Вы находитесь на странице: 1из 54

ISSN: 2278 – 2168

Milestone Education Review

(The Journal of Ideas on Educational & Social
Year 11, No. 01 & 02 (October, 2020)

Dr. Desh Raj Sirswal

Milestone Education Review (2278-2168)

Milestone Education Review (The Journal of Ideas on Educational & Social

Transformation) is an online peer-reviewed bi-annual journal of Milestone
Education Society (Regd.) Pehowa (Kurukshetra). For us education refers to any act
or experience that has a formative effect on the mind, character, or physical ability
of an individual. The role of education must be as an instrument of social change and
social transformation. Social transformation refers to large scale of social change as
in cultural reforms and transformations. The first occurs with the individual, the
second with the social system. This journal offers an opportunity to all academicians
including educationist, social-scientists, philosophers and social activities to share
their views. Each issue contains about 100 pages.

© Milestone Education Society (Regd.), Pehowa (Kurukshetra)

Dr. Desh Raj Sirswal, Assistant Professor (Philosophy), Post Graduate Govt. College,
Sector-46, Chandigarh.

Editorial Advisory Board:

Dr. Ranjan Kumar Behera (St. Joseph University, Virgin Town, Ikishe Model Village,
Dimapur, Nagaland).

Dr. Merina Islam (Department of Philosophy, Cachar College, Silchar, Assam).

Dr. Dinesh Chahal (Department of Education, Central University of Haryana,


Dr. Manoj Kumar, (P.G. Department of Sociology, P.G.Govt. College for Girls, Sector-11,

Dr. Sudhir Baweja (University School of Open Learning,, Panjab University, Chandigarh).

Dr. K. Victor Babu (Institute of Education, Mettu University, Metu, Ethiopia).

Dr. Jayadev Sahoo (Jr. Lecturer in Logic & Philosophy, GM Jr. College, Sambalpur, Odisha).

Dr. Rasmita Satapathy (Department of Philosophy, Ramnagar College, West Bengal.)

Dr.Pankoj Kanti Sarkar (Department of Philosophy, Debra Thana Sahid Kshudiram Smriti
Mahavidyalaya, Paschim Medinipur, West Bengal).

Mrs. Chetna Gupta (Department of Philosophy, SPM College, University of Delhi).

Dr. Kamal Krishan (Department of Hindi, P.G.Govt. College for Girls, Sector-11, Chandigarh).

Declaration: The opinions expressed in the articles of this journal are those of the individual authors, and
not necessary of those of the Society or the Editor.

In this issue………..

Sr. No. Title and Author Page No.

1. Conflict betweenTradition and Modernity- 4
An Anlytical study :Dr.Sandesh Tyagi
2. Soren Kierkegaard : Three Stages of Life : 10
Albert Amalraj M
3. The Significance, Purpose and Limit of 15
Human Enhancement: M. Arockia Charles
4. Does the Present Time need Feminism? An 19
Exploration : Sananda Sen
5. What can be shown, can not be said: 27
Wittgenstein’s thoughts special reference
to Tractatus Logico Philosophicas: Lipika
6. Mill's Theory of Reference: 34
Soumen Roy
7. बायत भें नैततक नेतत्ृ व: वततभान ऩरयदृश्म 42
एवॊ बववष्म डॉ दे शयाज ससयसवार

Conflict betweenTradition and Modernity-An Anlytical study

Dr.Sandesh Tyagi

This study has been undertaken to investigate the determinants of relationship of
Modernity and tradition. These two have been considered as opposite to each other but
this studies shows the other aspect. This study establishes that one is the base of other and
they are incomplete without each other.

Key Terms – Modernity, Tradition, History, compliment, idealism.

Generally Tradition and modernity are contrasted but they are not separate, They
are different from each other. They are complementary to each other and affect each
other well enough. While tradition makes a society or country prospers, modernity gives
it mobility. Modernity bestows us on flying, whereas tradition keeps us grounded. Thus
the harmony of tradition and modernity keeps the society at the same time, while
maintaining the pride of the past, and leads the society to progress and prosperity.
In Hindi Literature, Tradition is called Parampara which is originated from two
words – Param + Apara = Tradition Pre and Top.

Famous writer of Hindi Literature Aacharya Hazari Prasad Dwivedi says- Chalati
Aken Paden, Tishthi aik Buddhiman - That is, intelligent is one who stands from one
foot and walks with one foot. The same applies with man, society and its development.
Tradition means that which has passed from one hand to another during the period. The
tradition is made from the history of man, society, caste, its past. Tradition is a series, a
series connecting tomorrow to today. Traditions adapt to the changing environment and
pressure from new requirements. Some are abandoned, which have become unusable and
some are adopted, due to the interaction with new cultures.

Its tradition that contributes greatly to the creation of literature of a country and
society, because it derives from the wealth of hundreds or thousands of years of its past
through tradition. The rich tradition, which is a caste, society, region, will be a rich
tradition from the inside. For example, the history of America is only 400 years old, so
they do not have much of their own in the name of tradition, they can add more and more
to Britain, whereas India, China, Egypt etc. have a rich world of tradition. In this way,
tradition is that creative part of the past that has reached us in the journey of centuries,
whose association with us makes us rich.

The whole history, the whole past, is not a tradition, because it is very broad,
everything cannot be handled at once, so we have to leave something and handle the
important. There is a significant difference between tradition and tradition. When the
inherent dimension in the tradition is lost, then it becomes incoherent. In the same way,
when the society makes the law by knowing self-centered interpretation, unknowingly, it
is carried on like tradition even when it is being formed. The root is part of the traditional
tradition. For example, the caste-system was initially from the division of labor and
occupation, and not from the higher-ups. Later, when the work started to be considered
small and big, then the feeling of high and low was changed and caste system became
orthodox. Traditions relate the past to the future and the future to the future. As far as the
existence of man is there, the tradition affects him.

The Sanskrit term Adhuna has further changed to modernity. Modernism means
contemporaneity. It is a primal attitude to look past and shape the future through the
jharokas of the present. Modernity is a relative concept. Compared to the old, when
something new changes widely, it is modern compared to the old. For example, when the
Iron Age would have come after the Stone Age, when agricultural prosperity would have
developed, it was modern due to its developed, new and revolutionary nature compared
to its former, but not necessarily only by age. Should be considered as modern or archaic.

Kalidas has said ऩयु ानभ ् इत्मेव न साधु सवतभ, नवीनभ ् अवऩ एव न अन्मथा means that it is not

necessary that everything old is good and new everything is bad. For example, Kabir's

attitude towards humanity and society was still modern and is still modern, whereas even
today, being called modern from the point of view, there can be a lot of archaic and
regressive trends and thinking in today's era.

In modernity, ideas are universal. It goes beyond ethnicity, nationality, class,

ideology, religion and surroundings. It is the unity of mankind. There is a harmony of
opposites. Modernity can be understood from the imaginary image. How is it possible to
create a new world without destroying the old? Modernism is a global process. Modernity
era is the age of knowledge and science. Man has become rational and gives logical
consideration to every fact. Modernity has influenced all social, economic and religious
situations. The criteria of sin-virtue, religion and wrongdoing have changed, ancient
values have been disintegrated. The youth is imitating the Western culture in the fashion
race, but neither can it completely abandons the ancient values or adopts the new values.
Thus, it has become outwardly modern, but its inner being is still beyond modernity.

Relationship between tradition and modernity –

There is a unique relationship between tradition and modernity. Both are dynamic
processes. The only difference between the two is that tradition is the last step between
the journeys, while modernity is every step of the moving dynamic. In the words of
Hazari Prasad Dwivedi - no modern thought is born in the sky. Everything has its roots
deep in tradition. The beautiful-to-beautiful flower cannot claim that it is completely
different from the tree because of it. Similarly, no modern idea can claim that it is cut off
from tradition.

Research on the processes of modernity has also revealed such facts, which
contradict many basic sentences for the concept of development. For example, studies
have revealed the presence of modern elements in many traditions. There are studies that
demonstrate how the tradition can be successfully used to promote development.
Contrary to popular opinion, even modern mass media has helped in the reconstruction of
traditional myths and values. Video and television have become powerful tools of

communication-commerce and the preservation of cultural heritage of societies. For
example, television serials were made on two Hindu mythological epics Ramayana and
Mahabharata, which captivated audiences for more than two years. The miraculous
events described in mythological literature, which at first seemed incredible to the readers
of the holy texts as a flight of imagination, made it possible to demonstrate them through
new technology and thus gave credibility to the story. Tradition and modernity co-exist in
a variability society. A vibrant culture investigates newcomers in their own way, whether
they are brought from outside or indiscriminate from within. No culture is inflexible to be
determined not to change, and at the same time no culture is so unobtrusive as to allow
itself to be swept away in a flood of external influences. The imprint of both modernity
and tradition is always visible on literature. The litterateur of every era is present in the
depiction of life where Sanskrit and tradition are presented, while his thinking is often
prejudiced, denying the stereotypes.

Knowledge of tradition is as important for understanding modernity as water for a

thirsty person. Whereas 'keeping knowledge of tradition is not to be a traditionalist', how
far it is possible to see the entirety of modernity as separate from tradition! If a process
takes the form of tradition after undergoing rigorous and continuous experiments, then it
also carries with it the scope of corresponding change. If a tradition is rooted in the
absence of its relative evaluation over time, then it does not remain a tradition in any of
its forms, becomes a practice or a stereotype.

In the vast tradition of literature, with the help of historical consciousness, the
difference between a work being a living and a class can be understood. There the
chronological work is relevant while making serious contribution at some time, while the
classic work transcends its era other than its era. Yet both have their own importance for
literature. How modern are the poetic and poetic traditions of Bhaktikal in modern
contexts? It is not hidden from anyone. Nevertheless, the problems that the society was
facing then, have these problems remained in some form in the society even after a
thousand years?

The process of change is only part of tradition that gives rise to newness, because
newness cannot begin from scratch. The continuity link has a special significance in the
modern form of a tradition through the process of change. Only then does 'tradition not
give us the whole past, but its constant shattering, changing form, on the basis of which
we further shape the way of life.' Change and continuity create tradition, allowing
tradition to maintain its economy And incorporates the qualities of modernity in its actual

The logical tendency of any tradition helps to keep it alive. Otherwise it does not
take time for the tradition to dry up and take root. For the better examination or
examination of literature, tools and instrumnets come from the tradition itself. After this,
the tradition becomes the bearer of the values which the critique creates, and keeps
transferring the values from generation to generation.

When we try to get to know our traditions, our era of understanding becomes
stronger. After this, it is possible to measure modernity through the right standards.
Otherwise, in the name of modernity, to move forward without understanding the right
and wrong, is to call out the problems which are reflected from generation to generation.
But usually people take this aspect as an unnecessary thing. The truth is that all is not in
the mirror of modernity as it appears. The authenticity of tradition is essential to the real
philosophy of modernity. Only then is it possible to reach a firm conclusion.

Creating a new interpretation of a tradition is also creation. Myths have their own
special significance in literature around the world. Creating events from a period of
history, the creator imagines many wonderful characters and gives them creative ground,
and over time different types of creations about these characters become part of literary
work. At the same time, thinking about the works of old writers and regenerating them
from a new perspective is to give a new dimension to creativity. This reinforces the
tradition of literature on the one hand, while on the other hand the 'discovery of tradition'
gives ideological basis. This has been happening before, but in recent years, the
characters or myths present in a very old work are being reinterpreted, the works are

being recast. Obviously, the assumptions made by the contexts in a particular
composition are also changing. Be it literature writing or criticism work, if in any kind of
conceptual writing, 'manure and water' is taken from the tradition, then the creative crop
ahead is equally good. Thus, passing through the past while touching our past is also a
unique experience for the dear reader. After all, tradition is a dynamic process that is
complemented by a continuous evaluation, never being opposed to modernism.

Notwithstanding tradition and modernity, they are not completely different, yes
they do move relative to each other. Tradition itself becomes modernism by incorporating
new elements in it and this modernity later becomes tradition. Modernism has some evil
or some good, sometimes only liberal thinking. Adopting the good things of tradition, the
incorporation of modern ideas leads us to prosperity. The influence of science has turned
the world into a village, so by adopting the tradition and adopting modern ideas in this
universe, today's youth can achieve complete modernity.


 Dubey, Shyamnarayan.-- Parampara Itihias bodh aur Sanskriti

 Kumar, Rashmi. Nai Kavita ke Mithak Kavya. New Delhi:

 Pathak, Vinay Kumar. Hindi sahity ki Vaicharik Prishth bhumi.

 Pandey, Rajendra. Parampara ka Pariprekshya. Delhi.

 Shambhunath. Aadhunikta ki punarvyakhya.

 Gupta, Durga Prasad. Aadhunikta.

 Madan, Indranath. Aadhunikta aur Sahitya.

Soren Kierkegaard : Three Stages of Life
Albert Amalraj M

The indirect method of Kierkegaard received a tremendous importance. This
pseudonymous writing served a dual purpose: firstly, it was designed to convey in an
intimate manner the distinctive flavor and texture of dissimilar life-views; secondly, it
left the reader to draw ones on practical conclusions from what was communicated.1
He preferred that the readers reach their own conclusions. Kierkegaard proposed that
the individual passed through three stages on the way to becoming a true self: the
aesthetic, the ethical, and the religious. Each of these stages represents competing
views on life and as such potentially conflicts with one another. The contrast between
the aesthetic and the ethical comes out most vividly in either/or and that between the
ethical and the religious in Fear and Trembling. In any event, it certainly informs a
good deal of what one has to say about the relations between the different outlooks that
are portrayed.

Key words: life, aesthetic, ethical, religious

Stage One: The Aesthetic

The aesthetic life is defined by worldly pleasures. One must seek to maximize
those pleasures to live this life to the fullest. A person with this sphere is in a way
forced to take what is given as a gift. The destiny, nationality, birth place, race,
religion, family, personal and social identities are given. One‘s life is not governed by
critical reflections and choices but controlled by somebody or something in the world.
It is the life-given and not the life- chosen. It is indicated that the one who lives
aesthetically is not really in control, either of himself/herself or him/her situations. An
aesthete typically exists at random, tends to live for the moment, for whatever the
passing instant will bring in the way of entertainment, excitement, interest.‖2 The
importance of the aesthetic stage is acknowledged, but it is also presented as an
immature stage. The aesthete is only concerned with his/her personal enjoyment. The

aesthete forgets that its pleasure is so fleeting and it has no solid framework from
which to make coherent and consistent choices.

It is the characteristic of the aesthetic individual that one seems to be incapable

of development.‖3 The aesthete lives only in the moment, flitting aimlessly from one
episode to another without ever achieving any true personal identity. The result is
ultimate psychological and moral bankruptcy.‖4An aesthete can never do something
solely for the good of others. Eventually, one must begin seeking the ethical pleasures
instead. One does not feel to do anything, and so there is a need for another stage.

Stage Two: the Ethical

Ethics is the social rules that govern how a person ought to act.‖5 Ethics is not
always in opposition to aesthetics, but they must take precedence when the two
conflict. The aesthetic life must be subordinated to the ethical life, as the ethical life is
based on a consistent and coherent set of rules established for the good of society. The
ethical life actually offers certain pleasures which the aesthetic life cannot. A person
can still experience pleasure while living the ethical life. The ethical life serves the
purpose of allowing diverse people to coexist in harmony and causes individuals to act
for the good of society. The essential point about existential choice is that it makes one
aware of oneself as a true being, that is, as a being that does not live simply in the
immediate moment but needs to choose oneself in eternal validity. While identifying
oneself with marriage, friendship, work and social relations, one puts one‘s existence
on a higher plane. ―It is by accepting the duty and obligation, human admits one’s
dependence on values which are greater than oneself.‖6

Kierkegaard uses marriage as an example of an ethical life. In marriage, the

excitement of passion can quickly fade, leading to boredom and a diminishing of
aesthetic pleasure. However, by consistently acting for the good of one‘s spouse, one
learns that there is an enjoyment beyond excitement. Still, the ethical life does little to
nurture one‟s spiritual self. The person tries to build up a coherent, stable personality,
and consciously chooses to take on projects as a matter of long-term commitment
rather than short-term whim. In this way, ―one‘s life acquires continuity, and one is
able to go ahead to the future, learning from the past.‖7 However, we are very sure of

the fact that life is full of ambiguity and paradox. When the ethical person is faced with
two conflicting demands, one has to make a choice between these two undesirable
actions. We know that real satisfaction comes only when a person does with pure

Therefore, the ethical stage opens another stage whereby one finds real meaning
in life. Kierkegaard discerns that when people completely submit to universal moral
values, they lose their sense of individual responsibility. The ethical life diverts one
from self-exploration since it requires an individual to follow a set of socially accepted
norms and regulations. According to Kierkegaard, self-exploration is necessary for
faith, the key requirement for a properly religious life.

Stage Three: the Religious

Kierkegaard considers the religious life to be the highest mode of existence. He
is concerned with how to become a true Christian, living an authentically religious life
while surrounded by people who are falsely religious. The relationship with God is
exclusively personal. Christendom8 distracts people from that personal relationship.
Kierkegaard claims that the only way to make life worthwhile is to embrace faith in
God. Taking the life of Abraham, faith requires uncertainty because God is beyond
logic, proof and reason. There‘s no rational evidence for God, but this is exactly what
allows people to have faith in Him.

Kierkegaard claims that there is a higher stage of development open to human

beings, the stage of faith. Faith involves an all-consuming and world-defining
commitment to something that gives meaning to one‘s life, because faith cannot be
understood or described from outside. It is something that can only be alluded to and
indirectly communicated. As for us Abraham‘s faith is concerned, we cannot really
avoid the absurd, for the absurd is also present in Abraham‘s faith.9 Kierkegaard sees in
Abraham, an instance of an absolute duty to God which transcends ethics, a duty beyond
all duties. Abraham discovered such a duty when he came up against the paradox of
ethics, i.e. of the absolute that lies beyond it. Abraham is called the father of faith that he
believed against the understanding.10 The person who goes by faith will not stop at one
point instead goes further in life. ―One cannot stop with faith; must one go further? One

must go further.‖11 This urge to go further is not reserved for our generation alone but
ages to come.

Summarizing the stages on life‘s way, I understand that aesthetic existence is

essentially enjoyment and the life of immediacy and ethical existence is essentially
struggle and victory and the life of requirement, and the religious existence is
essentially suffering and venturing into new life.12

On the one hand, Kierkegaard is a commonly misunderstood author for his
pseudonymous writings; on the other hand his works are most consistently and
rewardingly understood as the poetry of inwardness which unfolds a wealth of
possibility for the human person. He also takes the reader ―through the contemplation
into the passion of personal appropriation.‖13 With all his ups and downs in life, he
openly confessed that ―he was happy in life, happy in the little world that was his
environment.‖14 He perceived God and existence of life from a humanistic view
emphasizing the total autonomy of human. Human being has to find out the truth for
oneself. One should know where the destiny in life is. Human being is put in a dilemma
in the process of finding out the truth in life.

Notes & References:

1. Patrick Gardiner, Kierkegaard, 44.
2. Ronald Grimsley, Leaders of Modern Thought: Kierkegaard, 30.
3. Ibid., 35-36.
4. Ronald Grimsley, Leaders of Modern Thought: Kierkegaard, 36.
5. Ronald Grimsley, Leaders of Modern Thought: Kierkegaard, 36.
6. Ronald Grimsley, Leaders of Modern Thought: Kierkegaard, 36.
7. Anthony Rudd, Kierkegaard and the Limits of the Ethical (New York: Clarendon
Press, 1997), 98.
8. Christendom made individuals lazy in their religion. Many of the citizens were
officially ―Christians,‖ without having any idea of what it meant to be a Christian.
Kierkegaard attempted to awaken Christians to the need for unconditional
religious commitment.
9. Søren Kierkaggard, Fear and Trembling, Repetition, 260.
10. Ibid., 257.
11. Ibid., 260.

12. Walter Lowrie, Kierkegaard’s Concluding Unscientific Postscript, trans. David F.
Swenson (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1944), 256.
13. Louis H. Mackey, ―Søren Kierkegaard: the Poetry of Inwardness,‖ in Existential
Philosophers: Kierkegaard to Merleau-Ponty, ed. George Alfred Schrader (New
York: Mcgraw Hill Book Company, 1967), 105.
14. Søren Kierkegaard, The Essential Kierkegaard, 184.

Gardiner, Patrick. Kierkegaard. New York: Oxford University Press, 1988.
Gardiner, Patrick, ―Kierkegaard Soren Aabye‖ in Routle Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
London and New York: Routledge,1998.
Grimsley, Ronald. Leaders of Modern Thought: Kierkegaard. London: Studio Vista,
Mackey. H, Louis. ―Soren Kierkegaard: the Poetry of Inwardness,‖ in Exisential
Philosophers: Kierkegaard to Merleau-Ponty. Edited by. Goerge Alfred Schrader.New
York: Megraw Hill Book Company, 1967.
Lippitt, John. Routledge Philosophy Guide: Book to Kierkegaard and Fear and
Trembling. New York: Taylor & Francis Library, 2004.
Kierkegaard, Soren. Either/Or Part II. Edited and Translated by Howard V. Hong and
Edna H. Hong. New Jersey: Princetor University Press, 1987.

The Significance, Purpose and Limit of Human Enhancement

M. Arockia Charles


Human enhancement is generally understood as any activity by which we improve our

bodies, minds or abilities in order to increase our welfare. Human beings have been
consistently striving to adapt themselves to their living situations and to improve
themselves down through the years.Heidegger the most prominent philosophers of
twentieth century, had stated that the experience of life as meaningful is intrinsically
linked to the horizon of morality. If we were able to postpone death indefinitely, nothing
in our life would matter anymore. We could delay all activities to a future moment.
Hence, the experience of vulnerability is constitutive of a truly human life. This paper
vitally explains that enhancing oneself and the other would be a greater medicine to come
out from all the problems.

Key Words: Cognitive Enhancement, Moral Enhancement, Biological Perfection (such

as happiness, success, profit, competitive advantage), Changing Environment, Attractive
appearance, Technological invention.


The relationship between the purpose and the limit of Human Enhancement is
inevitable. When the purpose becomes obvious, it is easier to set the limits to Human
Enhancement. The purpose of one individual enhancement might differ from another. For
instance, while the aim of cognitive enhancement is to have a sharper mind, the purpose
of performance enhancement is to boost one‘s athletic ability. Similarly, the objective of
―Moral Enhancement‖ is to have better moral motives or behavior, but the goal of life
extension is to have a longer life. One common element of all these is to plan to create a
better life. However, we are particularly concerned about the ultimate aim or end that one
wishes to achieve through the pursuit of Human Enhancement in general.1

Explanation of the Paper

Although the reasons might overlap, they are still distinct from each other. 1.
Some might have Human Enhancement, because they view their unenhanced traits as
defects or imperfections, and want to either do away with them or have them improved.2
2. Others might undertake human enhancement‘s to become ―better than well‖. 3. Still
others might want to achieve happiness, success, profit, competitive advantage and
biological perfection with the help of Human Enhancement. 4. Yet others might pursue
Human Enhancements to make them sufficiently competent since natural selection has
failed them, they need to look for artificial means like Human Enhancement to face a fast
changing environment.3 5. Some choose human enhancement to create the best possible
babies with a view to giving them better opportunities for a good life. 6. One may even
set the overall increase in well-being, or becoming post human as the ultimate end of
human enhancement.

Some of these targeted ends, however, are not actual ends, but mere means to
achieving something else. Similarly, the possibility of the realization of other actual ends
is either questionable or undesirable. For instance, a film actor and actress enhance
his/her normal features not merely to get greater opportunities to act in films by means of
her ―attractive‖ appearance. One may enhance as many capabilities as possible to obtain
an ―enhancement certificate,‖ which would function as a means to obtain the edge on
others. On the other hand, we question the feasibility of improving ones‘ overall well-
being and the desirability of making one happy or more moral through human
enhancement. Whatever the purpose of human enhancement, the question is whether we
can achieve that purpose, let alone its desirability. In the pursuit of realizing the purpose,
irrespective of it being achievable, whether it is possible to stop at a point and say
‗enough‘ is what matters. Similarly, when can we say, ―This much is too much? These
are pertinent questions, leading to limiting human enhancement.4

The purpose of human enhancement and its limits are interrelated to each other.
We cannot meaningfully speak about setting limits to human enhancement without
considering its purpose. Based on our analysis heretofore, we claim that the ultimate
purpose of human enhancement is unrealizable, and to that extent, the pursuit becomes

not only endless, but also meaningless. Even if the end were achievable, we do not
endorse its desirability nor do we promote it directly for its own sake, given the ethical
concerns.5 Our analysis of ‗the issue of limits‘ addresses the following three overlying
questions: 1. Are there constraints to the development of human enhancement
technologies? 2. Is there a limit to an individual‘s use of human enhancements? 3. Can
the state regulate individuals‘ pursuit of human enhancement? By way of answering the
first question, one could argue that we need to assess human enhancement technology as
we evaluate any technological development in general. There is no doubt that human
enhancement is a technological invention, but it is something different from all other
technologies due to its nature, purpose, cost, potential to change human life and the
nature of the human species itself.6 Hence, when we set right our dispositions, knowing
that we have a greater goal to live for, our life is more likely to be meaningful for us and
for others.


To conclude, we have not merited all that we enjoy today. We are able to see
things in perspective, have a clearer and greater vision for the future, and experience
different comforts-resulting from various developments and technologies of which most
of our ancestors could not even dream. We have not ourselves created our present
context; we have not started everything from scratch; rather, we are born into the ―given‖
context of a long history, which has also been gradually and carefully constructed over
generations together. We are proudly standing on the giant shoulders of our forefathers,
who have left this world a ―better‖ place than they found it. Having realized our sense of
being gifted, every gift involves a task – we need to reciprocate it by responsibly leaving
this world a better place for successive generations to enjoy rather than thinking of
occupying this earth forever by indefinitely extending our lifespan through our efforts to
―completely‖ overcome our vulnerability. The latter would not only obstruct the
responsible embodiment of our gratitude, but would also make this world an
unwelcoming place for the future.

Notes and References:
1. Jotterand, ―Beyond Therapy and Enhancement: the Alteration of Human Nature,‖
2. Hauskeller, ―Human Enhancement and the Giftedness of Life,‖ 64.
3. Habermas, The Future of Human Nature, 75.
4. Daniel, Normal Functioning and the Treatment-Enhancement Distinction,‖ 314.
5. Buchanan, ―From Chance to Choice: Genetic and Justice, 84.
6. Hauskeller, ―Human Enhancement and the Giftedness of Life,‖ 64.


Jotterand,Fabrice, ―Beyond Therapy and Enhancement: The Alteration of Human

Nature,‖Nano Ethics, (2008), 15-23.

Hauskeller,Micheael, ―Human Enhancement and the Giftedness of Life,‖ Philosophical

Papers, (2011), 55-79.

Habermas,Jurgen, The Future of Human Nature,Cambridge: Polity Press, 2003.

Daniel, Norman,―Normal Functioning and the Treatment-Enhancement Distinction,‖

Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics, (2000) 309-322.

Buchanan, Allen, ―From Chance to Choice: Genetic and Justice, Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press, 2000.

Does the Present Time need Feminism? An Exploration
Sananda Sen

It was indeed a very bright day… sipping over a cup of coffee and was scrolling
down the headlines. The news of the devastation caused by the pandemic is
everywhere. Regarding various welfare schemes, the government was quite lardy-
dardy and the common people behaved cumbrously. Eftsoons, we got a bigger
picture of the increase in the rate of crimes against women. The NCRB (National
Crime Records Bureau) had published data where Mumbai recorded 6519 cases of
women‘s violence after the national capital Delhi which was about 12, 902 in 2019.
Mumbai city ranked first in cases of insult to women‘s modesty and according to
the NCRB, Maharashtra reported the highest number of cases of cyberstalking or
bullying of women for the last three years (1126 cases). Inadvertently, I gasped
some air and continued with my errands.

The very next day, another news flashed all over the country – the ghastly event in
Hathras district of Uttar Pradesh. It was reported that a 19-year old Dalit woman
was allegedly gang-raped and gravely assaulted by four persons. The woman was
not able to survive the heinous crime – she died after two weeks of this incident.
Side by side, it also revealed that atrocities against the Dalit women have
surmounted to 7.3 % and the NCRB also disclosed the fact that Uttar Pradesh
recorded the maximum number of cases against Scheduled Castes (25.8%). It ranks
second in terms of the number of rapes against Dalit women. Not many days passed
by and another rape case came into the limelight where a six years old girl was the
prey. The incident took place in the Aligarh District of Uttar Pradesh. Just before
this incident, another news came into the light where a twenty-four years old man
of Ballia, Uttar Pradesh raped and thrashed a seventy years old woman to death,
and incessantly we can continue to talk about these kinds of ghastly happenings all
over India.

Before these incidents were surfacing, quite a time ago, the term ‗feminazi‘ became
much popular in the year 1992. A combination of the words feminism and Nazi,
this term was made popular by an American radio talk show, which was hosted by
Rush Limbaugh. As it is quite apparent, this particular word did not demonstrate a
positive outlook concerning ‗feminists‘. According to the Oxford Dictionary of
American Political Slang, feminazi is defined as ‗a committed feminist or a strong-
willed woman‘. The very usage of the term exposes the skeptical outlook of
Limbaugh concerning the relevance of the feminist movement. Specifically, he
targeted the radical feminists fighting for abortion rights. In his view, these
feminists were on a mission to dominate men and seize their power thereby making
them redundant. However, feminists pointed out that such a phrase was derogatory
and intently tries to demean their position either as men haters or power mongers.
Thus, feminazi attempts to prove that feminism, as a theory, holds no importance in
today's world.

Feminism, and more specifically radical feminism, questions the very foundation of
society, that is, patriarchy. Besides this, it also poses a challenge to the heterosexual
system, which is considered to be the only natural norm of society. Also, it has
raised voices for people of alternative sexualities, like gay or lesbians. Such
deliberation is quite revolutionary as it aims to demolish the basic foundation of
society, that is, the hetero-patriarchal system. The modus operandi of radical
feminists has tagged them as anti-men or anti-society. Their intentions are being
misunderstood and with time, people started to believe that society can thrive better
without any ‗feminism‘.

The above scenario was perceived in the West but in the Indian context, it was no
better. Indian society has its roots within traditional values which have often come
in conflict with feminist views. Feminists have the vision to achieve gender
equality, they try to restrain the misogynistic attitude, specifically, towards women.
They neither believe in any kind of domination nor in the top-down power
structure, where domination over women by men is justified. Feminists have started

a movement of liberation as well as have emphasized that no individuals can be
discriminated against, based on their sexual preferences. There lies the need to
acknowledge the fact that society is heterogeneous and feminists strive towards it.
Being vocal against the presence of any kind of fixed gender identity, feminists
opine that sexuality is not related to one‘s sex. Any effort to address sex inequality
is challenging and also breaks away all those social norms that are non-liberating.
To conflate Nazi with feminism is a mistaken step as feminists‘ objective is to
achieve an egalitarian society where all differences among individuals need to be
respected along with the right of every individual irrespective of her/his social

Reality is multiple and any belief that is considered to be ‗true‘ needs

interrogation. The ability to see things ‗beyond‘ what it is shown is quite a task
which Plato tries to explain in his allegory of the cave. He is of the view that people
remain chained within their thoughts, which they consider real. Living inside the
cave for a long time, they see some shadows outside and are believed to be existing.
Plato expresses that given a chance, if those people come out of that confined
space, then they may have the ability to distinguish the mere appearances from
reality. Similarly, we have a closeted system of belief and to make any kind of
alteration within it, is a matter of time. At first, we may suffer from some kind of
disorientation and disbelief. But with a critical bent of mind and analyzing our
thoughts, a situation may be reached where one may reflect upon the ‗nature‘ of
knowledge. People and their views are still restricted and only by a true exploration
of things, we may achieve a non-distorted view of reality. Then only we would
arrive at a situation whereby we can apprehend the essence and intention of

We need feminism for many reasons and here, a few of them will be discussed. Our
society tends to think in terms of the binary of man/woman, reason/emotion,
active/passive, and so on. Man is always associated with reason and is held in high
esteem in many traditional accounts for his ability to exercise his rational faculty by

not being influenced by any subjective factors. Besides, it is also imperative for
men to maintain an arm‘s length distance with others so that they may continue to
execute their duties in a non-passionate manner. There is a general propensity to
believe that emotions make people weak and confused, sometimes, incapable to
ponder over the moral issues in an organized, logical manner, and women are also
considered to be emotional. The traditional thinkers, who are mainly rationalist
philosophers, consider emotion as a lower order quality of humans and valorise
reason. As a consequence, women are always represented as the ‗lack‘ in terms of
rationality and the domain of rational knowledge excludes women.

Feminism contributes uniquely where it endeavors to show that all human beings
are equal and have different ways of dealing with situations in life. The ability to
exercise one‘s rational faculty cannot be the parameter of claiming one‘s moral
excellence. Australian philosopher Val Plumwood1 talks about the naturalness of
domination of man/woman binary, which also lies implicitly within the two-valued
logic. She questions such naturalness as well as express the fact that in two-valued
logic, if the word ‗p‘ stands for men, then women are represented as ‗not p‘, that is,
they are defined in terms of the absence of ‗p‘ and not as an independent category
of ‗q‘. She points out that ‗p‘ becomes the centre of power and ‗not p‘ is forced in
the background, thus, overlooking all differences and uniqueness of ‗not p‘. This
not only ends in gender-discrimination but also in deep-rooted domination of the
core/centre on the periphery/margin. In other words, it is the structural violence
within two-valued logic where any kind of difference between ‗p‘ and ‗not p‘ is
understood in terms of the dominant or superior party to the hierarchy. This kind of
dualism further leads to the failure in acknowledging any positive differences,
thereby, turning to a form of objectification, homogenization as well as
stereotyping of individuals under the category ‗not p‘. Plumwood points out two-
valued logic is problematic as it fortifies gender-binary and other kinds of

To rise above such a form of oppression, one also needs to question the very
category of ‗woman‘ and the meaning associated with it. Heterosexuality as a
system tends to be natural/normal in our society and one hardly questions such a
norm. Feminism aids us to think out of the box- to question or problematize
conventional social understanding. This can be illustrated by referring to the work
of who is a Swiss linguist and semiotician2. To understand his theory, we need to
explore his linguistic theory. Let us take an example of the word ‗horse‘. The sound
image or impression in our minds is of that representing the ‗horse‘. Our language
system helps us to realize the mental image related to this particular word. Thus, we
know the concept or the meaning associated with this particular word ‗horse‘. The
connections between the two elements (the image and the concept) are done
mentally without uttering or writing the word. The two parts are joined and formed
into a mental linguistic unit called ‗sign‘. The part of the sign which appears as the
concept or meaning is termed as ‗signified‘, that is, the idea about a horse. What the
word ‗horse‘ creates in our mind is called a signifier. A signifier is the sound of the
word or the symbols used in writing it. Signified is the concept attached to the
word. Saussure argues that the signifier cannot exist without the signified. Hence,
the word ‗horse‘ cannot exist in the absence of the signifier and the signified. He
states that there lies no logical connection between these two and there is no reason
why the letters h-o-r-s-e produce the image of an animal. He articulates this to be
an outcome of convention; users of the same language group have fixed these
letters or sounds to evoke a certain image. Similarly, in a patriarchal society, the
word ‗woman‘ acts as the ‗signifier‘. Saussure defines signifier and to quote him -

… all appearances freely chosen with respect to the idea that it

represents, is fixed, not free, with respect to the linguistic community
that uses it. The masses have no voice in the matter, and the signifier
chosen by language could be replaced by no other.3

The word ‗woman‘ has a concept or meaning which is the ‗signified‘. The concept may
not exist in reality but still has some reference to it. According to feminists like Judith
Butler, ‗women‘ is a constructed social concept; it is not ‗real‘ per se. Still, this word

confers some meaning or produces a specific image in our minds. Within the patriarchal
framework, this meaning of women or the ‗signified‘ becomes fixed with time. We see
women as a signifier but a woman may not be compulsorily heterosexual or by nature
emotional or care-giver. On the contrary, she may be less emotional or less caring. Here,
Sara Ruddick may be referred to who says that caring as an activity should not be
prescribed to women alone. She talks about the ability of men who are also equally
capable of expressing care. Ruddick holds that maternity is a social practice that can be
performed by men and women alike. She defines the word ‗mother‘ as a responsible one,
who provides care to a child‘s needs. And if this is what defines a mother, she concludes
that both men and women can be mothers, as long as they receive adequate training and
theoretical knowledge on this matter. As Ruddick points out that by becoming a mother, a
man does not experience any change in the body. To quote her, ‗to a man taunted for
―being a woman,‖ talk of parenting may be temporarily comforting. But if he is
undertaking maternal work, he is identifying with what has been, historically, womanly‘4.
Ruddick believes that men can easily take up the maternal task and thus, can transcend
the gender binary (though she confesses that it has not yet been achieved) and the fixed
meanings attached to any gender.

We are inclined to associate one‘s sexual preference with the heterosexual system. In
Saussure‘s theory, the relationship between the signifier and signified is arbitrary and one
may conceive of the term ‗woman‘ as an empty signifier. He says that –

language is no longer free, for time will allow the social forces at work
on it to carry out their effects. This brings us back to the principle of
continuity, which cancels freedom. But continuity necessarily implies
change, varying degrees of shifts in the relationship between the
signified and the signifier.5

Keeping in mind the critical theoretical areas and the emergence of problems due to the
pre-given social concepts, theorists have tried to arrest any kind of simplification. In our
society, a woman‘s identity is based upon stabilizing the concepts of sex, gender, and
sexuality. But this identity keeps changing by those ‗incoherent‘ or ‗discontinuous‘

gendered-beings, who do not conform to the hetero-patriarchal norms.6 Such ‗non-
gendered‘ beings are none other than the homosexuals like gay or lesbians. Under the
normative patriarchal framework, they are viewed as the ‗non-intelligible categories‘, the
‗developmental failures‘, or the ‗logical impossibilities‘. Henceforth, rises the demand for
the space to express various alternative identities, which can be by no means subsumed
under the purview of heterosexuality. As a consequence, various activists, theorists, and
particularly, feminists (lesbians) have demanded an alternative economy of pleasures,
where the role of ‗reproduction‘ cannot dominate the entire understanding of human

A woman of 35 years old was forced to remain in a state of confinement for the last one
and a half years by her husband inside a very small and stinking toilet. This incident
happened in Haryana. When protested against sexual harassment, a 16 years old girl was
shot dead by three men in Firozabad district of Uttar Pradesh. These are all recent events
of this year that occurred after the lockdown phase. According to the NCRB report
(2019), false marriage promises led to 57% rapes in Uttar Pradesh. Besides these kinds of
happenings occurring at various corners of India, on the social level, homophobia still
prevails. Feminism demands a change in the ontological understanding of the categories
of sex and gender. It points out the fact that heteronormativity is a power-driven category
that leads to intolerance towards other sexualities, like gays or lesbians. A platform is
needed so that one might have the freedom to choose, the right to express as well as the
right to criticize, and feminism undoubtedly seeks to provide such an opportunity. It
proposes active and inclusive solidarity and that is a quintessential requirement. This
needs to be accompanied by interactive dialogical encounters. Such solidarity would
allow individuals to ‗speak with‘ or to ‗listen to‘ each other with empathy. ‗Speaking
with‘ helps in accommodating plurality within various perspectives by attention to
diverse narratives. Thus, it endeavors to expand the domain of communication. But at the
same time feminism needs to be cautious about its various moves it takes to fight gender
injustice. It needs to follow the ‗power with power‘ structure where power is not linked
to any kind of domination. It is not only feminists but various welfare programs at the
administrative levels also required to realize the dream of equality and respect for all in

practice. We can understand the effort behind this motive with the help of a singular
instance - Kiori in Nuh has become the first village of the state of Haryana where 250
houses would be identified by the girls in the family. This became possible by the ‗Laado
Swabhiman‘ initiated by the former sarpanch of the village, Sunil Jaglan, whose selfie
with his daughter received recognition from the ministers, including the prime minister of
the country. It is also reported that Nuh has a sex ratio of 908 than other districts of
Haryana. This kind of positive instances is surely going to rise if we attempt to change
our perceptions towards human beings by not defining them solely based on the
sex/gender system.

Notes and References:

1. Val Plumwood, ―The Politics of Reason: Towards a Feminist Logic‖ in

Australian Journal of Philosophy, (Vol, 71, No.4, December 1993).

2. The study of meaning-making.

3. Ferdinand De Saussure, Cours de Linguistique Generale, tr. Wade Baskin, Course

in General Linguistics, eds. Perry Meisel and Haun Saussy, (London:

Fontana/Collins, 1916), p.71.

4. Sarah Ruddick, Maternal Thinking: Toward a Politic of Peace, (Boston: Beacon

Press, 1989), p. 45.

5. Sarah Ruddick, Maternal Thinking: Toward a Politic of Peace, (Boston: Beacon

Press, 1989), p.78.

6. Judith Butler, Gender Trouble: Feminism and the Subversion of Identity, (UK:

Routledge, 2006), p.23.

What can be shown, can not be said: Wittgenstein’s thoughts special
reference to Tractatus Logico Philosophicas

Lipika Das

I will highlight something about Wittgenstein's theory of language special reference to
his book ―Tractus Logico Philosophicas (TLP)‖. There seem to be many difficulties in
the meaning and use of the language. I will try to figure out a lot of problems which
mainly related to misleading or ambiguous words in the philosophy of language. I will
focus on Wittgenstein brought about such a change in philosophy. Wittgenstein's aim is
how to remove ambiguity or two meanings from the sentences. He discussed descriptive
language. Here descriptive means to say anything is equivalent to describing something. I
will also discuss Wittgenstein‘s concept about ‗saying‖ and ―showing‖. Wittgenstein in
his ―Tractatus‖ says that some sentences are only ―said‖ and some sentences are only
―showing‖. Wittgenstein said that only ‗spoken sentences‘ are – which is capable of
being true or false. Because this type of sentence is the limit of the language. But which
sentences are ‗can not be spoken of‘ are not capable of true or false. Because this type of
sentence is not the limit of the language. In this paper, I am using two diagrams to show
clearly the relation between ‗what can be said‘ and ‗what can not be said‘. I will be
talking about the propositions of logic, ethics, metaphysics, religion, etc. I will also talk
about which types of the sentence is mystical according to Wittgenstein. In this way, I
will try to explore the meaning of senses, nonsense, and sense-less of Wittgenstein's point
of view.
This paper explores the different philosopher‘s interpretation of Tractatus. It introduces
the structure of the language. Through this paper, we can get a deep understanding of
how are propositions to relate to the world?, what is the structure of the language?, what
is the function of language? etc. This paper is the exposition Wittgenstein‘s approach to
philosophical propositions.
Keywords: Tractatus, shown, language, world, senseless.

Wittgenstein was a British philosopher and he was also an analytic philosopher.
Philosophy discussed many things. Philosophical activity especially related to the
investigation of the nature, tasks, and methods of philosophy, etc. Each ‗revolution‘ in
philosophy brings a radical change in the different branches of philosophy. In recent
years Wittgenstein brought about such a change in philosophy. In this regard, G.E.Moore
said that Wittgenstein claims that what he was doing was a new subject, and not merely a
stage in continuous development; that there was now in philosophy, a ‗kink‘ in the
development of human thought comparable to that which occurred when Galileo and his
contemporaries invented dynamics, that a ‗new method‘ had been found, as had happened
when chemistry was developed out of alchemy.1

We have seen a lot of things in philosophy for a long time. We have a lot of problems
with the mainly misleading or ambiguous words in the philosophy of language. Those
were the analytic philosophers what was their work? Or what is the main purpose of
analytic philosophers? The main purpose of analytic philosophers has analytically
discussed the language. So the ambiguous or misleading words do not go there. In some
sentences, it is seen that ambiguity or two meaning comes out. In this way there were
some problems arising in this philosophy that what to use and what not to do use. Some
of these problems occur in philosophy. The first philosophy begins with the hands of
Plato and Aristotle. In this case, they were mainly discussed how do we gain knowledge?
What is knowledge? On the other hand, Psychology says that – how can we relate to the
world? at the same how can we understand the mind or nature of consciousness?
Descartes emerged in modern philosophy and he also discussed mind-body
interactionism. From there he discussed the existence of God. Even after this discussion,
it is seen that we do not know the validity of the sentences. Whether our sentences are
true or false? Now the answer is that metaphysical words must be eliminated.
Wittgenstein first thinks about the language and that‘s why he constructed the logical

Wittgenstein wrote various books. His famous book was ―Tractus Logico Philosophicas
(TLP)‖ and ―Philosophical Investigation (P.I)‖. With the help of these two books, we can

know Wittgenstein‘s two distinct intellectual life. There are many controversies between
these two books. ―No unbroken line leads from the TLP to the PI; there is no logical
sequence between the two books, but rather a logical gap. The thought of the later work is
a negation thought of the earlier.‖2 There are 7 sentences in this book. TLP deals with
different problems of philosophy. Wittgenstein gave different concepts through this book.
His main concepts were – picture theory, logical atomism, what is the concept of world,
language, sentences, objects, etc. He said that, with the help of this book we can get the
right language, we can judge the language by truth and falsehood; we can verify the
language, etc.

Wittgenstein always discussed the logical sentences, not the practical or public sentences.
The sentences must be constituted the subject term and predicate term. This is a logical
structure of the sentences. Wittgenstein speaks perfectly formal language. In philosophy
two theories are very important. One is correspondence theory and other is coherence
theory. Wittgenstein in his TLP always uses correspondence theory. Logic, language and
the world these three are the main emerge concept in TLP. Wittgenstein said that if we
can use language to talk about the world, there must be some propositions which are
directly connected with the world. So the truth and falsity of propositions are directly
connected with the world. So the truth and falsity are not determined by other proposition
but these are always determined by the world. This is called elementary proposition.
Wittgenstein said that the world there must be something common between language and
the world. So, Wittgenstein in his book TLP begins with the propositions that –―The
world is all the case (TLP.1.0).3 The world is totality of facts, not of things (TLP.1.1).4
Wittgenstein said that propositions denote the state of affairs. At the same time he said
that names denote the objects. The above discussion is shows with the help of the
following diagram:


Wittgenstein attempted to elaborate on the nature of logical truth in his book ―Tractatus
Logico Philosophicus‖. Wittgenstein in his book TLP has started with some sentences
and one of the most important sentences is ―What can be shown, can not be said‖ (TLP
4.1212).5 He said that we can relate reality with the picture and a picture can represent
reality. A picture means a logical picture. There should be a pictorial form or logical
form. A picture represents reality and reality means there should be some objects, and
elementary propositions represent the state of affairs.

According to Wittgenstein, ‗language‘ is identical to ‗descriptive‘ language, and to ‗say‘

anything is equivalent to ‗descriptive‘ something. He says that here language is
descriptive language. Here descriptive means to say anything is equivalent to describing
something.6 Thus ‗the totality of true propositions is the whole of natural science‘ (TLP
4.11) and ‗what can be said‘ is identified as ‗propositions of natural science‘(TLP 6.53)7
or ‗empirical propositions‘. Here Wittgenstein tries to understand that ‗Natural science‘
means the natural world or the logical world but not the practical world.

Wittgenstein in his Tractatus said that propositions of logic, ethics, etc do not say
anything. They are senseless or nonsensical because they are attempts to transcend, in
language, the limit of language, hence, the world.8
For example: Ram is a good boy.
Here this sentence is only shown, can not be said. Because with the help of the other
sentences, we can describe only this sentence. So this is not the limit of language as well
as the world. So Wittgenstein contends that – there are important things (mental and
aesthetic values, the meaning of life, etc) which although they can not be said, can be
shown. ‗ They are what is mystical‘(TLP 6.522).9

Wittgenstein in his ―Tractus‖ says that ‗can be said‘ – which is capable of being true or
false so that which of the two possibilities has to be decided by ‗comparing the
proposition with reality‘.10 A proposition has ‗sense‘ in so far as it is a logical picture of

the world. No picture can be true apriori. ―It is impossible to tell from the picture alone
whether is it true or false‖(T-2.224) without comparing it with reality.11
For example, i) This box is blue
ii) This box is beautiful.
The above first sentence (this box is blue) is ‗said‘ because this sentence is capable of
being true or false. But the second sentence (this box is beautiful) is ‗not said‘, only
‗shows‘ because this sentence is not capable of being true and false. The first sentence
has ‗sense‘ that means it is a logical picture of the world. If we comparing sentences (this
box is blue) with reality then we can say that these sentences are true or false, otherwise,
we can not say that this sentence is true or false. So logical propositions are true apriori,
they are tautologies.

Religion, ethics, art, and metaphysics are related to ‗what can not be said‘- because this
transcends the world.12 I am using two diagrams to show clearly the relation between
‗what can be said‘ and ‗what can not be said‘.13

In the above diagram, ‗A‘ is the ‗mirror image‘ of diagram ‗B‘. From the above diagram
‗A‘, we can say that, ‗world‘ is ‗what can be said‘ because this is the limit of the world.
But ‗outside the world‘ is ‗ what can not be said‘. ‗ What can not be spoken of‘ is
mystical. Like – God, self, time, etc this kind of term is mystical because this type of
word is under the category of outside the world, and this is not the limit of the world. So

Wittgenstein concludes that ― There are, indeed, things that are inexpressible. They show
themselves. They are what is mystical‖ (TLP. 6.522).14

In the same way from diagram ‗B‘, it should be noted that language always saying and
saying are three types – (i) senses, (ii) senseless, and (iii) nonsense, this is the limit of
language. Senses, senseless, and nonsense three are mainly logical categories. But this
three-term is also used in the ordinary sense. If we try to say anything about the limit of
language, results in senseless propositions. Many sentences (in aesthetic, logic, etc) like –
beautiful, good, etc are only showing, can not be said. Because this is the outside of the

Different philosophers own way interpretation of Tractatus. Logical positivists said that
metaphysics is nonsense and hence to be eliminated. This tendency is shown in the recent
interpretation of the Tractatus. In this regard Pitcher said that ― metaphysics is to be
eliminated‖.15 The same misunderstanding is prompted by different Scholars,
philosophers, interpreters, and so on.

Wittgenstein said that ―most of the propositions and questions to be found in

philosophical works are not false but nonsensical.‖(TLP.4.003) Wittgenstein simply
means that the philosophical proposition is not false, they do not misstate facts that could
be correctly stated, for they do not state or mis-state any facts at all. They look like
propositions but they are in reality, not a proposition in the strict sense.16 This does not
mean that Wittgenstein was anti-metaphysical Wittgenstein‘s approach is that
philosophical propositions are nonsensical.

According to Wittgenstein metaphysics, ethics, religion, and art, all this discipline
belongs to the realm of transcendental which can not be said but only shown. This is
nonsense because this is inexpressible. The mystical or inexpressible of all things are
important in our life.

1. G.E.Moore, ‗ Wittgenstein‘s Lectures in 1930-33‘ , in his Philosophical
Papers(London, 1959), p.322.
2. J.Hartnack, Wittgenstein and Modern philosophy(London, 1965), p. 49
3. Wittgenstein, Ludwig , Tractus Logico Philosophicus, trans by Routledge and
Kegan Paul, revised edition 1974,p.5
4. Ibid
5. Ibid,p.31
6. K.T.Fann, Wittgenstein Conception of Philosophy, University of California Press
7. Wittgenstein, Ludwig , Tractus Logico Philosophicus, trans by Routledge and
Kegan Paul, revised edition 1974, p. 89
8. K.T.Fann, Wittgenstein Conception of Philosophy, University of California Press
9. Wittgenstein, Ludwig , Tractus Logico Philosophicus, trans by Routledge and
Kegan Paul, revised edition 1974, p. 89
10. K.T.Fann, Wittgenstein Conception of Philosophy, University of California Press
11. Ibid, p.23
12. Ibid, p.23
13. Ibid,p.24
14. Ibid, p.24
15. G.Pitcher, The Philosophy of Wittgenstein(New Jersey,1964),p.159
16. K.T.Fann, Wittgenstein Conception of Philosophy, University of California Press

Mill's Theory of Reference
Soumen Roy

There are some important debates concerning the notion of proper name. There are
having different views about the notion of proper name. Proper Name appears to be heart
of several debates in philosophy. Why should western thinkers care about proper names?
We get proper name through two different ways: Firstly, between the world of our
thoughts, beliefs and desires and the world of our actions, and secondly, between the
linguistic and the non-linguistic, between the world of meanings and truth-values. Thus,
proper names turn out to be important for several reasons. And the one reason is what the
meaning of proper name? J.S. Mill offers that seems to be the most intuitive answer to the
question of meaning of proper name. He says that names are denotative, but not
connotative. In this paper I will be primarily concerned the nature of proper name in Mill
Key Words: Proper name, Non-connotative term, Singular term, Concrete term, General
The term 'Proper Name' came from the Greek word ὄνομα κύριον and also Latin
by nomen proprium, meant a 'genuine' name, or a name more genuinely such than other
names. Accordingly the ὄνoμα κύριον was contrasted with the προσηγορία or
'appellation', a term used to describe what we call 'general names' or 'common nouns' like
man, horse, tree. The Stoic Chrysippus made a sharper distinction, confining ὄνομα to
what we now call proper names.
The later philosophers, by using the epithet κύριον either with or without ὄνομα ,
imply that the προσηγορία is a sort of ὄνομα , but not a quite genuine one. No better
account exists than that by Dionysius Thrax, a pupil of Aristarchus. He say that Ά noun
or name' (the one word δνομα is used, this covering both notions ; the French nom = nom
substantif, whereas the Germans, like ourselves, distinguish Nomen = 'noun' and Namen)
'is a declinable part of speech signifying a body or an activity, a body like "pen" and an
activity like "education", and may be used both commonly and individually; commonly

(κοινώς) like "indian", "lion" and individually (ίδίως "privately") like "Hume".'
Dionysius himself also uses the term κύριον, identifying it with such names or nouns as
are used 'individually' (tSi'ojy) ; of the κΰριον he says it is 'that which signifies individual
being' (την Ιόίαν ούσίαν) such as "Kant", "Vivekananda".1

For J.S. Mill, proper names have only denotations and they are non-connotative
terms. That means, a proper name, for Mill, has only reference but has no sense. Mill
holds that a proper name is a singular name, non-connotative and concrete term. A
proper name is, for J.S. Mill, a kind of singular name which is a non-connotative and
concrete term. To explain Mill‘s view about proper name, I try to explain his views about
name, singular term, non-connotative term etc.

Usually a name is a word or a group of word. For example, the expressions

‗Aristotle‘, ‗The pupil of Plato‘ are instances of name. But any word or any group of
word is not a name. For Thomas Hobbes, ―A name is a word taken at pleasure to serve
for a mark which may raise in our mind a thought like to some thought we had before,
and which being pronounced to others, may be to them a sign of what thought the speaker
had before in his mind.‖2

Mill holds that a name is a word or a group of words which expresses things of
which anything can be affirmed or denied. For example, the word ‗Aristotle‘ is a name,
because, the word refer to a person of which anything can be affirmed or denied. When
we say ‗Aristotle is a man‘, in this sentence, the term ‗Aristotle‘ is used to refer Aristotle
and we also affirm a quality, i.e., the property of being man, of that person. But the word
‗all‘, ‗if-then‘, ‗either-or‘ etc. cannot be considered as names. Mill says,
It is usual, before examining the various classes into which names are
commonly divided, to begin by distinguishing from names of every
description, those words which are not names, but only parts of names.
Among such are reckoned particles, as of, to, truly, often; the inflected
cases of nouns substantive, as me, him, John’s; and even adjectives, as
large, heavy. These words do not express things of which anything can

be affirmed or denied. We cannot say, Heavy fell, or A heavy fell;
Truly, or A truly, was asserted; Of, or An of, was in the room. Unless,
indeed, we are speaking of the mere words themselves, as when we say,
Truly is an English word, or, Heavy is an adjective.3

For Mill, such type of words or a group of words do not express things of which
anything can be affirmed or denied. According to Mill, a word or a group of words can be
considered as name only if that word or group of words is used as subject term of a
sentence. He also say that all names are names of something, real or imaginary; but many
things haven‘t been given individual names. Others have—e.g. persons and remarkable
places. And when we want to pick out something that doesn‘t have its own individual
name, we construct one out of two or more words, each of which could be used by itself
to name an indefinite number of other objects. For example I say ‗this bag‘ to designate
x, one particular bag; ‗this‘ and ‗bag‘ are each names that can be applied to many things
other than x, though in combination in this particular context they pick out x. That is one
use of names that apply to more than one thing; if it were their only use, they would be
mere contrivances for economizing the use of language.

However it is not their only function. They also enable us to assert general
propositions, affirming or denying a predicate of an indefinite number of things at once.
So the distinction between general names and individual or singular names is
fundamental, and can be considered as the most basic classificatory split in names. Here‘s
how it is standardly understood: ‗general name‘ = ‗name that can be truly affirmed, in the
same sense, of each of indefinitely many things‘. ‗individual or singular name‘ = ‗name
that can be truly affirmed, in the same sense, of only one thing‘.

Mill holds that there are two types of name: general name and singular name.
According to Mill, singular name is only capable of being truly affirm of one single
person, at least in the same sense. Mill says,
An individual or singular name is a name which is only capable of
being truly affirmed, in the same sense, of one thing.4

The expressions ‗Aristotle‘, ‗The pupil of Plato‘ are, according to Mill, singular
names. According to Mill the expression ‗Aristotle‘ is a singular name, because Aristotle
is only capable of being truly affirmed of one single person. Though there are many
persons who bear the same name. The expression ‗The pupil of Plato‘ is also a singular
name. Since, there cannot be more than one person of whom it can be truly affirmed, is
implied in the meaning of the words.

Conversely, according to Mill, a general name is capable of being truly affirmed

of an indefinite number of things in the same sense. For example the word man is only
capable of being truly affirmed of Ram, James, Rahul and some other persons and also
we assert that they all possess those qualities. Mill says,
A general name is familiarly defined, a name which is capable of being
truly affirmed, in the same sense, of each an indefinite number of

In this connection Mill distinguish between general name and collective name.
According to Mill, A general name is a one type of name and those names can be
predicated of each individual of a multitude. For example, The 50th regiment of foot in
the Indian army. It is a collective name. The name is not a general name. For Mill, the
name is an individual name. Since, it can be predicated of a multitude of individual
soldiers taken jointly. But it cannot be predicated of them severally. According to Mill we
may say that Ram is a soldier, and Sham is a soldier, but we cannot say, Ram is the 50 th
regiment and Sham is the 50th regiment. Thus ―The 50th regiment‖ is a collective name,
but not a general name.

For Mill, the word ‗men‘ is a general name, because the word ‗men‘ is capable of
being truly affirmed of indefinite number of individuals in the same sense. According to
Mill, general names also refer to certain qualities. When a general name is used as a
predicate in a sentence, it describes some property to something designated by the subject
term of that sentence. Thus, general names are connotative terms. Accordingly, Mill

holds that general names cannot be considered as proper names. But there are some
singular terms which are also connotative. For example, ‗the author of Gitanjali‘ is a
singular term which is used to refer to a singular individual but it refer to that very
individual if that individual possesses the property of being the writer of Gitanjali. So the
expression ‗the author of Gitanjali‘ being connotative term cannot be regarded as proper
name, according to Mill. He says,
A connotative term is one which denotes a subject, and implies an
attribute. By a subject is here meant anything which possesses
attributes. Thus John, or London, or England, are name which signify a
subject only. Whiteness, length, virtue, signify an attribute only. None
of these names, therefore, are connotative. But white, long, virtuous,
are connotative.6

Mill holds that proper names are non-connotative. He says that a non-connotative
term is one type term which signifies a subject only or an attribute only. According to
him proper name denotes the individuals. But the individuals do not indicate any
attributes as belonging to those individuals. Generally when we name a boy by the name
Rahul, or a cat by the name dec, these names are simply used to those individuals to be
made subjects. Indeed, that we must have some reason for giving them those names. A
man has been named Rahul, since that was the name of his father. But it is no
significance of the word Rahul, that the father of the person so called bore the same
According to Mill, a proper name is also a concrete term. For, a proper name is
used to refer to particular concrete individuals. Mill says,
A concrete name is a name which stands for a thing; an abstract name
is a name which stands for an attribute of a thing. Thus John, the sea,
this table, are names of things. White, also, is a name of a thing, or
rather of things.7

A concrete name is one that stands for a thing; an abstract name stands for an
attribute of a thing. Thus ‗Kant‘, ‗the river‘, ‗this pen‘, are names of things. ‗Green‘ is

also a name of things, and ‗Greenness‘ is the name of a quality or attribute they all have.
‗Man‘ is a name of many things; ‗humanity‘ is a name of an attribute of those things.
‗Old‘ is a name of things; ‗old age‘ is a name of one of their attributes. According to Mill
proper name are not abstract name, because an abstract name stands for an attribute of a
thing. Mill says,
―By abstract, then I shall always, in Logic proper, mean the
opposite of concrete; by an abstract name, the name of an attribute; by
a concrete name, the name of an object‖8

Therefore according to Mill, proper names are non-connotative, singular and

concrete term.
But there are four objections to Mill theory that have often motivated
philosophers to reject it. These objections appear in the work of Gottlob Frege and those
are known as Frege‘s Puzzles.
The first is the Objection from Cognitive Significance. The names ‗Netaji‘ and
‗Subhash Chandra Bose‘ refer to the same person. Therefore, if Millianism is correct,
they have the same meaning. The sentences Netaji is Netaji and Netaji is Subhash
Chandra Bose differ only in that Netaji is Subhash Chandra Bose contains the name
‗Subhash Chandra Bose‘ in a position where Netaji is Netaji contains ‗Netaji‘. Therefore,
if Millianism is true, sentences Netaji is Netaji and Netaji is Subhash Chandra Bose mean
the same thing, and express the same proposition. However, Netaji is Subhash Chandra
Bose is informative whereas Netaji is Netaji is not: as Frege put it, Netaji is Subhash
Chandra Bose can contain a valuable extension of our knowledge, but Netaji is Netaji
cannot. Furthermore, a rational, competent speaker could understand both and yet think
that Netaji is Netaji is true and Netaji is Subhash Chandra Bose is false. Finally, Netaji is
Netaji is analytic and a priori, whereas Netaji is Subhash Chandra Bose is synthetic and a
posteriori. These sentences differ in cognitive significance. But if they expressed the
same proposition, they would not differ in cognitive significance. Therefore, Millianism
is incorrect.

The second major argument against Millianism is the Objection from Belief
Ascriptions. Ram believes that Netaji is Netaji. Ram believes that Netaji is Subhash
Chandra Bose. These belief ascriptions are exactly alike, except that Ram believes that
Netaji is Subhash Chandra Bose contains the name ‗Subhash Chandra Bose‘ in a position
where Ram believes that Netaji is Netaji contains ‗Netaji‘. Therefore, if Millianism is
correct, then Ram believes that Netaji is Netaji and Ram believes that Netaji is Subhash
Chandra Bose express the same proposition and cannot differ in truth value. But Ram
believes that Netaji is Netaji could be true while Ram believes that Netaji is Subhash
Chandra Bose is false. Therefore, the Millian Theory is incorrect. Notice that this
objection relies on the claim that Ram believes that Netaji is Netaji and Ram believes that
Netaji is Subhash Chandra Bose can differ in truth value, whereas the previous objection
relied on the claim that Netaji is Netaji and Netaji is Subhash Chandra Bose differ in
cognitive significance.

The third major argument is the Objection from Meaningful Sentences Containing
Non Referring Names. The name ‗Unicorn‘ does not refer. Therefore, Millianism entails
that it is meaningless. Thus, if Millianism is correct, then sentence Unicorn flies contains
a meaningless word. But if Unicorn flies contains a meaningless word, then Unicorn flies
as a whole is meaningless. Therefore, if Millianism is correct, then sentence Unicorn flies
is meaningless. But Unicorn flies are clearly meaningful.

The four arguments, the Objection from Negative Existential, is closely related to
the previous argument. The example Unicorn does not exist is in not consistent with the
view of Mill. If the Millian Theory is correct, then ‗Unicorn‘ and the sentence Unicorn
does not exist are meaningless. If Unicorn does not exist is meaningless, then it is not
true. But Unicorn does not exist is true. Therefore, the Millian Theory is incorrect. Notice
that the preceding objection relies on the claim that ‗Unicorn‘ does not refer is
meaningful, whereas this objection relies on the claim that Unicorn does not exist is true.9

Notes & References:

1. Cf. Gardiner, A., The Theory of Proper Names, pp-4-5

2. Computation or Logic, Thomas Hobbes, vol-1,ed. William Molesworth,p-16
3. J.S. Mill, ‗A System of Logic Ratiocinative and Inductive’, in R.M. Robson
4. J.S. Mill, ‗A System of Logic Ratiocinative and Inductive’, in R.M. Robson
5. J.S. Mill, ‗A System of Logic Ratiocinative and Inductive’, in R.M. Robson
6. J.S. Mill, ‗A System of Logic Ratiocinative and Inductive’, in R.M. Robson
7. J.S. Mill, ‗A System of Logic Ratiocinative and Inductive‘, in R.M. Robson
8. J.S. Mill, ‗A System of Logic Ratiocinative and Inductive’, in R.M. Robson
9. Cf. Braun, D., Names and Natural Kind Terms, pp-3-6

 Frege, G., ‗Introduction‘, in M.Beaney(ed.), The Frege Reader,1906
 Frege, G., ‗On Sinn and Bedeutung‘, in M.Beaney(ed.), The Frege Reader,
Blackwell publishers, Oxford, First Publication, 1997
 Garc´ıa-Ram´ırez, E, Proper Names A Cognitive-Philosophical Study, The
University of Michigan, 2010
 Gardiner, A. The theory of proper names, Oxford university press, London,1957
 Lepore, E. and Smith, B. (eds.), Handbook of Philosophy of Language, Oxford
University Press, 2006
 Lycan, William G, Philosophy of Language, New York and London, Routledge,
 Mill, J.S., A System of Logic Ratiocinative and Inductive in J.M.Robson(ed.),
University of Toronto Press, Toronto, 1974
 Munitz, M.K., Contemporary Analytic Philosophy, B.I. publishers, Delhi, 1976
 Searle, J. ‗Proper names‘. Mind LXVII, 1958
 Searle, J. Proper names and Description. in P. Edwards(ed).1967

भारत में नैततक नेतत्ृ व: वततमान ऩररदृश्य एवं भववष्य

(Ethical Leadership in India: Present Scenario and Future)

डॉ दे शराज सिरिवाऱ

शोध-ऩत्र िार

“नेतत्ृ व” एक ववस्तत
ृ प्रत्मम है जो कई सददमों से सभाजशास्र, भनोववऻान, याजनीतत शास्र,

रोकप्रशासन के अध्ममन का ववषम यहा है . मह एक ऐसा शब्द है जो जेहन भें आते ही याजनीततऻ

अथवा याजनीतत का फोध कयाता है ऩयन्तु वास्तव भें ऐसा नहीॊ है | इसका दामया असीसभत है |
सभाज को को ददशा दे ना, बावी ऩीढ़ी का भागतदशतन कयना, सभानता की बावना ऩैदा कयना, सभाज

के प्रतत उतयदामी फनाना इत्मादद बी नेतत्ृ व कयने वारों का ही कामत है . “नैततक नेतत्ृ व” से
असबप्राम उस नेतत्ृ व से है जो नैततक भल्
ू मों ऩय आधारयत हो औय दस
ू यों को गरयभाऩण
ू त जीवन औय
अधधकायों के प्रतत सॊघषत के सरए वचनफद्ध हो. जफ हभ “नैततक नेतत्ृ व” की फात कयते हैं तो हभाये

साभने ऐसे नेता की छवव उत्ऩन्न होती हैं जो अऩने चरयर से, अऩने कभत से, अऩने तनणतमों से
औय अऩनी ववस्तत
ृ सभझ से रोहा भनवा चक
ु ा होता है . बायत जैसे रोकतान्त्न्रक दे श भें आज
“नैततक नेतत्ृ व” की ज्मादा आवश्मकता है क्मोंकक हभ ककसी बी ऺेर भें दे ख रें तो जो रोग
सभाज औय दे श का नेतत्ृ व की फात कयते हैं उनके प्राम रोकतान्त्न्रक भल्
ू मों का अबाव, धन
ु ता, कभतहीनता औय आदशत जीवन के प्रतत नकायात्भक बाव इत्मादद दग
ु ण
ुत दे खने को सभरते
हैं. बायत भें जफ बी हभ नैततक नेतत्ृ व की फात कयते हैं तो हभाया असबप्राम उस “आदशत नेतत्ृ व”
से है जो सभाज के हय ऺेर भें न्माम, सभानता औय भ्रातत्ृ व के गण
ु ों से मक्
ु त हो औय उस
सभ्मता/ सशष्टाचाय के जीवन भें प्रमोग से है जोकक रोकतान्त्न्रक दे श भें न्माम, सभानता की
स्थाऩना भें सहमोग दे सके. प्रस्तत
ु शोध ऩर भें हभाया भख्
ु म उद्देश्म बायत की वततभान
साभान्त्जक-धासभतक- याजनैततक ऩरयन्त्स्थततमों के सन्दबत भें “नैततक नेतत्ृ व” के ववसबन्न ऩऺों का
अध्ममन कयना है .

एक न्मामवप्रम औय सहानब
ु तू तऩण
ू त साभान्त्जक न्त्स्थतत ककसी बी रोकतान्त्न्रक दे श की ऩहचान होती हैं
जहाॉ ऩय ककसी बी दोषऩण
ू त भतबेदों के बफना, ककसी द्ु खदामी इततहास को छे ड़े बफना एक सकायात्भक

बववष्म के तनभातण का सऩना हय नागरयक के ददर भें होता है . मह तबी सम्बव है जफ जीवन के हय ऺेर

भें काभ कयने वारे नेता उन सावतबौभ आदशों औय गण

ु ों को बफना ककसी दे श, धभत, धन औय जातत की

ऩरयधध के आत्भसात कयके चरे न्त्जससे सभाज औय दे श दोनों का सकायात्भक ववकास हो. दे श का हय

नागरयक सभान स्वतन्रता, सभान नागरयकता के उतयाधधकाय का प्रमोग कय ऩाए साथ ही हय नागरयक

भें कततव्मफोध बी उत्ऩन्न हो. रेककन हभ दे खते हैं की ववश्वस्तय ऩय बाषा, धभत, जातत, सरॊग को आधाय

फनाकय भनष्ु म ही भनष्ु म को खत्भ कय यहा है औय भानव सभ्मता ऩय अऩने मह धचन्ह छोड़ उसे
करॊककत कय यहा है . ऐसे भें हभें ऐसे नेताओॊ की जरूयत है जो हभें धभत, जातत, सरॊग, वगत आदद की

सीभाएॊ तोड़ भानव फनने के सरए प्रेरयत कयें औय दे श-सभाज ववकास भें हय नागरयक का मोगदान

तनन्त्श्चत कयें . “नैततक नेतत्ृ व” की अवधायणा ऐसे ही नेतत्ृ व का अध्ममन कयने का एक प्रमास है जो की

ववश्वस्तय ऩय “प्रामोधगक नीततशास्र” का अॊग फन चक

ु ा है .

नैततक मल्
ू य और उनका अजतन:
ू म जन्भजात नहीॊ होते हैं. इनका ववकास साभान्त्जकयण की प्रककमा के साथ साथ होता है . भल्
ू मों का

अजतन सभाज भें ही होता है , इस कायण से सभाज औय सॊस्कृतत दोनों ही का मोगदान भल्
ू मों के ऺेर भें

होता है औय वही भल्

ू मों के तनधातयक बी है . साभान्त्जक भल्
ू म वे साभान्त्जक भानक , रक्ष्म मा आदशत है

न्त्जनके आधाय ऩय ववसबन्न साभान्त्जक ऩरयन्त्स्थततमों तथा ववषमों का भल्

ु माॊकन होता है . मे भल्
ू म

साभान्त्जक जीवन भें फहुत भहत्वऩण

ू त सभझे जाते हैं. साभान्त्जक भल्
ू म सभाज व्मवस्था की दे न होते हैं

औय मह व्मस्था तथ्मात्भक (वास्तववकता ऩय आधारयत) औय आदशातत्भक होती है . इन्हीॊ के आधाय ऩय

ू मों के साभान्त्जक प्रततभान फनते हैं. सभाज ककसी बी व्मन्त्क्त के सरए सॊस्कृतत की ऩाठशारा के तौय

ऩय कामत कयता है इसी दौयान व्मन्त्क्त के जीवन के प्रत्मेक ऩहरु का सभाजीकयण होता है औय व्मन्त्क्त
ववववध साॊस्कृततक भल्
ू मों एवभ नीततशास्र के ववसबन्न ऩहरओ
ु ॊ से ऩरयधचत होता है जैसे फडो का
सम्भान कयना, फड़ों की आऻाऩारन, रयश्तों का सम्भान इत्मादद. मह सफ व्मन्त्क्त भें व्मन्त्क्तगत औय

साभान्त्जक नैततकता तनभातण भें भदद कयते हैं. रेककन इस तयह की नैततकता ज्मादातय प्रथागत

नैततकता होती है जोकी ससपत अऩने ऩरयवाय, अऩने जातत, अऩने धभत तक ही सससभत यह जातत है .

इससरए हभें ऐसे साभान्त्जक प्रततभानों को नमा स्वरूऩ दे ते हुए, साॊस्कृततक ऩष्ृ ठबसू भ के अरावा वततभान

सभम भें उऩमोगी भल्

ू मों की आवश्कता भहसस
ू होती है .

िभ्यता और िंस्कृतत :
अगय हभ सभ्मता औय सॊस्कृतत के अॊतय की फात कयें तो सॊस्कृतत का सम्फन्ध सशष्टाचाय औय
भन्त्स्तष्क के प्रसशऺण से है जफकक सभ्मता का अथत करा औय ववऻानॊ की अवस्था से है . सॊस्कृतत

साभान्त्जक जीवन के के ववचायात्भक ऩऺ को दशातती है जफकक सभ्मता ववशेष रूऩ से बौततक ऩऺ से

सम्फन्त्न्धत है .1 भैकाइवय औय ऩेज के अनस
ु ाय, सभ्मता से हभया अथत अऩने जीवन की दशाओॊ को

तनमॊबरत कयने के सरए भानव द्वाया तनमोन्त्जत सम्ऩण

ू त सॊगठन औय माॊबरकता से है ” सभ्मता को

ववसबन्न बफन्दओ
ु ॊ द्वाया अच्छे ढॊ ग से सभझा जा सकता है :

1. सभ्मता प्रभख
ु रूऩ से सॊस्कृतत का बौततक ऩऺ है .

2. सभ्मता के अॊतगतत आने वारी बौततक वस्तए

ु ॊ हभायी आवश्मकताओॊ की ऩतू तत एक साधन के रूऩ
भें कयती है .

3. बौततक ऩदाथों के अततरयक्त , इन ऩदाथों के तनभातण कयने वारा ऻान अथातत टे क्नोरॉजी बी

सभ्मता के ही अॊतगतत आती है .

4. सभ्मता के अनऩ
ु मोगी अॊग को व्मन्त्क्त त्माग दे ता है .

5. सभ्मता एक ऩरयवततनशीर धायणा है .

सभ्मता का सम्फन्ध उऩमोधगता से है जफकक सॊस्कृतत आस्था मा ववश्वास ऩय आधारयत है . हभ सबी

अऩनी अऩनी सॊस्कृततमों को श्रेष्ट सभझते हैं इससरए ककसी दस

ू यी सॊस्कृतत को अऩनाने भें हभें आसानी
नहीॊ होती जफकक की सभ्मता बफना प्रमास के आगे फदती यहती है जफकक सॊस्कृतत नहीॊ. क्मोंकक सॊस्कृतत

को अऩनाने के सरए हभे अऩनी भनोवतृ त को फदरना ऩड़ता है . अत: हभ कह सकते हैं की जफ सभाज के

ऩास सॊस्कृतत को प्राप्त कयने के न्त्जतने उन्नत साधन होंगे सभ्मता उतनी ही प्रगततशीर होती है .3

नैततक नेतत्ृ व के सरए सफसे ऩहरे हभें सॊस्कृतत के सॊवाहकों का सही ववश्रेष्ण कयना होगा न्त्जससे हभ
आज के अनस
ु ाय सही सशष्टाचाय के भाऩदॊ ड फना सके न्त्जसभें अऩनी सॊस्कृतत के भल्
ू मों का बी सॊवहन
कय सकें.

ू यों का वर्गीकरण:

व्मन्त्क्त केजीवन के उद्देश्मों औय रक्ष्मों की प्रान्त्प्त भें हो आदशत रूऩ भें सहामक होते हैं, वही भल्
ू म होते है.

ू म जीवन को शब
ु औय गरयभाऩण
ू त फनाते हैं तथा व्मन्त्क्तगत औय चारयबरक उत्थान भें सहामक होते हैं.

ू मों की प्रकृतत औय आवश्मकता के अनस
ु ाय हभ इनका तनम्नसरखखत वगीकयण कय सकते है :

 साभान्त्जक भल्
ू म: अधधकाय, कततव्म, न्माम, स्वत्तॊरता, सभानता , फॊधुत्व , उतयदातमत्व


 भानव भल्
ू म: नैततक भल्
ू म, आध्मान्त्त्भक भल्
ू म, बौततक भल्
ू म, सौन्दमातत्भक भल्
ू म,

भनोवैऻातनक भल्
ू म
 कामतऺेर सम्फन्धी भल्
ू म: याजनैततक भल्
ू म, न्मातमक भल्
ू म, ससववर सेवा भल्
ू म, व्मावसातमक

ू म इत्मादद.4

कई फाय हभ दे खते हैं की भानव -भल्

ू म नकायात्भक ऩऺ बी यखते हैं जैसे वततभान सभम भें भदहराओॊ का

साभान्त्जक-आधथतक बसू भका भें ऩरयवततन हो यहा है रेककन उन्हें सभानता हाससर नहीॊ हो यही क्मोंकक

हभाये ऩयम्ऩयागत भल्

ू म-व्मवस्था सरॊग, जातत-धभत इत्मादद भें फॊधी हुई है . वैसे ही वॊधचत वगों के सरए

ू मों की बसू भका अन्मामऩण
ू त हो जातत है . ऐसे भें हभाये सरए साभान्त्जक भल्
ू म ज्मादा भहत्वऩण
ू त हो जाते

हैं क्मोंकक कामतसम्फन्धी भल्

ू मों ऩय बी हभ प्राम जातत-धभत,सरॊग की ऩयम्ऩयावादी सोच का सामा दे खते


बायतीम प्राचीन धभत-ग्रन्थों भें चरयर तनभातण ऩय ववशेष जोय ददमा गमा है . न्त्जस भनष्ु म को भानससक

शाॊतत प्राप्त है , जो कभत, वचन भें सॊतर

ु न फनामे यख सकता है , वह सॊसाय की बराई कय कय सकता है

औय सॊसाय का नाश होने से फचा सकता है . सबी दे शों के प्राचीन सॊतों के साथ-साथ आज के उदाय धचॊतक

बी है , जो आत्भीमता एवभ कृतऻता को प्रधानता दे ते आमें है . भनु के धभत के दस रऺण –सॊतोष, ऺभा,

आत्भसॊमभ, दस
ू यों की सम्ऩन्त्त्त के प्रतत रोब-सॊवयण, शायीरयक ऩववरता, न्त्जतेन्र , ववद्मा एवभ ऻान

की प्रेयणा, सत्मवाददता एवभ क्रोधशभन, मे सशष्टाचाय के दस तनमभ बी इसी श्रेणी भें आते हैं. डॉ

ददवाकय ऩाठक के अनस

ु ाय, न्त्जस प्रकाय ऩाश्चात्म नीततशास्र के ववकास की ववसबन्न अवस्थाएॊ हैं : ग्रीक

मा प्राचीन नीततशास्र, भध्मकारीन नीततशास्र, आधुतनक नीततशास्र औय सभकारीन अधधतनततशास्र.

ठीक उसी प्रकाय बायतीम नीततशास्र के बी क्रसभक ववकास की चाय प्रभख

ु अवस्थाएॊ हैं :

1. प्राचीन बायतीम नैततक धचन्तन

2. भध्मकारीन सॊतों के नैततक उऩदे श
3. उन्नीसवीॊ शताब्दी के धभतसध
ु ायकों के नैततक ववचाय
4. आधतु नक नैततक धचन्तन धाया5

इस तयह हभ दे खते हैं कक बायत भें नैततक दशतन की एक ववस्तत
ृ ऩयम्ऩया है औय हभें भनष्ु म के चरयर,

व्मवहाय, कततव्मों औय उत्तयदातमत्व इत्मादद भल्

ू मों सम्फन्धी चचात सभरती है .बायत भें नैततक ससद्धाॊतों

के जीवन के साथ अववमोज्म सम्फन्ध यहा है . महाॉ नीततशास्र व्मन्त्क्त के आचयण का ववऻान यहा है .

महाॉ दशतन का तनतत से गठफधन यहा है तहत इसका सदा प्रमोजनवादी (प्रग्भदटक) दृन्त्ष्टकोण यहा है .

बायतीम नैततक धचॊतकों के सभऺ दो प्रभख

ु प्रश्न यहे हैं :

i. भानव-जीवन का सवोतभ रक्ष्म क्मा है ?

ii. ककसी बी ऩरयन्त्स्थतत भें भनष्ु म को कैसा कततव्म कयना चादहए?

मही कायण है कक प्रत्मेक ऩयम्ऩयावादी बायतीम दाशततनक भत की अऩनी एक आचाय –सॊदहता है .6

व्मन्त्क्त के जीवन के प्रश्नों औय सभस्मामों के फदरते यहने के कणत जीवन के रक्ष्मों भें बी ऩरयवततन होता
है . कपय बी ववसबन्न ऩयम्ऩयागत दशतनों भें भानव जीवन के आदशों का वणतन सभरता है . प्रेटो अऩने

श्रेष्ट याज्म की अवधायणा भें भानव-बव्मता (ह्मभ

ू न एक्सीरेंस) का आदशत प्रततस्थावऩत कयता है .

उनका ववश्वास था कक जीवन भें प्रत्मेक वास्तु अऩना ऩथ

ृ क औय ववशेष कततव्म यखती है औय इस कततव्म
का ऩारन बव्मता के साथ ही ककमा जा सकता है . उसका मह बी ववश्वास था कक प्रत्मेक भनष्ु म का

अऩना ववशेष चरयर होता है जो न तो द्ववभख

ु ी होता है औय न फहुभख
ु ी. अऩने ववशेष चरयर का अनग
ु भन

कयने के फाद ही भानव बव्मता प्राप्त कय सकता है . भानव-बव्मता सदाचाय के साभान होती है . स्वमॊ

को जानना, स्वमॊ के प्रततबा सॊश्रेष्ण को सभझना, स्वमॊ के चरयर को ऩहचानना, उसका अनग
ु भन

कयना तथा अऩने अनक

ु ू र कामत कयना आदद भानव-बव्मता तो है ही, सदाचाय बी तो है . अयस्तु याज्म

को एक नैततक सॊस्था भानता है , औय इसका आन्त्स्तत्व भनष्ु म को जीववत यखने के सरए नहीॊ , वयन उसे

श्रेष्ट जीवन व्मतीत कयाने के सरए है . अत: दोनों के ही अनस

ु ाय उधचत याज्म को अऩने सदस्मों के

कल्माण के सरए प्रमत्नशीर होना चादहए.7 इस तयह हभ दे खते हैं कक एक अच्छा दे श मा सभाज वही है

जो अऩने नागरयकों भें भल्

ू म तनभातण भें भददगाय होता है . साभान्त्जक भल्
ू मों औय साभान्त्जक व्मवस्था भें

फहुत ही साऩेऺ सम्फन्ध है .

नैततक नेतत्ृ व: िामान्य वणतन:

व्मन्त्क्त का नैततक जीवन सभाज के तनमभों औय नीततमों के अनस

ु ाय तनमॊबरक होता है . ऐसे नैततक

जीवन को भें भनष्ु म जहाॉ सही औय गरत की ऩहचान से अऩने जीवन को अधधक सही औय अथतऩण
ू त
फनाता है , वहाॊ उसका मह कततव्म बी फनता है कक वह अऩने आस-ऩास हो यहे अनैततक व्मवहाय ऩय बी

दृन्त्ष्ट यखे औय उसको सॊवायने के सरए अधधकाधधक प्रमास कये . भनष्ु म का अधधकतय जीवन फाहयी

ऩरयन्त्स्थततमों ऩय तनबतय कयता है .8 ऐसे भें हभें नैततक नेतत्ृ व के भाऩदन्डों का तनधातयण कयना अतनवामत

हो जाता है न्त्जस ऩय फाहयी ऩरयन्त्स्थततमों का प्रबाव कभ ऩड़े औय नैततक जीवन का तनवातह बी हो.

साभान्मत: न्मामतनष्ठ, सत्मतनष्ठा, तनष्ऩऺता, कुशरता, सहमोग, दयू दसशतता, तटस्थता इत्मादद कुछ

ु कुशर नेतत्ृ व से उम्भीद की जाती है . रेककन जफ हभ नैततक नेतत्ृ व की फात आती है तो भल्
ू म

सफसे ज्मादा भहत्व यखते हैं. वे भल्

ू म कैसे हों ? उनका तनधातयण ककस तयह से हो ? उन भल्
ू मों को कैसे

नेतत्ृ व भें ढारा जामे ? मे कुछ ऐसे प्रश्न हैं जो हभाये साभने एक चुनौती फनकय खड़े हो जाते हैं.

हभाये सभाज का बववष्म क्मा है ? हभ ककन भल्

ू मों को अऩने जीवन भें जगह दे यहें हैं? धभत, जातत ,

सरॊग, सॊस्कृतत मे सफ आज ऩयु े ववश्व के साभने एक चन

ु ौती फनकय खड़े हों गमे हैं. एक अच्छे नागरयक

की ऩयीबाषा को हभ कैसे धचन्त्न्हत कयें ? मे न केवर हभ यान्त्ष्िम ऩदों के रूऩ भें ही दे ख सकते हैं फन्त्ल्क

तकनीकी ववकास औय वैश्वीकयण के सन्दबत भें बी हभें सभझना ऩड़ेगा. नैततक नेतत्ृ व तनम्नसरखखत 3

ऩदों का सॊगठन है :

1. चरयर (Character)

2. सशष्टाचाय (Civility)
3. साभद
ु ातमकता (Community)

Figure 1: The Ethical Leadership Model—Self, Social, and Spiritual

जफ हभ “नैततक” शब्द का प्रमोग कयते हैं तो नीततशास्र के वततभान भें चर यहे फहुत से प्रत्मम हभाये
साभने आते हैं जैसे इच्छा भत्ृ म,ु सरॊगानऩ
ु ात आदद जो आजकर साभान्मत: नीततशास्र का दहस्सा फन

चुके हैं. नैततक तनमभ ठाट प्रथाएॊ जोकक एक फड़े स्तय ऩय रोगों द्वाया स्वीकृत हैं कई फाय नैततकता का

दहस्स्सा भानी जाती हैं ऩय इनऩय प्रश्नधचन्ह तफ रग जाता है जफ इनको ववस्ताय दे ने की कोसशश की
जाती है . ऐसे भें हभें एक अच्छे नेता औय एक फयु े नेता के गण
ु ों को फताने के सरए ज्मादा ताककतकता की

जरूयत होती है . नैततक-नेतत्ृ व के प्रत्मम भें आध्मान्त्त्भकता, नीततशास्र औय नेतत्ृ व सफका वणतन कयना

ऩड़ता है जफ हभ चरयर, सशष्टाचाय औय साभद

ु ातमकता से जड़
ु े हुए ऩहरओ
ु ॊ का ववस्तत
ृ वणतन कयने रग

जाते हैं. इसभें हभे व्मन्त्क्त से सम्फॊधधत प्रत्मम जैसे स्व, सभाज औय अध्मात्भ जैसे गढ़
ू ववषमों ऩय बी

ृ फात कयनी ऩड़ जाती है .

जफ हभ नैततक नेतत्ृ व की फात कयते हैं तो फाह्म वातावयण के साथ साथ हभें आॊतरयक वातावयण को बी
सभझना ऩड़ता है जो चरयर, सशष्टाचाय औय साभद
ु ातमकता की बावना ऩैदा कयने भें भदद कयते हैं. हभें

एक ऐसे व्मन्त्क्त का तनभातण कयना होता है जो शायीरयक के साथ भानससक, बावात्भक , फौवद्धक ,

नैततक-आध्मान्त्त्भक तौय ऩय सऺभ हों. जफ हभ अऩने आस ऩास के ससद्धाॊतों ऩय नजय डारते हैं तो हभे

फौवद्धकतावादी, उऩमोधगतावादी, व्मवहायवादी औय साऩेऺतावादी आदशत नैततकता के ससद्धाॊत सभरते हैं.

नैततक नेतत्ृ व के सरए हभें “सदगण

ु -सम्ऩन्न” आदशत ससद्धाॊत की जरूयत है जोकक ऩयम्ऩयागत सद्गण
ु ों

के साथ साथ भल्

ू मों औय कौशर से मक्
ु त हो औय ऐसा तबी सम्बव है जफ वह ककसी ववशेष सॊस्कृतत-

ु ाम के व्मवहाय को आदशत न भान जो वततभान के साथ बी साभजस्म स्थावऩत कय सके. इसके सरए

हभें तनन्त्म्रखखत भॉडर को ध्मान भें यखना होगा:

Figure 2: The Ethical Leadership Model—Defining Virtues, Values & Virtuosities of
Character,Civility and Community

प्रोपेसय फ्रक
ु य (Flucker) के अनस
ु ाय, “चरयर (character), सशष्टाचाय (civility), साभद
ु ातमकता

(Community) इन तीन भख्

ु म अवधायानाओॊ के प्रमोग के द्वाया हभ आरोचनात्भक सद्गण
ु ों
(Critical virtues), भल्
ू मों (values) औय दऺताओॊ (virtuousities) जोकक नैततक-नेतत्ृ व के सम्ऩण
ू त

ससद्धाॊत औय अभ्मास है . चरयर के अॊतगतत हभ तीन सदगण

ु ों : सम्ऩण
ू त
त ा (integrity ), सभानब
ु तू त

(empathy), आशा (hope), सशष्टाचाय के अॊतगतत तीन भल्

ू मों मा साभान्त्जक अभ्मासों: भान्मता

(recognition), प्रततष्ठा (respect), आऻाऩारन (reverence) औय साभद

ु ातमकता के अॊतगतत तीन

दऺताओॊ साहस (courage ), न्माम (justice), सॊवेदना (compassion) आदद का अध्ममन कयते

हैं. इसके अरावा नैततक नेतत्ृ व के सरए जागरूकता बी जरूयी है न्त्जसके द्वाया उबयते नेता सभाज के

आॊतरयक औय फाहयी चुनोततमों को सभझ सकते हैं औय उसके सरए सम्बाववत दयू दसशतता फना सकते हैं.

इसभें सफसे ज्मादा जोय साभद

ु ातमक जीवन भें आध्मान्त्त्भकता औय कल्ऩना के प्रमोग ऩय यहता है
न्त्जसभें अऩयोक्त तीनों अवधायणाएॊ चरयर (character), सशष्टाचाय (civility), साभद
ु ातमकता
(Community) तनदहत यहती हैं. इसभें सफसे फड़ा मोगदान उबयते नेताओॊ द्वाया ववस्तत
ृ साभान्त्जक-

ऐततहाससक सॊघटना से जुडी कहातनमों को माद यखना, दोफाया सन

ु ाना औय ऩन
ु ववतचाय कयके अऩनी

व्माख्मा दे ना है न्त्जससे की तीनों अवधायणाएॊ चरयर (character), सशष्टाचाय (civility), साभद
ु ातमकता
(Community) का तनभातण होता है .9

हमारा िमाज और भारतीय िंववधान :

जीवन भल्
ू म औय नैततकता व्मन्त्क्त भें जन्भजात रूऩ से नहीॊ ऩाई जाती है . सभाज के फीच यहकय व्मन्त्क्त

उनकी ऩहचान कयता है औय उन्हें अऩने आऩ भें ववकससत कयता है . उसका व्मन्त्क्तत्व ऩण
ू त
त : उसकी

अऩनी भौसरक तनसभततत नहीॊ होता अवऩतु उस ऩय ऩण

ू त ऩयम्ऩया का बी प्रबाव यहता है . वह भहान

ववचायकों, सध
ु ायकों आदद के जीवन से प्रेयणा प्राप्त कयता है , इनका अध्ममन न केवर उसका वततभान

की सभस्माओॊ से तनकरने का भागत प्रशस्त कयता है , फन्त्ल्क मह बी फताता है कक वह अऩनेजीवन को

ककस प्रकाय रूऩान्तरयत कये ताकक वह बी उन्हीॊ के जैसा भहान व्मन्त्क्तत्व फन सके.10 वततभान सभम भें

दे श साभान्त्जक, याजनैततक, गैय-याजतनततक व्मवस्थाएॊ तनम्न औय तनकृष्टतभ स्तय ऩय हैं. ऐसे भें

आवश्मकता है सभाज को सचेतन फनाकय यखने की. अत: आज के सभम भें कुशर नेतत्ृ व का प्रभख

रऺण है वततभान ऩरयन्त्स्थतत की प्रततकूरता को अनक

ु ू रता भें ऩरयवतततत कयते हुए नई ऩीढ़ी के तनसभत्त
ु नतत, ससु शऺा, सव्ु मवस्था, सयु ऺा एवभ ् फौवद्धक-साॊस्कृततक उन्न्मन की. इसके सरए उधचत

व्मवहाय ऩद्धतत को अऩनाने की है .

सभाज भें प्रत्मेक व्मन्त्क्त को आचायवान होने की तनताॊत आवश्मकता है . इसके सरए प्राचीन बायतीम

जीवन दशतन भें फहुत ही ववस्तत

ृ वणतन ककमा गमा है .जफ व्मन्त्क्त भें नैततक दातमत्व की बावना होगी

तबी भनष्ु म सत्कभत औय ऩयोऩकाय की ओय अग्रसय होता है . बततहयी के नीततशतक भें कहा गमा है कक

चरयर ही व्मन्त्क्त, सभाज औय सत्ता तथा दे श का सफसे आकषतक बष

ू ण होता है ऩद्मऩयु ाण भें कहा गमा है

की हभ दस
ू यों के साथ वैसा ही व्मवहाय कयें न्त्जस व्मवहाय की अऩेऺा हभ रोगों से अऩने सरए कयते हैं-

प्रततकूर व्मवहाय कबी बी वाॊछनीम औय प्रततकूर नहीॊ हो सकता.11 रेककन हभ बायतीम सभाज के चरयर

भें ऩाते हैं की मह सबी भल्

ू म ककताफों तक ही सससभत यह गमे. धभत, जातत, सरॊग के खेर ने कबी दस
ू यों के

साथ गरयभाऩण
ू त व्मवहाय नहीॊ कयने ददमा गमा. ऐसे भें हभे नैततकता के उन भाऩदन्डों को अऩनाना

ऩड़ेगा न्त्जससे उन भल्

ू मों का सज
ृ न हो सके जो आज के नेतत्ृ व को सही ददशा सके. अत: नैततक-नेतत्ृ व

के सरए ऩयभ आवश्मकता उन सॊवध

ै ातनक भल्
ू मों की है न्त्जन्होंने सॊकीणत ववचायधाया से उऩय उठकय दे श
औय व्मन्त्क्त ववकास भें मोगदान ददमा है . इस तयह बायतीम सॊदबत भें सभझें तो नैततक-नेतत्ृ व के सरए

न्माम, स्वतॊरता, सभानता औय फॊधुता मे वास्तववक भल्
ू म नजय आते हैं. आज की हभायी आवश्मकता

बायत के सभस्त नागरयकों को ऐसा जीवन दे ने की है न्त्जसभें तनम्न आदशत तनदहत हों:

 सभान्त्जक, आधथतक औय याजनैततक न्माम

 ववचाय, असबव्मन्त्क्त, ववश्वास धभत, उऩासना की स्वतन्रता

 प्रततष्टा औय अवसय की सभानता

 व्मन्त्क्त की गरयभा औय याष्ि की एकता सतु नन्त्श्चत कयने वारी फॊधुता

जफ तक उऩयोक्त आदशों स्वमॊ अऩनाकय कामत कयने वारे रोग हभाये जीवन के हय ऺेर भें नहीॊ होंगे तो
सभान्त्जक सभस्मामों से हभ जझ
ू ते यहें गें. भ्रष्टाचाय, गयीफी, फरात्काय, भानवाधधकायों का हनन,

काराफाजायी, असशऺा, फेयोजगायी, अस्वच्छता, गॊदी याजनीतत, धभत की आड़ भें कुकभत औय साभान्त्जक

जवाफदे ही इत्मादद का भर
ू कायण अच्छे नेतत्ृ व की कभी के कायण ही है . जफ तक हय ऺेर भें काभ कयने

वारे रोगों का जीवन भल्

ू मऩयक औय साभान्त्जक न्त्जम्भेवायी से ववभख
ु होगा मे सभस्माएॊ हभाये साभने
ु ॊ फामे खड़ी यहें गीॊ. अत: जैसा आदशत रेकय सभाज के रोग जीवन जीते हैं उसी तयह का सभाज फनता

है , हय व्मन्त्क्त को सॊकल्ऩऩव
ू क
त अऩने जीवन औय सभाज के प्रतत उतयदामी होकय काभ कयने की

आवश्मकता है औय न्माम, स्वरन्रता, सभानता औय फॊधत

ु ा को जीवन आदशत फनाने की आवश्मकता है .

1. उद्धयण- डॉ दहम्भत ससॊह ससन्हा, सॊस्कृतत-दशतन, हरयमाणा सादहत्म अकादभी, चॊडीगढ़, 1990,

ऩष्ृ ट 22.

2. वही, ऩष्ृ ट 22.

3. वही, ऩष्ृ ठ 24.

4. नीततशास्र, सत्मतनष्ठा औय असबरुधच, आई ए एस भख्

ु म ऩयीऺा, साभान्म अध्ममन ऩेऩय 4,

अरयहॊ त ऩन्त्ब्रकेशन्स(इॊडडमा) सरसभटे ड, 2014, ऩष्ृ ट 25-29.

5. डॉ ददवाकय ऩाठक, बायतीम नीततशास्र की ऐततहाससक ऩष्ृ ठबसू भ, बफहाय दहॊदी ग्रन्थ अकादभी,

ऩटना, 1994, ऩष्ृ ट 6.

6. वही, ऩष्ृ ट 14.

7. सी. एर. वेऩय, याजदशतन का स्वाध्मामन, ककताफ भहर, इराहफाद, ऩष्ृ ट 21, 28.

8. शासरॊदय ससॊह एवभ अन्म, पॊडाभें टल्स औय एप्राइड एधथक्स, कृष्णा ब्रदसत,जारॊधय,2011, ऩष्ृ ट


9. प्रोपेसय फ्रक
ु य, एधथकर रीडयसशऩ: कयै क्टय, ससववसरटी एॊड कम्मतु नटी, इडीएक्स कोसत.

10. नीततशास्र, सत्मतनष्ठा औय असबरुधच, आई ए एस भख्

ु म ऩयीऺा, साभान्म अध्ममन ऩेऩय
4, अरयहॊ त ऩन्त्ब्रकेशन्स(इॊडडमा) सरसभटे ड, 2014, ऩष्ृ ट 37.
11. सीतायाभ झा ‘श्माभ’ साभान्त्जक उत्क्राॊतत औय यान्त्ष्िम उत्कषत (सभाजशान्त्स्रम वववेचन),

बफहाय दहॊदी ग्रन्थ अकादभी, ऩटना, 2015, ऩष्ृ ट 12.

 Dr. Sandesh Tyagi, Assistant Professor, (Philosophy),
SriGanganagar, Rajasthan.
 Mr. Albert Amalraj M, Research Scholar, St. Joseph University,
Dimapur, Nagaland.
 Mr. M. Arockia Charles, Research Scholar, St.Joseph University,
Dimapur, Nagaland.
 Ms. Sananda Sen, Guest Lecturer (Philosophy), Heritage Degree
College, Kolkata.
 Ms. Lipika Das, Research Scholar, Department of Philosophy,
Raiganj University, West Bengal.
 Ms. Soumen Roy, Assistant Professor, Dept. of Philosophy, Netaji
Mahavidyalaya, Arambagh, Hooghly.
 Dr. Desh Raj Sirswal, Assistant Professor (Philosophy), P. G. Govt.
College., Sector-46, Chandigarh.