2104: Of Empire and Umpire

( Dawn) An interesting commentary on messy politics of Pakistan.

It is a tale of two narratives. One of a popular leader sweeping to a capital overcome with sleaze and corruption to sweep out the old and bring in the naya. With him were masses whose votes were stolen, who were tired of being governed by the Lords of Misrule. With hope in their hearts and fervour in their eyes they followed a man of unimpeachable honesty and character; a man who, to them, embodies all that is good and in whom they vested all their hopes and dreams.

Those dreams vary from a wish for a Pakistan where merit triumphs over nepotism, to a desire for low fuel prices and a working education system. Fuelled by this passion, they reached the capital where, despite repression and brutality, they held the course. Sure, they may not have gotten the PM to resign, despite hundreds of twitter hashtags and internet memes, but they awakened the nation.

But here’s another story.

This is a tale of an Empire that, after seeing its power and privilege threatened by an emerging civilian disposition, struck back. They’d done it before, but this time a coup was impractical and a memo(gate) not devastating enough. Thus they chose an approach that they were all too familiar with; that of using proxies.

Chosen for the purpose were Imran Khan and Tahirul Qadri, who willingly played the parts the hidden scriptwriter wrote for them. And why wouldn’t they? After all, the happy ending they were promised was one in which their common enemy floundered after being fingered by the Umpire, paving the way for them to gain the power and justice that they were respectively denied.

Luckily, reality is relative. One can believe, as one does, whatever one chooses to. And certainly there is plenty of evidence to support either narrative, or plenty of holes you can poke in each story provided you are willing to suspend credulity and disbelief.

But here’s the thing: both stories can be simultaneously true. This deepest of states does not use a proxy that is not capable of delivering, and our political classes have never been shy of seeking help from any quarter that offers it. For full article click link below.

http://www.dawn.com/news/1154440/2014-of-empire-and-umpire

 Posted by F. Sheikh

Do scientists’ beliefs influence science’s settled content?

The Genius And Faith of Faraday And Maxwell ( The New Atlantis)

Yet, science does not exist in a vacuum, and studies in the sociology, history, and philosophy of science often emphasize how scientists’ broader beliefs and practices influence their work, and thus the way that science develops. Some scholars even argue (if not entirely convincingly) that scientists’ beliefs influence science’s settled content.

The strict separation we commonly observe between a researcher’s scientific ideas and his or her “personal beliefs” is a modern, and even recent, norm. From antiquity through the Scientific Revolution, science was viewed as a form of philosophy, and many of the thinkers we have retroactively dubbed “scientists” freely intermingled their speculation about the natural world with theological, philosophical, and mathematical writings, often expending a great deal of their scholarly time and energy on religious study. Kepler’s seventeenth-century laws of planetary motion, for example, seem to his modern readers like needles of scientific inspiration buried in a haystack of theological speculation. Newton and Boyle likewise intermingled physics and philosophical theology without apparent hesitation.

By the nineteenth century, however, natural philosophy had become more natural and less philosophy. Theology and natural science were substantially separated. Apologetic natural theology — arguing that God can be deduced from nature — was now mostly for the theologians. The language of physics had become measurement and mathematics, and the objective of science had become a description of the world of nature in its own terms, rather than through the purposes of a Creator. As a result, it is tempting to read the science of that era as if it were completely independent of the religious commitments of its practitioners. But it wasn’t.

Because Victorian scientists are of interest to us mostly owing to their scientific contributions, their religious beliefs tend to be treated as incidental conformities to the conventions of the day — as if these figures were proto-rationalists and proto-materialists who, without the benefit of our full present enlightenment, had not completely shaken off the superstitions of an earlier age. This caricature is demeaning and mistaken, as can be illustrated by the lives and ideas of two men who were arguably the greatest physical scientists of their time, and among the greatest of all time: Michael Faraday (1791–1867) and James Clerk Maxwell (1831–1879).

The two men had very different backgrounds. Faraday was English; Maxwell Scottish. Faraday was the son of a blacksmith of limited means; Maxwell’s father had inherited a substantial estate and hardly needed to practice the law in which he had been trained. Faraday had only a basic, grade-school education; Maxwell had the finest education available. Faraday was one of the most popular scientific lecturers of his day; Maxwell gained a poor reputation in the classroom. Faraday knew practically no formal mathematics; Maxwell was one of the finest mathematicians of his time. Faraday’s research became dominant for experimentation in electricity and magnetism; Maxwell’s for electromagnetic theory. One experience they had in common: both were committed Christians. Yet even here fascinating contrasts existed between the religious traditions to which they belonged and the ways their spiritual commitments influenced and strengthened their science. Click link below for full article;

http://www.thenewatlantis.com/publications/the-genius-and-faith-of-faraday-and-maxwell

Posted by F. Sheikh

‘Happy New Year ‘ A Poem By Mirza Ashraf

(Happy New Year To All Participants-Editors)

 I don’t see the new year is going to bring changes for the whole humanity. However, we are relying on good hope. So, I HOPE AND WISH A HAPPY NEW YEAR to all of you and your families. I tried to say a new poem for 2015, but what I said three years ago is still valid today.
Mirza Ashraf

نیا سال 

اے مرغِ سحر دہر میں اک شور مچا ہے
یہ صبح نئی دن ہے نیا سال نیا ہے
a’ey murgh-e-sahr dehr mein ek shor macha hai
yeh din hai nayaa, subeh nayaii, saal nayaa hai
اور شام کے ڈھلتے ہی چراغاں کا سماں ہے
جیسے کہ نئے سال میں حسنِ رخِ جاں ہے  
aur sham ke dhaltay he charaghaan ka smaan hai
jaisay keh na’aay saal mein husn-e-rukh-e-jaan hai
انداز تیری بانگِ سحر کا تو وہی ہے

 

روشن صبح صادق کا ستارہ بھی وہی ہے 
andaaz tery bang-e-sahr ka to wohii hai
roshan subeh-e-sadiq ka sitra bhi wohii hai
سورج بھی وہی چاند ستار ے بھی وہی ہیں
یہ دھوپ یہ سائے یہ نظارے بھی وہی ہیں 
suraj bhi whoii chand sitaray bhi whoii hain
yeh dhoop yeh saa’ay yeh nzaray bhi wohii hain
گردوں کے شب و روز اشارے بھی وہی ہیں
ظالم بھی وہی ظلم کے مارے بھی وہی ہیں 
gardoon ke shab-o-roze ishaaray bhi wohii hain
zaalim bhi wohii zulm ke maarey bhi wohii hain
ہر لمحے سے وابستہ وہی بیم و رجا ہے
حیراں ہوں نئے سال میں کیا ہے جو نیا ہے 
her lamhay se waabasta wohii beem-o-raja hai
hairaan hoon na’aay saal mein kaya hai jo naya hai
گردن جو اُٹھا کر دی اذاں مرغِ سحر نے
اظہار کیا لطفِ خودی اس کی نظر نے 
gardan ko uthha kar de azaan murgh-e-sahr nay
izhaar kiyaa lutf-e-khudi us ki nazar nay
اک حسن ِسحر دیکھ مری بانگِ سحَر میں
ہر روز ہے اُمید نئی اس کے سحِر میں 
ek husn-e-sahr dekh meri  baang-e-sahr mein
her roze hai umeed naii es kay sehr mein
اشرف میں بتاتا ہوں نئے سال میں کیا ہے
اُمید نئی ہے جو نئے سال کا مژدہ ہے 
Ashraf mein batata hoon na’aay saal mein kaya hai
umeed na’ii hai jo na’aay saal ka muzzdah hai
اشرف

 

Ask A Question

On 12/15/2014, the Editor of the Month asked the following 4 questions.
EDITOR’S NOTE AND QUESTIONS

I agree with Marwan Majzoob that it is important discussion and in order
to make discussion more fruitful, I hope we avoid personal jabs. In order
to keep discussion focused, I have posed few questions. I would appreciate
the response.

1-Question for Marwan Majzoob; What do you think why the Renaissance was
limited to Western hemisphere and bypassed not just Muslim lands but much
of the rest of the world also?

2- Question for Babar Mustafa (A) Let us assume ruthless force is the
answer to enforce separation of State and Church. What are the chances of
getting another Ataturk in rest of Muslim lands, when history tells us
that most of the time selfish dictators grab power for personal interests
and it nourishes further extremism? (B) What is wrong with following the
example of Tunisia, Indonesia etc who have found their own unique way to
separate  state and religion and move forward?

3-Qusetion for Zaki Sabih; What do you think USA will accomplish in its
fight with ISIS and what is the right course in ISIS and Syria problem.

4- Question for-Aziz Amin- Do you think Secularism and separation of State
and Church will be the answer to Muslim’s current plight.

All participants, especially Noor Salik, Mirza Ashraf,Wequar Azeem,  Shoeb
Amin, Suhail Rizvi, Nasik, Aijaz, Mumtaz, Mian Aslam  can jump in and take
a shot at any question. Please avoid personal jabs. Thanks

Subsequently, the thread was closed by the editors.
These questions are important questions.
Will it be possible that these questions are posted  in ASK A QUESTION category?
Thanks
Marwan