बुद्धी ही अनिष्ट । अशी गोष्ट ...हेन्री बर्गसन (बर्गसॉं), आइनस्टाइन आणि विंदा करंदीकर ... Henri Bergson@162, Albert Einstein and Vinda Karandikar

#HenriBergson162

आज ऑक्टोबर १८ २०२१ रोजी हेन्री बर्गसन (बर्गसॉं) यांची १६२वी जयंती आहे. 

कै विंदांच्या 'अष्टदर्शने', २००३ मध्ये सातवे दर्शन आहे बर्गसॉंदर्शन...

बर्गसन आइनस्टाइन यांच्या बद्दल काय विचार करायचे हे आज २०२१ साली सुद्धा अंतर्मुख करून टाकते ...

“Bergson mentioned Einstein one last time, in writing, in 1937. He was seventy-eight years old. …

The note described Einstein as brilliant, savvy, and ambitious. But it provided an image of Einstein that differed markedly from the one the physicist promoted of himself. According to Bergson, Einstein was driven as much by discipline as by pleasure. There was no denying that in his early years he had been a soldier with a mission, but things changed in his later ones. Einstein was a man who had “practiced grand tourism, covering, first as a soldier [for science] and then for his own pleasure, Germany, Hungary, Switzerland, Holland, and even more countries.” But Bergson then accused Einstein of having used the League of Nations not for its intended purpose of promoting relations among scientists and intellectuals, but primarily as a networking forum used for his own advantage—to “get in contact with scientists all over the world, corresponding with a princess, lecturing to a queen.” Yes, sometimes, Bergson pictured Einstein deep in thought. But mostly he pictured him as an action hero: “I also see him on a ship where the crew conspire to steal and to throw overboard, anticipating them, and drawing his sword to hold back the bandits.” The scene described by Bergson was like those that could be seen in the new blockbuster movies and propaganda films that were gaining more and more audiences during those years. “Einstein,” explained Bergson, always tried to produce a “maximum effect” from his efforts. His whole life was organized for this purpose, argued the philosopher. The physicist had positioned himself in America in order to “organize his life to draw maximum effect from it.”

Bergson did not commend a life as active as Einstein’s, but he did not preach passivity either. Bergson urged his reader to strive to connect thought with action more tightly. Delivering one of his most celebrated and oft-quoted phrases, he concluded: “One should act like a man of thought, and think as a man of action.”…”

(Jimena Canales, 'The Physicist and the Philosopher: Einstein, Bergson, and the Debate That Changed Our Understanding of Time', 2015)

पृष्ठ ७१,  'अष्टदर्शने', २००३

सौजन्य : विंदा करंदीकर यांच्या साहित्याचे कॉपीराईट होल्डर्स

'अष्टदर्शने' पुस्तकात डेव्हीड ह्यूम यांचा समावेश यासाठी नसावा? ...Why Vinda Karandikar Probably Didn't Choose David Hume

 विंदा करंदीकर यांच्या ज्ञानपीठ विजेत्या 'अष्टदर्शने' पुस्तकात डेव्हीड ह्यूम यांचा समावेश नसल्याबद्दल मी पूर्वी ( फेब्रुवारी १ २०११, मार्च २१ २०१०, डिसेंबर ११ २००९)  नापसंती व्यक्त केली होती.  

पण Julian Baggini यांचा मे ५ २०२१ चा प्रॉस्पेक्ट मधील लेख वाचून ती टोच कमी झाली. 

"... How did one of the greatest philosophers who ever lived get so much wrong? David Hume certainly deserves his place in the philosophers’ pantheon, but when it comes to politics, he erred time and again. The 18th-century giant of the Scottish Enlightenment was sceptical of democracy and—despite his reputation as “the great infidel”—in favour of an established church. He was iffy on the equality of women and notoriously racist. He took part in a pointless military raid on France without publicly questioning its legitimacy.

In unravelling the Hume paradox, what we find is that the very qualities that made Hume such a brilliant philosopher also made him a flawed political thinker. There are implications here for contemporary academic philosophy—whose much-vaunted “transferable critical skills” turn out not to transfer so well after all. Styles of thinking that work brilliantly in some domains fail miserably in others: indeed, some of our biggest mistakes arise when we transfer a way of thinking apt for one domain to another where it just doesn’t fit. There are consequences, too, for day-to-day and working life: Hume shows that the smartest person in the room isn’t necessarily the smartest choice for the job. And then there are general implications for the way in which a healthy intellectual scepticism, the essential precondition for rational enquiry in science and much else, can easily become a fatalistic cynicism about the prospects for building a better society...."

 सौजन्य/ कलाकार: अविनाश गोवारीकर, कमल शेडगे

विंदांचे राहून गेलेले बर्गसॉंदर्शन - नारी दर्शन ....Bergson, Women and Vinda

#HenriBergson160

दुर्गा भागवत:
"... ' जे प्रमाणाच्या मापात, नसे बाबा सापडत; 
त्यात आणि आकाशपुष्पात , भेद काय?,'

हा तुम्ही अज्ञानवाद्यांना विचारलेला प्रश्न तुमच्याच अंगावर उलटवता येईल. अज्ञानाला एक न्याय आणि ब्रह्माला दुसरा , असे कसे? पण शेवटी असल्या डावपेचांनी अर्थ तो किती! म्हणून मी तक्रार करत नाही , ही अस्पष्टता व संदिग्धता निखळ तत्वज्ञानाला अपायकारक असली तरी तत्वकाव्याला उपकारकच ठरली आहे..."

 (पृष्ठ १६०, 'अमृतानुभवाच्या अनुवादाच्या निमित्ताने', 'भावसंचित', मे २०१५... 'संत ज्ञानेश्वरांचा ।।अमृतानभव।।: ज्ञानदेवरचित अनुभवामृताचे विंदाकृत अर्वाचीनीकरण', १९८१/२००८)

विंदा करंदीकरांच्या "अष्टदर्शने" मधील सातवे दर्शन आहे बर्गसॉंदर्शन (पृष्ठ ६५-७३), आवृत्ती २००३.

त्यात दोन महत्वाच्या उणीवा मला जाणवत आल्या आहेत...खालील गोष्टींचा उल्लेख विंदा करत नाहीत:

१. बर्गसॉं यांची २०व्या शतकाच्या सुरवातीची सेलेब्रिटी लोकप्रियता 
२. विशेषतः स्त्रियांमधील त्यांची लोकप्रियता आणि त्यामुळे त्यांच्या विरोधात आलेली लाट

त्याची पुन्हा एकदा जाणीव मे २०१९ मध्ये एमिली हेरिंग यांचा हा लेख वाचून झाली.

"Women loved Bergson’s philosophy of creativity, change and freedom, but their enthusiasm fuelled a backlash against him... 

...The presence of women in a traditionally exclusively masculine space was regarded at best as a source of ridicule, at worst as a nuisance (for instance, some worried that, by their mere presence, the Bergsoniennes were robbing male philosophy students of their rightfully earned seats). Others took this phenomenon to be the sign of something more serious. The fact that so many women were drawn to Bergson’s philosophy perhaps said something about Bergson as a thinker. Indeed, traits traditionally associated with femininity, such as irrationality and sentimentality, clashed with the traditionally masculine qualities deemed necessary to be a good philosopher. Some of Bergson’s most serious adversaries began arguing that Bergson’s success among women was no accident. They believed that the reason the most irrational beings of all, women, were so enthusiastic about Bergson’s ideas was that Bergson’s philosophy was a philosophy of the irrational....

....Bergson’s philosophy, they said, lacked clarity, and should be combatted, because it was grounded in an unreliable and obscure mysticism that was ‘feminine’ in nature...."

विंदा म्हणतात :

".... 

बुद्ध आणि ख्रिस्त । बुद्धीला टाळून 

सन्मार्ग नवीन । दाखविती . 

मानवाविषयी । प्रेम व करुणा 

यांचीच प्रेरणा । होती त्यांना 

..."

 हे खरे आहे , पण बुद्ध आणि ख्रिस्त यांच्या बरोबरीने प्रेम व करुणा यांच्या संबंधात विंदांना स्त्री आठवत नाही?  प्रेम व करुणा म्हटल्यावर पहिल्यांदा मला माझी आई आठवते... आणि नंतर बुद्धी लावल्यावर आठवतात बुद्ध आणि ख्रिस्त!

Bergson and Einstein