Chapter: I

It is very difficult to explain what philosophy is in terms of philosophy. But the answer becomes easy when we are willing to step out of philosophy. Then the answer can be given in just one word: philosophy is a language. But that exposes us to yet another difficult question: what is language? We all know what language is. But it is very difficult to explain what it is actually. It is difficult because we will have to explain language in terms of language only. We have no other option. Now, as we will try to understand language just in terms of language, we will not bother to restrict ourselves within conventional domains of any particular discipline such as philosophy or science. Firstly; we must not forget that philosophy is a language, but language is not just limited to philosophy. Neither is language limited to science, art or religion. Hence we will float freely among these disciplines and touch upon concepts which will help us to understand language. Secondly; I consider myself primarily to be an artist. In that sense art is my first discipline. As an artist I realize that since art is a language, I first need to understand what language is. And this I believe is equally true for science, philosophy and religion. It is this conviction that I want to share with my fellow artists and with the general readership. Until we understand language, we just can’t understand ‘life’, ‘mind’, ‘matter’, ‘being’, ‘knowledge’, ‘evolution’, ‘consciousness’, ‘god’, or the ‘cosmos’. Just as we can’t understand ’society’, ‘state’, ‘economy’, ‘polity’, ‘law’, ‘culture’, ‘value’, or ‘ethics’. So we can’t understand ‘physics’, ‘chemistry’, ‘biology’, ‘mathematics’, ‘logic’, ‘grammar’, ‘literature’, ‘music’, ‘painting’, ‘dance’, or ‘drama’. Each one of them is ultimately a word (just as each of science, art, philosophy and religion is ultimately a language). And since they are words, they are integral parts of language. Now, the problem is that the general readership is not well conversant with the technical vocabularies of science, philosophy, or linguistics. So in order to overcome this difficulty I will largely restrict myself from using technical jargons. Furthermore, such technical languages are mostly very rigid. Their

debates and talk shows. In the parliaments we see the parliamentarians involved in very serious debates. the nature of their linguistic interactions influences the nature of their relationship. Two individuals A1 and A2 are talking with one another: they are engaged in a discussion. All sort of people involved with all sort of things. Such interactions may take innumerable shape and forms. Let us begin with an arbitrary example. But the thing that becomes very clear is that there is some sort of relationship between A1 and A2. These ‘innumerable factors’ determine the dynamics of their relationship. ecology and the cosmos. and hence are not much open to reinterpretations and improvisations. The nature of their relationship invariably influences the nature of their linguistic interactions. meetings. and the beggars begging in the streets. the men flirting with women. and we see people talking with one another. The ministers discuss important policies in the cabinet meetings. ‘the nature of their linguistic interactions’ also depends upon innumerable factors. And similarly. I believe that the fluidity of ‘natural language’ is ideally suited for my purpose and I will largely restrict myself to its spirit. the priests chanting in the temples. In other words A1 and A2 are linguistically interacting with one another. And at the same time. the clergies preaching in the churches. we see the lawyers pleading in the courts. The directors decide important strategies in the board meetings. Along with them we see the actors acting. For that we will have to start from somewhere.terminologies tend to be well defined. Let us elaborate. In the United Nations we see the head of states involved in very serious discussions. Everywhere we see seminars. We see the world around us. professors teaching in the universities. we intend to understand language. the leaders addressing the rallies. And at the same time. the singers . the ‘nature of their relationship’ depends upon innumerable factors. Now. Now. This is so because the relationship between A1 and A2 is an integral part of a very large network of relationships that include the whole of our human society. Most of such terms have a long history. the sellers negotiating with the buyers. symposiums.

The relationship between A1 and A2 is an integral part of this network of relationships. drinking. all talking with one another. conspiring and even rioting. and various other public address systems. this network of relationships which we are talking about is an integral part of a is an ever evolving phenomenon. cheering their favorite teams and favorite stars. the lovers. . the dancers dancing. multileveled. Now. the painters painting. the musicians playing music. We see people in groups. And this fabric which is woven in terms of human language is ultimately determined by the nature human interactions. praying. gossiping. attending parties. fighting. It came into existence with the emergence of human language. the idea of the ‘fabric’ that we have just engendered I hope will enable us to visualize Our arbitrary example can engender innumerable stories. billboards. the family members the relatives. the sculptors sculpting. mobiles. exhibitions. going for picnic. television. and the players playing their games. DVDs. Now. magazines. protesting. multidimensional interactions they become related with one another.singing. internet. pen drives. The two individuals A1 and A2 are talking with one another It is this fabric that determines the nature their relationship. it implies that this ‘fabric’ influences the nature of their linguistic interactions. multilayered. the neighbors. laughing. the writers writing. telephones. chips. big and small. radio. It includes the interactions between A1 and A2. the colleagues. CDs. Apart from them we see the friends. And in terms of these myriad. advertisements. We are surrounded by books. the business partners. the journalists reporting news. agitating. crying. the film makers making cinema. chatting. newspapers. celebrating. In other words it implies that the nature of their relationship that influences the nature of their linguistic interactions is determined by this fabric.

And at the same time.the whole fabric The nature of their relationship invariably influences the nature of their linguistic interactions. Now. A2 So be it– but an ever changing one . In terms of such linguistic interactions Mr. And this relationship is definitely not a static relationship. A1 is coordinating with Mr. the nature of their linguistic interactions influences the nature of their relationship We are uninterruptedly weaving this fabric since we learned to talk in terms of language. this fabric that we are uninterruptedly weaving is an integral part of a much larger fabric.