Home/mppsc: moral thinkers & philosophers
- Recent Questions
- Most Answered
- Answers
- No Answers
- Most Visited
- Most Voted
- Random
- Bump Question
- New Questions
- Sticky Questions
- Polls
- Followed Questions
- Favorite Questions
- Recent Questions With Time
- Most Answered With Time
- Answers With Time
- No Answers With Time
- Most Visited With Time
- Most Voted With Time
- Random With Time
- Bump Question With Time
- New Questions With Time
- Sticky Questions With Time
- Polls With Time
- Followed Questions With Time
- Favorite Questions With Time
According to Rabindranath Tagore, which type of relation is there between man and nature?
Introduction Rabindranath Tagore, a renowned poet, philosopher, and thinker, had a profound understanding of the relationship between man and nature. In his view, this relationship is harmonious and interdependent, reflecting a deep spiritual connection. Tagore believed that man is an integral partRead more
Introduction
Rabindranath Tagore, a renowned poet, philosopher, and thinker, had a profound understanding of the relationship between man and nature. In his view, this relationship is harmonious and interdependent, reflecting a deep spiritual connection. Tagore believed that man is an integral part of nature, and both must coexist in mutual respect and balance for true progress and happiness.
1. Spiritual and Emotional Bond with Nature
According to Tagore, there is a spiritual and emotional connection between man and nature.
2. Nature as a Teacher and Guide
Tagore considered nature as a teacher, imparting valuable lessons to mankind.
3. Critique of Industrialization and Exploitation of Nature
Tagore was critical of the industrialization and exploitation of nature. He warned against the blind pursuit of material progress at the cost of environmental degradation.
4. Human Life Enriched by Nature
Tagore highlighted that human life is enriched when man lives in harmony with nature.
Conclusion
See lessAccording to Rabindranath Tagore, the relationship between man and nature is one of deep harmony, mutual respect, and spiritual connection. He urged humanity to recognize the value of nature not as a commodity but as a partner in the journey of life. His ideas resonate strongly today, as the world grapples with environmental challenges and seeks to rebuild a sustainable relationship with nature, emphasizing the importance of coexistence.
What is the biggest contribution of Charvaka Philosophy to Indian Philosophy?
Introduction The Charvaka Philosophy, also known as Lokayata, is one of the most significant materialist schools of thought in Indian philosophy. It rejected the traditional religious practices, authority of the Vedas, and metaphysical concepts, instead emphasizing direct perception and a hedonisticRead more
Introduction
The Charvaka Philosophy, also known as Lokayata, is one of the most significant materialist schools of thought in Indian philosophy. It rejected the traditional religious practices, authority of the Vedas, and metaphysical concepts, instead emphasizing direct perception and a hedonistic approach to life. Despite being criticized by orthodox schools, its contribution to Indian philosophy is profound.
1. Emphasis on Empirical Knowledge
The biggest contribution of Charvaka philosophy is its emphasis on empirical knowledge or sense-perception (Pratyaksha) as the only valid source of knowledge.
2. Critique of Religion and Metaphysics
Charvaka philosophy is known for its sharp critique of religious practices and metaphysical concepts such as karma, reincarnation, and the existence of an afterlife.
3. Advocacy of Materialism and Hedonism
Charvaka advocated materialism, where the physical world is considered the only reality. It encouraged individuals to seek pleasure and avoid pain in this life, as it rejected any afterlife.
4. Influence on Secular and Atheistic Thought
Though Charvaka was a minority voice in ancient Indian philosophy, its ideas have influenced secular, atheistic, and rationalist movements in India and abroad.
Conclusion
See lessThe biggest contribution of Charvaka Philosophy to Indian thought is its rational, empirical approach to knowledge, and its critique of metaphysical and religious concepts. Its materialistic worldview and focus on living in the present continue to inspire modern scientific thought, secularism, and rationalism. While it was often marginalized in ancient philosophical discourse, its relevance in contemporary debates on religion, knowledge, and science is undeniable.
Why is 'sense-perception' not a knowledge, according to Plato?
Introduction According to Plato, 'sense-perception' does not qualify as true knowledge because it is linked to the physical world, which is in a constant state of change and, therefore, unreliable. For Plato, true knowledge must be certain and unchanging, something that sense perception cannot proviRead more
Introduction
According to Plato, ‘sense-perception’ does not qualify as true knowledge because it is linked to the physical world, which is in a constant state of change and, therefore, unreliable. For Plato, true knowledge must be certain and unchanging, something that sense perception cannot provide.
1. The World of Forms vs. the Physical World
Plato divided reality into two realms: the World of Forms and the Physical World.
2. Sense-Perception is Subjective and Unreliable
Plato argued that sense-perception is subjective because different individuals can perceive the same object differently. For example, an object may feel hot to one person but warm to another. Since our senses can be deceptive, they cannot be a reliable source of knowledge. In contrast, knowledge of the forms (such as the form of beauty or justice) is objective and eternal.
3. The Allegory of the Cave
In his famous Allegory of the Cave, Plato illustrates how people are trapped in a world of shadows, perceiving only reflections of the true forms. The prisoners in the cave mistake the shadows (which represent sense-perception) for reality, but these are just distorted images of the real objects (the forms). For Plato, this demonstrates that sense-perception is inferior to intellectual reasoning, which leads to the understanding of the forms.
4. Recent Example of Sense-Perception Limitations
In modern times, the unreliability of sense-perception can be observed in scientific fields. For example, optical illusions trick our sense of sight, leading us to perceive something that is not real. Similarly, the advancement of technology such as virtual reality (VR) can simulate experiences that seem real but are artificial. This modern example aligns with Plato’s idea that the physical world, as perceived by the senses, is not a true representation of reality.
Conclusion
See lessIn Plato’s philosophy, sense-perception is not knowledge because it deals with the changing and imperfect physical world. True knowledge, for him, comes from intellectual reasoning and the understanding of the eternal and unchanging forms. His ideas continue to be relevant, as seen in modern examples like optical illusions and VR, which show that sense-perception can indeed be misleading.
'Self-reliance' was among the main principles of Economic Policy of Sardar Patel. Discuss.
Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel, a key figure in the Indian independence movement and the first Deputy Prime Minister and Home Minister of India, played a significant role in shaping the economic policy of the newly independent nation. One of the central principles of his economic policy was "self-relianceRead more
Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel, a key figure in the Indian independence movement and the first Deputy Prime Minister and Home Minister of India, played a significant role in shaping the economic policy of the newly independent nation. One of the central principles of his economic policy was “self-reliance.” Here’s an overview of this principle and its implications:
1. Concept of Self-Reliance
Self-reliance, in the context of Patel’s economic policy, referred to the ability of the nation to depend on its own resources and capabilities rather than relying heavily on external assistance or imports. The idea was to build a robust and self-sufficient economy that could stand on its own feet and reduce dependency on foreign countries for essential goods and resources.
2. Industrialization and Economic Independence
Sardar Patel emphasized the need for industrialization as a means to achieve economic self-reliance. He recognized that economic development and industrial growth were crucial for the nation to achieve independence from foreign control. Patel believed that developing indigenous industries and infrastructure would help in reducing dependence on imports and enhance the country’s economic strength.
3. Agricultural Development
Agriculture was another area where Patel advocated for self-reliance. He was aware that India’s economy was predominantly agrarian and believed that improving agricultural productivity and self-sufficiency in food production were essential for economic stability. Patel supported initiatives aimed at enhancing agricultural techniques, promoting irrigation, and improving rural infrastructure.
4. Integration of Princely States
Patel’s role in integrating the princely states into the Indian Union was also related to the principle of self-reliance. By consolidating various regions into a unified country, Patel aimed to create a larger and more cohesive economic entity that could better support itself. This integration helped in pooling resources, standardizing economic policies, and reducing fragmentation in trade and industry.
5. Economic Policy Framework
Patel’s economic vision was part of a broader framework that sought to build a foundation for a self-reliant economy. This involved:
6. Legacy and Impact
While Patel’s direct involvement in economic policy was limited compared to his focus on political integration and administrative reforms, his emphasis on self-reliance laid the groundwork for future economic policies. The principle of self-reliance influenced subsequent economic strategies and development plans in India.
In summary, Sardar Patel’s principle of self-reliance was a cornerstone of his economic vision for India. It aimed at fostering economic independence through industrialization, agricultural development, and the integration of states. This principle helped set the stage for India’s early economic policies and continues to be a relevant concept in discussions of economic strategy and development.
See lessDiscuss the concept of form and matter according to Aristotle.
Concept of Form and Matter According to Aristotle Aristotle’s Philosophy Aristotle, the ancient Greek philosopher, introduced a foundational concept in his metaphysics involving form and matter. This duality is essential for understanding how substances and objects exist and change. 1. Matter DefiniRead more
Concept of Form and Matter According to Aristotle
Aristotle’s Philosophy
Aristotle, the ancient Greek philosopher, introduced a foundational concept in his metaphysics involving form and matter. This duality is essential for understanding how substances and objects exist and change.
1. Matter
Definition and Characteristics: Matter, according to Aristotle, is the underlying substance or “potentiality” that can take on various forms. It is the material aspect of things that has the potential to assume different shapes and states. Matter itself is not determined but becomes actualized through form.
Recent Example:
2. Form
Definition and Characteristics: Form, in Aristotle’s view, is the essence or “actuality” of a substance. It defines what a thing is and gives it its specific characteristics and functions. Form actualizes the potential of matter, shaping it into a specific reality.
Recent Example:
Integration of Form and Matter
Aristotle posits that matter and form are inseparable and work together to constitute reality:
Recent Example:
Conclusion
Aristotle’s concepts of form and matter provide a comprehensive framework for understanding the nature of reality. Matter represents the potentiality or the substance that can take various forms, while form represents the actuality that defines the specific characteristics and functions of an object. This duality is fundamental in both classical and modern philosophical and scientific contexts.
See lessWhat is the difference between intuition and intellect according to S. Radhakrishnan?
Difference Between Intuition and Intellect According to S. Radhakrishnan S. Radhakrishnan’s Perspective Dr. Sarvepalli Radhakrishnan, a renowned philosopher and former President of India, made significant contributions to understanding the nature of intuition and intellect. According to RadhakrishnaRead more
Difference Between Intuition and Intellect According to S. Radhakrishnan
S. Radhakrishnan’s Perspective
Dr. Sarvepalli Radhakrishnan, a renowned philosopher and former President of India, made significant contributions to understanding the nature of intuition and intellect. According to Radhakrishnan, intuition and intellect represent two distinct modes of knowing and understanding.
1. Intuition
Definition and Characteristics: Intuition, according to Radhakrishnan, is a form of immediate, non-rational knowledge that arises without conscious reasoning. It is often described as a “gut feeling” or an innate understanding of something without the need for analytical thought.
Recent Example:
2. Intellect
Definition and Characteristics: Intellect involves rational, analytical, and systematic thinking. It is characterized by deliberate thought processes, logical reasoning, and critical analysis. Intellect deals with structured and objective understanding based on evidence and analysis.
Recent Example:
Key Differences
Conclusion
According to S. Radhakrishnan, intuition and intellect represent two distinct approaches to knowledge and understanding. Intuition offers immediate, non-rational insights, while intellect involves structured, analytical thinking. Both are valuable in different contexts, contributing uniquely to human cognition and problem-solving.
See lessWrite the names of five great vows according to Mahavira.
Five Great Vows According to Mahavira Mahavira, the 24th Tirthankara of Jainism, emphasized a life of discipline and self-control to achieve liberation (moksha). His teachings included the Panch Mahavrata (Five Great Vows), which form the foundation of Jain ethics and spiritual practice. These vowsRead more
Five Great Vows According to Mahavira
Mahavira, the 24th Tirthankara of Jainism, emphasized a life of discipline and self-control to achieve liberation (moksha). His teachings included the Panch Mahavrata (Five Great Vows), which form the foundation of Jain ethics and spiritual practice. These vows are essential for monks and nuns, but they also serve as guiding principles for laypersons in a more limited form.
1. Ahimsa (Non-Violence)
Ahimsa is the foremost vow, where one commits to non-violence in thought, word, and deed. Mahavira emphasized that every living being, whether human, animal, or plant, has a soul, and thus, harming any form of life is a sin. This vow extends not only to physical actions but also to speech and thoughts.
2. Satya (Truthfulness)
The vow of Satya commits individuals to always speak the truth. According to Mahavira, truthfulness is essential for spiritual purity, and lying or deceit causes harm to both oneself and others.
3. Asteya (Non-Stealing)
Asteya refers to the vow of non-stealing, which means one should not take anything that is not willingly given. This includes both material possessions and intellectual property.
4. Brahmacharya (Celibacy)
For monks and nuns, Brahmacharya means complete celibacy. For laypersons, it signifies fidelity in marriage and controlling one’s desires. This vow aims at reducing attachment and passion, which are seen as obstacles to spiritual growth.
5. Aparigraha (Non-Possessiveness)
The vow of Aparigraha involves non-attachment to material possessions and limiting one’s needs. Mahavira taught that greed and accumulation lead to bondage, while reducing attachment to possessions aids in spiritual liberation.
Conclusion
The Five Great Vows of Mahavira—Ahimsa, Satya, Asteya, Brahmacharya, and Aparigraha—serve as ethical and spiritual guidelines not only for ascetics but also for laypersons. These principles continue to influence modern values, particularly in areas like non-violence, truthfulness, sustainability, and ethical living. By adhering to these vows, one moves closer to moksha and lives a life in harmony with the universe.
See lessWhat is Dayananda Saraswati's idea about the Vedas?
Dayananda Saraswati's Idea About the Vedas Swami Dayananda Saraswati (1824–1883) was a renowned Hindu reformer and the founder of the Arya Samaj. His ideas about the Vedas were revolutionary in his time, and he sought to bring about a revival of Vedic knowledge and practices. Dayananda's interpretatRead more
Dayananda Saraswati’s Idea About the Vedas
Swami Dayananda Saraswati (1824–1883) was a renowned Hindu reformer and the founder of the Arya Samaj. His ideas about the Vedas were revolutionary in his time, and he sought to bring about a revival of Vedic knowledge and practices. Dayananda’s interpretation of the Vedas was grounded in a belief that the Vedas were the ultimate source of truth, rationality, and morality. His ideas influenced India’s religious, social, and educational landscape.
1. Vedas as the Ultimate Source of Knowledge
Dayananda Saraswati believed that the Vedas are infallible and eternal, containing the highest form of knowledge about all aspects of life. He argued that the Vedas provide guidance not only on spiritual matters but also on science, ethics, and social principles. According to him, all true knowledge, be it physical, metaphysical, or moral, is contained within the Vedas.
2. Rejection of Idol Worship and Ritualism
One of the core tenets of Dayananda’s Vedic interpretation was his rejection of idol worship, ritualism, and polytheism. He strongly advocated for a return to monotheism as depicted in the Vedas, emphasizing the worship of the formless, omniscient, and omnipotent God (known as Ishwar). According to him, many later texts and practices were misinterpretations or corruptions of the original Vedic teachings.
3. Emphasis on Social Reform and the Vedas’ Relevance to Society
Dayananda Saraswati viewed the Vedas as a guide for social reform. He interpreted the Vedas as advocating for equality, women’s rights, education for all, and the abolition of caste-based discrimination. He believed that society could be reformed by returning to Vedic principles, which, according to him, were egalitarian and progressive.
4. Vedas and Rationality
Dayananda emphasized that the Vedas are based on reason and must be understood in a rational and scientific manner. He rejected blind faith and superstitions, arguing that the Vedas encourage inquiry and logical thought. For Dayananda, Vedic teachings were compatible with reason and modern science, and he believed that Indians should return to these rational Vedic principles to reform society.
5. Interpretation of Vedas through Arya Samaj
To propagate his vision, Dayananda Saraswati founded the Arya Samaj in 1875, with the aim of promoting Vedic teachings and reforming Hindu society. The Arya Samaj continues to promote Dayananda’s Vedic ideals of monotheism, social reform, and education, making the Vedas accessible to the common people.
Conclusion
Swami Dayananda Saraswati’s idea of the Vedas was revolutionary in the context of 19th-century India. He saw the Vedas as the ultimate, rational source of knowledge, covering all aspects of life—spiritual, social, and scientific. His rejection of idol worship, focus on social reform, and rational interpretation of the Vedas continue to influence Indian society through the Arya Samaj and other movements today. His vision of returning to the Vedas remains relevant in the modern context, particularly in discussions around social justice, education, and scientific inquiry.
See lessWhat is the difference between Kabir's and Tulasidas' Ram?
Difference Between Kabir’s and Tulsidas’ Ram The concept of Ram has been central to many Bhakti poets, but the interpretations by Kabir and Tulsidas are significantly different, reflecting their individual philosophies and approaches towards spirituality. While both poets invoke Ram, their visions oRead more
Difference Between Kabir’s and Tulsidas’ Ram
The concept of Ram has been central to many Bhakti poets, but the interpretations by Kabir and Tulsidas are significantly different, reflecting their individual philosophies and approaches towards spirituality. While both poets invoke Ram, their visions of him differ in profound ways, shaped by their unique religious outlooks—Kabir’s mysticism and nirguna bhakti versus Tulsidas’ saguna bhakti.
1. Saguna vs Nirguna Ram
2. Focus on Devotion and Spiritual Path
3. Inclusive vs Exclusive Spirituality
Conclusion
While both Kabir and Tulsidas invoke Ram, their conceptualization of Ram is vastly different. Kabir’s Ram is formless, universal, and transcends religious boundaries, promoting an inclusive, personal spiritual experience. In contrast, Tulsidas’ Ram is the incarnate deity, ideal in form and action, serving as a guide for devotion and righteous living. Both perspectives continue to influence Indian spirituality, reflecting the diversity and depth of religious thought in the country today.
See lessWhat is the Cārvāka view point of atman?
Cārvāka Viewpoint on Ātman The Cārvāka school of thought, also known as Lokāyata, is an ancient Indian materialistic philosophy that rejects the metaphysical concepts prominent in other Indian philosophical traditions, such as ātman (soul or self), karma, and moksha. The Cārvāka philosophy is considRead more
Cārvāka Viewpoint on Ātman
The Cārvāka school of thought, also known as Lokāyata, is an ancient Indian materialistic philosophy that rejects the metaphysical concepts prominent in other Indian philosophical traditions, such as ātman (soul or self), karma, and moksha. The Cārvāka philosophy is considered heterodox as it challenges the orthodox Hindu doctrines, especially those found in Vedanta and Sankhya systems.
1. Rejection of Ātman (Soul)
The Cārvāka viewpoint on ātman is fundamentally materialistic and atheistic. According to Cārvāka, there is no separate or eternal soul distinct from the body. They argue that consciousness is a product of the body and the mind, particularly as a result of the combination of the four elements: earth, water, fire, and air. When these elements combine in a particular way, consciousness arises. Thus, they do not believe in an immortal or eternal soul that survives after death.
2. Denial of Life After Death
Cārvāka also rejects the idea of rebirth or transmigration of the soul. They hold the view that life is limited to the physical existence of the body, and once the body dies, consciousness ceases to exist. In other words, death is the end of everything—there is no afterlife, no heaven or hell, and no soul that continues to exist after the body perishes.
3. Criticism of Religious Rituals and Moksha
Cārvāka strongly criticized the religious rituals and practices that were aimed at achieving moksha (liberation) or securing a better afterlife. According to them, the concept of moksha is a myth, and such rituals are meaningless since there is no afterlife or soul to liberate. Instead, they advocated for hedonism, believing that the purpose of life is to enjoy the pleasures of the material world.
Conclusion
The Cārvāka view of ātman is starkly different from the spiritual perspectives of other Indian philosophies. They deny the existence of an eternal soul, rebirth, and the concept of an afterlife, focusing solely on the materialistic and physical aspects of life. In many ways, Cārvāka’s materialistic and atheistic philosophy parallels modern secular, scientific, and hedonistic viewpoints, offering a critique of religious and spiritual doctrines that have persisted over millennia.
See less