OSHO on WISDOM and PHILOSOPHY

Philosophy, the very word, means love for wisdom, and they have nothing to do with wisdom at all.Wisdom happens only through meditation; it never happens by collecting information. It happens by going through a transformation. Wisdom is the flowering of your consciousness, the opening of the one-thousand-petaled lotus of your being. It is the release of your fragrance, the release of the imprisoned splendor.Real philosophy has nothing to do with thinking; on the contrary it has everything to do with transcending thinking, going beyond and beyond thinking, going beyond mind, reaching to the pure space of no-mind. Out of that space something flowers in you. You can call it Christ-consciousness, Buddhahood, or whatsoever you like. That is true philosophy.

How Populism Works ?

I'm reminded of the well-known satirical novel by Robert Escarpit – The Literatron. I haven't read the novel but just a summary of its review is reproduced from eurozine article. It explains in subtle about how populism works....

I'm reminded of the well-known satirical novel by Robert Escarpit – The Literatron. The Literatron is more or less a machine for creating texts similar to a computer. The idea of its creators was to generate the perfect novel based on the best images from world literature. In response to the highest of expectations, the machine produced a bestseller – Virgin and Typesetter! When the Literatron was asked to compose a political speech the outcome was even more scandalous. After processing the entire history of political rhetoric the machine spewed out a series of gaffs such as: "This politics thing the more it changes the more it stays the same... There are no two ways about it, the clever people are the most stupid of all... All you have to do is hang a few of them (politicians) and things will improve...". This line of thought fits perfectly with an eloquent phrase from the Bulgarian transition, wrought by another merciless critic of his time, the Bulgarian satirist Aleko Konstantinov: "They are all rogues, on both sides!" The speech generated by the literatron was welcomed with raptures by the electorate and the politician whose job it was to make it quickly became a star. Every attempt to deviate from the absurd scenario led to vigorous disapproval.

I can't remember what happened to the literatron, whether it was destroyed as a malicious invention or if it destroyed itself. What was more important was the principles on which the machine operated. Its aim was universality and in the process it purged all nuances, simplified the meaning and looked for an arithmetical mean. The aim was for the text to reach the widest possible audience. The greatest irony was that a message meant for all was in practice a message for no one. This undermined its purpose, since it would have left its audience completely indifferent. The literatron is clearly a metaphor for populism as a leading principle of the political machine. However, populism works. If it didn't, politicians wouldn't resort to it so often.

The story is over dudes..

End of an Argument. How ?

Agrippa's Trilemma :The trilemma is a breakdown of all possible proofs for a theory into three general types:

* The circular argument, in which theory and proof support each other.
* The regressive argument, in which each proof requires a further proof.
* The axiomatic argument, which rests on accepted precepts.

This Trilemma is just for giving you an idea about types of arguments and little bit of creating impression about me (:P).

We came across several heated debates on the online community, forums and blogs about any topic. In a typical argument, each person tries to prove themselves right and the other person wrong. Instead of synthesis or refining of ideas, our focus shifts to stick to our owns idea as prime and supreme one. In the end, each person only ends up either more entrenched in their views or influenced by dominant juggling of words, regardless of who seems to deliver the most rational argument. Arguments are done for the sake of progress than victory. An argument can't be won by resistance. It will only increase the stubbornness of others and a little communication of importance will be achieved. Trying to prove yourself right and the other person wrong is like making a frontal assault on an entrenched enemy position. The goal of your argument is attempting to raise the other person’s awareness while maintaining your own sense of inner peace and identity with the idea.

I wanted to know why so brilliant individuals can't agree on a small point for evolving into next level of discussion. Its major reason which I can catch was that our education system fosters competitive excellence rather than intellectual curiosity or cooperation . Also, I want to know how to conclude these arguments as per seen similar situations in much popular fish market like Group discussions (GD). Any suggestions ??????????????

For good reading purpose,

1- Tagore and his India --- Amartya Sen.

2- Leszek Kołakowski (1927- 2009)

3- Who killed the Indian University ?

4- An interview with Fatima Bhutto.

5- Recession: How Risk Models Failed Wall St. and Washington?

A Crazy Post !@#$

Image is of Madman painted by Theodore Gericault. Now the preview of this writeup should be cleared to you.

"Logic is deduction, not description. Understanding is secondary; the reasoning is the thing. In Logic and Mathematics, we do not understand things . . . we reason and deduce."
--- Quoted from the movie :The Enigma of Kaspar Hauser.

This slightly amended dialogue from the movie set the mood of this post. I haven't seen the movie but read this punch line on pfc. Suddenly, I wanted to compile some hotch potch about wisdom, knowledge and information.
Starting with poetry.....

Where is the Life we have lost in living?
Where is the wisdom we have lost in knowledge?
Where is the knowledge we have lost in information?
-T.S. Eliot

And then progressing with a quote...

Knowledge comes by taking things apart:analysis. But wisdom comes by putting things together.--John A. Morrison

On reading about genius people on nimmy's blog, my heart propelled me to put my crazy idea into words. I choose very arbitrary topic: Knowledge Management. I have put a paragraph here of my crazy idea about KM....

"Reducing carbon emissions of corporates is vital to green IT, a task that recession-induced cost cutting has indirectly fulfilled. I found new mantra for information usage in the era of green IT. Reduce, reuse and recycle the information. Information pollution is term coined by me only in this age of knowledge economy. Knowledge management people should have used this mantra, Its free and open source. Thesis of green IT, Antithesis of Information network and prosthesis for KM guys."

See, I have no clue what I had written here in chaos. I think it is there to confuse people involved in KM field. If you are smart then figure the meaning yourself...

I am going Insane or mad with each day, now you decide....
I am off.