Where do we locate subjective truth: as fact or fiction?

Yesterday, Jan. 14th 2015, The Hindu carried a very controversial opinion article, "In maya, the killer and the killed", http://www.thehindu.com/opinion/lead/in-maya-the-killer-and-the-killed/article6785735.ece, by DEVDUTT PATTANAIK. I feel the article is deeply flawed as it does not give an outright condemnation of the Charlie Hebdo violence. In fact, the lack of such a condemnation makes some readers, as shown by comments on the article web page, assume that it is trying to justify that violence! However, the article does have some good points too. A small extract given below is one that I found to be quite good:

And here is the problem — measurement, that cornerstone of science and objectivity.

We can manage the measurable. But what about the non-measurable? Does it matter at all? Emotions cannot be measured. The mind cannot be measured, which is why purists refer to psychology and behavioural science as pseudoscience. God cannot be measured. For the scientist, god is therefore not fact. It is at best a notion. This annoys the Muslim, for he/she believes in god, and for him/her god is fact, not measurable fact, but fact nevertheless. It is subjective truth. My truth. Does it matter?

Where do we locate subjective truth: as fact or fiction?

--- end extract ---

It also talks about how today the 'barbarian'(brawn) is being forced to respond, when provoked by the intellectual(brain), in a language he does not know (brain).

Ravi: My view is that in today's age, people of all walks of life have to learn to either ignore malicious & destructive criticism or tolerate it if forced to view/hear it. Tolerance towards malicious criticism has become the key quality that the spiritual/religious person needs to cultivate. Polite criticism of spirituality/religion should be welcomed as such criticism can prevent or keep in check any wrong-doings of spiritual/religious groups.

Comments

Archive

Show more