Archive for the ‘e-Village’ Category
ALLAMA IQBAL..khudi
November 9, 2009A tribute to Allama Iqbal
November 9, 2009This Geomentary talks about Iqbals life and his esthetical tenure. It pays profound tribute to this diversified poet and scholar and covers every stage of his life with his poetic words backing up …
Who Is Allama Iqbal?? 1 of 8
Who Is Allama Iqbal?? 2 of 8
Who Is Allama Iqbal?? 3 of 8
Who Is Allama Iqbal?? 4 of 8
Who Is Allama Iqbal?? 5 of 8
Who Is Allama Iqbal?? 6 of 8
Who Is Allama Iqbal?? 7 of 8
Who Is Allama Iqbal?? 8 of 8
Azfar Mani Show – Sheikh Rasheed
September 22, 2009
Sheikh Rasheed & Atiqa Odho Coversation About His Marriage
September 22, 2009Sheikh Rasheed & Atiqa Odho Coversation About His Marriage (Conversation with Atiqa Odho)
Pakistan
September 14, 2009To Country of Great Nation…….Pakistan
Source: http://aliadnan.wordpress.com
MIND & MATTER & MORALITY – A CASE STUDY – By Monteiro, Marty
July 28, 2009
MIND & MATTER: THE 2ND PERSON (PART I)
In a case study, a matter and mind model is presented from an ‘interpersonal’ perspective in the context of ‘final-ity’ and ‘causality’. The social architecture of mind-body relation occurs on basis of ‘interaction’ at physical-, mental- and social level. Interaction is generated through an imbalanced state of ‘shortage-surplus’ within a person and between persons to bring about a balanced state by en-ergy/matter transactions. At all levels, learning occurs resulting in physical-, social and mental development. The growth of matter takes place through mind-in-matter trans-formation mediated in short-term memory and mental devel-opment through matter-in-mind transformation in long-term memory. Material synergy evolution is on account of the mental autonomy of inter-individual interaction, contrary to mental synergy evolution, for which a supra-individual unifying-creating force is postulated.
1.1 INTRODUCTION
For thousands of years one has approached the mind-body issue from the perspective of a sole per-son without taking another human being into consid-eration. Trying to explain consciousness while fo-cussing on mattermind influencing, the individual is viewed either from the 3rd person physical-biological domain as a ‘passive’ being or in case of mindmatter influencing from the 1st person per-spective; the mind is an ‘active’ agent supposed to exist as a phenomenal consciousness of how reality is experienced subjectively. It is advocated that the 3rd as well as the 1st person approach fall short and it is tried to cross the border of the individ-ual perspective by way of including the social en-vironment. The claim that active consciousness to-wards the environment is not only object-oriented but above all subject-directed, throws light on the mind-matter issue. Unveiling the ‘private’ mind-matter domain occurs in the framework of interper-sonal behaviour, behavioural products, related to intersubjective mental processes serving as valida-tion criterion. Within a growth-dynamic experimen-tal setting, mind and matter are made ‘public’ in the context between the 1st person – 2nd person.
The architecture of mind-matter in a social framework provides additional information through the introduction of finality beyond causality. It concerns not only the related causal process pat-terns but also the emergence of autonomous proc-esses. Autonomous processes operate at mind-body levels for which the status of finality holds. The relative role of finality and causality is valid under specific conditions. The claim is that final-ity is valid for primary autonomous linear proc-esses and causality for related processes forming a cyclic system. It is assumed that final processes only play a role before interaction between events. After interaction feedback occurs, generating a cy-clic process system to which the status of causal-ity applies. In the framework of processes between objects and between subjects, the distinctive role of finality as well as causality refers to:
1) physical process level of sensation of a stimu-lus & motivation of a need
2) mental process level of cognition of structuring & perception of information
3) social process level of sensation of a norm & motivation of a value…
The claim is that morality refers to the ‘mind state’ of a person and specifically that cognition is the source of morality. Testing of morality of cognition occurs, however, at an interpersonal energy and/or behavioural level by perception. Defining morality refers to an interactive interpersonal (inter-group) domain. Ethics are restricted to events outside interactions and concern the short-term or long-term consequences for a person involved or affecting (an) other person(s). If persons mutually behave morally, this does not necessarily imply that the effects of an interpersonal event can be qualified as ethical, as for instance giving a child too much candy, which will affect its teeth later on. Thus, morality is restricted to ‘interactive’ events of satisfaction in economic transaction, pleasure in cultural relation, fulfilling in natural dependency, and happiness in universal connection. Thus, the definition of ethics refers to the consequences of interaction affecting other systems in the socio-cultural and bio-natural field, generating a feedback on the person(s) in question at a later stage. On the basis of the interactive and consequential perspective of the domains of morality and of ethics, one can state a morality and ethics distinction.
The reference frame of mind and matter serves as the starting point for founding morality and ethics. The mind-matter processes are operational in the categorical system of the relation between mind and morality. The mind is laying the basis to approach morality and morality test from the perspective of ‘interpersonal utility’. In the framework of social interaction of moral good reflected in satisfaction, pleasure, fulfilment and happiness, it defines the border of morality and the domains of ethics. The morality and ethics distinction is relevant and based on the interactive and consequence criterion resulting in direct or indirect feedback. Economic transactions can be morally satisfying but not consonant with or even contradictory to culture ethics, etc. The role of morality is more extensive than the conditional role of finality and causality. Morality keeps its general status whether cognition is final or cause. To know man’s mind and morality in the framework of another person is the essence of human existence in his moral entanglement.
TABLE 2 Mind & Morality
| Mind-Morality
1st -2nd person |
Morality +Test cognition-perception |
Space-Timefinality-causality | Domain Ethicssocial utility |
| social interaction | good | 3-D morality | social ethics |
|
economic transaction |
satisfaction | present | economic ethics |
| cultural relation | pleasure | past | cultural ethics |
|
natural dependency |
fulfilment | future | natural ethics |
|
universal connection |
happiness | past-present-future | universal ethics |
For more details read Case study: mind & matter & morality Case Study
Bibliography
Monteiro, Marty (2009) – Model Of Man: Mind & Matter – Mind & Morality. AEG Publishing Group, New York, Lon-don, Frankfurt
——————————————————-
This case study is extracted from the author’s book Model Of Man: Mind & Matter – Mind & Morality (AEG Publishing Group, New York, London, Frankfurt, 2009)
To discuss more with Monteiro, Marty about this case study and his book, join Yahoo group at:
Rational Solution
Dark side of 21st century in Pakistan
July 15, 2009
Scrutinizing a snapshot of a Brazilian girl and two presidents at the G8
July 11, 2009
President Obama is in the middle of the G8 conference, where he and other world leaders are trying to fix the climate, the global economy, and about a million other terrifying problems. And yet, all anyone can talk about is a photo that supposedly shows the U.S. president and French leader Nicolas Sarkozy checking out a young woman’s posterior.
Obama meeting with Pope Benedict XVI on bioethics
July 10, 2009VATICAN CITY – President Barack Obama sat down with Pope Benedict XVI at the Vatican on Friday for frank but constructive talks between two men who agree on helping the poor but disagree on abortion and stem cell research.
“It’s a great honor,” Obama said as he greeted the pope, thanking him for this first meeting, which lasted 30 minutes. They sat down at the pontiff’s desk and exchanged pleasantries before reporters and photographers were ushered out of the ornate room.
The pope was heard asking about the Group of Eight summit, the meeting of developed nations that concluded before Obama’s arrival at Vatican City. Obama said it “was very productive.”
After the meeting, the Vatican said the two leaders discussed immigration, the Middle East peace process and aid to developing nations. But the Vatican’s statement also underscored the pair’s deep disagreements on abortion.
“In the course of their cordial exchanges, the conversation turned first of all to questions which are in the interest of all and which constitute a great challenge … such as the defense and promotion of life and the right to abide by one’s conscience,” the statement said.
Even in his gift to the U.S. leader, the pope sought to communicate his beliefs. Benedict gave Obama with a copy of a Vatican document on bioethics that hardened the church’s opposition to using embryos for stem cell research, cloning and in-vitro fertilization.
“Yes, this is what we had talked about,” Obama said, telling the pope he would read it on the flight to Ghana.
Source: http://news.yahoo.com
