What
is philosophy of life? The answer is uncertain. There is no single answer. It
is like entering an ocean of debates; the end result being the beginning
of the ocean. My argument against this will be human life can not survive in a vacuum.
There needs to be debate and discussion, this is what makes the human being rational.
It will be safe to argue that every individual has his own philosophy of life.
It may also be safe to argue that philosophy of life changes from place to
place, from situation to situation and from time to time. In my philosophy of
life, I have the following propositions.
The
first proposition is individual is fragile. However a strong and determined a
person may be, there must be moments in his life when his determination melts,
or he breaks down or feels weak. At the death of his wife, Kasturba, Gandhi
bemoaned, “After sixty years of constant companionship, I cannot imagine life
without her.” You can call it a sign of emotional chord that Gandhi struck at
the loss of Kasturba but it shows the softer side of Gandhi who was otherwise
considered a strong willed person who sat on fast for weeks together and fought
non-violently the mighty British. I can give many examples. The great scholar
and one of the founders of modern sociology, Emile Durkheim was devastated at
his son’s death and this hastened his death. This fragility comes in many shapes
– physical, emotional, moral, etc.
The
second proposition is individual’s thinking and actions are molded by
circumstances. No genius now says that a time will come when there will be
flying machines as Roger Bacon had said centuries ago. We just fly. We do not
think about travelling faster in aero planes, we just travel in them. We are no
more worried about how to light our home as electricity is a quotidian thing.
This was not the case hundred and some years ago. One of my friends in Minneapolis narrated how
the older generations were confronting cold as they had to go outside their
houses to attend nature’s call in minus twenty five degree Fahrenheit
temperature and how they had to keep fire burning so that their house can be
warm. These are now the past. These are some of the examples in collective life
of the individuals. Even an individual’s personal thinking and behavior changes
due to circumstances. Circumstances sometimes force an individual to do an act
which he could not have otherwise done. We know extreme cases how an individual
commits a serious crime, which he repents later. When I say circumstances I
include these factors: individual’s state of mind at a given time, his place
and status in society, his current location and the time, and his perception of
laws and mores.
The
third proposition is there is something in individual life which is not always
in his control. You may call it fate or destiny. There is such an element in
human life. The fate may include a eureka moment as in case of Archimedes or an
apple falling on Newton ’s
head. One element brings these disparate incidents together is in none of these
cases the person expected that particular incident will happen. I am not saying
they are same. What I am trying to allude is the reward may not be always
correspondent to a person’s work, the reverse maybe true. Shakespeare had said
that some have greatness thrust upon them. I will give an Indian example.
During choice of candidates for presidential elections in India in 2007, the ruling Congress
party chose Karan Singh, one of the able candidates for the post. One of the
coalition partners of the Congress, the Communist Party vetoed it arguing that
Singh belongs to a royal family, and his aristocratic upbringing and his views
on religion may not be suitable to the post. They proposed another candidate
Pratibha Patil, who was a classmate of a communist leader. Patil was elected
President.
The
fourth proposition is the most workable philosophy of life is inclusivism. A
narrow minded person always finds faults in others and indulges in blame game.
To add, a self-centered philosophy is not a better philosophy of life. I do not
deny the importance of self, but there is a limit. I also believe in the
dictum: a person who does not know how to help him can not help others. I am
trying to extend the argument further. Gandhi comes here as an ideal. For him,
all religions are like different rivers flowing to a sea or like beautiful
flowers in a garden. For him, divisions on the basis of caste, color, religion,
country are man made and they do not stand rational scrutiny. A person
believing in inclusivism when sees a problem will first ask: how far am I
responsible for this? How much have I contributed to this problem? How much can
I help to resolve it? He will respect different views, different ways of life,
though not necessarily succumbing to them. He will learn from others. To quote Gandhi,
learn as if you are a student whole life.
The
fifth proposition is humility is a greater asset than arrogance. I believe in
the Socratic saying, ‘I know that I do not know.’ It is true that more an
individual learns he becomes more humble. Swami Vivekananda articulated this
proposition very well with the simile of well-frog. The frog living in the well
can not see beyond the well. For the frog, the well is the universe, and there
is nothing beyond that. A frog from outside fell down in the well. The well-frog
asked the outsider: is your home bigger than this? The frog from outside said
the outside world is too big, there is no comparison. The well-frog insisted
that there can be nothing bigger than the well. The point I am trying to make
is a person who wants to learn more must be humble; an arrogant person closes
his mind for new knowledge.
I
will stop for now. I will add few more propositions later. Perhaps the sixth
one will be: simple living and high thinking. There is no end to human need;
hence the better thing to do is to minimize the needs. I do not disagree with
Aristotle that a person needs comfort and time to have useful reflections. But
one has to find out ways how to find one’s comfort in such a way as to put
minimal burden on nature and earth. The seventh proposition will be: one must
contribute to society. I believe the society is our larger self. One needs to
contribute to society in his own capability. A person who has no food needs to
be busy to find means of subsistence. But a person who has no such worry should
contribute to society.
No comments:
Post a Comment