Can Indians Distinguish Between Religion and Science?

"No wonder Indians completely lack scientific temperament, even those who attend top colleges in the world, even those who do their PhD in Physics, even those who launch rockets into space, even those who do research in medicine."

totally uncalled for and unsubstantiated !

That's where Indians continue to find their Hinduism superior to Modern Science.

Dude.. i agree to most of your shit.. what i dont understand is your focus on only Hinduism..

All religions are fucked up :) dont point only to Hinduism... makes people question your credibility :) I have a soft corner to Hinduism, because i have seen how its treated in Kerala. I have a soft corner to Brahmins, because being one and being mistreated in some areas on TN i know how it feels :) I have a soft corner to minrorities, because i was a linguistic minority in kerala who lived my miserable childhood in Kerala and for the 9 of my 18 years there i could not speak mallu :)

All religions are fucked up :- Remember the Church blocked science for 800 years :) And it even executed people who believed that there was a mathematical infinity (which was the basis of calculus) if calculus was invented in the 1300s we would have been 700 years into the future now :)

I agree to the rest of your article.. if indians had scientific temperament compared to the west.. we would have innovations and products coming out of india. Instead of what we are doing now, body shopping.

I am into a startup which develops products and have been searching for investors for a while.. WHen i explain these ideas to some of my wealthy indian friends (stanford types) and some of my friends in the US (local college type) i can see a marked differece in appreciation :) . Some of the profs in local colleges out here have better insight than some of the IISc ones that i have met. It shattered my initial dream of starting an R&D hub in India. I have figured out a way for that but i am not sure how practical it is.


The difference in explaining technology to an indian dude and to an american dude is precisely the differences you mentioned.

I am not sure of where india is heading to in the scientific realm. What i am sure is that the next big technological innovation cannot come from India :)

Whoa there -- religion is based on blind faith, because it requires an adherent to believe in things that cannot or have not been proven.

Science requires that you believe in things after they have been proven, rather than blindly through faith. Science is therefore not a mere belief system like religion is, but is rather rational process of thought and reasoning requiring proof, and allowing for skepticism and challenge towards any established idea, with the caveat of providing proof, of course. So science is no mere dogma, just as proof and evidence aren't mere dogma.

But just because one enjoys reading fantasy literature, and finds Lord of the Rings entertaining, doesn't mean they take it as real. I happen to enjoy stories of heroism and valour like Lord of the Rings, etc, but that doesn't mean I believe in the existence of pointy-eared elves. I would say that I enjoy the heroic and courageous values depicted in the stories against a refreshingly exotic backdrop. If anything, this radically different other-worldly backdrop helps to accentuate the depiction of the heroism, courage and related values.

After all, most people in our mundane, everyday world don't get to fight off a horde of Orcs, trolls and goblins. Neither do they get to fight off the onslaught of the Kaurava empire, or waves of rakshasa demons.

I think that the main reason Lefties like you scoff at mythology-lovers, is because you have difficulty coping with the notion of chivalry, individual courage and sacrifice, or similarly virtuous values. You feel that feel that all upliftment and betterment comes from the welfare state.

I'm reminded of a Pakistani film critic's review of a Star Trek movie. He felt that the United Federation of Planets was a manifestation of American Imperialism, and questioned why they kept persecuting the helpless Borg, whom he felt were needlessly maligned by the Federation. I find such loaded critiques to be laughable.

So please, Sujai, do continue to amuse us by commenting upon how the innocent downtrodden Orcs were victimized by the dastardly alliance of corrupt humans, evil Upper Caste Elves and the greedy gold-digging zionist dwarves. Please do write us an extended editorial on this. You can call it, "Lord of the Rings: The Untold Story", or something like that.

Sanjay:

While i am totally not a left wing person and i yearn for a religion free world :), i kinda disagree with you here :)

Enjoying Fantasy literature is ok. Stifling creativity, and BELIEVING in fantasy literature to be the ultimate is something that would make even the most right wing dude in you shrudder.

Thats what the mullahs and the xtian and hindu fundus do :)

Its this monotonic creativity stifling that has lead to zombie like technicians whom we call desi engineers.

Most of the companies do not require a keen scientific insight to do coding, and hence the desi engineer thrives on.

However coming to having a scientific temperament, the creativity stifled indians find it really difficult to cope with :)

I think i have to agree with Sujai that Indian Education system stiffles creativity, in the name of believing in fantasy.

There is also one more cause. THe racist motherfucker Maculay wanted some indians to be trained in English and western style education. (that is a reason why we have one British Resident LN Mittal and the Ambanis in India now who have more money that the British Queen and her Kohinoor diamond put together twice).

The Indians were educated in a need to know basis (you are to be servents and not rulers ;) ).. the system is still being followed.

This and the religious beliefs combined has made india into an exotic place, where we have a lot of literate people who have absolutely no creativity

Sanjay:

You did not understand the message.

I was never equating mythology readers to blind believers. I am talking about those who think that those mythologies are actually real (the latest example being the Ram Sethu controversy).

Enjoying mythology is not equated with believing mythology here!

I think that the main reason Lefties like you scoff at mythology-lovers,

;-)

When did scoff at mythology-lovers. Liking Batman comics, reading Calvin and Hobbes, reading Amar Chitra Katha, or get amused by Alice in Wonderland is different from believing that Batman exists! I am talking about those folks who start believing army of monkey build a bridge to Sri Lanka, and those who believe there was a talking Bear who helped Lord Rama.

I find such loaded critiques to be laughable.

Do you find producing Valmiki's Ramayana as proof for proving existence of Lord Rama laughable?

Laxmikanth:

I was concerned about Hinduism, which seems to dominate the Indian ethos, in this topic. I did not delve into other religions.

Christianity is dogmatic in theory (and practice few centuries ago) but has gone through a major struggle to separate state from religion. Islam is dogmatic in theory and practice and continues to dominate all spheres of life. Hinduism, though 'not dogmatic' in theory has been showing signs of dominating all spheres of life- approaching slowly towards where Islam is today (still far off).

What is disturbing is the direction it is taking.

If I were to rank each of these religions (as currently practiced by its followers in their centers) on a rating of scientific temperament, Islam would be the last, and one notch above could be Hinduism.

I did not go into how each religion had different attitudes towards pursuit of Science in different times - because there was a time, when Western Christianity was going through Dark Ages, Islam carried the torch for a while.

In the same way, there way spurt of activity from Hindus as well in remote past.

I guess I was looking at the present context and that too India alone, and therefore mostly guided by Hinduism (being major religion).

Laxmikanth:

I was concerned about Hinduism, which seems to dominate the Indian ethos, in this topic. I did not delve into other religions.

Christianity is dogmatic in theory (and practice few centuries ago) but has gone through a major struggle to separate state from religion. Islam is dogmatic in theory and practice and continues to dominate all spheres of life. Hinduism, though 'not dogmatic' in theory has been showing signs of dominating all spheres of life- approaching slowly towards where Islam is today (still far off).

What is disturbing is the direction it is taking.

If I were to rank each of these religions (as currently practiced by its followers in their centers) on a rating of scientific temperament, Islam would be the last, and one notch above could be Hinduism.

I did not go into how each religion had different attitudes towards pursuit of Science in different times - because there was a time, when Western Christianity was going through Dark Ages, Islam carried the torch for a while.

In the same way, there way spurt of activity from Hindus as well in remote past.

I guess I was looking at the present context and that too India alone, and therefore mostly guided by Hinduism (being major religion).

Laxmikanth:

I am into a startup which develops products and have been searching for investors for a while.. WHen i explain these ideas to some of my wealthy indian friends (stanford types) and some of my friends in the US (local college type) i can see a marked differece in appreciation :) . Some of the profs in local colleges out here have better insight than some of the IISc ones that i have met. It shattered my initial dream of starting an R&D hub in India. I have figured out a way for that but i am not sure how practical it is.

This discusses the state of Indian entrepreneurship to a certain extent:
Ground realities from a technology product startup in India

#8, Link:

Ground realities from a technology product startup in India

I am not sure if the above link is working:
Here, I paste the whole link-
http://www.pluggd.in/2007/11/ground-realities-from-a-technology-product-startup-in-india

I just realized this:
The same is discussed at-
http://www.venturewoods.org/

Sujai:
Thanks, I am reading it now. Never thought you faced pretty much the same shit that i did. I had issues with explaining a simple transport protocol to an IISc dude .. i had to give up a couple of ideas due to blatant discouragement from the IISc professors and I decided to leave for an MS in the US :)

Now i have a dedicated set of people who focus on a particular area (computer/biometric/distributed image anamysis). Funny thing when i tried to rope in some IIT/IISc pple is IISc/IIT people were not looking at how some technology can be adapted, they were looking at what technologies can already be lisenced from companies in the west who already developed it :)

Creative impotence is the hall mark of Indian Science at present. Gone are the days of Ramanujam and CV Raman :)

Famous Hindu scientist.

Science without religion is lame. Religion without science is blind.-Albert Einstein

Laxmikanth wrote:
"Enjoying Fantasy literature is ok. Stifling creativity, and BELIEVING in fantasy literature to be the ultimate is something that would make even the most right wing dude in you shrudder(sic).

Thats what the mullahs and the xtian and hindu fundus do :)"

Lax, I happen to be an atheist and a rationalist, and I think you need to recognize that theism is not the only type of mythology in the world. Socialism is another type of mythology that you need to recognize for what it is. As a rationalist, I'll say that it's irrational to reject or oppose the rationally derived laws of physics and nature. I'll agree with you that belief in supernatural deity/deities is indeed an irrational blind leap of faith. But it's a transgression of a far lesser order than someone who disowns and disparages the most important natural laws pertaining to our human nature -- the laws of economics.

So while someone who believes that the Sun revolves around the Earth is certainly ignorant or irrational, the fact is that someone who believes in social justice through socialism is guilty of a far more dangerous irrationality.

Why? Because if you or I stop believing that the atomic nucleus is held together by the Strong Force, that will in no way prevent or interfere with its gluons from doing what they always do. If you or I fail to understand how our ribosomes assemble RNA into polyamino proteins, that will in no way stop our ribosomes from doing what they always do. But when socialists -- and I certainly include Islamists amongst the strands of blindly socialist believers -- believe in and spread their irrational and false economic beliefs, then yes, they certainly do interfere with and undermine the rational conduct and lifestyles of others.

So you need to figure out and recognize who is committing the greater sin against rationality -- the irrational theist who pours some milk on his idol but makes a rational living as a doctor, or some self-proclaimed atheist who's too fucking stupid/lazy to get off welfare, get a job, and to see the corrupting nature of the welfare state. I'd argue to you that it's the latter who's the most irrational, and in the most dangerous way.

I'm an atheist, and I think that belief in God is irrational. But I have more respect for the religious guy who makes an honest living as a real estate agent, than some worthless asshole who lives on the dole while preaching that free market economics is evil. It's pretty obvious to me which one of the two is the more medieval. You need to figure that out, because Sujai certainly can't, and that's why he's still living on the dole and campaigning for ethnic quotas on school admissions.

Scientific knowledge has certain properties which are almost never presented to students in India. Perhaps the most important is that scientific knowledge is tentative , those ideas which are found to correspond to observations are held to be tentatively true and when those ideas are not found to do so , they are abandoned. This is in stark opposition to the concept of absolute, gospel Truth. There is indeed no such thing in science. This also has something to with the notion of accepting that we do not understand a large set of observations, but we might do so in the future with better ideas and more precise observations. But if you already think that everything is known , there is no incentive to develop new ideas.

The second idea is that scientific knowledge is developed by fragile humans and indeed as they say , one scientist's glory is to bury the other in a non-personal way. This means that the knowledge does not flow from the authority of any individual. I like a particular story in this regard , where one of Einstein's papers was rejected during peer review(after he got the Nobel prize) for being incorrect; and this man was the most revered scientist of his time.

Most religious knowledge is based on completely different principles. The ideas of Ram , omnipotence , omniscience, benevolent interjector , flying horses are unsubstantiated by precise evidence. They are held as elements of faith and do not require corroboration with new evidence. They do provide great psychological support especially in a country where life can often be nasty , brutish and short. Science which would bring a culture of doubt might be too unsettling. Perhaps when we are richer..

Those who believe science is perfect, has all the answers, is cure for all problems, can create civilized order, can build character in persons and moral institutions, and save mankind, than I would call them irrational, dogmatic, blind-faithed and superstitious. Science vs religion is old debate and volume of ink have been spilled on it. As long as there are religions like islam and xianity who confine pursuit of knowledge to books, these debates will go on. Neither science nor religions are monolithic. Not all sciences are as precise as math, chemistry and physics. You have psychology, history, economics, social/political sciences, anthropology, archeology etc that are touted as sciences but are highly subjective, dogmatic and loaded with prejudices and preferences. On the other hand, particle/quantum physics have brought sciences much closer to eastern religions. Those who deride Puranic stories and characters as 'myth' do not have developed intellect nor rational mind - and perhaps envious of power that such 'myth' have been able to hold over people for thousands of years as opposed to their own secular myths which have not been able to stand up beyond few decades, I think they are more driven by envy, anger and anti-religion agenda, and I think they are trying to ride on the credibility of exact sciences. I have seen same people put on a hat of socialist, communist, secularist, rationalist, scientist, universalist, constitutionist or whatever that suited them to attack a hindu religious issue.

Sujai: Education in India is not to impart rational thinking or induce scientific temperament or to induce universal laws or inculcate a mature discussion capability. It is not to make law-abiding citizens or better humans. It is treated as a cumbersome but necessary exercise that one has to go through to earn more in life, get material goods, buy homes, get a good career, buy cars, travel world (nowadays), show off and feel happy about

Chandra: Well said!!

However, i dont think religion alone is responsible for the dismal state of science in our country.

Sujai wrote:
"I am talking about those folks who start believing army of monkey build a bridge to Sri Lanka, and those who believe there was a talking Bear who helped Lord Rama.
...
Do you find producing Valmiki's Ramayana as proof for proving existence of Lord Rama laughable?"

Frankly what I find appalling is that someone would be required to validate that their sacred heritage site was built according to their beliefs, simply to keep it from being destroyed. I find the Leftist and self-proclaimed Dravidian "rationalists" (really just Dravidian RACISTS in false garb) to be a bunch of intolerant and savage thugs. Nobody claims that Om Parbat was built by any man or monkey, so does that make it okay to dynamite it? How dare the Dravidian racialists require others to validate the origin of someone's religious heritage site to keep it from being destroyed. Can anyone verify the true origin of the Kaaba? Should failure to do so mean that it gets bulldozed and turned into a shopping mall? As usual, Sujai is a desperate pretender at rationalism, and not a bona fide believer in it.

#18,

Object reverence of place of worship or a site of heritage gets that label because certain people visit it as a site of pilgrimage or because people go there to worship it or it is built by man at some point of time.

Is Ram Sethu visited by pilgrims, worshipped to, or made by man?

What if people say that river Krishna is sacred to them and hence no dam should be built across it?

What if people say that Bay of Bengal is the site where Asuras and Devas churned sea to get divine potion and hence no ship should venture into that region?

What if people say that whole of Bharat Bhoomi is sacred and that all construction should be stopped because it was hurting sentiments of people who believe that each time someone digs, it is hurting Bharat Bhoomi?

You posit yourself as an atheist. But none of your argument sound like one.

That should read as
Object of reverence, place of worship or...

A very very avoidable article, the author talks of Indians as if he is from an alien land.

And Mr. Author, since when did Indians = Hindus?

I haven't seen a more nonsensical generalization than:

"A parent whose kid scores first rank is happy - he doesn't care or bother to know if the kid really understands the subject. As far Indian education is concerned it is happy as long as the kid is a good Xerox copy machine with Terabytes of memory. They don't need an intelligent and thinking machine."

or

"When they go back home, after finishing their 'job', which is done only to go the next level in social and economic hierarchy, they go back to their gods, their blind beliefs and their superstitions. They go back to the safe abode of secure irrationality where once again Lord of the Rings and Harry Potter become real."

Dude, wake up, we live in different times, you seem to be stuck in the 20th century.

#21,

Dude, wake up, we live in different times, you seem to be stuck in the 20th century.

Are you talking of the same times when people believe that Ram Sethu was built by an army of monkeys?

Are you talking of the same times when scientists at DRDO consult astrologers for holding important meetings?

Are you talking of the same times when Indian government officials actually perform Hindu Puja to start an event?

Is this the 20th Century you are talking about?

"Are you talking of the same times when scientists at DRDO consult astrologers for holding important meetings?

Are you talking of the same times when Indian government officials actually perform Hindu Puja to start an event?"

While irrational, these practices are fairly benign and don't curtail scientific progress. I don't know why there is a need to overreact to consulting astrologers to hold internal meetings. As long as astrologers are not consulted in making major engineering decisions, we are ok. Just a minor irritant, that too to people within the organizations. As outsiders, we should only look at the results.

In continuation of my prev post, I was with an MNC with an office in India. For Ayudh pooja, we would hire a priest to come and bless all the equipment, and all employees would get prasad at the end.

I never approved of it, but being at the senior level, I didn't want to make it a big issue. I saw no point in doing so, since it took 10 minutes in a year, and its impact on productivity was essentially zero. And no, it didn't influence the engineers into making bad engineering decisions either.

#23, Ledzius:

I gave those examples as a counter argument to the statement made in #21,

Dude, wake up, we live in different times, you seem to be stuck in the 20th century.

I wasn't suggesting that those practices directly lead to curtailing scientific progress.

#24,

In continuation of my prev post, I was with an MNC with an office in India. For Ayudh pooja, we would hire a priest to come and bless all the equipment, and all employees would get prasad at the end.

I never approved of it, but being at the senior level, I didn't want to make it a big issue. I saw no point in doing so, since it took 10 minutes in a year, and its impact on productivity was essentially zero. And no, it didn't influence the engineers into making bad engineering decisions either.

Ledzius:

I reacted exactly opposite to this.

When I was asked by some folks at my company whether we should do puja for an event, I forbid them from doing any religious ritual. I asked if it would be a Hindu ritual, a Muslim ritual or a Christian ritual? The guys answered that it would be a Hindu ritual. I told them that we are not a Hindu Company. Yes, we are an Indian company but not a Hindu company. Then I explained why I forbid it. I told them that they are entitled to create their own puja but it will not be an officially sanctioned one. The guys understood and now realize why I do not promote such religious rituals.

Each of our actions dictates how we shape this country. While we call ourselves a secular country, our state apparatus is seeped in religion. Every event is marked with a Hindu Puja. Sometimes, one gets a doubt whether we are a Hindu country.

It's not about wasting 10 minutes or about decreasing productivity. It's about setting an attitude - a secular attitude.

My apartment complex in India are organising a christmas party. All the 200 members participating are Hindus. :-)

Sujai, in the US when I was working with a different start-up, for Christmas we got a Christmas tree, and all of us (including me) spent an afternoon decorating it. I certainly didn't feel out of place because I was a Hindu. The thought didn't even cross my mind. I knew I was in a country with a majority Christian population, so I had accepted the fact and just made the best of it.

Just tell any company in the US that they shouldn't hold official Christmas parties and see the response you get.

ledzius.. well... most offices in US no longer hold "christmas" parties and instead hold HOLIDAY parties.. so it can be hanukkah, christmas, bakrid, kwaanza, or whatever you want it to be.

My office is holding a christmas party too. Not only that, I am expected to buy a gift for someone else and then attend a company-paid christmas party. I dont do any of this even on diwali and here I am supposed to be doing this on christmas. So much for secularism.

"most offices in US no longer hold "christmas" parties and instead hold HOLIDAY parties.."

Well, do they serve egg-nog for bakrid or kwaanza? This whole thing of renaming "Christmas" as "Holiday" is just a charade to fool the PC crowd. Call them what you want, the truth is, these are thinly veiled Christmas parties.

"My apartment complex in India are organising a christmas party. All the 200 members participating are Hindus. :-)"

Have to say something about this - the thing about many Christian (read white) customs is that they appeal to Hindus (and probably others too). In today's Times of India there is an article on the front page about many Hindu women opting for gowns at their weddings, in the Christian tradition. And engagement rings and wedding bands (which were hitherto alien to Hindu customs) have now become commonplace among educated Hindus. These have nothing to do with belief in Christianity as much as just the raw appeal. And Christmas parties are fun anyway. For this reason you wouldn't find a Hindu celebrating Bakrid by sacrificing a goat at his door step.

#28,
Ledzius:
You are talking about two different things here.

One is the secularization of the festivities and the other is performing rituals that deify a religious god.

Celebration of Christmas as done in certain companies or Celebration of Holi as done by folks from Indian Cinema, without bringing in the religious elements is an attempt to secularize a festivity making it accessible to all and sundry, not just Christians or Hindus. Such attempts include Thanksgiving Day or Halloween, etc. The origins could be religious but the celebration themselves have been secularized to a certain extent in certain contexts.

Using intonations, selected verses in praise of certain gods, singing hymns praise of a religious god, or performing pujas, etc, come under rituals that deify a religious god.

For US, which was largely and mostly Christian, celebration of Christmas may be equated with celebration of a local festivity. For Indians, it's not that clear since it is home to so many religions, languages, regions, etc. Celebration of Ugadi is not universal in India, and so is celebration of Durga Puja. But people living in Bengal may attend festitivies of Durga Puja and the state could celebrate the festivities as long the event is secularized.

Well atleast we try to explain by twisting religion to fit scientific findings. We do not say Creationism and reject darwinism. That is the reason why Science has developed in India I think, by not confronting religion and to the credit of religion it is flexible enough to fit in scientific conclusions without the scientific method

X-Mas is about celebrating birth of Jesus christ. One can't deny its religious significance. So are Diwali, Holi, Eid etc. I have seen people swear by OMG, Jesus Christ etc and they are not even xians, same way people greeting Jai Ramjiki, Jai Shri Krishna even when they are not hindus. Same goes for many rituals like lighting of lamp, inauguration ceremonies, invocation of prayers, house-warminhg poojas etc. I donot like to call it secularization of religion because word 'secular' has very confusing meanings to different people - I would call it culturization of religion. Certain things occupy cultural space so overwhelmingly that people of other faith can not escape them even if they want to - plus spirit of festivities is contagious - if you can not fight it, why not join it and have fun and be a good sport and earn mutual respect and goodwill in the process - Celebrating Diwali does not make xian a hindu nor celebrating Eid one a Moslem. In fact, it strengthens one's resolve to reaffirm one's own faith - though it probably does not happen for many hindus as being apologetic and ashamed remains their primary religion.

I think it is fashionable to blame religions for failures of economic policies, political ideologies and educational policies that are defective. Especially when religions have no power over state and its policies. If one pursues communist-secularist-Macauley driven educational agenda, the results would be predictable - harvesting lousy, lazy, slavish clerks who can not deliver achievement but specialize in evading accountability and blaming religion for all problems.

#35:

Kerty:

I would stick to 'secularization of festivities' and not agree with your 'culturization of religion'. The word 'Secular' is clearly defined and is not confusing to many people (except Indians).

There is another phenomenon which is 'indigenization of alien religions and festivals'.

When people want to celebrate just because they want to celebrate without having to go into reasons why that celebration came into existence, whether it was Rama who killed Ravana or if Julius Caesar created a new calendar, and try to keep away from religious icons and symbols that directly correlate it with one particular religion (a set of belief systems), I call that 'secularization of festivities'. Some people in India do not pray to God or bring in a religious element and still celebrate Diwali. Its about having fun to some, while it is a serious religious affair to some other people. So, the latter affair cannot be called secularized festival. It remains deeply religious.

Similarly, Christmas is celebrated as both a religious festival and as a secular festival. When Xmas is celebrated as a secular festival, they keep away from all those religious symbols and try to make it accessible to anyone from any part of the world so that they can participate in those celebrations, without performing the rituals that can be interpreted as unique to certain religion (though the some of the rituals could be local to a certain land or geography).

The indigenization of alien religions and festivals is a different thing altogether. If you go to small villages in India who celebrate Christian festivals, there are many elements of local culture getting into it, and many of those rituals are borrowed from their erstwhile religion which happens to be Hinduism. So, you will see many Hindu symbols in their celebrations.

One just cannot keep looking for the origins of each symbol and beat it to death. Christianity embraced many pagan and local practices (Santa Claus, Christmas tree) which have no basis in Biblical times or Biblical places. (The red and white dress of Santa Claus comes from Coca Cola).

Sujai spews:
"You posit yourself as an atheist. But none of your argument sound like one."

Hah, because I'm an rationalist atheist and not a Stalinist like you, that means I lack real atheism?
Dream on. Stalinist types like you, who advocate burning down other peoples' Churches/Temples/etc are the ones who give atheists a bad name. Especially when your goal is to selectively target certain religions more than others.

But rationalist atheism is not Stalinism, and I believe in proactively dissociating it from rabid jerks like you. You use the monkey-bridge argument as your phalanx for socialism, but I likewise say that when you're a hypocritical believer in socialist mythology, then you're not the one with any rational highground.

Get your muddy feet off my rationalism.

Sujai

As far as I am concerned, organisations have no business to celebrate any religious festival - Hymns or no Hymns. Individuals have the right to celebrate whatever they want or wherever they want.

rgds

Chandra...

I don't think you can stop any individual or organization from celebrating religious festivals if they want to. Come to think of it if somebody suggests organizations should not celebrate new year, republic day, Gandhi Jayanti, Nehru Jayanti, valentine day etc. Festivals are organized celebrations, meant to be celebrated with families, friends, neighbours, in localities and communities.

Kerty

I said 'religious' festivals and I also said 'Individuals' can do anything they want. You have misquoted me on both.

rgds

Chandra..

I know your injunctions were aimed at 'organizations' and 'religious'. That is why I had to point out how untenable your injunctions are.
In India, most festivals are religious and most of them are organized events in which families and communities and organizations participate. Be that may at temples, streets, public sites, business sites, Mohallas, river banks. They are not individual-centric, they are family and group-centric. They are not like silent prayers individuals can do in private. Even prayers and Poojas are done in group setting in India. Not even Stalin would dare stop them in India.

Another thing that struck me was singling out 'religious' and 'organizations'. I can understand commie/stateist phobia against them but like so many of their utopian fantasies, its mere wishful thinking. All one can do is not participate in them if that is not part of one's menifesto, but to deny others or limit them to individuals or their private realms would be quite a stretch.

Dude,
Nobody knows whether Religion or Science are inter-connected or totally disparate.

The 20th century's biggest science marvel "Quantum Physics" is astonishingly being compared to ancient Eastern Philosophies viz Hinduism, Buddhism and Taoism.

Read "The Tao of Physics"...(if you have not already) it will open your mind to lot many things.