History has been one of my chief distractions from the very beginning. Right from the days when I listened to the heroic tales of a long-forgotten era, awed by their grandeur, as they were told with apparent conviction by elders, it always has had the electrifying effect on me.
Be it Maratha History, or even Ancient Greek History, I'm always game for it. It is only now that I've begun seeing something beyond the details: a pattern, not in the constructive sense of Kronecker, but in the same sense as that of an existence proof.
Lets muse into the endless sea of myriad kings foes, wars and what not. I don't know how deep I can delve, but one can always try. Here,I'll present many curious little details that are worthy of attention. They may be mere trifles,but- what the heck!
Recently I've been reading Will Durant's "Age of Voltaire". It is a masterpiece, indeed. The historian writes about each facet of ever civilization as if he lived then and there only. His style is very pleasant: he seems to love them all with an aloof bearing. Unlike T.S. Shejwalkar, He is seldom opinionated: the latter, who was and still is my idol in Maratha History, was as poignant of pen as any skilled soldier may ever be of his sword.
While reading it, I grasped a bit the origin of so-called modern philosophy: the ideal stage for such a school of thought to flourish was 18th century Europe. That is the Gangotri of radical, modernistic ideas:
The most important and alarming signal of this philosophy is that it has been able successfully to liberate the individual. The process from the economic condition (chiefly in England) has been well illustrated by F.T. Powell in his"Evolution of money market", and stated in different terms by Friedmann in "World is flat".
Pros of this approach are easy to enumerate and appreciate, especially in the current era. All the same, one must not forget the ardous process of establishing supremacy of reason over conviction. This has been indeed a paradigm shift in the outlook of humanity. The whole thing began with conquest and colonization but, in the hindsight, one might afford a slight justification, if only with a fatalistic touch, is it not?
Now for the cons. This process was essentially Euro-centric, and as a result, diversity was fast diminishing. The 17th century European ideal of state was enforced upon the rest of the world, and so were the European ways of life. The factions in society became more violent against each other, and spoke of the eternal injustice inflicted upon them by the other side.
This is only the tip of the iceberg. What went on inside the mind was even more startling. It was as if a dream come true for the baser instincts. Form rather than spirit is the norm today,and so justified as if it is eternal. Greed for all has been increased, even glorified: This, if continued more, could lead to a crisis of mind, where one would die, not of hunger or torture, but of the dull uniformity, of the dissipative life that physical comforts forced on him.
Today, we see that diversity of minds is not encouraged: the basic needs of the man are glorified and put onto a pedestal: People are being made to believe this and think no more.
Perhaps the time has come to think of a more harmonious integration of man with his surroundings, which are ever so away from nature. Lets see what happens.
