EDITORIAL
Season’s Greeting!
The journal Philosophical Papers is a UGC- Care Enlisted and peer-reviewed journal
that carries the legacy of the Department of Philosophy, University of North Bengal.
The Department of Philosophy of North Bengal University is a leading Department
among the humanities faculties. The UGC SAP Programmme, enjoyed by the
Department from 2002 to 2020 in different phases, transformed the Department into an
ideal higher educational hub. The financial assistance received by the Department
under the SAP program has hugely enriched the departmental infrastructure, library,
and computer lab to a large extent. During the UGC SAP Programme, the Department
published more than thirty-seven books and eminent professors from all over the
country and abroad visited the Department. As a result, the students, research scholars,
teachers of the Department of Philosophy, and affiliated colleges were immensely
benefited.
However, it was a setback for the Department of Philosophy when the journal
Philosophical Papers: Journal of the Department of Philosophy (jpp.nbu.ac.in)
was not included in the UGC-Care Enlisted Journals during the Covid period. Prof.
Laxmikanta Padhi, the then Head of the Department of Philosophy, almost
singlehandedly took the initiative to revive the journal. With his innovative effort, the
journal finds its place in the UGC-CARE ENLISTED JOURNAL list. Since then, the
journal has drawn the attention of scholars all over India. It is heartening that the
Department receives papers of a diverse philosophical nature, and particular
emphasis is given to the core philosophical areas covering different branches of
philosophy. We also encourage papers related to Indian philosophy and
interdisciplinary ones. However, the final selection of the paper is solely based on the
blind report received from the reviewers.
Though disheartening, it is still a reality that due to the financial embargo of the
authority of North Bengal University, we have no option but to reduce the page quality
and the number of copies of the journal. However, the contributor to the journal will
get the opportunity to access the online copy. Having said this, the Department, in
particular, remained grateful to the Honourable Vice-Chancellor, the Registrar
(Officiating), the Finance Officer, and the University Press, whose unvarying support
has made the publication possible. We hope the authority of the University will support
the Department in the coming days.
This year, we incorporated twenty-four papers and two book reviews. The papers are
diverse. The paper entitled: Can a Vijñ ānavādi Consistently Admit the Existence of
Other Mind? Dharmakirti vs. Ratnakirti by Dilip Kumar Mohanta deals with the
controversy about the existence of other minds between Dharmakirti and Ratnakirti.
The author, following texts, argued that Dharmakirti admits to the existence of other
minds in the way Yogācāra’s view is considered. Ratnakirti refuted Dharmakirti’s view
regarding the existence of other minds for various reasons. If the Vijñ ānavādi admits
that the "other mind" exists in addition to one's own mind, it will contradict the
established thesis of Dharmakirti: 'Mind is the only reality.' Moreover, one cannot
prove other minds through perception and inference; hence, their independent
existence is denied. The author ends the paper with the conclusion that Dharmakirti
denies the existence of other minds not from an empirical point of view but from an
ultimate point of view.
In Inequable Right Claims of Unequables? The Abortion Conudrum, Jyotish
Chandra Basak mainly focuses on the controversy associated with the mystical nature
of abortion. Even though the issue of abortion is primarily an issue of medical science
where medical ethics determines the cogency of abortion, the issue still appears as a
serious ethical issue to moral philosophers. Among many other debates, moral
philosophers, in particular, cannot ignore the ethical aspect, particularly when, for
some reason or other, the mother desires to discontinue the pregnancy and terminate
the fetus. The writer, throughout his paper, has developed arguments for and
against abortion. The writer argues that the problem of abortion is not only an ethical
issue but it is equally a social, religious, and cultural issue. Keeping this insight in
mind, the writer cited various judicial verdicts, the judicial discrepancies of such
verdicts, and side-by-side also exemplified the nascence of the fetus in the light of
Ayurved Sastras. Besides, the paper's writer discusses the pragmatic approach
of Buddhism and the position of the Quoran and finally revisits the vital issue and
debate of the fetus's moral status. This paper reflects that there is a vast gulf between
the rational perception of abortion and the religious and ethical implications of
abortion. Having said this, the writer, at the end of his paper, concludes by saying that
to overcome the problem of abortion, we need to have a society with more rational and
progressive thinking.
The paper Adopting and Rejecting Logic by Nilanjan Bhowmik provides a
motivating insight into logic. In modern times, we confine ourselves to Logic
and Logics even though ignoring the substratum of first-order propositional
(sentential) logic would be difficult. The writer argues that not all logic obeys classical
logic as it seems the fundamental principle of classical logic, namely, the principle of excluded middle, has been challenged. As a result, it is argued that logic needs to be
revised to be on par with the development of science. There lies the relevance of the
revision of logic. Indeed, the writer, while substantiating the title "Adopting and
Rejecting Logic", in some sense or other, invokes logical revisionism. In this regard,
he takes Putnam and Quine and then argues that logical revisionism results from the
empirical pressure of Putnam and Quine.
On the other hand, Kripke argues that we cannot set aside reasoning while doing logic.
However, the reasoning that we apply in the case of a formal logic system is about the
portion of reasoning. In this context, Kripke admits that a formal system of logic is
departed from classical logic. The writer also exemplifies the normativity of logic and
reasoning in the light of Kripke. The writer is not in favour of rejecting logic; instead,
he is in favour of revising classical logic, which creates a new formal system of logic.
However, this does not lead us to assume that such a revised form of classical logic is
not similar to science, nor do we say that the new formal system is open to rejection.
Even though logic is a systematic study of reasoning, it remains sceptical and doubtful
about what logic our reasoning employs. It is argued that logic deals with a portion of
specific human reasoning. The writer further argues that even though some revisionism
in logic is welcome, it does not or cannot hamper the apriority of logic. Finally, the
writer concludes that the adoption and rejection of logic is a viable practice of logic
because if we cannot adopt logic, we cannot reject it either.
The paper entitled: Re-vitalizing Vedantic Epistemology- Conceptions of Depth
Epistemology in S.L.Pandey, R.D. Ranade and A.C. Mukherji: Elements,
Topology, and Some Problems by Anubhav Varshney deals with the concept of
Depth Epistemology with particular reference to Professor S.L. Pandey, R.D. Ranade
and A.C. Mukherji. The concept of Depth Epistemology bears some novelty and
uniqueness, which the author wants to explore in this paper. The author has taken pain
in reading the writings of Professor S.L. Pandey, Professor Ranade, and Mukherjee and
has explored their own observations regarding Depth Epistemology. Professor Ranade
has developed a new variant of Depth Epistemology, while Professor Mukherjee has
synthesized the idealistic traditions of India and the West. The author has tried to stress
Depth Epistemology to re-vitalize the Vedantic views of knowledge, followed by some
problems concerning Depth Epistemology, which are worth pondering.
The paper Unsocial Sociability and our Predisposition to Goodness: Kantian
Perspective by Arup Jyoti Sharma reflects a new dimension of Kantian unsocial
sociability. According to Kant, man is a social being, and as a social being, a man
expresses goodness and evil in society. The expression of evil may be defined as
unsocial sociability. The present paper tries to discern how some use the social structure to appease evil. In his paper, the author explicates Kant’s opinion about
unsocial sociability or radical evil and the predisposition to goodness by establishing
an ethical community. After such an establishment, an individual tries to encounter it
and use it negatively for himself, i.e., for individual purposes. The author claims that
using society for individual evil purposes, such as breaking down the society itself is
unsocial sociability. Again, by studying the difference between reason and inclination,
the author has shown how an individual uses reason to favour the inclinations, leading
to evil and the breakdown of the very social structure, which is like a stool in their
hands. This area of ethics has yet to be the area of much research. In his paper, the
author displays a deep understanding of the subject and how reason has been used to
favour instinct from the Kantian perspective.
The paper entitled Theories of Justice and the Epistemic Foundation of
Pluralism by Md. Inamur Rahaman attempts to develop the significance of justice in
the light of modern political thought. Here, he conceives Rawls' concept of justice as
fairness, the 'first virtue of social institutions', and Plato's virtue of soul as the form of
Good. The author then argues that Rawls' conception of justice as 'the first virtue of
social institutions' and Plato's conception of justice as the 'virtue of soul' are two
different paradigms of understanding and cognizing socio-political thought and two
fundamentally different epistemological systems. The author's main contention is to
show the relationship between these two paradigms within pluralism. While
substantiating his objective, the author divides the paper into four sections. In the first
section, the author shows how Rawls developed and reached an objective principle of
justice; in the second section, he develops in what sense the epistemic presupposition
of Cartesian Dualism obtained specific knowledge based on similar presuppositions;
in the third section, the author in the light of Plato's Republic examines different
epistemic and political approaches, and the final section appears as the concluding one
where the author attempts to show an alternative way of existence where the integrity
of the soul could firmly be established through plural engagements of the world.
We, as humans, need peace, love, and harmony. It is even more relevant when the
world is witnessing war at present. N. Ramthing, in his paper entitled Peace Studies:
A Brief Philosophical Outline explores in what sense peace is imperative for mutual
and harmonious global co-existence. Peace Study as an ongoing discipline carries
global, theoretical, practical, and normative outlooks. It stands as a promising platform
that peacefully resolves conflicts and violence. Peace is not only an abstract
idea; rather, one can take it as an essential policy for achieving global peace. The author
outlines the relevance of peace studies from a wide-ranging multidisciplinary
perspective. Peace can be interpersonal, intrapersonal, political, cultural, or spiritual, where issues arising from society, state, national, and international are involved. The
author relooks at and justifies all these by studying the brief genesis of the evolution of
peace studies. Besides, he also illustrates theoretical concepts of peace in the light of
classical realism, structural realism, liberalism, and constructivism, and more
importantly, considers the transcendal approach of peace studies in the light of
Galtung. Finally, the author brings the Gandhian Principle of Ahiṁsā as the foundation
of Peace Studies. Peace or peace study will remain a far cry without the spirit of non-
violence. Non-violence can be the only virtue that can effectively establish peace and
perpetual peace. The author ends the paper with the insight that his understanding of
peace studies is dynamic, collaborative, integrative, and transforming, where there is
no place or room for war. As the world badly needs peace, love, and harmony, a
resolution of abolishing war and conflict in the line of Ahiṁsā can be an effective
resolution for overcoming war and conflicts.
Education is light, and primary education is a must for all. Thus, life and education are
interwoven in a meaningful way. However, not all types of education are coherent with
ethical and moral values. Our contemporary thinkers, namely Gandhi, Vivekananda,
Tagore, and others, do not consider the so-called higher education as value-based or
proper. Bhupesh Debbarma, in his paper titled M. K. Gandhi on Education makes a
conscious attempt to unfold in what sense the present world overwhelmed with greed
and materialistic attitude dismantles value-based education. The web of AI and
machine learning educational systems incurs and redirects humans' propensity toward
materialism, individualism, and subjectivism and, in turn, gradually diminishes the gulf
between basic needs and greed. Within the post-modern civilized environment, cultural
and spiritual values are constantly eroded, and formal education is mainly responsible
for that. The author argues that the Gandhian concept of education can significantly
shape a world of peace by redirecting the web of materialism into spiritualism. The
author intends to say that proper education is the education of the Self, not of the mind,
and his understanding of education in the light of Gandhi will address questions like,
does education stand as a means for livelihood or to achieve academic recognition?
What, then, is the highest end of education? The author attempts to unearth the true
meaning of education in the light of Gandhi, which will ensure a harmonious co-
existence of all living beings. Education that would not address righteousness or a good
life is no longer proper, and the modern introduction of formal education is worthless.
The term justice is a desirably-loaded humanitarian concept. Justice means what is just.
Naturally, where there is justice, there is no need for punishment. However,
punishment is relevant in case of violation of justice. Swagata Ghosh, in her paper titled
Justice and Punishment: A Critical Study on the Ethics of Kautilya Daṅḍaniti, makes a mindful effort to conceptualize a just state in the light of
Kautilya. She argues that punishment is almost imperative for the offenders to
minimize crimes. With particular reference to the Arthaṡāstra of Kautilya, particularly
the third and the fourth adhikaraṇa, the author subscribes to show how Daṅḍaniti is
relevant in maintaining law and order and also restoring peace and harmony in the state
by the government. The objective of the panel system is to diminish crimes and
offences of various forms. However, it remains an open question whether the panel
system acting on monetary, corporeal, and physical punishments, including capital
punishment, is morally and ethically justifiable.
The author has rightly claimed that we cannot ignore moral and ethical questions while
implementing the Daṅḍaniti of Kautilya. Throughout her paper, the author takes a
threshold analysis of Kautilya’s vision of statecraft in the light of law and order and
also examines the efficacy of the panel system towards restoring justice in society. In
the process, the author discusses various forms of punishment and perspectives of law
and administration in Arthaṡāstra, eventually guiding an in-depth look at the ethical
analysis. The author further contends that the panel system of Kautilya portrays a
rigorous system capable of preventing crimes of all sorts. The combination of monetary
penalties and corporeal punishments is equally effective in minimizing crime in
society. Implementing exemplary physical punishments, including capital punishment,
shows that justice has to be restored by any means. While looking at the ethical and
moral issues of Kautilya’s justice system, the King and the concerned officials must be
trained in Anviķṣiki, i.e., the science of logic, and enquires into Truth based on dharma,
i.e., righteousness. This reflects that Kautilya’s panel system accredited the
humanitarian approach of the legal system. The author ends her paper with a cryptic
insight that Kautilya’s most extraordinary visionary of statecraft and politics
successfully established a law code for the masses and power holders to ensure and
minimize crime and maintain a just state.
The paper Philosophical Counseling in the Context of Bhagavad Gitā: With
Reference to Osho by Vinita Nair deals with a new area of therapeutic practice to
guide individuals in their complex life journey with ups and downs. The paper builds
up on the need for philosophical counseling. It deals with Western and Indian
philosophy, culminating with Osho’s interpretation of the Gitā. The selection of Gitā
has been well justified as it contains the essence of the four Vedas and Upaniṣads. Osho
places emphasis on complete mindfulness rather than withdrawal. He considers the
Gitā the earliest psychological scripture in the East before the writings of Freud, Adler,
and Jung. The spiritual journey begins at a point where the cognitive faculties cease.
The paper states that due to immense technological advancements and social complexities, individuals often wrest themselves with existential questions, emotional
chaos, and ethical dilemmas. There must be a fusion of philosophical counseling and
spiritual wisdom of the Upanishads, Aṣṭavakra Gitā, and Bhagavad Gitā. Indeed, the
Gitā offers profound insight into the human psyche, addressing existential dilemmas,
the nature of reality, and the purpose of life. Here, individuals grappling with questions
related to identity, duty, and inner turmoil find solace in its teachings. The
philosophical counseling of Gitā equally emphasizes self-realization, detachment, and
devotion and gives rise to a psychological framework for coping with life's challenges.
The primary objective of Gitā's counseling was to alleviate Arjuna’s despair, which
was not individualistic but universal for all. Krishna appears as the Divine Spirit
(Sārathi) who guides, inspires, and empowers us. The concepts of loka-hita and loka-
Sangraha convey that every individual can assist individuals and societies in managing
conflict. However, Osho thinks that Arjuna’s dilemma is not spiritual but psychological
and practical, and in this regard, it differs from Freud's psychology. Freudian
psychology does not encompass phenomena beyond the mind's boundaries, whereas
Gitā indicates something beyond the mind.
Caste system is a much debated religious issue, and modern thinkers, particularly B.
R. Ambedkar, raised serious objections against the functional aspect of the caste system
of the Hindu religion. The main contention is whether the hierarchism of caste is
determined based on varṇa or guṅas (qualities). Arun Kumar Chowdhury, in his paper
entitled Society’s Caste System: A Philosophical Analysis from Swami
Vivekananda’s Vedfantic Ideal of Equality explores in the light of Vivekananda that
a man differs from others only in manifestations but not in essence. We are the same
as Sat-Ċit-Ānaṅda. Throughout his paper, the author explores how Vivekananda
explains the society's caste system from the Vedāntic ideal of equality. Vedānta
philosophy is central to oneness in the universe; in this sense, we are all equal in the
divine essence. As a result, any division is a sheer delusion, an image.
The division is an illusion portrayed in manifestation, but in divinity, there is unity.
One has to realize. Self-realization is the key to unearthing or unfolding what lies in
existence. As God is the Sat-Ċit-Ānaṅda, God is in you and all of you. One can realize
it at the stage of jivanmukti. There is nothing wrong with the Varṅa system as long as
it is not hereditary. However, the hereditary caste system based on priest craft is
problematic. It created the so-called social evil (curse) in the name of untouchability.
The only solution to overcome this is to emphasize value-based real education and to
transform society. Radical transformation of the society based on ideal value-based
education can be the only effective measure to overcome the hereditary caste system
in India.
The philosophical concept of solipsism has occupied a central place in core
philosophical discussion since Berkeley. The idea of solipsism seized sufficient ground
over the centuries, and one can find its relevance even in Descartes and Wittgenstein.
Rekha Nayak and Manoranjan Mallick, in their paper entitled Berkeley and early
Wittgenstein on Solipsism: A Review seek to compare Berkeley and early
Wittgenstein on the theme of solipsism. Indeed, writers of the History of Philosophy
Berkeley as a solipsist. Richard Falckenberg has tagged even Descartes as a solipsist.
Of course, labels matter, but what a philosopher says matters more. Some
contemporary scholars argue that it is a mistake to call Berkeley a solipsist.
While discussing Wittgenstein’s appraisal of solipsism in his Tractatus, the authors
take Berkeley as an advocate of the doctrine and examine his view in light of
Wittgenstein's critique. The task is more than a comparison. The authors assess the
alleged solipsism of Berkeley and elucidation of Wittgenstein's view on solipsism in
the Tractatus that it boils down to realism and leads to a thought-provoking conclusion
that realism is the root of Berkeley's solipsism, and it is the fruit of Wittgenstein's
solipsism. Realism gave rise to solipsism in Berkeley, and solipsism is the same as
realism, according to Wittgenstein. Berkely is situated in the tradition in which an
idea is regarded as the primary unit of knowledge. Wittgenstein is situated in the
tradition in which a proposition is the primary unit of meaningful expression. The
former method is empirical perceptual, and the latter is logico-linguistic. Berkeley
elevates percipient-centric ideas to God-centric ideas, thereby absorbing
commonsensical realism, i.e., Hylasian realism, within the framework of idealism.
Wittgenstein makes solipsism in realism of the same type. The authors intend to
analyze the concept of solipsism following Wittgenstein, referencing Berkeley's view
as previous. Thus, they aim to shed new light on the problem of solipsism, opening a
vista for further future discussion.
The problem of meaning is a central issue in philosophy in general and analytic
philosophy in particular. Analysis matters in analytic philosophy because determining
meaning appears to be a daunting task to the philosophers of analysis. Analytic
philosophers adopted and approached various paradigms of meaning criterion, and
nothing is beyond questions begging. In his paper entitled A Critical Exposition on
Quine’s Notion of Meaning and Intederminacy Niranjan Adhikari clarifies how
Quine concludes that the meaning of a word or a sentence is radical and indeterminate.
In this process, he elucidates the referential theory of meaning supported by Russell
and the sense theory of meaning developed by Frege. He then clarifies how Quine
rejects these theories because meaning is not an entity but a confirmation expressed
through a stimuli assent or dissent of a given speaker, i.e., through behaviour. Besides, the author raises the issue of how, according to Quine, the problem of meaning is rooted
in his relativistic interpretation of conceptual schemes and, thereby, in his
indeterminacy thesis.
Further, the author argues in what sense the unified core of the conceptual scheme, the
foundation of the Kantian knowledge system, for Quine, is relative, i.e., uncertain in
terms of translation. After that, the author is concerned with the path for the
indeterminacy thesis, the source of which, according to the author, lies in the rejection
of the analytic-synthetic distinction by Quine in his "Two Dogmas of Empiricism."
Though the indeterminacy thesis is initially based on rejecting the analytic-synthetic
distinction, it is eventually grounded on translating an alien language into a customary
language because the native mind is inaccessible. For further clarification, the author
also analyses the indeterminacy thesis from two different aspects: the 'argument from
above' and the 'argument from below'. The former claims that the evidence
underdetermines the scientific theory, whereas the latter establishes the indeterminacy
of reference. The evidence underdetermines a scientific theory, and the translation,
being a particular scientific theory, must be based on some evidence. However, no
translation in two different scientific theories could be claimed to have an identical
stimulus meaning. For example, the concept ‘Gavagāi’ appears whenever there is a
Rabbit, but there is no certainty that both have the same stimulus meaning. Thus, it is
concluded that every translation under all possible empirical evidence in the form of
the native assent or descent is indeterminate. This is how the indeterminacy of
translation stands. The author also clarifies in what sense Quine’s indeterminacy
thesis is explained through the under-determination project. At the end of his paper,
the author concludes that any theory to define meaning is not conclusive and, thus, is
insufficient because observational data often fails to justify that the meaning of the
term "Rabbit" is synonymous with the meaning of Gavagāi.
Kasturi Datta (Majumdar), in her contribution entitled: Equality In Difference: An
Analysis with reference to Motherhood, refers to the concept of gender
discrimination, which is one of the essential topics of Practical Ethics. Any
discrimination hinders the growth of society. All human beings deserve equal rights
and opportunities irrespective of race, caste, religion, or sex. The biological differences
between individuals can never be taken as a criterion for gender discrimination. The
concept of motherhood has been glorified in India to a great extent. In ancient India,
motherhood had a significant position in society, although it does not imply that, at that
time, women occupied a high status in society. For her, motherhood is considered a
glorified aspect of women’s lives, but this is a patriarchal ploy to keep women in a
cage. We need to re-think our traditional theories to ensure women's equality.
It is often argued that there is no ethics in politics, i.e., ethics and politics are polar
concepts. Politicians are just like snakes; when they get opportunities, they bite their
counterparts. The state needs moral politicians rather than political moralists.
Deepanwita Datta, in Political Ethics: An Enquiry into its Nature, Scope and
Relevance attempts to discuss the complex affinity between ethics and politics.
Political Ethics is an adjunction of politics and ethics, where politics, as a social
scientific inquiry, invokes philosophical questions of a normative nature. For example,
the political question "How a society should be organized" entails an ought question.
Ancient political ethics in India acknowledges that politics has never been
alienated from religion and morality. It took political activity as an integral part of
spirituality that motivated man towards self-realization. Unlike the West, the Indian
Society was based on metaphysics and ethics, and it interpreted the essential problems
of human existence. For example, Rājadharma, the cascade of all dharma, is the central
theme of Hindu political thought, where the King protects law-making citizens and
punishes wrongdoers. It protects the people with the help of daṅḍa, a means of
vigilance that keeps an eye even over the King following certain niti. The author
invokes political pragmatism in the light of political realists, where the need for
flexibility in politics remains open. She justifies flexibility in politics where normative
questions, such as "means justifies end" or "end justifies means", are relevant. In this
regard, the debate between consequential and deontological approaches is worthy.
Being a political realist, Machiavellian argues in favour of consequentialism, saying
that "end justifies means" and that unethical means are conducive to sustaining various
political lives. The deontological position of Kant and others holds that there is no
separation between means and end and that means are, after all, all means. We have
control over means but not over end. So, means, not end, has to be the right way.
The problem of meaning is the central issue of analytic philosophy and within the
semantics and pragmatics, there are different paradigms employed for determining
meaning. To know the meaning of a sentence is to know what the sentence refers to.
Again, to know the reference of a sentence means to know the sentence's Truth.
Language refers to hooks, maps, pictures, or represents, and based on this, various
theories of meaning developed, namely, correspondence, coherence, semantics,
pragmatics, internal, extensional, and intentional. Thus, meaning in semantics is deeply
associated with the reference and Truth of the descriptive terms or sentences. The
famous traditional theory of meaning expounded by Frege and others determines
meaning through reference. However, this theory again begs questions from
philosophers like Putnam and others. In Meaning ain't just in the Head: From
Meaning to Reference Jayanta Barman critically accounts for the problem of meaning
criteria after Putnam. Putnam, a realist at his initial stage, became the critic of the same in the second phase of his philosophical career. By denying metaphysical realism, he
develops internal realism. He argues that the traditional interpretation of meaning is
false because it holds that meaning is just in the head. Putnam thinks the other way
around. His famous metaphor, Twin Earth Hypothesis, justifies that the traditional
concept of meaning and reference is false due to narrow psychologism. Instead, the
meaning of a term is determined socio-linguistically, and in this regard, he again uses
the metaphor "the division of linguistic labour". This means that it is not the outcome
of individual psychology but rather the outcome of a socio-linguistic
community. This is how the traditional theory of meaning and reference gains critical
conceptual magnitude in his internalistic phase. His internal realism holds that
reference substantially determines meaning instead of meaning determining reference.
Here, community, environment, and socio-linguistic issues get more priority over
narrow psychologism and narrow mentalism. The author ends the paper with the view
that Putnam develops an alternative theory of Frege’s semantics by bringing the context
of the division of linguistic labour and the relevance of society and the environment.
Feminism is a much debated and litigious socio-philosophical, socio-economical
matter where issues like women's liberty, equality, and empowerment are critical. It
proclaims that women are exploited and subjugated primarily based on gender
inequality. Najmun Katum, in Islamic Feminists' View on Muslim Women's
Equality and Empowerment mainly focuses on gender equality, women's equal
rights, opportunities, and empowerment from Islamic feminists' point of view. In this
regard, she refers to the Quran, the sacred text of Islam. It is generally alleged that the
Quran is the primary source of women's subordination. However, Islamic feminists
think the other way around. For them, there is nothing wrong with the Quran;
somewhat, it was completely misinterpreted by the patriarchal society. There is no
single verse found in the Quran that voices against women's empowerment and gender
equality. Islamic feminists thus rise with the external pragmatic interpretation of the
Quran where there is no place for a hierarchy between male and female. All are equal
in the eye of the Quran, and this position of the Quran conforms to humanism. Women's
liberty, equality, and empowerment are the need of the hour. However, all these would
remain a far cry if males and females were not treated equally in rights and
opportunities. It is where the relevance of gender equality in Islam lies.
Indeed, there is no exaggeration in saying everyone desires to lead a meaningful life.
Human life only makes sense if it is meaningful or purposeless. The worth of life is,
alternatively, defined as the meaning of life. Of course, the meaning of life is
evaluated by values. In his paper entitled Wittgenstein on Meaning of Life Abhijit
Ghosh attempts to unearth the meaning of life in the light of Wittgenstein's conception xii
of values. For Wittgenstein, there are different levels of values, namely, relative and
absolute. What is relative is lower, and what is absolute is higher. Again, what is lower
is accidental, and what is absolute is non-accidental. Absolute values lie outside the
limits of language and the limits of the world, and as a result, it is ethereal and mystical.
The value of ethics (religion, aesthetics) contains absolute values. Wittgenstein tries to
determine the meaning of life by examining higher, non-accidental, and ethereal
values. It is a revealed value for which we cannot say. As it lies outside the limit of
language, it is inexpressible. One has to remain silent about it. However, it is helpful
to lead a happy and meaningful life. One needs to have a right view of the world to
understand it. It is possible only by seeing the world as sub-species aeternitatis. Thus,
there is a happy and unhappy world, i.e., the world of happy man and the world of
unhappy man. A world of the happy man is the world of eternity; to have the sense of
it, one needs to have the feeling of inexpressibility. The feeling of inexpressibility
eventually reveals the absolute value, an eternal reality, the foundation of happiness
deeply embedded in culture and religion but utterly detached from civilization. Thus,
the meaning of life is embodied in human culture as determined by eternal and absolute
value.
The burning problem we face at present and for which our future generation would be
endangered is environmental degradation and ecological unsustainability. The so-
called civilized society, due to their limitless desire for materialism and extreme forms
of anthropocentrism, created environmental crises and will leave the world as a
desolate and unproductive land for future generations. This is a human catastrophe, an
impasse created by modern scientific society, for which future generations will
essentially be the misfortune recipients. In his paper entitled Ecological Rift and
Human Alienation from Nature: A Materialistic Understanding, M. P. T. Samuel
attempts to resolve the ecological rift and human alienation from nature by offering a
materialistic interpretation. The relationship between nature and humans is widely
discussed in philosophical discourse. Approaches such as anthropocentrism, non-
anthropocentrism, deep ecological movement, ecofeminism, etc., are some of these.
The environmental issues are mainly due to the over and conscious exploitation of
nature, which different disciplines have studied. The author argues that there is always
a futuristic approach, which is ordinarily absent in many studies that scholars have
attempted. Some of the theoretical attempts made by the economists are highlighted in
the paper. For example, the scholar mentions the green capitalism developed by Brett
Clark and Richard York.
Moreover, the scholar also briefly examines the distinction between shallow and deep
ecology. It is shown how Marxism gives particular importance to the co-evolutionary approach in the context of human beings and nature. It is also shown that Marx
provides a solution to the ecological rift through a structural change in the mode of
production. The locus of the ecological rift is humans' alienation from
nature. This makes a drastic change in humans' attitude towards nature. However,
Marx was convinced that human alienation could not be solved through make-shift
solutions offered by techno-capitalism, i.e., materialism and anthropocentrism, but by
overthrowing the capitalist mode of production. One must address various social
conflicts existing in a particular society to overcome the so-called ecological
rift. Otherwise, we cannot have a holistic solution to the environmental problems we
need for future generations.
The world that we are living in today is the world of globalization. It has both
advantages and disadvantages. The world of globalization invites ethical relativism and
denies moral absolutism, creating ethical problems. It adulterates our culture and
values and, in turn, invites identity crisis. In Ethical Issues of Globalization: A
Kantian Solution, Beauty Das attempts to apply the Kantian model to solve some of
the ethical issues of globalization. What is heartening is that here, the author applies
how Kantian categorical imperative has a practical domain in the light of two critical
works of Kant. Undoubtedly, some contemporary issues arising from globalization
can be seen from different perspectives. The author tries to understand the issue by
showing how the concept of Vasudhaiva Kuduṁbakam which speaks about the
significance of the well-being of the world community, can be seen in the light of Kant.
It is also pointed out that cultural, social, and religious aspects must be
considered while discussing the above. The author identifies three major issues
globalization engendered: value crisis, identity crisis, and environmental crisis. Here,
the author argues that Kantian methodology helps to resolve such a crisis. Kant's
importance in understanding the moral nature of human beings is mentioned and
discussed. However, the author could have elaborated on this in detail, and the
application of Kant in solving the above problems could have been highlighted.
In the recent past, an issue was raised against Buddhism, arguing that Buddhism as a
religion is not engaged as Buddha himself was confined to his own salvation through
Nirvāṇa. Thus, Buddhism as a religion is self-centered and by no means engaged. In A
Transition from Spiritual Enlightenment to Social Action: A Survey on
Buddhism, Kirtika Das intends to show how Buddhist ethical guidelines lead toward
practical engagement. It is argued that individual awareness always leads to social
welfare, and more importantly, Buddhism has evolved from Pratyekabudha-s to
engaged Buddhism. Further concept of Bodhisattva always tries to alleviate the
sufferings of others. Again, a careful study would reflect that a shift from self-liberation to liberation for all is possible in Buddhism. It is further argued that spiritual transitions
are not about detaching people from society; instead, they raise our hands toward
suffering. The emancipation of people is possible from the notion of Self. So, our main
objective is to attain Nirvāṇa, ceasing our sufferings and mental agonies. A person who
attains Nirvāṇa can alleviate everyone else's suffering. Throughout her paper, the
author cited various Buddhist texts and showed us how Buddhism in different schools
is deeply engaged. The issue of engaged Buddhism was initially raised against the
Therāvāda Buddhists. However, the author argues that the theory of Therāvāda is
ontologically engaged. As far as Mahāyāna Buddhism is concerned, they are
practically engaged as they address issues like human rights, social justice,
environment, and many more. The author ends her paper with the view that Buddhism
is deeply engaged in conformity with humankind.
Within the sphere of modern globalization, consumerism reached its heyday. The web
of consumerism gives birth to materialism, individualism, subjectivism, and
anthropocentrism. All these are directed to the erosion of our traditional and cultural
values. Ankita Sharma, in her paper entitled Consumerism on the Rise and the
Significance of Indian Traditional Values: A Perspective for Change wants to
quash consumerism. Here, the author intends to bring about a change as she feels that
consumerism is a Western way of thought developed after the Industrial Revolution, in
which mechanized mass production developed, giving rise to the inhuman treatment of
workers. This problem did not originate in India because there were always
philosophies to guide. The author thus delves into the solution given in Indian
Philosophy. She delves into the Vedic values, such as Puruṡārtha, i.e. Dharma, Artha,
Kāma, and Moķṣa. Dharma is the guiding principle of Kāma and Artha. Consumption,
in the present-day understanding, has a transformative influence over the dynamic of
human life. It establishes patterns in inter-human relations and exerts influence over
the elements of lifestyle and social life, contributing to changes in modern social
dynamics. The author also explores the significance of traditional Indian values,
starting with the Veda-s, Upaniṣad-s Ṥāstra-s, Rāmāyaṇa, and Mahābhārata. Further,
she explores the Buddhist notion of impermanence and constant change and explains
the concept of Paṅċaṡila about consumerism. The ethics of Gitā seemed equally
relevant in annulling the web of modern consumerism. After that, she deals with the
contrasting views of Marx. At the end of her paper, she concludes that the materialistic
and individualistic web of modern consumerism can be reversed in a better way by
following Indian traditional values.
Humanism carries a lot in philosophy in general and ethics and religion in particular
while determining the meaning of life. However, we notice a constant revision of the outlook on humanism. As we move from the modern to the post-modern era, humanism
is transitioning to posthumanism. In her paper entitled (The) Mapping of
Posthumanism: A Philosophical Study Akoijam Thoibisana studies posthumanism
in tune with the studies of postmodernism, poststructuralism, and postcolonialism from
a historical perspective and philosophical thought. The paper traces the history of the
development of posthumanism in the works of several philosophers, like Heidegger,
Satre, Derrida, and others. It looks promising to become a detailed survey of the
postmodernist account of the understanding of 'Man'. The crux of the paper is mapping
the philosophy of posthumanism through the lens of deconstructing humanism in the
light of Heidegger's Humanism and the Concept of Being, Althusser's Theoretical Anti-
Humanism, and Lacan’s Psychoanalysis. The paper traces the idea of Man along with
their critiques and modifications. Thus, in a sense, it shows promise of a good analysis
of the history of posthumanism. The author subscribes at the end that Derrida's
deconstruction of humanism is not a repetition of humanism but a sure way to
deconstruct the anthropocentric thought of the same.
Being a rational and social animal, every man desires to lead a good life. However, the
very nature of the excellent life immensely varies across the board. Thus, the issue of
how to lead a good life has remained a central philosophical issue since antiquity. In
Deconstructing the Aristotelian Concept of Akrasia in Contemporary
Perspective Arun Garg explains the concept of a good life in the light of the
Aristotelian concept of Akrasia. The term Eudaimonia, used by Aristotle, stands for
happiness, the fundamental concept of life that theoretically determines the idea of a
good life. The paper states that to extract the highest form of good for human beings,
Aristotle delves deep into understanding the essence of being human, which occupies
a rational soul functioning according to virtue. Thus, Aristotle's virtue ethics can
answer the question of the good life. The term Akrasia, as used by Aristotle, means
weak-willed, which influences our reasoning and leads us away from the Good. It
invites motivational conflict between rational and irrational aspects of the soul. Before
Aristotle, Plato used the term Akrasia. In a dialogue, Socrates says that Akrasia is
impossible and that no one willingly goes towards bad. However, Plato believes in the
possibility of the same and attributes it to the victory of the irrational part of the soul.
Within the perspectival discrepancies, both argued that the assumption that reason
leads to ultimate Good is not challenged. The emphasis should be placed on the
application of reason rather than on understanding the causes of its breakdown. Akrasia
lies in the middle ground between virtue and vice, and it plays a vital role in ethical
reasoning. As reason is the highest virtue that may not be attainable for all, the old
definition of man as a rational animal needs modification. As a result, the emotional
aspect of man should find a place. Thus, to lead a good life, one needs other virtues.
Friendship, courage, and empathy will enrich a person's life. A person in his every step
finds Akrasia, a temptation to make a shortcut, a desire to take an easier option, a lure
of immediate gratification. However, there remains a hope that knowledge and reason
will strengthen an individual, and one can regain self-control and lead a good life.
Morality is the central issue deeply associated with humanism, human values, and the
well-being of all. Still, the question of why we should be moral has been relevant in
philosophy since antiquity. In Brahman as the Principle of Interconnectedness: The
Ground of the Ethical Teachings of the Upaniṣad-s Kheya Roy examines why we
should be moral with special reference to the Upaniṣadic ethics. Here, particular
emphasis has been laid on the practical aspect of some ethical codes of conduct
suggested by the Upanishads. Upaniṣadic ethics, the author argues, determines our
societal behaviour, having a tinge of teleological ethics. The paper promises that
Upaniṣadic ethics are usually associated with specific ideas of spirituality, and it was
even reflected in Swami Vivekananda’s remarks that the foundation of Upaniṣadic
ethics is love, unity, and sameness. Arguably, ethics that lead to unity are right, and
those that lead to division are wrong. A deontologist or a teleologist cannot offer a
profound answer to why we should be moral. Still, one can find a suitable answer to
the question in the Upaniṣadic doctrine of the oneness and unity of Ātman or Brahman.
It states that we are interconnected with each other. As Brahman is everywhere, He is
the highest of all things and is the Self in all. He is the essence of everything, the wool
of the whole universe, and is interconnected with all. So, we should be moral in
controlling and restraining ourselves; otherwise, we will eventually destroy ourselves.
At the end of her paper, the author has landed that the Upaniṣadic ethical theory of
interconnected answers to why we should be moral. The ground is not only spiritual; it
is equally scientific and practical as well. So, let us promise to be humble and practice
the Truth through our moral codes of conduct.
V. Sujata Raju, in her contribution entitled: The Concept of Pramā and Pramāṇa: An
Analysis in the Light of Pramāṇaśāstra enunciates the meaning, definition, and
nature of pramā-pramāṇa among the diverse schools of Indian philosophy. An
attempt is made to represent the nature, form, and method of valid knowledge enriched
with the commentaries sub-commentaries of sources/literature of epistemological
traditions in Indian philosophy (Pramāṇaśāstra). An overview of various issues,
views, and comparative exposition of any system of epistemology deals with the
following disputable questions: What is knowledge? What is valid knowledge? How
do we distinguish valid knowledge from invalid knowledge? What are the
instruments/means of arriving at valid knowledge? To this end, she attempts to
synthesize the divergent views of all the concerned schools of Indian epistemology.
At the end I express my heartfelt thanks to all contributors for their submissions to this
edition and also for their academic cooperation with the Editorial Team during the
production phrase. I also express my deep sense of gratitude to the entire Editorial
Team whose commitment and perseverance made this journal possible.
Further suggestions and opinions for the improvement of this journal in the coming
years is solicited.
With warm regards
Professor (Dr.) Kanti Lal Das
Head and Editor-in-Chief,
Department of Philosophy,
University of North Bengal