What do we understand about science in the era of "Technological Rationality"? How do we know about what really do we know? May be, you need not to think too much about these questions. Technology will take care of all sort of "verdictionary" politics (Michel Foucault, The Birth of Biopolitics). Technology provides those underneath and beneath rules to derive a sense of truth. The real power lies in "right to decide", to refer Carl Schmitt. Then question is what is truth? How do we know about what is truth? And what are the limitations to know the truth. This is a foucauldian paradigm, an art of impossible, which provides the basis of all "normalising powers". Science is desired by homo sapiens for the sake of power. The master narrator, Francis Bacon, once remarked that "knowledge is power". The quest of knowing is mastering. Ignorance is despised. Even Kantian paradigm went into the similar direction to discipline human minds as per the law of nature, to formalize the very sense of ethics in form of categorical imperatives. And of course, the historians all time, Hegel and Marx went into the similar direction to unearth the law of nature in form of dialectics. The European Enlightenment culture and counter Enlightenment cultures have turned the tide, super-imposed their narratives over the multiple sense of science, arts, and politics which were demonized as per the "verdictiory art of enlightened citizens of the Earth". Wasn't there any possibility to find other models of sciences, other dimensions of politics, other colours of arts? Of course, it was there! But, it was a politics of liberal art which went with the demystification, "demagification", and "the disenchantment of the world"(Weber, Science as a Vocation). Needless to say, that the fact loving citizens, who are in the illusion of fact, started to change the social and cultural milieu as per the requirements of materialism and dialectical materialism. Science as a paradigm became an art to define the possibility of truth and false. Nay, a technology to create, deface, and rationalize a sense of truth which gave the tragedic birth of innumerable possibilities, which in a way, emnanted into an impossible task to decide the validity of truth and false. So many informations, so many possibilities, so many discretions, emanated into an impossible task to decide what is a proper way to live authentically. And humans invested all their possible energies to create some smart and newer technologies to replace the older and traditional ones. Their over-dependence and surplus love over the myriad technological slumber provided enough space for not too indulge in big questions. Life became too faster and narrower. The vision for life contracted in such a way that self interest becomes the simulacrum of life-success and its glorified symbol. Freedom and its ideals were conceived in individualistic and egotistic goals without having any emotional attachment with family, foes, and friends. Western philosophy in that sense taught us some arts to master over others. Every artist was destined to learn, in that environment, to run in the competition of life, and to fight and survive. When Nietzsche proclaimed the death of God, it was not a theological pen that proclaimed a sensentional sermon, neither a news room theatrical chord. It was a sociological phenomenon which depicted a new born reality in form of "secularized myth" (Carl Schmitt, Political Theology).
Aristotle once wrote in his Nicomachean Ethics that there are four significant virtues for human beings, namely Prudence, Temperance, Justice, and Courage. There are a few judges who have courage and sense of justice, both. Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rohinton Nariman has been truly an exemplar judge and erudite historian, theologian and philologist, a great scholar of music as well as a courageous and meticulous jurist of our country. He did his Master of Laws from Harvard Law School in 1980-81 and taught by one of the finest jurists of the last century, Roberto Unger. He became Senior Advocate in 1993 in the age of 37 and also served as Solicitor General of India in 2011 before he was elevated as a judge of the Supreme Court of India in 2014. He delivered many landmark judgments, including Shreya Singhal v. Union of India. There are a few people with whom time moves too fast, but to count that experience takes ages. Justice Rohinton Nariman is one of those great jurists with whom a meet
Comments
Post a Comment