ‘freedom’ held by those who think they enjoy it. He states how, a human being, in order to stay alive, must eat, drink, sleep, wash, and do other bodily functions. Even if he goes into voluntary hibernation, he can’t avoid doing these functions. Nearly half of his day goes for these mundane (routine) inescapable functions. So, Shaw argues, Nature and the Creator rob the humans of half of their freedom. After this is done, a human has to work for a living. Those, who are too wealthy, need not work, but they must walk, do certain minimal works at home. Even these obligations can be got done through servants, animals like horses etc. But, still freedom eludes(avoids) them. They have to produce food, clothing, and a host of other goods and commodities to cater to their needs for a comfortable living. Thus, he cannot quite shake off the shackles (chains) of enslavement. Women suffer more as they have to bear children, apart from doing household chores to keep the tradition of family going. So, even for a very rich woman, slavery is un-avoidable.

So beware! If you allow any person, or class of persons, to get the upper hand of you, …………………………..………..The amazing thing about it is that you are fool enough to believe them.

Nature, by giving us the feeling of an empty stomach, has authorized that we feed ourselves at regular intervals to satisfy our hunger. To keep food on our table, we need to grow it in the fields. This obligation steals some of our freedom, but the problem gets worse when we are made to toil in someone else’s farm for long grueling(tough) hours to grow enormous amount of food for him. The person, who works for others, is paid very less, but large share goes to the owner’s granary. To feed one’s own family by growing food in one’s own land might need just a few hours of work a day, whereas working as a paid farm hand means dawn to dusk toil (hard work).

This is where, the government’s role is crucial. It must intervene (get involved) to stop such senseless exploitation that supports slavery. But, the government does the opposite. Instead of banning employment of farm hands, it regulates their working hours through various laws, thus covering it with the legal clothing.

Similarly, we are told that the once-in-five-years elections give us our freedom to choose our government. But, this exercise is nothing but deception in a grand scale. In the election, we are asked to choose a candidate from among a few contestants, almost all of them belonging to the affluent(wealthy) class. Our choice is, therefore, limited. The elected ones form the government that continues the practices of its predecessor. What we are told is, the new government has abolished the system of ‘bonded labour’ and all farm hands and factory workers can choose their employers as they wish. This is ‘freedom’, the government claims. But, in effect, it is nothing but continuation of slavery through the legal and constitutional route. And we believe this as fools. In another words, we are fool to believe this.

Now mark another big difference between the natural slavery of man to Nature…………………………….…………….A tramp can earn his supper by singing “Home, Sweet Home.”

Man is enslaved by both Nature and his fellow human beings. But, Nature is benign (kind) enough to ensure that the acts, which it forces us to do, such as eating, drinking, sleeping, cohabiting (living together) and raising a family, are all very pleasant functions. One never detests eating, sleeping or living in a home. So, humans have little to complain against the slavery enforced by Nature. It makes our life so joyous.

The slavery of man to man……………………..…………………………and not to attempt to put it on anyone else.

While the slave-like services humans offer to Nature leads to joyous and rewarding results, slavery under fellow powerful humans can prove be quite oppressive, exploitative and, often, degrading. The pain and humiliation the rich and the powerful inflict (impose) on their downtrodden (exploited) brethrens (brothers) can be hideous (shocking) Karl Marx saw this very clearly. Thomas More, the great Christian soul, who was later declared that ‘the gap between the ‘haves’ and ‘have-nots’ can be narrowed to bearable levels only when every human being works with his own hands to produce what he needs for his consumption. Thomas More sang the praise of manual labour as a solution for the disharmony and friction in society.

Naturally the master class, through its Parliaments……………………………………and invite them to dinner.

Shaw felt that the institutions like the Parliament, schools and the newspapers are used by the exploiting ‘master class’ to brainwash(convince) the general public, especially, the poor and the powerless to believe that everything is fair in the society, and everyone enjoys the best possible degree of freedom. Our school history books are designed to create an impression in the minds of pupils, that there have been many historical events during different times.

For the un-convinced, who refuses to accept that he is indeed free, the pro-establishment protagonists (central characters) have a set reply. They point to the power of ‘vote’ granted to the citizens that empowers them to vote or vote out governments. The poor and the toiling classes are told that the government takes away some 25% to 50% of their incomes as taxes, cleverly concealing the fact that poor are working almost twice hard under the ‘just’ society as they would work if they were free.

Many radical thinkers have protested against this oppressive parasitic (blood sucking) structure for centuries. Sadly, these free thinkers are silenced by the strong powers of the state. Their writings are banned and their thoughts banished from the public.

Most shamefully, England sides with the tyrannical kings and emperors who thrive (prosper) on slavery, and wages war against the revolutionaries, who, fired with the revolutionary ideals, stand up to the state. The joining of hands between an oppressive empire and the government of Britain concluded in the victory at Waterloo. The government grabbed this opportunity to plead that British Freedom had triumphed. The innocent poor, swayed by the propaganda, cheered the government.

Now though this prodigious mass of humbug is meant to delude the enslaved class only, it ends  …………………………………………………….. American ballot paper as far as their freedom is concerned.

The social system based on an elected government, the courts and a fearsome (terrible) law-enforcing body succeed in achieving a deeply unjust, unequal and oppressive society divided by class. The privileged people have access to it. Through a process of aggressive and clever brain-washing, it convinces the have-nots that they are being fairly treated. The son of an a rich family goes to the best schools, colleges and universities, gets the best of what the society can offer towards his upbringing, and he  qualifies for the high level jobs in government, industry, and businesses and in public life. His mind gets trained to believe that he deserved the high status in society as much as he deserved the highly privileged upbringing in his early years. Thus, the historic injustice inbuilt in the system is never abolished.

They do not quite accept as to why they should get a smaller pie of the nation’s wealth compared to the ‘worthy’ citizens, whom they serve as servants,  peasants, factory workers. If they express their bitterness openly and disruptive manner, they face the heavy hand of the law-enforcement arm of the government. The enslaved class  given a chance they would vote against the system that inflicts (imposes) such injustice to them.

So far I have mentioned nothing but plain, ………………………………………. chemists exploit her too greedily.

Now, G. B. Shaw reflects on whatever he has said so far. He is aware of the fact that his views may not be quite agreeable to a good number of his listeners. So, he decides to be less aggressive in preaching what he believes. He is aware of the fact that radio talks are necessarily one-way communications giving no scope for argument. In such an environment, it is but natural that some listeners might be furious in disagreement.

He asserts that he does not want his talks to create controversies. He does not want to come to a summary or conclusion. As a word of advice, he tells his listeners that a certain degree of intelligence is needed to appreciate his arguments. A listener if he does not  understand his words, is likely to draw dangerous conclusions from his arguments. That would be undesirable.

Ironically, Shaw argues that to be called a slave might be considered insulting by most citizens, but for running a society, slaves are necessary. It was the great philosopher Aristotle who maintained that slaves are essential for running governments with their system of law and order. In a government set-up, there are a few who occupy dignified positions whom the citizens obey. These privileged persons must have an feeling of superiority. How can this appearance be built? It can be done by making them look smart, powerful, special and very rich. They must dress well, eat well, speak with polished accents, live in mansions, move around in expensive cars, must not do any of their personal works themselves. Servants must cook his food, brush his dress and carry his bags. The under-privileged people are inclined to obey them. So, the creation of the special class of people with power necessitates creation of an army of slaves. You can make people obedient to authority only if they are trained to treat their superiors as lords.

And now to sum up. Wipe out………………………………………..  and disorder generally.

Here Shaw attempts to sum up his arguments. He feels that man can never be truly free because Nature takes out nearly 12 hours from a day’s 24 hours. He has to relax, sleep, and wash. In the rest 12 hours, he has to work either for himself in his own fields or for his employer to be able to earn a living.

In a civilized society, one has to abide by so many rules. Breaking of these rules invites the heavy hand of the police. Disobedience of rules and non-payment of government dues surely invites severe action that may mean imprisonment or even execution. However, society’s laws are not always undesirable. When applied uniformly, they prove to be boon rather than bane in one’s life.

But as society is constituted ……………………………………………..present benighted condition.

Shaw laments that in the present form and practice of society, the influence of the landlord and the employer may be overpowering. If you are a tenant, the landlord may compel you by ordering you to practice a certain religion, vote for a candidate of his choice. If you are an employee, the employer decides what uniform you will wear in the work place, how long you will work, or even the tenure of your job. He can dismiss you from service at his will, pushing you to the streets.

If the office/ factory hours are 12, you are left with no time for yourself because, the Nature has already claimed 12 hours. When pushed to a corner by the indifferent employer, you may approach your trade union for rights. The Union can call for a strike, but then that means no job and no income. Strike means no income and consequently starvation. The law of the land prevents any coercive protest near the employer’s place. So, as the protester, one has to move back to one’s home to suffer from hunger. A start of mass strike may appear quite forceful to compel the employer to compromise, but if the latter does not do so, then the workers have to suffer severely resulting  starvation and even deaths.

If you work for just eight hours instead of 12, you are left with four hours for yourself. However, during this time you must not do anything against the laws of the land. If you want to spend this time reading a book or going to a film, you must afford to buy the book or the ticket to the movie. In either case you must have money to spare. More sadly, if your duty involves long manual slog (labour), you will return home to hit bed at the earliest. Then, the ‘free’ four hours goes for relaxation, not for recreation.

I take it, then, that nine out of ten of ..................................................................................wives.

Towards the end of his talk, Shaw assumes that nearly nine out of 10 citizens want freedom, and what to learn all about it from the radio, if possible. So, it is not a very practical solution, Shaw feels. He thinks the prevalent politics needs to be radically changed if true freedom can be made accessible to ordinary people. Till then, we should stop celebrating our freedom, which is misleading. Since the people in the lower level of British society had never experienced real freedom. Shaw suggests that ‘leisure’ is the nearest equivalent word of ‘freedom’. People should demand more money and more scope for leisure in exchange of a reasonable amount of work.

Shaw then expresses his disparagement for the system of elections and political parties. The talk of freedom and liberty are false speeches made by a parasitic political class, nicely disguised as a champion of justice and equality. The politician, in the true sense, is an anarchist who deserves to be prosecuted and punished rather than respected and trusted upon.

Shaw then reflects on the advice he has proffered – to demand more money and more leisure. He fears that most people can’t make judicious use of their new-found affluence and free hours. They will indulge in sinful ways and waste their riches. Even, some of them might be crippled by diseases that result from the excesses of luxury. One needs education and healthy conditioning of mind to make good use of wealth and leisure. He asks his listeners to choose between:          a.         Eight hours of daily work, higher earning and scope to retire at 45, Or

b.         Four hours of work a day, but no scope for retirement till the age of 70In                                         a lighter vein. Shaw asks his listeners to confide not in him but in their                                         wives about their preferred choice in this riddle.

                                                                        The End

Read more

FREEDOM NOTES

Slavery of man to nature is natural whereas slavery of man to man is unnatural. Both are different. Natural wants are slavery indeed but nature is kind to her slaves. Eating, drinking and sleeping are made pleasant experiences. Building families and societies also is made pleasant. But slavery of man to man is hateful to body and to spirit. In course   of time slaves and their masters form their own organizations and enter a civil war known as class war. Karl Marx spent his life proving that slavery of man to man will never stop by itself unless stopped by law. Speaking or oration (speech) will not do but everyone has to do his share of the world’s work by his own hands and brain.

Half the day we are slaves to necessities such as eating, drinking, washing, dressing and      undressing. For another one-third of our life time we are slaves to sleep too. So theoretically there can never be a perfectly free person. Chattel slavery is said to have been abolished legally but it continues to be in other forms. Even voting in elections does not liberate a person. Two rich friends ask us for our vote and we have to choose one of the two, which is not real freedom.

1) Why according to Shaw no man is perfectly free?

 According to Shaw there is no perfectly free man on earth because logically this is impossible. Whether humans like it or not, they must sleep for one-thirds of their lifetime; wash and dress and undress; they must spend a couple of hours eating and drinking; they spend as much time from travelling from one place to another. For half the day they are slaves to their natural requirements, which they cannot shirk(avoid).

2) Do all social and governmental regulations aim at regulating man’s slavery?

Shaw says that the object of all honest Governments should be to prevent the unnatural slavery of man to man. But he regretfully observes that the actual motive of all Governments is just the opposite. The Government simply enforces the slavery of man to man and calls it freedom. They also regulate the norms of slavery and try to keep the greed of the master class within bounds. This does not leave the repressed class any freedom because they have to choose between one master and the other.      

3) What does Shaw think of the right to vote?

Shaw thinks that the governments simply deceive the public by promising that they have the power to govern the country themselves by getting to choose their representative through their right to vote. A general election is held every five years. At the election, two of their rich friends, who are divorced from the pains the commoners, become the candidates for the election. The candidates themselves are unworthy; therefore, in spite of having the right to vote the people are not free to do whatever they would like to do.

4) How is man’s slavery to nature pleasant?

Shaw believes that man’s slavery to nature is pleasant because even though she (nature) forces man to eat and drink, she makes eating and drinking pleasurable so much so that some people simply live to eat. The comforts of civilised society and family life are so great that young people are eager to get married and join building societies to realize their dreams.

5) How can slavery be ended?

Shaw points out that man’s slavery to man is unnatural and must be prevented at any cost. He says that poets do not praise slavery. They say that no man is good enough to be another man’s master. Shaw uses the example of Marx who had advocated that law could only stop slavery. Because there were no proper laws against slavery in those times there were continual civil wars. Thomas More also raised his voice against such a social evil. He believed that peace could be achieved only by compelling everyone to do his own share of work with his own hand and brains, and not to put it on anyone else.

6) What means does the master class use to maintain the upper hand over the slave class?

The master class through its Parliaments, schools and newspapers, makes the most desperate efforts to prevent the mass from realizing their slavery. By directly controlling their thoughts, the master class prevents the slave class from forming a derogatory opinion of them. Whenever the people complain, they are told that they themselves are responsible for their misery because of their own wrong choice of their representative. When they try to protest about the system of voting they are reminded that they have been given the Factory Acts and the Wage Board, and free education, and the New Deal, and the dole. They always reassure the slave class that they do not need any more than has been already given to them.

7) How do the master class prevent the upheaval of the downtrodden masses when lead by famous figures?

Shaw says that whenever famous writers protest against the imposture of the master class, they teach the people that they are traitors of the country. Shaw gives the examples of Voltaire and Rousseau and Tom Paine in the eighteenth century, or Cobbett and Shelley, Karl Marx and Lassalle in the nineteenth or Lenin and Trotsky in the twentieth century.  These people are declared atheists and libertines, murderers and scoundrels; and often it is made a criminal offence to buy or sell their books. If their disciples make a revolution, England makes war upon them and lends money to the other powers to join her in forcing the revolutionists to restore the slave order.

8) How is the master class led to accepting the righteousness of human exploitation?

Shaw regrets that though “the prodigious mass of humbug is meant to delude the enslaved class only, it ends in deluding the master class more completely”. A gentleman whose mind has been formed at a preparatory school run by the master class itself, followed by a public school run by the government and university course, is completely under the false notion of created history and dishonest political economy and snobbery taught in these places. The gentleman’s education teaches him to think highly of himself. He thinks that being socially superior to the commoners is his right to get his work done by the other underprivileged people.  He sincerely believes it to be his duty to shed his blood and the blood of others to the last drop in order to defend such a nation which has bestowed so many favours on him.

9) Why do most workers or women vote for their social superiors?

Shaw notes that great men like Aristotle believed that men must be made ignorant idolaters before they can be made obedient workers and law abiding citizens. One must pretend to have God-like-superiority in order to draw the attention of their social inferiors. Women are no exception to this rule. Shaw notes that when women were enfranchised and given the right to sit in Parliament, first use they made of their votes was to defeat all the women candidates who stood for freedom of the workers and had given them years of distinguished service. They had elected only one titled lady of great wealth. The reason behind such mistaken choice is due to human nature. Human nature can of course be changed through education. But education is provided by the Government and the Government would never like to educate the masses to think against the existing system.

10) How does a civilized society protect its citizens?

According to Shaw, a civilized society has a Government which frames a constitution enumerating the rights and duties of the citizens. Absolute freedom of the citizens is restricted by the laws of the land, enforced by the police, who will oblige the citizens to do something and not do some others and to pay rates and taxes. If they do not obey these laws the courts will imprison them and if they go too far kill them. If the laws are reasonable and impartially administered the citizens have no reason to complain, because the laws increase their freedom by protecting them against assault, highway robbery, and disorder generally.  

11) How should an intelligent trade union movement conduct its affairs?

Shaw points out that it becomes very difficult for the employees to work under such tyrannical employers. They have only one remedy that of joining a trade union movement. The trade unions use the weapon of strike, which is the device of starving on the enemy’s doorstep until justice is done. The extreme form of strike—the general strike of all workers at the same moment—is also the extreme form of human folly, as, if completely carried out, it would extinguish the human race in a week’s time. And the workers will be the first to die. According to Shaw general strike is madness. Practical trade unionism would never sanction more than one big strike at a time, with all the other trades working overtime to support it.

12) What are Shaw’s views on working hours and retirement?

At the end of his essay, “Freedom”, G.B Shaw tickles our minds with a question that if we had unlimited freedom would we be able to handle it responsibly? Since absolute freedom is impossible, Shaw leaves his readers to decide for themselves that if they had a choice would they work eight hours a day and retire with a full pension at forty-five, or would they rather work for four hours a day and keep on working till the age of seventy. Shaw wittily concludes the essay by urging his readers to talk this proposition over with their wives and not try to send any replies to him.

13) “Nature may have tricks up her sleeve to check us if the chemists exploit her too greedily”. Critically comment on the statement.

Science and technology can definitely help produce machines and increase the production of food grains which would directly help equal distribution of wealth. The author reflects on the fact that though we can now cultivate the sky as well as the earth, by drawing nitrogen from it to increase the quality of grass to enhance the quality of food given to the cattle, and consequently improve our cattle, and butter and poultry, it might prove risky. Shaw here is talking about ecological disturbance which is the harsh reality of the modern world.

14) How did the author’s forefathers win freedom for themselves? Give some examples.

Shaw mockingly points out that whenever countries like England or America are attacked by external forces they try to prevent them. If the said countries are victorious in their assault they note it down in their history books as the glorious triumphs of patriotism. He gives a few examples. The forceful signing of the Magna Carta by King John; the defeating of the Spanish Armada; the beheading of King Charles; the acceptance of the Bill of Rights by King William; the issue and implementation of the American Declaration of independence; the victory of the battles of Waterloo and Trafalgar and the changing of the German, Austrian, Russian and Ottoman Empires into Republics.  

15) What, according to Shaw, are the factors that lead to the curtailment of freedom of common men?

According to Shaw a lot of factors contribute toward the curtailment of freedom of common men. First of all, man is a slave to his own bodily desires and needs. Secondly, he becomes a slave to the fancies of his employers to whom he has to remain obedient in order to feed himself and his family. Thirdly, he is slave to his landlord. Fourthly, the Government of his country, extracts income tax from him. Fifthly, by the opaque education given to him by the Governmental institutions. Finally, his independence is mocked at through the flawed institution of voting and democracy.

Read more

CUSTOM

"Customs" by Clyde Kluckhohn

Summary of the Text

"Customs" is an essay written by Clyde kluckhohn an American anthropologist. He is well known for the studies of the Navaho Indians and for his work on personality and culture. Here, he defines cultures and shows cultural differences by using different examples. Kluckhohn says that people are different not by instincts not by god, not by fate, not by weather but by culture. According to anthropologist, culture is the man made part of the environment. It is the total life way of the people. It is the social legacy which the individual acquires forms his group.

A man of culture is a man who is acquainted with history, literature, philosophy, and  the fine arts. A person who knows about these things is considered to be a "cultured" person.  In fact, we cannot explain acts only in theorems of the biological properties of the people concerned, their individual past experiences, and the immediate situation.  Such things are partly responsible for behaviour, but not entirely. Culture plays an important role in almost every event. Each specific culture constitutes a kind of blue print for all of life's activities.

 One of the interesting things about human beings is that they try to understand themselves and their own behavior. Humans show an interest in their own behaviour and want to know why people behave as they do, especially when differences are observed.  Anthropologists offered the explanation that the existence of different types of "culture" is the  reason for the differences in human behaviour. Others explain it with the concept of evolution in biology, gravity in physics and disease in medicine. A good deal of human behavior can be understood and indeed predicted, if we know a people's design for living. It affects daily activities, dress, eating habits, and choice of furniture. We brush our teeth on a rising. We put on pants not a loincloth or a grass skirt. We eat three meals a day - not four or five or two. We sleep in bed not in hammock or on sheep pelt (skin of sheep with wool). If the writer knows a person is American then he can accurately predict many things about that person's daily behaviour.

An American woman can't imagine the practice of plural wives nor would allow other woman to share her husband whereas a Koryak woman of Siberia would treat an American woman selfish and jealous of her own race for not allowing her to share her husband.

A man who was born in America and biologically was native American but brought up in China could not adjust himself in the American society and therefore returned to China.

 A trader's wife in Arizona once served her guest with sandwiches filled with the flesh of rattlesnakes. After they had eaten full stomach, she told them about what was there in the sandwiches, they started vomiting as they were not used to eating the flesh of snakes. A biological process is caught in a cultural web.

In Indian culture a boy does not dance with a girl if both belong to the same family or have the same ancestry because bodily contact in American social dancing has a directly sexual connotation. The bodily contact between the members of the same clan in India is considered incest taboos as an American young girl feels about sleeping into the same bed with her brother.

 At Yale University, the files of the cross cultural survey are organized according to categories such as "marriage ceremonies", "life crisis rites", "incest taboos". At least seventy-five of these categories are represented in every single one of the hundreds of cultures analyzed. In spite of differences in behaviour that are the result of culture, there are also many similarities. Some similarities shared in common by people are: biological features, marriage taboos, some personal experiences-like illness, helplessness, or old age. The fact that certain   stage or event in life are recognized as importance by all societies and are accompanied by rituals e.g. marriage, death. However, there are certain things that are impossible for any human to do. 

Read more

CUSTOM NOTES

1.            What is culture? How does it affect the way we think?

In the text, the word "Culture" has two different meanings as given by Kluckhohn. First, he defines it from an anthropologist's point of view. Culture means customs - how things are done. Culture is the total life way of people, the social legacy the individual acquires from his group. Culture can be regarded as that part of the environment that is the creation of man.

 

Second, culture means knowledge, particularly about literature, philosophy, history and fine arts (music, drama). A person who knows about these things is considered to be a "cultured" person. Some small section of people even regard culture as the knowledge about James Joyce, Scarlatti and Picasso.

 

2.            How are human beings alike at bottom?

Culture plays an important role in almost every event. Each specific culture constitutes a kind of blue print for all of life's activities. Kluckhohn says that people are different not by instincts not by god, not by fate, not by weather but by culture. According to anthropologist, culture is the man made part of the environment. It is the total life way of the people. It is the social legacy which the individual acquires forms his group.

At Yale University, the files of the cross cultural survey are organized according to categories such as "marriage ceremonies", "life crisis rites", "incest taboos". At least seventy-five of these categories are represented in every single one of the hundreds of cultures analyzed. In spite of differences in behaviour that are the result of culture, there are also many similarities. Some similarities shared in common by people are: biological features, marriage taboos, some personal experiences-like illness, helplessness, or old age. The fact that certain   stage or event in life are recognized as importance by all societies and are accompanied by rituals e.g. marriage, death. However, there are certain things that are impossible for any human to do. In this way, human beings alike at the bottom.

Read more

BEAUTY NOTES

A.     BEAUTY

 

1.            What Susan Sontag says beauty is?

or           What is beauty for Susan Sontag?

or           What kind of beauty does Sontag favor for?

 

               Susan Sontag is advocating for the' inward/inner beauty'(character, intellect and vision), which  is considered to be more important than 'outward/outer beauty'(facial attraction or looks,   physique, or sense of proportion of the body)especially for women. Our society always teaches    women to be fair and beautiful. So, most women think that their only aim and responsibility is to be beautiful. Such a concept has not only degraded women's dignity but has also made them   inferior to what they are and dependant to males. The writer is telling the beautiful women to    think over the     triviality of outer looks. Their beauty should be used as a source of power to do        something but    not to attract men. They should be competent, independent, and thoughtful in       order to revive   the ideal value of beauty and preserve their identity in the society. Women   shouldn't be flattered by the males.

 

2.            Explain the degradation of the concept of beauty and the word "Beauty" itself.

or           How is 'beauty' devalued in modern days? Discuss with reference to its meaning in ancient                time.

or           How has the idea of beauty changed over the period of time?

or           How did the meaning of beauty change over two thousand years?

or           What is the classical notion of beauty in Greek time and how is it changed over the years?

or           What is the Greek concept of beauty? How is it paradoxical in today's understanding?

 

               To the Ancient Greeks beauty was very important, but they made no distinction between inner  beauty and outer beauty. To them "excellence" included beauty, character and ability. Socrates   puzzled them because he was a small, ugly man, yet he was a great philosopher and teacher. His  outside appearance did not reflect the knowledge and wisdom that were inside him. He actually  contradicted their concept of excellence.

 

               The Christian era introduced some different ideas about beauty. A person could have an    attractive appearance, but lack virtue(goodness). So, Christians made a distinction between   inner goodness and outer beauty. Beauty was considered to have no real value. It was  not   nearly as important as character.

 

               In the modern time the concept of beauty changed and is used to refer a female appearance.  When people hear the word 'beauty', they think of "female appearance" and not her  intelligence or quality. This reinforces the idea that beauty is not really valuable, only useful as a  decoration. In spite of knowing that beauty is only valued as  decoration, modern women still  feel they should look beautiful and they worry too much about their appearance. Beauty may   give a woman a kind of power-the power to attract men. As a result, even if women succeeded   in acquiring leading position in any field, the male society looks at them with suspicious eyes.        They discredit women's potentiality, their intelligence and professionalism. So the women  should return to the idea of overall excellence as stated by the Greeks.

 

3.            If beauty is a form of power why does Sontag object that kind of power?

               Beauty is a form of power, but she is always looked at with suspicious eyes even if she has good      rise in work, politics, law, medicine, business or whatever. She is always under pressure to  confess that still she works at being beautiful/attractive. This power is always conceived in   relation to men; it is not power to do but to attract. As a result, women's striving to attain it    makes them feel inferior to what they actually are. They cannot choose this power freely as her        capacity or ability is always under  social censorship. That's why Susan Sontag  objects to   women's striving to attain beauty.

 

Read more

BEAUTY

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                 

Susan Sontag (1933 - ) An American critic, novelist and screenwriter. She was educated at the University of California, the University of Chicago, Harvard University and Oxford University. She established herself as one of the America's major social critics. In the text "Beauty" she defines beauty - concept about beauty and then she argues how the concept of beauty has oppressed (dominated) women.

 

Contents or IDEAS in the passage

 

Greek                            Overall excellence....                   Physical +Moral        Female + Male

Christianity                 Superficial enchantment           Physical                        Female

Contemporary          Female good looks only            Physical                        Female

 

• Illustrating how women and men are viewed/treated differently to support the argument -the oppression of women.


• Pointing out how society's gender stereotypes have affected adversely the development of women (e.g. encouraging, narcissism, dependence, immaturity, passive acceptance....etc.


• Calling on women and the whole society to get out of the trap created by the 'myth of beauty' and the resulting oppression of women.

 

Summary of the Text

Ideas about beauty have changed throughout history. For the Greeks, beauty was a virtue - a kind of excellence but made no distinction between 'inner' beauty and 'outer' beauty. To them "excellence" included beauty, character, and ability. Socrates puzzled them because he was small, ugly man, yet he was a great philosopher and teacher. His outside appearance did not reflect the knowledge and wisdom that were inside him. He actually contradicted their concept of excellence. Socrates' disciples had observed the "inside" beauty in their teacher but outwardly he was ugly. A man who is beautiful could also be intelligent, talented and good.

In the west, Christianity introduced some different ideas about beauty. A person could have an attractive appearance, but lack virtue(goodness). So Christians made a distinction between inner goodness and outer beauty. Beauty was considered to have no value. It was not nearly as important as character. Christianity has limited excellence to moral virtue and for the last two centuries or more ,beauty has been attributed to woman only who are considered to be inferior to men. This attribution has further limited beauty because the word "beauty" now belongs only to women.

We say 'a beautiful women' but 'a handsome man' in English. In French and Italian the word 'beauty' is not reserved for women only. A man may also be called beautiful. When people hear the word 'beauty' they think of female appearance. In the English language the word 'beauty' is never used to describe a man. This reinforces the idea that beauty is not really valuable, only useful as a decoration. In spite of knowing that beauty is only valued as a decoration, modern woman still feel they should look beautiful and they worry too much about their outer appearance. The need to be beautiful becomes a burden for them. Susan Sontag objects to doing so because it is the only form of power that most woman are encouraged to seek. Moreover, this power is always conceived(regarded) in relation to men. It is not the power to do but to attract. And, consequently women's striving to attain it makes them feel inferior to what they actually are. That's why Sontag objects to woman's striving to attain beauty, a source of power.

Sontag wants to bring about a complete change in attitude in her female readers. She wants to emphasize inner beauty - i.e. vision and wisdom, which is long lasting and more fruitful. Woman should not limit their attention to be beautiful outwardly. If they feel that to be or to try to be beautiful is their only aim in life, it will certainly make them more inferior and dependant to male. Without being beautiful too women can act as competently as males.

Similarly, Sontag wants to bring about a change in attitude in her male readers too. Male should not judge females on the ground of their  physical beauty but to pay attention to their inward beauty that is excellence, intellect and wisdom. Our society always teaches women to be fair and beautiful and most women think that their only aim and duty is to be beautiful. She is obliged to observe and evaluate every part of the body. That leads to anxiety and despair. This concept has not only degraded women's dignity but has also made them inferior and dependant. They should use their beauty as a source of power to do something but not to attract men. They should be excellent, competent, independent and preserve women's identity in the society. Women should not be flattered or praised by men on the basis of outer beauty. They should be professional and uplift their personality. This will help them to upgrade their social status in the male dominated societies.

Even society teaches them to judge each part of their bodies separately and if any part is found slightly imperfect, they are called imperfect. But for males, such imperfections are trivial things. Sontag says that males are responsible for making them inferior to males. Even if women succeeded in acquiring leading position in any field, the male society looks at them with suspicious eyes. They always discredit  women's potentiality, their intelligence, and professionalism. The society has a prejudice against women. Beauty contests are held in different countries national and international levels. These competitions emphasize that outward beauty is more honored and publicized. Fashion shows have also added charm to physical beauty of the skin and artificial gestures.

A successful career woman is in dilemma. Even if she gets success by her intelligence, she will be doubted. If she takes care of her appearance and looks smart she will be criticized. If she doesn't look attractive, she will also be criticized and ignored. Whatever she does is considered wrong. Therefore, women should return to the idea of overall excellence(the original Greek idea). This would release them from the consequences caused by the "limited" idea of beauty in the modern era- beauty is devalued and so are women.

Women naturally try to be appropriate and beautiful to attract man.  They have gone to very high levels of obsession with themselves that they lost track of their purpose of being beautiful and their position in this society. Sontag also argues that women at the same time have the idea in their minds that being beautiful will earn them a certain reputation and place in society, and that beauty brings power and success.

Read more

Hello world!

Welcome to WordPress. This is your first post. Edit or delete it, then start writing!

Read more