Recently in Neo-Humanism Category

In his article, "On humanism past and present," Perez Zagorin asks the question: Is there a place for humanism in the 21st century? While asking this, he simultaneously defines humanism as the stance of regarding "the life and happiness of human beings as a supreme value to be cherished and promoted in every possible way."^[1]

Looking back through the annals of time, we find several versions of the concept of 'humanism,' starting with its birth in Greece during the fourth and fifth centuries BC, during the lives of Plato and Aristotle. According to Zagorin, it was the Sophists who originated the concept of humanism. While they did not use the term 'humanism' (in fact, there is no Greek equivalent for the term), yet the Greek philosophers discussed the ideas and concepts of humanism as it later came to exist. After Plato and Aristotle, other philosophers continued to develop the concept; however, they considered the study of humanism to be restricted to the elite of the society, the "free men of aristocratic background and independent means who had the leisure for the pursuit of excellence."^[2] Defects abounded in this early Greek concept. Not only was it restricted to the elite of society, it also accepted both slavery and perpetual war as permanent features. The Greek humanism seems woefully inadequate. Today people want inclusivity, democracy, egalitarianism, and perhaps even a soaring ideal to fill the abyssal void brought on by the rampant materialism of the 20th century.

Humanism has been a powerful ideology especially in western civilization. The term itself is usually ascribed to German educationist F. J. Niethammer who in 1808 used it to denote the study of Greek and Latin classics - "Literae humaniores" or human letters. Through the term is of more recent coinage, humanism actually refers to the rediscovery of the classics, which was a distinguishing feature of the Italian Renaissance. To move from a God-centric, to a man-centric universe was indeed a major shift for the West. Arguably it is this shift which gave rise not only to Humanism as such but also to Humanities or the study of human beings as it is revealed in History, Literature, Art and so on. Humanism, especially secular Humanism of European humanists like Voltaire and Hugh helped to undermine the dogmatism and the power of the Church. This is turn contributed to the secularization of western society. Post-enlightenment academic disciplines tended to divided into pure or natural sciences on the one hand, and human sciences on the other.

According to Prout, human society is one and indivisible. Human society is just like a garland, which is made of different types of flowers, linked by one common thread. The complete beauty of the garland is dependent upon the proper manifestation of each flower. Similarly, to maintain unity and solidarity in society, each strata of society must be equally strengthened.

Any human being or non-human being who wants to break this solidarity must be opposed, and you will have to fight against such elements. For example, although the five Pandavas and the one hundred Kaoravas were enemies, Yudhisthiira, the eldest of the Pandava brothers said:

"Vayam paicabhikam shatam" "One hundred and five will fight against a common enemy." So when you have to fight anti-social and anti-human forces in Asia, Europe, the world or the entire universe you must fight as a single, unified entity.

Society is a dynamic entity. It has to progress by endlessly struggling to break through ever-changing barriers. It has to equip itself in different ways to respond to changing conditions and new challenges. Society cannot afford to forget that the type of struggles it had to go through in the past will not be the same as the struggles it has to go through in the present, and that the struggles of today will not be the same as those of the future. Thus, as the environment changes, newer and newer codes of justice will have to be formulated on the basis of the moral code. The duty of those who frame legal codes is to fully recognize the essential characteristics of life and not violate the interests of individuals, groups or society as a whole. Otherwise the codes will be seen as unnatural and will not be accepted, which means that the state will have difficulty in implementing them effectively. (For example, during the British rule of India, the Sarda Act(5) was not properly enforced due to a lack of education.) If a large section of the society is confronted with the possibility of being considered criminals in the eyes of the law, they will engage in deceitful conduct and other antisocial acts to avoid punishment. Thus the standard of morality will decline considerably. Therefore, if such codes are ever formulated, the state will lose its credibility and become the laughing-stock of society.

The task for this paper is to locate the works of Shrii P. R. Sarkar in a range of classification schemes and at the same time to make these schemes themselves problematic. In general, we find Sarkar's works exemplary for the following reasons. In terms of economy, his work is strong on both growth and distribution dimensions. Sarkar is also eclectic in his theory of political-economy drawing on market and regulatory mechanisms. Alienation is a result not of private property but of the concentration of wealth and of the location of the self in a materialistic paradigm. Sarkar's Prout manages to satisfy survival, wellbeing, identity and freedom needs. Market models are strong on freedom but weak on wellbeing (especially at the periphery). Local "small is beautiful" models are strong on survival, wellbeing and identity but weak on the freedom dimension. Sarkar also takes an eclectic model of epistemology having a range of ways of knowing the world. He also takes a layered "deep and shallow" view of the nature of reality. Finally, and this is the centerpiece of the argument, Sarkar's social theory combines linear, cyclical and transcendental dimensions, thus avoiding cultural exploitation and fatalism, and accentuating ancient, modern and postmodern constructions of the social and the economic.

Having progressively crossed the different evolutionary stages since the distant past human beings have at last reached the present stage . The journey has not been solitary: People have advanced together in society. Even in the primitive past, humans lived in clans and tribes, for alone they could not easily procure the means of livelihood. An individual who totally shuns collective life finds existence difficult, for humans are essentially social beings. Whenever one thinks of a human being one automatically thinks of the society in which he or she lives. Human existence is thus two-sided - individual existence and collective existence - and as such it has two sets of values : social values and human cardinal principles.

"The value of human life surpasses all other values. Be it state or scripture, society or religion, the significance of everything lies in developing humanity to the optimum point through knowledge, culture, health and affluence of life. It is for the unfoldment of humanity that civilization has so many impediments, the state presents various forms, theories multiply and the scriptures abound in ordinances and regulations. What does the state stand for, what is the use of these regulations, or what are the marvels of civilization for, if humanity is deprived of manifesting itself, if human beings do not get any chance to build a good physique, to invigorate their intelligence with knowledge and to broaden their heart with love and compassion? Instead of leading humanity to the goal of life, if the state stands in the way then it cannot command loyalty, because humanity is superior to the state."

India achieved its independence in the year 1947. Bengal was divided into two parts. Did the aspirations of Bengal find their fulfillment? Did the politically-shattered, economically-devastated Bengal find justice from the new rulers of Delhi? Could the Bengal that had been the colony of the British raise its head with sovereign dignity? Before analysing post-independence Bengal, however, it is essential to elaborate on her socio-cultural background. How could the people of such an advanced civilisation have tolerated ruthless exploitation and oppression for such a long period of time? In any society, people's aspirations and hopes, dynamism and fighting spirit, and their social, economic and political structures all develop on the foundation of that society's cultural heritage. So at the outset let us look at the cultural evolution of Bengal.

As you know, physical pabulum is limited, so the mind continually runs from one thing to another. This process goes on in a never-ending order. But in the realm of intuition the goal is infinite. When aspirants come into this realm, their desires, their longings, are fully satisfied. Thus the controlling point is the spiritual order. Because the spiritual order is infinite, human beings have no control over it, but as the physical realm is finite, human beings can increase their sphere of activity in this realm. The attempt to do this is a never-ending process, and there are infinite permutations and combinations in this endeavor, but the latent hunger in human beings will never be satisfied in this realm. The quest to satisfy this hunger can at best only lead to the threshold point of spirituality. As human beings progress towards the realm of spirituality, they are helped on the one hand by Prout, which guarantees minimum requirements and maximum amenities, and on the other hand by neo-humanistic outlook, which removes disparities. These two approaches help human beings in their progress and elevation. Finally the existential faculty merges in the Supreme.

"Pragatishiila upayogatattvamidam' sarvajanahita' rtham' sarvajanasukha' rtham praca'ritam"

[This is the Progressive Utilization Theory, propounded for the happiness and all-round welfare of all.]

A developed economy should consist of four parts - people's economy, psycho-economy, commercial economy and general economy. This quadri-dimension of economy is a vast ex¬pansion on the contemporary and co-contemporary conceptions of economic activity.

Most economists today understand only a little of the principles of general economy and something of commercial economy; but both of these parts are still in an undeveloped stage. People's economy and psycho-economy are totally over-looked by modern economists, and as such could find no place in the present mode of economic thinking.