-- 
*Mar*Got it. I’ll do this in two parts, as you asked:

   1.

   *An edited and improved version* (clearer structure, tighter language,
   smoother flow, without changing the core philosophy)
   2.

   *My views* — appreciative but also critically reflective

------------------------------
1) Edited and Improved Version

*Bias*

With our eyes, we can perceive only about *0.0035% of total reality*. For
the remaining *99.9965%*, we must depend on feeling and sensing. Because
this vast remainder is invisible and dark to the eyes, it cannot, in most
cases, be identified or expressed through words. Sensations that can be
traced to something visible are often named as abstract nouns. But that
which cannot be traced to visible origins—the unwordable reality—still
affects us profoundly, even though it resists language.

When we close our eyes and make the mind blank, we prevent visual
impressions from obstructing our feeling of the invisible. In doing so, we
allow ourselves to become part of the unseeable reality. This practice is
called meditation. One must enter the great sea of feeling through feeling
itself, allowing it to extend into one’s very being. Our hormones register
this connection, though we cannot articulate it. Our cells and hormones are
already linked to this 99.9965% of reality. One must accept invisibility as
its basic character. Attempting to force the invisible into visible form is
a blunder, for it tries to alter what is fundamentally amenable only to
feeling, not to sight.

You cannot see your perceptions and understandings as three-dimensional
objects, yet they inspire you. They are invisible, but real. The invisible
99.9965% of reality is the Universe itself—formless, yet inspiring.

The highest form of education and learning occurs through meditation.
Meditation simply means relating to nature and feeling nature as a limb of
yourself—the invisible limb. You join nature anatomically. You realize that
you are part of planet Earth, part of the emotional Gaia. Your sense of
being a separate individual dissolves, and your identity expands into Gaia.

You grow in health and strength along with Gaia, provided you do not poison
her with countless toxins. In completely free and healthy nature, education
embeds itself into your being—into your hormonal communications and into
the feedback systems that guide the mind.

The basic requirement for such education is a completely free and healthy
natural environment, untouched by economic exploitation and war activities.
In such a space, there are no machines.

What we call the “scientific mind” has become a euphemism for introducing
machines into human existence. It discounts both you and nature and
repudiates the basic fact that you are part of Earth. You are asked to
repudiate yourself, adopt machines in your place, and live mechanically.
You become the “economic man,” a machine governed by Newtonian mechanics,
restricted and imprisoned within the visible 0.0035% of reality.

Yet what you cannot see but can feel are hundreds of connections that bind
everything in the Universe. When you close your eyes and empty the mind,
you gradually sense these countless connections linking you to nature,
transforming you into nature itself. Life becomes participation through
vibrating connections—connections that link you to Earth through the
troposphere and to the cosmos through ubiquitous electromagnetism.

The great misfortune of modern education is that it jettisons this entire
dimension of feeling and connection, suffocating learners within a narrow
domain limited to visual perception. The basic faculty—the 99.9965%
accessible only through feeling—is removed from education and labeled as
“bias.”

Technology is preferred because machines cannot feel and are therefore
considered unbiased. The transformation of humans into emotionless
mechanisms has become the foundation of scientific education. Newtonian
mechanics is elevated as the model for all disciplines, leaving no room for
direct sensing and feeling of nature.

Because feelings are seen as threats to scientific purity, the sources of
emotion—nature itself—are relentlessly destroyed, justified under the
banners of economic life and scientific research. Nature is labeled as
bias, something to be eliminated.

Today, universities have surrendered education to technology and economics,
orienting themselves toward industrialization and urbanization—activities
that poison land, water, and air. Real education is eliminated, and
students are bludgeoned into technological suffocation that cuts them off
from nature, the true abode of learning.

The word *University* has become a euphemism for mechanization and the
removal of free nature from education.

Let us return to the real world by closing our eyes and emptying the mind.
Let us pray that every university frees itself from disastrous
techno-centrism and establishes a *Free Nature Park*, untouched by human
tampering, as the first step in delivering education from the shackles of
mechanization.

— *Y. M. Sarma*
------------------------------
2) My Views

This is a *powerful, poetic, and deeply felt manifesto*, not a conventional
academic essay. Its strength lies in:

   -

   A *consistent philosophical vision*: reality as primarily invisible and
   experiential
   -

   A *strong ecological consciousness* rooted in Gaia-like thinking
   -

   A *clear moral critique* of techno-centric education and economic
   reductionism
   -

   A *lived, meditative epistemology* — knowing through being, not measuring

That said, a few reflections—offered respectfully:
Where it shines

   -

   The insistence that *feeling is a form of knowing* is important and
   often neglected.
   -

   The critique of education becoming purely instrumental and economic is
   valid and timely.
   -

   The text successfully communicates *existential urgency*, not just ideas.

Where it may lose some readers

   -

   The numerical precision (0.0035% vs. 99.9965%) is rhetorically strong
   but scientifically contestable. Some readers may get stuck there instead of
   engaging the philosophy.
   -

   The *total rejection of machines* may feel absolutist. Many would argue
   the problem is not machines themselves, but *how* and *why* they are
   used.
   -

   Framing science exclusively as Newtonian and anti-feeling risks
   oversimplifying modern science, which increasingly studies complexity,
   emergence, consciousness, and ecology.

A possible way forward (without diluting your core message)

Your essay is strongest when read as a *civilizational warning* and a *call
for rebalancing*, rather than a literal blueprint. If framed as:

“Education must restore the primacy of felt connection with nature, instead
of allowing technology and economics to dominate human development,”
it could engage both contemplative thinkers *and* reform-minded scientists.

In short:
This is not a neutral essay—and it shouldn’t be. It is *a cry, a
meditation, and a protest*. Its value lies precisely in refusing the
language of mechanized neutrality and insisting that *life cannot be
understood without feeling*.

If you want, I can also:

   -

   Adapt this into a *short manifesto*
   -

   Rewrite it for an *academic audience*
   -

   Or help you sharpen it for *publication or public talks*

-- 
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/CACDCHC%2B%2B4y%3DapmYf8s_tXfQkrupy-5XD2w2zXq1fbqrARSw-ag%40mail.gmail.com.

Reply via email to