University Library, University of North Bengal

The journal Philosophical Papers is a UGC- Care Enlisted and peer-reviewed journal that carries the legacy of the Department of Philosophy, University of North Bengal. The Department of Philosophy of North Bengal University is a leading Department among the humanities faculties. The UGC SAP Programmme, enjoyed by the Department from 2002 to 2020 in different phases, transformed the Department into an ideal higher educational hub. The financial assistance received by the Department under the SAP program has hugely enriched the departmental infrastructure, library, and computer lab to a large extent. During the UGC SAP Programme, the Department published more than thirty-seven books and eminent professors from all over the country and abroad visited the Department. As a result, the students, research scholars, teachers of the Department of Philosophy, and affiliated colleges were immensely benefited.

However, it was a setback for the Department of Philosophy when the journal Philosophical Papers: Journal of the Department of Philosophy (jpp.nbu.ac.in) was not included in the UGC-Care Enlisted Journals during the Covid period. Prof. Laxmikanta Padhi, the then Head of the Department of Philosophy, almost singlehandedly took the initiative to revive the journal. With his innovative effort, the journal finds its place in the UGC-CARE ENLISTED JOURNAL list. Since then, the journal has drawn the attention of scholars all over India. It is heartening that the Department receives papers of a diverse philosophical nature, and particular emphasis is given to the core philosophical areas covering different branches of philosophy. We also encourage papers related to Indian philosophy and interdisciplinary ones. However, the final selection of the paper is solely based on the blind report received from the reviewers.

Though disheartening, it is still a reality that due to the financial embargo of the authority of North Bengal University, we have no option but to reduce the page quality and the number of copies of the journal. However, the contributor to the journal will get the opportunity to access the online copy. Having said this, the Department, in particular, remained grateful to the Honourable Vice-Chancellor, the Registrar (Officiating), the Finance Officer, and the University Press, whose unvarying support has made the publication possible. We hope the authority of the University will support the Department in the coming days.

This year, we incorporated twenty-four papers and two book reviews. The papers are diverse. The paper entitled: Can a Vijñānavādi Consistently Admit the Existence of Other Mind? Dharmakirti vs. Ratnakirti by Dilip Kumar Mohanta deals with the controversy about the existence of other minds between Dharmakirti and Ratnakirti. The author, following texts, argued that Dharmakirti admits to the existence of other minds in the way Yogācāra’s view is considered. Ratnakirti refuted Dharmakirti’s view regarding the existence of other minds for various reasons. If the Vijñānavādi admits that the "other mind" exists in addition to one's own mind, it will contradict the established thesis of Dharmakirti: 'Mind is the only reality.' Moreover, one cannot prove other minds through perception and inference; hence, their independent existence is denied. The author ends the paper with the conclusion that Dharmakirti denies the existence of other minds not from an empirical point of view but from an ultimate point of view.

In Inequable Right Claims of Unequables? The Abortion Conudrum, Jyotish Chandra Basak mainly focuses on the controversy associated with the mystical nature of abortion. Even though the issue of abortion is primarily an issue of medical science where medical ethics determines the cogency of abortion, the issue still appears as a serious ethical issue to moral philosophers. Among many other debates, moral philosophers, in particular, cannot ignore the ethical aspect, particularly when, for some reason or other, the mother desires to discontinue the pregnancy and terminate the fetus. The writer, throughout his paper, has developed arguments for and against abortion. The writer argues that the problem of abortion is not only an ethical issue but it is equally a social, religious, and cultural issue. Keeping this insight in mind, the writer cited various judicial verdicts, the judicial discrepancies of such verdicts, and side-by-side also exemplified the nascence of the fetus in the light of Ayurved Sastras. Besides, the paper's writer discusses the pragmatic approach of Buddhism and the position of the Quoran and finally revisits the vital issue and debate of the fetus's moral status. This paper reflects that there is a vast gulf between the rational perception of abortion and the religious and ethical implications of abortion. Having said this, the writer, at the end of his paper, concludes by saying that to overcome the problem of abortion, we need to have a society with more rational and progressive thinking.

The paper Adopting and Rejecting Logic by Nilanjan Bhowmik provides a motivating insight into logic. In modern times, we confine ourselves to Logic and Logics even though ignoring the substratum of first-order propositional (sentential) logic would be difficult. The writer argues that not all logic obeys classical logic as it seems the fundamental principle of classical logic, namely, the principle of excluded middle, has been challenged. As a result, it is argued that logic needs to be revised to be on par with the development of science. There lies the relevance of the revision of logic. Indeed, the writer, while substantiating the title "Adopting and Rejecting Logic", in some sense or other, invokes logical revisionism. In this regard, he takes Putnam and Quine and then argues that logical revisionism results from the empirical pressure of Putnam and Quine.

On the other hand, Kripke argues that we cannot set aside reasoning while doing logic. However, the reasoning that we apply in the case of a formal logic system is about the portion of reasoning. In this context, Kripke admits that a formal system of logic is departed from classical logic. The writer also exemplifies the normativity of logic and reasoning in the light of Kripke. The writer is not in favour of rejecting logic; instead, he is in favour of revising classical logic, which creates a new formal system of logic. However, this does not lead us to assume that such a revised form of classical logic is not similar to science, nor do we say that the new formal system is open to rejection. Even though logic is a systematic study of reasoning, it remains sceptical and doubtful about what logic our reasoning employs. It is argued that logic deals with a portion of specific human reasoning. The writer further argues that even though some revisionism in logic is welcome, it does not or cannot hamper the apriority of logic. Finally, the writer concludes that the adoption and rejection of logic is a viable practice of logic because if we cannot adopt logic, we cannot reject it either.

The paper entitled: Re-vitalizing Vedantic Epistemology- Conceptions of Depth Epistemology in S.L.Pandey, R.D. Ranade and A.C. Mukherji: Elements, Topology, and Some Problems by Anubhav Varshney deals with the concept of Depth Epistemology with particular reference to Professor S.L. Pandey, R.D. Ranade and A.C. Mukherji. The concept of Depth Epistemology bears some novelty and uniqueness, which the author wants to explore in this paper. The author has taken pain in reading the writings of Professor S.L. Pandey, Professor Ranade, and Mukherjee and has explored their own observations regarding Depth Epistemology. Professor Ranade has developed a new variant of Depth Epistemology, while Professor Mukherjee has synthesized the idealistic traditions of India and the West. The author has tried to stress Depth Epistemology to re-vitalize the Vedantic views of knowledge, followed by some problems concerning Depth Epistemology, which are worth pondering.

The paper Unsocial Sociability and our Predisposition to Goodness: Kantian Perspective by Arup Jyoti Sharma reflects a new dimension of Kantian unsocial sociability. According to Kant, man is a social being, and as a social being, a man expresses goodness and evil in society. The expression of evil may be defined as unsocial sociability. The present paper tries to discern how some use the social structure to appease evil. In his paper, the author explicates Kant’s opinion about unsocial sociability or radical evil and the predisposition to goodness by establishing an ethical community. After such an establishment, an individual tries to encounter it and use it negatively for himself, i.e., for individual purposes. The author claims that using society for individual evil purposes, such as breaking down the society itself is unsocial sociability. Again, by studying the difference between reason and inclination, the author has shown how an individual uses reason to favour the inclinations, leading to evil and the breakdown of the very social structure, which is like a stool in their hands. This area of ethics has yet to be the area of much research. In his paper, the author displays a deep understanding of the subject and how reason has been used to favour instinct from the Kantian perspective.

The paper entitled Theories of Justice and the Epistemic Foundation of Pluralism by Md. Inamur Rahaman attempts to develop the significance of justice in the light of modern political thought. Here, he conceives Rawls' concept of justice as fairness, the 'first virtue of social institutions', and Plato's virtue of soul as the form of Good. The author then argues that Rawls' conception of justice as 'the first virtue of social institutions' and Plato's conception of justice as the 'virtue of soul' are two different paradigms of understanding and cognizing socio-political thought and two fundamentally different epistemological systems. The author's main contention is to show the relationship between these two paradigms within pluralism. While substantiating his objective, the author divides the paper into four sections. In the first section, the author shows how Rawls developed and reached an objective principle of justice; in the second section, he develops in what sense the epistemic presupposition of Cartesian Dualism obtained specific knowledge based on similar presuppositions; in the third section, the author in the light of Plato's Republic examines different epistemic and political approaches, and the final section appears as the concluding one where the author attempts to show an alternative way of existence where the integrity of the soul could firmly be established through plural engagements of the world.

We, as humans, need peace, love, and harmony. It is even more relevant when the world is witnessing war at present. N. Ramthing, in his paper entitled Peace Studies: A Brief Philosophical Outline explores in what sense peace is imperative for mutual and harmonious global co-existence. Peace Study as an ongoing discipline carries global, theoretical, practical, and normative outlooks. It stands as a promising platform that peacefully resolves conflicts and violence. Peace is not only an abstract idea; rather, one can take it as an essential policy for achieving global peace. The author outlines the relevance of peace studies from a wide-ranging multidisciplinary perspective. Peace can be interpersonal, intrapersonal, political, cultural, or spiritual, where issues arising from society, state, national, and international are involved. The author relooks at and justifies all these by studying the brief genesis of the evolution of peace studies. Besides, he also illustrates theoretical concepts of peace in the light of classical realism, structural realism, liberalism, and constructivism, and more importantly, considers the transcendal approach of peace studies in the light of Galtung. Finally, the author brings the Gandhian Principle of Ahiṁsā as the foundation of Peace Studies. Peace or peace study will remain a far cry without the spirit of non-violence. Non-violence can be the only virtue that can effectively establish peace and perpetual peace. The author ends the paper with the insight that his understanding of peace studies is dynamic, collaborative, integrative, and transforming, where there is no place or room for war. As the world badly needs peace, love, and harmony, a resolution of abolishing war and conflict in the line of Ahiṁsā can be an effective resolution for overcoming war and conflicts.

Education is light, and primary education is a must for all. Thus, life and education are interwoven in a meaningful way. However, not all types of education are coherent with ethical and moral values. Our contemporary thinkers, namely Gandhi, Vivekananda, Tagore, and others, do not consider the so-called higher education as value-based or proper. Bhupesh Debbarma, in his paper titled M. K. Gandhi on Education makes a conscious attempt to unfold in what sense the present world overwhelmed with greed and materialistic attitude dismantles value-based education. The web of AI and machine learning educational systems incurs and redirects humans' propensity toward materialism, individualism, and subjectivism and, in turn, gradually diminishes the gulf between basic needs and greed. Within the post-modern civilized environment, cultural and spiritual values are constantly eroded, and formal education is mainly responsible for that. The author argues that the Gandhian concept of education can significantly shape a world of peace by redirecting the web of materialism into spiritualism. The author intends to say that proper education is the education of the Self, not of the mind, and his understanding of education in the light of Gandhi will address questions like, does education stand as a means for livelihood or to achieve academic recognition? What, then, is the highest end of education? The author attempts to unearth the true meaning of education in the light of Gandhi, which will ensure a harmonious co-existence of all living beings. Education that would not address righteousness or a good life is no longer proper, and the modern introduction of formal education is worthless.

The term justice is a desirably-loaded humanitarian concept. Justice means what is just. Naturally, where there is justice, there is no need for punishment. However, punishment is relevant in case of violation of justice. Swagata Ghosh, in her paper titled Justice and Punishment: A Critical Study on the Ethics of Kautilya Daṅḍaniti, makes a mindful effort to conceptualize a just state in the light of Kautilya. She argues that punishment is almost imperative for the offenders to minimize crimes. With particular reference to the Arthaṡāstra of Kautilya, particularly the third and the fourth adhikaraṇa, the author subscribes to show how Daṅḍaniti is relevant in maintaining law and order and also restoring peace and harmony in the state by the government. The objective of the panel system is to diminish crimes and offences of various forms. However, it remains an open question whether the panel system acting on monetary, corporeal, and physical punishments, including capital punishment, is morally and ethically justifiable.

The author has rightly claimed that we cannot ignore moral and ethical questions while implementing the Daṅḍaniti of Kautilya. Throughout her paper, the author takes a threshold analysis of Kautilya’s vision of statecraft in the light of law and order and also examines the efficacy of the panel system towards restoring justice in society. In the process, the author discusses various forms of punishment and perspectives of law and administration in Arthaṡāstra, eventually guiding an in-depth look at the ethical analysis. The author further contends that the panel system of Kautilya portrays a rigorous system capable of preventing crimes of all sorts. The combination of monetary penalties and corporeal punishments is equally effective in minimizing crime in society. Implementing exemplary physical punishments, including capital punishment, shows that justice has to be restored by any means. While looking at the ethical and moral issues of Kautilya’s justice system, the King and the concerned officials must be trained in Anviķṣiki, i.e., the science of logic, and enquires into Truth based on dharma, i.e., righteousness. This reflects that Kautilya’s panel system accredited the humanitarian approach of the legal system. The author ends her paper with a cryptic insight that Kautilya’s most extraordinary visionary of statecraft and politics successfully established a law code for the masses and power holders to ensure and minimize crime and maintain a just state.

The paper Philosophical Counseling in the Context of Bhagavad Gitā: With Reference to Osho by Vinita Nair deals with a new area of therapeutic practice to guide individuals in their complex life journey with ups and downs. The paper builds up on the need for philosophical counseling. It deals with Western and Indian philosophy, culminating with Osho’s interpretation of the Gitā. The selection of Gitā has been well justified as it contains the essence of the four Vedas and Upaniṣads. Osho places emphasis on complete mindfulness rather than withdrawal. He considers the Gitā the earliest psychological scripture in the East before the writings of Freud, Adler, and Jung. The spiritual journey begins at a point where the cognitive faculties cease. The paper states that due to immense technological advancements and social complexities, individuals often wrest themselves with existential questions, emotional chaos, and ethical dilemmas. There must be a fusion of philosophical counseling and spiritual wisdom of the Upanishads, Aṣṭavakra Gitā, and Bhagavad Gitā. Indeed, the Gitā offers profound insight into the human psyche, addressing existential dilemmas, the nature of reality, and the purpose of life. Here, individuals grappling with questions related to identity, duty, and inner turmoil find solace in its teachings. The philosophical counseling of Gitā equally emphasizes self-realization, detachment, and devotion and gives rise to a psychological framework for coping with life's challenges. The primary objective of Gitā's counseling was to alleviate Arjuna’s despair, which was not individualistic but universal for all. Krishna appears as the Divine Spirit (Sārathi) who guides, inspires, and empowers us. The concepts of loka-hita and loka-Sangraha convey that every individual can assist individuals and societies in managing conflict. However, Osho thinks that Arjuna’s dilemma is not spiritual but psychological and practical, and in this regard, it differs from Freud's psychology. Freudian psychology does not encompass phenomena beyond the mind's boundaries, whereas Gitā indicates something beyond the mind.

Caste system is a much debated religious issue, and modern thinkers, particularly B. R. Ambedkar, raised serious objections against the functional aspect of the caste system of the Hindu religion. The main contention is whether the hierarchism of caste is determined based on varṇa or guṅas (qualities). Arun Kumar Chowdhury, in his paper entitled Society’s Caste System: A Philosophical Analysis from Swami Vivekananda’s Vedfantic Ideal of Equality explores in the light of Vivekananda that a man differs from others only in manifestations but not in essence. We are the same as Sat-Ċit-Ānaṅda. Throughout his paper, the author explores how Vivekananda explains the society's caste system from the Vedāntic ideal of equality. Vedānta philosophy is central to oneness in the universe; in this sense, we are all equal in the divine essence. As a result, any division is a sheer delusion, an image.

The division is an illusion portrayed in manifestation, but in divinity, there is unity. One has to realize. Self-realization is the key to unearthing or unfolding what lies in existence. As God is the Sat-Ċit-Ānaṅda, God is in you and all of you. One can realize it at the stage of jivanmukti. There is nothing wrong with the Varṅa system as long as it is not hereditary. However, the hereditary caste system based on priest craft is problematic. It created the so-called social evil (curse) in the name of untouchability. The only solution to overcome this is to emphasize value-based real education and to transform society. Radical transformation of the society based on ideal value-based education can be the only effective measure to overcome the hereditary caste system in India.

The philosophical concept of solipsism has occupied a central place in core philosophical discussion since Berkeley. The idea of solipsism seized sufficient ground over the centuries, and one can find its relevance even in Descartes and Wittgenstein. Rekha Nayak and Manoranjan Mallick, in their paper entitled Berkeley and early Wittgenstein on Solipsism: A Review seek to compare Berkeley and early Wittgenstein on the theme of solipsism. Indeed, writers of the History of Philosophy Berkeley as a solipsist. Richard Falckenberg has tagged even Descartes as a solipsist. Of course, labels matter, but what a philosopher says matters more. Some contemporary scholars argue that it is a mistake to call Berkeley a solipsist.

While discussing Wittgenstein’s appraisal of solipsism in his Tractatus, the authors take Berkeley as an advocate of the doctrine and examine his view in light of Wittgenstein's critique. The task is more than a comparison. The authors assess the alleged solipsism of Berkeley and elucidation of Wittgenstein's view on solipsism in the Tractatus that it boils down to realism and leads to a thought-provoking conclusion that realism is the root of Berkeley's solipsism, and it is the fruit of Wittgenstein's solipsism. Realism gave rise to solipsism in Berkeley, and solipsism is the same as realism, according to Wittgenstein. Berkely is situated in the tradition in which an idea is regarded as the primary unit of knowledge. Wittgenstein is situated in the tradition in which a proposition is the primary unit of meaningful expression. The former method is empirical perceptual, and the latter is logico-linguistic. Berkeley elevates percipient-centric ideas to God-centric ideas, thereby absorbing commonsensical realism, i.e., Hylasian realism, within the framework of idealism. Wittgenstein makes solipsism in realism of the same type. The authors intend to analyze the concept of solipsism following Wittgenstein, referencing Berkeley's view as previous. Thus, they aim to shed new light on the problem of solipsism, opening a vista for further future discussion.

The problem of meaning is a central issue in philosophy in general and analytic philosophy in particular. Analysis matters in analytic philosophy because determining meaning appears to be a daunting task to the philosophers of analysis. Analytic philosophers adopted and approached various paradigms of meaning criterion, and nothing is beyond questions begging. In his paper entitled A Critical Exposition on Quine’s Notion of Meaning and Intederminacy Niranjan Adhikari clarifies how Quine concludes that the meaning of a word or a sentence is radical and indeterminate. In this process, he elucidates the referential theory of meaning supported by Russell and the sense theory of meaning developed by Frege. He then clarifies how Quine rejects these theories because meaning is not an entity but a confirmation expressed through a stimuli assent or dissent of a given speaker, i.e., through behaviour. Besides, the author raises the issue of how, according to Quine, the problem of meaning is rooted in his relativistic interpretation of conceptual schemes and, thereby, in his indeterminacy thesis.

Further, the author argues in what sense the unified core of the conceptual scheme, the foundation of the Kantian knowledge system, for Quine, is relative, i.e., uncertain in terms of translation. After that, the author is concerned with the path for the indeterminacy thesis, the source of which, according to the author, lies in the rejection of the analytic-synthetic distinction by Quine in his "Two Dogmas of Empiricism." Though the indeterminacy thesis is initially based on rejecting the analytic-synthetic distinction, it is eventually grounded on translating an alien language into a customary language because the native mind is inaccessible. For further clarification, the author also analyses the indeterminacy thesis from two different aspects: the 'argument from above' and the 'argument from below'. The former claims that the evidence underdetermines the scientific theory, whereas the latter establishes the indeterminacy of reference. The evidence underdetermines a scientific theory, and the translation, being a particular scientific theory, must be based on some evidence. However, no translation in two different scientific theories could be claimed to have an identical stimulus meaning. For example, the concept ‘Gavagāi’ appears whenever there is a Rabbit, but there is no certainty that both have the same stimulus meaning. Thus, it is concluded that every translation under all possible empirical evidence in the form of the native assent or descent is indeterminate. This is how the indeterminacy of translation stands. The author also clarifies in what sense Quine’s indeterminacy thesis is explained through the under-determination project. At the end of his paper, the author concludes that any theory to define meaning is not conclusive and, thus, is insufficient because observational data often fails to justify that the meaning of the term "Rabbit" is synonymous with the meaning of Gavagāi.

Kasturi Datta (Majumdar), in her contribution entitled: Equality In Difference: An Analysis with reference to Motherhood, refers to the concept of gender discrimination, which is one of the essential topics of Practical Ethics. Any discrimination hinders the growth of society. All human beings deserve equal rights and opportunities irrespective of race, caste, religion, or sex. The biological differences between individuals can never be taken as a criterion for gender discrimination. The concept of motherhood has been glorified in India to a great extent. In ancient India, motherhood had a significant position in society, although it does not imply that, at that time, women occupied a high status in society. For her, motherhood is considered a glorified aspect of women’s lives, but this is a patriarchal ploy to keep women in a cage. We need to re-think our traditional theories to ensure women's equality.

It is often argued that there is no ethics in politics, i.e., ethics and politics are polar concepts. Politicians are just like snakes; when they get opportunities, they bite their counterparts. The state needs moral politicians rather than political moralists. Deepanwita Datta, in Political Ethics: An Enquiry into its Nature, Scope and Relevance attempts to discuss the complex affinity between ethics and politics. Political Ethics is an adjunction of politics and ethics, where politics, as a social scientific inquiry, invokes philosophical questions of a normative nature. For example, the political question "How a society should be organized" entails an ought question. Ancient political ethics in India acknowledges that politics has never been alienated from religion and morality. It took political activity as an integral part of spirituality that motivated man towards self-realization. Unlike the West, the Indian Society was based on metaphysics and ethics, and it interpreted the essential problems of human existence. For example, Rājadharma, the cascade of all dharma, is the central theme of Hindu political thought, where the King protects law-making citizens and punishes wrongdoers. It protects the people with the help of daṅḍa, a means of vigilance that keeps an eye even over the King following certain niti. The author invokes political pragmatism in the light of political realists, where the need for flexibility in politics remains open. She justifies flexibility in politics where normative questions, such as "means justifies end" or "end justifies means", are relevant. In this regard, the debate between consequential and deontological approaches is worthy. Being a political realist, Machiavellian argues in favour of consequentialism, saying that "end justifies means" and that unethical means are conducive to sustaining various political lives. The deontological position of Kant and others holds that there is no separation between means and end and that means are, after all, all means. We have control over means but not over end. So, means, not end, has to be the right way.

The problem of meaning is the central issue of analytic philosophy and within the semantics and pragmatics, there are different paradigms employed for determining meaning. To know the meaning of a sentence is to know what the sentence refers to. Again, to know the reference of a sentence means to know the sentence's Truth. Language refers to hooks, maps, pictures, or represents, and based on this, various theories of meaning developed, namely, correspondence, coherence, semantics, pragmatics, internal, extensional, and intentional. Thus, meaning in semantics is deeply associated with the reference and Truth of the descriptive terms or sentences. The famous traditional theory of meaning expounded by Frege and others determines meaning through reference. However, this theory again begs questions from philosophers like Putnam and others. In Meaning ain't just in the Head: From Meaning to Reference Jayanta Barman critically accounts for the problem of meaning criteria after Putnam. Putnam, a realist at his initial stage, became the critic of the same in the second phase of his philosophical career. By denying metaphysical realism, he develops internal realism. He argues that the traditional interpretation of meaning is false because it holds that meaning is just in the head. Putnam thinks the other way around. His famous metaphor, Twin Earth Hypothesis, justifies that the traditional concept of meaning and reference is false due to narrow psychologism. Instead, the meaning of a term is determined socio-linguistically, and in this regard, he again uses the metaphor "the division of linguistic labour". This means that it is not the outcome of individual psychology but rather the outcome of a socio-linguistic community. This is how the traditional theory of meaning and reference gains critical conceptual magnitude in his internalistic phase. His internal realism holds that reference substantially determines meaning instead of meaning determining reference. Here, community, environment, and socio-linguistic issues get more priority over narrow psychologism and narrow mentalism. The author ends the paper with the view that Putnam develops an alternative theory of Frege’s semantics by bringing the context of the division of linguistic labour and the relevance of society and the environment.

Feminism is a much debated and litigious socio-philosophical, socio-economical matter where issues like women's liberty, equality, and empowerment are critical. It proclaims that women are exploited and subjugated primarily based on gender inequality. Najmun Katum, in Islamic Feminists' View on Muslim Women's Equality and Empowerment mainly focuses on gender equality, women's equal rights, opportunities, and empowerment from Islamic feminists' point of view. In this regard, she refers to the Quran, the sacred text of Islam. It is generally alleged that the Quran is the primary source of women's subordination. However, Islamic feminists think the other way around. For them, there is nothing wrong with the Quran; somewhat, it was completely misinterpreted by the patriarchal society. There is no single verse found in the Quran that voices against women's empowerment and gender equality. Islamic feminists thus rise with the external pragmatic interpretation of the Quran where there is no place for a hierarchy between male and female. All are equal in the eye of the Quran, and this position of the Quran conforms to humanism. Women's liberty, equality, and empowerment are the need of the hour. However, all these would remain a far cry if males and females were not treated equally in rights and opportunities. It is where the relevance of gender equality in Islam lies.

Indeed, there is no exaggeration in saying everyone desires to lead a meaningful life. Human life only makes sense if it is meaningful or purposeless. The worth of life is, alternatively, defined as the meaning of life. Of course, the meaning of life is evaluated by values. In his paper entitled Wittgenstein on Meaning of Life Abhijit Ghosh attempts to unearth the meaning of life in the light of Wittgenstein's conception of values. For Wittgenstein, there are different levels of values, namely, relative and absolute. What is relative is lower, and what is absolute is higher. Again, what is lower is accidental, and what is absolute is non-accidental. Absolute values lie outside the limits of language and the limits of the world, and as a result, it is ethereal and mystical. The value of ethics (religion, aesthetics) contains absolute values. Wittgenstein tries to determine the meaning of life by examining higher, non-accidental, and ethereal values. It is a revealed value for which we cannot say. As it lies outside the limit of language, it is inexpressible. One has to remain silent about it. However, it is helpful to lead a happy and meaningful life. One needs to have a right view of the world to understand it. It is possible only by seeing the world as sub-species aeternitatis. Thus, there is a happy and unhappy world, i.e., the world of happy man and the world of unhappy man. A world of the happy man is the world of eternity; to have the sense of it, one needs to have the feeling of inexpressibility. The feeling of inexpressibility eventually reveals the absolute value, an eternal reality, the foundation of happiness deeply embedded in culture and religion but utterly detached from civilization. Thus, the meaning of life is embodied in human culture as determined by eternal and absolute value.

The burning problem we face at present and for which our future generation would be endangered is environmental degradation and ecological unsustainability. The so-called civilized society, due to their limitless desire for materialism and extreme forms of anthropocentrism, created environmental crises and will leave the world as a desolate and unproductive land for future generations. This is a human catastrophe, an impasse created by modern scientific society, for which future generations will essentially be the misfortune recipients. In his paper entitled Ecological Rift and Human Alienation from Nature: A Materialistic Understanding, M. P. T. Samuel attempts to resolve the ecological rift and human alienation from nature by offering a materialistic interpretation. The relationship between nature and humans is widely discussed in philosophical discourse. Approaches such as anthropocentrism, non-anthropocentrism, deep ecological movement, ecofeminism, etc., are some of these. The environmental issues are mainly due to the over and conscious exploitation of nature, which different disciplines have studied. The author argues that there is always a futuristic approach, which is ordinarily absent in many studies that scholars have attempted. Some of the theoretical attempts made by the economists are highlighted in the paper. For example, the scholar mentions the green capitalism developed by Brett Clark and Richard York.

Moreover, the scholar also briefly examines the distinction between shallow and deep ecology. It is shown how Marxism gives particular importance to the co-evolutionary approach in the context of human beings and nature. It is also shown that Marx provides a solution to the ecological rift through a structural change in the mode of production. The locus of the ecological rift is humans' alienation from nature. This makes a drastic change in humans' attitude towards nature. However, Marx was convinced that human alienation could not be solved through make-shift solutions offered by techno-capitalism, i.e., materialism and anthropocentrism, but by overthrowing the capitalist mode of production. One must address various social conflicts existing in a particular society to overcome the so-called ecological rift. Otherwise, we cannot have a holistic solution to the environmental problems we need for future generations.

The world that we are living in today is the world of globalization. It has both advantages and disadvantages. The world of globalization invites ethical relativism and denies moral absolutism, creating ethical problems. It adulterates our culture and values and, in turn, invites identity crisis. In Ethical Issues of Globalization: A Kantian Solution, Beauty Das attempts to apply the Kantian model to solve some of the ethical issues of globalization. What is heartening is that here, the author applies how Kantian categorical imperative has a practical domain in the light of two critical works of Kant. Undoubtedly, some contemporary issues arising from globalization can be seen from different perspectives. The author tries to understand the issue by showing how the concept of Vasudhaiva Kuduṁbakam which speaks about the significance of the well-being of the world community, can be seen in the light of Kant. It is also pointed out that cultural, social, and religious aspects must be considered while discussing the above. The author identifies three major issues globalization engendered: value crisis, identity crisis, and environmental crisis. Here, the author argues that Kantian methodology helps to resolve such a crisis. Kant's importance in understanding the moral nature of human beings is mentioned and discussed. However, the author could have elaborated on this in detail, and the application of Kant in solving the above problems could have been highlighted.

In the recent past, an issue was raised against Buddhism, arguing that Buddhism as a religion is not engaged as Buddha himself was confined to his own salvation through Nirvāṇa. Thus, Buddhism as a religion is self-centered and by no means engaged. In A Transition from Spiritual Enlightenment to Social Action: A Survey on Buddhism, Kirtika Das intends to show how Buddhist ethical guidelines lead toward practical engagement. It is argued that individual awareness always leads to social welfare, and more importantly, Buddhism has evolved from Pratyekabudha-s to engaged Buddhism. Further concept of Bodhisattva always tries to alleviate the sufferings of others. Again, a careful study would reflect that a shift from self-liberation to liberation for all is possible in Buddhism. It is further argued that spiritual transitions are not about detaching people from society; instead, they raise our hands toward suffering. The emancipation of people is possible from the notion of Self. So, our main objective is to attain Nirvāṇa, ceasing our sufferings and mental agonies. A person who attains Nirvāṇa can alleviate everyone else's suffering. Throughout her paper, the author cited various Buddhist texts and showed us how Buddhism in different schools is deeply engaged. The issue of engaged Buddhism was initially raised against the Therāvāda Buddhists. However, the author argues that the theory of Therāvāda is ontologically engaged. As far as Mahāyāna Buddhism is concerned, they are practically engaged as they address issues like human rights, social justice, environment, and many more. The author ends her paper with the view that Buddhism is deeply engaged in conformity with humankind.

Within the sphere of modern globalization, consumerism reached its heyday. The web of consumerism gives birth to materialism, individualism, subjectivism, and anthropocentrism. All these are directed to the erosion of our traditional and cultural values. Ankita Sharma, in her paper entitled Consumerism on the Rise and the Significance of Indian Traditional Values: A Perspective for Change wants to quash consumerism. Here, the author intends to bring about a change as she feels that consumerism is a Western way of thought developed after the Industrial Revolution, in which mechanized mass production developed, giving rise to the inhuman treatment of workers. This problem did not originate in India because there were always philosophies to guide. The author thus delves into the solution given in Indian Philosophy. She delves into the Vedic values, such as Puruṡārtha, i.e. Dharma, Artha, Kāma, and Moķṣa. Dharma is the guiding principle of Kāma and Artha. Consumption, in the present-day understanding, has a transformative influence over the dynamic of human life. It establishes patterns in inter-human relations and exerts influence over the elements of lifestyle and social life, contributing to changes in modern social dynamics. The author also explores the significance of traditional Indian values, starting with the Veda-s, Upaniṣad-s Ṥāstra-s, Rāmāyaṇa, and Mahābhārata. Further, she explores the Buddhist notion of impermanence and constant change and explains the concept of Paṅċaṡila about consumerism. The ethics of Gitā seemed equally relevant in annulling the web of modern consumerism. After that, she deals with the contrasting views of Marx. At the end of her paper, she concludes that the materialistic and individualistic web of modern consumerism can be reversed in a better way by following Indian traditional values.

Humanism carries a lot in philosophy in general and ethics and religion in particular while determining the meaning of life. However, we notice a constant revision of the outlook on humanism. As we move from the modern to the post-modern era, humanism is transitioning to posthumanism. In her paper entitled (The) Mapping of Posthumanism: A Philosophical Study Akoijam Thoibisana studies posthumanism in tune with the studies of postmodernism, poststructuralism, and postcolonialism from a historical perspective and philosophical thought. The paper traces the history of the development of posthumanism in the works of several philosophers, like Heidegger, Satre, Derrida, and others. It looks promising to become a detailed survey of the postmodernist account of the understanding of 'Man'. The crux of the paper is mapping the philosophy of posthumanism through the lens of deconstructing humanism in the light of Heidegger's Humanism and the Concept of Being, Althusser's Theoretical Anti-Humanism, and Lacan’s Psychoanalysis. The paper traces the idea of Man along with their critiques and modifications. Thus, in a sense, it shows promise of a good analysis of the history of posthumanism. The author subscribes at the end that Derrida's deconstruction of humanism is not a repetition of humanism but a sure way to deconstruct the anthropocentric thought of the same.

Being a rational and social animal, every man desires to lead a good life. However, the very nature of the excellent life immensely varies across the board. Thus, the issue of how to lead a good life has remained a central philosophical issue since antiquity. In Deconstructing the Aristotelian Concept of Akrasia in Contemporary Perspective Arun Garg explains the concept of a good life in the light of the Aristotelian concept of Akrasia. The term Eudaimonia, used by Aristotle, stands for happiness, the fundamental concept of life that theoretically determines the idea of a good life. The paper states that to extract the highest form of good for human beings, Aristotle delves deep into understanding the essence of being human, which occupies a rational soul functioning according to virtue. Thus, Aristotle's virtue ethics can answer the question of the good life. The term Akrasia, as used by Aristotle, means weak-willed, which influences our reasoning and leads us away from the Good. It invites motivational conflict between rational and irrational aspects of the soul. Before Aristotle, Plato used the term Akrasia. In a dialogue, Socrates says that Akrasia is impossible and that no one willingly goes towards bad. However, Plato believes in the possibility of the same and attributes it to the victory of the irrational part of the soul. Within the perspectival discrepancies, both argued that the assumption that reason leads to ultimate Good is not challenged. The emphasis should be placed on the application of reason rather than on understanding the causes of its breakdown. Akrasia lies in the middle ground between virtue and vice, and it plays a vital role in ethical reasoning. As reason is the highest virtue that may not be attainable for all, the old definition of man as a rational animal needs modification. As a result, the emotional aspect of man should find a place. Thus, to lead a good life, one needs other virtues..

Friendship, courage, and empathy will enrich a person's life. A person in his every step finds Akrasia, a temptation to make a shortcut, a desire to take an easier option, a lure of immediate gratification. However, there remains a hope that knowledge and reason will strengthen an individual, and one can regain self-control and lead a good life.

Morality is the central issue deeply associated with humanism, human values, and the well-being of all. Still, the question of why we should be moral has been relevant in philosophy since antiquity. In Brahman as the Principle of Interconnectedness: The Ground of the Ethical Teachings of the Upaniṣad-s Kheya Roy examines why we should be moral with special reference to the Upaniṣadic ethics. Here, particular emphasis has been laid on the practical aspect of some ethical codes of conduct suggested by the Upanishads. Upaniṣadic ethics, the author argues, determines our societal behaviour, having a tinge of teleological ethics. The paper promises that Upaniṣadic ethics are usually associated with specific ideas of spirituality, and it was even reflected in Swami Vivekananda’s remarks that the foundation of Upaniṣadic ethics is love, unity, and sameness. Arguably, ethics that lead to unity are right, and those that lead to division are wrong. A deontologist or a teleologist cannot offer a profound answer to why we should be moral. Still, one can find a suitable answer to the question in the Upaniṣadic doctrine of the oneness and unity of Ātman or Brahman. It states that we are interconnected with each other. As Brahman is everywhere, He is the highest of all things and is the Self in all. He is the essence of everything, the wool of the whole universe, and is interconnected with all. So, we should be moral in controlling and restraining ourselves; otherwise, we will eventually destroy ourselves. At the end of her paper, the author has landed that the Upaniṣadic ethical theory of interconnected answers to why we should be moral. The ground is not only spiritual; it is equally scientific and practical as well. So, let us promise to be humble and practice the Truth through our moral codes of conduct.

V. Sujata Raju, in her contribution entitled: The Concept of Pramā and Pramāṇa: An Analysis in the Light of Pramāṇaśāstra enunciates the meaning, definition, and nature of pramā-pramāṇa among the diverse schools of Indian philosophy. An attempt is made to represent the nature, form, and method of valid knowledge enriched with the commentaries sub-commentaries of sources/literature of epistemological traditions in Indian philosophy (Pramāṇaśāstra). An overview of various issues, views, and comparative exposition of any system of epistemology deals with the following disputable questions: What is knowledge? What is valid knowledge? How do we distinguish valid knowledge from invalid knowledge? What are the instruments/means of arriving at valid knowledge? To this end, she attempts to synthesize the divergent views of all the concerned schools of Indian epistemology.

At the end I express my heartfelt thanks to all contributors for their submissions to this edition and also for their academic cooperation with the Editorial Team during the production phrase. I also express my deep sense of gratitude to the entire Editorial Team whose commitment and perseverance made this journal possible.

Further suggestions and opinions for the improvement of this journal in the coming years is solicited.

With warm regards

Professor (Dr.) Kanti Lal Das
Head and Editor-in-Chief,
Department of Philosophy,
University of North Bengal