Monday, December 27, 2010

Life Imprisonment to Binayak Sen: Violation of Human Dignity and Human Rights"

Critique Ferozepur Chapter and Philosophical Society: A Students Discussion Forum and other students of the Dev Samaj College for Women, Ferozepur City, Punjab expressed their dissatisfaction over the recent verdict of life imprisonment by the sessions court of Raipur to Dr. Binayak Sen. They said that the judgment is as a big jolt to democracy and human rights in India. In the discussion on “Life Imprisonment to Binayak Sen: Violation of Human Dignity and Human Rights” presided by the college principal Dr. Mrs. Madhu Prashar, Sukhdeep Kaur , President of Philosophical Society, Karamjeet Kaur , Amandeep Kaur, Amrit Kaur, and Komalpreet shared their views with the students and faculty of the campus.
In the first round of discussion Amandeep said that Binayak Sen worked on Mahatma Gandhi’s principles and extensively worked for the underprivileged section of our society. Raipur Sessions Court passed a judgement against a man who left the privileged life in which he was born and raised and devoted his life for social service. The cases should again be scrutinized considering his previous records and service to society.
Karamjeet said that Dr Sen has been contributing theoretical papers to books and journals on public health. He was honored with the Paul Harrison award in 2004 for lifetime work of medical care in the service of humanity. She was of an opinion that there are very few doctors in the country, who practiced among the poor and the disadvantaged of the country, Dr. Binayak was one such man. She further said that the current verdict is against the principles of law and democracy. Komalpreet said that putting Binayak Sen behind bars is the death of democracy and human rights in India.
On the occasion college Principal Dr. Madhu Prashar, faculty members and students of the college appealed the central government, the Supreme Court and High Court of Chattisgarh to re-look on the matter and pursue a fresh enquiry as they are sure that Dr. Binayak Sen is innocent.

Wednesday, November 24, 2010

Modernity, Development and Violence: Gandhi’s Perspective (12- 13 November, 2010)

Ambuj Sharma of Philosophical Society participated and presented a paper on Modernity, Development and Violence: Gandhian Perspective in the UGC National Seminar On ‘Science, Society and Liberty’ organized by Government Meera Girls College and Mohanlal Sukhadia University, Udaipur at Udaipur on 12-13 November, 2010
In his paper he tried to bring the debates of Gandhian critique of technology and its various forms. He argued the concept of development associated with the advancement of technology and globalization. He brought the Philosophical critique of western modernity offered by Gandhi and said that “technology is acting as a new slavery of commodities and market which Gandhi opposed. He argued that in the era of science and technology it is important to understand the politics behind technology as to who are benefited largely by the technology and who is deciding the course of technology. The paper tried to reflect on the Gandhian approach to understand society and its development.

Civil Disobedience, Rights and Distributive-Justice: Raising a few questions in Afro Asian Political Philosophy (20-23 October, 2010)

Colonialism has been a longstanding concern for political and moral philosophers in the Afro Asian tradition. At least since the Crusades and the conquest of the Africa and India, political theorists have struggled with the difficulty of reconciling ideas about justice and natural law with the practice of European sovereignty over Afro Asian peoples. In the nineteenth century, the tension between liberal thought and colonial practice became particularly acute, as the oppressed people raised resistance in different ways.
Myths like, “civilizing mission,” by colonialists, which suggested that a temporary period of political dependence or tutelage was necessary in order for “uncivilized” societies to advance to the point where they were capable of sustaining liberal institutions and self-government was out rightly criticized by both Afro and Asian countries. Civil liberty movements and civil disobedience by the oppressed opened a new technique and discourse to question the rights and Justice for the oppressed
Civil disobedience is the vigorous denial to obey certain laws, demands, and commands of a government, or of an occupying international power. Civil disobedience is usually, but not always, defined as being nonviolent resistance.
Ambuj Sharma of Philosophical society presented a paper on “Civil Disobedience, Rights and Distributive-Justice: Raising a few questions in Afro Asian Political Philosophy”, in the Afro-Asian Philosophy Association Conference organized by Department of Philosophy, University of Mumbai at Mumbai on 20-23 October, 2010
In his presentation he attempted to understand the concept of civil disobedience in relation to rights and justice. He focused on the Afro Asian Philosopher's understanding of civil disobedience. He brought the debates of Gandhi’s political philosophy on civil disobedience and made a comparative study of Frantz Fanon and Mahmood Mamdani views on pathology of violence and citizen's rights in a struggle against colonial empire and its consequences for contemporary understanding of distributive justice in the domains of contemporary Afro-Asian Political philosophy.

Monday, October 11, 2010

The Great Dictator, (1940) A film by Charlie Chaplin ( 9 Oct, 2010 )

The Great Dictator (1940) a film by Charlie Chaplin was screened today by Critique Ferozepur Chapter and Philosophical Society in the Dev Samaj College for Women Campus at Ferozepur. The movie was followed by discussion in which issues of Fascisms, and dictatorial violence was discussed at large between 400 students and other teachers of the college.
Amandeep, student of B.A. First year, appreciated Charlie Chaplin’s act in the movie and said that despite comedy Chaplin could well portrayed the agony, anguish, fear a Dictator creates in his thrust of power and control. Jagdeesh Kaur, another student said that the dictator in the movie shares his appearance with that of Hitler and in a very satirical way unfolds the fantasy and brutish character of the dictator. Rashpinder Singh and Kuldeep Singh from Punjabi Department also expressed their perceptions of the movie and said that Chaplin initially raised many questions about hegemony, control, war, common citizens, and resistance. Among others who addressed were Harpal Kaur of Sociolgy Department, Paramveer of Punjabi Department and Ambuj Sharma from Philosophy Department


Ambuj Sharma of Critique Ferozepur Chapter and Philosophical Society participated and presented a paper on Honour Killings: A Study on Honour Predicament in the Seminar on MODERNITY AND CHANGING SOCIAL FABRIC OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA organized by Indian Institute of Advanced Study (IIAS), Rashtrapati Nivas, Shimla (India) on 27-28 September 2010.
His presentation explored the philosophical dimensions of the concept of honour. He extensively discussed the development of morality while questioning the honour predicament and also the notion of patriarchy which most of the times governs the moral judgment. He also discussed the concept of gender while analyzing honour killing. He also questioned the role and responsibility of state as an entity in safeguarding the lives of its citizens particularly those who are in constant threat for choosing their life partners. Citing examples of the honour killing, he questioned the role of society and state and appealed for complete cessation of such acts.
He expressed that there is a dire need of dialogue among young group of students regarding issues pertaining to their lives and the society they live in. A critical rationality has to be developed. Young ones have to create a dialogue with their elders about the changing norms and the tradition they have been living in. the tradition of questioning the tradition. It is absolutely important that the universities and colleges have to play a crucial role in bringing up the questions pertaining to marriages and honour killing.