APEET
A nimals
P eople
E nvironment
E thics
T ruth
are all related both in terms of their relation on (and beyond) earth
and in terms of the similarity of the causes when one is working for them.
The same attitude - selflessless or unconditional love - goes into working for each of them.
I do *not* think one can be an *unconditional* human rights activist but *not* an animal rights activist, for example.
Well ... there is one case where that is possible though - when the person is ignorant or immature. I definitely do not mean this as an offence. What I'm trying to say is when someone "genuinely feels" for fellow humans and helps but is indifferent to the pain of other animals, it's just that he or she has not yet noticed or not yet thought about the fact that animals do feel pain. Same holds for other categories in APEET as well - as in, one who feels and works for humans and animals but has no respect for ethics or truth has not yet realized.
This "completeness" is sometimes referred to as "holism". Some (or most?) of the "grassroots" stuff work towards a similar aim, if not the same.
Explicitly thinking and working towards all these causes is very minimal, if at all.
And that is my aim for this blog and for the groups apeet@yahoogroups.com
I do agree that it is not possible to work for all causes in not-too-long-a-lifespan. Just that we atleast don't have to shut off the thinking and the theories as well. And more importantly, we can change ourselves and our lifestyle as much as possible.
I have been *running* in life as well and am lucky enough to have had the inputs and catalysts to sit back, observe and think. I currently teach needy children, am a vegan and have my vegan groups TowardsVeganism@yahoogroups.com, am eco-friendly (thought i haven't yet started activism there) and have enormous regards for values - truth, ethics, honesty, fairness and the like. I'm right now trying to network various organizations and help unite and together plan, organize and work.
And I would love to stress a very very important point here. I also have a selfish side and (hence) also have a personal life. I do not think it is wrong especially when it doesn't harm others. And more importantly, I do not think we need to actually keep evaluating everything to the point of getting confused and stressed. What we need to always make sure is that we never ever go against our conscience.
Well ... and in APEET, I have differentiated Ethics and Truth because I mean Ethics at the material or earth plane where all these values translate to thoughts and actions - as in, "being" honest, "being" fair etc.
While I mean *Truth* as something bigger - the ultimate Truth devoid of all constraints - including constraints like space, time and dimension. You call it whatever - Consciousness or God or Soul or Truth, it all means the same. This should show, I also value theories (without actions or "use").
And the "People" in APEET refers not just to human-rights-activism, freedom and selfless service to humans but to research and development as well - to science, to technology, to reason, to planning, to organization and so on.
I would love to have this blogger as a free forum for discussing any philosophy, any activism (as long as they are within moral and legal constraints). To share newer and newer ideas towards a better and better world - more development, more maturity and less suffering And also to help network all philosophers and activists.
Some people reject these grand goals by equating it to"Idealism". The equation to "Idealism" definitely does hold. Yes, this is "Idealism". Show me one person who doesn't want constant "betterment" (either for a selfish cause or for a selfless cause or none, doesn't matter). Yes, this desire does disappear as well when one self-realizes or sees the truth or attains enlightenment but in the process, in the quest, didn't the holy saint want more and more clarity to his questions? And this desire for more and more upto an ideal situation is human nature. No one says "No! I do not want an ideal situation". It is not here that people differ. It is only when feasibility questions arise that people differ - "No it is not possible to have an ideal world".
Then why not try?
TowardsIdealism@yahoogroups.com
Thanks and Warm Regards,
Naga
P eople
E nvironment
E thics
T ruth
are all related both in terms of their relation on (and beyond) earth
and in terms of the similarity of the causes when one is working for them.
The same attitude - selflessless or unconditional love - goes into working for each of them.
I do *not* think one can be an *unconditional* human rights activist but *not* an animal rights activist, for example.
Well ... there is one case where that is possible though - when the person is ignorant or immature. I definitely do not mean this as an offence. What I'm trying to say is when someone "genuinely feels" for fellow humans and helps but is indifferent to the pain of other animals, it's just that he or she has not yet noticed or not yet thought about the fact that animals do feel pain. Same holds for other categories in APEET as well - as in, one who feels and works for humans and animals but has no respect for ethics or truth has not yet realized.
This "completeness" is sometimes referred to as "holism". Some (or most?) of the "grassroots" stuff work towards a similar aim, if not the same.
Explicitly thinking and working towards all these causes is very minimal, if at all.
And that is my aim for this blog and for the groups apeet@yahoogroups.com
I do agree that it is not possible to work for all causes in not-too-long-a-lifespan. Just that we atleast don't have to shut off the thinking and the theories as well. And more importantly, we can change ourselves and our lifestyle as much as possible.
I have been *running* in life as well and am lucky enough to have had the inputs and catalysts to sit back, observe and think. I currently teach needy children, am a vegan and have my vegan groups TowardsVeganism@yahoogroups.com, am eco-friendly (thought i haven't yet started activism there) and have enormous regards for values - truth, ethics, honesty, fairness and the like. I'm right now trying to network various organizations and help unite and together plan, organize and work.
And I would love to stress a very very important point here. I also have a selfish side and (hence) also have a personal life. I do not think it is wrong especially when it doesn't harm others. And more importantly, I do not think we need to actually keep evaluating everything to the point of getting confused and stressed. What we need to always make sure is that we never ever go against our conscience.
Well ... and in APEET, I have differentiated Ethics and Truth because I mean Ethics at the material or earth plane where all these values translate to thoughts and actions - as in, "being" honest, "being" fair etc.
While I mean *Truth* as something bigger - the ultimate Truth devoid of all constraints - including constraints like space, time and dimension. You call it whatever - Consciousness or God or Soul or Truth, it all means the same. This should show, I also value theories (without actions or "use").
And the "People" in APEET refers not just to human-rights-activism, freedom and selfless service to humans but to research and development as well - to science, to technology, to reason, to planning, to organization and so on.
I would love to have this blogger as a free forum for discussing any philosophy, any activism (as long as they are within moral and legal constraints). To share newer and newer ideas towards a better and better world - more development, more maturity and less suffering And also to help network all philosophers and activists.
Some people reject these grand goals by equating it to"Idealism". The equation to "Idealism" definitely does hold. Yes, this is "Idealism". Show me one person who doesn't want constant "betterment" (either for a selfish cause or for a selfless cause or none, doesn't matter). Yes, this desire does disappear as well when one self-realizes or sees the truth or attains enlightenment but in the process, in the quest, didn't the holy saint want more and more clarity to his questions? And this desire for more and more upto an ideal situation is human nature. No one says "No! I do not want an ideal situation". It is not here that people differ. It is only when feasibility questions arise that people differ - "No it is not possible to have an ideal world".
Then why not try?
TowardsIdealism@yahoogroups.com
Thanks and Warm Regards,
Naga
posted by Naga at 12:47 AM
1 Comments:
Please add another p,for unequivocal emphasis and common well being in future as I do believe appeet butresses the monument you are inspired to construct :)
More energy and strength to you. You have, much before myself realized that the number of appeet are far too numerous than we think they are. And many more whose appeetness has to be given a small nudge and it would roll.
Anyways ..
Post a Comment
<< Home