Ji Xianlin (1911-2009)

Ji Xianlin

• Chinese scholar
• Hehad “secretly translated the Sanskrit-Hindu text of the Ramayan into Chinese during the Cultural Revolution”.
• He died July 11 at the age of 98.

Scope of sociology

Sociology Treats of the Origin of Society. — It is possible to have a science of society without going back to its origin, yet there are certain advantages in studying, as far as we may, society in its primitive state. This is the rule in all scientific investigations, that complex forms are traced to simpler ones in order to discover laws and principles. Society to-day is so complex that the laws applying to it are high generalizations not easily discovered, while the simple movements of society in its earlier forms reveal the cause and effect of social action.sociology is given a sound basis by the study of the primitive social institutions and processes. Many present-day social institutions and processes cannot be understood without a knowledge of those ancient ones from which they have developed. Therefore sociology begins with a study of social origins.

Sociology Treats of the Growth of Society. — Beginning with a simple association, society has expanded or developed into a highly complex organization. Its growth is recognized by the addition of new forms and new functions and increased energy; by the greater systemization of its parts and the greater precision of its recurring actions. To show the gradual unfolding of society, or as it is usually termed, " the building of society," how it developed from primitive forms to the forms found in highly civilized societies, is one of the tasks of sociology. By some this process has been called " social evolution." In the beginning of social life society was homogeneous. It had not become highly differentiated into groups with specialized functions and complex institutions. As time went on groups of individuals became interdependent. The parts of the whole mass became segregated and a specific function or service was given to each part. These parts gradually became more closely related and interdependent. From a state of simplicity, society grew more complex ; it became heterogeneous. At first a mass or horde of people driven about by the influence of circumstances, following each other through imitation or led by their own in-definite desires, gradually took up new activities which were per-formed by separate individuals. This multiplication of services and duties in time brought about a high state of social complexity.

Social Activities. — But while historic development is of much value as a groundwork of sociology, giving the student a broad conception of society as well as instructing him in the elemental points of social order, nevertheless, the real work of the science is with the forms and activities of a completed society. By a completed society we understand one that has all the ordinary activities and organization necessary to make an independent social body. What men- are doing in concert or in groups concerns the student more than how they began to work together, so that the social activities present the formal basis of the science. The operations of the various departments of government, the work of educational institutions, of the church, of social and philanthropic groups, as well as the organized industrial groups, must come under the close scrutiny of the student.

Social Forms. — It is quite impossible, however, to treat of social activities without treating specifically of the structure of society. In all development of social groups the function or the action always precedes the formal organization. The United States Senate, for example, if considered as to its structure, would be treated as an organization composed of a group of individuals chosen in a specific way for a definite purpose. These individuals meeting together complete their own organization by choosing various officers. Thus far we have nothing but the structure of a group in society. If we consider what the senate does, its various duties, services, and privileges, as a representative body, we shall have the sociological function of an organic group of society. If we were to consider in detail each separate act of the senate, we should have its history. In this case we should be outside of the field of sociology.

Organic Conception of Society. — The early writers on sociology used many terms borrowed from physics and biology. It was observed that society represented various interrelated parts more or less dependent upon one another. Men saw that the social groups in their activity resembled to a certain extent the activities of the individual. Hence it happened that out of these analogies the new science received its principal terms of expression. As every new branch of knowledge must have an independent terminology, or else be expressed in the terms of other sciences, the writer of a new science Must either coin new words, or put new meaning into old words. In the early history of sociology those sociologists who attempted to put new meaning into old words succeeded better in making a clear exposition of their science than those who attempted to coin a new terminology.'

They saw first that there was an analogy between the organic structure of a biological body and the structure of society. As a result they wrote about the social organism, but the analogies were carried so far by some writers that they assumed identity of structure between the physical and social bodies.2 This led to a revolt against what is known as " biological sociology." In this case, as in many others, the critics were as far away from a judicially balanced statement as were those criticized for their extreme assumptions. There is a social organism, having some analogies to the physical organism, but when we use the word " organism " in its application to society, it has a somewhat different meaning than when applied to a physical body. With that understanding and in the absence of terms of wide acceptance among sociologists, it is sometimes helpful to use physical and biological terms to express the principles of a new science of society.

Comparison of the Biological with the Social Organism. — The tree has its roots, trunk, bark, branches, leaves, flowers, and fruit. Each one of these parts is dependent upon the, others for its existence. The activities of this physical organism are closely related. They are made up of groups of physical and chemical actions. The social organism is made up of groups of individuals more or less dependent for their existence upon one another. They perform certain reciprocal services which are essential to their respective existences. The analogy might be carried out much farther to show that the bioplast in the cell of the tree is living an independent individual existence similar to the individual in the social group. It might be shown that one group of bioplasts were building leaves, while another were making roots, and another the bark of the tree. So it might be shown that these correspond to groups of individuals, some working in one department of social life and some in another. But such extended comparisons generally lead to misconceptions. The characteristic work of the social organism is a psychical element which is lacking in the biological cell. The predominance of conscious effort in human society forever destroys the idea of making sociology merely a part of biological science. With this understanding of the phrase there is no harm, therefore, in using the term " social organism." It is not necessary to think of the tree or the human body, or any other organic structure, but to think of a social organism different from all of these. The only requisite is to assume that society is made up of interdependent individuals and groups more or less closely connected with one another. The psychic element in the social body makes it something more than an individual organism — it makes it an organization. Moreover, each individual and component group of society has its own life purpose to subserve, while the biological cell seems to live and function only for the organism of which it is a part.

Sociology Treats of the Forces which Tend to Organize and Perpetuate Society. — Wherever there is action or motion there must be some force impelling or causing it. Part of the work of sociology, then, certainly is a consideration of the forces which are in operation in human society. What causes mankind to associate in groups ? What forces brought about the establishment of the family and the perpetuation of the family life ? What are the forces that give rise to the religious group and cause people to build churches and carry on religious association? What forces cause people to come together in large cities, to organize in industrial groups, to build a state or a nation, and to develop a government? In short, what are the forces that are working to create and perpetuate the social organization? These are questions that must be answered by the sociologist. One of the primary purposes of sociology is to discover these forces and to trace their operations.'

Sociology Treats of the Laws Controlling Social Activities. — The forces referred to are not irregular and intermittent, or there could be no permanent organic development of society. There must be a regular order in their activity and certain laws and rules of action controlling them. If, for instance, it be considered that men are struggling to obtain wealth for the purpose of improving their material condition, we have in this struggle a positive social force. If we search for any regulating law, we shall discover among others that man seeks to obtain the largest possible return for the least sacrifice. Likewise, we shall find that everywhere there are forces impelling society forward, and with a description of these forces must go certain laws, describing how these forces operate. One of the specific services of sociology is to discover these laws and to formulate them.

Psychic Factors in Social Organization. — While many activities tend to create and perpetuate society, none are more prominent than the psychic forces. There are influences of physical nature that compel men to cooperate and combine. There are certain physical characteristics of individuals that cause their association. But the individual characteristics which arise from the psychical nature of the associational process are among the chief causes of the creation of human society. All society represents the " feeling, thinking, and willing together " of people, and these elements are the most constant and permanent found in society. While the study of biology may come to the support of sociology in very many ways, social psychology is more than an analogy — it is a distinct branch of the science. After all, the strongest currents that draw society together when followed to their origin are psychical.

Sociology is Both Dynamic and Static. — These terms are borrowed from mechanics and in a measure have the same meaning in sociology as in mechanics. However, the meaning of these terms in sociology is modified to suit the requirements of a science dealing with human beings with will power as against a science dealing with inanimate matter. Dynamic sociology refers in general to development or progress while static refers to relationship. We should have the basis of the latter if we were to take an instantaneous view of all society with its various co-relationships in regard to structure or activity. If now we could consider society moving forward and its various relation-ships changing at each successive stage, we should have the dynamic conception. In the static conception the comparison of relationships might be referred to some ideal standard which would lead us to an ethical basis of society. Some writers, carrying over into sociology the terminology of physics, have introduced the terms " social kinetics " and " social statics " as subdivisions of social dynamics.' This terminology, however, as in the use of biological terms in sociology, is helpful only if clearly recognized as borrowed and not as exactly fitting social phenomena unless the terms are redefined. At the most they only serve to call attention to two different ways of looking at social phenomena. For, if we consider society at all, it is always developing or changing. Only for an instant do relationships continue until they are suddenly changed into new relationships by the process of social development. This constant changing of society enables us to establish general laws of social order, but not to determine a permanent status of society. Therefore, social statics would give us a picture of society at consecutive stages of its development, but considered together, this series of snap shots would be a moving picture of social development, that is, of social dynamics.' Therefore it seems better to speak of social dynamics, and then subdivide it into social statics and social kinetics, the former dealing with social movements which are not changing in rate or direction, and the latter with those which change in rate or direction or both.

The Cosmic and the Ethical Processes of Society. — Man is a part of the universe, and its laws also bear upon and move him. He is influenced by physical and mechanical as well as by vital forces. Certain writers have attempted to subject him entirely to the operation of natural law, giving him no position of independent activity. They have treated him as a particle of the universe being moved here and there by the various forces of nature and of his own being. This doctrine came as a reaction against the extreme theory of the freedom of the will and as the result of the study of natural evolution. Here, as elsewhere, the middle ground is safer and nearer the truth than either extreme, for while it is recognized that man is controlled by circumstances, his will operates with much power within certain limits.

The struggle for existence in the early history of mankind gives unmistakable evidence of man's common lot with other living organisms. As such, on the one hand, he was dependent for survival upon physical surroundings and, on the other, upon his own effort. At first this struggle was common with the beasts of the field. It was a wolfish struggle for life in which egoism was the predominating characteristic. Then, faintly at the beginning were felt the first stirrings of altruism, which grew stronger, until now altruistic practices constitute a remarkable feature of modern society.

The Shifting of the Struggle from a Physical to a Psychical Basis. — Meanwhile, as the altruistic principles became ascend-ant, the competition between individuals of the same species became less severe, and changed from the physical to the intellectual. At first this change was shown by the individual directing his energy to some line of pursuit for the purpose of accumulating wealth instead of trying to insure survival by destroying real or supposed enemies. Each in the attempt to satisfy his desires learned to respect the rights of others. Subsequently, men learned to cooperate with one another in defense and in the pursuit of wealth. Gradually the altruistic principle became more important and each tended to seek the well-being of the group as well as his own safety, believing that his final success depended upon it.

The Survival of the Best. — Through the development of altruistic sentiments and the extension of the cooperative practices of mankind, the old struggle became modified and the survival of the fittest biologically gradually tended to become the survival of the best socially. The adaptability of the individual to his physical environment was followed by adaptability to his fellow men. Those who cooperated survived and those who failed to cooperate perished. One can scarcely estimate the importance of this social fact in the development of the human race. So it came about that those who were most interested in their fellow men became known as the best, or, in other words, the best included not only the physically and mentally strong, but those of the largest cooperative power and adaptability to social life. In this process of cooperative protection the virtuous as well as the vigorous survived. It is really nothing more than an extension of the idea of the survival of the fittest to social environment, that is, to associated human conduct, when once social relation-ships were established and survival became dependent not only upon fitting into the physical environment, but also fitting into a social life in such a way as made cooperation possible. Then the fit was he who could control his impulses in the interests of group cooperation for purposes of survival.'

The Telic Process of Society. As individuals become more unified in sentiment, thought, and action there is developed what is known as social consciousness, whereby society recognizes its own collective power. In its endeavor to use this for the benefit of all its members the society or group exercises its telic capacities. In other words, the attempt to force society through certain channels, to cause it to perform certain acts for the general well-being of the social body is a recognition of the conscious effort of society to change or reform itself. To a large extent society has been created by the effort of each individual to follow his own personal desires as they related to himself and his fellows, regardless of any attempt to build the structure of society. However, through the influence of social consciousness there is a realization of social ideals and social aims, as well as social defects, and there arises an attempt to remove the defects and attain to social well-being.

The Scientific Nature of Sociology. - The foregoing statements represent partially and in brief the complex material with which the science of society must deal. It must consider social facts of all kinds and arrange and classify these facts and deduce therefrom universal principles or laws relating to the growth and activity of human society. The difficulty in bringing such diverse groups of phenomena into logical order and giving a scientific basis to this order is not easily overcome. Sociology is the most difficult of all the social sciences. It deals with material which has existed from the beginnings of human association, but proposes to establish the most general fundamental truths concerning its existence. Sociology today represents the results of studies of different scientists sometimes along parallel lines, in other instances along converging lines and in still others, along trajectories which have crossed. Each science views society from a different standpoint, and sociology will not become a compact, well-defined science until sociologists are able to generalize the truths discovered by those approaching social phenomena from various points of view and to agree more or less closely upon the subject matter and the method of treatment.

The Place of Sociology among the Social Sciences. — This point involves the real nature and scope of sociology. It is one that has caused a vast deal of discussion among writers on sociology and one which, to a certain extent, is still unsettled. There is one group of writers who hold that sociology is a synthesis of all the social sciences, that the science is fabricated by running a thread through all the sciences and stringing them together in one mass. Others a little more discriminating hold that it is a synthesis or rather an amalgamation of the results of other social sciences. Herbert Spencer used the term " sociology " as a generic term to include all the other social sciences. From a scientific standpoint such a usage might be of value in showing that all are branches of one great science called " sociology " just as Spencer included the group of all natural sciences relating to life under the term " biology."

But the present writers hold that sociology is one of several coordinating social sciences, the most recent of the group, created for a special purpose and standing on an independent basis, and that while economics, political science, or ethics may deal with specific laws relating to parts of society, sociology deals with the general laws which apply to the whole structure.'

The Differentiation of the Social Sciences. — Let us suppose that there are numerous phenomena of human society which continually increase with the development of social order. Society may go on developing from century to century without any scientific attempt to make an orderly arrangement of these phenomena. But gradually in the progress of knowledge scholars begin to realize that there are facts that constantly recur in the social process, for instance, those relating to the moral conduct of the individual. As a result there is developed the science of ethics. The classification of these phenomena and deduction of general laws and principles make this chronologically the first of the social sciences. Again, some observe that there are other groups of facts relating to government, and that there are certain principles involved in the development of social control. These facts are collected, classified, the principles established, and the science of government is brought forth. But there are other social phenomena unclassified and other purposes unsatisfied. The processes of obtaining and distributing wealth as independent activities may not be involved in either ethics or politics. And so a new science called political economy is created. These various sciences continue to expand in their natural order but there still exist, outside their legitimate boundaries, other social phenomena unclassified. and other scientific purposes still unsatisfied. No one yet has shown the universal forces at work in the growth, development, and structure of society as a whole. The laws of social being have not yet been set forth. Political, religious, ethical, and economic life have been presented from specific standpoints, but the general laws of society, the regularities to be found in man's thoughts, feelings, and purposes when engaged in any of his social relationships, whether they be economic, political, ethical, or religious, have not been developed. Here, then, is the opportunity for a new science called sociology. It refuses to be included in any of the other social sciences, and the other social sciences refuse to be grouped under it or to be absorbed or assimilated by it. From scientific and pedagogical considerations it stands alone. It has a definite purpose and a specific body of classified knowledge, as well as a body of laws and principles of its own.

Characteristic Mark of Sociology. — Much of the confusion concerning this science has arisen from books whose writers fail to acknowledge that science has a subjective as well as an objective boundary. It is the aim of a science, the course of reasoning and the end to be sought as much as the phenomena with which it deals that give it its distinctive mark as a science. For instance, botany and chemistry may be dealing with the same material in a certain sense, but with entirely different aims. However, added to this is the fact that in the scientific sense the " material " with which each deals is quite distinct. The chemist is dealing chiefly, though not wholly, with inorganic matter and is interested primarily in molecules and atoms of different kinds and their relations to each other. The botanist, on the other hand, is interested in molecules and atoms only incidentally. He is studying organic matter primarily and is concerned with cells and the forms into which they build them-selves. Both are studying matter, but quite different aspects thereof, and in widely varied relations. So with sociology, ethics, economics, politics, and history ; while they all deal with the same thing in a broad sense, viz., human society, each is interested in a different aspect of social relationships. In the history of the natural sciences biology was the latest to develop. It is a general science, in the sense that it deals with facts and principles which underlie all the special sciences concerned with various forms of life, such as botany, zoology, anthropology, etc. While biology rests on all these special biological sciences in the sense that they provide facts and principles upon which larger generalizations can be made, yet its field is not precisely that of any of these special sciences. It deals with fundamentals common to them all. So with sociology. While economics, politics, history, anthropology, and all the rest deal with particular aspects of human association, sociology is the science which investigates the regularities of human association in all its varied aspects. The special social sciences take as presuppositions the general aspects which are the objects of sociology. Take, for instance, the trust and consider all the facts and phenomena of society that arise out of it. If we consider it from an economic standpoint, we shall be determining how the trust increases the development of wealth, its effect on wages or on general distribution of products, and many other economic questions. It is evident that we are working within the province of economics. If we consider the moral conduct of the individual interested in the trust, and its general effects on the morals of the community, we shall be studying ethics. If, however, we consider what legislation may be brought to control or regulate the trust, we shall be in the realm of political science. If, finally, we consider trust-phenomena in relation to their effects on the homes and migrations of people, the dispersion and concentration of social groups, in fact, the general effect on the social standard, we shall be in the realm of sociology. So we shall find, so far as the material field of operation is concerned, that all sciences cross each other more or less, and we must not forget that in reality there is but one science, — the science of the universe, — and that the division of this science into groups and individual branches is merely a matter of convenience and pedagogical relationships. Let, for instance in Figure I, — which is merely illustrative, not exhaustive, — the rectangle A, B, C, D represent all possible social phenomena, that of E, F, G, H all the phenomena of the science of ethics, M, N, 0, P that of economics, X, Y, Z, W that of political science, S, V, T, L that of history, and I, J, R, K that of sociology, and they will have a tendency to overlap each other somewhat similarly to the arrangement rep-resented in that figure. But the sciences themselves do not over-lap for the reasons stated above.

Groups of Social Sciences. — The following schedule will represent a simple classification of the social sciences from a pedagogical standpoint. Only the principal subheads are given under each main group :

I. Ethics.

Feminism

Throughout history, women have always struggled to gain equality, respect, and the same rights as men. This has been difficult because of patriarchy, an ideology in which men are superior to women and have the right to rule women. This ideology has permeated the social structures of societies throughout the world and as a result, even in the new millennium, women are still struggling for rights that most men take for granted. The struggle was even more difficult for women of color because not only were they dealing with issues of sexism, but also racism. In order to fight patriarchy, feminism and feminist theory was born.

What is feminism? By general definition, feminism is a philosophy in which women and their contributions are valued. It is based on social, political and economical equality for women. Feminists can be anyone in the population, men, women, girl or boys.

Feminism can also be described as a movement or a revolution that includes women and men who wish the world to be equal without boundaries. These boundaries or blockades are better known as discrimination and biases against gender, sexual orientation, age, marital status and economic status. Everyone views the world with his or her own sense of gender and equality. Feminists view the world as being unequal. They wish to see the gender gap and the idea that men are superior to women decreased or even abolished. There are many different types of feminist theory and each has had a profound impact on women and gender studies.

The first is cultural feminism, which is the theory that there are fundamental personality differences between men and women, and those women’s differences are special. This theory supports the idea that there are biological differences between men and women and sexism can be overcome by embracing the “women’s way.”

The second type is individualist or libertarian feminist. This feminism is based upon libertarian philosophies, with the focus on autonomy, rights, liberty, independence, and diversity. Next, there is the radical feminism; this theory began during the Sixties. This ideology focuses on social change, and “attempts to draw lines between biologically – determined behavior and culturally- determined behavior” in order to free both men and women as much as possible from their previous narrow gender roles.

Finally, there is liberal feminism, a theory that focuses on the idea that all people are created equal and that education is the primary means to change discrimination.

Article by kathy henry

Modernity and social chane in europe

The development of sociology was born out of two revolutions: the French Revolution of 1789, and the Industrial revolution. Both of these events destroyed all previous social norms and created a new social organization: the modern industrial society. In particular, the French Revolution destroyed not only the political and social foundations of France, but almost every country in Europe and the North Americas. Ideas of liberty and equality were put into practice, setting the stage for a completely new social and political order. These changes also represented the victory for the downtrodden in France, and the beginnings of societies in other countries based on the individual and individualism. A new class of people, emboldened by what happened in France, appeared on the political stages of Europe and North America and were not afraid to fight for their rights as citizens and human beings.

The concept of modernity came about when classical theorists needed to understand the meaning and significance of the Twin Revolutions and the effects of industrialization, urbanization, and political democracy on rural societies. The term ‘modernity’ was coined to capture these changes in progress by contrasting the “modern” with the “traditional.” Modernity was meant to be more than a concept. Modernity referred to a world constructed anew through the active and conscious intervention of individuals. In modern societies, the world is experienced as a human construction, an experience that gives rise to a new sense of freedom and to a basic anxiety about the openness of the future.

Modernity consists of three elements: traditional, institutional, and cultural. Traditional modernity means that there is a historical consciousness, a sense of breaking with the past, and a post-traditional consciousness of what is going on in the world. Institutional modernity is concerned with capitalism, industrialism, urbanism, and the democratic nation-state. Cultural modernity entails new beliefs about science, economics, and education. It involves a criticism of religion and separation of religion from politics and education.

A new social science was created in the wake of these events and was given the name ‘sociology’ by Auguste Comte, a French philosopher and he is thought of as the founder of modern sociology. Sociology is not only about intellect, but is connected with developments in the social world and changes in society. One reason why sociology is different than the other social sciences is that it attempts to describe different sets of social forces that develop in a society at different times and places, with different actors and results. As societies change, it is the nature of these changes that sociologists attempt to explain, and it is the changes themselves that lead to different explanations of these changes.

For example, Marx's political-economic theory is an explanation of nineteenth century capitalism as it developed in Britain. His theory could not have been developed fifty years earlier because the trends and forces that he described and explained were only beginning in the early part of the nineteenth century. Weber's analysis of bureaucracy and rationalization could not have emerged much sooner than it did, because the bureaucratic structures and the forces of rationalization had not developed all that much before Weber's time. And Durkheim’s analysis of the changing division of labor could take place only once some of the economic and social trends of modern, industrial societies became apparent. The same is true today: as society changes and becomes more modern, new sociological theories and approaches are developed in an attempt to understand and explain these changes.

Marx, Weber, and Durkheim had different views on modernity. For Marx, modernity is capitalism and he felt that the ideal of true democracy is one of the great lies of capitalism. He thought that the only ideas that came out of a capitalist society was alienation, class conflict, and revolution. He also thought that capitalism will be eventually destroyed by revolution. For him, history is a human construction and that history is made by those who have the political and material means to do so. Humans participate in their own oppression through false conscious, any belief, idea, or ideology that interferes with an exploited and oppressed person or group being able to perceive the objective nature and source of their oppression.

Weber construes modernity as rationalization, bureaucratization, and the “Iron Cage.” For him, the history of modernization was increased rationalization. There would be a search for the most efficient techniques and stresses that everything is reevaluated. Everything humans depend on would be controlled by large capitalist bureaucratic organizations.

Durkheim saw modernity as moral order, anomie and the decline of social solidarity. In his analysis of modernity, there is a breakdown of social values, the breaking down of traditional social order. Anomie is a transitional problem, lacking moral regulation. Increased egotism is also a problem. All three of these classic theorists had a very critical view of modern capitalism and society

Kathy henry Article

The real woman

We live in a world that has grown by leaps and bounds. It is a far cry from the world my mum knew or I knew when I was much younger. The tendencies we had as we grew up has changed. I watch now with some alarm and misgiving. I had been one of those who thought my mother missed the point when she insisted that a woman did more for the country by simply being herself.

In essence, what is the real role of woman here on earth? Is it to be the president of a country as we all insist on gender equality? Is it to be married? Have children? or just be the creature her Creator intended her to be as the motivating engine and facilitator of life here on Earth. The real role of a woman is 'to be' The question is however to ask, who is a woman? We tend to shrug and smile at that question. particularly womenfolk themselves who wonder if one had lost her marbles when you ask. A woman from Biblical information is the creature the Almighty trusted enough to continue with creation and help humanity find its soul.

A real woman would engender in the male an instant recognition of something higher. Something he can't place his finger on but that gives him a sense of peace, longing for something noble. I wonder if we are not missing the point when we make so much talk about gender equality and forget the fact that not one sex is really inferior to the other. We may be complementary, if we so choose but each of us have a responsibility to fulfill our real roles. The man, with his coarse brute strength is not to be confused with cave mentality neither should we lull ourselves into calling woman the weaker sex and make token recognitions of their importance.

I wish women could see that they change the world for the better if they could really identify themselves and recognize their singular and special importance to the continuity of the species referred to now as Homo Sapiens. It is not the fashion, not marriage, not motherhood, but the essence of being a woman, the transition of humanity from one level to the other. Being a woman is the noblest duty one can have and when you can really identify and define true womanhood, you would be pleased to learn and follow your roles as a real woman.

***** Above post is not written by me.Only for reference**********

Imagining a naion : The hindu article

July 18, 2009 marked the world’s first Mandela Day. Mandela Day is celebrated to honour the life and legacy of the 91-year-old veteran freedom fighter, Nelson Mandela. Mandela spent 67 years of his life, 27 of these in prison, in South Africa's struggle against apartheid. Mandela Day marks the moral authority of this great statesman and is a global call to action to each and every individual to devote their time and effort to the service of their communities.

The history of the struggles of many nations across the world has shaped each country’s basic beliefs and core national values. This evolves into a nationally upheld value system which is usually institutionalised in that country’s constitution.

The United States of America has laid out its core democratic values in its Declaration of Independence and its Constitution. These core values of life, liberty, the pursuit of happiness, justice, truth and common good are taught to every elementary school student in America.

Members of the European Union have been working on a consortium for European values and in 2005, the Atlas of European Values was published. This atlas presents the values, norms, and beliefs of Europeans at the turn of the millennium. The results of this study have turned out surprisingly conservative. An overwhelming majority of folks has chosen “married-with-children” as their preferred lifestyle, dispelling influences from the liberating 1960s, with its messages of emancipation and individualisation.

Our Indian heritage is awash with values that have been emphasised and passed down from generation to generation. The Indian national pledge calls for treating parents, teachers and all elders with respect. The Indian interpretation of respect differs slightly from those of Western nations. As a mark of respect for elders, we rise to offer them a seat, we refrain from calling them by their first names and are taught not to backchat to them.

Refreshingly different

United States President Barack Obama demonstrates an understanding of and is at ease with different world cultures. After being sworn in as President, when Obama personally saw off his outgoing counterpart George W. Bush onto his helicopter Marine One and off to his home in Texas, the President was practising a value that is well understood in the Eastern world. Another unprecedented act in the realm of Western campaign politics was the dinner that President Obama hosted for his defeated opponent, John McCain. Many people of Eastern descent would recognise the act of seeing off an elder statesman to be a mark of respect for his age, for his stature and for the services rendered to his country. President Obama has had global life experience — having spent four of his formative teenage years in Indonesia.

The Indian constitution embodies many of the core values that have been part of the Indian ethos. It has resolved to secure to all its citizens justice, equality, liberty and fraternity.

The Preamble to the Constitution of India seeks to establish what Mahatma Gandhi described as “The India of my Dreams”:

“I shall work for an India in which the poorest shall feel that it is their country, in whose making they have an effective voice, an India in which there shall be no high class or low class of people; an India in which all communities shall live in perfect harmony. There can be no room in such an India for the curse of untouchability or the curse of intoxicating drinks and drugs. Women will enjoy as the same rights as men. We shall be at peace with all the rest of the world. This is the India of my dreams.”

We have other core values handed down to us over the generations — values such as respect for women, caring for the old and the sick and empathy for the poor and downtrodden.

If morality is the answer to the question “how ought we to live”, group morality develops from shared beliefs and helps regulate behaviour within a community. The reality of today’s society is that many countries are faced with endangered values.

In answer to the question, “What is the world’s greatest challenge in the new millennium?”, Jimmy Carter has stated in his book Our Endangered Values America’s Moral Crisis: “The greatest challenge we face is the growing chasm between the rich and the poor on earth”. He goes on to explain that the gap is steadily widening. At the beginning of the last century, the 10 richest countries were nine times wealthier than the 10 poorest ones. Today that ratio is 131:1.

Many independent studies are being conducted on the factors affecting changes to the moral fabric of our society. There is a need to put into perspective the values that are changing as a result of globalisation. George Matafonov in his book Fire and Water: Market Morality and Civil Societystates that the root causes of global social unrest are not primarily the result of the rise of terrorism, but should be attributed to the new model of society whose core has become economic theory rather than traditional human values. He argues that in a span of less than 50 years, economic theory has turned the world upside down by insisting that our chief value should be competitive self interest. The challenge therefore for modern societies is to bring back the sense of traditional morality without negating the advantages of economic theory.

Our choices

India is a country of many cultures and ethnicities. Our common binding force doesn’t have to be drawn from Western influences, food, language or dress. Our history can be taught as a proud acceptance of our diversity or can be spun into a grim reminder of assault and plunder. Our attitude can be forward looking as an all-inclusive and tolerant community or can be backward looking, exclusionist, reactionary and violent. Our behaviour can be marked by belligerence and suspicion or we can be cosmopolitan and yet preserve our individual cultures.

Every so often, the moral fabric of our nation must be whetted and reaffirmed. Refreshment of our core values has to be an ongoing process. While attempts have been made in different communities to define a benchmark set of moral standards — enforcing these standards is quite another issue. Coersion is not the best form of adherence. If we perceive an individual or group of individuals to be violating a core value, the appropriate response is one which is within the framework of justice and equality.

Our most steadfast and enduring values are those that were introduced in our early years. Character education shows best results when introduced early in life. This makes schools a vitally important instrument in the character education agenda. Also, cohesive nationalism is a concept that needs broader definition and support. We need to champion this cause — something that we can practise everyday until it resonates in our lives. To teach our children to be divisive is a very dangerous game to play. They grow up looking at all relationships from this lens. The dangers of stoking the embers of hatred for this or that ethnic group are that the ensuing fire sometimes turns around to ultimately consume one of our own loved ones.

True progress has no room for mutual suspicion or divisiveness and can be achieved collectively, not individually. Our greatest moral challenge today is our poor. As a country with about 25 per cent people in poverty, this should be our primary focus. Our second biggest challenge is finding a way to live peacefully and amicably with all of our cultures and to preserve and promote our diversity.

Courtesy : The hindhu

Are we ready for LGBT rights?

Since last month we have been hearing about Lesbian Gay Bisexual Transgender(LGBT) and section 377.Let me give you a brief introduction about section 377.According to Indian penal code section 377 "who ever volountarly has carnial intercourse against nature with any man,woman or animal ,shall be punishable with imprisonment for life or imprisonment for a term which may extend 10 years.This law was introuduced during british colonoal perion in 1860. Britan has ruled out this law in 1967 and it seem now that only her colonies are still sticking to the law.Delhi high court has ruled out this law by station the carinal intercouse of homosexual is nomore illegal.

Even though delhi highcourt has ruled out section 377.Our traditional indian society is not ready to accept the LGBT rights.How ever, we can hope for a change,as the HC decision is the first step for equal rights.Our democracy says" All people should be treated equally under the law,regardless of their religion,caste,region etc".So whats the point of keeping section 377.Even if we have implement section 377,we have plenty of LGBT personals in indian subcontinent (Approximately 40 Lakhs according to latest report).Resent protest of LGBT's in Chennai,Delhi and Mumbai proves tmy above words.Lesbian or gays are not made ,perhaps they are born.The same god who created us has created them.In a democratic country like india we can't neglect the rights of LGBT's just because they are a minority.

People had menitioned that LGBT are trend which we followed from western madness.Homosexuality is mentioned in manusmriti,a book written a centrury ago.This gives us a clean evidence that homosexuality is not a new trend,its a general behaviour of human beings followed by our ancestors.A person who has knowledge in medical sciennce would understand this.During a debates in media peopls mentioned that,it is against our social morality.Stripping a 22 year old lady in bihar,Molesting a foreigner in Mumbai,Raping a teenage girl in our capital city.Is the above mention incidents shows our social morality.Peoples shouls understand that fact that LGBT's are not fighting to spread the Lesbian or gay charecter,perhapd thare fighting to jsut to be considered equal in our society.Religious scholars defending against this by saying it against our religious norm.Killing a cow,Idiol worship,Drinking alchahol etc are against religious normas of different religion india.Is the religious scholars going to ask for laws to prohibhit that.Obviousy "no" will be the answer.Because its a personals choice.Simillarly LGBT is also a personal behaviour.

Just because of this protest we can't completely ruled out this law in a secular india.Indeed, we have to come with a balanced law which satisfy all and get equal rights of all regardless of any minority.I accpet that homosexuality will ruin our generational existennce.Implementing a law dosent make any difference in that.Instead by ruling out this law we will able to find more LGBT's and give them proper counselling and studies regarding the after effects of thier deeds.Perhaps it will helps us to bring back them to a peacefull hetrosexual life.Because we persue a anyone to change their behavious a gun point.

Exemption of pre embarkation security check

List of VIP/VVIP who are exempted from pre embarkation security check.

1. All Former President/Vice president
2. Three service cheifs
3. The President
4. The Vice President
5. Prime Minister
6. Lok Sabha Speaker
7. Chief Justice of the Supreme Court
8. Chief Justices of High Courts
9. judges of the Supreme Court
10. Leaders of Opposition in the Lok Sabha and Rajya Sabha
11. Cabinet Ministers
12. Ministers of State in the Union Council of Ministers
13. All Governors and Lieutenant-Governors of Union Territories,
14. Chief Ministers and Deputy Chief Ministers of Union Territories.
15. Deputy Chairman of the Planning Commission
16. Bharat Ratna awardees
17. Chief Election Commissioner
18. Comptroller and Auditor General of India
19. Attorney-General of India
20. Cabinet Secretary.
21. Ambassadors of foreign countries
22. Charge d’affaires
23. High Commissioners and their spouses
24. the Dalai Lama, SPG protectees
25. and Robert VadraA

Hillary's misson India

Courtsey The hindhu

On November 20, 2008, the U.S. threw its full weight behind new draft rules at the Nuclear Suppliers Group that ban the sale of enrichment and reprocessing (ENR) items to India. The NSG draft, ‘Revised Paragraph 6 and 7 of INFCIRC 254/Part I,’ lists seven criteria that must be fulfilled before an NSG member authorises the supply of ENR facilities, equipment and technology.

According to a copy of the confidential text obtained by the Arms Control Association (ACA) and accessed by The Hindu, the very first of these criteria, numbered 6(a)(i), is that the recipient must be “a party to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons and is in full compliance with its obligations under the Treaty.” The second is that it has “signed, ratified and is implementing a comprehensive safeguards agreement with the IAEA,” something India cannot do because it has nuclear weapons.

Only four countries are not party to the NPT: India, Pakistan, Israel and North Korea. But since the existing NSG guidelines prohibiting nuclear transfers to non-NPT members have been waived only for India, the proposed restriction directly targets New Delhi.

Though the draft was introduced by the Bush administration, the Obama administration got the G-8 to begin implementing it on a national basis this month. If approved by the 45-nation cartel, the clean waiver India got last September would apply only to nuclear reactors, components and fuel and no longer to ENR items. It would be, in the words of Atomic Energy Commission chairman Anil Kakodkar, a “breach of trust” and “contrary to the spirit” of the Indo-U.S. nuclear agreement.

When Secretary of State Hillary Clinton was asked on Monday whether the U.S.-sponsored NSG move undermined the Indo-U.S. nuclear deal, her answer took everyone by surprise. “As I understand [the] question, it was whether we oppose the transfer of processing and enrichment technology, well, clearly we do not,” she said. “We have just completed a civil nuclear deal with India. So if it is done within the appropriate channels and carefully safeguarded, as it is in the case of India, then that is appropriate.”

“Ms. Clinton either misspoke or was badly advised about U.S. policy on the transfer of sensitive ENR technology,” ACA director Daryl Kimball told The Hindu. “The purpose and intent of the G-8 policy — and the pending November 2008 NSG proposal — is indeed to bar ENR technologies to states [like India] that have not signed the NPT …”

At an off-the-record interaction with Indian analysts here on Tuesday, a senior U.S. official initially said “India won’t be affected” by the draft NSG rules. But he added he was on “thin ground” and that Bob Einhorn, Ms. Clinton’s special adviser on non-proliferation, was better placed to clarify U.S. policy.

While Indian officials, who say they still have not seen the NSG draft, suspect Ms. Clinton misspoke, they believe India should hold her to the position. Indian analysts, however, see her remarks as aimed at buying time. “It would have been very inopportune for Clinton to rule out ENR transfers while in Delhi. That would have injected a note of controversy just as the PM was earmarking two sites for U.S.-supplied nuclear reactors to India,” said the former Foreign Secretary, Kanwal Sibal. “The U.S. will continue to obfuscate the issue so that the prospects of the U.S. nuclear industry in India are not hurt. The line would be that we are not ruling out anything and that after the reprocessing negotiations are completed, other issues will be taken up.”

Chess

Laiden chess tournament (Netherlands)

Mr.Lalith Babu of India won laiden chess tournament held in dutch city Laiden.He defeated third seeded Georgian grandmaster Mr.tornike sankidze in the final round.

Shreyanash Dakila achieved his maiden international master norm and S.Harini achieved her maiden womens international master norm.

Scottish chess championship

Mr.Arun prasad became the first indian to claim the 116 year history of scottish chess championship,in eden burg.He defeated Magesh chandran in ninth and final round.

Najdorf Memmorial Tournament Warsaw,poland.

Defending champion K.Sasikaran lost to Polish grand master Mr.Wojtaszek Rodslow

Khel ratna and Arjuna awards 2008

Overview

Rajiv Gandhi Khel Ratna award

Rajiv Gandhi Khel Ratna award is India's highest honour given for acheivments in sports.The award is named after former Prime minister of india Late Mr.Rajiv Gandhi.Khel Ratna Award started in year 1991.The Khel Ratna was devised to be an overarching honour, conferred for outstanding sporting performance, whether by an individual or a team, across all sporting disciplines in a given year.As of 2004-05, when the award was last bestowed, the cash component stands at Rs. 500,000/-

Arjuna Award

Arjuna award is institued by india in 1961 to recognize outstanding acheivement of sports.The award carries a cash prize of Rs. 300,000, a bronze statuette of Arjuna and a scroll.To be eligible for the Award, a sportsperson should not only have had good performance consistently for the previous three years at the international level with excellence for the year for which the Award is recommended, but should also have shown qualities of leadership, sportsmanship and a sense of discipline.

Dronacharya Award

Dronacharya Award is an award presented by the government of India for excellence in sports coaching. The award comprises a bronze statuette of Dronacharya, a scroll of honour and a cash component of Rs.300,000. The award was instituted in 1985

The Awardees 2008

Rajiv Gandhi Khel Ratna Award

M.C. Mary Kom (boxing

Arjuna awards

1. Mangal Singh Champia (archery)
2. Sinimole Paulose (athletics)
3. Saina Nehwal (badminton)
4. Sarita Devi (boxing)
5. Tania Sachdev (chess)
6. Gautam Gambhir (cricket)
7. Ignace Tirkey and Surinder Kaur (hockey)
8. Pankaj Shirsat (kabaddi)
9. Satish Joshi (rowing)
10. Ronjan Sodhi (shooting)
11. Poulomi Ghatak (table tennis)
12. Yogeshwar Dutt (wrestling)
13. Girdhari Lal Yadav (sailing)
14. V. Prabhu (wheelchair tennis).

Dronacharya award

1. Gopi Chand (badminton)
2. Satpal (wrestling)
3. J. Uday Kumar (kabaddi)
4. Baldev Singh (hockey)
5. Jaidev Bisht (boxing).

Space agreement between India and US

India is looking to sign a end use monitoring agreement to ease the sale of US millitary hardware during Mrs.Clintons vsit.

Agreemnet to be signed

1.The new Technology Safeguards Agreement (TSA) will cover the launches involving satellites owned by Us government or academic institution or a third country space agency and universities which has US equipment on board.

2.second agreement will be signed on a farme work for " robust result oriented cooperation " in science and technology for collabrative research and technology cooperation agreement

Railway budget 09

Hi guys.Following are the highlight of the railway budget prsented byCentral railway minister Smt.Mamta Banerji.

1. No increase in passenger fare and fright tarrif
2. Budget have the inclusive growth and expansion of railway network to evry corner of the country.
3. Plan outlay of Rs 40745cr proposed for 2009-10
4. Passenger ammenity to get high increase,119% increase.
5. Tarrif recipt during 2008-09 increase by 11.4% while freight loading crew at 5%
6. Special trains for perishable farm produce facilities for transportation of rural craft
7. Works for 7 new line,guage conversionof 17 lines and doubling of 13 line to be taken up.
8. Fast parcel service proposed on three routes
9. Tatkal scheme to be made passenger friendly
10. Railway ticket to be made avaliable through post offic and "Mushkil Assan" mobile vans
11. Consession for press persons increased by 50%
12. Monthly ticket for Rs 25, for unorganized sector or poor under izaat scheme
13. Only ladies EMU trains at kolkata,Delhi and chennai
14. 57 new trains,extension of 27 trains and increase in the frequency of 13 trains and air conditioned double decker train proposed.
15. 50 station to be upgraded to world class station
16. Long distance train will have on noard doctor and infotainment services
17. Handycapped and aged person to have more amneties
18. Special fund for devolopment of north east railway
19. Quazigund - anantnag line to be completed in next month
20. 6650 staff quaters to be constructed and group D employees to get scholarship for their girl child
21. Railway ro comeout with while paper on financial status and vison 2020 document

Budget 09 highlight

Highlight of UPA government 2009 budget are as follows.

1. Target 9% growth
2. Commodities transaction tax to be scrapped
3. 10% surcharge on personal income scrapped
4. Fringe Benifit Tax (FBT) to be scrapped
5. IT exemption for woman hiked Rs.190,000
6. IT exemption for senior citizen hiked Rs.240,000
7. Rs 12000 crores earmarked for expenditure on rural road 2009-10
8. Drug related to heart disease cheaper
9. Service tax to be applicaable on law firms
10. Bio diesel custom duty lowerd
11. Custom duty on import of gold and silver increased
12. Bio diesel custom duty lowerd
13. Branded woman jwellery to be cheaper
14. Rs 16300 crores to be set aside for upcoming common wealth games.
15. IIT and NIT to get Rs 2113 cr more.
16. Corporate tax unchanged
17. one rank pension scheme to be establish for ex-service man
18. National ganga project allocation up to go to 562 crores
19. UID project under Mr.Nandan M nilkani to be out in 12 - 18 months
20. NRHM to be raised by Rs.257 crores
21. A national level action plan for climate change
22. National employment exchange to be mordenised
23. Interest subsidy for home loan up to 1 Lakh
24. Indira awas yojana blosterd up by 63% to Rs8883 cr
25. Saral 2 forms to simply tax filling process
26. Emphasis on fertilizer subsidy reaching out directly to farmers
27. Petroleum expert panel to set petroleun prices which would be in sink with global level.
28. Rashtriya krishi vikas yojana allocation increased by 30%
29. IIFCL, a new company will look in to infrastructure needs.
30. Extension of farm loan wavier scheme by 6 months
31. Allocation of National Highway authority of india increased by 23%
32. Fiscal stimulus at 3.5%pf the GDP
33. Small scale business to be exempted from advance tax.
34. 50% reduction in the custom duty of LCD panels
35. Set top box to be costlier
36. Goods and service Tax (GST) to be in effet from,April 2010
37. Textile unitto be enjoy continued tax holiday

Endeavour reaches in its orbit

Space shuttle Endeavour and its crew of seven astronauts are in orbit after an on-time launch at 6:03 p.m. EDT ,NASA reported.Following a smooth countdown with no technical issues and weather that steadily improved throughout the afternoon, the shuttle lifted off from Launch Pad 39A and began its orbital chase of the International Space Station.

"It was a testimony for this entire launch and flight control team," Launch Director Pete Nickolenko said of the countdown and successful liftoff, which came on the sixth launch attempt after technical issues and weather concerns prevented the first five tries. "It was an outstanding effort, and it made the complex look really easy. It really was a case of persistence."

Bill Gerstenmaier, associate administrator for Space Operations, also commended the launch effort, but cautioned that the mission to come is "very challenging," with five spacewalks and robotic activities scheduled. "The teams are fully prepared -- they're ready to go do what they need to go do, and we look forward to the exciting activities as we install the Exposed Facility out on the Kibo module."

Diamond lost the tittle of hardest material.

According to the new scientfic research.A rare natural substance called lonsdaleite,which is made from carbon atom just like diamonds,has emmerged 58% more harder than gemstone.A team lead by zicheng pang and collegues at shanghai jiao tong university simulated how atoms in two substances belived to have promise as very hard materials would respond to the stress of a finely tripped probe pusing down on them.These rare minerals are formed when meteroids containing graphite hits the earth.