15 hours ago :::
Russia stopped gas pipeline to Poland and Bulgaria ..... The Russian currency had refused to pay the price of oil ...
13 hours ago :::
Poland agreed on gas payments in rubles.
9 hours ago :::
Austria and Bulgaria agree on gas payments in rubles.
8 hours ago :::
European Commission allowed the ruble to buy gas in Europe ....
What happened? It proved that the world knows only one language and that is "" power of language ""
I tell girls to be connected to the means by young adulthood from childhood in society, from the time they feel ashamed to talk about it to prepare for the physical changes or pornography, indecency falls into the category. Uhann girls with every condemns rape incidents is merely rhetorical ..bhla her angel-like atmosphere that the Internet and social media messenger that their generation is much better thanks to our generation ..hmara time not too far away I have just come from the angels and apostles.
School Days, shalwar kameez and dupatta white nyfarm .. U do not discuss sex education of mothers. I wanted to touch the hands of a change in the relationship. Sanctity in the eyes of many an untold savagery. Relationships come to the waist and breasts go hand affectionately on the head .... come to the thighs of the hands of those who do not even touch each and every lap. he said a trembling, and he wakes up in the body sense abhor.
The school day, not with a girl, like a little drama ..sfydy to take red spots on clothing. Fear of ignorance of young faces. Injury decades to justify if they have made the noise of a blow to somewhere unknown ..astanyun quiet secret secret smile. And then his eyes focused on white blood started moving a long way short of ..hr way home from school, but life itself. And it is revealing a strange lust in every eye.
Look, if you ever feel that you have to be mature in ignorance for a child? .. come what hour a child is unknown at the moment passes. Yes! He gave Dan a moment that made her mother a generation of nature ... but I made synonymous with social ignorance of centuries of Resurrection childhood days at the moment the mother of the future ...
Know if you can feel it down! .. weak to greater maturity up in the body, every pain is your pain stays given its huge ignorance in these critical days when ... when it's totally unaware of the experiences physical changes around the neighborhood who apprised them of spots of blood on the clothes you are laying the table of social lust ....
Hiya and a confidante of June Elia that once rang the night bell at the gate two hours. They arrived on June Elia's eyes were.
Johnny said. I do not drink at that time, I also want to call the ranger's elder brother Syed Taqi, who was a property dispute.
In those days it was called the killings in Karachi and Rangers personnel were patrolling the city. Rangers were very afraid. Friends brought him to the phone, was very tremor in their hands. In addition, he dialed the wrong side of the hole rotated alternately. He did not even remember the number.
Johnny said. Your phone holes are made in the wrong place, and we all try to see, please call mladu.😁
Friends dialed the phone.
Syed Mohammad Taqi came on the phone, putting on eateries lips trembling hand holding the receiver to June, 'Brother! I'm Rangers'. Brother'd said what I said, it must repeat here nhyn.😂
Throw the phone were hitting my head with both hands and Elia Jun say that were 'Sir! This civilization was destroyed us. This civilization kept us nowhere. Mother and small frown not gone civilization strife. Amroha civilization destroyed me ''. 😄
Who is the creator of the creator?
Whenever it is said of the Creator of the universe that the
universe is an organized and cohesive system and that there must be a Creator
of everything created.
So the atheists immediately say that who is the creator of
the Creator?
This question is irrational in scientific scales and totally
against common sense.
Because the question about any thing is in view of its
structure and attributes.
For example:
As soon as they see a wooden table, the common sense
immediately asks who made this table.
But if the same wood is lying on the forest, its structure
does not show that it is made of wood, then common sense does not raise the
question of who is the maker of this wood.
Looking at the universe in terms of how beautiful the universe
is made up of this principle, everything organized and connected seems to be
connected to another object, a beautifully designed image that you see. The
human intellect is stunned ... So the common sense immediately questions the
creator of this universe, is immediately ready to search for its creator, and
is forced to think of an extraordinarily conscious designer. That is why the
question of any conscious human being is who is the creator of this universe.
But there is no attribute in the properties of the Creator
of the universe that does not compel the common sense to ask who is the Creator
of the Creator, because there is no structure made by the Creator whose creator
should be asked and thought of. ...
Yes, we have to find out its identity and we have to
consider its attributes which have been given to us. This is the requirement of
intellect and consciousness.
* Note: * Before
answering each question, the question is looked at whether the question is
correct or just a mistake. The correct question is answered correctly. Wrong
question is pointed out ...
Atheists make mistakes in the name of the question and when
their misunderstanding is cleared, they start crying and shouting that we are
not being answered the question.
Regardless of the noise, drunkenness and propaganda of the
atheists, the question should be examined first on the basis of knowledge and
then the answer and error should be pointed out.
Conscious people will understand themselves ...
Allah Almighty is the Lord of the worlds, there can be no
creator of it. The Creator is always of creation. Just as man is the creator of
the seven heavens and the earth for the purpose of jinn and angels, only Allah
Almighty.
Science also believes in only one creator because the
creation of the perfect universe is possible only through one Lord of the
worlds. Science has also rejected more than one creator.
Atheism is a false religion and it is not different from
idolaters. Idolatry worships idols while atheists worship idols
And how can you be
different from them when you are stoning the devil of stone hard and prostrating
to the house of stone and kissing and respecting the stone itself?
Science also says La ilaha illa Allah.
And we have always believed and believed in La ilaha illa
Allah.
The perfection and perfect calculation of the universe is in
itself the greatest testimony. However, our terror is over all the deniers of
Islam.
You should be ashamed
to call others haramzada who proudly tell you that you were born as a result of
sex between siblings.
And what about the devil-shaped stones and the black cell?
You can remove the kissing stone. If you do this, you can
criticize someone, otherwise you are the same.
Atheists are always illegitimate children because these
people are never born as a result of marriage. Even if you ask your mother, you
too are the result of some mutual consent.
Marriage between siblings is haraam. But atheism is
permissible in religion. By the way, there is no definition of relationships in
atheism. Not at all Atheism is a satanic religion of ignorant ideas.
We are the people of truth. All religions except Islam,
including atheism, are false religions.
Wearing the cloak of atheism, they pierce the religion of
truth
You worship idolatrous idols, whether the idol is made by
hand or by the desires of the flesh.
We just follow the truth which is also accepted by science.
The offspring of atheist monkeys do not even believe in
science
So what about Adam's
descendants of sons and daughters?
Then the rule of law would prevail.
Wine can be bought with dignity from the shop.
From Peshawar to Calcutta, everyone lived in brotherhood.
There would be no train accidents.
Before the United States, there would have been more awards like electricity in Calcutta.
There would be a high level of cleanliness.
Merit would rule.
Milk and chilies are pure.
The army would be subordinate to the government.
Madrassas would not be full.
Schools provide secular education on an integrated and modern basis.
An active and well-managed railway network would have stretched from Khyber to Bangladesh.
Bangladesh, India and Pakistan would be an economic superpower.
We would have a strong British India passport.
Law and order would be the same for everyone.
The drain would have been cooked.
Girls go to college on motorcycles without fear.
People enjoyed art, fine arts and fairs.
Tourists from all over the world flock to our countries to enjoy our landscapes,
archeology and ancient buildings.
Our conservative civilization would have had the dawn of modernity and
we would have entered the 21st century with a bang like any other developed country.
More museums and Victorian-style buildings
If we don't get independence from the British ...
This is the other side of the picture.
Whatever it is today is due to the British.
It takes a long time for a house to be looted by robbers.
All our wealth was looted by the British. Did they build the railway for our convenience or to take our wealth to England?
And then the military establishment imposed on us.
Muhammad Ali Jabah imposed Quaid on us. Where was he among us?
There is no denying their services to India, but if they consider themselves, they are different from us.
The merciless plunder of Indian capital by the time they enter or leave India and today compound the pound rate Koh Noor diamond Emperor Jahangir's throne Taus 3 ship gold It is in favor of India and not in favor of Pakistan. Who is entitled to it?
What do you think will be the value of the pound if the gold, which is taken from all over India, is returned to the UK?
In 1993, with whom Khan. ??
With Nawaz Sharif
In 1999 he was with the Khan. ??
With Pervez Musharraf
2000 was with the Khan .. ??
With Pervez Musharraf
In 2001, with whom Khan?
With Taliban
In 2002, the Assembly voted for the Prime Minister of Pakistan?
Maulana Fazlur Rehman
What was with Khan in 2006?
With Iftikhar Hussain Chaudhry
In 2008, with whom Imran Khan.
With Qazi
2013 was with the Khan of Pakistan.?
Party with the
2014 was with the Khan sit .. ??
With Qadri
2015 was with the Khan in municipal elections. ??
PML-N, MQM in Karachi East, Karachi. JUI, ANP Buner, Mardan space with PML-N
St. election in 2016 with what was Imran Khan.
Party with Islamic League
In 2018 the ship was with the St. chairman Imran Khan.
With PPP
And when the mind is sick with every government will ask yuthyun?
If the answer chosen.
One of the students said to his teacher: We disobey Allah day and night but Allah does not punish us.
Respected teacher replied: No such thing but how many punishments Allah Almighty gives us but we do not realize it.
Listen to what are the punishments of Allah ...
1- Deprived of the pleasures of divine prayers: Has not the pleasure of prayers been taken away from you by the Lord?
2- Cruelty of heart: What could be a greater punishment than hardening one's heart?
3- One of the major punishments is that you get very little success in good deeds.
4- Neglecting the recitation of the Qur'an Fear of Allah would have shattered * We hear this verse but it has no effect on our hearts?
5- Deprivation of Tahajjud: Long nights pass but Tahajjud is never successful?
6- Disregarding the spring of good deeds: The spring of good deeds comes and goes, such as the fast of Ramadan, the fast of Shawwal and the blessed days of Dhu al-Hijjah, etc .... What could be the greater punishment?
7- Feeling the burden of worship: Don't you feel the burden of worship?
8- Neglecting the remembrance of Allah: Does not the remembrance of Allah keep your tongue silent?
9- Don't you feel weak in the face of desires?
10- Love of the world: Aren't you suffering from greed for wealth and position and fame? What could be a greater punishment?
11- Considering major sins as minor: Is it not the case that you consider major sins as minor and insignificant like lying backbiting?
12- Aren't you often engaged in frivolous things?
13- Ignorance of the Hereafter: Have you not forgotten the Hereafter and made this world your greatest goal?
All this deprivation and helplessness are also punishments and punishments from Allah but you do not realize it.
Remember that this is a very minor torment of Allah which we feel in our wealth, children and health and the real torment and the most dangerous punishment is that which befalls the heart.
Therefore, ask Allah for forgiveness and ask forgiveness for your sins because the servant is deprived of the ability to worship because of sin.
Sri Lanka's full name is
"Democratic Socialist Republic of Sri Lanka".
This "democratic socialism" of Social Democracy was in front of us today. Sri Lanka have to know everything that "socialism" and "democracy" is only the name of the original, which in modern capitalism (neo-liberal ISM) has ruined the economy of Sri Lanka bankrupt it.
There are also signs for those socialists who thought the word "socialist" or "communist" with the name of a country or Parthians it takes to truly socialist or communist, and even for those social democracy or democratic socialism Islam and also for those who understand that the colonial countries is rather feudal and capitalist economic system is the key to economic and social development of these countries is in the national capital.
Sri Lanka has a literacy rate of 93%, employment rate of 95% and public health facilities. Sri Lanka has the lowest mortality rate in the South. Sri Lanka made a lot of money from exports and used it to build a social democratic, welfare state.
On the other hand, the average minimum wage in Sri Lanka is 10,000 Sri Lankan rupees per month and the average annual income is 7 577 per family, while one dollar is equivalent to about 350 Sri Lankan rupees.
Thus, despite providing education, health and employment to the people, the Social Democratic, welfare state of Sri Lanka was doomed as inflation caused by the neoliberal capitalist system wiped out the purchasing power of the people.
This suggests that the measures proposed by the Social Democratic and Liberal circles to improve the economy, such as reducing imports, increasing exports, creating jobs, education and health services, etc., are not fundamental to solving the problems of the economy.
Keep If all these facilities are provided to the people by the state but the productive relations remain capitalist, the pricing of wages and essential commodities, especially foodstuffs, is left at the mercy of the market, ie the capitalists. Even in a social democratic state, the economic system can be ruined. Every economic system will be in danger of collapse until the perpetual contradiction between labor and capital is eliminated.
* Pakistan's education system *
* About the math paper yesterday, I asked two students how the paper went.
💠 One said Sir 75 Marks would come, I told him well done inshallah (because he worked hard all year)
* Another said that 65+ marks will come, I was surprised to hear the words of 65+ because he could hardly get 25 marks, then I asked my son how so many marks will come then he said that the paper started 2 minutes after the incident, the teacher came to the examination room and explained all the objections and kept writing the remaining papers on the pages and sending them to the examination room.
💠 Since yesterday I have been wondering what is going on in the heart of a hard working student that I had worked all year, the teacher gave the same paper to the one who did not work all year.
💠 I have only one question for such teachers that tomorrow (on the Day of Judgment) if a hardworking student complains to Allah and asks him for reward for his hard work, what will these teachers give him ????
💠 All teachers are requested to try to recognize the qualities of the teacher and understand what the teacher says, if you can't do that then choose another field to earn a living. (Thanks)
It seems that the ideological debate in Pakistan has come to an end even at the academic level. Hardly any forum, group, intellectual front seems to be where the issues facing the world come under discussion. We have all accepted defeat as soon as the new millennium has begun and we have to get rid of the populist society without getting confused at any level. In order to satisfy and justify ourselves, we are forced to assume many things, for example: capitalism is an absolute 'system' which has immense potential to sustain itself; Revolution always loses, democracy is the only solution, but incomplete solution; The era of ideological talk is no more. In the postmodern age we have to abandon the twentieth century ideals. Etc. etc.
Despite all the ideological inconsistencies of the last two or three decades, all the major arguments are centered on capitalism versus right wing Marxism against liberalism. In the former we try to justify our confusing situation, while in the latter we build the dream of a better world by gaining an understanding of the currents of history.
Marxism continued to be active in the practical field, in addition to offering opinions and philosophical solutions to almost every aspect, including nature, peace, the environment, racism, social welfare, feminism, chauvinism and nationalism. This book Why Marx was Right? Is translated. It compares the views of right and left on ten important topics and teaches us a unique way of seeing and understanding the world.
If you were asked to create a new world or a better imaginary world, which ideals would it be closest to? Would you like to imagine a world full of racism, wars, and class strife, or a world in which social justice, equality, democracy, peace, and the provision of basic necessities are managed?
Thanks to this book, we are forced to rethink such questions as: Are the classes in the world gone? Is democracy the ultimate destination of humanity? Do we destroy nature in the process of conquering it? Is there a way to remedy prejudice and injustice? Is the idea of an imaginary world harmful and tantamount to an escape from reality? And most of all, has ideological thinking become a thing of the past?
(This book is also published by Al-Faisal Publishers. I am sorry that the top five books have been hidden which have been stalled for the last two years. The protesting government employees will then say that I hire others.)
I don't usually talk much about other people's translations. But on this occasion, I must say that all the other translations of Terry Eagleton are unreliable, wrong and very wrong.
According to a survey, 75% of university students (BS level) in Pakistan do not read textbooks at all. Now you tell me, isn't it a matter of wondering what a great shortcoming is taking place in this important place of life. Go away
Nadeem Farooq Paracha Sahib had complained in one of his articles that there are very few students in the University of Peshawar who know or read these people but not everyone else knows their names.
Ustad G. Yasir Jawad, Qazi Jawad, Dr. Mubarak Ali Sahib, Arshad Mahmood ... These are just some of the goal setting shareware that you can use.
Very good translations of these people have been published by Mashal Publications but BS level boys in the university hardly know them. All of them read Qasim Ali Shah, Borya Naqbool Jan and Zalil-ur-Rehman Qamar and the result is that when they start arguing, they start with hatred against Jews and against women and end with it.
Once she started saying that she wanted to go to Nankana Sahib but she was afraid that someone might kidnap her and kill her. I said no such calamity has come, now countless Sikhs from different countries of the world keep coming to Pakistan all the year round. Despite my reassurance, they are still scared.
The question is, what is the source of this fear? In short,
the Indian media itself plays the most important role in creating this fear,
while on the other hand, religious students in Pakistan have played an
important role in this regard. Hindi films often portray a very ugly and
negative face of Pakistan, the thematic imprint is so deep that extremist Hindu
ideology pervades art as art, and filmmakers and directors' own prejudices
replace art. Take it
Apart from politicians and media, the film is playing a
pivotal role in spreading hatred at the ideological level. Now it is clear that
the rulers have a major role to play in spreading hatred on the basis of
different sects, different countries, different colors, races, nationalities,
languages, otherwise the people of Pakistan have a wider heart than the
Indians. Religion is the main reason for the spread of hatred in both
countries. That is why it is necessary to promote secular values so that
religion is excluded not only from politics but also from the curriculum. In
the minds of Pakistanis, all hatred is against infidels, and this is the
subject of their politics and education. One of the major shortcomings of the
PTI government was that it made certain sections of religious texts necessary
to destroy the minds of children in schools. Our question is, do these people
have any strategy to reduce hatred, and to draw attention to the real problems
of the people? Isn't the intellect of these people capable of finding a way out
of the cave ideology of hundreds of years ago? Their rational evolution seems
to be "complete," and they have no choice but to decentralize man. They
are carrying religion on their heads and walking backwards. The great German
philosopher Friedrich Hegel said that truth is like bread, which burns on one
side, so things must be changed, or else man will be wasted in this theological
business of hatred.
Comrade Yusuf Tarigami has passed away in the same year.
He was a leading leader of the National Conference Party
(Farooq Abdullah Wali Party) in Jammu and Kashmir, India and a frequently
elected MLA. He came to Lahore to participate in the Congress of 2014. He
watched the proceedings of the Congress for two days in a row. They will go to
Nagar and tell their comrades that if I have come to Lahore, Pakistan to attend
a wonderful and peaceful Congress which was arranged by the Communists of
Pakistan, then no one will believe me.
This is just an angle of thinking. Hundreds of my friends
have come to Pakistan. They travel without fear and danger. Now there is social
media. Make new friends, get information and get their services and go on a tour
of Pakistan.
Two or three foreigners have expressed their desire to see
Pakistan to me in spite of all my consolations that wherever you people intend
to go, there are normal conditions just like your own countries. There is no
fear, no danger and There is no uncertainty but so far I have failed to allay
their fears in spite of millions of Jatts. It is not their fault either. I
breathe on my own; because an invisible fear haunts me like a shadow, as soon
as I come out of the airport I look at everyone with suspicious eyes but as
soon as I get in the car the situation starts to feel normal.
She is Ms. Bharti where there is constant propaganda against
Pakistan but I am Pakistani, I live in Pakistani society albeit symbolically
but I am Muslim (symbolic explanation is coming up). I do, I intend, and I
cancel the intention just so that there is no explosion. I have been planning
Friday prayers for the last six months, but this is the thought that I will not
be able to attend the funeral of any famous person for fear of this.
Explanation: You know of Pakistani society that you have to wear the cloak of
Islam, otherwise it would have taken two and a half minutes. Their fears are
justified.
Reading the current political situation in Pakistan and the attitudes of politicians, the comments of artists, poets, journalists and "intellectuals" on them, I am reminded of Plato's dialogue 'Apology' in which Sharifon asks a Delphi deity: "Is there anyone wiser than Socrates?" The goddess of Pythagoras replied, "No, no one is wiser than Socrates." Now Socrates needed to confirm this statement of the goddess. Sharifon was dead, so Socrates thought he would meet people who have great names in wisdom, and see for himself how wise they are. In this regard Socrates first meets a great wise politician, and asks him a few questions, and then see the conclusion that Socrates draws in his own words:
"Neither of us knows anything good or reasonable, but
I'm still better than that." Because he doesn't know anything but thinks
he knows a lot and I don't know and I don't think I know anything. "So I'm
better than that.
After that Socrates meets some more people, like the
journalists of our country. See what Socrates concludes after meeting them in
Socrates' own words:
"The result of this investigation was that I saw that
the people who have the most fame are the most foolish and those who are not
respected are actually better and more intelligent than them."
After meeting these two types of people, Socrates came up
with the idea of meeting the great poets, including Almiya, Farhiya and all
kinds of other poets. Socrates thought that now he would be caught and the word
of the gods would be proved wrong, but he was sure that the gods do not speak
wrong. So Socrates took the most difficult poems of his poetry and started
talking to them with the question, what are the meanings of these poems?
However, when Socrates, after hearing their answers, looked at their mental
state and said:
Believe me, I am ashamed to say these words, but I am
compelled to say that every one of the people who are here can speak better to
these poets about poetry, as they themselves have done. ۔
Then I came to know that these poets do not say poetry with wisdom but with a
kind of conscience. Their condition is like that of priests who say many good
things but do not know their meaning. Besides, I have seen that poets, on the
strength of their poetry, call themselves wise even in matters of which they
have no knowledge.
After the poets came the industry. After talking to the
craftsmen, Socrates concluded that they had no knowledge of what they were
saying, based on a particular skill. And the industrialists were also suffering
from the same misunderstanding that the poets were victims of. As a result,
Socrates concludes that not every person has knowledge of everything, but only
of certain things which pertain to his field. But if you look at the
politicians in Pakistan, they are not familiar with the principles of politics,
the situation of poets is not different from them and journalists who consider
themselves experts in political matters are not even aware of the basic
principles of journalism. ۔
Today I have made two comments on a post, you also read.
Modernists are still better, otherwise non-modernism is said
to be a characteristic of Abu Jahl, and the common Muslim of today has every
characteristic that was present in Abu Jahl. Abu Jahl was also very sure of the
truth of his religion.
Doubts and atheists have always been and always will be. Abu
Jahl was neither a skeptic nor an atheist, but he believed in God, who was
nevertheless killed.
Doubt and atheism always present aspects of progressivism
and innovation, and both were not present in Abu Jahl, who, like the Muslims,
believed in religious traditions as true, and was against the modernists of his
time. Basically, you are the trustee of the intellectual tradition of Abu Jahl,
not the tradition of Anjanab.
This comment was raised by a brother.
Abu Jahl believed in God?
To which god
Is it the same God whom the Prophet (peace and blessings of
Allaah be upon him) used to preach?
What good is a web site if it simply "blends in"
with everything else out there? "
My answer was this.
Did Abu Jahl and Anjab believe in two different gods? That
is, God is not one but two?
Jews, Christians and others have different ideas about the
rest of God. But having different ideas about God doesn't make God two, four or
six.
The concept of God that Abu Jahl believed in was inherited
by him, just as you or anyone else inherited the concept of God. In it, Abu
Jahl was convinced of his concept of God, just as you are convinced of the
concept of God borrowed from inheritance. Now Abu Jahl is wrong and how did you
become right?
As far as idolatry is concerned, Hindus are now close to one billion. Even God's efforts did not eliminate idolatry. The Islamic God tried very hard, he himself used to throw stones at the polytheists in wars, but what spoiled them, nothing.
A man from St. Augustine asked, "What was God doing before
he created the world?"
Augustine said it was hell for those who asked such questions.
I never discuss politics in my private gatherings, but touch
on scientific and intellectual topics. This is because most people start with
the affirmation of phenomena, while we start with the negation of phenomena.
The act of negation is the first rational action. While the affirmation of
phenomena is limited to sensory or comprehension only. They begin in
affirmation, while our affirmation lasts, when we have reached the essence of
phenomena. The whole process of reaching the essence depends on the rational
activity.
The Source of Ethics: Man or Someone Else?
Pushing the deity out of the human being and then
considering this deity as the source of morality and laying the foundation of
morality on it, falls under the category of immorality under the concept of
modern philosophy and human centrality and rational references. Every morality
in which the deity is the central reference, and the morality that has reached
man through the deity is immoral. Where there is no centrality of man, there is
only alienation, alienation of man from himself, from his human status. There
is no rational justification for the deity and its centrality in modern
philosophy.
The intellect belongs to man, not to God. That is why the
great Aristotle laid the foundations of his book "Ethics" twenty-four
hundred years ago on the basis of reason. What could be more immoral than to
first deport or decentralize man as a human being, and to replace him with a
deity, and then to teach man morality through this deity? If man can acquire
and practice false morality through the medium of God, then why can't he
practice real morality on the basis of his own centrality? It must be borne in
mind that the centrality of the deity can never be the basis of morality; Man's
direct relationship with man is moral, and through God or someone else, is
immoral.
A few years ago, French philosopher Alan Bedouin, speaking on the British channel's program "Hard Talk", was sharply criticizing the policies of the French government. The host said that you are criticizing the policies of the best country like France while your socialism is long gone. The historical words that Bedio said there still resonate in my mind. "I'm a philosopher, not a journalist, and as long as I see new and better possibilities, I'll be very critical," Bedouin said.
From this conversation I came to the conclusion that a true student of philosophy or philosophy should sharply criticize political and social issues, as long as he has in mind the idea of building a better society. In our country which is trapped in the clutches of the worst political parties, where political parties are transferred by will and one person is made party leader for life, journalists and top intellectuals would be justifying their legitimacy. Are In response to one of my criticisms of the concept of hereditary politics, a superficial "intellectual" said that "democracy in Pakistan has not yet matured." I objected that becoming the spokesperson of these political parties would make democracy more abominable. People should be made aware that if there is dictatorship within political parties then such parties would not be democratic.
Within France, the chances of improvement were slim, as most of the ideals had been achieved, but a philosopher like Bedouin criticizes it for showing more possibilities. Here in Pakistan, journalism is a buying and selling of conscience, everyone is acting on behalf of their party. But what is the problem with these "intellectuals"? Do they not have a better choice at the intellectual level on the basis of which people can be awakened? Criticize government policies, if they are hostile to the people, set the ideal so that people can realize a better alternative. That's how change happens.
What is the process of making a video?
What's wrong with a married man walking around naked in his room or house, running, or having sex to the best of his ability? What if you were going to the bathroom after having sex and your wife made a video from behind? We don't know anything about the lives of married people, what they do at night, but making videos of everything they do is an ugly moral act that must be condemned. In my opinion, making a video in such a situation should be legally acceptable. Suppose a man makes a video of his wife or girlfriend in such a situation? Now the person we don't like, is the will against him all good? Man has his own rules and regulations. So present proof of mental puberty.
I was overwhelmed when I entered the literature department at the University of Birmingham in the UK and attended class on the first day. I feel like I'm stuck in the wrong place. We came from Pakistan (although I had done MA International Journal from the same university before), and we could do nothing but memorize. The first week, however, passed, deciding what to do next. Four books were handed out the following week, including books on the culture of TS Elliott, Matthew Arnold, Raymond Williams and Terry Eagleton, and it was stated that they would be discussed next week.
Well, I didn't know what to talk about in class next week, so I ran out of time to listen to others. Then there was a list of books to be read in the coming weeks, including Karl Marx's 18th Bromeier, Lucas's History and Class Consciousness, essays on Gramsci's culture, Tariq Ali's book on culture, Rolland Barth's mythology. Including many other books.
Three months passed and the first part was completed. The students were then asked what to study in the next three months. There are three lists to choose from. I chose Philosophy of Aesthetics, and the books on the list included Plato's Republic, David Hume's Essays on Aesthetics, Bamgarten's Aesthetic Theory, Schiller's Letters, and Emmanuel Kant's Third Criticism. Many other books were included, including A Critique of Aesthetics. Well, I had to write three articles in three months. Have to write, semester is over. He rested for a while and then the head of the school called a meeting, in which he asked what would you choose for your final dissertation? Anyway, the training was done. I chose Trotsky's "Literature and Revolution" and wrote an essay on it. He later decided to write a dissertation on Kant's philosophy of aesthetics. As I write my dissertation on Trotsky's book, I repeatedly include philosophy. Supervisor's philosophy was not specialized. They did not stop me from saying that you were doing wrong, but held a meeting with the head of the school and gave me another philosopher and supervisor who had written several books on Wittgenstein. From there I set out to reconcile literature and philosophy and completed two dissertations, one on Trotsky and the other on Kant.
The supervisor never told me what to do. He would only meet me every other week and ask what he had done, and check the quality. There was a lot of trouble, they had left Pakistan, they had to do everything by themselves. However, the work was completed. I was given three titles to choose from. The reason was that I had reconciled literature and philosophy. Anyway, at least I didn't go down without explaining myself first.
The purpose of all this explanation was simply to show that in the British education system, the inside of a person is brought out, his abilities are enhanced. Curiosity is created in it, it is made active, not unknown. Nothing is pushed into it. We are given material in the form of books to think about, but the final decision rests with the student. In the UK, the process begins with schools. Later, during my experience in schools, I saw how a GCSC child criticizes Shakespeare.
How he criticizes religion and how he sees freely what happened in the two great wars of the twentieth century, not that this child is part of any propaganda. Twelve-year-olds were asked during the Iraq war what they thought was right and wrong. Most of the children called it wrong and criticized the policies of their country and the training is such that the child does not get involved in propaganda. Fourteen-year-olds openly criticize British policies while studying history. Criticism of the church is a general attitude that is not taught to children, but is formed by children in their own minds, taking into account a wider historical context.
There is no such thing as "British Studies" like "Pakistan Studies", which should be stuck in the minds. That is the true meaning of burning up of bad psychic imprints on one's mind and body. The education system here teaches man to be active, responsible, a believer in equality, respect for freedom of expression, and the tolerance required for a pluralistic society. There is a great creator hidden inside every child, this is the work of education and this is how to bring it out.
The conditions of the country and the head and shoulders of the bald
Chhota Ganja arrived in the UK on a two-day tour with his team on the 11th. PML-N's Channel J is saying that the visit has been extended, as consultations are underway with "Badshah Salamat" (big bald) about the country's economic situation. Keep in mind that there is no economist bigger than Badshah Salamat in Pakistan at the moment.
Two things are skyrocketing in the country at the moment: one is inflation and the other is humiliation of liberals. Because the Liberals are now completely silent, a few who are alive but dead on the inside, are busy abusing Imran Khan, who has now turned from a politician to a religious reformer. While both the bald ones are eating sari pai and khadi here.
However, the extension of the visit to Chhota Ganja, which is said to be aimed at consulting King Salamat (the elder Ganja) on the economy, proves that the Prime Minister is about 20,000 feet above Chhota Ganja's Ganja. That is why he did not find any slave in the whole of Pakistan.
The work that Molotte had been doing for centuries, and which we had been teaching in schools since childhood, he has now begun. Now who can explain to this person that truth is important only because of truth and not because of any deity. I wish this man had read Plato's dialogue in which the great Plato had concluded with reference to goodness that goodness is valued only because of goodness. The limit has been reached.
Many friends keep asking questions about philosophy, literary and critical theories. Obviously, it is not possible to answer everyone. Over the past few weeks, many questions have arisen about postmodern "theoretical" structures, metaphysics. Most friends are not aware of the basics. When they are asked that there are some professors in Pakistan, contact them, they reply that "they themselves have no knowledge." However, in the next few days I will try to review the "central" issues of structures and post-structures. I will give a one hour live lecture for this, and then your live questions will be taken. The lecture will be given in the light of the questions inboxed by your friends.
A religious thinker has stated that the reason for denying God in philosophy is ontological argument. While we say that the position of religions is also ontological. For example, the greatest theologian brings only the "argument" as to where the universe came from and then without argument claims that it was created by God. The question then goes, Who created God? And how is it possible that God created the universe? It is the responsibility of the one who claims to have created the universe to make this point clear and to prove it. However, we see that God has been missing for many centuries for unknown reasons. We've documented his disappearance many times, but it's possible he did. I don't know why he is so ashamed. Since he cannot come forward, lies are being spread in his name.
Although the basis of ontological argument is philosophical, the great Aristotle, in his book Science of Ontology, discussed in detail in his book Metaphysics Four, discovered a first principle which is not the creator of the universe. Was, in fact, the cause of motion in the universe. Religious people do not know that if there is no ontology, meaning no existence, or no universe, matter, etc., then there is no such thing, and if there is no such thing, then there is no God, and there is no belief in God. So where will the debate come from? However, it is true that religious gods have lost their case due to their ontological position. If God's own books do not offer any proof of his existence, should philosophers give the answer? This is ridiculous.
Now the problem is that whenever religious people bring arguments in favor of God, instead of bringing their own religious books, which they say were sent by the same God, they use the arguments of these few philosophers. There are those who see the Creator in the universe, but do not acknowledge the folly of these religions in the name of God and in His books. The principle is that God proves Himself through His own books. But that is not the case. The authors of these religious books, as far as they know, claim to be nothing more than stupidity.
Religious people do not even know that the philosophical God is only to the extent of the universe, and he does not interfere in the affairs of the people. As Aristotle said, God does not know the details, if He has, He only knows the Universals. Unlike the philosophical god, the religious god who considers it necessary to get involved in every issue, cannot even explain himself. Philosophical God, if there is one, is great in that He has made man active, endowed him with intellect, the simultaneous presence of intellect and revelation gives rise to irreconcilable contradictions, and the whole history of religions confirms this. That is, whenever the intellect is active with all its might, the manipulations of revelation begin to take place, and then its defenders start fighting the rationalists. If God is rational, then He needed to create rationalists. Otherwise, only murderers have been created who are always engaged in subjugating the intellect to revelation, instead of elevating it to the level of revelation. Bring it to the level of. They take pleasure in bringing down the intellect.
The god of religion is something else. The god of Judaism, for example, was a racial and tribal god. If you have read the Bible you must have read that he used to talk to Abraham through Isaac, Jacob and later other "prophets". For example, in the Jewish tradition, the "Ten Commandments" were spoken and written by God Himself to Moses. The God of the Jews was racist, and unjustifiably hated other races. Ordered to kill them, even to kill their cattle. There was no reason other than that he wanted to be given such and such land, such and such land.
The God of Christianity was not universal either. Christ said in the Gospel that He only came in search of the lost sheep of the Jews. So the God of Christianity was also racist. His characteristic, however, was that he took on a human form and was finally crucified, freeing and activating the human intellect. And this idea formed the basis of modern Western philosophy that after Christ human will is free and later Kant provided rational basis for morality and discovered that there is no morality without free will.
The God of the Arabs was also a god of the Arabs before Muhammad. Then he used it. He made God not universal but very bigoted and biased. He was so biased that he fought wars with the infidels alongside the Muslims and stoned the infidels.
Now, knowing all this religious nonsense, a reasonable person must become an atheist, provided that faith has not taken away from him all his ability to think. Philosophers sought to reconcile Christian philosophy with the concept of "essential existence." Therefore, the concept of obligatory existence is not religious in itself, but has been established by rationalist philosophers, which is used by theologians. The concept of the essential existence of God was discovered in the tenth century by the Christian theologian St. Anselm.
The modern founders of this concept were the German philosophers Leibniz and Wolf. But Kant dispelled his metaphysical rhetoric, making it clear that God is merely an idea of reason, which cannot be verified by sensory experience. Therefore, the concept of essential existence was logically shattered. These issues have not reached these people, because they are ignorant of the history of philosophy, they come up with the same old "arguments" which have been thrown in the dustbin of history.
If we do not tolerate this heat today, then ten years later our children will die in our own hands from global warming. The only solution is to plant trees. Mango, Jaman, Litchi and Falsa seasons are at their peak. In this regard, we request you not to throw the seeds and pods of these fruits in the trash after eating the fruits, but to wash them and put them in your car etc. and whenever you pass by such a place. Where there are no trees, etc., throw the seeds and pods there, or in places along the highways. After a few days the rainy season will show its color and most of the seeds you have sown will germinate and by the grace of Allah will become trees. Trees are not only a charity but also the biggest need of Pakistan and the world at this time, this small action of ours will be the first drop to make Pakistan a green Pakistan. And it is an investment that will benefit our future generations.
We know that conductors are required for the transmission of electricity and almost all metals are conductors but most of the wires made of silver or copper are used for the transmission of electricity. Scientists have been trying for some time to get rid of this entanglement of stars. One of the earliest successes in this regard is the successful experiment of the US Navy Research Institute, which for the first time has been able to transmit electricity from one place to another without the use of wires.
Experts have described it as an "extraordinary development" in which the US Naval Research Laboratory (NRL) has sent about one and a half kilowatts of electricity one kilometer away without a wire. The experiment was conducted in a military research field in Maryland. The principle of this experiment is very simple and interesting. It converts large amounts of electricity into the first microwave radiation. These microwave rays travel through the air to the receiver where it is converted into direct current or DC electricity.
In this experiment, some amount of energy was wasted and 60% of the electricity reached from one place to another, but this rate is higher than the expectations of the experts. The experiment also showed that birds, humans and trees were not harmed.
The success of this experiment has shown that the day is not far when electricity can be transmitted from one place to another without any wires. On the other hand, according to experts, this technology will be equally effective in space and will also be able to send electricity to the earth 24 hours a day through large solar panels in the Earth's orbit.
Like every time, he thought to go by public transport, but he decided to follow the advice of some friends, took his elder sister with him and dared to drive himself. ۔
My friendship with this sister is more than all siblings and when friendship is more, you can think of enmity.
On the way, while refreshing our childhood memories, we came to a point where we both fell silent for a few moments.
I was driving and my brain started playing.
Being from a lower middle class family, the first dream of my childhood could have been to have a big house and a big car.
But it was never thought that the house and the car would be privately owned, and no clear concept of women's ownership could ever be formed in girls like us.
The only thing that used to happen was that it would be Brother John's car and we would come and say, “Brother John! Where's the car key? Go shopping. "
And the brother will say go with the driver. Since ATMs or credit cards were not the norm at the time, the idea of handing out cash could only come to mind.
In other words, the dream of economic development in our country is associated only with the man of the house. Why couldn't we, as girls, think for ourselves?
Why never thought that I would have a car and my brother would say “Sheila! Where is the key? I have to go to work. "
I will have a home and I will be able to earn enough to have an army of employees at home who are always at the service of my parents.
Today, all that we used to think of associating with our brothers, we do not know how and why we got to own the property rights, but in our collective training, there was no concept of autonomy at all.
Think about whether you are giving confidence to the daughters of your household that the ease of their lives is not only the responsibility of these male relatives.
... Labor Day
The wealth of the upper and middle class is created by squeezing the laborer. The upper and middle class people boast that they have become richer from the poor due to their hard work and intelligence. But they forget that they did not become rich by their own labor but by becoming rich in such a way that they made them work by paying less than other hard working people.
He was recruited as a painter in a Marathi army. When he retired, he started a dyeing shop with the money he got. This is what he had been doing all his life. Paint the dupatta with fiery pink ”- Now Marathi has dyed khaki uniforms all his life. Even the elders do not know what is the name of fiery punk. It seems that the girl said, "Uncle Atashi Punk matches with my suit." Marathi said quietly. They are in color. ”Marathi said,“ Look, son, this is a khaki color, it is very ripe, all the other colors are raw. ” Nothing comes 😕 I will get it painted somewhere else. ”Marathi snatched the scarf back angrily and said angrily,
_________
🙂🤣🤣🤣🤣 So have fun sitting at home with the children and do not spoil the relationship.
