A deeper malady of the world now!
Asifuzzaman :
To overcome the isolation of the hunter-gatherer life, the revelation of human to human was essential: It involved mutual understanding, depth of empathy, and a broader vision of existence.
To achieve this, humanity required the assurance of food security. In the development of the intellect, cave paintings provided vital guidance through the analysis of experience, the sketching of future blueprints, and the weaving of thoughts into abstraction.
It was likely through this path that food security was attained—namely, the innovation of agriculture. This journey paved the way for cosmic expeditions and inspired the intellectual search for extraterrestrial life.
Yuval Noah Harari wrote something in his book Sapiens that initially felt like a clever observation, but later resonated with a haunting gravity: Did humans domesticate wheat and grain, or did wheat and grain domesticate humans? Does the security brought by agricultural innovation stifle creativity, or does it merely trap the pursuit of a permanent existence in a state of stagnation? While the former is hard to accept, the latter cannot be dismissed.
Could it be that our greed for a worry-free sanctuary is leading us into a dead-end alley?
“Could our survival have been made more peaceful and tolerant? Could it have been guided through a path of flexibility and grace? Though Dwijen-da (Dwijen Sharma) used to say that without the abnormal concentration of capital, cosmic expeditions would never have been possible.
According to the provocative insights of neurologist Paul D. MacLean, inconsistencies in the evolution of the human brain have turned this capital-centric system into an instinctive social trait.
This is driving a relentless trend toward centralization—a path that is ultimately leading us toward a decaying and degraded society.”
“Could our survival have been made more peaceful and tolerant? Could it have been guided through a path of flexibility and grace? Though Dwijen-da (Dwijen Sharma) used to say that without the abnormal concentration of capital, cosmic expeditions would never have been possible.
According to the provocative insights of neurologist Paul D. MacLean, inconsistencies in the evolution of the human brain have turned this capital-centric system into an instinctive social trait. This is driving a relentless trend toward centralization—a path that is ultimately leading us toward a decaying and degraded society.”
Many, like Hermann Scheer, author of the book The Solar Economy, believe that much depends on the transition from fossil fuels to solar energy. At the beginning of this century, many renowned journals even claimed that the world was on the brink of a “Second Industrial Revolution” (in terms of energy).
Yet, overlooking those prospects, a sudden celebration of the Fourth Industrial Revolution or Artificial Intelligence began—a development about which Stephen Hawking himself expressed grave concerns. In reality, the utilization of solar energy does not require massive capital; rather, it needs countless small-scale investments and small-scale installations.
Through the participation of every individual, the widespread use of solar energy is entirely possible. Therefore, a focus centered on capital cities is obsolete and technologically unacceptable in this context. Achieving this does not require large transnational business groups or megacities; instead, it can be accomplished through small and medium-sized firms and rural regions.
When digital technology, which is inherently decentralized in character, is integrated with this, decentralization will accelerate. As a result, there is no concentration of capital here. Such progress and advantages may create a natural tendency to lead society toward a new political foundation.
Most importantly, it was immensely logical to consider this availability of energy—achieved with less chaos—as the true measure of civilization’s development and prosperity. This was brilliantly presented by Dr. Ali Asghar in a follow-up to one of my lectures titled “Why Didn’t They Come?” Are we too late in making this transition? Some calculations suggest that this was certainly possible at least 30 years ago.
People like Arthur C. Clarke thought so too. However, those who control greed for power and the concentration of capital are repeatedly delaying the matter through their own tactics. The carriers of commercial commercialism are becoming the “heroes” of society.
In our current way of life, we are creating a demand for consumer goods that dictates our education and culture. Through the mass media, we are bombarded with advice on how to build a ‘heaven of happiness’ while simultaneously destroying our rivers, our wildlife, and even our own health.
Without fixing the core principles of our ecosystem, slogans are raised claiming we will defeat Corona under the pretext of vaccine discovery. Even after two years, Corona could not teach us that the virus did not ‘attack’ us; rather, we invaded their habitat. They simply entered us by taking advantage of our uncontrolled and imbalanced lifestyle.
Proper schooling is not taking place, and a healthy social foundation is failing to form; as a result, nothing can stand against the culture of hierarchy and power. Once, the world had no formal institutions. Knowledge gradually evolved from informal folk traditions, and formal institutions later provided a structure and clarity to that acquired knowledge. This offered great advantages for documentation and preservation.
However, to foster new thoughts and ideas, formal education was never meant to shut down informal practices. If these informal roots are severed, the emergence and evolution of new ideas will eventually lose their way, trapped in an endless maze.
Therefore, every educational institution must build a bridge between its own curriculum and informal, grassroots practices. This bridge expands understanding while fostering flexibility and tolerance. Yet, within the rigid iron-clad structures of institutionalism, the knowledge of the common people has been pushed into neglect.
An even more catastrophic aspect is this: everyone is treating scientific data as their own private, secret treasure. In reality, tolerance and flexibility are our greatest tools for survival, and these can only be achieved through democratic practice. It is this very spirit of democracy that can propel science forward.
After all, science is observation; science is the application of logic; science is the free exchange of information—not just among scientists, but across every nation and state.
Reaching an independent conclusion is, in essence, an act of democracy and transparency; it is the unveiling of a universal, natural truth. What is beneficial for humanity must also hold true for the chimpanzees of the Congo. Science teaches us exactly this: to unfold ourselves while causing the least amount of chaos.
The tragedy is that, globally, it is the businessmen who are now the lawmakers or in control of state power—or perhaps the other way around. Even poets like Jibanananda Das lamented that the world is suffering from a deeper malady now.
(The writer is a Science Orator;
Editor, Mahabritta)