| FORUM | ARCHIVE |                    | TOTAL QUIZ RESULT |


  New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - Bhavagat Gita & the Management
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login


Welcome stranger, click here to read about some of the great benefits of registering for a free account with us and joining us in our global online community.


Bhavagat Gita & the Management

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <123>
Author
Ramesh V.Naivaruni View Drop Down
Shogun
Shogun
Avatar

Joined: 21 Jul 2011
Location: BANGALORE
Status: Offline
Points: 246
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Ramesh V.Naivaruni Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 30 Aug 2011 at 08:36

The highly sansritised text and parrot like narration of Mantras whose meaning were not understood by people did not appeal to them, whereas in Bhudism was preached in Pali the local langauage and it had mass appeal, as the rules of the same were simple and easy to understand as compared to the Vedas.

There is no doubt the learned (or Brahmans as you may name them) did take advantage of it, infact absued the system to such an extent that Bhudism took over which is true. The Statement made by you on how it revived is not right, The Adi Shankara was the one who revived Hinduism and it is not because of the conquest of Muslim ruler.
RAMESH.V.NAIVARUN
BANGALORE
INDIA
rameshnaivaruni@yahoo.com
email rameshnaivaruni@yahoo.com
blog:Http.Indiandemocracy in mousetrap
Back to Top
Sponsored Links


Back to Top
gcle2003 View Drop Down
WorldHistoria Master
WorldHistoria Master
Avatar
PM Honorary Member

Joined: 06 Dec 2004
Location: Luxembourg
Status: Offline
Points: 13262
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote gcle2003 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 30 Aug 2011 at 11:26
Originally posted by Ramesh V.Naivaruni Ramesh V.Naivaruni wrote:

What I fail to see here is that either management has lost it relavance with regards to setting high standards and values as some poster think so, but in reality no organisation can ever survive if the people who work there are deviod of "High Standard & Values", Leadership is and will be the primary reason for driving people to perform better.
That's just circular. If people perform better for some reason jou just say 'that's leaderhsip'. What you don't do is define 'leadership' as is obvious from the quote from Dee Hock. (I don't have anything against Hock, but he did not have much of a role as a manager, rather than as a smart businessman who guessed right at the right moment. Mostly he talks what sounds like sense to me, but his notion of 'leadership' is miles different from what you describe. Itseems to mean only 'manipulation')
Quote
While accepting the fact the Good leader is one who manages the least
Trivial sound bite. and not true either. 'Managing the least' is as bad a qualification as 'managing the most'.
Quote
 it is because the team will be the eyes and ears for him and it is necessary for him to have highly motivated and efficient staff.
Sounds a rather dictatorial viewpoint.
Quote
Here are some quotes on leadershp which is self explanatory.
To lead people, walk beside them ... As for the best leaders, the people do not notice their existence. The next best, the people honor and praise. The next, the people fear; and the next, the people hate ... When the best leader's work is done the people say, 'We did it ourselves!'"
— Lao-tsu
The best leader and the best manager is the one who achieved the goals he sets for himself (which of course doesn't mean he is the best subordinate). How he does it is up to him and his circumstances and the resources he has available. There are no easy generalisations.
Quote
"Dictators ride to and fro upon tigers which they dare not dismount. And the tigers are getting hungry."
— Winston Churchill

Not a bad Churchillism. However Churchill is pointing out the flaws in your concept of a good manager/leader, not supporting them. Looking at the management problem with the eyes of an autocrat pretty well guarantees inefficiency, at least in the modern world.
The rest of the quotes you give are just a ragbag of assertions based on very different ideas of leadership. I like the Kissinger for its simplicity but like the Galbraith it merely describes the task of the 'leader' and doesn't go into the 'how' of it. Drucker's point is a good one, that goes against all you have been saying. The Chesterton has nothing to do with 'leadership' at all, thouigh it is a typically witty Chestertonian distinction between power and authority.
 
Quote
"Control is not leadership; management is not leadership; leadership is leadership. If you seek to lead, invest at least 50% of your time in leading yourself—your own purpose, ethics, principles, motivation, conduct. Invest at least 20% leading those with authority over you and 15% leading your peers."
— Dee Hock
Founder and CEO Emeritus, Visa


"All of the great leaders have had one characteristic in common: it was the willingness to confront unequivocally the major anxiety of their people in their time. This, and not much else, is the essence of leadership."
— John Kenneth Galbraith


"If a rhinoceros were to enter this restaurant now, there is no denying he would have great power here. But I should be the first to rise and assure him that he had no authority whatever."
— G.K. Chesterton to Alexander Woollcott


"The task of the leader is to get his people from where they are to where they have not been."
— Henry Kissinger


"No institution can possibly survive if it needs geniuses or supermen to manage it. It must be organized in such a way as to be able to get along under a leadership composed of average human beings."
— Peter Drucker
 
I dont think there is any team in the world who has not lost a single match, victory and defeat are part and parcel of any sport.  Here Bhagavat Gita  says, one should take both Victory and defeat in equanimity and it is very valid. One should not get exicted when one wins and at the same time one should not feel let down if he is defeated. Life should go on. 




Edited by gcle2003 - 30 Aug 2011 at 11:27
Citizen of Ankh-Morpork.

Never believe anything until it has been officially denied - Sir Humphrey Appleby, 1984.

Back to Top
Ramesh V.Naivaruni View Drop Down
Shogun
Shogun
Avatar

Joined: 21 Jul 2011
Location: BANGALORE
Status: Offline
Points: 246
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Ramesh V.Naivaruni Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 30 Aug 2011 at 13:54
The modern Management Guru's talks about Leadership could be easily related to the teaching of Bhagavat Gita as text on Karma talks about ones responsibility of the leader as that of the driver of action and all action that emantes out of his command should be treated as his action. A good leader does not take credit for only success but also takes the responsiblity of his teams failure.
 
Here are some quotes by Modern guru which could be compared to the teaching in Bhagavat Gita.
Checking the results of a decision against its expectations shows executives what their strengths are, where they need to improve, and where they lack knowledge or information.
Peter Drucker

Company cultures are like country cultures. Never try to change one. Try, instead, to work with what you've got.
Peter Drucker

Effective leadership is not about making speeches or being liked; leadership is defined by results not attributes.
Peter Drucker

The best point I could see in these quote by peter Drucker is that he is companies culture to that of countries culture which is very valid, instead of changing them work with it.


 
 
RAMESH.V.NAIVARUN
BANGALORE
INDIA
rameshnaivaruni@yahoo.com
email rameshnaivaruni@yahoo.com
blog:Http.Indiandemocracy in mousetrap
Back to Top
gcle2003 View Drop Down
WorldHistoria Master
WorldHistoria Master
Avatar
PM Honorary Member

Joined: 06 Dec 2004
Location: Luxembourg
Status: Offline
Points: 13262
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote gcle2003 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 30 Aug 2011 at 16:24
Originally posted by Ramesh V.Naivaruni Ramesh V.Naivaruni wrote:

The modern Management Guru's talks about Leadership could be easily related to the teaching of Bhagavat Gita as text on Karma talks about ones responsibility of the leader as that of the driver of action and all action that emantes out of his command should be treated as his action. A good leader does not take credit for only success but also takes the responsiblity of his teams failure.
What makes you think that any of that isn't and hasn't been widely accepted without the Bhagavad Gita ever entering into their awareness? I'd differ over the questiion of the 'leader' being the 'driver of action' though. You don't 'drive' people except in the minds of people wanting to ee themselves as macho alpha males. Which is probably the last thing you want in a manager. (Incidentally that's somewhat different from having a reputation for being successful with women - which, I forgot to point out earlier, was notoriously true of Jack Welch).
 
Drucker is a reasonable analyser: h^just quoting some of his remarks and saying they could be compared to somethingor other in the Gita doesn't mean anything.
 
But note the last of his three quotes. It's exactly what I said earlier. Good managers are those who get good results no matter how. About the only common factor involved is that a good manager shouldn't believe he knows the way to 'lead people'.
Quote  
Here are some quotes by Modern guru which could be compared to the teaching in Bhagavat Gita.
Checking the results of a decision against its expectations shows executives what their strengths are, where they need to improve, and where they lack knowledge or information.
Peter Drucker

Company cultures are like country cultures. Never try to change one. Try, instead, to work with what you've got.
Peter Drucker

Effective leadership is not about making speeches or being liked; leadership is defined by results not attributes.
Peter Drucker

The best point I could see in these quote by peter Drucker is that he is companies culture to that of countries culture which is very valid, instead of changing them work with it.


 
 
Citizen of Ankh-Morpork.

Never believe anything until it has been officially denied - Sir Humphrey Appleby, 1984.

Back to Top
drgonzaga View Drop Down
King
King
Avatar
Plus Ultra

Joined: 01 Oct 2005
Status: Offline
Points: 6262
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote drgonzaga Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 30 Aug 2011 at 16:29
Originally posted by Ramesh V.Naivaruni Ramesh V.Naivaruni wrote:

You call everything which goes aganist your line of thinking as wicked, while you are talking nationalism running amok I do agree, it is your thinking which is confirned to the confines of narrow nationalism, while you profess thinking with Global perspective but what you write about others shows your true colour.  When I mention infosys I had also metioned GE, I am not biased but you are.  We are not talking about technology in the first case, I am trying to find out whether Bhagvat Gita has any significance in Todays Management Thoughts even remotely ?. At the end of the discussion I may agree that it has no significance as I am open, but on your part you have formed your mind not to agree even to rationalist thoughts. That does not augur well in a forum.Smile
 
"My line of thinking"? I am afraid that the only one pandering to a line of thought here, albeit with more Zig Zag than any corner vendor of drug paraphernalia, comes from the distended attempt to link a complex group of composite writings attempting the metaphysical as a guide book to business success! Scattered quotes from Peter Drucker, the father of the How To genre in business publishing and the nonsense that one has to have a management degree to be successful at business, is far from what any rational mind might assert as historical proof! Of course, in quoting Drucker there was a bit of hypocrisy involved, given his own declaration over "gurus" and management: "I have been saying for many years that we are using the guru only because charlatan is too big to fit into a headline."! [Business Review Weekly, 15 September 1997, p. 48-49]. Are we now going to discuss the social ecology of salesmanship?
 
Let's cut to the chase here, what you are attempting is rank abuse of historical methodology and compounding the crime by appeals to out-of-context quotes and blatant misinformation [Drucker was good at that all on his own] but hey, are we going to discuss the fuhrer priciple and the art of "managing people" so as to access power in business? If "calling you out" over these ridiculous machinations is an act of "wickedness" so be it. How does that old Western aphorism go..."even the devil can quote scripture"?
 
 


Edited by drgonzaga - 30 Aug 2011 at 16:31
Honi soit qui mal y pense
Back to Top
Ramesh V.Naivaruni View Drop Down
Shogun
Shogun
Avatar

Joined: 21 Jul 2011
Location: BANGALORE
Status: Offline
Points: 246
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Ramesh V.Naivaruni Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 31 Aug 2011 at 06:59
“Better indeed is knowledge than mechanical practice. Better than knowledge is meditation. But better still is surrender of attachment to results, because there follows immediate peace.(Bhgavat Gita).
Here it is amply clear that doing one jobs creatively is better than doing Job that is assigned with the focus on the objetivity of the job in Hand. Otherwise Monotony syndorome will set it. The motive of any business is profit but profit should be come through right path and end should not determine the means.
I am not sure why a the Doctor is quoting scriptures and his finishing touch best suits his mindset.
"The devil should not quote scripture".
This is yet an another quote from Bhagvat Gita. "Do your duty and never worry about the result" for result out of dedicated and consistent effort is bound to come.
The modern thoughts on management lays great emphasis on "Emotional Quotient" while determing best Management Practices which is emphasised in Bhagavat Gita. I have no doubts in my mind that some of the thoughts that is there in the book calls for a larger debate if we are to enquire its significance in todays management practices.


Edited by Ramesh V.Naivaruni - 31 Aug 2011 at 07:01
RAMESH.V.NAIVARUN
BANGALORE
INDIA
rameshnaivaruni@yahoo.com
email rameshnaivaruni@yahoo.com
blog:Http.Indiandemocracy in mousetrap
Back to Top
Ramesh V.Naivaruni View Drop Down
Shogun
Shogun
Avatar

Joined: 21 Jul 2011
Location: BANGALORE
Status: Offline
Points: 246
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Ramesh V.Naivaruni Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 31 Aug 2011 at 07:08
Originally posted by drgonzaga drgonzaga wrote:

Originally posted by Ramesh V.Naivaruni Ramesh V.Naivaruni wrote:

You call everything which goes aganist your line of thinking as wicked, while you are talking nationalism running amok I do agree, it is your thinking which is confirned to the confines of narrow nationalism, while you profess thinking with Global perspective but what you write about others shows your true colour.  When I mention infosys I had also metioned GE, I am not biased but you are.  We are not talking about technology in the first case, I am trying to find out whether Bhagvat Gita has any significance in Todays Management Thoughts even remotely ?. At the end of the discussion I may agree that it has no significance as I am open, but on your part you have formed your mind not to agree even to rationalist thoughts. That does not augur well in a forum.Smile
 
"My line of thinking"? I am afraid that the only one pandering to a line of thought here, albeit with more Zig Zag than any corner vendor of drug paraphernalia, comes from the distended attempt to link a complex group of composite writings attempting the metaphysical as a guide book to business success! Scattered quotes from Peter Drucker, the father of the How To genre in business publishing and the nonsense that one has to have a management degree to be successful at business, is far from what any rational mind might assert as historical proof! Of course, in quoting Drucker there was a bit of hypocrisy involved, given his own declaration over "gurus" and management: "I have been saying for many years that we are using the guru only because charlatan is too big to fit into a headline."! [Business Review Weekly, 15 September 1997, p. 48-49]. Are we now going to discuss the social ecology of salesmanship?
 
Let's cut to the chase here, what you are attempting is rank abuse of historical methodology and compounding the crime by appeals to out-of-context quotes and blatant misinformation [Drucker was good at that all on his own] but hey, are we going to discuss the fuhrer priciple and the art of "managing people" so as to access power in business? If "calling you out" over these ridiculous machinations is an act of "wickedness" so be it. How does that old Western aphorism go..."even the devil can quote scripture"?
 
 
Just as a fire is covered by smoke and a mirror is obscured by dust, just as the embryo rests deep within the womb, wisdom is hidden by selfish desire.”would simply quote this text from Bhagavat Gita which suits you so much " I sooner you come out it it is better for you.
RAMESH.V.NAIVARUN
BANGALORE
INDIA
rameshnaivaruni@yahoo.com
email rameshnaivaruni@yahoo.com
blog:Http.Indiandemocracy in mousetrap
Back to Top
Srinath Naivaruni View Drop Down
Knight
Knight
Avatar

Joined: 16 Jul 2011
Status: Offline
Points: 93
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Srinath Naivaruni Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 31 Aug 2011 at 07:13

The simple and straight forward question of the post is 'whether  the Bhagavad Gita  is relavant to  corporate governance, War management ( better expressed, the principle of warfare), and self management.

Most of the ancient books of wisdom contain some principles that seek to guide humanity in its onward course . Now , whether these principles  are relevant  to the present  is debatable, given the fact that  they are circumscribed by the context in which they  were written and are embellished by the  views and  experiences of  the writer.  However it  cannot be disputed that , in them , are enshrined ,certain principles that have stood the test of time and  are relevant  whatever be  the  age that  approaches them for guidance.
 
The Bhagavad Gita has limited  importance as a book on principles of management, given the fact that  the ultimate aim of the book is spiritual ( the essence of which is beyond the  discussion of this thread).  However if  at all some importance is to be assigned to it, it comes from the leadership style  that   can be discerned in it.   We can see in it a  'Transformational Leadership style'.
 
Coming to  the principle of warfare, its importance lies in the fact that its basic premise is that  the  ends if ethical, justify the means ,that  a soldier should fight  without regard to his prejudices and  personal considerations  and that the casue of humanity is much more important than all personal considerations.
 
The importance of the book lies in its  approach to self management.  It attempts ( successfully) to delve into the  complexity of human  individuality  and guide it  to achieve a  synthesis with the universal.
"There is a special providence in the fall of a sparrow......"
Back to Top
drgonzaga View Drop Down
King
King
Avatar
Plus Ultra

Joined: 01 Oct 2005
Status: Offline
Points: 6262
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote drgonzaga Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 31 Aug 2011 at 07:41
Of what profit all this needless chatter all that is required to approach the subject of business and management can be learned from an interesting 16th century text by Thomas Tusser, Five Hundred Points of Good Husbandry--"A foole and his money be soon at debate: which after with sorrow repent him too late".
How about rewriting Al Jolson's take on Stephen Foster's tune, "Old Folks at Home': Swami, how I love you, how I love you, my dear old Swami...
 
 
Honi soit qui mal y pense
Back to Top
Ramesh V.Naivaruni View Drop Down
Shogun
Shogun
Avatar

Joined: 21 Jul 2011
Location: BANGALORE
Status: Offline
Points: 246
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Ramesh V.Naivaruni Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 31 Aug 2011 at 09:52
If Thomas Tusser , Five Hundred Points of Good Husbandry is good enough for a discussion on Management , Wlhy not !.  The music on the You Tube was good one as Humour quotient was missing in this thread.  I am sure with you around there cannot be a scope for a dull moment.
RAMESH.V.NAIVARUN
BANGALORE
INDIA
rameshnaivaruni@yahoo.com
email rameshnaivaruni@yahoo.com
blog:Http.Indiandemocracy in mousetrap
Back to Top
drgonzaga View Drop Down
King
King
Avatar
Plus Ultra

Joined: 01 Oct 2005
Status: Offline
Points: 6262
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote drgonzaga Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 31 Aug 2011 at 10:20
Satire is usually the sharpest and quickest critique when unsustainable argumentation is proferred. To begin with there is nothing remotely associated with Natural History in the Bhagavad Gita and by the admission that what is sought is personal application of spirituality, are we to conclude the presence of spirit in plants and animals or rock formations? How such relates to anything as vaguely quantifiable as Transformational Leadership Style borders on the Carrollesque as "confessed" here:
 
 
Jargonized rationalizations as sales pitches are humorous all on their own but therein clarity is hardly an objective!
 
By the way there is a more appropriate thread on this Forum for all of this tom-foolery--
 


Edited by drgonzaga - 31 Aug 2011 at 10:24
Honi soit qui mal y pense
Back to Top
gcle2003 View Drop Down
WorldHistoria Master
WorldHistoria Master
Avatar
PM Honorary Member

Joined: 06 Dec 2004
Location: Luxembourg
Status: Offline
Points: 13262
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote gcle2003 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 31 Aug 2011 at 10:34
Originally posted by Ramesh V.Naivaruni Ramesh V.Naivaruni wrote:

“Better indeed is knowledge than mechanical practice. Better than knowledge is meditation. But better still is surrender of attachment to results, because there follows immediate peace.(Bhgavat Gita).
Morally that may be correct. Psychologically it may be correct. As a way of life it may be ideal. As a maxim in management/business it's nonsense. In management if you're not attached to results, you lose.
Quote
Here it is amply clear that doing one jobs creatively is better than doing Job that is assigned with the focus on the objetivity of the job in Hand. Otherwise Monotony syndorome will set it. The motive of any business is profit but profit should be come through right path and end should not determine the means.
Same comment. What you're preaching here is simiply morality. Management lessons must be just as valid for Nazis or criminaly as they are for anyone else; otherwise there just platitudes on how to live the good life (in the eyes of the preacher).
Quote  
I am not sure why a the Doctor is quoting scriptures and his finishing touch best suits his mindset.
"The devil should not quote scripture".
Because you are quoting scriptures. This whole thread you started is about quoting scriptures. In the very next sentence you quote them again - what do you think 'scriptures' are?
Quote
This is yet an another quote from Bhagvat Gita. "Do your duty and never worry about the result" for result out of dedicated and consistent effort is bound to come.
Did you ever consider emigrating to the real world?
 
Forty-odd years ago Herman Kahn told me that India could be a world power (as he predicted Japan and China would be) 'if it wanted to', but basically it didn't want to. You seem to be exemplifying the problems Kah foresaw.
Quote
The modern thoughts on management lays great emphasis on "Emotional Quotient" while determing best Management Practices which is emphasised in Bhagavat Gita. I have no doubts in my mind that some of the thoughts that is there in the book calls for a larger debate if we are to enquire its significance in todays management practices.
You seem to have read an article  or two and swallowed everythinig literally. The whole 'emotional intelligence' thing is a mish-mash of extravagant claims and scientific flaws with an occasional insight blown up to its bursting point. It certainly isn't anything to do with 'best management practices' insofar as there are any definable 'best management principles' at all. 
Citizen of Ankh-Morpork.

Never believe anything until it has been officially denied - Sir Humphrey Appleby, 1984.

Back to Top
gcle2003 View Drop Down
WorldHistoria Master
WorldHistoria Master
Avatar
PM Honorary Member

Joined: 06 Dec 2004
Location: Luxembourg
Status: Offline
Points: 13262
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote gcle2003 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 31 Aug 2011 at 10:59
Originally posted by Srinath Naivaruni Srinath Naivaruni wrote:

The simple and straight forward question of the post is 'whether  the Bhagavad Gita  is relavant to  corporate governance, War management ( better expressed, the principle of warfare), and self management.

Most of the ancient books of wisdom contain some principles that seek to guide humanity in its onward course . Now , whether these principles  are relevant  to the present  is debatable, given the fact that  they are circumscribed by the context in which they  were written and are embellished by the  views and  experiences of  the writer.  However it  cannot be disputed that , in them , are enshrined ,certain principles that have stood the test of time and  are relevant  whatever be  the  age that  approaches them for guidance.
That is certainly true in the moral sphere, often true in the sphere of human motivations, and has value in the general achievement of human happiness.
 
It is not true of modern business management or for that matter any other management, primatily because there has been considerable shift in human motivation as expressed in practice, thaks to the vastly increased standard of material wealth and security. The 'lessons' quoted therefore tand to be unrealistic in the modern world, and if adopted would drag management back into the dire days of poverty.
 
In India and China it may well be true that the deprived masses react in the way there anestors would have sme thosands of years ago. I don't know. But it's cetain that the working and middle classes of the West don't, and it's just as true that if and when substantial achievement in wealth comes about, the people will stop reacting that way (as has been seen in Japan, and I gather is also being seen in South Korea).
Quote  
The Bhagavad Gita has limited  importance as a book on principles of management, given the fact that  the ultimate aim of the book is spiritual ( the essence of which is beyond the  discussion of this thread).  However if  at all some importance is to be assigned to it, it comes from the leadership style  that   can be discerned in it.   We can see in it a  'Transformational Leadership style'.
Well, I agree that the book itself is outside the scope of this thread. But I wish you would not use somewhat meaningless jargon as if it did other than disguise a useless set of observations. 'Transformational Leadership' defines one particuar type of good leader, but comes down in the end to merely a continual restatement of the assertion that a good leader is a good leader. Levi-Strauss did better than that.
Quote  
 
Coming to  the principle of warfare, its importance lies in the fact that its basic premise is that  the  ends if ethical, justify the means ,that  a soldier should fight  without regard to his prejudices and  personal considerations  and that the casue of humanity is much more important than all personal considerations.
The western liberal tradiition is of course that the end never justifies the means, which is one reason your attitude comes over as totalitarian. And of course that same tradition holds that  following orders is no excuse: personal considerations of conscience should override loyalty to the leadership, another reason why your views conflict with tthe principles of liberal democracy.
Quote  
The importance of the book lies in its  approach to self management.  It attempts ( successfully) to delve into the  complexity of human  individuality  and guide it  to achieve a  synthesis with the universal.
I don't disagree the importance (though 'successfully' is a matter of opinion), but I'd suggest that the greater importance of the book, as with most such texts, is how it defines the goals that one should seek through self-management. (Whether such goals are good or bad is of course irrelevant to their importance.)
Citizen of Ankh-Morpork.

Never believe anything until it has been officially denied - Sir Humphrey Appleby, 1984.

Back to Top
Srinath Naivaruni View Drop Down
Knight
Knight
Avatar

Joined: 16 Jul 2011
Status: Offline
Points: 93
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Srinath Naivaruni Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 31 Aug 2011 at 11:53

"You should never assume contempt for that which it is not very manifest that you have it in your power to possess, nor does a wit ever make a more contemptible figure than when, in attempting satire, he shows that he does not understand that which he would make the subject of his ridicule. "----Lord  Melbourne

While not attempting a definition of  spirituality ( or the Bhagavad Gita's take on it) which would be out of sync with this  light hearted banter, spirituality can also be extended to mean the presence of the eternal spirit  within  the cup of   Omar Khayyam.Wink
"There is a special providence in the fall of a sparrow......"
Back to Top
Srinath Naivaruni View Drop Down
Knight
Knight
Avatar

Joined: 16 Jul 2011
Status: Offline
Points: 93
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Srinath Naivaruni Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 31 Aug 2011 at 12:41

It has been clearly pointed out in my post that the application of these principles in the present context is debatable given the  distance in time and difference in circumstances.

However there are some precepts of wisdom in all ancient books that are universally applicable( regardless of the field of activity).  For example  ' focus on goals' stressed by the Gita,  the 'stress on morality' in the Bible--these are applicable to all fields of human endeavour.
 
If  in  the western liberal tradition the end did not justify the means, one is compelled to wonder about the justification for the use of the little boy and the fat man or the crusades for that matter.
 
The state of an army where the soldiers are guided by personal considerations of conscience, to say the least would be precarious. Democracy is good  in politics. However if the army was to function on democratic principles with  freedom to follow one's conscience ,it is very much doubtful whether such  an army would  fight a battle,  let alone win it.
"There is a special providence in the fall of a sparrow......"
Back to Top
pinguin View Drop Down
WorldHistoria Master
WorldHistoria Master
Avatar

Joined: 29 Sep 2006
Status: Offline
Points: 15238
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote pinguin Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 31 Aug 2011 at 12:48
If we want to be fair, all ancient books have some degree of wisdom. The Bible, the Vedas, the Tao Te King, the Illiad and Oddysey, the native American beliefs, etc. The question is why to choose one system and forget about the others.
Back to Top
Ramesh V.Naivaruni View Drop Down
Shogun
Shogun
Avatar

Joined: 21 Jul 2011
Location: BANGALORE
Status: Offline
Points: 246
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Ramesh V.Naivaruni Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 31 Aug 2011 at 14:00
I have not said we should discuss only Management with relavance to Bhagavat Gita only, But the name is suggested by me to open the thread to find out whether is it possible to link the ancient widsom of Gita to present day management practices. I think we can discuss other books of relavence like Bible, Tumuld, Koran or Zen for that matter.
 
Iwill  take it with a tinch of salt if somebody is to tell all statement are absolute nonsense, as I feel if you are critical of everything that is been said on any book or statement by people, you are limiting your inteligence to criticism ONLY, one should try and dig deep into the thought process and find out reason behind statement to derive meaning.
 
No modern Management can exclude Emotional Quotient which is such a relavant topic , special session are conducted accross companies to bring in sensitivity amongst Top Management to included emotional quotient in their day to day affairs, as employee retention is such a huge task today.
I agree if one is to go by Management of the early seventies or eighties EQ was missing for such people it is time to go back to school again to understand Modern Management Practices. I was personally there for a session at P&G where 60% of the time was spent of EQ.


Edited by Ramesh V.Naivaruni - 31 Aug 2011 at 14:03
RAMESH.V.NAIVARUN
BANGALORE
INDIA
rameshnaivaruni@yahoo.com
email rameshnaivaruni@yahoo.com
blog:Http.Indiandemocracy in mousetrap
Back to Top
gcle2003 View Drop Down
WorldHistoria Master
WorldHistoria Master
Avatar
PM Honorary Member

Joined: 06 Dec 2004
Location: Luxembourg
Status: Offline
Points: 13262
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote gcle2003 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 31 Aug 2011 at 16:02
Originally posted by Srinath Naivaruni Srinath Naivaruni wrote:

It has been clearly pointed out in my post that the application of these principles in the present context is debatable given the  distance in time and difference in circumstances.

However there are some precepts of wisdom in all ancient books that are universally applicable( regardless of the field of activity).  For example  ' focus on goals' stressed by the Gita,  the 'stress on morality' in the Bible--these are applicable to all fields of human endeavour.
 
If  in  the western liberal tradition the end did not justify the means, one is compelled to wonder about the justification for the use of the little boy and the fat man or the crusades for that matter.
I don't know what you mean by the 'little boy and the fat man'. The crusades, however, were hardly liberal or for that matter democratic. Nor was there much morality about them.
Quote  
The state of an army where the soldiers are guided by personal considerations of conscience, to say the least would be precarious. Democracy is good  in politics. However if the army was to function on democratic principles with  freedom to follow one's conscience ,it is very much doubtful whether such  an army would  fight a battle,  let alone win it.
Precarious, possibly. Morally it wold be superior however. It has nothing however to do with democracy, merely that a soldier who does what he is told to do is just as accountable for it as the person who issues the order.
However, even from a pecariousness point of view, people who are ordered to do things against their conscience don't execute the orders efficiently or effectively anyway.
Moroever if all armies were to refuse to fight a battle, wouldn't that be a vast improvement? And democracy eventually depends entirely on armies following their consciences, rether than their orders: cf what's happeniing in Libya right now.  
Citizen of Ankh-Morpork.

Never believe anything until it has been officially denied - Sir Humphrey Appleby, 1984.

Back to Top
gcle2003 View Drop Down
WorldHistoria Master
WorldHistoria Master
Avatar
PM Honorary Member

Joined: 06 Dec 2004
Location: Luxembourg
Status: Offline
Points: 13262
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote gcle2003 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 31 Aug 2011 at 16:34
Originally posted by Ramesh V.Naivaruni Ramesh V.Naivaruni wrote:

I have not said we should discuss only Management with relavance to Bhagavat Gita only, But the name is suggested by me to open the thread to find out whether is it possible to link the ancient widsom of Gita to present day management practices. I think we can discuss other books of relavence like Bible, Tumuld, Koran or Zen for that matter.
 
Iwill  take it with a tinch of salt if somebody is to tell all statement are absolute nonsense, as I feel if you are critical of everything that is been said on any book or statement by people, you are limiting your inteligence to criticism ONLY, one should try and dig deep into the thought process and find out reason behind statement to derive meaning.
 
No modern Management can exclude Emotional Quotient which is such a relavant topic , special session are conducted accross companies to bring in sensitivity amongst Top Management to included emotional quotient in their day to day affairs, as employee retention is such a huge task today.
People have been organising 'sensitiity training' among companies all over the place for decades. The one thing they mostly have in common is they don't work. (Occasionally I thinkk T-groups, by whatever name they have gone from time to time, have had some effect, just as group therapy for alcoholism and such have a reasonable record.)
 
Otherwise I can only repeat what I have said before elsewhere:
Quote Not that I intend to preach any particular techniques [for changing behaviour]. Given my choice of weapons I think I would usually pick drugs and hypnosis, but they tend to be ruled out in normal managerial circumstances. But there are a few necessary ground rules. The basic one is to recognise that human beings are not rational creatures. Their behaviour is not rationally motivated, even if it can be rationally 'explained'.
It is of little use therefore to attempt to change anyone's behaviour by rational argument. It may be possible to convince him that what he believes is wrong, and what he does is silly. But it wil merely change his verbal behaviour. In future he will apologise for what he has done, but he will still do it.
 
Quote
I agree if one is to go by Management of the early seventies or eighties EQ was missing for such people
'Emotional intelligence' as a phrase has been around since the 'sixties at least, and traces back to earlier attempts to extend the idea of the intelligence quotient - itself of course frequently misused. Every passing fad has its adherents - even Synanon - and they all fade away. The idea of 'emotional intelligence' has been comprehensively debunked since its 'eighties heyday. For an unusually polite contradiction of it see the abstract at least at http://psycnet.apa.org/journals/psp/75/4/989/
or check out what Eysenck had to say in wikipedia.  
Quote it is time to go back to school again to understand Modern Management Practices. I was personally there for a session at P&G where 60% of the time was spent of EQ.
You wasted the 60%, unless you weren't paying attention.
Citizen of Ankh-Morpork.

Never believe anything until it has been officially denied - Sir Humphrey Appleby, 1984.

Back to Top
Ramesh V.Naivaruni View Drop Down
Shogun
Shogun
Avatar

Joined: 21 Jul 2011
Location: BANGALORE
Status: Offline
Points: 246
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Ramesh V.Naivaruni Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 02 Sep 2011 at 06:17
I was really surprised that a notification on this thread stating writing access denied, I feel there must be a reason to it, at least information if this thread is closed down. It was removed from the list and shown as a topic which is hidden. It is just a observation and not a complaint aganist anybody.

Edited by Ramesh V.Naivaruni - 02 Sep 2011 at 06:19
RAMESH.V.NAIVARUN
BANGALORE
INDIA
rameshnaivaruni@yahoo.com
email rameshnaivaruni@yahoo.com
blog:Http.Indiandemocracy in mousetrap
Back to Top
Srinath Naivaruni View Drop Down
Knight
Knight
Avatar

Joined: 16 Jul 2011
Status: Offline
Points: 93
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Srinath Naivaruni Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 02 Sep 2011 at 07:00
The little boy and fat man were the bombs dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki. My question was  ' how does the liberal western tradition    account for  the use of   atomic bombs on Japan unless the  end justified the means?
How does the liberal western tradition justify the invasion of Iraq or for that matter  the west's  approach to the middle east (specifically Palestine).
 
As far as I know  morality in warfare is a  utopian dream.  No war has ever been fought morally.  If the pricks of conscience were to affect the  efficiency or effectiveness of a soldier, I am very much doubtful  whether  any battle in the annals of human history would have been won at all.
 
It is grander utopian dream that armies would refuse  to fight battles. I perfectly agree with you that there would be a vast improvement in the overall scheme of things---It is another matter that both us will be arrested  by our respective governments on charges of sedition.Smile 
"There is a special providence in the fall of a sparrow......"
Back to Top
Ramesh V.Naivaruni View Drop Down
Shogun
Shogun
Avatar

Joined: 21 Jul 2011
Location: BANGALORE
Status: Offline
Points: 246
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Ramesh V.Naivaruni Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 02 Sep 2011 at 07:30
Even in war, there was some amount discipline that was followed such as there will be no attacks after dusk, nobody kills civilians, or places of worship or Markets etc., during the ancient age and such war were called Dharma Yudha. This is what Management in War is all about, that is what is missing now.
The war on Iraq is a biggest example of it. A nation which was thriving was unnecessary pulled into a fight and bombed indiscrimately. Here Bhgavat Gita says war can be only waged when ADHARMA TAKES OVER DHARMA(when evil takes over all Good).
Trancendental wisdom is a must for Rajan(KING and in todays parlance the Ruled).The Countries are to uphold noble Virtues.  Again Objective Mind and subjective Mind is what is being taught here, one should not be driven by greed or power or for plenty.
 
Global Age calls for mutual concern and mutual existenance, whether it is business, trade or even country.  I have seen in this thread that some fear has been expressed India & China taking over number uno position from the West etc., no just here we could see this fear in President Obama statement that watch out INDIA will take over in education etc.,  This is unfounded even if this has to be true, why should people with Global perpective in mind should fear ?.  I was really impressed by President Obama speech which included these words which I feel are is Just."DREAMS ARE SINGULAR BUT THE RESULTS OF THOSE DREAMS ARE ALWAYS SHARED".
We are on the portal of a big change in terms of "positioning in almost all International Forum"  INDIA in particular and Asia in general will have to be there if these forums are to be effective.  Any forum minus India cannot be effective.
It is our Ancient Wisdom that keeps us grounded always, Look at India after Independence Vis sa Vis Pakistan, while India is on the forefront in almost every feild of activities, Pakistan has emerged as a banana republic.
Let us analyse just one fact which will substantiate my arguement, The free India embraced 'NON ALINMENT " PAKISTAN was with United States". like wise we can cite hundreds of example.
The West has been credited with Mastery on Management Science, early writer has always been from United States like Prof  Adam Smith etc., But look at the way they have managed War Funds in Iraq and Afganistan, yesterday report on the same makes one wonder about the rationale of such a large abuse of Tax Payers monies.  I was told that United States Pays ransom in Afganistan
and Iraq to enimies like Taliban & Al-queda through their contracter to transport Food & Amunitions and if these were to be true.  Is this the "STANDARDS OF MANAGEMENT THEY HAVE ?.


Edited by Ramesh V.Naivaruni - 02 Sep 2011 at 11:28
RAMESH.V.NAIVARUN
BANGALORE
INDIA
rameshnaivaruni@yahoo.com
email rameshnaivaruni@yahoo.com
blog:Http.Indiandemocracy in mousetrap
Back to Top
Ramesh V.Naivaruni View Drop Down
Shogun
Shogun
Avatar

Joined: 21 Jul 2011
Location: BANGALORE
Status: Offline
Points: 246
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Ramesh V.Naivaruni Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 02 Sep 2011 at 11:23

Further to the discussion ,I would like to place this web link of the author who has personally written  to me to give him an assesment of his work. I would request all the members of this forum to visit his web page and post your comments. This budding author inspite of his work schedule has taken time out to write this book, 

I trust that the esteemed members of this forum will give him the encouragement by giving him both positives and negatives of his work which will motivate him to write better.
www.cincinnatitemple.com/articles/BhagavadGitaManagement.pdf -
 
Alas who know's how many such works would not have seen the light. I qutoe from Thomas Grey's unforgetable words
"FULL MANY A GEM OF PUREST RAY SERENE,
LAY DARK UNFATHOMED CASE OF OCEAN BEAR,
FULL MANY A FLOWER HAS BORN TO BLESH UNSEEN AND WASTE'S ITS SWEETNESS ON THE DESERT
AIR".
 
 
RAMESH.V.NAIVARUN
BANGALORE
INDIA
rameshnaivaruni@yahoo.com
email rameshnaivaruni@yahoo.com
blog:Http.Indiandemocracy in mousetrap
Back to Top
gcle2003 View Drop Down
WorldHistoria Master
WorldHistoria Master
Avatar
PM Honorary Member

Joined: 06 Dec 2004
Location: Luxembourg
Status: Offline
Points: 13262
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote gcle2003 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 02 Sep 2011 at 14:44
Originally posted by Ramesh V.Naivaruni Ramesh V.Naivaruni wrote:

I was really surprised that a notification on this thread stating writing access denied, I feel there must be a reason to it, at least information if this thread is closed down. It was removed from the list and shown as a topic which is hidden. It is just a observation and not a complaint aganist anybody.
This was caused by a bug in the new software, and has now - hopefully - been corrected. If you had imediately posted the same thing again it would have been accepted. It's been happening randomly to everyone, including moderators.
Citizen of Ankh-Morpork.

Never believe anything until it has been officially denied - Sir Humphrey Appleby, 1984.

Back to Top
gcle2003 View Drop Down
WorldHistoria Master
WorldHistoria Master
Avatar
PM Honorary Member

Joined: 06 Dec 2004
Location: Luxembourg
Status: Offline
Points: 13262
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote gcle2003 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 02 Sep 2011 at 16:54
Originally posted by Srinath Naivaruni Srinath Naivaruni wrote:

The little boy and fat man were the bombs dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki. My question was  ' how does the liberal western tradition    account for  the use of   atomic bombs on Japan unless the  end justified the means?
How does the liberal western tradition justify the invasion of Iraq or for that matter  the west's  approach to the middle east (specifically Palestine).
The implication is that the end is insufficient to justify the means. But I agree it could be clearer than it is in the proverbial version. However it is not meant to imply that the results do not justify the means: the 'end' means the 'intent'.
With regard to Hiroshima/Nagasaki it means that if you think in the first place that dropping the bombs was wrong, then why you were dropping them is irrelevant.
 
For a brief discussion to the point which is inherently insolvable except subjetivels cf http://www.aeriagloris.com/UnrestrictedWarfare/TheEndJustifiesTheMeans.htm
Quote  
As far as I know  morality in warfare is a  utopian dream.  No war has ever been fought morally.  If the pricks of conscience were to affect the  efficiency or effectiveness of a soldier, I am very much doubtful  whether  any battle in the annals of human history would have been won at all.
Then no battle in human history would have been fought. That would be a bad thing? In effect making the soldier realise he is reponsible for his own acts (whether for ethical reasons or for self-preservation) goes against dictatorship: dictators can't be efficient if they have to justify their actioons to their followers.
[/QUOTE] 
It is grander utopian dream that armies would refuse  to fight battles. I perfectly agree with you that there would be a vast improvement in the overall scheme of things---It is another matter that both us will be arrested  by our respective governments on charges of sedition.Smile 
[/QUOTE]
Well, you can't have it both ways. You claim soldiers would refuse to fight and therefore lose. If that's true, which I would dispute anyway, it must apply to both sides. If both armies refuse to fight then no battles. I agree that wouldn't happen but that's because your first premise is wrong - that soldiers who went by their own conscience wouldn't fight. It wouldn't for instance have stopped either side in the Crusades.
 
Citizen of Ankh-Morpork.

Never believe anything until it has been officially denied - Sir Humphrey Appleby, 1984.

Back to Top
pinguin View Drop Down
WorldHistoria Master
WorldHistoria Master
Avatar

Joined: 29 Sep 2006
Status: Offline
Points: 15238
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote pinguin Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 02 Sep 2011 at 17:32
Originally posted by Srinath Naivaruni Srinath Naivaruni wrote:

The little boy and fat man were the bombs dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki. My question was  ' how does the liberal western tradition    account for  the use of   atomic bombs on Japan unless the  end justified the means?...


I don't think it was the "western tradition" what justified that but the practical need to end a war. After all, the U.S. was attacked first, so it very well be said the war was an act of self deffense.

Back to Top
Ramesh V.Naivaruni View Drop Down
Shogun
Shogun
Avatar

Joined: 21 Jul 2011
Location: BANGALORE
Status: Offline
Points: 246
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Ramesh V.Naivaruni Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 03 Sep 2011 at 06:16
While accepting that United States was pulled into the War by the attack on pearl harbour, I dont think it was sensible to launch an Automic Bomb on Hiroshema and Nagasaki, the collective wisdom of the United States should have understood the ramification of the Atom bomb and should have adopted more tactical move to win the war rather than pressing the trigger of Atom bomb, which the posterity of the twin cities suffering even today.
 
What is the gaurantee that some trigger parasite would not press the nuke button and end this civilisation all at once citing come  frivilous reason ?
 
I quote Martin luther King

“We have genuflected before the god of science only to find that it has given us the atomic bomb, producing fears and anxieties that science can never mitigate.”

 

I would also like to quote the Father of Nuke Mr.Oppenheimer citing instances of Bhagavat Gita in his speech saying the world will not be the same after explosion.

He has also said this is only the first explosion in the Modern meaning we have had such explosion in the ancient age has dwelt upon Karma Yoga of Bhagavat Gita. 



Edited by Ramesh V.Naivaruni - 03 Sep 2011 at 06:18
RAMESH.V.NAIVARUN
BANGALORE
INDIA
rameshnaivaruni@yahoo.com
email rameshnaivaruni@yahoo.com
blog:Http.Indiandemocracy in mousetrap
Back to Top
Srinath Naivaruni View Drop Down
Knight
Knight
Avatar

Joined: 16 Jul 2011
Status: Offline
Points: 93
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Srinath Naivaruni Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 03 Sep 2011 at 06:49
[I don't think it was the "western tradition" what justified that but the practical need to end a war. After all, the U.S. was attacked first, so it very well be said the war was an act of self deffense.

[/QUOTE]
wars are always  justified  by practical necessities and not by traditions. Never in the history of mankind has a war been justified by tradition.  I was responding to gcle's views that  in the liberal western tradition  the ends never justified the means, however ethical the ends are. 
 
Now the definition of practical necessity is often left  to the eloquence of the victor and his ability to convince a gullible international opinion as to the practicality of the necessity or the necessity of the practical. All of us know how practically  necessary the dropping of the atomic bombs was. We also know how the international opinion was mesmerised  into accepting  the eloquence of the victorious allies on the practical necessity of   it  in terms of self defence.
"There is a special providence in the fall of a sparrow......"
Back to Top
Srinath Naivaruni View Drop Down
Knight
Knight
Avatar

Joined: 16 Jul 2011
Status: Offline
Points: 93
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Srinath Naivaruni Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 03 Sep 2011 at 07:03
[
Well, you can't have it both ways. You claim soldiers would refuse to fight and therefore lose. If that's true, which I would dispute anyway, it must apply to both sides. If both armies refuse to fight then no battles. I agree that wouldn't happen but that's because your first premise is wrong - that soldiers who went by their own conscience wouldn't fight. It wouldn't for instance have stopped either side in the Crusades.
 
[/QUOTE]
 
When the soldiers  start following their own conscience , two things may happen.  One is that they will refuse to fight ... which is extremely good as it would totally avoid the battle.   The other is that they may still fight obeying orders, but their efficiency will be affected in which case the  army with a greater conscience- awareness will lose. But the whole premise is hypothetical for  if a soldier starts  acting according to the   dictates of his conscience disobeying orders, he would be court martialled and would not be allowed to fight or he will  desert the army.
 
The problem however is that these pricks of the conscience  are not universal in their presence, for there will alwyays be soldiers who are mercenaries and who will fight without regard to their conscience and it is a fact that  most armies  of the world have such soldiers to fight their wars.
"There is a special providence in the fall of a sparrow......"
Back to Top
pinguin View Drop Down
WorldHistoria Master
WorldHistoria Master
Avatar

Joined: 29 Sep 2006
Status: Offline
Points: 15238
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote pinguin Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 03 Sep 2011 at 13:46
Originally posted by Ramesh V.Naivaruni Ramesh V.Naivaruni wrote:

While accepting that United States was pulled into the War by the attack on pearl harbour, I dont think it was sensible to launch an Automic Bomb on Hiroshema and Nagasaki, the collective wisdom of the United States should have understood the ramification of the Atom bomb and should have adopted more tactical move to win the war rather than pressing the trigger of Atom bomb, which the posterity of the twin cities suffering even today.
 
What is the gaurantee that some trigger parasite would not press the nuke button and end this civilisation all at once citing come  frivilous reason ?
 
I quote Martin luther King

We have genuflected before the god of science only to find that it has given us the atomic bomb, producing fears and anxieties that science can never mitigate.”


He has also said this is only the first explosion in the Modern meaning we have had such explosion in the ancient age has dwelt upon Karma Yoga of Bhagavat Gita. 


After the war, all people are generals
(Western, or at least Spanish, proverb)

Facts:
(1) The U.S. has only 2 atomic bombs. Producing a third wold have taken months.
(2) The U.S. didn't have the chance to "warn" the Japanese, because there was a risk that the bomb dropped on Japan wouldn't explode! If that had happened, the Japanese have had the nuke to bomb the U.S. Confused
(3) The U.S. military kept dieing at a high rate. If the decision was postponed, it would have cost them thousands of lives more.
(4) Tokio was already hardly hit, and it is clear the conventional bombings of Tokio or Dresde were as much destructive as the nukes.

With all these facts at hand, the U.S. decided to drop the bomb to stop the war.
If that didn't happened, the U.S. would have wiped out Hiroshima and Nagazaki anyways, by conventional bombings with an equivalent numbers of victims, before invading that country.

I think King and other "experts" could make the moral analysis they wished, after the fact, but they weren't in the boots of Truman.

With respect to Oppenheimer, it is interesting his cites of the Gita, but that's nothing new. Scientists usually love to compare theirs thoughts with popular culture. You can read Einstein talking about God playing at a cassino, Fritjof Capra speaking about the Tao of physics, or to Michio Kaku talking about the physics of Star Trek. I have also seen a book that talks about the "Physics of superheroes" LOL



Edited by pinguin - 03 Sep 2011 at 13:49
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <123>
  Share Topic   

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Forum Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 11.10
Copyright ©2001-2017 Web Wiz Ltd.

This page was generated in 0.125 seconds.