https___ramkshrestha.wordpress.com_2012_08_14_science-and-religion_.xml
https___ramkshrestha.wordpress.com_2009_08__1.xml
1.1 2.1 3.1 3.2 3.3 3.4 4.1 4.2 4.3 5.1 5.2 6.1 6.2 6.3 7.1 7.2 7.3 8.1 8.2 8.3 9.1 9.2 10.1 10.2 10.3 10.4 11.1 11.2 11.3 11.4 12.1 12.2 12.3 13.1 13.2 13.3 13.4 13.5 14.1 14.2 15.1 15.2 15.3 16.1 16.2 17.1 18.1 18.2 18.3 18.4 19.1 19.2
Science and Religion Posted by Ram Kumar Shrestha on August 14, 2012 This article appears in Einstein’s Ideas and Opinions, pp.41 – 49. The first section is taken from an address at Princeton Theological Seminary, May 19, 1939. It was published in Out of My Later Years, New York: Philosophical Library, 1950. The second section is from Science, Philosophy and Religion, A Symposium, published by the Conference on Science, Philosophy and Religion in Their Relation to the Democratic Way of Life, Inc., New York, 1941. During the last century, and part of the one before, it was widely held that there was an unreconcilable conflict between knowledge and belief. The opinion prevailed among advanced minds that it was time that belief should be replaced increasingly by knowledge; belief that did not itself rest on knowledge was superstition, and as such had to be opposed. According to this conception, the sole function of education was to open the way to thinking and knowing, and the school, as the outstanding organ for the people’s education, must serve that end exclusively. One will probably find but rarely, if at all, the rationalistic standpoint expressed in such crass form; for any sensible man would see at once how one-sided is such a statement of the position. But it is just as well to state a thesis starkly and nakedly, if one wants to clear up one’s mind as to its nature. It is true that convictions can best be supported with experience and clear thinking. On this point one must agree unreservedly with the extreme rationalist. The weak point of his conception is, however, this, that those convictions which are necessary and determinant for our conduct and judgments cannot be found solely along this solid scientific way. For the scientific method can teach us nothing else beyond how facts are related to, and conditioned by, each other. The aspiration toward such objective knowledge belongs to the highest of which man is capabIe, and you will certainly not suspect me of wishing to belittle the achievements and the heroic efforts of man in this sphere. Yet it is equally clear that knowledge of what is does not open the door directly to what should be. One can have the clearest and most complete knowledge of what is, and yet not be able to deduct from that what should be the goal of our human aspirations. Objective knowledge provides us with powerful instruments for the achievements of certain ends, but the ultimate goal itself and the longing to reach it must come from another source. And it is hardly necessary to argue for the view that our existence and our activity acquire meaning only by the setting up of such a goal and of corresponding values. The knowledge of truth as such is wonderful, but it is so little capable of acting as a guide that it cannot prove even the justification and the value of the aspiration toward that very knowledge of truth. Here we face, therefore, the limits of the purely rational conception of our existence. But it must not be assumed that intelligent thinking can play no part in the formation of the goal and of ethical judgments. When someone realizes that for the achievement of an end certain means would be useful, the means itself becomes thereby an end. Intelligence makes clear to us the interrelation of means and ends. But mere thinking cannot give us a sense of the ultimate and fundamental ends. To make clear these fundamental ends and valuations, and to set them fast in the emotional life of the individual, seems to me precisely the most important function which religion has to perform in the social life of man. And if one asks whence derives the authority of such fundamental ends, since they cannot be stated and justified merely by reason, one can only answer: they exist in a healthy society as powerful traditions, which act upon the conduct and aspirations and judgments of the individuals; they are there, that is, as something living, without its being necessary to find justification for their existence. They come into being not through demonstration but through revelation, through the medium of powerful personalities. One must not attempt to justify them, but rather to sense their nature simply and clearly. The highest principles for our aspirations and judgments are given to us in the Jewish-Christian religious tradition. It is a very high goal which, with our weak powers, we can reach only very inadequately, but which gives a sure foundation to our aspirations and valuations. If one were to take that goal out of its religious form and look merely at its purely human side, one might state it perhaps thus: free and responsible development of the individual, so that he may place his powers freely and gladly in the service of all mankind. There is no room in this for the divinization of a nation, of a class, let alone of an individual. Are we not all children of one father, as it is said in religious language? Indeed, even the divinization of humanity, as an abstract totality, would not be in the spirit of that ideal. It is only to the individual that a soul is given. And the high destiny of the individual is to serve rather than to rule, or to impose himself in any other way. If one looks at the substance rather than at the form, then one can take these words as expressing also the fundamental democratic position. The true democrat can worship his nation as little as can the man who is religious, in our sense of the term. What, then, in all this, is the function of education and of the school? They should help the young person to grow up in such a spirit that these fundamental principles should be to him as the air which he breathes. Teaching alone cannot do that. If one holds these high principles clearly before one’s eyes, and compares them with the life and spirit of our times, then it appears glaringly that civilized mankind finds itself at present in grave danger, In the totalitarian states it is the rulers themselves who strive actually to destroy that spirit of humanity. In less threatened parts it is nationalism and intolerance, as well as the oppression of the individuals by economic means, which threaten to choke these most precious traditions. A realization of how great is the danger is spreading, however, among thinking people, and there is much search for means with which to meet the danger–means in the field of national and international politics, of legislation, or organization in general. Such efforts are, no doubt, greatly needed. Yet the ancients knew something- which we seem to have forgotten. All means prove but a blunt instrument, if they have not behind them a living spirit. But if the longing for the achievement of the goal is powerfully alive within us, then shall we not lack the strength to find the means for reaching the goal and for translating it into deeds. The photograph shows Einstein in 1946. This picture was scanned from Albert Einstein by Johannes Wickert, Rowohlt Taschenbuch Verlag GmbH, Reinbeck bei Hamburg, 1972.
1.1 2.1 3.1 3.2 3.3 3.4 4.1 4.2 4.3 4.4 7.1 8.1 9.1 10.1 11.1 12.1 13.1 16.1 17.1 18.1 19.1 20.1 21.1 24.1 25.1 26.1
Posted by Ram Kumar Shrestha on August 31, 2009 * Albert Einstein This article appears in Einstein’s Ideas and Opinions, pp.41 – 49. The first section is taken from an address at Princeton Theological Seminary, May 19, 1939. It was published in Out of My Later Years, New York: Philosophical Library, 1950. The second section is from Science, Philosophy and Religion, A Symposium, published by the Conference on Science, Philosophy and Religion in Their Relation to the Democratic Way of Life, Inc., New York, 1941. During the last century, and part of the one before, it was widely held that there was an unreconcilable conflict between knowledge and belief. The opinion prevailed among advanced minds that it was time that belief should be replaced increasingly by knowledge; belief that did not itself rest on knowledge was superstition, and as such had to be opposed. According to this conception, the sole function of education was to open the way to thinking and knowing, and the school, as the outstanding organ for the people’s education, must serve that end exclusively. Read the rest of this entry » Like this: Like Loading... Posted in Article | Leave a Comment » Posted by Ram Kumar Shrestha on August 29, 2009 *दयानन्द बज्राचार्य यस वर्ष मेक्सिकोमा सम्पन्न ४०औँ अन्तर्राष्ट्रिय भौतिकशास्त्र फिजिक्स ओलम्पियाडमा नेपालबाट विज्ञानका दुई जना विद्यार्थीले मात्र भाग लिने अवसर पाएका थिए। पाँच जना विद्यार्थीलाई सहभागी गराउन सकिने भए पनि सरकारबाट आर्थिक सहयोग नपाएकाले दुई जनाले मात्र भाग लिएका हुन्। कतिपयलाई लाग्दो हो हाम्रो जस्तो गरिब मुलुकले यस्ता वैज्ञानिक कार्यक्रममा भाग लिन रकम उपलब्ध गराउन नसक्नु वा नचाहनु स्वाभाविकै हो। तर केही दिनअघि मात्र बैंककमा एक एसियाली खेल प्रतियोगितामा ७० लाख रुपियाँ खर्चेर भाग लिन भने हाम्रा १८ खेलाडी र २२ प्रशासकलाई मुलुकको ‘गरिबी’ले रोकेन। यसरी हेर्दा राष्ट्रसँग पैसा नै नभएको त होइन रहेछ भन्ने बुझ्न सकिन्छ। कुरा प्राथमिकताको रहेछ। बैंककको खेलमा सहभागी ४० मुलुकमध्ये पदक तालिकामा नेपाल पुछारमा परेको थियो। तीन मुलुकको मात्र सहभागिता रहेको एक खेलमा मात्र एक नेपाली खेलाडीले कास्य पदक प्राप्त गर्न सफल भएका थिए । ७० लाख रुपियाँ खर्च गरेर प्राप्त भएको उपलब्धि यही नै थियो। उता विश्वका अति विकसित मुलुकलगायत ८१ राष्ट्रका ३१४ विद्यार्थी सहभागी भएको मेक्सिकोको प्रतियोगितामा नेपालका तर्फबाट भाग लिएका विज्ञानका दुई विद्यार्थीमध्ये रोहन पौडेल फिजिक्स ओलम्पियाडको इतिहासमा नेपालका लागि पहिलोपल्ट कास्य पदक जित्न सफल भए। फिजिक्स ओलम्पियाडमा पदक जित्नु खेलतर्फको ओलम्पिक प्रतियोगितामा पदक जित्नुभन्दा कम कठिन र गौरवको विषय होइन। Read the rest of this entry » Like this: Like Loading... Posted in प्रेरणादायी सामग्रीहरु | Leave a Comment » Posted by Ram Kumar Shrestha on August 7, 2009 *रामकुमार श्रेष्ठ प्रजातन्त्रको पुन:स्थापना पस्चात अधिकांश समय केन्द्रीय भूमिकामा रहेको नेपाली कांग्रेस संबिधान सभाको निर्वाचनपस्चात नराम्रोसंग पाखा लाग्न पुग्यो । स्पस्ट बहुमत पाएको कांग्रेसले जन चाहना र देशको आवश्यकतानुरुपका कार्यहरुलाई प्राथमिकता दिदै संयमताका साथ देशमा केही गरेर देखाउन सकेको भए नेपालको ईतिहासमा कम्युनिस्टहरुको अवस्था कमजोर भै नेकाको एक छत्र शासन चल्ने संभाबनालाई नकार्न मुस्किल पर्थ्यो । किनकि जनता सामान्यत कुन पार्टि अथवा शासन पद्धतितिर बढी झुकाब राख्छन भन्ने कुरा समय, परिस्थिती र अवस्थाले निर्धारण गर्ने कुरा हो । जनताको लागि त्यही पार्टी राम्रो हो जस्ले उनीहरुको लागि केही गर्न सक्छ अथवा गर्न सक्छ कि भन्ने आशा राख्ने ठाउँ रहन्छ । जब उनीहरुको आशामा तुषारापात हुन थाल्दछ त उनीहरुलाई पार्टी परिवर्तन गर्नु कुनै महाभारतको युद्ध हुँदैन । संबिधान सभाको निर्वाचन परिणामले यही वास्तबिकताको पुस्टि गर्छ । सबैलाई आस्चर्य चकित तुल्याउदै जे जस्तो किसिमले अनपेक्षित तबरबाट चुनाव परिणाम देखा पर्यो त्यस्को मल जल भनेकै आम नेपालीले देख्दै र भोग्दै आएका प्रजातन्त्रको पुन्:स्थापनापस्चात देखा परेका ठूला पार्टीहरुका बिभिन्न किसिमका सदाबहार गाइजात्रे कृयाकलापहरु हुन भन्ने कुरा बिबादको बिषयभन्दा बाहिरको कुरा भैसक्यो । यहाँ गैर् ह माओबादीहरुले बुझ्नै पर्ने महत्वपूर्ण यथार्तता के हो भने रहरले माओबादीको पछि त्यत्रो जन सागर उर्लेको होइन र माओबादी पक्षधरले पनि बुझ्नै पर्ने कुरा हो – जे जस्ता कारणले जे जसरी जन सागर उनीहरुको पक्षमा उर्लेर आयो, नेका र एमालेका बिगतका सदाबहार गाइजात्रे कृयाकलाप नै त्यस्को मूल कारण भएकोले सो जन लहरको निरन्तरताको लागि देश र जनताको आवश्यकतानुरुपका ठोस कार्यक्रमहरु र नेतृत्वदायी ब्यक्तिहरुमा उदाहरणीय व्यबहार र चरित्र टडकारो रुपमा देखिन नसकेको खण्डमा त्यो संभब हुने छैन किनकि नेका र एमालेभन्दा भिन्न रुपमा एनेकपा (माओबादी) लाई लिने आधार त्यस बेला समाप्त हुनेछ र जनता पुन: नयाँ शक्तिको खोजमा भौतारिन वाध्य हुनेछन । Read the rest of this entry » Like this: Like Loading... Posted in लेख/ रचना /निबन्ध | Leave a Comment »