Abstracts continued from last page
9. Singh A.R., Singh, S.A.(1990), Gandhi on
Religion, Faith and Conversion: Secular Blueprint Relevant Today, New Quest, Vol 80, Mar-Apr, p103-107.
Gandhi's thoughts on religion have something to do
with how a multi-religious society can, and should, function. He could accept only that part of Hinduism that did not go against
his reason. If Vedas were the inspired words of God, so where the Bible and the Koran. He would not hesitate to call himself a
Muslim or a Christian if he could follow these creeds with his own interpertation of them, for then Hinduism-Islam-Christianity
would become synonymous terms. But he could not accept proselytization. That does not mean he believed in undoing events of
the past. But the large scale enterprise of conversion and the convert's denial of links with his forefathers, and his attempts
to establish links with foreigners, was repugnant to his thinking. When asked what would he advise to a person who sincerely
believed in getting converted, he said he would still tell that person to go follow his faith, and understand it properly
first. For what the Gita says, the Bible says, and so does the Koran. One must make the attempt to find it, and not seek
pseudo-fulfilment in change of faith. Proselytisation would mean no peace in the world, for it was based on inequality. It
meant that believers of one faith considered themselves superior to the other. Such an orientation towards religion was not
spiritual but political and open to machinations, and all the debasement that goes with the games played by those who
seek to hold people in their power.
10.Singh A.R., Singh, S.A.(1990), A
peep into man's histority: the lessons for today, Journal of the Indian Council of Philosophical Research,
Vol VII:3, p23-46.
When an order crumbles prematurely, anarchy of thought
and governance is inevitable. Faith not only sustains itself. It sustains the semblance of an order that serves to prop up
a crumbling edifice till the time a fresh one can be erected. That it can retard the erection of a fresh one is true only
when it is blindly used. But the advent of free enquiry heralds the end of its reign. And for some this becomes synonymous
with the end of faith itself. An inability to allow for contradictions to co-exist, coupled with a new found joy of conquest
results in an annihilatory fervour to abondon all faith. For the tyranny of reason which cannot couple with faith, which cannot
accept that their mutual contradiction is as complementary as ostensibly adversarial, matches the tyranny of blind subservience
to faith itself. And paradoxically, the blindness of conceit, malice and malevolence can be as much a product of unbridled
faith as of unbridled enquiry. Idle fantasies and futile speculations are then only measures of the short-cuts that such a
free-thinking must inevitably engage energies in. Equally strong grows the urge to do away with the trammels of unleashed
thought. What begins to grow almost imperceptibly in the back ground, and this is of consequence, is an amalgam
that combines the robusy enquiry of the free-thinker with the steadfastedness of the believer. This lays the background of
enquiry that is as resolute as it is persistent. It lays the background for all significant philosophising.
This is illustrated with a peep into both Indian and
Western History. The revolt in the Epic Period by the Carvakas, the Buddhists and the Jainas against the supremacy of
the Vedas is outlined on the one hand, while the Renaissance and Romantic Movements in the West against the stranglehold of
the Papacy are studied on the other. Man's search for self-determination, for freedom from the restraints of dogma and authority
that cramp his creative and individualistic pursuits result in self-indulgence, recklessness, anarchy and the existential
despair and identity crisis of unharnessed individuation. The difficulties that such breaking loose involves and the problems
it poses for man's search for identity becomes all the more pressing as personal actualisation and growth are the concerns
that haunt man's creative predilections more ominously today than at other times. Ominously, because today he has both
the ability and the inclination to convert these predilections into catastrophies. For it requires just an urge to convert
some despot's mad itch to convert the seething mass of humanity into a nuclear rubble of corpses. The challenge to man's histority
is to provide the means to stem this head-long foray into devastation, to unseat man from the nuclear stock-pile that is his
narcissistic alter-ego ready to ignite in front of his blind folded eyes, to offer him alternative hedonistic pursuits
that satiate this narcissism, and provide a sublimatory channelisation to his recklessly driving thanatos.
It is to the lessons of man's history
that the philosopher must direct his critical eye and salvage his Being from his Nothingness.
This something lies at hand-shaking distance.
11.Singh A.R., Singh, S.A.(1994), Ideological Conflicts
and their Resolution in Psychiatry, Archives of Indian Psychiatry, Vol 1(2), p86-91.
Aside from tackling what it considers as illnessses, psychiatry
has perchance to comment on and tackle many issues of social relevance as well. Whether this is advisable or not is another
matter; but such a process is inevitable due to the inherent nature of the branch and the problems it deals with. Moreover
this is at the root of the polarisation of psychiatry into opposing psychodynamic and organic schools.This gets reflected
in their visualization of scope, in definitions and in methodology as well. Whilst healthy criticism of one against the other
school is necessary, there should be caution against hasty application of one's frame of reference to an approach that does
not intend to follow, or conform to, one's methodology. This should be done within the referential framework of the school
critically evaluated, with due consideration to its methods and concepts. Similarly, as at present, there is no evidence to
prove one or the other of these approaches as better, aside from personal choice.This suggests the need for unification
of diverse appearing approaches to get a more enlightened world view. However, the integration must be attempted without
destroying the internal cohesiveness of the individual schools. This will give a fair chance for polarisation in which a single
proper approach in psychiatry could emerge.