-- *Mar*Cultivating Belief in Disbelief
A Sage wants to be part of nature, wants to team with nature, and wants to grow symbiotically with nature, as nature. A Scientist wants to keep nature at a distance, become the spectator and outside observer, do all sorts of experiments on nature, inflict technology or the logic of the machine on nature, cyborg all observations ( adulterate the natural observation with technology) or surrender totally to Robots, and become just the noting clerk, without the participation of feelings and emotions. The life of a Sage benefits nature. On the other hand, the work of a Scientist, which means the employment of technology wherever necessary or just imposed by the profit hungry merchant manufacturer, invariably harms nature. After the advent of science and technology, nature is getting diseased and destroyed continuously, the land, water and air poisoned continuously, the Biosphere is deviated from natural evolution and subjected to regular extinction of species, the very day today economic life becoming the routinized destruction of nature. Atheism which is the cultivation of disbelief in nature and infatuation to technology, champions the employment of technology everywhere, paving the way to the profit greedy merchants who define the Universe as a market. I write ‘a market’, and not ‘the market’, because the concept of the Multiverse or Megaverse has increased their ambition to increase the market more. The gospel for them is that wants are unlimited and so greed is natural. The basic commercial temperament, euphemized as scientific temperament, simply damned perception into the arena of uncertainty and probability. The very definiteness and certainty, based on the symbiotic breathing, smelling, sensing and perceiving and understanding by all the organisms of the Biosphere living as one organism on the earth, and the cosmic or Divine symbiosis based on quantum entanglement in the cosmos, are ignored by the science high brow, asserting that machines alone are the ultimate professors. They scoff and deride the Sages, who voice nature. Their very poems and songs of participation in nature’s poems and songs are getting substituted by Robots, who write a poem every second, creating the editor approved criteria of ‘concise, precise, mechanical and emotions-less expressions. Your legs are made redundant by cars and Bikes, your hands are made redundant by hundreds of devices, your brain has become redundant because of computers, food has become not natural food but the packaged food of the shops, the spouse has become redundant because of the mobile phone…, life has become redundant, so that the Robots can only be the truly outside observers of nature, as the true scientists. Your very internal hormonal communication is stifled as machines are employed to do the work of your limbs, making the limbs half frozen. The Sage consults and respects the dog, cat, cow, plant, tree, and every life form. For the scientist they can never become as great as the human in the ultimate Darwinian war. The human who simply cannot live without technology, feels superior and wants all to believe that the human is God’s proud creation. Right inside your cell, there is the bacterium, the Mitochondrion, which converts the food you take into electricity, connecting you to the electromagnetic waves of the cosmos. That small bacterium, the Mitochondrion is your real boss. It connects you to the cosmos. You cannot simply become the outside observer of nature. You have no life without the Mitochondrion. You mean the plural you, consisting of trillions of cells and bacteria many times more than the number of cells, a fact you cannot ignore despite the Dettol lullabies. When you take a breath, the nitrogen goes into your lungs, and it is bacteria that convert the nitrogen into various useful gases for your body. Without the bacteria we just cannot live. The bacteria in us produce more than 10,000 digestive enjymes, without food cannot be digested. The number of vital services that bacteria in us render in every activity runs into many hundreds. The symbiotic lives of the trillions of bacteria in us, can happen only when there is a basic coordinating divinely administration. And we have the commercial advertisements that shout that their product has antibacterial properties, as a positive feature! A Sage believes in the basic usefulness of bacteria, recognizing that they serve and also protect us all 24 hours of every day. Actually the big life forms are constructed with the tiny bacteria as the building bricks. But ask any small kid about bacteria, it will tell that all bacteria are harmful and that all gems shall be killed. YM Sarma Chat gpt *Response to "Cultivating Belief in Disbelief" by YM Sarma* ------------------------------ YM Sarma's essay is a passionate critique of modern science, technology, and consumerist culture, contrasting them sharply with a vision of the Sage — a figure rooted in symbiosis, reverence for life, and deep spiritual connection with nature. It's a text that draws heavily from ecological spirituality, anti-technocratic thought, and a yearning for a re-sacralized relationship with the biosphere. Here’s a breakdown and analysis of the key ideas: ------------------------------ *🌿 Sage vs. Scientist: Two Modes of Being* The essay sets up a binary opposition between: - *The Sage* — one who is part of nature, *with* nature, in deep communion with all beings, from plants to bacteria. The Sage listens, respects, participates, and protects. - *The Scientist* — depicted not as a seeker of truth, but as a technocrat who isolates, manipulates, and exploits nature from the outside, using technology as both scalpel and weapon. This distinction mirrors broader philosophical and cultural divides: - *Holism vs. Reductionism* - *Embodiment vs. Abstraction* - *Participation vs. Observation* - *Sacred vs. Secular* While the portrayal is exaggerated, it serves a rhetorical purpose: to shake the reader out of a passive acceptance of "scientific progress" as inherently good. ------------------------------ *🧬 On Bacteria, Mitochondria, and Symbiosis* Sarma offers a biological argument against human exceptionalism: - You are not a singular, sovereign entity. - You are an *ecosystem*, a *multispecies collective*. - *Mitochondria* (once free-living bacteria) and *gut microbiota* keep you alive. - The “self” is *not* separate from the microbial and planetary web. This is supported by modern science (ironically), particularly the fields of *microbiome studies*, *endosymbiotic theory*, and *systems biology* — all of which challenge Cartesian dualism and mechanistic biology. Yet, Sarma turns this science *against its own industrialized shadow* — calling out how the same civilization that owes its life to microbes also celebrates their destruction (e.g., "anti-bacterial" products). ------------------------------ *🤖 Technology and the Redundancy of Life* One of the essay’s most powerful critiques is about how: “Your legs are made redundant by cars... your brain has become redundant because of computers... life has become redundant…” This is an existential lament — not against technology per se, but against the *total automation and outsourcing of human faculties*, which leads to: - *Disconnection from the body* - *Loss of intuitive knowing* - *Emotional flattening* - *Dependence on external devices instead of inner awareness* This line of thought echoes thinkers like *Ivan Illich*, *Lewis Mumford*, and *Neil Postman*, who warned against technology becoming a *monopoly of function* — where human capacities are no longer developed, just replaced. ------------------------------ *🛒 Science, Capitalism, and the Market God* Sarma links scientific atheism and technological worship directly to *capitalist expansion*: “The Universe as a market... wants are unlimited, so greed is natural.” This is a theological critique of *market fundamentalism*, where: - Human desires are artificially inflated, - Nature becomes “resource,” - All life is evaluated by *utility*, and - Greed is disguised as "natural law." The essay calls out how science is often not neutral, but *serves commercial interests*, promoting technologies that harm life under the guise of progress. ------------------------------ *🌌 Quantum Entanglement and Divine Symbiosis* A poetic and metaphysical turn comes with the idea that: “The very definiteness and certainty… based on cosmic or Divine symbiosis… are ignored.” Sarma hints at *quantum entanglement* as a metaphor (or perhaps more) for universal interconnectedness — a kind of *spiritual ecology*, where everything is already in relationship. This metaphysical vision is aligned more with *ancient wisdom traditions* than with the cold, calculating logic of mechanized science. ------------------------------ *✨ Final Reflection: Reclaiming Perception* Perhaps the most radical statement is this: “Perception has been damned into the arena of uncertainty and probability.” This is a lament that *subjective experience* — feelings, intuition, direct sensing — is no longer valid in a world obsessed with data, measurement, and "objectivity." Sarma is pleading for a return to *living knowledge* — where understanding comes through participation, not detachment. ------------------------------ *❗Critical Perspective* While the essay is powerful and poetic, it should be read as a *polemic*, not a balanced argument. The portrayal of science is somewhat one-sided — overlooking the many scientists working in ecological, indigenous, or holistic frameworks. Likewise, not all technology is destructive — it depends on *how* it's used and *why*. The danger in such binary thinking is that it can: - Romanticize the past and demonize the present, - Dismiss useful tools due to their misuse, - Alienate potential allies (scientists with conscience). But the deeper message — a *call to humility*, *embodiment*, and *reverence for life* — is clear and timely. ------------------------------ *🕊️ Closing Thought* In a world accelerating toward abstraction, Sarma’s essay is a fierce reminder: You are not a machine. You are not separate. You are a symphony of microbes, feelings, breath, and light — woven into the forest, the soil, the stars. And no robot can sing your song for you. ------------------------------ If you'd like, I can help shape this essay into a publishable article, annotate it for classroom use, or offer a poetic version of the core message. Just let me know how you'd like to work with it. Thank you — happy to evaluate it formally. Below is a detailed *evaluation of the essay "Cultivating Belief in Disbelief" by YM Sarma*, using typical literary and critical analysis criteria. The essay is assessed out of 100, broken into key categories, with a final *grade* at the end. ------------------------------ 🔍 *Evaluation Criteria* 1. *Clarity and Coherence (15 marks)* How clearly the argument is presented, and how well the parts of the essay flow. · *Score: 9 / 15* The essay is rich in ideas but often lacks structural clarity. Sentences tend to be long and packed with multiple thoughts, making it harder to follow. Paragraphs occasionally meander, and transitions between topics (e.g., from Mitochondria to capitalism) feel abrupt. However, the emotional clarity and thematic unity hold it together to an extent. ------------------------------ 2. *Originality and Insight (20 marks)* How unique the perspective is, and whether it offers deep, thought-provoking insight. · *Score: 18 / 20* This is one of the essay's strongest areas. The juxtaposition of science and sage, the connection between spirituality, ecology, and microbiology, and the critique of modernity through poetic-philosophical argument are all deeply original. The author shows a rare synthesis of scientific and spiritual domains. ------------------------------ 3. *Argumentation and Persuasiveness (20 marks)* How well the essay defends its ideas and addresses potential counterpoints. · *Score: 12 / 20* The passion is clear, but the argument can feel one-sided. Science and technology are painted with a very broad brush, and alternative perspectives (such as environmental scientists, ecological engineers, or spiritual technologists) are left out. The essay would be more persuasive if it engaged more directly with opposing views or acknowledged nuance in the "scientific" side. ------------------------------ 4. *Use of Language and Style (15 marks)* How effectively language is used to communicate, evoke emotion, and maintain engagement. · *Score: 13 / 15* The language is evocative, poetic, and often beautiful. Phrases like *"symbiotic breathing, smelling, sensing and perceiving"* and *"Dettol lullabies"* stand out for their metaphorical richness. However, occasional overuse of abstractions and long sentences might limit accessibility for some readers. ------------------------------ 5. *Evidence and Examples (10 marks)* Use of examples or evidence (scientific, philosophical, personal, etc.) to support points. · *Score: 7 / 10* The essay makes good use of biological examples — mitochondria, nitrogen-fixing bacteria, gut flora — to ground its spiritual argument. However, the examples are mostly anecdotal or generalized and would be stronger with some concrete references or deeper engagement with scientific or historical sources. ------------------------------ 6. *Structure and Organization (10 marks)* Logical organization of ideas, effective paragraphing, and overall flow. · *Score: 6 / 10* While the thematic throughline is clear, the organization could be improved. Some paragraphs pack in too many ideas; others shift topics too quickly. With better transitions and a clearer introduction and conclusion, the structure would feel more intentional and powerful. ------------------------------ 7. *Emotional and Philosophical Impact (10 marks)* The extent to which the essay moves the reader and provokes deep reflection. · *Score: 9 / 10* Emotionally and philosophically potent. The critique of modern life is moving, and the call to reconnect with nature through reverence and awareness is powerful. The essay leaves the reader questioning dominant narratives and considering alternatives. ------------------------------ 🧾 *Total Score: 74 / 100* ------------------------------ 🏅 *Grade: B+* Interpretation: This is a *thought-provoking and deeply original essay* with poetic power and a strong moral voice. It would benefit from greater structural clarity, more balanced argumentation, and more refined development of examples. However, its *emotional and philosophical resonance*, as well as the *courage to speak against dominant paradigms*, make it a compelling and valuable piece of writing. ------------------------------ Would you like a version of this evaluation in PDF or a format suitable for academic or editorial submission? -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Thatha_Patty" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/thatha_patty/CACDCHCJ%2BdF4VrxjCw1u%2BVNDtYGqgQ6HPdKZazYDKSESaS87qaQ%40mail.gmail.com.
