The World As Will & Idea : Arthur Schopanhauer

The World as will & idea, although this book was rejected by most of the contemprory thinkers of Schopenhauer but still, I fell in love with this book as soon as I started reading it. The book was published in 1844.
What strikes me most is the style of this book. Here is no chinese puzzle of kantian terminology, no hegelian philosophy but there is blunt honesty, refreshing vigour & uncompromising directness.

The book starts with the first sentence of Schopenhaeur , 'The world is my idea'.
The most vital part of the first section is the attack on materialism. 'How can we explain mind as matter, when we know matter only through mind ?'.

In the second section i.e. The world as will he writes ' Consciousness is the mere surface of our mind, of which, as of the earth, we do not know the inside but only the crust'.

He ends this book with a sentence which I think partly became the cause of rejection of this masterpiece ' No time can be more unfavorable to philosophy than that in which it is shamefully misused on the one hand to further political objects, on the other hand as a means of livelyhood.

This book, I love a lot.

Bertrand Russell

I appologize dearly to all the readers as I have again deviated from the topic of books to the authors. But in this case it was necessary;just to save time & space.

Bertarnd Russell, the logician,philosopher,thinker,mathematician & the reformer, was born in Britain in 1872. He was awarded Nobel Prize in 1950.
There have been two Bertrand Russells : One who died during the war; & another who rose out of that one's shroud, an almost mystic communist born out of the ashes of a mathematical logician.Perhaps there was a tender mystic strain in him always. I tried to focus myself on the later Bertran Russell.

I had a chance to read four of his books:

1). An Inquiry Into meaning & Truth :-In this book Russell is concerned with the foundation of knowledge. He approaches his subject through a discussion of language, the relationship of truth to experience & an investigation into how knowledge of the structure of language helps our understanding of the world.

2). Analysis Of Mind :- This book has grown out of an attempt to harmonize two different tendencies, one in psychology, the other in physics, with both of which Rusell found himself in sympathy, although at first sight they might seem inconsistent. On the one hand, many psychologists, especially those of the behaviourist school, tend to adopt what is essentially a materialistic position, as a matter of method of metaphysics. In this book, Russell talks about consciousness, desires, instincts & habbits.

3). Why I am not a christian :- This book actually is the collection of Russell's lectures & debates over his firm postion of atheism. Russell deeply goes into human mind in order to investigate the origins & causes of religion. Like Nietzsche Christianity is symbolic for Russell's rational ideas. He opposed all the organised religions.

4). The Roads To Freedom :- This is political doctorine of Russell. A pro-revolution book in which Russell developed his specific political idealogy more clealry than in any other book that he wrote during the first world war.

Being & Nothingness : Jean-Paul Sartre

Being & Nothingness. In that work, Jean-Paul Sartre attempts to straighten out a question that had eluded Descartes, Kant and Leibniz, and to a lesser extent Heidegger and Bergson: What is the relation of being to its nothingness? Bergson, for example' posited the act of duration, in which organization is melodic, involving a multiplicity of interpretations. Anyone who has been in a meetings, knows there are always competing perspectives and interpretations of events. Sartre, however, points out that if we talk of "temporality" then duration, as a multiplicity of interpretations, must presuppose "an organizing act".

Kant, in contrast to Bergson, did not see a synthesis in a multiplicity and the organizing act. At issue, for organization theory, is the terrain of "collective memory." For Bergson, the past interpretations cling to those of the present, penetrating the present in the form of memory, which is "ekstatically in the Past." What is ekstatic? For, Sartre's theory of temporality and organizing, ekstatic is not one, but three dimensions. And this is one of many contributions he makes in Being & Nothingness.

Sartre's contribution was to move from the philosophy of "I think, therefore I am" to "I think; therefore I was". The problem for organization studies is to answer the question of how is it that organizations change and are interpenetrated by permanence (what does not change In-Itself), and collective memory (that is being perpetually restoried), in time? Duration of organization presupposes an organizing act which is antenarrative, foreshadowing the nihilation of In-Itself and the becoming For-Itself. Organizing is the multiplicity and interpenetration of Being & Nothingness.

This book, I love a lot.

Tractatus Logico Philosophicus : Ludwig Wittgenstein

Ludwig Wittgenstein's Tractatus Logico Philosophicus is one of the most remarkable book I ever came across. For me, this book depicts the very insight of a human being and intelligence. But if I am truly asked I would say that there is nothing unusual in this book other than one sentence with which Wittegenstein ends his book Whereof, one cannot speak thereof, one must be silent or I would simplify it That which cannot be spoken about must be passed over in silence.

This contribution to the new readings of the early Wittgenstein presents in detail how one might read the Tractatus as a sustained attack on Frege's and Russell's philosophical and logical conceptions while at the same time presuming Wittgenstein to have always been in some sense a "late Wittgensteinian," that is, already embarked on the therapeutic task of setting down "the way of release" from philosophical confusion and "ensnarement of thought" (1). Taking seriously the passage in the Tractatus (6.54) in which Wittgenstein assesses his "elucidations" as "nonsensical," Ostrow places himself among those readers who infer that straightforward theory-making was not Wittgenstein's aim, but differs from them in his original and challenging account of how the propositions of the Tractatus are nonsense.

This book, I love a lot.

Principia Ethica : G . E. Moore

Another book I am mentioning here is G. E. Moore's Principa Ethica. Moore is one of the most important, and the most overlooked, figures in Analytic philosophy. All too many historical surveys of early Analytic philosophy treat him as attached to Bertrand Russell’s hip, and as soon as they have got done discussing their joint break with Absolute Idealism and offered a rather Russellian understanding of Moore’s work on Analytic method, they pretty quickly move on to talk about what’s taken to be the heavy-duty stuff: Principia Mathematica, Wittgenstein, and the Vienna Circle. All of this is too damn bad; for as valuable as the parts of Analytic method that Moore and Russell developed more or less in tandem are, there are in the end deep differences between Moore and Russell, in the motivations that led each to adopt Analytic method and the understanding of the aim and right method of philosophy that resulted for each.

G. E. Moore in his seminal Principia Ethica stated that a naturalistic fallacy was committed whenever a philosopher attempts to prove a claim about ethics by appealing to a definition of the term "good" in terms of one or more natural properties (such as "pleasant", "more evolved", "desired", etc.).

The naturalistic fallacy is related to, and often confused with, the is-ought problem (as formulated by, for example, David Hume). As a result, the term is sometimes used loosely to describe arguments that claim to draw ethical conclusions from natural facts.
Alternately, the phrase "naturalistic fallacy" is used to refer to the claim that what is natural is inherently good or right, and that what is unnatural is bad or wrong.

This book, I love a lot.

Thus Spake Zarathustra : Friedrich Nietzsche

Thus Spake Zarathustra, became for me one of the books with whom I cannot avoid loving ever since I read it. It is the masterpiece of Nietzsche.

Friedrich Nietzsche, German Philosopher (1844-1900), was appointed professor of classical philology at the university of Basel in 1869. Thus Spake Zarathustra is the title by which Nietzsche is popularly known, the work's literary genre has placed a considerable obstacles in the path of it's author's reception as a serious philosopher. However, in Nietzsche's case, to question whether his writings are artistic or philosophical is profoundly misleading.

In Thus spake Zarathustra Nietzsche rejects the Christian ideas of God in favour of the superior powers of the superman. This superman would be any man who throws off the shackles of religion (in this case Christianity, but relevant to any religion conforming society) and creates his own values. Only under heavy distortions allows it to appear to fit in with the ideals of Adolf Hitler's Third Reich movement. It may see a much purer model in the future, where the mass realisation - God is dead or more accurately never alive in the first place and man takes full control. Here man may use scientific knowledge such as genetics engineering combined with spiritual knowledge through meditative techniques to evolve to a vastly superior being.

Though Nietzsche once lamented that he wrote rather than sang, for most of his creative life there was never any rigid distinction between the literary and philosophical dimensions of thinking. In Thus Spake Zarathustra Nietzsche allows his imagination full rein. To quibble about the philosophical or literary status of the text is foolish. What matters is the subject matter of the endeavour rather than its formal idiom. There is no doubt that Thus Spake Zarathustra was written by Nietzsche as if he were possessed by a tormented and tormenting muse.

He writes that when Zarathustra was thirty years old, he left his home and went to the mountains for the enjoyment of his spirit and his solitude. He came down ten years later and met and old man to whom he said, ' dont you know that the god is dead '. And from here starts the journey of Zarathustra where he meets many persons whom he discourses.

I would like to quote an elegant remark of AJ about Nietzsche, ' Nietzsche, for me draws very blur and thin line between reason and insanity. '

But Nietzsche, for me, was an unfortunate fellow. He knew everything about the superman but never became one. He filled his mind with so much questions but failed to find the answer. He lived the last ten years of life in a mental asylum and died in 1900 in a very desperate manner.

But he left his legacy in the shape of Thus spake Zarathustra.

This book, I love a lot.

The Prophet : Kahlil Gibran

This book, The Prophet was first published in 1923. Kahlil Gibran, the author, instantly placed himself on highest platform of human thinking with the publication of this book.

Kahlil Gibran ( 1883-1931) , a Lebanese writer and thinker was versatile. He was an artist also and drew many sketches which are considered today as metaphysical. He setteled in New York, America. But apart from being an influential thinker, writer and artist Gibran was an alcoholic to the marrow. He died of liver cancer due to execissive drinking of alcohol.

The prophet is a story of a chosen man of god, Almustafa, who lives in a small town of Orfelis. He waited for twelve years for a ship to come which will take him to the land he was born. The ship did came but as he was about to board the people of town came to him to ask the questions of wisdom. Almustafa discourses them. This small book is nothing but commentries on life by Kahlil Gibran put on the mouth of Almustafa.

Gibran's way of seeing life is entirely different as is evident from his writing. He divided the book into various chapters such as Life, Love, Fear, Unhappiness, Law, Marriage, Punishment, Freedom, Sorrow, Friendship, Time, Blissfulness, Beauty etc etc. What Gibran writes, reminds me of J. Krishnamurthy.

Some of his writings:-

1. When love calls you, you should follow it. Although it's way is very difficult. When love opens it's wings, you should devote yourself to it even if the sword hidden in those wings may wound you.

2. Love on one hand crowns you and on the other hand crucifies you. On one hand it develops your soul and on the other hand cuts you in into pieces.

3. Your clothes hide what is beautiful in you but cannot hide what is ugly in you.

4. If you really want to witness death then open your heart fully to life. B'coz life and death are the same just as river and sea are the same.

5. Mostly, the kindness which sees itself in the mirror turns into stone.

And like this the story goes on. Almustafa departs from Orfelis with a promise to come back. The Prophet is Kahlil Gibran's masterpiece.

This book, I love a lot.

Beyond Good & Evil : Friedrich Nietzsche

The second book I am mentioning belongs to the one of the most influential thinkers of all time : Friedrich Nietzsche & the book is Beyond Good & Evil.

Nietzsche was controversial to the marrow and still is controversial. This book of his Beyond Good & Evil followed his famous work Thus Spake Zarathustra. But here instead of talking about his superman Nietzsche simply summed up his philosophy- but in less flamboyant and more systematic form. The various parts of the book are designed to give idea of Nietzsche's thought.
It is interesting to read Nietzsche's comments about the prejudices of philosopher, the free spirit, virtues and nobility.

But for me, the core part of the book is epigrams and interludes section of the book which contains various qoutes of Nietzsche.
Some of them I should mention:-

1. " knowledge for it's own sake"- that is the last snare of morality: with that one becomes completely entangled in it once more.

2. Love of one is barbarism; for it is exercised at the expense of all others. The love of god too.

3. Whoever despises himself still respects himself as one who despises.

4. A soul that knows it is loved but does not love itself betrays it's sediments: what is at the bottom comes up.

5. If we train our conscience , it kisses us while it hurt us.

6. Whatever is done from love always occurs beyond good & evil.

So, this was the man like. But one may find some of the Nietzsche's remarks on women as hideous. But the fellow never cared while writing this book what we are going to make out of his remark.

In his own words from this book -" In truth the matter is different: while you pretend rapturously to read the cannon of your law in nature, you want something opposite, you strange actors and self deceivers ! Your pride wants to impose your morality, your ideals on nature- even on nature- and incorporate them in her".

The book was first published in 1886. Nietzsche experimented himself of having something published at his own expense; assuming to cover his expenses if 300 copies were sold. Unfortunately this did not happened. Only 114 copies were sold in 5 years. But by 1903, 17000 copies were in print & today this book is considered as classic. But Nietzsche never lived to see all this. He died in 1900.

Altogather, this book offers some thing vague and dramatic ideas.

This book, I love a lot.

Meetings With Remarkable men : G. I. Gurdjieff

The first book I am mentioning here is G. I. Gurdjieff's Meetings with Remarkable Men. This is 2nd series of his collected work All And Everything.

G.I. Gurdjieff(1877-1949), literally unknown mystic was born in Alexandropol and trained in Kars as both physician and a priest. Later on he formed a society Seekers Of Truth and went on travelling the remotest regions of central Asia and Middle east. He also went to India and Tibet in order to seek the truth. This journey of his lasted for about twenty years. These years were crucial in the moulding of his thought. On his return, he began to gather pupils in Moscow but had to fled away during the Russian revolution. P. D. Ouspensky, a well known Russian mathematician, discovered Gurdjieff when he was hiding in the hills of Caucasus. Later on gurdjieff settled in the outskirts of Paris where he opened his Institute for the Harmonious Development of Man in 1922 on a larger scale.

This book of his, is an autobiographical account of his journey. The book contains the memoirs of Gurdjieff with numerous people whom he considered remarkable. These people namely his own father, his first tutor Dean Borsh, Bogachevsky, his companion during many journeys Captain Pogossian, his friend Abram yelov, Seeker like himself Prince Yuri, Ekim Bey, karpenko and Proff. Skridlov. For Gurdjieff, these men helped him to understand the very core of human intelligence. For me, these men were painters who painted the man whom we all know by the name of George Ivanovitch gurdjieff.

Every chapter of the book resembles not the remarkability of these men but also the insight of the author. What I liked the most was the style of writing the book. As if I was reading a novel or watching a movie. Gurdjieff mentions his father as a practical man. He writes in the book some of the subjective sayings of his father-

1. Without salt, no sugar.

2. He is deep down, because you are high up.

3. If a man is coward, it proves he has will.

4. Truth is that from which conscience can be at peace.

5. He is stupid who is ' clever'.

6. Happy is he who does not sees his unhappiness.

7. If you wish to be rich, make friends with the police. If you wish to be famous, make friends with the reporters. If you wish to be full--with your mother-in-law. If you wish to sleep--with your wife. If you wish to have peace--with your neighbour and if you wish to loose your religious faith make friend with the priest.

In the word of gurdjieff that man can be called remarkable who stands out from those around him by the resourcefulness of his mind, and who knows how to be restrained in the manifestations which proceed from his nature, at the same time conducting himself justly and tolerantly the weaknesses of others.

The book was first published in 1963. But the manusripts were complete in 1927 and was revised by Gurdjieff over a period of many years. The book was originally written in Russian and later on translated in English.

This book, I love a lot.