Hinduism Essay Essay

Considering that Hinduism lacks a uniting belief system, what makes up the Hindu religion? â€Å"One big societal element is that India is one of the last bastions of the ancient world’s culture. Its population practices scores of diverse religious tradition. â€Å"Hinduism† is actually an umbrella term referring to the people living â€Å"on the other side of the Sindhu River.† The actual name is the â€Å"Santayana Dharma† or Universal Truth or Way. One of â€Å"Hinduism’s† greatest strengths is its ability to unite the diverse beliefs and practices of its people in ways that are absolutely necessary for India to continue as it historically has. This is one reason why the government of India is so aggressive in its opposition to Christian and Muslim missionaries. Religious like Christianity or Islam demand a degree of doctrinal uniformity that would not work well for the Indians because  they destroy the historic traditions and beliefs o f those who come under their dogmas. India’s incredibly rich traditions are their nation’s greatest riches. As evidence, consider the differences between modern India and Pakistan (formerly part of India, separated by Islam). India allows Muslims to live in peace, for the most part, while Pakistan makes it all but impossible for Hindus to live there. Hinduism’s demand of vegetarianism reflects an important reality. Ancient India’s lifeblood was its cattle. This is still largely true today in the villages. The bulls plow the fields so that food can be grown. Cows give milk, an important ingredient in many Indian foods and a vital source of protein. Cow dung is used for making cooking and heating fires as well as some Ayurveda medicines. â€Å"Ahimsa,† non violence, maintains a civility that otherwise would not exists considering the religious and political differences in the region. The caste system (the â€Å"varnashram dharma†) is much maligned, but in its original form this system was very effective and made sure that Indians worked together in an organized fashion. The system eventually was abused and became a racist system (barman’s typically have the lightest sin color and mudhas or untouchable have the darkest, the others darken in color as one goes to the lower castes). In past times, this system was socially positive and enabled Indian’s to co-exist. Hinduism’s greatest strength remains its diversity and its ability to incorporate all beliefs systems. Indeed, one can literally argue that Christianity, Islam and all other religious systems are part of the Santayana Dharma or Universal Way of spiritual practice. India would be an utterly different place without the Hindu dharma and it fits the region wonderfully. Hinduism, which is actually known as the Santayana Dharma or Eternal Truth, has many uniting belief systems and contexts. These include the conviction that Truth is knowable and can be directly experienced. Hinduism is an umbrella term for many different traditions. Each of these traditions employs different means for enlightenment and views things a bit differently. What practically all Hindu sects accept however, is the famous statement of the Rg Veda: Truth is One; the sages call it by different names. There is therefore an underlying unity to the Hindu belief system. It also has deeply shared sense of morality and ethics. The teaching of ahimsa or non-violence is one such conviction. The belief in transmigration is another as is the belief in karma (actions and reaction), dharma (Truth) and marga (destiny). These teachings show how all life is interconnected and are â€Å"part and pacel† of the Whole. Hinduism is the oldest religion on the planet. It culture and traditions date back far into antiquity. Those who grow up in Hindu families are steeped in ancient traditions and beliefs from infancy on and  they are much more alike than dissimilar. Therefore it has a profound influence on cultural Hindus as well as on those who convert into it. Those Hindus who enter into serious discussions with other religionists, as well as those of us from other cultures who are drawn to the Hindu Dharma, soon discover that Hinduism is an extremely logical and inspirational religious system that offers experiential results to those who practice its various forms. In all ways the Hindu Dharma is at least comparable to any other religion on earth. What â€Å"makes up† the Hindu religion is the fact that it works and that it is able to exist within such internal and external diversity.† (~John of All Faith; Prakasa, Jagannatha)

The Copernican Revolution

The Copernican Revolution Introduction Modern science can be said to have its roots from the Copernican theory, though it was received with uncertainty by the Copernicans prior to the seventeenth century (Curd 3). Most of the scientists in the sixteenth century believe Ptolemy’s theory of Earth-centered astronomy, as well as Tycho Brahe’s theory of Geoheliocentric system. The reluctance of early scientists in accepting the Copernican theory makes their later approval raise a few questions about the other theories (Curd 3).Advertising We will write a custom essay sample on The Copernican Revolution specifically for you for only $16.05 $11/page Learn More One big question posed by this shift of mind is why and when the Copernican theory gained approval over the Ptolemaic theory. Current reviews of the ideas previously adopted as explanations of the change of beliefs have been found to be unsatisfactory. The Copernican theory had been found to be more precise in its foreca sts and clear-cut than the Ptolemaic, which is not the case today (Curd 3). Reasons for accepting the Copernican theory One of the reasons as to why the Copernican theory was accepted is that it satisfied the â€Å"taste† of people, who disregarded rationale and facts. This harsh conclusion by Thomas Kuhn was challenged by Zahar and Lakatos, who argued that the research undertaken for the Copernican programme was empirically precise (Curd 3). The empirical progression of the Copernican theory was based on its essential geometric configuration, which had adequate projecting capabilities. Lakatos and Zahar later edited the conception of a novel fact, stating that it was not necessary for it to be unfamiliar, but it should not have been acknowledged in the formation of the theory (Curd 3). Glymour was also in support of the Copernican theory, compared to the Ptolemaic one, stating that the latter was objectively inferior. The superiority of the former theory was observed in its capability to validate and be analyzed by the facts of that time based on positional astronomy (Curd 4). Comparing the Heliocentric and Ptolemaic theories Support on the validity of the heliocentric theory has been from various scientists, like Millman and Hall, who found it satisfying before the discoveries by Newton and Galileo (Curd 4). The book on testing and confirmation of theories by Glymour looks at the two theories comparatively; that is the geocentric and the heliocentric theories. Glymour and Zahar believe to have been contributors to the understanding of the heliocentric theory, in terms of its methodical logic, harmony and accord, as expressed by other authors like Rheticus, which is contrary to the belief that the theory was irrational, as put forward by Kuhn (Curd 4). One way to compare the two theories is by using the equation (1), 1/T p = 1/T e -+ 1/S p where T is the heliocentric period of planet P, Te is the heliocentric period of Earth and S is the time interval between successive episodes of retrograde motion as viewed from earth. When the planet is superior, the sign in the equation is used, while + is used for an inferior planet (Curd 5). Inferior planets are Mercury and Venus. The Copernican theory works with an excess of three planets on the superior side, while the Ptolemaic theory works with the superior planets only. The Ptolemaic theory also fails to explain the relationship between the motion of the planets and the solar component.Advertising Looking for essay on astronomy? Let's see if we can help you! Get your first paper with 15% OFF Learn More The Copernican theory offers various explanations unlike the Ptolemaic theory (Curd 5). One of the things enlightened by the Copernican theory is the progressively diminishing value of S, as the distance of the planet from earth increases, irrespective of the direction (Curd 5). The limits of the Ptolemaic theory do not allow for the determination of the displa cement of planets from earth. Aristotle defended one of the theories in the Ptolemaic theory that states that the period of a planet is proportional to the size of its orbit (Curd 6). In the heliocentric theory, the distances are obtained with reference to the distance between the planets and centre of revolution, which is actually the sun. These displacements that are predetermined are used as a basis for the order assignments, which is an indication of harmony and order, characteristics of Copernican theory, and lacking in the Ptolemaic theory (Curd 6). Bases on the tests conducted between the two theories, the Copernican theory emerges as the better one with greater explanatory power. The tests were based on the same positional data (Curd 6). The Tychonic theory The Copernican revolution was defined as the change of belief from the Ptolemaic theory to the Copernican theory. The revolution was dependent on two decisions namely the denunciation of the Ptolemaic theory as untrue, an d the recognition of the Copernican theory as correct (Curd 6). The prudence of either choice is not explained by the positional data due to the effect of two factors namely the Tychonic theory, a third alternative theory, and the existence of vital drawbacks to the Copernican theory. The Tychonic theory was published towards the end of the sixteenth century by Brahe. This theory suggests a geoheliocentric array whereby the earth is static and at the centre (Curd 6). The sun and the planets are said to revolve around the earth. Therefore, the planets have the orbit of the sun as their deferent, and their major epicycle is the heliocentric orbits. Unlike the Ptolemaic theory, the Tychonic system is comparable to the Copernican theory, both kinematically and geometrically (Curd 6). The Tychonic theory is like the Copernican theory in that in spite of its two centers of revolution, it provides for the derivation of equation 1, and the calculation of the displacement of the planets from the sun (Curd 7). The Copernican theory had two main problems namely the perceptible proof that the earth is static, and the lack of noticeable stellar parallax.Advertising We will write a custom essay sample on The Copernican Revolution specifically for you for only $16.05 $11/page Learn More These problems were unique to the Copernican theory, since the other two theories were geostatic. The scientists in support of the Copernican theory argued that the two problems were contradicting with the requirements of the theory, which are two terrestrial motions. The writings of Galileo, in the early seventeenth century were sufficient to disregard the Ptolemaic theory, though the issues in the other two theories remained (Curd 7). Semi-Tychonic systems appeared in the 16th and 17th centuries and believed that the earth rotated, but did not revolve around the sun (Curd 7). The semi- Tychonic theory was accepted since it enjoyed similar merits with those of the C opernican theory, as well as its simplicity, which made sure to ignore the independent motion of every celestial body. This was especially beneficial in its acceptance after the discovery of Newton’s first law of motion, which defines the forces that maintain a body in circular motion (Curd 7). Conclusion The acceptance of the Copernican theory was supported by both observation and acceptance on its scale of rationality as was seen in the Tychonic alternatives (Curd 8). One deduction observed in the determination of the validity of the theories is that the scientists who support the law focus a lot of their energy and time to build on it, and therefore defend it from harsh criticism, and non-believers (Curd 8). The justification of any theory is only dependent on scientific analysis, to solve any mysterious questions and doubt in people (Curd 8). Curd, Martin V. The Rationality of the Copernican Revolution. PSA: Proceedings of the Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Scienc e Association (1982): 1, 3-13.