Diese Präsentation wurde erfolgreich gemeldet.
Die SlideShare-Präsentation wird heruntergeladen. ×

Natural World Order & The Islamic Thought

Never in the human history world required true
philanthropists and philosophers as the world requires
Human beings, whether created or evolved, which
would be thoroughly discussed in this endeavor, is born and
lives for some...
philosophy is not a pre-requisite to understand the message
of this endeavor. However the knowledge of philosophy,
Nächste SlideShare
Economics And The Complexity
Economics And The Complexity
Wird geladen in …3

Hier ansehen

1 von 301 Anzeige

Weitere Verwandte Inhalte

Diashows für Sie (20)

Ähnlich wie Natural World Order & The Islamic Thought (20)


Aktuellste (20)


Natural World Order & The Islamic Thought

  1. 1. P R E F A C E Never in the human history world required true philanthropists and philosophers as the world requires presently. From Socrates up to about eighteenth century philosophy, science, arts and all social sciences were studied together and a very well defined correlation existed between all these fields so as to understand the universe and every living and non-living thing which exists therein. Considerable progress was made in all fields of study and some pioneering work was done in political science especially by Plato and Aristotle. During last two centuries philosophy and different fields of study got divorced and studies became highly specialized and compartmentalized for the researcher or the group of researchers. Whatever be the purpose of study and research of the individuals, the fact remains that everybody has contributed to the human knowledge and understanding. Resultantly a sea of knowledge and information is available to us for finally to understand the universe and the human beings. Philosophers are required now, though late, who could put together and analyze all the relevant knowledge and information to understand the purpose of all creation. Human beings have to be primary concern of all the studies and the task of all studies is almost accomplished if we understand what the human being is and what could be the purpose of human being on this planet and how to fulfill that purpose. 1
  2. 2. Human beings, whether created or evolved, which would be thoroughly discussed in this endeavor, is born and lives for some period of time and finally dies. Every study, scientific or otherwise, agrees that the death of the physical body of the human being is inevitable and in no case death could be overcome. Apparently the purpose of every human individual is to live on this planet for some time. It should be sole purpose of the life of the true philanthropists and the philosopher to work out the ways and means to fulfill this apparent purpose of human beings in the most comfortable, fulfilling and just manner so that there is no injustice, confusion, confrontation, exploitation, corruption and bloodshed on this planet. Philosophy has to be revived to use the sea of information and knowledge available to us so as to accomplish the task of fulfilling this apparent purpose of human life because it is only through philosophy all the information and knowledge could be analyzed and processed so as to understand human beings and the universe. The information and knowledge has been utilized in this endeavor to revive the philosophy in order to understand the human being and the universe and efforts have been made to know the ways and means by which humans could live on this planet peacefully without injustice, confusion, confrontation, exploitation, corruption and bloodshed. After Kant (1724-1804) almost no philosopher has paid due attention to this field of study in a positive sense by utilizing the present day knowledge and information. The endeavor is written in such a manner that the knowledge of 2
  3. 3. philosophy is not a pre-requisite to understand the message of this endeavor. However the knowledge of philosophy, physics and political philosophy will be of great help in understanding this work in true perspective. Besides the reader need not be highly qualified person to understand this endeavor but anybody of the level of under graduate education could easily do so. The individual human being and the collective social structure is the primary concern of this endeavor. Since the studies and research was compartmentalized in narrow fields of study and the researchers confined to these narrow fields of study, none of philosophers attempted to utilize the relevant scientific and other knowledge and information to derive the exact nature and purpose of human life and a social structure required for peaceful existence on this planet. There had been great philosophers in the past from Socrates to Kant, but due to lack of scientific evidence and verification of their knowledge, their philosophies remained as ideas and no one has tried to apply scientific information to test and verify the knowledge they gave to the world especially during the last two centuries. This is high time, though late, to reveal and to make all human beings to realize that this is what you are, this is what your purpose is, this is what you are supposed to do and this is how it could be done at the individual level as well as at the collective level. All human beings at one time or the other have been misled, exploited, confused, corrupted, massacred and terrorized by a few for one reason or the other. A state of 3
  4. 4. total confusion is prevailing and human beings are simply reduced to animals who strive for their survival and materialism. Religious corruptions prevail in almost all religions as the result of which religions are reduced to the doctrines of illogical beliefs which cumulatively adds to the state of confusion. Basic and fundamental concepts require to be clarified so that there is no confusion and exploitation. The individual life and collective social structure are closely interdependent and change in one cannot lead to the change in the other. At both levels a simultaneous change is required and this endeavor is precisely meant to effect the change. One might feel that this endeavor reveals some miraculous findings or some highly complicated and technical matters, beyond the comprehension and understanding of the common human being, through which the change is contemplated but this endeavor discusses & uses simple, basic, fundamental and understandable axioms so as to realize the importance of the change in the individual life and the collective social structure and by using simple, basic, fundamental axioms this endeavor works out the alternative world order. At the individual level people especially educated and even the uneducated but intelligent people find the religious beliefs as illogical doctrines which they do not dare to challenge. What they understand about religion they find it neither applicable nor practicable in the world. There is confusion as the result of which they simply hold their faith and belief without any conviction. They do not feel any desire to ponder on their faith & belief and nor take up in 4
  5. 5. depth study of their faith & belief. Those who take the faith and belief seriously and take up in depth study of their faith & belief find certain fundamental facts of the faith & belief illogical and irrational and their confusion cumulatively increases. When they turn to the religions scholars and preachers for the answer the reply is not at all convincing and in some cases the reply is that for faith and belief the rationality and logic does not apply. There are serious fundamental problems with the present world order but it has to its credit the progress in education of all sections of society. No educated individual will accept, with total conviction, the faith and belief systems which are not based on rationality and logic. It cannot be denied that a small percentage of people in orthodox societies keep faith & belief with total conviction without going deep into the philosophical defects in their faith and belief. But in those societies also educated and intelligent people keep their doubts and confusion with them and no one dares to come out with the problems with their faith & belief. These confusions about the faith & belief systems are one of the basic factors for the evolution of the present agnostic world order. Charles Darwin was a genius of his time and keen study of his life history would reveal that he initially intended to associate with the church and because of the fundamental defects in his faith and belief system he turned into an atheist and proposed Darwin’s Theory which being a great instrument for evolution of the present agnostic world order. This endeavor attempts to put a final nail in the coffin of the Darwin’s Theory. 5
  6. 6. Every individual in the world, irrespective of their faith, is convinced that the social structure which is evolving because of the present world order is bad and with time it is getting from bad to worst. Every individual is also convinced that the world order and the social structure would require a change. But every individual, though convinced, is apprehensive above the alternative world order and secondly realizing the dimensions of the efforts required to change the world order; every individual acts as a mute spectator of whatever is happening in the world. The advocates of the present world order have made it clear to the world that it would be absolutely futile to even to think of any alternative world order especially the world order based on faith. Any efforts of changing the world order, even on a small scale or localized level is being suppressed with ruthless force. People at large, irrespective of their faith and even the atheists, have to realize that there has to be a world order and a social structure which could be practicable, acceptable and applicable to the whole world. Every philanthropist, philosopher, thinker, intellectual and true leader should not leave any stone unturned to identify and devise a new world order which could be practicable, acceptable, compatible and applicable to the whole world so that there is no injustice, confusion, confrontation, exploitation, corruption and bloodshed in the world. This is high time to accomplish this task and it will be greatest service to the humankind and the generations to follow. The present world order is basically agnostic and the social structure which has evolved encourages the agnostic 6
  7. 7. values. Though at the personal level one is free to practice any faith but has no power to interfere in the evolution of the agnostic social structure. Nobody can deny that the present scientific and technological advancement, abolition of slavery and progress in education of all sections of societies has taken place during the present world order. But that does not mean that with some other world order these achievements could not have been possible. The civilizations would not have survived if world order had not allowed these achievements. Unfortunately the present world order has failed in every other sphere of activity of the humankind; the most important aspect of human life which has badly suffered because of the present world order is faith. The present agnostic world order is responsible for moral degradation of the human beings to an extent that it will be a herculean task to repair the damage. The family structure has almost collapsed all over; the collapse is almost complete in the developed countries whereas in the under- developed countries the degree of collapse is lower. The moral and human values are at the verge of annihilation. The present agnostic world order encourages the adoption of materialism as the true religion, where anything other than materialism is not of any importance. Every sort of corruption, exploitation, confrontation, injustice, bloodshed is the order of the day in the present world order. This endeavor undertakes the task of understanding the human being scientifically, philosophically and psychologically so as to work out the most suitable and practicable ways and means of living a satisfying and 7
  8. 8. peaceful life at the individual as well as at the collective level. A new method has been conceived for this purpose. Available scientific, philosophical and psychological knowledge and information shall be analyzed and discussed in great details to derive the basic tenets of the religion and the world order. This study could be applied to the different religions so as to identify the corruption in the religions and the present world order, so as to rectify the corruptions in the religions, which exists in almost all the religions and on the basis of this study the possible and practicable world order would be derived so that human beings could live peacefully individually and collectively. 8
  9. 9. 1. Impracticability of Democracy I. Human Being – Life & soul II. Human Being – Nature & Purpose III. Political Systems & Impracticability of Democracy 9
  10. 10. I. Human Being – Life & soul Human being is the most intelligent and perfect creature on this planet and our basic and primary concern should be to strive to understand the origin, constituents and purpose of human being. Unless and until correct, logical and rational answers are found, nothing could be right about the life of the human beings on this planet. Human beings have reached almost to the point of climax of scientific and intellectual development and with the available knowledge & information, it is high time and it should not be very difficult to find out answers of these basic and fundamental questions. Presently the human life is in a state of confused existence and will continue to be so, if the task of finding the answers of these basic questions is not undertaken. Let us first consider the origin of human life. There could be only two possibilities as to how life on this planet, including the human life, came into existence. Either the life came into being by itself or life has been created by some creator. One has to bear in mind that either of the two possibilities could be right. Human knowledge is basically information regarding the effects and in some cases the mechanism of effects and in almost all the cases have no knowledge of the cause. Scientists present hypothesis, theories and even conclude that they possess the knowledge, but they basically have either the information of the effect or information regarding the mechanism of the effect. This applies to most of the physical sciences, especially the biological sciences. To 10
  11. 11. substantiate this a few examples are quoted here. Newton was basically a philosopher who concluded that matter attracts matter and called it gravitation by philosophically observing and analyzing the falling of an apple from the tree. This is a universal fact and scientists have put forward a theory that gravitation is due to the exchange of gravitons, which being the infinitely small particles. The gravitation being the effect and the theory of exchange of gravitons being the mechanism of effect but the actual cause of this effect shall continue to be the mystery till the causative factor of gravitation is discovered. Physicists know that the opposite charged particles attract and the same charged particles repel. These are the effects which physicists know but the actual cause of attraction or repulsion is not known. To explain the mechanism of attraction or repulsion, physicists say that the attraction or repulsion is due to the electric field which in turn, according to some theoretical physicists, is due to exchange of infinitely small particles, but what is the actual causes of emission of such particles is not known. Thus the actual cause shall continue to remain the mystery. The cosmological theories are simple theories of the effect, but the actual cause is unknown. The Big Bang Theory concerns the effect as the cause remains a mystery. Fertilization is an effect and the cause of the fertilization shall remain a mystery, unless and until serious attempts are made to know the cause. With this background let us explore the first possibility that life came into existence by itself. There is one theory which has been put forward which claims that life evolved naturally in time by mere chance under the influence of the 11
  12. 12. environmental factors without any intervention from any external factor; which is called Darwin’s Theory of Evolution. Before we examine the Darwin’s Theory let us look into the life history of Darwin. It has to be accepted that Darwin was an intelligent person of his time. Initially he got associated with the Church for some time and after remaining associated with the Church he could not reconcile with some irrational and illogical concepts of Christianity as the result of which he disassociated with the Church. To justify his disassociation with the Church he looked for ways & means to defy the existence of God. I would like to reproduce his three quotes and make comments on his quotes. The first quote is ‘Believing as I do that man in the distant future will be far more perfect creature than he now is, it is an intolerable thought that he and all other sentient beings are doomed to complete annihilation after such long continued slow progress’. The present day science has made it crystal clear that the life on this planet has to end sooner or later. The universe as well as the world is living on the edge and the whole equilibrium can get disturbed at any time. Sun is emitting the radiation in space around it continuously as the result of the nuclear reaction called nuclear fusion. The reaction could stop at any point of time and emission of radiation could stop and this radiation being the source of life on this planet and resultantly the life on this planet would annihilate. Secondly without doing any calculations, the nuclear fuel in the sun has to exhaust at one time, however long it may take, as the result of which the life on this planet is destined to annihilate. Thirdly the sun is emitting radiation continuously and a small portion of this 12
  13. 13. radiation reaches this planet. Part of this radiation is reflected and part of it is being absorbed by this planet by means of photosynthesis and other mechanisms. Thus the energy level of the atmosphere of this planet is continuously increasing resulting the average temperature of the atmosphere is also increasing with time. Let us not take into account the increase in temperature due to artificial carbon and other gas emissions. Thus the average temperature of this planet will continue to increase as long as sun emits the radiation and water level will continue to increase in the seas due to the melting of the glaciers; all or most of the land mass will be drowned, if the glaciers contain that much of water which could drown the whole land mass otherwise land mass will be partly drowned. The drowning of the land mass will annihilate most of the life forms of this planet. This should prove that Darwin had wrong beliefs which cannot stand the test of science. The second quote of Darwin (Introduction to the descent of Man, 1871) is a very beautiful quote and I wonder had he pondered on this quote with an open vision, he would not have presented his Theory of Evolution. The quote is ‘Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge; it is those who know little, not those who know much, who so positively assert that this or that problem will never be solved’. Keeping in view the scientific knowledge available today, Darwin’s knowledge could be compared with ignorance of today. He did not imagine that the basic unit of life which is a cell could be studied with the help of modern technologies to the extent it is being studied today. Had he foreseen the complexities of the cell and that of the 13
  14. 14. DNA, he would have considered himself as an ignorant being and would not have tried to solve the problem of understanding the origin of life with his virtual ignorance. His theory draws inferences, without considering the cause, on effects and assumes that the cause is a natural phenomenon. The cause as such is taken for granted and thereby denied. Unless and until the possible causes or mechanism of any phenomenon are discussed and proper provision kept in the theory for the mechanism or causative factors, the theory cannot be justified. Darwin closed the doors of any possibility of finding the mechanism or the cause and declared nature, time and environment to be the cause. This reveals that Darwin had the wrong conception of the basic principles of science. The third quote of Darwin (Descent of Man) is ‘false facts are highly injurious to the progress of science, for they often endure long, but false views, if supported by some evidence do little harm, for everyone takes a salutary pleasure in proving their falseness; and when this is done, one path towards errors is closed and road to truth is often at the same time opened’. It we analyze this quote, it is not the false facts which are injurious to the progress of science because sooner or later science will prove false facts to be false. But false views, if supported by some evidence about some obscure matter are more injurious to the progress of science. The views whether false or true views continue till the obscurity of the matter is resolved. Since the obscurity of the origin of life has not been solved till date, Darwin’s views continue to be held despite the lapse of about one and half century. If we assume, at this stage, that Darwin’s views 14
  15. 15. were wrong then humanity after assessing the damage Darwin’s views have done to the humanity scientifically, socially, politically and morally, will never forgive Darwin for his false views. Darwin never considered this possibility whatsoever, which reveals that he had wrong understanding as well. From the quotes of Darwin it should be clear that Darwin had wrong beliefs, wrong conceptions and wrong understanding. This endeavor will prove this scientifically as well as philosophically. In this endeavor I do not intend to repeat what is already written so as to keep its size within limits. Scientific difficulties of Darwin’s Theory on the same principles on which it was derived are well known and well written about. Instead of repeating what is already written I will refer to the collection of books wherein all the information regarding the difficulties of Darwin’s Theory are discussed in great detail. These books have been written by Adnan Oktar under the pen-name Harun Yahya which are available on the website www.harunyahya.com, which are: - 01. The Evolution Impasse 02. If Darwin Had Known About DNA 03. The Skulls That Demolish Darwin 04. What Darwinists Fail to Consider 05. Confessions of the Evolutionists 06. Darwin’s Dilemma; The ‘soul’ 07. The Cambrian Evidence That Darwin Failed to Comprehend 08. Atlas of Creation 09. The Intellectual Struggle Against Darwinism 15
  16. 16. 10. The Error of the Evolution of Species 11. The Transitional Form Dilemma 12. The Collapse of the Theory of Evolution 13. Once Upon A Time There Was Darwinism 14. The Social Weapon, Darwinism 15. Charles Darwin & His Magic Barrel 16. How Fossils Overturned Evolution 17. The Religion of Darwinism 18. The Dark Spell of Darwinism 19. New Research Demolishes Evolution 20. The Evolution Deceit 21. The Disasters Darwinism Brought to Humanity 22. Fascism: The Bloody Ideology of Darwinism 23. Darwinism Refuted 24. A Definitive Reply to Evolutionist Propaganda I would request the readers to go through at least some of these books and read from purely scientific perspective as some of the material in these books has been written with religious perspective. Reading these books is not a pre-requisite for understanding the contents of this endeavor, but those readers who are interested in scientific analysis of the Darwin’s Theory should go through these books. These books give sufficient proofs that there are very serious problems with Darwin’s Theory scientifically and as such the theory is not tenable logically and scientifically. The basic unit of life is a ‘cell’ which is common to all life forms. Biologists now know almost everything physical about the cell as to what are the constituents of the different types of cells, plant and animal, and what functions different cells perform; of which Darwin at his time was not aware of. 16
  17. 17. The cells, plant or animal, could be in three states; dead, living but dormant and living. Again dead cells could be of three types; firstly dead cells with food supply stopped and constituents of the cell intact, secondly dead cells with food supply intact but constituents of the cells damaged/disturbed and thirdly dead cells with food supply intact and constituents of cells intact. The existence of third type of dead cells is a phenomenon which cannot be explained by any scientific demonstration, not to speak of Darwin’s Theory. According to Darwin’s Theory the cells have life as a natural phenomenon and there should be life in every cell with food supply intact and constituents of the cells intact. The very existence of dead cells with food supply intact and constituents of cells intact defies the Darwin’s Theory on simple & fundamental facts. It is believed that DNA molecule in the nucleus of the cell contains all the information pertaining to the cell, organ or organism and to know about the cell and the DNA I will again refer to two books again written by Adnan Oktar under the pen- name Harun Yahya which are available on website www.harunyahya.com namely 01. The Miracle in the Cell 02. The secrets in the DNA This has been done to avoid writing what is already written and to limit the size of this endeavor. Again I would request the readers to read with purely scientific perspective as in these books some material has been written with religious perspective. With this in the background, recently the DNA of the chimpanzee has been matched with human DNA (R.J. Baitten 17
  18. 18. 2002) and it has been demonstrated that the two DNA’s almost (95%) match. This defies the Theory of Evolution and almost puts the final nail in the coffin of the Theory of Evolution, because two species with almost matching DNA differ so much in physical and instinctive characteristics proves loudly and clearly that DNA is not containing all the information regarding the cell, organ or organism and the inheritance & modification over time and environment is not based on facts. Darwin had conceded that ‘if it could be demonstrated that any complex organ/organism existed, which could not possibly have been formed by numerous successive slight modifications my theory would absolutely break-down’. This is exactly what the matching of chimpanzee & human DNA’s demonstrates. Two species do exist which have almost same DNA and even the cell structures, proves that one species has not proceeded from another and live differently and separately. There is no question of any modification. Thus this should be taken as scientific collapse of Darwin’s Theory of Evolution which even Darwin himself had conceded. Let us analyze the Darwin’s Theory of Evolution philosophically. There are some basic, fundamental and simple facts which need to be considered to understand the phenomenon of life. Molecules and chemicals are known to have physical and chemical properties. Outside the cell, the basic unit of life, molecules and chemicals in any composition or in any set of arrangement do not and cannot have the property of reproduction, growth, sense of identification of harmful and beneficial molecules and chemicals and many other senses. How it is that all the 18
  19. 19. constituents of the cell when in the cell possess senses? Whatever the extent of information contained in the DNA, it cannot give the senses of reproduction, growth and many other senses to the cell, organ or organism; DNA can, at the most, be responsible for definite physical and chemical characteristics of the cell, organ or organism. The life in the cells or organic being cannot be due to the mere arrangement of chemicals & molecules and by any means the instincts cannot be stored and transmitted. Darwin and evolutionists assume that because of special arrangement of chemicals and molecules in the cells and elsewhere, life exists as a natural phenomenon and the instincts in the organic being could be stored, transmitted and modified by the numerous, successive and slight modifications. This is due to the lack of philosophical mind on the part of biologists which includes the evolutionists. We need to understand the phenomenon of life before we could decide upon the origin of life. It will be proved that evolutionist’s basic presumption that life exists due to mere arrangement of chemicals & molecules in the cells, organs or organisms is wrong. Philosophically it has been concluded, decades before, that the process of evolution as the origin of life is not tenable and there is something wrong with the theory of evolution and explanation of phenomenon of life as understood by the biologists. This would be clear to the readers by the passage from Wildon Carr which is quoted as follows; ‘If intellect is a product of evolution the whole mechanistic concept of the nature and origin of life is absurd, and the principle which science has adopted must clearly be revised. We have only to state it to see the self-contradiction. How 19
  20. 20. can the intellect, a mode of apprehending reality, be itself an evolution of something which only exists as an abstraction of that mode of apprehending, which is the intellect? If intellect is an evolution of life, then the concept of the life which can evolve intellect as a particular mode of apprehending reality must be the concept of a more concrete activity than that of any abstract mechanical movement which the intellect can present to itself by analyzing its apprehended content. And yet further, if the intellect be a product of the evolution of life, it is not absolute but relative to the activity of the life which has evolved it; how then, in such case, can science exclude the subjective aspect of the knowing and build on the objective presentation as an absolute? Clearly the biological sciences necessitate a reconsideration of the scientific principle.’ The readers should bear in mind that every living organism has the intellect of survival, growth & reproduction as the natural instincts. It is due to the compartmentalization of different fields of study that the biologists and evolutionists have not taken notice of such basic & fundamental philosophical problems of evolution & phenomenon of life. Newton’s observation of gravitational force between matter was accepted as a natural phenomenon without going into the reason of attraction. This was accepted as a universal fact and physicists did not bother to look for the reasons or mechanism of attraction between the matter for several centuries. Now the physicists have come forward with the theory that matter attracts matter because of exchange of infinitesimally small particles called gravitons. 20
  21. 21. Similarly the processes which take place within the cell, biologists assume that these processes are a natural phenomenon and no biologists has gone further as to how such processes take place within the cells and have given the names like protein-synthesis, cell-metabolism to cover up the mysterious functioning of the cells. The biologist have to give an explanation of causative factors for all the processes which take place within the cells and none of the micro- biologists, including molecular biologists, bio-chemists and genetic scientists have even thought of any explanation. The food material being converted into amino acids which in turn are converted into 2,00,000 types of proteins in the cells as the human body uses this number of proteins. It is presumed by the biologists that the information of protein formation is encoded in the DNA and also the information of the proteins to be utilized within the cells & those which are to be exported outside the cells. This is the illogical argument held by the biologists to avoid defining the actual cause of the functioning of the cell. Unless there are means of communication between the DNA and the actual constituent of the cell where the protein synthesis and other functions take place and these means of communication have to be identified which could pass on such information. No such means of efficient communication have been conceived not to speak of the identification. The functioning of the cell is accepted as a mystery which needs to be resolved. There has to be a theory to explain the mysterious functioning of the cells and that of organs and organisms. If the theory can explain all the phenomena which have not been explained so far by scientists and the philosophers then 21
  22. 22. one has to consider the theory seriously. The theory has been conceived and is presented herein. If that is done, the Darwin’s Theory summarily fails to explain the origin & phenomenon of life. There has to be a driving force within the cells, organs or organisms which could be responsible for livingness of the cells, organs or organism. Human beings have to look for this driving force which gives life to the cell to know the origin & phenomenon of life. It has to be done scientifically as well as philosophically. The existence of the dead cells with the food supply intact and the constituents of the cells also intact is a phenomenon which in no case could be explained by any scientific demonstration with the presumption of biologists that life exists as a natural phenomenon in the cells. This phenomenon could be explained by existence of some driving force of livingness within the cells. There is absolutely no other alternative but to accept this driving force or livingness or essence within the cells to explain existence of dead cells with food supply intact and constituents of cells intact. Secondly matching of the DNA in two species to the extent of 95% or more and their differences in physical and instinctive characteristics, as wide as that between chimpanzee and the humans, loudly and clearly proves the existence of some other substance, the driving force or livingness or essence as the cause of differences in the physical and instinctive characteristics. Thirdly despite tremendous advances in the molecular biology, bio-chemistry and genetics the functioning of a 22
  23. 23. living cell remains a mystery. Unless and until we accept the existence of a driving force or livingness in the cell, this mystery cannot be resolved. This substance within cell as the source of life has to be highly complex; more complex than the cell or DNA. Fourthly we might know the processes from production of sperm or pollen and its fertilization then birth, growth, survival, reproduction and finally death of the organisms but science has so far failed to assign or explain the causative factors to all these processes. Fifthly there are many other phenomena such as sleep, mysticism or spirituality, mystical curing of diseased human beings, evil spirits etc. All these phenomena could only be explained by the existence of this complex substance within the human beings. The physical characteristics of this complex substance are described as under: - 01. This substance has to be invisible to the naked eye, microscope, electron microscope etc. because till date no such substance has been seen or imagined to be existing in the cell or organic being except some vague imaginations by some philosophers like Plato, Aristotle, Leibniz, Avicenna and Averroes etc. 02. This substance has to be highly complex and interactive within the cells; otherwise this substance has to be inert and inactive with respect to other matter outside of the cells. This is due to the fact that physicists have not made any observations regarding such a substance. It has to be more inert than neutrinos outside the cells. 23
  24. 24. 03. This substance when interacting with the constituents of the cells or organic being gives senses of reproduction, growth, understanding or simply life to the cells or organic being. 04. This substance has to be highly interactive and communicating between different units of its existence within the organism & capable of having independent existence also. Evidently the substance could be highly complex ‘energy’ which could have its independent existence as well. This ‘energy’ is the source of life of every living thing, plant & animal. At this stage, readers might feel that I am trying to resolve the mysteries of cell function and life or human being by introducing some mysterious ‘energy’. But I will prove the existence of this ‘energy’ indirectly by explaining everything which hitherto could not be explained by science or philosophy; besides a direct proof will be given to the human beings when they could simply feel the presence of this ‘energy’ within them. The humankind being a special and perfect creature and our primary concern, let our attention be on the human beings only. This ‘energy’ is the source of life for all living things and in so far as the human being is concerned in this ‘energy’ is embedded the ‘ego’ of the human being. This ‘ego’ is the ‘soul’ of the human being. Thus living human being is not simply a set of different groups of cells but besides these cells, human being has this ‘energy’ as the source of life and a ‘soul’. The physical body of the human being, ‘energy’ and the ‘soul’ can have their independent 24
  25. 25. existence also. The physical body in the form of a dead body has neither ‘energy’ nor ‘soul’. In the condition of sleep human being has physical body and ‘energy’ only. Acceptable explanation of all the phenomena by this design is a proof of existence of ‘energy’ and ‘soul’. The body and the ‘soul’ independently are inactive and with the help of interaction between the body, the ‘soul’ and the ‘energy’; human being is a living being capable of all the activities which human being perform. Due to the interaction between the ‘energy’ and the human body thoughts are created either due to the external stimuli or in situ. These thoughts after giving some feelings reach the ‘soul’, where final decision of action is taken and opinion is formed. The ‘soul’ of the human being has the innate knowledge of right & wrong of every action, thought or opinion. Now if we prove that innate knowledge of right & wrong exists within the human being that will indirectly prove the existence of ‘energy’ and ‘soul’. I have done intense research by interacting with people of different education levels and intelligence quotients, of different classes of societies and of different financial status and even observed the children of different ages of above mentioned classes of people. Every adult human being has agreed of having the innate knowledge of right and wrong irrespective of religion and social taboo. Any intelligent reader will agree to it and he is free to consult any number of people; then he will simply confirm that every individual including the children have the innate knowledge of right and wrong of all his actions and thoughts. This is the most convincing indirect proof of existence of the ‘energy’ 25
  26. 26. and ‘soul’ to all the people of the world and resultantly indirect proof of the ultimate failure of Darwin’s Theory of Evolution. The destiny of the human being lies in as to how he applies his innate knowledge of right and wrong to all of his actions and thoughts. Due to the external stimuli or in situ thoughts are created in the human being as the result of the interaction between body and the ‘energy’. This gives rise to the formation of feelings, which may require action or may not require action, and in ‘soul’, with the innate knowledge of the right and wrong, decisions are taken about the action and opinion. Thus an attitude of a human being is formed by the way he acts and with time he develops a habit and finally a type of personality is formed which determine the destiny of the human being. This all is represented in the figure 1 for easy and quick understanding. 26
  27. 27. 27 Fig 1 External Stimuli Body Energy In situ Body Energy Thoughts Feelings Requiring Action Requiring No Action ‘soul’ OpinionAction Attitude Habit Personality Destiny Having innate knowledge of right & wrong and decides about action and opinion
  28. 28. Evolutionists assume that habits or instincts are inherited and transmitted to the off-springs by their parents. But through genes only the physical characteristics are transmitted to the off-springs. This fact is confirmed by the fact that the DNA’s of the chimpanzee and the human being match to the extent of 95% because it could be acceptable that difference of 5% in the DNA’s of chimpanzee and human being could account for the physical differences between the two. But the difference of 5% of DNA’s cannot explain the huge difference of physical and instinctive characteristics between humans & chimpanzees. Since physical characteristic could be stored and transmitted through genes as such for all the plant species the type of ‘energy’ required as source of life could be uniform ‘energy’. But for the animal life the ‘energy’ has to be different for different species, because instinctive characteristics of different species are different. Evidently there is no need of any ‘soul’ in respect of plant life on the whole and all of the animal species except human being. Keeping in view what has stated herein and trying to understand the human being to be in a state in which we find him, we could easily draw the inference that the Theory of Evolution fails scientifically as well as philosophically. But the fact remains that the origin of life has to be explained which I will do hereunder. It stands cleared that the cell and ‘energy’ in respect of plant life and all of the animal species except the human beings and cell, ‘energy’ and ‘soul’ in respect of human beings contain all the information of physical characteristics and instinctive characteristics including the senses of growth, 28
  29. 29. reproduction, etc. The cell being the basic unit of life wherein the ‘energy’ is the source of life or driving force or livingness and in respect of humans cells contain besides ‘energy’, the ‘soul’; the most convenient and acceptable origin of life has to be the cell but unlike Theory of Evolution, cells have to originate for different species separately and independently and secondly the place of origin of the cells have to be water and thirdly the cells have to originate at different places on the planet as different species, plants and animals, survive in different climatic zones. Human being is one of the species which can survive naturally in every climatic zone. In respect of human being we could accept that the whole humanity originated from the couple of cells; one cell of the male and another cell of the female. In that case one has to understand that the combination of cell and ‘energy’ especially the ‘energy’ in respect of initial two cells, one male & one female to be slightly different, to allow for the fending in the initial stages of the first human male and female like some of the animal species who survive in absence of the parents. Having solved mystery of the functioning of the cell and proposed a theory of origin & phenomenon of life; the question as to whether the initial cells for every species have originated by itself or have been created, needs to be answered. After analysis of all the studies conducted regarding the cell and the DNA and also keeping in view what is contained herein one can easily conclude that there is negligible probability that the cells could come into being by itself. How could such a complex and perfect entity come into existence without the intervention of the perfect 29
  30. 30. designer or creator? Any statistician, biologist or a philosopher after due consideration of all aspects of science and philosophy would simply arrive at one and only solution, that the initial cells of every species have been created by a perfect designer or creator. Even if scientists may be in position to assemble the cell but to give life to the cell would be beyond human reach because the ‘energy’ required for the cells to be live and functional is not under the control of human being. This also substantiates the existence of perfect designer or creator for as the only cause of creation of all life forms on this planet. The theory & design of the human being which has been conceived herein had not been thought of by scientists so far but several philosophers in the past have vaguely conceived the existence of such a design of human being. These ancient philosophers namely Plato, Aristotle, Leibniz, Averroes, Plotinus, Avicenna etc. were the first who suggested the somewhat similar design of human being, but since no scientific evidence & verification was possible at those times, the designs remained only as ideas and virtually faded away with time. Since during last two centuries philosophy was an almost forgotten field of study no scientist or researcher, also due to compartmentalization & specialization of scientific study, paid any attention to the great works of these ancient philosophers. Out of all the philosophers whom the world has produced till date Plato stands out as the visionary philosopher, which shall be proved by the contents of this book also because his philosophy had a divine touch. The contents of this work will make it clear that Aristotle, though a genius of his time, 30
  31. 31. except his borrowed concept of ‘Ousia’ which he borrowed from Plato, all his philosophy especially his political philosophy had been on wrong foundations. Plato’s concept of ‘forms’ and his belief that the material world as it seems to us is not the real world, but only a shadow of the real world, has been conceived & evidence gathered is this work. Leibniz had also put forward the concept of ‘monads’ in place of ‘energy’ of this work as the source of life. In the ‘soul’ of the human being there is the concept of perfect universal creator which human being feel as intuition which Descartes realized and suggested that since humans have the feeling that God exists; God must exist. This design confirms the basic concept of Descartes. Descartes’ concept was rejected by Kant later-on on the basis of his confusing philosophy which was not based on the right principles. However, one must admit that a few of the inferences which Kant drew from his confusing philosophy do hold good because he in his philosophy accepted the existence of ‘a priori’ but his definitions and classifications of ‘a priori’ are not tenable. Avicenna tried to apply the Greek philosophy especially the Aristotle’s philosophy, to the religious thought but encountered certain genuine difficulties which he spelled out in his works because the existence of perfect universal creator has some serious difficulties in the Greek philosophy which have been resolved in this work. Algazel did painstaking work to point out certain basic difficulties in the Greek philosophy and tried to solve the basic difficulties of religious thought in his work namely “The Incoherence of the Philosophers” but failed. His failure of giving proper & justified explanations of the difficulties in the religious 31
  32. 32. thought has been described by Averroes in his work “The Incoherence of the Incoherence”. Averroes rightly concluded that the difficulty cannot be explained by another difficulty. However Averroes had also proposed a somewhat similar design of human being as contained in this work but lacked in details & description and scientific demonstration. Finally after Kant philosophy as a field of study was neglected by the world. This was all due to the fact that the Greek philosophy, especially the Aristotle’s philosophy, and subsequent philosophies were based on wrong axioms of matter as the base material of everything in the universe and imagination of anything other than matter as the base material did not occur to any philosopher except a few philosophers like Russell but the application was vaguely done, as the result they could not derive other philosophical conclusions correctly. With the scientific knowledge presently available this foundation of philosophy has been challenged in this work with scientific evidence. To summarize the theory & design of the human being; human being consists of the body, ‘energy’ and ‘soul’. All the three constituents of the human being are capable of independent existence. The body occupies the defined space whereas ‘energy’ and ‘soul’ have no defined space as they have no limitations of space. The body acts as material base and ‘energy’ is the source of life, the driving force or livingness or essence within the body and has abundant properties; ‘energy’ could be initially uniform with all the human being and once in a human being it stores the information and subsequently gets labeled as ‘energy’ of a particular individual. While interacting with the body it gives 32
  33. 33. the senses of growth, reproduction, feelings, emotions and most importantly produces the thoughts of right and wrong desires as the result of external stimuli or in situ. This ‘energy’ under special conditions can have the senses of hearing, seeing and movement independent of the body so much so this ‘energy’ can perceive the existence of other ‘energy’ and know its content and quality and interact with the other ‘energy’. Besides it stands already described as to what the ‘energy’ in itself has to be. ‘soul’ as already discussed is embedded in the ‘energy’ and capable of independent existence also wherein the concept of existence of the creator is already existent besides it has the innate knowledge of right and wrong and the decision of action or opinion lies with the ‘soul’ and finally the ‘souls’ of every individual are already created with defined identification as every ‘soul’ has an ‘ego’ associated with it. This final design of human being would require some more clarification. As already clarified that due to external stimuli or in situ interactions between body and the ‘energy’ thoughts are created. These thoughts give rise to desires and these desires could be right or wrong. Since these desires have to have the approval of the ‘soul’, this has the innate knowledge of a desire being right or wrong, before the human being could take any action or form an opinion. It needs no clarification that the ‘soul’ of an individual has to be specific and no two ‘souls’ could be similar or equivalent. The most important point which needs clarification is that the ‘soul’ has the innate knowledge of existence of the perfect universal creator. The manifestation of this innate 33
  34. 34. knowledge is that most of the human beings hold on to the perception that there exists a perfect universal creator irrespective of the religions they believe in. The intelligent human beings who study the religions deeply find that most of the religions are illogical and irrational but yet hold on to the perception that there exists a perfect universal creator. They also understand that the religions are corrupted, one more than the other, and even though having rejected the religious beliefs (as most people of the Europe and America and of advanced countries have) yet in the heart of hearts they know that there exists a perfect universal creator. This could be sufficient proof to every intelligent human being that the ‘soul’ has the innate knowledge of the existence of a perfect universal creator. The ‘energy’ under special conditions can have certain properties/senses; could now be discussed to explain certain phenomena which hitherto have not been explained by science or philosophy. It has been already clarified that thoughts give rise to desires in the human beings. The pre-requisite for spirituality or mysticism is to have the monotheistic belief, irrespective of religion, and one has to sacrifice all the human desires right as well as wrong except the desire of feeding oneself to survive for the sake of one perfect universal creator. Besides there is another mode of mysticism; that is to adopt any of the monotheistic religion and carry out all the duties prescribed under that religion as a normal human being, then under the guidance of a spiritual guide and defined practices one can attain the spiritual power. By spiritual power is meant to have the control over his ‘energy’ through 34
  35. 35. which he is exposed to different experiences which cannot be expressed by him. The mystic or Sufi has the control over his ‘energy’ and the degree of control varies from mystic to mystic depending upon the purity of his mind and intention. With time the mystic attains the perfection through increase in control over his ‘energy’; if he sustains the hardships and maintains his purity of mind and intention. Through ‘energy’ within him, the mystic can have the senses of hearing, seeing and movement independent of the organs of hearing, seeing and those of movement of the body. The perfection of the mystic could reach the climax when the mystic attains the power to influence the ‘energy’ of the other human being. Since life in the human being is due to the interaction of body and the ‘energy’ and through the influence on the ‘energy’ the diseases of the diseased could be cured by mystic, whereas doctors through chemicals, which influence different organs of the patient, cure the patients; besides doctors repair the damages of different organs/tissues through operations to cure the patients. Most of the diseases are due to some malfunction of the cells/tissues either due to the attack of bacteria or viruses or otherwise or else because of the malfunction of the ‘energy’ within the cells/tissues. The mystic through the influence on the ‘energy’ within the cells/tissues can cure both types of diseases whereas the doctors could cure the cells/tissues by chemicals or operation. This should explain the mystic curing of the patients which hitherto has been an unexplained phenomenon by science, theology or philosophy. In many religions also there are also such practices by which they attain the control over the ‘energy’ of the self or 35
  36. 36. other human being. The readers should know that mysticism or spirituality is also a way of life and some people sacrifice their lives for this purpose. The existence of mysticism or spiritually or even poetic mysticism should be indirect proof of this design of human being. This design of human being will also help in scientific study of sleep, dreams and psychology. Lastly this design of human being rejects all the materialistic philosophies. I could discuss all materialistic philosophies one by one and prove them to be wrong. Keeping in view that readers are not supposed to have knowledge of philosophy and also keeping in view that this work has to be concise and precise, instead of that all efforts will be made to prove the correctness of this design of human being by providing sufficient evidence in chapters ahead. 36
  37. 37. II. Human Being – Nature & Purpose The human nature has been studied and written about in great detail by most of the philosophers from Socrates to Iqbal. The human nature is so complicated that hundreds of books written so far about it have not described it completely. There is no need to repeat what is already written. However I have tried to describe the human nature in the simplest possible manner. Before describing the human nature it would be desirable to analyze & redefine certain concepts which are in use to describe the human nature, in view of the design of the human being introduced herein. As per the design the mind is the collective activity of the ‘energy’ and ‘soul’. ‘Energy’ has the capacity of storing the information and the ‘soul’ has the capacity of reasoning. Understanding is also a collective activity of the ‘energy’ & ‘soul’. Virtue is the capacity and content within the ‘energy’ of the human being which by interacting with the human body is capable of performing acts which are good for the human being himself as well as other human beings. Vice is the capacity and content within the ‘energy’ of the human being which by interacting with the human body is capable of performing acts which are harmful/damaging for the human being himself as well as other human beings. The state of nature of the human being is that he possesses varying quantum of vice and virtue and the same human being is capable of actions which are worst than the ruthless wild animal and virtuous actions of the noblest human being. Since by the judgment and approval of the 37
  38. 38. ‘soul’ the human being is capable of performing an action, thus it is because of the ‘soul’ a human being may be virtuous or evil. Besides it has been already stated that ‘soul’ has the capacity of reasoning to analyze the genuineness of the innate knowledge of right and wrong of a particular action and finally the ‘soul’ has also the innate knowledge of existence of a perfect universal creator. Plato believed that man is immortal ‘soul’ corrupted by vice and purified by virtue, of whom the body is only an instrument & he has also stated that the ‘soul’ must be freed from vice; which should be the ultimate goal of the human being. In principle Plato was very right but actually vice and virtue are created by the creator and shall continue to be within the human beings as long as human beings live on this planet. There is more of the vice than virtue in the human being and for controlling the vice human being has been spirited with the ‘soul’. The vices in the human beings could be divided into three classes namely: - 01. Major Vices 02. Medium Vices 03. Minor Vices Major Vices are of seven types 01. Desire of Power (financial power & authority) 02. Sex 03. Selfishness & Greed 04. Unjust & Hypocrisy 05. Anger & Cruelty 38
  39. 39. 06. Envy & Misanthropy 07. Superiority, Pride & Arrogance Medium Vices are also of seven types 01. Ungratefulness & Negligence towards duties 02. Apathy towards poor, orphans & disabled and people in trouble 03. Backbiting, Scandalousness & Mischievousness. 04. Corruption & Nepotism 05. Untrustworthiness 06. Suspicion 07. Deceit & Cheating Minor Vices are also of seven types 01. Impatience 02. Animosity 03. Cowardice 04. Imprudence 05. Intolerance 06. Lethargy 07. Extravagance, Love of comforts, luxuries & merrymaking with least efforts However there could be many more vices which would fall in these classes of vices or types of vices. The virtues are opposite of vices. But one has to bear in mind that desire of power to the reasonable extent with justified and honest means cannot be a vice. If a human being has the capacity of doing good in a place of authority and his desire to have authority is not a vice. The intent and means of desire of power makes it a vice or a virtue. Similarly sex, of course created by the perfect universal creator, to the extent permissible by the ‘soul’ is a virtue rather than a vice. 39
  40. 40. Demand of remuneration for work is not selfishness or greed but a right but desire of remuneration much more for a small quantum of work is selfishness and greed. To desire good things for the self by honest means is a justified desire whereas feeling jealous about the possessions of others is envy and is not justified. Thus it has to be born in mind that virtue and vice are the two sides of the same coin, only the intent and the means makes an act a vice or virtue. The ‘soul’ has the innate knowledge of whether an act though apparently a vice is actually an evil or a virtuous act because the intent and means of the act is known to the ‘soul’. If desire of power is based on doing good then it is justified and ‘soul’ is in complete knowledge of its intent and declares it to be right. A same act may be virtuous act in view of some people and an evil act in view of other people. The most important question to decide about such an act is how to decide virtuousness or evilness of an act. The simplest way of presenting the example of such a situation is the sexual act between a male and a female who are not married, when male and female mutually agree to the act. This debate has not been settled till date and would remain an unsettled debate for centuries to follow unless and until philanthropists & philosophers intervene. The simplest of the solutions to such matters is let the ‘souls’ of the human beings decide the matter. Let there be wise men who could analyze the decisions of the ‘souls’, irrespective of the religious beliefs and social taboos. It is not much difficult with the present day knowledge of psychology to know the feelings and decisions of the ‘soul’ about rightness or 40
  41. 41. wrongness of an act and let those conclusions be debated. The human beings themselves also know the decisions of the ‘soul’ about an act; intelligent human being easily understand these decisions whereas less intelligent also do understand these decisions but after some explanations by the psychologists. The right and wrong stands already decided by the creator of the ‘soul’ and human being is simply to decide whether to do right or wrong. The perfect universal creator having created the ‘energy’, wherein he has put virtue and vice, and the ‘soul’ wherein he has kept the innate knowledge of right and wrong of the act; the only thing left with the human being on the whole is the ‘freedom of action’. The philosophy of human being having the ‘free will’ cannot be right, because the will or desire depends upon the content of virtue and vice in the ‘energy’ which being the creation of the perfect universal creator. The human beings have the ‘freedom of action’ and through their actions they could decide to be virtuous human beings or evil human beings. It has been already stated that ‘soul’ has the faculty of reasoning though it also has innate knowledge of existence of the perfect universal creator. This is the ‘Natural State of Nature’ of human being and has been studied by several past philosophers. Having understood the nature of human being we could now discuss the purpose of human life. Human beings are created and they live for some period of time on this planet and finally die. The apparent purpose of the life of the human being is to live peacefully on the planet? The question now arises what the human being is supposed to do 41
  42. 42. on this planet. We will not discuss here the purpose of the creator for creating the human being, which we will discuss later in this work. The first & foremost purpose of the human being is to live peacefully on this planet and we will have to search for the ways and means by which we could live peacefully. The philosophers as genuine philanthropists have very rightly concluded that mankind can have peaceful existence on this planet only through the prevalence of virtue in the individual life and in the society and that should be the ultimate goal of the mankind. It will be stupidity to question or challenge this conclusion. This task could be accomplished if and only if the majority of the people, especially the people in authority are real philanthropists. But mankind by nature is a selfish creature and he could wish good to others only after doing good to himself and there is no limit to his desire of doing good to himself. Thus the state of nature of the human being is that he cannot be a philanthropist at all even if his ‘soul’ has the innate knowledge of right and wrong and also the innate knowledge of existence of a perfect universal creator. Hence the peaceful life of mankind on this planet and state of nature of mankind are incompatible and there is one and only one condition under which the state of nature of mankind and peaceful existence of mankind on this planet could be compatible. I have thought over this serious problem for years and have not left any relevant literature unread, which includes science, philosophy, political systems and theology and interacted with wide range of people and reached one and only one conclusion that human being has to be answerable & 42
  43. 43. accountable for his evil acts after death before the perfect universal creator. The human being cannot be answerable & accountable for the content of his vices because the vices are innate in the ‘energy’ over which human being has absolutely no control of creation. The human being can exercise control over the acts of vice through ‘soul’ as the human being has the ‘freedom of action’. Plato has held that ‘human body is just an instrument’, the ‘energy’ and the ‘soul’ being immortal and these two constituents of the human being contain all the information of the human being itself as well as the actions done by the human being during his life time. This is my challenge to the whole humanity to unravel any other alternative by which virtue will prevail in the individual lives and the society so that there could be peaceful existence of mankind on this planet. There is absolutely no alternative. It has been already made out by the philosophers that laws have to be based on the human nature and purpose. The innate knowledge of right and wrong about all actions with the ‘soul’ is the virtual definition of laws wherein the permissible and prohibited actions are defined thus we have to accept that laws are already defined by the perfect universal creator and are contained in the ‘soul’ of the human beings. As the ancient philosopher namely Aquinas has called these laws as Natural Laws I too will call these laws as ‘Natural Laws’. Thus we need genuine philosophers to know the Natural Laws as contained in the ‘souls’ of the human beings, with the help of reason it would not be a difficult task to unravel these Natural Laws. 43
  44. 44. No law, right or wrong could be enforced unless and until it is derived from ‘Natural Laws’ of which human beings have innate knowledge of its correctness and secondly the people are convinced about answerability and accountability of evil deeds after death. No judge would judge an act correctly to be right or wrong unless and until he too is instinctively convinced about the rightness and wrongness of the act and secondly he too is absolutely convinced of basic axiom of answerability & accountability of evil actions after death. Thus laws are useless unless and until this basic axiom is accepted. Thus if we do not accept the answerability and accountability after death, there can be no laws and no virtue in the individual lives and the society and no peaceful existence of human being is possible on this planet. Just as in the cells the information of everything physical about the human being is contained, similarly the actions of the human beings arise because of the thoughts. We derived the origin of the human being from the cells so we have to derive actions which the human being is supposed to do from thoughts. The perfect universal creator must have kept the whole information in the human being which we will have to unravel. Neither thoughts are within the control of the human being nor the decision about the action to be right or wrong is within the control of human being, the only thing on which the human being has the control is ‘freedom of action’. As already explained thoughts arise out of the interaction between body and the ‘energy’ whereas the ‘soul’ has the innate knowledge of right & wrong about all the actions and power of the decision of action. The ‘freedom of action’ is with the ‘soul’ of the 44
  45. 45. human being. The human being has to do the virtuous actions, which the perfect universal creator wants from the human beings which the design of the human being as created by the perfect universal creator would suggest. As already clarified that by virtuous actions of the human beings individually as well as collectively the peaceful existence of the human beings is possible on this planet; thus it has to be purpose of perfect universal creator and that of the human being that people should live peacefully on this planet and the perfect universal creator has already kept the reason and means of living peacefully within the human being. As already mentioned that only means by which human beings could do virtuous actions is that human being has to be answerable and accountable for his actions and the perfect universal creator in his perfect wisdom has chosen the time after death to be the time of answerability and accountability. This reveals that human being has to live and do what is right as defined in the ‘soul’ and accept answerability & accountability after death. The second most important and general purpose of life of the individual human being is to be grateful to the perfect universal creator for creating the individual and pray the perfect universal creator for help and guidance for spending the life so as to fulfill the purpose of life. The third purpose of life, of those human beings who have the means, should be to know and understand the perfect universal creator and all his creations and educate others. The last important purpose of life of the human being has to be to use whatever the perfect universal creator has created on this planet justly so that the human being could 45
  46. 46. live peacefully on this planet and fulfill his purpose of life from his point of view and from the perfect universal creator’s point of view. 46
  47. 47. Political Systems & Impracticability of Democracy A. Political Systems B. Impracticability of Democracy 47
  48. 48. A. Political Systems It has been already stated simple, basic and fundamental facts & axioms will be considered to draw inferences and conclusions. I have no intention of convincing the readers with lengthy discourses or jugglery of words. The political philosophies have been written in detail by philosophers like Plato, Aristotle, Hobbes, Locke, Aquinas, Russell, Rousseau, Eliot, Hegel, Marx etc. and I will not repeat what is already written excepting quoting their conclusive statements. Hobbes has rightly stated that without the government world would be place of war where all will be against all. Every government has to be based on a political system. Hobbes had also stated that the government without sound political system would be a government wherein everyone will try to deprive every other person of everything he has. I need not go into unnecessary discourse to prove the correctness of both these statement because readers would find no reason to deny these facts. The original work on political systems has been done by Plato and Aristotle and all subsequent works on political systems are simply extensions of the works of Plato & Aristotle. They have identified six political systems which would cover all types of political systems which existed in the past and which exist even today. 1. Monarchy 2. Aristocracy 3. Polity 48
  49. 49. 4. Democracy 5. Oligarchy 6. Tyranny, Patriarchy & Matriarchy These political systems in simplest possible terms could be defined as Monarchy: - Monarchy is the rule by one man for the common good of all the inhabitants of a piece of land; the one man is called the monarch. Aristocracy: -Aristocracy is the rule by few for the common good of all the inhabitants of a piece of land. Polity: - Polity is the rule by many for common good of all the inhabitants of a piece of land. Democracy: -Democracy is the rule by the ruled or rule of many in their own interest. Oligarchy: - Oligarchy is the rule by a few in their own interest and not in the interest of all the inhabitants of a piece of land. Tyranny, Patriarchy & Matriarchy: - Tyranny is the rule by one in his own interest. I have also included patriarchy and matriarchy in the same category of political system because philosophically all the three political systems are almost the same. Dictatorship, military rules, anarchy have no political system and are extremely dangerous for existence of mankind and so need not be discussed. As already stated every government has to be based on a political system. The political system defines guiding principles of the government. The rule of a government is implemented through laws. Thus the laws depend upon the guiding principle of the government, which is the political system. Hence laws and the political system are 49
  50. 50. complementary and the laws of one political system cannot be valid or applicable for other political system and vice versa. On the other hand the laws have to be based on the human nature and purpose. If the laws are not based on the human nature & purpose then the government sooner or later has to fail. The purpose of laws is to enforce virtue in the individuals and the society. Thus through laws it is aimed that the society and the individual are virtuous as almost all philosophers have held that ultimate goal of mankind should be that virtue should prevail in the social structure and the individual lives for peaceful existence of mankind on this plant; otherwise there has to be injustice, exploitation, corruption, confusion, confrontation, plunder and bloodshed. Mankind has sincerely worked hard to gather sufficient knowledge of the creations of the perfect universal creator but unfortunately besides the source of life the most important aspect of mankind, the ways and means of living peacefully on this planet has not received the sincere attention. Several philosophers have made efforts but due to one reason or the other have made mistakes resultantly none of the philosophers has put forward the practical and acceptable method of living peacefully on this planet. Plato has preferred the rule of philosophers but has failed to identify the philosophers fit to rule and instead imposed some unreasonable restrictions on the rulers. Plato has opposed polity and democracy because human being is generally corruptible, irrational, driven by human 50
  51. 51. weaknesses with false or even irrational beliefs, unjust and criminal tendencies besides because of equality, power seekers driven by personal gains than the public good, and unlimited power would lead to anarchy and corruption (Republic). Aristotle has preferred polity and democracy without going into the natural state of nature of the human beings. According to Aristotle three things are essential for those who hold the offices, of course, besides selecting them very carefully: - i. Belief, trust, conviction and affection for established regime ii. Virtue & justice iii. Capability to work as involved in the rule. But keeping in view the natural state of nature of the human being; no human being can have these qualities excepting under one condition which has been already stated that is mankind has to accept that he will have to be answerable and accountable for his actions before the perfect universal creator after death. There is just no alternative by which human beings could adopt the virtue as his way of life which can result in the virtuous social structure. Mankind needs the existence of the perfect universal creator for the peaceful living on this planet. Excepting tyranny and oligarchy the aim of all political systems is common good as such no philanthropist philosopher will advocate political systems of tyranny and oligarchy. A careful analysis would prove that aristocracy sooner or later turns into oligarchy, which history has already proved in Rome and France. 51
  52. 52. Plato states ‘the human race will have no respite from evils until those who are real philosophers acquire political power or until through some divine dispensation those who rule and have political authority in the nations become real philosophers’. Plato seems do have concluded that real philosophers are the people who are devoid of vices which includes the self interest. But it is impossible to find a person who is without the vices and the philosophers could not be the exception. There has to be divine dispensation through which philosophers could be the philanthropist also. This is exactly what philosophers should have looked for. Plato has criticized polity & democracy because human beings being generally corruptible, as these political systems have already failed in Rome and Greece before Christian era. Presently in the world there is only one political system, the democracy, which is the political system of governance in one form or the other in all countries excepting nominal exceptions like Saudi Arabia etc. Democracy has strong advocates all over the world and there are many pseudo-scholars of different religions who advocate democracy as the political system of their religion; forgetting the fact that the underlying principle of democracy is agnosticism. The most important aspect of democracy which needs to be discussed is Lockean right of conscience and religion; which means the religion and conscience as to be the personal matters of individuals. Locke while advocating democracy has said ‘God in his great mercy & beneficence has relinquished even religious rights to the discretion of the magistrate’. He had probably forgotten that the conscience being the personal matter of the individuals and there being no modus operandi for 52
  53. 53. testing the conscience and in fact no need of testing the conscience of the magistrates then the simple question would be to consider; could we trust the magistrates with the fate of the nation & the people? We have already concluded that through virtuous individuals and the social structure we can have the peaceful life on this planet and that is possible only when mankind accepts the answerability and accountability before the perfect universal creator after death. This could be done only through religion. As I have already explained that ‘soul’ has the faculty of reasoning besides has the innate knowledge of existence of a perfect universal creator but the ‘soul’ has no knowledge of accountability and answerability before the perfect universal creator. The ‘soul’ of the human being will not accept any religion which does not satisfy the reasoning to the minutest details and this should be basic axiom to test the genuinely of any religion. Thus any religion which is not rational cannot and should not be acceptable to the human being. As already quoted according to Plato ‘the human race will have no respite from evils until those who are real philosophers acquire political power or until through some divine dispensation those who rule and have political authority in the nations become philosophers’. I have respect for the vision of Plato. He had presumed that real philosophers would naturally be the philanthropists; here I disagree with Plato. But future philosophers should have searched for this divine dispensation by which rulers could be philosophers and philosophers could be philanthropists. If divinity exists then there had to be some faith & belief 53
  54. 54. system which could be responsible for this divine dispensation. Unfortunately most of the religions have been corrupted and misinterpreted, one more the other and no religion satisfies the reasoning of the ‘soul’. The irrationality of the religions is evident by the fact that almost all religions have sects and sectarianism in itself is corruption or misinterpretation. Instead of rectifying the religions of the corruption & misinterpretations, most of the philosophers proposed the separation of church & state, and this concept got impetus by Darwinism and thus democracy became the only possible political system. Aquinas is the first philosopher who made the mistake by proposing that Christianity does not prescribe any political system of governance as had been the concept with Augustine. Aquinas rejected the applicability of the ‘law’ of the old testament and from the gospel ‘render unto Caesar the things that are Caesar’s’ (Mathew 22-21) he inferred that Christianity does not provide for conduct of civil society and Christianity could flourish under any political system. Augustine had also similar ideas and held similar perspective of Christianity. They did not visualize that from the ‘Law’ as in the Old Testament a political system could be derived after removing the corruption, misinterpretations of the scriptures. Some philosophers like Eliot did criticize the democracy as such societies rejected the advantage of wisdom of belief system resultantly would degenerate into tyranny, social & cultural fragmentation, exploitation of natural resources by a few, corruption and moral decay. But due to Darwinism no attention was paid to such philosophies. Under the influence 54
  55. 55. of Darwinism philosophers like Nietzsche rejected the idea of divinity by stating ‘God as the protector of the weak, though once alive, is now dead, and that we have rightly killed him’. Similarly Marx, an atheist, rejected faith and said religion to be ‘opium of people and religion is the heart of the heartless world’. Russell also concluded as a pseudo-philosopher ‘Religion is based, I think, primarily and mainly upon fear’ he further adds “A good world needs knowledge, kindliness and courage, it does not need a regretful hankering after the past or a fettering after the intelligent words uttered long ago by ignorant men”. Before concluding the discussion about political systems I would like to clarify that the laws of one political system cannot be applied in the government of any other political system. To illustrate this, the tyranny and the monarchy are the one man rule but the objective of the two being different, so the laws of the two political systems have to be different depending upon the guiding principles of the political system. There are some pseudo-scholars of Islam who think that Islam can be practiced in democracy and there are also other set of pseudo-scholars of Islam who think that democracy is the Islamic way of life and the Shariat Law could be applied in democracy. They fail to understand that the underlying principle of democracy is agnosticism & liberty of religion and conscience and Shariat Law and agnosticism being contradictory; these two contradictory principles cannot exist together. The six political systems mentioned herein have to have different set of laws and the set of laws of one political system cannot be applied in other political system. The laws have to be 55
  56. 56. based on the guiding principles of the political system and objective of the political system. Finally since there is only one political system, in one form or the other, being practiced almost all over the world as such the practicability or impracticability of this political system will be discussed in detail. 56
  57. 57. B. Impracticability of Democracy As a rationalist and realist one has to realize that presently there is absolutely no alternative political system to the democracy. Also realizing that most of the religions are corrupted, misinterpreted and unexplained, thereby making these irrational doctrines, besides there are sects in most of the religions thereby proving the corruption of the religions. Under these circumstances neither one could be justified to advocate accepting the irrational religions nor mixing up the state and religion in the political systems. Readers need not bear in mind what has been written in previous chapters or even the title of this chapter to avoid any bias against the democracy. One has to sincerely try to analyze democracy, if by any chance it could be practicable for common good and peaceful existence of mankind. Under these circumstances the underlying principle of agnosticism with freedom of religion & conscience in democracy is justified. All forms of governments with democracy as the political system have underlying basic principles of agnosticism with freedom of religion & conscience and equality, liberty & fraternity. As already clarified that there has to be government and for any government there has to be a political system. The government is effected through laws and as Aristotle has put it ‘for where the laws do not rule, there is no regime or government’. Firstly we will have to discuss the process of enacting of the laws. In almost all forms of governments under the political system of democracy there is a body of representatives of people called legislature where the laws are enacted. Some laws 57
  58. 58. could be enacted by referendum where under people directly decide about the enactment of a law. Theoretically under the method of referendum the opinion of 0 – 49% people of the nation will carry no weight and as such the laws of a government cannot have the consent of all the people. Theoretically in case of legislature enacting the laws through public representatives, even if the public representation are true representatives of the people, the laws would have the consent of 26 – 100% (51% votes for each representative with 51% seats in the legislature) of the people and as such the opinion of 0 – 74% people can carry no weight. Theoretically speaking under democracy the laws cannot have the approval & consent of all people of the nation and since there would naturally be people who are against the laws, that would lead to lawlessness and instability in the nation. This is the inherent problem of democracy which under any democratic form of government cannot be solved as the result of which there have to be sections of the society who cannot have affection, belief, conviction and trust in the government; which as per Aristotle are essential for a regime. Now let us assume that the government is in the hands of real philanthropists and the representatives of the people are genuine and wise and the laws will be enacted very wisely keeping in view the aspirations of all people and all the people have faith, trust and affection for the government on this score. We will now discuss the nature of laws. Before doing that I would like to clarify some aspects of the need of ‘Laws’. Laws are enacted to restrict certain harmful actions 58
  59. 59. of individuals against other individuals or even actions against themselves for smooth conduct of society. There could be civil laws, social laws and criminal laws. Besides there are constitutional laws and international laws. There is the Natural Law Theory of Aquinas which comes under the category of present-day Overlap Thesis where under laws are divinely dictated. Since democracy has an underlying principle of agnosticism, as such, such divine Natural Laws cannot be adopted in democracy. Other alternative for nature of laws in democracy fall under purview of Legal Positivism and there could be three types of laws under Legal Positivism. i. The Social Fact Thesis ii. The Conventionality Thesis iii. The Separability Thesis Under i & ii laws validity is tested with respect to social behavior and social conventionality respectively. These theses cannot be adopted or acceptable under democracy because social behavior and conventionality depending upon age old traditions & practices which have their origin in the religious beliefs of the people. But since democracy has to assess the validity of laws from agnostic view point and also the guiding principle of liberty, thus all the laws which could be legitimate under democracy would come under the purview of the Separability Thesis. However some laws which could be tested by the Social Fact Thesis & the Conventionality Thesis as valid could also be enacted provided the laws fulfill the guiding principles of democracy. The Separability Thesis envisages that law and morality are conceptually distinct which is consistent with the basic 59
  60. 60. guiding principles of democracy. This is a serious limitation of law formation in democracy. The second most important limitation in democracy is in so far as the laws connected with the individual behavior, wherein no other individual is harmed or benefitted, cannot be enacted. This has been put forward by John Stuart Mill “the only purpose for which power (of enactment of law) can rightfully be exercised over any member of a civilized community against his will is to prevent harm to others. His own good either physical or moral, is not a sufficient warrant. Over himself, over his own body and mind, the individual is sovereign”. This is in accordance with the spirit of democracy. Thus we can now draw following conclusions; I) In democracy the laws which impose restrictions on the individual behavior (self regarding actions) where under no harm to others is involved, cannot be enacted. II) The democracy having agnosticism & liberty as guiding principles, no restrictions on the basis of religious morality can be imposed. Hence no law can be enacted which is on the basis of religious morality and challenges the liberty of the individuals. This is inherent problem of democracy and as such cannot be solved. Whether committing suicide is permissible or not cannot be decided in democracy. Similarly is sex permissible between two individuals of same sex or opposite sex, out of wedlock, with their consent will remain a debate so long as democracy is there. However some nations have enacted laws coming under above mentioned two categories under Legal Moralism but those laws have been enacted 60
  61. 61. against the spirit of democracy. Sooner or later, as agnosticism would find its deep roots in the society, these laws shall have to be repealed. Since we have no alternative to democracy, so we will have to manage with these limitations; meanwhile in religious terms let there by moral decay so much so the basic unit of society, the family structure may be demolished and the only purpose other than materialism, that is living for the sake of the children may also vanish. However assuming that people will behave the way they deem proper as they have freedom of religion, and the state would in no case interfere with their faith & belief. Another serious problem with democracy is if laws are enacted, that which are necessary but which are somehow against the religious morality, then democracy has to face a revolt. The point which I intend to make clear is that the concept of liberty and freedom of religion in the democracy are contradictory and this serious problem has evidently no solution. Similarly liberty and fraternity are also logically incompatible. However since there is no alternative to democracy, we have to find ways & means how to live with the limitations which are inherent in democracy. Now laws have to prescribe punishments for offensive acts against the individuals, society, property of individuals or society. The punishment is to inflict discomfort on the criminals for retributive, deterrence, preventive, rehabilitative and restitutive purposes. All over the world there are laws prescribing punishment but ‘the point is not that the offender deserves to suffer; it is rather that the offended party deserves and desires compensation’ (Barnett 61
  62. 62. 1977). Accordingly laws have to be changed so that the offenders convicted of wrongdoing are sentenced to compensate the victim in proportion to the victim’s loss. The punishment of imprisonments is also logically wrong because if the criminal is married, the wife and the dependent children of the criminal have also to suffer for none of their faults. Excepting those advanced & resourceful countries where unemployed and disabled persons are paid by the state; in other countries there is no social security and such people are not being paid and if these people commit theft to feed themselves and those dependent on them; apparently he has committed a crime but keeping in view the guiding principle of equality the criminal act has taken place because of failure of state of providing the individuals with the basic requirement of life. The laws all over the world do not take these matters into consideration. However since there is no alternative to democracy, we will change the laws and punishments and keep the duties of the state in mind while framing the laws. There are Critical Theories of Law & Legal Realism which envisage that the laws are generally indeterminate & inconsistent; then judges nearly always decide cases thereby make a new law which is against the guiding principle of democracy. Further where there are indeterminate & inconsistent laws or the cases are indeterminate judicial decisions are influenced by judge’s political & moral outlook. The Critical Legal Studies Theorists argue that cases are radically and globally indeterminate in the sense that the class of legal material available rarely, if ever, logically/casually entails a unique outcome. Critical Legal 62
  63. 63. Studies Theorists also view the content of the law in liberal democracies reflects ‘ideological struggles among social factions in which competing conceptions of justice, goodness and social & political life gets compromised, truncated, vitiated and adjusted’ (Altman 1986) resultantly there is profound inconsistency permeating the deepest layers of law. Since the law is inconsistent, a judge can justify any number of conflicting outcomes. There is another problem with the laws in democracy which have been identified by philosopher of law namely Fuller (1964). According to him law’s essential purpose of achieving the social order cannot be fulfilled, if following eight conditions are not fulfilled. 1. Laws must be expressed in general terms. 2. Laws must be publicly promulgated. 3. Laws must be prospective in effect. 4. Laws must be expressed in understandable terms. 5. Laws must be consistent with one another. 6. Laws must not require conduct beyond the powers of the effected parties. 7. Laws must not be changed frequently, that the subjects cannot relay on them. 8. Laws must be administered in a manner consistent with the wording. According to Fuller ‘such a system cannot be called a legal system at all’ if all these conditions are not fulfilled. On the one hand judges change laws by justifying all sorts of conflicting judgments and on the other hand in most of the democracies laws do not fulfill all these conditions. However since we have no alternative to democracy we will change 63
  64. 64. everything about laws and make them determinate and consistent and judge would not be allowed to play with laws and the law making will be left to legislators only. Legislators are generally with different educational background and in some under-developed countries and developing countries legislators are illiterate and having nominal education. A limited percentage of legislators have the background of law. But legislator’s knowledge of law, as it is, cannot be of any help because legislators being law makers, they should be aware of the implications of law and possibility of misuse of law at all the stages. Thus the legislators should be the philosophers of law, so that proper laws are enacted and old indeterminate and inconsistent laws are replaced by determinate and consistent laws. However since there is no alternative to the democracy so in order to frame proper laws we will keep a condition that only philosophers of law will be eligible to be the legislators. Justice depends upon laws and if laws are not proper then injustice prevails. Plato has very rightly clarified that injustice causes civil war, hatred and fighting in the society besides the loss of faith and trust in the governments. But because of contradictory guiding principles of democracy we cannot frame laws properly as such there cannot be justice so we have to be always ready to face the consequences as predicted by Plato. This is the inherent problem of democracy with which we have to manage. The governments under a democratic political system rules with the help of functionaries; whose functions would fall under following four classes of functions. 1. Legislature 64
  65. 65. 2. Judiciary 3. Executive 4. Media It is globally and historically an accepted fact that the main pillar of democracy is judiciary and if there is anything wrong with judiciary the society has to collapse sooner or later. If there are shortcomings with other three pillars of democracy but the judiciary is perfect the society is likely to pull on. It is a global phenomenon that judiciary is independent and the decisions of judiciary are to be obeyed by all. It is through judiciary laws are interpreted and implemented and a civilized society cannot afford to take any chances of allowing any flaw in the judicial system. But we have seen the plight of laws in democracy and so is the case with judiciary. But since judiciary is independent and so it is not accountable to any forum in democracy resultantly the judiciary is law onto itself and globally there is nothing right about judiciary and nobody can dream of justice from the judicial system in democracy. To begin with no democratic country provides lawyers to the both sides as the result of which justice is to be purchased. Thus though there is right to justice but justice is to be purchased. The global situation is that if any nation has something right about judiciary, sooner or later that rightness is destined to vanish. There are defined laws, criminal procedures and judicial procedures and during last two centuries lawyers have turned into experts in detecting drawbacks and loopholes of the judicial system which includes detecting the procedural mistakes in the judicial cases. Everything about judicial system is exposed as the result of which criminals are 65
  66. 66. assured about acquittal and the plunderers of natural and other resources have a safe shelter under judiciary. Since laws are globally and generally indeterminate and inconsistent giving the judges liberty to justify any number of conflicting judgments under some consideration or otherwise. On the one hand judges can justify any number of conflicting judgments due to indeterminate and inconsistent laws and additionally by using changed laws by some superior judges in the higher courts and one the other hand judiciary is independent and not accountable to any forum in democracy. It seems that democracy has irreparable drawbacks in laws and judicial system which would ultimately convert the civilized societies into criminal societies. Globally laws are, besides indeterminate & inconsistent, complex, complicated & lengthy and it seems laws are made for understanding of the lawyers and not for the common people who are under obligation to obey them. Generally judges are concerned with laws, criminal procedures and judicial procedures and any incomplete formality leads to the acquittal of the criminals. The judges and judiciary are insensitive to the rise in criminal activities & corruption in the societies, because the surveys reveal that the crime is on increase year after year which indicates the failure of judiciary but judiciary is not accountable to any forum. The judiciary, globally, is a lucrative business for the lawyers and judges alike resulting in ever increasing crime and corruption. In most of the democracies the civil as well as criminal cases take decades for decisions thereby the very purpose of justice is defied but judiciary being independent 66