on this page

Or send us an email




Application form




Pathways programs

Letters to my students

How-to-do-it guide

Essay archive

Ask a philosopher

Pathways e-journal

Features page

Downloads page

Pathways portal



Pathways to Philosophy
Home



Geoffrey Klempner CV
G Klempner



International Society for Philosophers
ISFP site







PHILOSOPHY PATHWAYS electronic journal

[home]



P H I L O S O P H Y   P A T H W A Y S                   ISSN 2043-0728
http://www.philosophypathways.com/newsletter/

Issue number 35
30th June 2002

CONTENTS

I. Munayem Mayenin on the 'Dehumanisation of Humanity'

II. 'Zero Ground' by Munayem Mayenin

III. In Memory of Rogers Albritton

-=-

I. MUNAYEM MAYENIN ON THE 'DEHUMANISATION OF HUMANITY'

Editor's note:

The following is an extract from the Introduction to a projected four volume
work, 'Dehumanisation of Humanity' by Munayem Mayenin. Below, I have reproduced
Chapter 1, 'Zero Ground'. The author is an amateur philosopher who studied in
Bangladesh. I was moved by the passion of these writings and charmed by their
poetry. The theme is revolutionary, apocalyptic. Yet the author is steadfast in
his opposition to violence of any kind. Settle down for a gripping read.

---

INTRODUCTION

"...I was born in a so-called civilised society that kills everything that is
human and tries to make everything saleable, beastly, naked, dark, vulgar and
worthless. I should have been born in a different time where I could have been
a good and pure human who could have earned a meaning by living a human life
where I would not have been merely staying alive! Where I would not have 'lost
life in living'. But I am here and I am in now and must say I feel a foreigner
to this civilisation (in the east, west, north, south, up, down, left and right
of it). Because I see its vulgarity, I see its insanity, I see its lunacy, I see
its waste. I myself alone cannot change it. But this ought to be changed (made
better) for the sake of humankind. And what ought to be changed, that must be
changed. What ought to be and must be changed, that can be changed. And if
anything can be changed, that should be changed and it will be changed.

"From this belief I have started this work, simply as a very personal, private
and in a way poetic business, completely on my very personal resources, to make
my contribution towards this change. Because I believe this is how I could still
by-pass and fail this system, which is determined to stop me being a human
being, and earn a meaning by contributing towards the betterment of humankind.
I cannot alone change this insane and lunatic civilisation but I could help it
change. I am leaving this for the people who would try to understand the case
for change and who would realise the eternal dreams, desires and visions of
humankind that says, there is nothing you cannot do, only when you know,
believe and choose that certain things must be left to the category of 'ought
not to be done'. What ought not to be done, that must not be done. What ought
not and must not be done, that cannot be done. What cannot be done, that should
not be done and thus will not be done.

"I am writing this work because I believe humankind must be free from lunatic
madness and from living a worthless life that can be equated to a cheat, as
people are not living a life, rather they are staying alive. The system is, on
the other hand, living with the ones who have been able to negotiate the best
value for their terms of slavery and conditions on their contracts. I am
writing this work because I believe humankind and thus every single one of us
have infinite potential. By that I mean we have an imprint of the whole of the
universe and the things and possibilities it holds in our being, namely, our
mind and having a civilisation that supports that potential to be released we
can be a limitless exploration, an endless journey of adventure, a colourfully
blissful creative explosion.

"I am writing this work as I believe our dreams and vision of eternal multitude
to see fairness and equality can finally be established and I believe it ought
to be done. Thus I believe, it must be done and can be done and should be done
and that we as a race can do it. Not with class struggle or bloody revolution
or in vengeful retribution or zealous callousness but with rationality, purpose
and working together as an orchestra of humanity. We are not in a hurry. We have
suffered millennia we can suffer a bit longer if necessary to avoid much more
imposed killings and hatred. I do not and will not, under any circumstances or
positions or times or background, subscribe or support bloodshed or hatred or
vengeance.

"Ever since we came into being it has been ruthless madness that surrounded us.
We had never been able to materialise our dreams. Humankind's eternal pursuit
for natural justice, explored in the form of equality, to create a just society
has always been featured and explored through Socrates, Plato, Aristotle to
Voltaire, Rousseau, Kant, Hegel, Feuerbach, Karl Marx, Sartre. In all the
schools of Philosophy in the west and east we see this continuous theme.
Hundreds of revolutions and experimental efforts had been afforded in the
search of equality and justice. This eternal dream, this longing vision, this
burning desire for equality and justice have always been supported and
pioneered by different schools of philosophy that have been taken on by
political power (by the states). And there came legislative, administrative and
judicial back up, outlining the principles of equality and justice, spelling out
policies and drawing on the procedures to follow. After the collapse of Marxist
socialist countries and their philosophy it is clear that that was not the way
of getting justice and fairness established. But now the big question is, Why
so far has everything failed?

"Marx's efforts to analyse the capitalist society and economy and to find out
the answers were tremendously powerful and liberating for the world in the
sense that it was he who dared the world to get ready for the big project and
showed a vision to people, almost like a science, that it was not only possible
but also achievable to actually change the world and make it fair and equal for
everybody. However, throughout this discourse we will deal in detail with this,
suffice to sum up and say that his answers have apparently failed to sustain.
That failure or missed opportunity has taken away all light and signs of light
along with the hopes and dreams of mankind and now 'everything seems quiet in
the western and eastern front' and this silence sounds like sonar and people
who have the ability to listen to sonar cannot sleep. We are back to square one
again! All is lost? It may not be as Marxism served its philosophical historic
purpose and will always be a philosophical milestone so long as humans shall
live on this planet. However, our journey must continue. For humankind is much
bigger and greater than any particular school of thought!

"I am writing this work as I feel this is the best I could do to change this
evil civilisation and the irrational, immoral and lunatic system that is
obstructing the progress and development of the whole of humankind. It needs to
be changed into a human, moral, rational and free civilisation that is in tune
with the need of humankind and that is based on these six foundation stones
that essentially define and identify us as humans: rationality, morality,
equality, liberty, natural justice and purpose. A civilisation is a natural
system that has these things alive and active on the planet (that is part of
the greater universe), as natural as the scented air of the green meadow, as
natural and inherent as the blue sky reflected on the beautiful unspoiled
Mediterranean sea, as natural as to say that we no longer have any need to even
be aware of these things or have declarations made, signed and ratified for
these foundation stones, as natural as looking at a butterfly serenading the
spring flowers or the dancing spring singing Beethoven or Mozart to the
mountain trying to kiss the cloudy sky.

"And finally we the humankind come to be able to be united in vibrant and
colourful diversity where really 'thousands flowers bloom' (God forbid not like
China! or the Soviet Union!). Nothing could now destroy humankind. It's a new
civilisation on this beautiful blue planet of ours (which I call my home). It
is a new way of thinking, a new generation of languages, with a new vocabulary
created to reflect the newly earned values and meanings. This is not a utopia.
It is not only possible but also achievable. Look at the system we are in now.
It is a mess and it is messing us up terribly badly. It is dying and at the
same time it is suffocating and killing us. It says it is trying to fix
problems but as soon as it goes to fix something, a new something goes deeply
broken or gets messed up. It cannot survive. It cannot sustain itself let alone
to sustain humankind..."

-=-

II. 'ZERO GROUND' BY MUNAYEN MAYENIN

The most important of all tasks before us, is to begin our study with the
assumption that we will, at every way and perspective possible, try our utmost
to make best use of our faculty of rationality so that whatever we see and show
are to be the best of humanity possible. For we take the view that the best that
we as human beings could claim to have is our ability to think and think
rationally, just as we take the premise that what differentiates us from being
simply animal is this rationality. All animals are genetically and
physiologically capable of feeling emotions to a varying degree but most,
except humankind, lack the quality of rationality. Thence they act out their
lives and live it following their emotions. A scared dog would essentially bark
or run away where a scared human will react differently. We have not only
emotions but have their varied forms and coupled with multiple complexities,
and not only are we able to recognise them but also control them to a certain
degree.

How we manage to do that is an essential question. We do that by the
utilisation of rationality. That is why we say that we feel with the heart but
run our life not by following the heart or its responses; rather we rationalise
and make decisions and then follow or execute them. That is what we propose to
take with us in this journey of analysing ourselves and the systems in which we
find ourselves imprisoned. However, our overwhelming difficulty is that the
system we have developed does not permit us the opportunity to afford to use
this faculty, and thus creates a series of problems and difficulties one after
another since there are other instruments which influence everything we do and
we end up not only losing ourselves and losing control but also the ability to
even see or understand it.

So, here we stand, at a point of society or civilisation that claims to be
civilised, which fosters, nurtures, upholds and advances the best of humanity,
namely justice and fairness, equality, human rights, liberty and most of all
the rule of law or democracy and still we see, or feel the majority of our
fellow members of this civilisation disagreeing that we have any of these
things that the system claims that we have. To a very basic level we are
hungry, we are poor, we are uneducated, we are homeless, we are jobless and we
do not have access to any kind of Medicare. Moreover, we cannot even recognise
that we have been made personless; we lack so many important and invaluable
items, so that without them we can hardly be called human beings at all: things
like being able to develop the capability to use rationality, act with morality,
live with equality while enjoying liberty, in short, to live and interact with a
purpose. In a situation like ours it is the most hard of all jobs to endeavour
and try to analyse the whole of so-called civilisation and try to find out why
things are forced to be the way they are; why, instead of supporting the
progress and enhancement of humankind, it is putting up all sorts of possible
and impossible barriers and obstacles to our being or progressing at all.

In order to avoid any dispute or controversy we have to decide the beginning
point of our study and take a point to start, namely to point out the beginning
of humankind. We would like to take that point as the 'zero ground' where things
began. We must accept this that things do not begin from one, they begin from a
state of nothingness or a point of no numerical or mathematical significance
and then onwards as progress is made the number line continues to count. We do
not think that until humankind reached slavery they had actually started making
any progress with regards to the zero starting point.

If we then take the journey with that group of our predecessors out on this
planet trying to live a life how would we find them? We must warn our readers
that we must leave all the so called clothing of civilisation as well as the
filthy prejudices we have been made to digest, such as primitive people,
uneducated bunch, barbarians, uncivilised, lacking of modern way of thinking
and being unable to recognise the sign of Microsoft or unable to eat McDonald's
fries or drink Coke. It is paramount for us to be able to understand how those
people made their way into life and left their marks on this beautiful planet
and since then how continuously we continued to destroy and corrupt this planet
and along with it brought about all sorts of evil for our kind.

That ideal 'Humanity' holds light for us and would show us the way in which we
should have been living. Let us begin our investigation of their way of living.
Those people are the pioneers of humanity and they were on a planet that was
uninhabited and they treated it as a gift to them so that they could live on
it; and they lived on it, leaving it, if not better then not worse to their
children. They did not buy the planet, they did not fight any war to occupy it.
They merely found themselves on the planet and we could only take the view that
they treated it as well as their own life to be a gift from a superior being.
They respected both their own lives and the planet they lived on. There were no
homeless persons, there were no jobless persons, there were no persons without
Medicare, they did not have rich nor did they have any poor. They had no one
who was mentally ill or psychopathically oriented. They had no crime nor had
they have any criminals. They would not kill anything the way we do.

They lived as part of the planet as an organic part of it. They lived as
friends of nature in harmony. They lived like fishes live in water without
disturbing it, they lived like snakes in the jungle, they lived like the bees
or butterflies without disturbing the flowers. They lived like the mole under
the ground. They lived like the eagles of the sky. These animals live in nature
as part of it without challenging it or tampering with it or manipulating it or
destroying it. They did not have to do any of this as they believed that they
were part of the planet and without harmony with it there can not be peace in
oneself. This is like the infant who has had an argument with his mother and
who, no matter who says what, can not find mental peace, even if he pretends
that he is peaceful. That is where we had left our mental harmony, our peace
and emotional well being.

Our predecessors never lived in irrationality. They had the highest degree of
liberty and they held the uttermost equality on this planet. They were moral in
their way of living. And when we say moral we do not mean a puritan morality.
They had a purpose in living and they did not lose 'life in living'. That was
where we had humanity. That society was the one that was there to enable
humanity to be. Their society enabled them, enhanced them and they lived to the
full and they left the world better than they had received it. But it is us who
destroyed all this. This is not imagination, what we are talking about. That
early well being we had acquired is still helping us to hang on and not all
become insane. All prisoners would go mad had they have no earlier life of
liberty to a certain degree and had they no hope of being able to come back to
something better than prison.

In that society they had no government or state as we know it, nor did they
have any such thing as law the way we know it or view it. They did not have
police, courts, security services or royalty: yet they managed to hold onto the
best of humanity that we only could dream of having.

How was it possible? All that was possible because they had natural justice
which now we try to enshrine through declarations of rights or declarations of
conventions convened so that we can feel good about ourselves as doing
something. My father used to say he who needs to swear is definitely lying.
They were equal and thus they had liberty. A human being can live few minutes
without air yet with human dignity, but he can not live a second without
liberty maintaining his human dignity, and unless human beings are equal to
each other they can not enjoy liberty at all. Thus those people had these two
essential elements that kept humanity in being.They had other paramount items
of humanity: they had rationality as they were the only humans who were able to
exercise rationality to the fullest in everything they did and thus whatever
rational things they did, they did morally. Moral they were and thus they had a
purpose. With all these they had the system and apparatus to support their
humanity and to enhance, improve and maintain continued progression of it.

As soon as that state of affairs was changed we started to degrade ourselves.
Still trying our best to maintain the good qualities of humanity, we continue
failing it, bending it, manipulating it, tampering with it, destroying it and
finally we have been successful in dehumanising the whole of humanity and here
we stand with a dehumanised humanity that can not even be. The whole system of
civilisation is now standing like an all round death wall of humanity that
keeps killing us every second of our life until we physically die. In effect,
in this civilisation we are only allowed to a certain limited degree to be able
to live like human beings, which is in early childhood. As we cross the
threshold of that tiny and brief childhood the system starts manipulating us
and turns us into dehumanised biological entities so that not only are we
unable to develop and be as human beings but also become incapable of seeing it.

This zero ground of humanity can be seen in every country of the world. In a
generalised sense the east of the planet maintained that zero point longer than
the west. Even now at the stage of overwhelming globalised capitalist world
civilisation still some cultures in the east and some tribal nations in the
west, which the civilisation tried and is trying its best to murder, show signs
of efforts of maintaining those values.

Still now in countries and communities where capitalism entered late with its
overwhelming power of manipulation and destruction we see better humanity than
in the advanced capitalist societies. That is because humanity still has not
yet been dehumanised.

(c) Munayem Mayenin, London, 2002

E-mail: Munayem@mayenins.fsnet.co.uk

-=-

III. IN MEMORY OF ROGERS ALBRITTON

Date: Tue, 11 Jun 2002 02:10:18 -0300
Sender: Philosophy in Europe <PHILOS-L@LISTSERV.LIV.AC.UK>
From: J L Speranza <jls@NETVERK.COM.AR>
Subject: Rogers Albritton

From the San Francisco Chronicle:

"Los Angeles -- Rogers Albritton, a charismatic philosopher who rarely
published his work yet dazzled colleagues of diverse persuasions with his lucid
analyses of fundamental human dilemmas, has died. He was 78. The former UCLA and
Harvard University professor died May 21 of pneumonia at UCLA Medical Center. A
heavy smoker for most of his life, he had emphysema and had been in declining
health.

"Called a philosopher's philosopher, he was considered one of the most
formidable intellects in his field. His respected stature, however, stemmed not
from his writings but from what philosopher and film critic Stanley Cavell
called 'the charisma of conversation alone.' He was famous for marathon
conversations about philosophy. A discussion lasting six or eight hours was not
unusual. A former graduate student once reported talking with Mr. Albritton for
11 hours. In such encounters, the lean and stylish Princeton-trained thinker
loved nothing more than to explore such vexing matters as the nature of evil,
free will or reality. Conversing with him was not like sitting downstream of a
flood; he did not lecture. Rather, he probed gently, asking many questions in
Socratic fashion to illuminate hidden dimensions of a philosophical problem.

"Famously nondoctrinaire, even though he was an expert on the Greeks and Ludwig
Wittgenstein, he was averse to ever declaring that a problem was solved. He
could argue that a person had no way of knowing whether he was asleep or awake,
then conclude the opposite after more hours of laughter-filled discussion. 'He
was a kind of philosophical conscience,' said philosopher Thomas Nagel, an
Albritton student who now teaches at New York University. 'Almost all of the
rest of us fall back on the stuff we think we've established. Rogers was a
reminder that you can never dispense with the obligation to actively think
whatever you're thinking and be prepared to think it through from the
beginning.'

"Over four decades of teaching, Mr. Albritton published about four papers, none
considered definitive. Most appeared before he left a tenured position at
Harvard to join the philosophy faculty at UCLA in 1972. Mr. Albritton was born
in Columbus, Ohio, on Aug. 15, 1923. When he was 3, his father Errett, a
physiologist, and mother Rietta, a chemist, moved the family to Bangkok, where
the father founded a medical school with a Rockefeller foundation grant. Mr.
Albritton completed his elementary and secondary schooling in Maryland and
Washington, D.C. At 15, he enrolled at Swarthmore College, transferring two
years later to St. John's College, the Annapolis, Maryland school famous for
its emphasis on the Great Books. There Mr. Albritton began his formal training
in philosophy, focusing on Plato and the Greeks. After two years with the Army
Air Corp in Hawaii after the attack on Pearl Harbor, he earned his bachelor's
degree from St. John's and his doctorate, in 1955, from Princeton. He taught
briefly at Cornell University, then joined the Harvard faculty in 1956. He
chaired Harvard's philosophy department from 1963 to 1970. He came to UCLA for
a year in 1972 and stayed."

------

An Albritton bibliography:

'Present truth & future contingency'
Philosophical Review vol. 66.

'Forms of particular substances in Aristotle's Metaphysics' Journal of
Philosophy vol. 54

'On Wittgenstein's use of the term "criterion"' Journal of Philosophy vol. 56.
Repr. with a postscript in G. Pitcher,
'Wittgenstein: The Philosophical Investigations' (Macmillan)

'Freedom of will & freedom of action'
Proceedings/ Addresses American Philosophical Association. vol. 58

J.L. Speranza

E-mail: jls@NETVERK.COM.AR

---------------------------------------------------------------
  Philosophy Pathways is the electronic newsletter for the
  Pathways to Philosophy distance learning program

  To subscribe or cancel your subscription please email your
  request to philosophypathways@fastmail.net

  The views expressed in this newsletter do not necessarily
  reflect those of the editor. Contributions, suggestions or
  comments should be addressed to klempner@fastmail.net
---------------------------------------------------------------


[top]
Pathways to Philosophy

Original Newsletter
Home Page
Pathways Home Page