LETTER TO ABRAR…GROUP A AND GROUP B PEOPLE

Dear Abrar,

Thank you very much for your detailed answers to my questions. I really appreciate you putting so much thought into it. Your letter was very helpful for me to understand how you think. You have a unique perspective and as a writer you have every right to have a unique perspective. It is wonderful for creative expression. But for creative communication the writer and reader need a common language so that the reader can understand and appreciate what the writer is trying to communicate. It is one way to ensure that the message given is the same as the message received. In my opinion the way you understand those terms are not the way most people I know whether lay people or writers, academicians and philosophers think. In my opinion every word, every term and every concept has a history…it was born and it grew with time, its use changed and now it is used in a certain social, literary and political context. LANGUAGE IS A LIVING THING. People who use that language change it. Dictionaries are usually a decade behind the living language used in the streets as well as academic circles. Unfortunately your definitions and interpretations of the terms:

Religion, Fundamentalism, Communism, Capitalism, Secularism and Humanism may not be shared by many lay people or academicians. When I read them I smiled and remembered a couplet

janooN ka naam khirad rakh dia khirad ka janooN

jo chahay aap ki nigah-e-karishma saaz karay

Now the question is that if you and I do not agree on the basic concepts and definitions of terms how can we move further. In my opinion you are confusing religions with ideologies and philosophies. You are blurring the borders between

….those ideologies that look towards the past for their guidance and have concepts of heavenly God, scriptures, prophets, divine revelations, life after death and believe in miracles at their core

and

…those philosophies that look towards the future and have human logic and observations by microscopes and telescopes and rational thinking as their basis and try to find realistic human solutions to human problems.

At this stage of our friendly dialogue I can say good bye and end this chapter by saying “we agree to disagree” or find some creative way so that you and I could agree on some common grounds and basis to pursue this discussion further. So I will make an attempt.

        Rather than going into an abstract philosophical debate about the meaning of those terms and defining ideologies and philosophies, why do we not start with individual human beings, before we put them in any group, Religious or Secular, Spiritual or Scientific, Communist or Capitalist.

        Every day in my professional and social lives when I meet people I see them on a wide spectrum. On one end of the spectrum are those people, let us call them

GROUP A

These people are

…logical

….rational

….flexible in their attitude

…people can have a genuine dialogue with them

…when they are provided new information and new evidence based on new research about a subject, they change their opinion

…they minds are like open systems

…their discussions are based on their own observations and life experiences

…if we follow them we see them learning and growing and evolving in their lifetime

On the other end of the spectrum are those people, let us call them

GROUP B

They are

…illogical

…irrational

…have inflexible attitude

…believe in monologues rather than dialogues

…think their truth is not a truth, it is rather the truth even the ultimate truth

..when offered new information or evidence, they cling to their own opinion and deny or ignore new evidence

…they are like closed systems that do not change with time

…they quote other people and books rather than sharing their own observations and experiences to prove a point

…if we follow them over years and decades we see they have stopped growing and evolving and learning.

Dear Abrar, I would like to ask you what terms / names / definitions would you give to

Group A People

Group B People

I am trying to find some common basis for our genuine dialogue to continue and grow.

In my opinion we can imagine three types of dialogue

Group A People with another Group A People

Group A People with Group B People

Group B People with another Group B People

Looking forward to your next letter.

                                                        Affectionately,

                                                        Sohail

August 4, 2009