In Oslo last week, President Barack Obama ironically used his acceptance speech for the Nobel Peace Prize to deliver a lengthy defense of the "just war" theory and dismiss the idea that nonviolence is capable of addressing the world's most pressing problems. After quoting Martin Luther King Jr. and giving his respects to Gandhi - two figures that Obama has repeatedly called personal heroes - the new peace laureate argued that he "cannot be guided by their examples alone" in his role as a head of state.

Full Analysis...

A new BBC World Service global poll, surveying 29,033 adult citizens (living in major urban areas) across 27 countries (Australia, Brazil, Canada, Chile, China, Costa Rica, Czech Republic, Egypt, France, Germany, India, Indonesia, Italy, Japan, Kenya, Mexico, Nigeria, Pakistan, Panama, the Philippines, Poland, Russia, Spain, Turkey, Ukraine, the United Kingdom, and the United States of America), conducted between 19 June and 13 October 2009 by the international polling firm GlobeScan, together with the Program on International Policy Attitudes (PIPA) at the University of Maryland finds that dissatisfaction with free market capitalism is widespread, with an average of only 11% saying that it works well and that greater regulation is not a good idea. That is, eight in nine people believe that free market capitalism is bad; it has failed and is not working for them any more. So overwhelming is the verdict against capitalism that no statistical magic or jugglery can put a dent to the conclusion drawn from the study.

Full Article...

Most of the current institutions of global governance are forums for governments - through their appointed representatives - not forums for elected representatives of the people. The decisions made by governments are not necessarily the same as those that would be made by their people. A World Parliament would speak for the peoples of the world, not the governments of the world.

Read Here...

There is a rising tide of opposition around the world to America's unilateral assertion of its national interests. But few realize that for the United States to become a more responsible country, the world economy needs to move from the current U.S. dollar standard to a global currency.

Full article...

The Maldives Islands in the Indian Ocean could disappear by the end of the century. Global warming threatens to raise sea levels, submerging the low-lying archipelago. Newly-elected President Mohamed Nasheed has therefore set himself the task of holding back the tide of climate change.

Full Article...

It is obvious, even to the most Prozaced-out individual, that today's global crises impacting the environment, health, economics and social stability are threatening the survival of human civilization. Suddenly, the old cartoon of some bearded weirdo carrying a placard reading, "The World is Ending!" doesn't seem that funny. Media and government continuously focus our attention on the darkness of impending crises, however, recent advances in physics and biology offer a significantly different and amazingly hopeful alternative for these very same symptoms.

Click Here...

[Click below "Read More" to reach the FT article.]

The best way to give the poor a real voice is through a world parliament...

Full article...

Thomas Crowley is a professor of geosciences at the University of Edinburgh and has previously taught evolution in a US university with many fundamentalist students
thomas.crowley@ed.ac.uk

Click here to read the article..

John Bellamy Foster is editor of US socialist publication Monthly Review,professor of sociology at the University of Oregon and author of a number of books including Marx's Ecology. This is an abridged interview with him on the economic crisis republished from WIN magazine, the journal of the US-based War Resisters League.

Full Interview...

There are valuable lessons to be learned from the failure of the neo-liberal economic model.

Full Article...

Unlike dramatic religious conversions, Antony Flew's change of heart seems based on sober assessment of science's advance over his lifetime. As he puts it, his is "a pilgrimage of reason and not of faith." "This is the world picture, as I see it, that has emerged from modern science."

Read More...

Instead of worshipping the invisible, and usually remote, hand of the market economy (which too often can be caught picking the pockets of the poor), you design an economic system in which resources flow and circulate effectively to serve the invisible heart of the core economy - made up of family, neighbourhood, community and civil society.

Full Article...

Developing the welfare of animals is another ``moral evolution'' we humans urgently need to take....

Click here for the Article...

[Comment: Anthony Flew was a world-class atheist philosopher, with whom I had many "conversations" (via his books) when I was doing my D. Phil. at Oxford on the relation between science and theology, 1961-64. I remember him as one of the clearest writers on various issues, and often more helpful than many Christian writers. He wrote clearly, gracefully, and honestly. The history of the relation between Flew and his interviewer, Gary Habermas, is a classic example of why we should befriend and respect those with whom we disagree, not berate, insult, demean, or ignore them.]

First read the introduction & then...Read the Interview...

The integral philosopher explains the difference between religion, New Age fads and the ultimate reality that traditional science can't touch..

A remarkable autodidact, Wilber's books range across entire fields of knowledge, from quantum physics to developmental psychology to the history of religion. He's steeped in the world's esoteric traditions, such as Mahayana Buddhism, Vedantic Hinduism, Sufism and Christian mysticism. Wilber also practices what he preaches, sometimes meditating for hours at a stretch. His "integral philosophy," along with the Integral Institute he's founded, hold out the promise that we can understand mystical experience without lapsing into New Age mush.

Though he's often described as a New Age thinker, Wilber ridicules the notion that our minds can shape physical reality, and he's dismissive of New Age books and films like "The Tao of Physics" and "What the Bleep Do We Know." But he's also out to show that "trans-rational" states of consciousness are real, and he's dubbed the scientific materialists who doubt it "flatlanders."

Read More...

Based on a talk given by Ajahn Brahmavamso to lay people at the Dhammaloka Buddhist Centre, Nollamara, Western Australia, on 19^th of October 2001....

Click here...

Until our final moment of liberation we live in the realms of our senses and mind. The Vedas proclaim that one of the instincts inherent in our nature is to seek "beauty and comforts" or kaam. To deny that instinct given to us by our creator would be to go against the idea of creation itself. Yes, religion preaches against excesses but not against the joy of life.

There is definitely a God, so let's stop worrying and enjoy our life!

Full Article..

Why are we here on earth? To Richard Dawkins, that's a remarkably stupid question. In a heated interview, the famous biologist insists that religion is evil and God might as well be a children's fantasy.

Read More...

To generate the type of love and compassion that motivates you to seek buddhahood, not for yourself but for the sake of others, first you must confront suffering by identifying its types. This is the first noble truth. From the time we are born to the time we die we suffer mental and physical pain, the suffering of change, and pervasive suffering of uncontrolled conditioning. The second and third noble truths lead us to understand the causes of suffering and whether or not those causes can be removed. The fundamental cause of suffering is ignorance; the mistaken apprehension that living beings and objects inherently exist.

Read More...

When one compares Jesus with the other great religious leaders, a remarkable distinction emerges. Ravi Zacharias, who grew up in a Hindu culture, has studied world religions and observed a fundamental distinction between other religious founders and Jesus Christ.

"Whatever we may make of their claims, one reality is inescapable. They are teachers who point to their teaching or show some particular way. In all of these, there emerges an instruction, a way of living. It is not Zoroaster to whom you turn; it is Zoroaster to whom you listen. It is not Buddha who delivers you; it is his Noble Truths that instruct you. It is not Mohammad who transforms you; it is the beauty of the Koran that woos you. By contrast, Jesus did not only teach or expound His message. He was identical with His message."⁴

The truth of Zacharias's point is underscored by the number of times in the Gospels that Jesus' teaching message was simply "Come to me" or "Follow me" or "Obey me." Also, Jesus made it clear that his primary mission was to forgive sins, something only God could do.

Read More...

Religious plurality in this world is willed by God, as is stated in the Qur'an. It equates the unlawful killing of a person (Muslim or non-Muslim) with the killing of all of humanity. The Qur'an also clearly calls for reconciliation during times of conflict. Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) extended the greeting of peace to all without distinction, his actions serving as an example to Muslims.

Read More...

Contrary to popular understanding, Hindus recognise one God, Brahman, the eternal origin who is the cause and foundation of all existence. The gods of the Hindu faith represent different expressions of Brahman. Different Hindu communities may have their own divinities whom they worship, but these are simply different ways of approaching the Ultimate. [Ed's comment: Is there a Supreme Intelligence as the facilitator of an infinite cycle of universal phenomena designed for a purpose? The Hindu epic Bhagawadgita says: 'Yes']

Read More...

The beauties of religion need to be saved from both the true believers and the trendy atheists, argues compelling religious scholar James Carse.

Full Interview...

The world's chief exponent of the theory that tells life began in deep space and reached earth riding on comets said the philosophical backdrop for his theory was provided by Buddhism.Prof. Chandra Wickramasinghe: "I owe deep debt of gratitude of Elmore Bruin at Royal College, and to C. J. Eliezer and Douglas Amarasekera who were my teachers at the University of Ceylon.""In the 1970s it was generally believed that the Earth must be the centre of life in the whole universe, an antithesis of Buddhist cosmology of course," said the Cardiff University Mathematician and Astronomer Professor Chandra Wickramasinghe in an interview with this writer.

Click here to read the interview (Asian Tribune)

Jamie Drummond lobbies the richest people on the planet on behalf of the poorest. Tim Adams meets the man with a direct line to the world's most powerful leaders.

Read More...

Of course they can, argues physicist and theologian Karl Giberson, if only many believers were more sophisticated and atheists less dogmatic.

Read More...

May 3, 2008 | LIVINGSTON, Mont. -- Somewhere on his 9,500-acre ranch in Montana's Paradise Valley, maybe as he watched the sun-dazzled Yellowstone River slide by the 12,000-foot Absaroka Mountains, Wall Street tycoon and self-described conservationist Wade Dokken must have had a vision: He would create a new kind of luxury community in the heart of the American West. Different from the typical recreation-based developments, utopian in concept, his Ameya Preserve would be a place of unsurpassed beauty, where bright and uncommonly well-heeled people could, however briefly, take their ease in a community implementing the kind of cutting-edge technology that could one day save the planet.

Read More...

An amazing array of scientists are bewildered by the design of the universe and admit a possibility of a designer.

According to growing numbers of scientists, the laws and constants of nature are so "finely-tuned," and so many "coincidences" have occurred to allow for the possibility of life, the universe must have come into existence through intentional planning and intelligence.

Read More...

A British philosophy professor who has been a leading champion of atheism for more than a half-century has changed his mind. He now believes in God more or less based on scientific evidence, and says so on a video released Thursday.

Read More...

At the basis of the theory of neo-Darwinian evolution lie two basic assumptions: that changes in morphologies are induced by random mutations on the genome, and that these changes in the morphology of plant or animal make the life form either more or less successful in the competition to survive. With nature doing the selection, evolutionists claim to remove the theory of evolution from that of a random process. We are told that the selection is in no way random. It is a function of the environment. The randomness, however, remains as the basic driving force that produces the varied mutations from among which the selection by survival takes place.

Read More...

Foreign correspondent and intellectual provocateur Chris Hedges explains why New Atheists like Christopher Hitchens are as dangerous as Christian fundamentalists.

Read More...

Vasantha Raja's Comment: Notwithstanding Prof. Silva's claims to the contrary, his epistemology seems to me to be thoroughly influenced by western empiricist philosophy. Along with many Western philosophers, he thinks that there's no way humans can go beyond what is directly given to our senses, and thus, what we call 'knowledge' is some how built through non-epistemological factors. He fails to appreciate the way knowledge evolves via practice & abstraction. A tailor's mathematical diagram of a customer's shape/size, for instance, is an abstraction. But that abstract model is far more important than thousands of customer's photos taken from different angles which are relative. The abstract measurements are expressed in symobols which are meaningful to the tailor who has the relevant concepts. In other words, mathematical & linguistic symbols are a guide to action - to make a suit for the customer, in this case.

The point is: Evolving knowledge through practice & abstractions does penetrate (go beyond) the sense-data barrier to gain objective kowledge. Thus, knowledge is expressed as abilities to deal with mathematical/linguistic symbols as a guide to practically deal with the external world. This means theory & practice are inseprable: they are in unity & conflict with each other. That's how knowledge develops.

Contrary to his views on the "manifested" reality our universe is not an illusion; It is an objectively evolving process. The DNA that produced Prof. Silva, for instance, had an objective meaning, an objective purpose, of producing him; in a rudimentary sense, Silva was existing in his embryonic egg - just as a lemon-seed would have the objective purpose of producing a unique lemon tree; that tree is somehow embedded in the seed as a potential.

In the same sense the evolving universe could also have an objective purpose. Nothing in the universe comes as finished products. Everything has a seed-like biginning, evolving towards a product, and then decays and dies - except one that may not die: mind-energy (the subjective-side of evolving energy). Where that is heading is the big mystery.

As the Anthropic Principle demonstrates, all processes in the universe since the Big Bang may be essentially interconnected to produce and evolve consciousness & intelligence; not just on Earth but in the universe as a whole. The universe may be a production-line, a school. [Note that the concept of progress is crucial here; not just 'change', but progress. 'Progress' does not necessarily imply 'good', for value judgements arise and evolve only in relation to the evolving mind-energy.]

Buddhism, I think, should not merely point at 'change' (anicca) and ignore 'progress'. For instance, a Bodhisathwa's (Saint's) journey in samsara is a conscious effort to improve, evolve & develop the mind. Thus, an evolving mind has to pass from birth to birth, perhaps in the form of a "spiritual DNA". Otherwise the concept of "improvement" becomes meaningless.

At least one thing is getting increasingly clear: There seems to be an objective purpose to our evolving universe. Systematic evolution of the Mind-energy towards a specific end could well be that purpose. Thus, the essence of all religions may make more sense than many think. They may be much more than just a "sigh of the oppressed" as Marx thought.

Perhaps, energy-fields at their lowest seed-like level at the Big Bang were put on a causally determined space-time straitjacket precisely to self-evolve energy into individual, enlightened 'souls' that can liberate and transcend causally determined existence. [I'm just speculating here on the basis of the dialectically interactive contradictory features embedded in the evolving universe.]

In fact, recent experiments have demonstrated that 'energy-forms' of primitive stages might not be subject to the "speed of light barrier". Does this mean 'primitive energy' is free from space-time limitations? perhaps, it does. Dialectically evolving universe in a "seed-product" model may well be primitive energy's struggle to return to the original state on a higher level: conscious, intelligent, compassionate souls free of all space-time limitations (enlightenment). If becoming conscious of mind-energy's potential & the emergence of the will to make the deliberate effort to achieve enlightenment are part of the process, then the causal determination of the final outcome is not the product of fatalism; for, it preserves freedom of the will.

The Anthropic principle, along with the eventual solution to 'quantum/relativity dilemma', may mark a turning point in science that would boldly step into hitherto untreaded territory, and look for an authentic "theory of everything" that includes life, consciousness and society too.

Seeing the Big Bang as the birth of our universe's "DNA" with the potential to evolve all the subsequent developments will, I believe, help scientists overcome the ongoing quantum mysteries. Also, this approach will, I think, help overcome the seemingly unbridgeable abyss between the micro-world (quantum mechanics) & macro-world (relativity theory). The macro-world seems to be an organically higher stage in the evolution of our universe. The seed-like quantum states seem to be impregnated with the potential to do the 'leap' into 'particle-form' under appropriate circumstances.

The contemporary empiricist effort to reduce the commonsense 'reality' to subatomic 'reality' appears to be the culprit that misleads. The macro-world appears to have absorbed or assimilated the micro-world in an organic sense. It is not a mechnical extention of the quantum phenomenon; the macroworld is not reducible to the microworld because they are incommensurable.

The empiricists' "simple-to complex random evolution" approach also appears to be part of the problem. It, in my view, should be set aside as a methodological (conceptual) error, and replaced with a 'seed-product' model.

Scientists' real task, in my view, should be to explain the objective purpose of our self-evolving universe. What is it trying to produce...where is it heading? That should be the central question. Remember, discovering the purpose takes the form of revealing mind-energy's potential to liberate from all causality to reach freedom from space-time existence.

To conclude: One cannot really grasp the past & the present without having some sense of the end product. And, 'seeing the end-product as a real potential' becomes a determining factor in the process. Thus, before reflecting on Prof. Silva's "Unmanifested' reality we must properly understand the meaning of our 'manifested' reality. Perhaps science has already begun to turn in that direction.

Although Prof. Silva doesn't go into the methodological points I've raised, I invite readers to thoroughly grasp the epistemological & ontological points I have mentioned and click here to read Prof. Silva's article...

Vasantha Raja's Comment: Prof. Silva denies the objectivity of concepts (knowledge). Curiously, contrary to his anti-western credentials, in his Sinhala book Magay Lokaya (My World) he uses widely known (western) "sense-data arguments" to justify his case. My own conviction is that knowledge of the external world is an evolving phenomenon, in the sense children's knowledge develops through practical dealings with the surrounding world. This is an objective process independent of cultural factors. In sciences, unlike in commonsense activity, there's a conscious effort to organize concepts consistently to be tested against the objective world. Thus, the limited nature of theorie are constantly being exposed paving the way to enrich, expand or even radically transform them into new theories. This does not, however, mean all of the previous concepts are totally false. They have only been partly false.

[Remember the ancient Indian parable of "six blind men and the elephant": The one who touched elephant's broad & sturdy side thought the animal must resemble a wall; The one who got hold of the trunk thought the elephant looked like a snake; and the one aho felt a leg said it must be like a tree without branches, and so on. The point is: each observation was partly correct. But there are ways to correct their mistakes and reaching increasingly all-sided concepts of the elephant's real shape.]

Note that the progressing picture is not the sum total of partial pictures added in a formal way; in other words, the new picture is not reducible to old pictures; they are incommensurable. As the new conceptual networks incorporate the old concepts the latter undergo change (a leap) in terms of the developed ones. Thus the old concepts become part of the new setup and are redefined in terms of the new framework.

The same epistemological observations can be applied to the way science develops too. Newtonian conceptual network, for instance, reflected the commonsense world outlook where bodies mechanically interact within absolute time and absolute space as separate categories. But as scientists confront new phenomena that move in breakneck speeds the limitations of the Newtonian picture - the commonsense worldview - began to crumble. A new world outlook (Einstein's theory of relativity) emerged where time-space and speed are inseparably intertwined. The commonsense outlook was subsumed within the new framework, and the Newtonian concepts' validity was restricted to areas where the impact of movement (speed) is negligible.

The next big challenge to the evolving scientific worldview emerged when scientists confronted the quantum world of microscopic phenomena: quantum mechanics. Here the scientists are dealing with the embryonic stage (the 'DNA') of the universe as opposed to the highly evolved stage that is reflected in the theory of relativity;the latter stage is only embedded in the former as a potential to produce the latter. Hence, both quantum mechanics and theory of relativity are incredibly successful in their own arenas, albeit, the scientists are presently facing grave difficulties in unifying the two. However, I believe, the ongoing dilemmas will help the scientists to improve their own prejudices as to the 'real shape of the elephant' (The universe)! For, the universe seems to resemble a "seed-to-product' model rather than a 'simple-to-complex' model. In other words, the Big Bang seems to have given birth to a DNA-like state that contained all the subsequent stages in the universe's evolution to be brought into being through quantitative changes and qualitative leaps. Thus, I believe, the ongoing efforts to somehow reduce relativity to quantum mechanics is a step in the wrong direction. However, this is not the place to go into all this. Let us return to Silva's denial of objective validity to concepts.

As I've explained, the progressive development of concepts is demonstrated in our growing ability to deal with the world. Concentrating merely on the symbolic aspect of knowledge (both language & mathematics) is bound to mislead. Symbols are there to become meaningful to conscious actors who use them as a guide to deal with the objective world. For example, a tailor who wants to make a suit for Prof. Silva would want to have an abstract (mathematical) diagram of his body. That will guide him to make a suit that fits him. Silva's real shape never appears before the tailor as sense data; for appearing shapes can only have a symbolic value in guiding him towards the real shape. That's why the abstract diagram is far more useful to the tailor than thousands of Silva's photographs taken from different angles and distances. Thus, mathematical & linguistic signs become meaningful symbols to the person possessing the relevant concepts, so that he can act. Same point applies to immediately given sense-data too. They also have a symbolic value to represent a reality that exists.

On this basis, I want to argue against the belief that all knowledge-claims about the external world have no objective validity.

Humans' practical abilities to change the world - building bridges, vehicles, houses, rockets, planes, semiconductors, medical scanners and so on & so forth- prove the objectivity of concepts. Man-made products, artistic creations (man-made changes in nature) are objective manifestations of the subjective consciousness; for, those forms, obviously, first emerged in subjective minds before becoming part of the objective reality. They are the proof of the inseparable unity between the subject and the object.

[Kant was wrong to create an unbridgeable gap between the subjective side of consciousness and the external reality. His dualism failed to grasp Mind's unbreakable link (practice) with the objective world. Ironically, it was Kant's agnosticism that provided the epistemological framework for the main pillars of contemporary western philosophy: Logical Positivism, Linguistic Analysis, Existentialism, Postmodernism etc. In theology, Kant's influence took the form of heavy dependence on 'blind faith' to justify a transcendent reality. Although all such schools of thought immensely contributed to new insights in many fields they lacked a scientific theory of knowledge to justify the objectivity of knowledge. Philosophical insights of Hegel, Marx et al countering Kantian agnosticism - with profound revolutionary implications against the social status quo - were systematically ignored within mainstream philosophy.]

Growth of practical abilities is the objective criterion of developing knowledge. Objectivity of knowledge is not a scholastic issue, but a practical issue, as Marx correctly pointed out. It's important to realise that mind itself is a highly developed form of energy and is an active force with a subjective side to it. Its ability to transform reality is the proof of its conceptual objectivity.

Without quantum mechanics semiconductors, communication gadgets, MRI machines in hospitals etc., - are unthinkable. Same applies to the theory of relativity too.Its concepts are crucial, for instance, to all space travel. Newtonian theories are not adequate for such activity, though they are applicable to aspects of reality. Although the concepts within Newtonian physics & relativity are "incommensurable", both contain corresponding "practical abilities" that demonstrate why the latter is higher than the former.

Yes, it is true, theories (concepts) are changing (rather, evolving) & the reality is also changing (rather evolving). But this only means that knowledge can only be an approximation. It, however, does not mean that there is no objective way of differentiating between sound knowledge and speculative fantasies. [A tailor would need to know the objective shape & size of Prof. Silva to make a suit for him. Otherwise, the suit wouldn't fit. Also, Prof. Silva would need objective concepts, for instance, to cross a road safely or drive his car.] If all concepts are arbitrary creations of mind then all 'knowledge-claims' become epistemologically equal. Then visiting a doctor when Silva is ill or seeing a motor mechanic to fix his car etc., become meaningless. Thus, I think, Silva's line of reasoning leads to scepticism and "My World"-type solipsism. Prof. Paul Feyerabend also has been an ardent opponent of 'objective knowledge' who finally branded himself as an "epistemological anarchist" proudly using his catchy slogan, "anything goes". He described his approach: "epistemological anarchism". Thus,his unguarded enthusiasm for free, creative thinking has made him throw the baby out with the bathwater and open the door for total scepticism. Sadly, Prof. Silva seems to have got stuck in a similar trap.

I urge readers to closely follow Silva's arguments with above mentioned points in mind. I shall publish an elaborate critique of Silva's philosophical outlook soon.

Click Here to read his article...

Editor's Note: Here is an article written in1909 by Anton Pannekoek: A comparison of Darwinism & Marxism. Although it is good in many ways, I think, it misses an important point: that orthodox Maxists see Dialectics as the logic of evolution in general - society, species and nature; in short, the universe as a whole. Even though Darwin's groundbreaking contribution to science marked a crucial paradigm-shift, Marxists should demonstrate how Darwin's ignorance of the dialectical method is resposible for his "abstract concept of gradualist & random evolution" that falls short of explaining the self-evolving processes through quantitative changes and qualitative leaps. Pannekoek's article, however, seems to limit dialectics only to the self-evolution of society.

Click Here...

NEARLY twenty centuries ago Jesus Christ, the Founder of Christianity, set forth a revolutionary doctrine that has since created much interest in the world. Here was a religious teacher who did not emphasize any prescribed ritual or develop any new system of philosophical logic. His teaching stressed something which enjoyed no previous popular exposition, though interwoven in the obscure prophecies of the Old Testament: the kingdom of God and the kingdom of Heaven. [Ed's comment: Will humanity eventually produce a global society of justice, equality, cooperation & love? According to the ancient visionaries of the middle-east the answer is 'yes'.]

Read More...