From: hakim@bigq.enet.dec.com (Kamran Hakim)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.iranian
Subject: Re: Perception of righteousness!
Date: 30 Sep 92 18:48:31 GMT
Organization: Digital Equipment Corporation


In article <1992Sep29.210146.23447@src.umd.edu>, manizh@src.umd.edu (Reza 
Shahidi) in reply to K1 you write:

RS>To train a mind to think free is very hard, if not impossible.

Very hard may be, but, nothing is impossible.

RS>How would you define a free mind? I cheated in the above by
RS>defining a free mind as an empty mind. 

A free mind is one which actively investigates each and every situation
and judge each one according to its own merit. An empty mind, as K1 has
rightfully pointed out, is "free of everything". Such a mind is incapable 
of judgment.

RS>Now, once you start
RS>defining a free mind as something different, you start putting your 
RS>own values into a so called free mind. 

The term "free" implicates submission to certain governing laws. Therefore 
the truest meaning of freedom is realized by one's success in controlling 
one's wishes. A free mind is a disciplined mind. One which would place 
itself under self-restraint, control and regulations, thus by doing so 
becomes capable of liberating itself. Such a discipline does not naturally 
appear in an individual. It comes about as a result of training and 
education. This discipline neither implicates childish lack of knowledge 
and experience, nor does it suggest freedom in the literal sense of the 
term. 

RS>The only other way that
RS>I can see to acheive a free mind is to know everything 

I must respectfully disagree with you on this point. A knowledgeable person
could potentially view others as ignorant, thus, offer the anti-thesis to
your suggestion. Knowledge, similar to wealth, power, class, ethnicity,
etc..., etc... could induce arrogance and prejudice in an individual. So,
knowledge itself becomes the cage within which one's mind could potentially 
become imprisoned, thus, one's lack of mental freedom. This is not say that
knowledge is bad or that all knowledgeable people are arrogant.

RS>there is
RS>but that is not possible because as Bozorgmehr said " No one
RS>knows everything because everybody knows everything and everybody
RS>is not yet born". 

This is most certainly one way of looking at it. However, being knowledgeable
does not appear to be the cause of mental freedom. On the contrary, in the
absence of self-control it could be a barrier to mental freedom as mentioned
above.

RS>In closing, I shall say that tolerance in an absolute sense
RS>cannot exist. 

This is a very true statement. However, if EVERYTHING was to be tolerated 
(i.e. thus tolerance in an absolute sense) by the individual or the society, 
then justice would loose its meaning.

An important point to consider is that in the world of existence EVERYTHING
is by definition relative. The construction of human reality is such that
we will be incapable of understanding anything which is absolute (i.e.
For example consider God which is an absolute essence, and people have a
hard time to define God in relative terms.). Yet, we have no problem in
understanding the relative.

RS>However, one could become relatively tolerant
RS>by letting others to question his/her thought process. One
RS>should be free of absolute concepts such as blasphemy related stuff. 

I agree with you, there is much truth in what you are suggesting above.

RS>There
RS>should be nothing in the world that could scape proper analysis
RS>on the basis of absolute truth. 

Scientific method is indeed a very wonderful and through approach in
dealing with the challenges of human life.

RS>Ignorance is the source for
RS>enslaved minds. 

This is very true.

RS>By ignorance, I mean to have a filter in one's mind.
RS>If you have a filter, make sure that it is an all pass filter.

An all pass filter is no filter. The ascendancy of human mind over
animal is the ability to judge. Judgment requires to filter out or
distinguish between the sensory data we accumulate in order to make
a solid decision. If we are to give up this ability in the name of
achieving free-mindedness, then we become free-minded in the absolute
sense of the term (i.e. A cow is, in my opinion, the essence of such
free-mindedness.)

RS>If you have a cutoff point, you'll reach that point oneday and
RS>then the outcome is intolerance. I'll let everybody think about
RS>this. I'll be glad to read other analysis! :)

When we start being intolerant again that means we have fallen victim to
mental laziness by allowing our lives be governed by routines (Automatic 
human responses to various social situations and conditions as oppose to 
reaction based on understanding.). The challenge of human life is to 
constantly remain aware of this and not allow oneself to fall into these 
routines. 

Warm regards,

Kamran Hakim