Are We 🇮🇳 Indians Scientific? | Nope w/ Kunal Kamra | Episode 001

Summary

In the first episode of 'Nope' with Kunal Kamra, the conversation revolves around the role and understanding of science in Indian society. The discussion highlights the stark contrast between scientific reasoning and deeply ingrained traditions and superstitions. Guests explore various philosophies, historical perspectives on science, and the importance of maintaining a scientific temperament against anti-scientific ideologies prevalent in society. The episode urges the audience to distinguish between scientific truth and religious beliefs and underscores the need for critical thinking and questioning in contributing to society's progress.

Highlights

• Kunal Kamra explores the intersection of science and tradition in Indian society. 🔍
• The episode questions the role of religion in scientific progress. 📚
• Discussions around philosophies like Charvaka challenge traditional beliefs. 🕊️
• The importance of testing, questioning, and re-evaluating scientific claims. 🔬
• Differentiating science from non-science and highlighting their societal roles. 🧪
• Analogies like the 'old woman on the moon' are used to discuss scientific claims. 🌕
• Scientific advancements are celebrated, unlike stagnant religious doctrines. 🎉
• Fictional scenarios highlight the absurdities of mixing science with superstition. 🤯
• The necessity of embracing science for societal success is emphasized repeatedly. 🌍

Key Takeaways

• Indians need to embrace scientific thinking to progress as a society. 🧠
• It's important to differentiate between scientific facts and religious beliefs. ✨
• Asking 'why' questions leads to stagnation; 'how' questions drive progress. 🔄
• Historical and current scientific philosophies challenge traditional beliefs. 🚀
• Turning to science, not superstition, can solve modern-day problems. 💡
• Science thrives through questioning and proof; old beliefs resist change. 🌱
• The pursuit of science promotes peace and understanding, not conflict. ✌️
• Understanding science is crucial for developing critical thinking skills. 🧐
• Technology and science are often confused but have different implications. 📲

Overview

In this enlightening episode, Kunal Kamra delves into a thought-provoking discussion about the role of science in Indian society. The conversation highlights how science and tradition often find themselves at crossroads, with scientific reasoning clashing against age-old beliefs and superstitions, and emphasizes the need for a scientific temperament.

The episode dives into various philosophical discussions, such as those based on Charvaka philosophy, which challenges traditional religious narratives. The discussions provide a historical perspective on science, highlighting how scientific inquiry and philosophizing have long existed alongside, but often in conflict with dominant religious ideologies.

This episode serves as a clarion call for embracing scientific thinking and critical inquiry. It encourages the listeners to differentiate between scientific facts and religious beliefs and discusses the significance of asking the right questions—moving from 'why' to 'how'—to foster progress and address the modern world's challenges.

Chapters

• 00:00 - 00:30: Introduction This chapter introduces the dichotomy between violence and scientific ideology, emphasizing that scientific progress cannot thrive amidst violence. The speaker argues that unlike confrontations in other fields, science has never been about physically defeating opponents but rather thriving on rational discourse and evidence-based arguments. The chapter questions the mix of war and peace, urging reflection on the legacy being left for future generations.
• 00:30 - 01:00: Internet and Half-Truths The internet is rife with misinformation, comprising half-truths and complete lies. Modern society lacks the inclination to engage in deep thought or attentive listening. In response, an initiative aims to establish a 'quiet corner' on the internet through a novel podcast format that emphasizes thoughtful discourse. In this setting, a simple yet profound question is posed, highlighting the current state of digital media consumption.
• 01:00 - 02:00: Defining Science The chapter begins with a discussion on the perception of science, where the speaker addresses a seemingly simple yet profound question - 'What is science and what is its importance?'. The conversation explores the idea that some concepts like science and democracy are often taken for granted, as everyone assumes they understand their meaning, despite not engaging deeply with what these terms truly imply. The speaker challenges the audience to reflect on the actual definitions and significance of such concepts in society.
• 02:00 - 03:00: Democracy and Science This chapter explores the complex concepts of democracy and science. It begins by questioning our basic understanding of democracy and science, referencing them as topics commonly studied in education. The discussion shifts to examining broader societal questions such as culture, democracy, and superstition. The author acknowledges the deceptively simple nature of these concepts and shares their personal journey of grappling with these ideas over 50 years, suggesting a depth of insight and continued exploration of these themes.
• 03:00 - 04:00: Early Curiosity About Science In the chapter titled 'Early Curiosity About Science', the author reflects on the innate curiosity about scientific questions shared by all children. The author mentions common childhood questions regarding the existence of the universe, the origin of Earth, and the nature and identity of stars, highlighting the simplistic answers often provided by society.
• 04:00 - 05:00: The Role of God in Explanations The chapter discusses the role of God in explanations, presenting a conceptual model where God is depicted as an omnipotent being who created everything. This entity, who is attributed with setting the universe in motion, may also occasionally intervene in human affairs and alter destinies, emphasizing the divine influence and governance over existence.
• 05:00 - 06:00: Studying Science and Definitions The chapter explores the pondering thoughts about destiny, including knowing one's own time of death and how events are predetermined. These questions resonate while studying scientific concepts. Definitions of fundamental scientific principles such as force, velocity, speed, mass, and electricity are discussed. The narrative touches on the educational journey, emphasizing how understanding starts with mastering definitions. It also highlights the societal implications and risks tied to scientific knowledge.
• 06:00 - 07:00: Cultural and Religious Influences The chapter explores the early experiences and influences of children growing up in culturally diverse environments. It highlights how sounds and rituals, such as the call to prayer (azan), church bells, or household pujas, become part of a child's daily life. These experiences shape their upbringing as they are exposed to various religious practices and beliefs from a young age. The chapter also touches upon protective rituals like putting a black mark on a child's forehead to ward off evil, reciting prayers, and using amulets, suggesting a blend of cultural and spiritual elements in nurturing children's lives.
• 07:00 - 08:00: Science vs. Non-Science This chapter discusses the contrasting elements of science and non-science in the context of education in India. It mentions the omnipresence of religious and spiritual sites like temples and mosques, suggesting that these should not influence school environments. The chapter highlights the ongoing debates around religious practices creeping into educational settings, using examples like Ganesh vandana and Quran recitation. It emphasizes the limited exposure to scientific education, confined to short interactions during school hours, compared to the pervasive influence of religious and non-scientific practices. The author expresses concern over the overwhelming presence of religion and non-scientific thought in students' lives, potentially overshadowing the importance of scientific education.
• 08:00 - 09:00: Philosophies of Science In the chapter titled "Philosophies of Science," the discussion revolves around the various perspectives on defining science. It emphasizes the bombardment of audio visual messages and how these shape our understanding of science, highlighting that definitions come from philosophers, historians of science, scientists, and politicians.
• 09:00 - 10:00: Charvaka Philosophy In this chapter, the focus is on exploring the Charvaka philosophy, a system of thought that stands distinct from conventional scientific understanding. The transcript begins with an individual's initial hesitation which leads to a broader contemplation on what constitutes as science versus non-science, extra science, or anti-science. There is a notable emphasis on the dissemination of such contrasting messages within society. The speaker's curiosity about the nature of science is piqued, prompting a deeper inquiry into this philosophical perspective.
• 10:00 - 11:00: Philosophies Challenging Religion The chapter explores the Charvaka philosophy, also known as Brihaspati, which challenges traditional religious beliefs. It highlights how this philosophy, which originated around two and a half thousand years ago, serves as a foundation for scientific inquiry. Despite its historical significance, it remains largely unknown in common discourse.
• 11:00 - 12:00: Buddha and Questioning Beliefs The chapter titled 'Buddha and Questioning Beliefs' discusses a philosophy that challenges conventional religious beliefs. It suggests that anything that cannot be experienced, known, or proven through our five senses is considered non-existent. This encompasses concepts like the soul, god, and the afterlife. It also highlights an intriguing aspect of the country's philosophy where religion is critically examined.
• 12:00 - 13:00: Karl Popper and Scientific Claims The chapter titled 'Karl Popper and Scientific Claims' begins with a provocative statement suggesting that concepts like 'soul' and 'God' are inventions by clever individuals aimed at deceiving the general public. This viewpoint is noted to be controversial, implying that such a statement could provoke strong reactions or even violence in today's society. Additionally, the text mentions that caste is a deeply entrenched element of philosophy, highlighting its pervasive and resilient nature. Towards the end, there is a brief reference to Buddha, though his specific teachings or sayings are not elaborated upon in the provided transcript.
• 13:00 - 14:00: Scientific Method and Al Hasan Alhatham The chapter discusses the importance of not blindly believing in information passed down from ancestors, family, spiritual leaders, or scriptures. Instead, it emphasizes the need to fact-check claims by consulting what wise individuals have written and ensuring understanding. This approach is linked to the scientific method, advocating for evidence-based belief rather than accepting knowledge without scrutiny.
• 14:00 - 15:00: Scientific Claims and Falsifiability The chapter 'Scientific Claims and Falsifiability' explores the criteria for believing in scientific claims. It emphasizes taking a balanced approach, suggesting that belief should be driven by the betterment of humanity, and navigates the interplay between materialism and philosophy. This balance is metaphorically described as a 'middle path of Mercury,' with influences from Jupiter (materialistic views) and philosophy. The text briefly mentions narratives such as the origin of the universe and the caste system, highlighting the diverse stories that intersect with scientific discourse.
• 15:00 - 16:00: Incomplete Definitions of Science The chapter titled 'Incomplete Definitions of Science' explores various philosophical ideas and critiques traditional belief systems such as the caste system and rebirth, primarily from a philosophical standpoint that cannot be detected by the five senses. It makes a reference to Karl Popper's philosophy as a more advanced idea. It mentions the philosopher Al Hasan Alhatam, hinting at his significant role in shaping early philosophical thought.
• 16:00 - 17:00: Differences Between Science and Religion The chapter discusses the differences between science and religion, particularly focusing on the scientific method. It highlights the importance of critically examining claims by adopting an adversarial perspective, where one should rigorously test these claims from various angles. If the claims withstand these critical examinations, they should be accepted as scientific, emphasizing the need for evidence and validation in scientific inquiry.
• 17:00 - 18:00: Role of Questions in Advancement The chapter discusses the concept of questioning as a means of advancing knowledge and understanding. It highlights the importance of examining claims from every angle, identifying weaknesses, and applying scientific methods to investigate them. The chapter includes the example of the 'Father of Optics' who challenged the prevailing belief that rays come from the eyes, showcasing how questioning established norms can lead to new discoveries.
• 18:00 - 19:00: Celebration in Science Versus Religion The chapter discusses the misconception that vision involves rays emanating from the eyes, a belief held historically and reflected in today's language. Despite modern understanding that light enters the eyes from outside to the brain, linguistic remnants of the old belief persist.
• 19:00 - 20:00: The Importance of Questioning The chapter titled 'The Importance of Questioning' discusses the perspective of Popper on scientific claims. According to Popper, a claim cannot be considered scientific unless it can be proven wrong, which is now known as falsifiability. The chapter includes a simple and interesting example to illustrate this concept, though the example specifics are not provided here.
• 20:00 - 21:00: Nehru and Science Emphasis In this chapter titled 'Nehru and Science Emphasis,' the dialogue explores the nature of scientific claims, using the example that 'all swans are white' to illustrate falsification in science. This principle is challenged by demonstrating that the discovery of even a single black swan would invalidate the claim, thus highlighting the nature of scientific inquiry. The narrator shares personal anecdotes and refers to explanations detailed in their book to further elucidate these concepts. Additionally, the chapter touches upon childhood stories and scientific perspectives, including a tale about an old lady on the moon, to reinforce the interaction between culture and scientific understanding.
• 21:00 - 22:00: Science and Society's Future The chapter explores the relationship between science and myth, emphasizing the importance of falsifiability in scientific claims. It uses the allegory of an old woman on the moon spinning a charkha to illustrate the point: a claim is scientific only if it can be proven false. If the narrative changes to suggest the woman would disappear upon observation, it transitions from science to unscientific myth, as it lacks the capacity for disproof. This underscores the need for testability in distinguishing scientific theories from folklore.
• 22:00 - 23:00: Science vs. Technology The chapter discusses how certain claims in society cannot be definitively categorized as right or wrong. It emphasizes that some assertions, such as the existence of ghosts or God's role in running the universe, lack empirical evidence and therefore do not constitute scientific claims. These topics are contrasted with science and technology, which rely on verifiable evidence and logical reasoning.
• 23:00 - 24:00: Role of Technology The chapter 'Role of Technology' explores the contrast between science and non-science, raising fundamental questions on how each is defined and perceived. It suggests that neither science nor religion can exist in isolation, implying that understanding one requires consideration of the other. The discussion highlights a central question in science about the differences and interactions between scientific and religious paradigms.
• 24:00 - 25:00: Paisist Relationship with Technology The chapter explores the philosophical relationship between faith (or religious belief) and technology. It delves into the fundamental questions religions pose, such as 'Why?' which are termed as Sophistic or meta questions. These questions often arise when individuals reach the boundaries of their current understanding, prompting them to seek answers that transcend empirical evidence, often pointing towards divine or theological explanations.
• 25:00 - 26:00: Contradictory Views on Darwinism The chapter titled 'Contradictory Views on Darwinism' addresses the complexity of understanding certain scientific questions immediately. It highlights how some questions, particularly in the context of the universe's origins, require seeking knowledge beyond initial assumptions or immediate answers. The narrative suggests that questions beginning with 'but how' may not yield straightforward responses immediately, emphasizing the necessity of researching or asking experts. The concept of the universe existing at 10 to the power minus 43 seconds since its inception serves as an example of such intricate scientific inquiries.
• 26:00 - 27:00: Science Challenging Authority The chapter titled 'Science Challenging Authority' delves into the interplay between science and other belief systems throughout history. It begins by acknowledging the current limits of scientific understanding of certain periods in the universe's history, suggesting that future generations might find answers to these mysteries. The discussion transitions into a reflection on how, historically, when science has yet to provide answers, societies have often turned to religious or non-scientific explanations, such as the existence of God. The chapter outlines four key differences that are essential for the audience to recognize, underscoring the importance of approaching ancestral claims with an open mind, free from biases, within the realm of scientific inquiry.
• 27:00 - 28:00: Science’s Impact on Structures The chapter discusses the fundamental role of science in advancing knowledge by being subject to proof, whether right, wrong, or inconclusive. Science requires the presentation of new ideas or methods for understanding. To progress academically, particularly at the PhD level, contributions to knowledge must be original. The discussion touches on the process of validation and replication in science, using historical examples like Newton's contributions to illustrate these concepts. The chapter emphasizes that scientific progress is contingent upon continuous exploration and verification.
• 28:00 - 29:00: Hate vs. Acceptance of Science This chapter explores the dichotomy between hate and acceptance of science through historical examples and scientific discoveries. The discussion begins with the basic concept of gravity, referencing Newton's law of gravitational force (g = m1 * m2 / r²). The transcript highlights Einstein's contributions to science. Einstein challenged existing ideas by suggesting that the universe was static and stated that science does not progress until foundational claims are rigorously tested and either proven or disproven. The chapter ultimately reflects on the transformative power of accepting scientific inquiry and evidence over dogma.
• 29:00 - 30:00: Interview with Example of False Claims This chapter discusses a conversation where Lama challenges the authenticity of certain scientific claims and assertions. Lama mentions a spreading claim that Einstein has been proven wrong. There is a focus on the evolution of science and the process of proving scientific theories, as illustrated by a hypothetical situation involving a scientist. Additionally, the dialogue touches upon historical controversies with a brief mention of the birth of religious figures like Ramachandra and Mohammed Saheb, indicating an exploration of false claims and their implications.
• 30:00 - 31:00: Traditions and Science Coexistence The chapter discusses the tension between tradition and science, illustrating how attempts to challenge long-held beliefs can lead to conflict. It uses the metaphor of a fatwa and moon splitting to highlight the societal resistance faced by those who seek to disprove or alter established ideas. The narrative emphasizes that the person challenging the traditional views is often blamed as the adversary, causing a crisis in the process of seeking truth.
• 31:00 - 32:00: The Role of Scriptures The chapter titled 'The Role of Scriptures' discusses the dynamic nature of science, highlighting how scientific knowledge is continually evolving as new discoveries prove previous understanding wrong. This contrasts with the 'frozen knowledge' of scriptures, which remains unchanged over time. The chapter also touches upon debates in religious practices, using the example of the triple talaq controversy, to illustrate how interpretations of scriptures might affect modern societal issues.
• 32:00 - 33:00: Questioning Beliefs vs. Acceptance The chapter discusses the approach of seeking guidance on matters of right and wrong within religious contexts. It highlights the tendency of people to consult religious authorities, such as Mullahs or Qazis, for decisions and validation of beliefs. The passage underscores the reliance on religious texts, such as the Quran in Islam, and the Vedas in Hinduism, to resolve doubts and affirm beliefs. This reflects the theme of contrasting questioning beliefs versus acceptance of established religious doctrines.
• 33:00 - 34:00: Copernican Revolution The Copernican Revolution is presented as a metaphor for the pursuit of knowledge and the quest for up-to-date and authentic information. The chapter discusses the dichotomy between traditional knowledge and modern scientific advancements, emphasizing the importance of seeking the latest research and technologies, particularly in critical situations, such as dealing with diseases like cancer. The metaphor suggests that while ancient wisdom holds value, modern science offers the most current and effective solutions, akin to seeking a cancer institute for its cutting-edge tools and recent discoveries.
• 34:00 - 35:00: Science vs. Religion Hegemony The chapter explores the historical conflict between science and religion, emphasizing that many truths from religion are considered timeless and authentic by its followers. It highlights inter-religious conflicts and illustrates how these differing views have led to significant violence and bloodshed over time. The chapter underscores the importance of acknowledging these differences to make positive change and reduce conflict.
• 35:00 - 36:00: Science Celebrating Rationalism The chapter titled 'Science Celebrating Rationalism' discusses the nature of scientific discourse. It emphasizes that unlike other forms of disagreement that might lead to physical confrontations, scientific disagreements are settled through discussions, publications, and proofs. There is an hypothetical scenario where followers of different scientific theories engage in violence to illustrate the absurdity of such actions in the scientific community. The narrative underscores the rational and civilized methods of resolving conflicts and debates in science.
• 36:00 - 37:00: Modern Traditions and Science The chapter discusses how modern traditions and science are interconnected and highlights the importance of experimentation in resolving scientific questions.
• 37:00 - 38:00: Knowledge from Holy Books The chapter discusses the idea that being proven wrong should be celebrated as an opportunity for growth and learning. It uses the hypothetical example of proving that Einstein's famous equation, e = mc², might have been incorrect or incomplete, suggesting a modification to e = mc² + c. The chapter concludes with a rhetorical question about the implications of awarding a Nobel Prize to comedian Kunal Kambra for such a scientific breakthrough.
• 38:00 - 39:00: Unique Scientific Perspective The chapter titled 'Unique Scientific Perspective' explores the dichotomy between crisis and celebration within the realm of science. It challenges the notion of simplicity in scientific understanding, highlighting its complexity. The narrative does not advocate for or against spirituality and religion, but rather emphasizes individual choice in belief systems. The celebration is rooted in proving ancestors wrong, reflecting science's role in shaping and shifting perspectives.
• 39:00 - 40:00: Religious and Scientific Claims The chapter titled 'Religious and Scientific Claims' presents a discussion from the perspective of an atheist. The speaker expresses his lack of belief in God and shares personal experiences of not participating in religious practices such as offering namaz or worshiping. The narrative highlights the influence of Javed Sahab, who is known for his strong arguments supporting atheism. However, despite Javed Sahab's convincing arguments, the speaker notes that he has not been successful in converting others to atheism. The chapter touches on how beliefs and views can be ingrained in individuals from childhood, affecting their openness to questioning those beliefs.
• 40:00 - 41:00: Religion and Science Coexistence This chapter explores the concept of coexistence between religion and science. It highlights the importance of asking questions as a foundation for both scientific and philosophical thought. By seeking answers starting with 'why' or 'how,' individuals can contribute to the expansion of knowledge and ultimately progress society. The chapter suggests that a persistent inquiry into 'why' drives human advancement.

Are We 🇮🇳 Indians Scientific? | Nope w/ Kunal Kamra | Episode 001 Transcription

• 00:00 - 00:30 On one side there is violence and on the other side there is scientific ideology which cannot flourish without it I could not have ever heard that a group of scientists went and beat up another group Started Why Make False Claims Leave Science Apart Leave Religion Apart Why are you mixing it brother, like are you with the war or are you with peace, so today the question is We have to ask what legacy do we want to pass on to the next generation
• 00:30 - 01:00 Today the internet is full of half truths and complete lies. No one has time to think deeply or listen quietly. We are one Trying to create such a quiet corner No Not Your Ordinary Podcast for Entertainment hello sir thank you for coming thanks kunal For calling me in this troubled time or I want to ask you one simple question
• 01:00 - 01:30 I would like to say that you have spent 50 years with science can you explain to us that What is science and what is its importance? This is a simple question that can be asked very easily. It seems like this is a stupid question. Does everyone know that this is science? What is science, but what happens in society is that many such words happen to us It is like if someone asks what is democracy, it is a useless question, everyone knows about it
• 01:30 - 02:00 What is democracy? Science is the same as what we study in school and college. So these seem to be easy answers to us. What is culture and what is democracy in society? What is superstition but if we try to define it, If we try to go into the definition then slowly it begins to seem difficult You are right, I have spent 50 years grappling with these questions because when
• 02:00 - 02:30 When I started studying science, I started asking the same questions that every child asks in school. and I am sure you too must have asked the question, how did this universe exist Where did we come from? Where did this earth come from? What are stars and what is their biggest identity? We get a simple answer in society, a very easy and sweet answer
• 02:30 - 03:00 All this is God's gift. Now this is a theoretical conceptual model that he has a power He made everything and started moving, he made everything his loss and he started moving He is there and sometimes he interferes in our lives and even writes our fate
• 03:00 - 03:30 He also tells you when you will die, he writes it beforehand before leaving, so all these questions come to mind were echoing and when I was studying science I had to read the definitions I had to study what is force, what is velocity, what is speed, what is mass If electricity is there then our relation is with any educated child its creation starts with its definitions and the second risk is within the society
• 03:30 - 04:00 Now if we take the life of a common child with stories then I am sure that You too will have this experience, every child in our country has this experience, eyes open So the sound of azan is coming, or the bell is ringing, or someone is doing puja in the house This is going on continuously, then he was prepared and we said that he was prepared so Someone put a black mark on his forehead, recited a prayer, spat on it and put an amulet on his forehead and then he moved ahead. 1
• 04:00 - 04:30 Any child can walk a kilometer in India and show me where he finds a temple or a mosque Gurudwara or grave or any such thing should not be found in school Ganesh vandana is happening, otherwise Quran Khan is not happening, something like this will start His interaction with science takes place in that 45 minute hour; mathematics is also taught. If you get it, you will return home in 90 minutes. If this is all there is a bombardment.
• 04:30 - 05:00 wei called audio visual bombardment of messages we Are anti science or are not science, so when we are trying to define science So on one hand we will have to look at the philosophers Historians of science, scientists and even politicians have given such a definition of science
• 05:00 - 05:30 I tried to give it a try but on the other hand we will also have to look at what is not science Because the entire bombardment that is happening is non-science, extra science or anti-science Science, whatever you want to call it, that kind of messages are getting spread in the society then My curiosity grew a bit when I started to wonder what this science is and then
• 05:30 - 06:00 I had to search for the definitions, so do such definitions exist in our civilization? which can find the roots of science, then I found out that yes, Charvak is a philosophy whose The name is Brihaspati or Charvaka Philosophy and it says There is a very strange thing that happened two and a half thousand years ago in this country, about which we normally do not know
• 06:00 - 06:30 No, this philosophy is being taught or told, it is saying that whatever We cannot experience or know or prove anything with our five senses. I can't do that, that doesn't exist, there is no soul, no god, no afterlife And the third thing is very interesting, that philosophy of our country says that religion
• 06:30 - 07:00 Soul and God are the creations of clever people Clever people who were prepared to fool the common people, if in today's era If someone says this, I think he might get lynched Caste is a part of our philosophy and it is very strong Now if we go further than this then what is Buddha saying here, Buddha says this
• 07:00 - 07:30 They are saying that don't believe in something just because it has reached you from your ancestors Your family believes in it, some guru of yours has told you about it It is written in your scriptures, after giving a long list they say that every one Fact check every claim, read what the wise have written and if you understand
• 07:30 - 08:00 If they meet the criteria then believe in them and when you do believe in them then do so for the good of humanity Use it is a middle path of Mercury on one side Jupiter or Materialistic On the other side there is philosophy, on the other side there is Mercury and on the third side we have many stories in this of the origin of the universe and of the caste system and so on and so forth yes Jupiter who
• 08:00 - 08:30 This philosophy is also against the caste system and says that there is no rebirth. Because it cannot be detected by the five senses, it is also against the caste system Let's move ahead and get another definition. I short-circuit the middle definitions. I have read Karl Popper's book, it is very beautiful, what does he say, it is better than that First let us talk about Al Hasan. Al Hasan Alhatam is a philosopher. He is perhaps the first philosopher who
• 08:30 - 09:00 He is also giving the definition of scientific method, what is he saying He is saying that you should look at any claim with an enemy's eye or become its enemy and every Attack him from an angle, if you lose in these attacks then accept him i.e. There is a need to test and accept your claim or someone else's claim as scientific
• 09:00 - 09:30 The thing is that whoever is claiming it or believing it, he is looking at it from every angle. If you attack and find out his weaknesses then this is probably the first definition of What is known as scientific tapper and this fellow is a very interesting character he He is called the Father of Optics. He said for the first time that rays do not come from the eyes.
• 09:30 - 10:00 Light comes from outside into the eyes and before we see with the brain The whole world believed that rays emanate from everyone's eyes and the reason for them It is visible to us and even today when we talk in common language, we say this My eyesight has diminished, we are two such sentences Its old remnants have survived in our languages, so if we come back, Karl
• 10:00 - 10:30 Popper says that no claim can be a scientific claim unless it has Not able to prove yourself wrong, what is now known as trapped He gives a very simple and interesting example of this and that example
• 10:30 - 11:00 This is that all swans are white, this is a why is it a scientific claim because it is a scientific claim that if even one If we find a black swan, this can be proven wrong. I have explained this in more detail in my book. I have taken another example and it has been said in it that all our children should This story is told in childhood, maybe you have heard it too, I have heard it In my childhood I saw an old lady sitting on the moon, she lives with a spinning wheel, this is a scientific
• 11:00 - 11:30 The reason is that because if we go to the moon with science and find an old woman there, then it is good It was proved that the old woman was not found spinning the charkha, so it was proved wrong and it became scientific But if we change it a little bit and say that there is an old woman on the moon who spins a charkha and If we go there on the moon, it will disappear, we will not be able to see it, then this This is no longer a scientific claim because now it cannot be proven right
• 11:30 - 12:00 And similarly there are many such claims in the society which you can call right or wrong. We cannot prove that ghosts are created by God, we cannot prove that they are right or wrong God is running the universe, if it is not proven right or wrong then it is no longer a scientific claim If we try to see then all these definitions seem like this
• 12:00 - 12:30 It is incomplete, that is, without the other, we cannot self-define what the other is Similarly, what is different from science, what is non-science, what is extra science If you see, then a question came to my mind that brother what is the big difference between the two i.e. All religions should be kept in one place, all science should be kept aside, can any If there is a difference then it is a basic difference and I felt that a big question of science has begun
• 12:30 - 13:00 How does this happen and the big question of religions which I call Sophistic question or meta I say a question always starts with why, then why do you start asking When you reach the limit of your knowledge you will have no other answer to God's question
• 13:00 - 13:30 Apart from the wish, if you start the question with 'but how' then this is not an option for you now. There is only one option left, I don't know, we should ask I will tell you after reading it, I will tell you after looking at the internet, or this could also be the answer like There's a question about the universe being 10 to the power minus 43 seconds when it started
• 13:30 - 14:00 Scientists do not know what happened in that period of the universe, research is ongoing Perhaps the future generations will give the answer, then how can we start from science? We reach to know why in non science we reach to God and many more There are four differences which are very important for our audience to know and it is very important for the listeners to know It is important to accept the claims of our ancestors without any bias in science
• 14:00 - 14:30 Science cannot progress unless it is proved right, wrong or otherwise, I mean to me You will not get a PhD degree unless you say something new, i.e., misinform anyone I will proceed only after I prove it or I will present the same thing in some new way If I prove it then I will move ahead, let us take an example, Newton said that
• 14:30 - 15:00 bro everything is going on It is moving at the speed g = m1 * m2 / r² i.e. gravity. Einstein said that it Science did not progress until it was proven that there is no force Einstein claimed that the entire universe is static, which was the first claim
• 15:00 - 15:30 Lama wrote that no, this is spreading, now Einstein has been proved wrong He then said Science Advances but suppose I I am a scientist here and please prove that Ramachandra Yes, were the riots not born in Ayodhya or should someone say that Mohammed Saheb
• 15:30 - 16:00 did not split the moon into two parts, it was an illusion, riots again The fatwa will come immediately right, in non-science when you try to prove old things wrong If you try to change it, a crisis arises and The one who is proving wrong is held responsible for the enemy where as in
• 16:00 - 16:30 We always prove science wrong, so science expands, which has two meanings There is dynamic knowledge here, it changes every day, what was proven yesterday may be wrong today There is frozen knowledge there, the question of change does not arise Another interesting thing is that if let's say three If there is talk of divorce and a debate starts on whether triple talaq is right or wrong, then what?
• 16:30 - 17:00 We will go to some Mullah and ask him whether this is right or wrong and get satisfaction from him You won't be able to find out if it won't be there, no, friend, the Mullah can't tell, the Qazi can tell This is their area, they will go to the bigger Qazi, they will go to the bigger Qazi We will go to the Qazi and ultimately see the Quran, brother, whether it is right or wrong The issue will be resolved and if some problem arises in Hinduism then you can go to Vedas
• 17:00 - 17:30 we will go there and search, that means here you have the oldest knowledge which is the most Authentic us but what if I get cancer If I tell you, you will say that you should go to the cancer institute because there is latest information There is knowledge, there are latest machines, the research that was done yesterday is present in science
• 17:30 - 18:00 What was true yesterday is the most authentic truth and non-science The oldest truth in me is the most authentic one and let's take two more Let us make a difference. We have seen a lot that people of one religion have different views about other religions. and much blood has been shed in the name of religion Most of the blood has been shed in the name of religion; each other's houses were burnt
• 18:00 - 18:30 They killed people, they did all that, have you ever heard that a group of scientists They went and started beating the other group, meaning the followers of Newton beat up Einstein After the Theory of Relativity came out, come on brothers, let's go and beat them and burn their house down, no Sometimes in science we try to do that through discussions, through publications, through proofs
• 18:30 - 19:00 Resolve things through experiments and here things revolve normally By force and the last one is bigger I have discovered 27 such differences that when in science If we prove someone wrong, we get a PhD, which I mentioned above and the bigger the claim, the bigger the
• 19:00 - 19:30 The more you are proven wrong the bigger the celebration is, for example if you are your In the next episode, prove that the e = mc² equation is a bit wrong Einstein had missed c in it and it should be e = mc² + c, prove it What will happen to you if you give the next Nobel Prize to Kunal Kambra
• 19:30 - 20:00 There is crisis here and there is celebration. To prove our ancestors wrong, there is celebration. It is celebrated that this is what science is all about and it is not easy for us to understand We think that it is easy but the matter is not that easy and until we understand this difference I am not saying that you should believe in spirituality and religion or not, it is your choice.
• 20:00 - 20:30 I am an atheist, I do not believe in any God, I have never gone to offer namaz, I did not go to worship. My view is that of an atheist and if Javed sahab's To put it bluntly, he could not convert anyone else into an atheist; his argument was very good. The argument is that brother, he gets damaged in childhood itself, one part of him gets cured soon The thing is, unless you ask the question
• 20:30 - 21:00 And unless you look for answers, you are not scientifically tamed What can be called a question is the foundation, if you start with why then you will move in that direction If it starts with how, you will come here, you will contribute to the knowledge, you will We will expand and society will progress when you stop at the question of why
• 21:00 - 21:30 if it is so then the evolution of the society also stops, that is why there is a great need that we should I continuously ask questions, ask all kinds of questions, think that there is no wrong question, there is a wrong answer It may be so and if a mistake has been made today we can correct it tomorrow. I am Nehru's I am talking about Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru and I completely agree with this fact that
• 21:30 - 22:00 The coming time was talking about the 20th century but the coming time was with it It will happen with the same person, it will happen with the same society, it will happen with the same country who will be friends with science, if there is science in the society If anti-science ideologies are flourishing in a society, then that society is not friendly with science.
• 22:00 - 22:30 I cannot progress and I am not talking about technology here I am talking about I am talking about science, sir, please explain this a little by separating science and technology Separating this is a very difficult task and science is becoming more and more difficult Kunal, whatever workshops I have taken on technology, my experience is that as long as you
• 22:30 - 23:00 Ask questions about science, as long as it is okay, what is technology, it is okay but As soon as you ask this question that after hearing the word science, what happens to your mind after hearing this word What images emerge in the mind when things get complicated In my opinion the two are very different, and this is why many historians and Philosophers differ, this is a very intense debate. I think science is what it is
• 23:00 - 23:30 Knowledge: If you multiply two and two, it becomes four. This is science. e = mc square is Science Maxwell's equations are science that is knowledge Technology is the five senses of human being Lokayat was talking about philosophy, it is the same in the world and elsewhere
• 23:30 - 24:00 Philosophy has been flourishing in this way, we are not alone in those five aspects of materialist philosophy Expanding our capacities and senses, their efficiency The material we prepare for increasing it means we can go from walking to traveling in a car Travelling in an aeroplane and a rocket using scientific knowledge
• 24:00 - 24:30 to make machines that produce things that we It can enhance these five senses of life and give us more protection Technology is very interesting that NDA One dropped a bomb explosion in our country and the bomb that is
• 24:30 - 25:00 It goes through two processes, first fission and then fusion involve the eight The conservative people here have come out on the streets, they are a very anti-science section And they said Hindu bomb Hindu bomb Hindu, after 15 days Pakistan exploded it Gave the same bomb, same fuzz first, same fuse later, same material, all of it, what happened there
• 25:00 - 25:30 All the Islamic bombs there are Islamic bombs so this section is anti science section He has a very strange relationship with technology, that's why I am telling you this Why is the question you have asked important to understand the technology in society? there is a hate love relationship with it but with science
• 25:30 - 26:00 Hate is a hate relationship if you knew Osama bin Laden If yes, then you might not have met him personally, you would know about him from television. You might have found out, maybe you have seen the photo in the newspaper or read the statement, these are the people who They were banning television in Afghanistan, they were flogging everybody for the fact that
• 26:00 - 26:30 Film could not be seen, photos could not be taken but I was using it myself without any If the interview was not done on camera then there is no problem with technology Look at our Babas, they have no problem with technology. They use airplanes, they use cell phones, they use air conditioning they use they use the fridge what is that thing which Temples and mosques are not being used, go to places without electricity today
• 26:30 - 27:00 You won't be able to see anyone, so they have no problem with technology Where is the problem? Don't teach Darwinism, brother. Why? Because you are saying that Allah Miya or Khuda has created six days created everything by working hard and rested on the seventh day, someone else is saying that man From here and then from the arms and then from the stomach and from the legs different castes were created so you
• 27:00 - 27:30 How can you teach Darwinism? If your government comes to power, then you will have to teach it in NCERT. We'll have to remove Darwinism from it, right? Someone asked me laughingly that brother, Darwinism makes sense with him So there is a conflict, why was this periodic table removed?
• 27:30 - 28:00 There was nothing like that in it, if you want to make the sermons of Babas common then you cannot make periodic table and teach it to people because then you will have to There Baba is telling that everything is made from four elements and here everything is made from five elements The periodic table is telling you about so many elements Kant then there would be a conflict with science. The conflict with science would have been at another level as well.
• 28:00 - 28:30 and that level is such that science and technology doesn't force you to ask Questions are necessarily a car, you don't need questions you will use it don't ask questions in cell phone you will use it you can use it with button You come to suppress them so much, in science you need to ask questions, without that you can't do anything. If we have to ask both kinds of questions, then somewhere in the society this
• 28:30 - 29:00 It develops a habit that asking questions is the right thing and because science is a knowledge system That is why it challenges the power balance somewhere. Now someone is running a business of predicting the future by looking at the lines of the brain
• 29:00 - 29:30 It is obvious that science comes in the way and this power structure Because of the challenges we take, it is often said that we have a lot of things here Something is fine but the churches in Europe are very dirty So they burned Bruno and put the Galileans under house arrest
• 29:30 - 30:00 If I forced him to apologize then this Narendra Dabholkar And Govind Pansari and Kalburgi and then why do we not know till today where Aryabhatta was And when was this the country where we all know our birth chart, Aryabhatta I don't know why he was made fun of then When he said that the earth probably revolves around every society
• 30:00 - 30:30 Whether it is the Indian subcontinent, the Arab world, the Chinese or Whenever science has challenged that structure in every European society, Scientists have had to suffer but there is no problem with technology The problem is for the public, if there is a need to use force for them then you say
• 30:30 - 31:00 Remove the loudscar but there is no problem with the loudspeaker itself so use it. Question This is what we want to give to our generations and the next generations We want to give them a scientific base to match our traditions. In my scriptures, there is something materialistic or curiosity-inducing These are the sources of these streams, will we accept them as our tradition or will we be against violence?
• 31:00 - 31:30 We will accept science as our tradition because where our scriptures and I follow the scriptures When I am talking about Hindi, this is not the meaning of using Hindi words It is not that I am talking about Hinduism or the scriptures to me. For example, in all the religious scriptures both the trends are present, on one side there is violence Everything is anti-science, on the other hand there is scientific ideology, without it we cannot flourish
• 31:30 - 32:00 If so, then today we will have to ask the question, what tradition do we want to give to the next generation If we love our scriptures as well as our history If there is love then which tradition? Veda is raising the question beautifully that one There was a time when there was neither life nor lack of life There was neither darkness nor absence of darkness nor death nor absence of death, who knows
• 32:00 - 32:30 How all this was created, perhaps the gods know, but even the gods How would they know, they were born later and then If this goes further then he says and I am talking about Rigveda, he says that perhaps He may know, the creator who has created all this may know, maybe even he knows
• 32:30 - 33:00 If not, then there is questioning within the tradition. The Gita is entirely based on questions and answers. There are questions and answers in the Quran, there are questions and answers in the Torah, there are questions and answers in the Bible Which tradition do we want to give, to raise questions or to end questions? Beyond believing or knowing, another question is that science uses fundamentalism a lot.
• 33:00 - 33:30 If you can explain a little bit to justify the fact that there was a period when During this period if science or anyone makes any claims then they should go to religious leaders I had to fold my hands to decide whether I could say this or not. Copernican Revolution That is, when Copernicus said that the earth rotates on its axis, there was an uproar over it
• 33:30 - 34:00 But in the period after the Copernican Revolution, science became free from religion. It is a very long debate that started in Europe and its effect started all over the world and This is a very beautiful debate, one should definitely pay attention to it but today there is a shortage of time. Because I am not going into how even Newton was told that he was useless.
• 34:00 - 34:30 They are talking about it being anti-religion, but now that you are free, it means you cannot be killed Can means you have the freedom to present your claim, write it down and publish it to the people This change has come, a very big change has come, some people are establishing it as Hegemony of science says that this knowledge system is superior to all other knowledge systems
• 34:30 - 35:00 Until the relationship changes, science is going to religion with folded hands that we Give us a certificate that this is not against religion so that we can say everything after this Period is the opposite, all religions are trying this, especially all religious Leaders are trying this and when it comes into the arena of politics, then it The effort increases even more to show how scientific our religion is and we have one
• 35:00 - 35:30 Things get added to the problem because there is a fight and then the other person's religion is so unscientific We also have to prove ourselves scientifically and to others After this the effort to prove it unscientific begins, I take it that This is a big victory for science. She is a lady and now she has even said this in the parliament. He said that if you look at a cow, the cow gives oxygen
• 35:30 - 36:00 It leaves and takes as well; it is a solitary animal; it has two parts; it is completely anti It is scientific and many people laugh at it, you can laugh it off but they She is using oxygen She is using the word oxygen This is for knowledge Every animal needs oxygen for survival, this does not come from any scripture
• 36:00 - 36:30 The knowledge of oxygen as an element has been established by science, so if we look into it, we will find that every If you turn on some television in the morning, you will see the events of the whole day on it. We tell you what is going to happen to you today and what is the horoscope and what is not He often takes the name of NASA, we NASA scientists also said this
• 36:30 - 37:00 This is clearly showing that somewhere there is a deep inferiorotic complex which Independents of science can no longer prove themselves to be rationalists are you saying something that we should believe why this claim was made and and nothing nobody less than the prime minister of the largest
• 37:00 - 37:30 Ganeshji of democracy was anyway considered the Ganeshji of plastic surgery The idol of Ganeshji which has been there for the last 100 years People already respected him but what was the need today for the Prime Minister to say that Plastic surgery became necessary because without it,
• 37:30 - 38:00 The story is not authentic in today's date and if I tell you this that all our traditions, no matter how unscientific they may be, If we are scientific then we will have to give such arguments that our Look here sir, those eyes were not there but still there was a television because of which he was telling the situation of war and then if there was television or internet then there was internet then there was satellite
• 38:00 - 38:30 So there was a satellite, there was a rocket, there was an atom bomb etc. God provided everything It took a long time for scientists to find it Di this was said to me and I was asked somewhere whether I think that everything is in the Holy Quran Whether there is knowledge or not, this is the claim made about the Vedas as well or the same claim is made It is done, there is complete knowledge about Tot and Injil as well, so this was a direct question
• 38:30 - 39:00 After a lecture whether you think that the Quran has everything and all the knowledge, then My simple answer is that all the knowledge cannot be contained in any one book, but If we look at the tradition, there is a hadith of Mohammed Saheb that acquire knowledge even if it is from China Why should we go till there, the Quran did not descend in China, it descended in Arabia
• 39:00 - 39:30 In fact, he clearly stated that there was knowledge that was outside the Quran and was present in China. For which he asked to go then why is it not so in this whole matter If only I could tell you in advance that brother, now these scientists are going to search for us Look here, sir, if the scientists find and discover it in some four to five years, then You will have to listen to me, I am telling you everything right now, brother, did you remember it?
• 39:30 - 40:00 You repeated it again and again and again and you could not invent anything and someone else The one who did not remember anything, read it once, took it inside you and made the atom bomb I took it, something is understandable, in the same way there is so much in our traditions It's beautiful, let's celebrate that, that's why we make these false claims
• 40:00 - 40:30 Let it be friend, religion is religion, it's fine if you believe in it, it's a good thing, we will convince you. We could not do it, it is our weakness, as if we should let science remain separate and religion separate Leave it, why are you mixing it brother, why are you searching, there is no science in books There is religion there, believe it, but don't look for science, sir, thank you for that What about Your Time and your new book?
• 40:30 - 41:00 You will say what have you done in this that is necessary in today's times. I wrote this book I felt the need for this because the questions that I had been asking in the meanwhile included one question This was also before me that when did man start asking questions and A related question is whether animals ask us questions and I have the answer to that.
• 41:00 - 41:30 No, I tried very hard to find the answer to this question, but this is a very important question because If a person asks questions then he will have to keep asking questions, it is his responsibility is to ask questions and there are some questions that science will never answer like you are asking questions about war Are you with us or are you with peace, with tranquility, with love
• 41:30 - 42:00 are with hate You will have to answer these questions yourself According to science, the universe is approximately 14 billion years old.13 In 799 billion years we reached here: Human Brain
• 42:00 - 42:30 whose number of neurons is amazingly high it's very Large, it was formed in 13-14 billion years So is it designed so that we divide ourselves into castes and religions? Let us divide ourselves into countries; let us hate each other Destroy homes, rape each other, drop bombs on each other, become a threat to the earth itself
• 42:30 - 43:00 Or else we are here on this earth for the sake of peace and love Stay and try to know the secrets of this universe We will have to set our goals in the right way and our politicians will also have to set their own goals You have to decide very correctly, if you do not ask questions, you will become an animal
• 43:00 - 43:30 thank you sir for coming any clap ya [music] Take