These so-called scholars often mislead society by spreading false information about topics they claim to understand, but in reality, they don't. Ruchira is one of them, but there are many others like him in our country. People tend to trust them because of their social status, even though they shouldn't. While people hate politicians, they often embrace these scholars. Despite proudly displaying the famous quote "The nation that does not create new things will not rise in the world" on his banner, Ruchira ends up doing the complete opposite by blindly imitating other scholars and intellectuals form the West. People should oppose such behavior, but unfortunately, it doesn't seem to be happening.
Sir, I feel that most of the things analyzed in your videos are parts of the philosophy shown in Buddhism. Dahama is philosophy or dharma. You have explained how the human mind works in a certain situation, just as it is shown there. ( In Abhidharma, the way the mind works has been extensively analyzed.) "Power blinds man"...Because you present the facts within the Western philosophy itself.-Thanks for your explanation.
Thank you very much, Sir, for sharing this valuable knowledge among us! My opinion is that one must not do something bad to another person if the same action makes the doer unhappy if it happens to him. Even though I have heard this from Buddhist Phylosophy, I strongly believe it's true by experiencing real-life incidents. Because of that, most of the time, I try to practice this, not because to receive merits or rewards for it, but for my own satisfaction and happiness. So, I truly believe that trying to become a better person has an eccentric value as well as an instrumental value. Because of that, I think the point that you have emphasised should go to the 3rd category. I would like to know about the opinion and the reasoning of Plato too. Could you please be kind enough to acknowledge his view as well! Thanks again for your kind and generous effort to make this society a better place! ❤️🙏💐
hi Ruchira sir, when will you be doing the video to explain Plato's answer for Galucon's questions? I don't feel good about agreeing to Glaucon's theory. There are other factors like empathy and love (maybe more) that goes against this theory.
***තියන ෙහාද සහ ෙප්න ෙහාද*** this is in my words and I Used to say always.... I havent read much about socreties or plato musch.... yet I identified this long before with my observations. now i feel that i am tiny yet indipendent philosopher and I admit my stormy bad side but always aware not to harm at my best........not easy...struggle with storm is part of my daily routine. happpy new year Mr. Ruchira.
Highly valuable insight. ! Thanks for this. Not pointing out an error. Shouldn't that be intrinsic, not "insinstric". Maybe the way I heard. Thanks again
Fascinating! ✨️💜✨️ Thank you so much for this great explanation and for the valuable information you shared with us professor sir. ✨️💜✨️ May the noble triple gem bless you and your family forever and ever professor sir! 💜💜💜🌼🌼🌼🙏🙏🙏
❤ karunu 5 ma ethama vedagath. Pudgalikava avsana karnunata mama ehalama thenaka tiyanava. Evagema kiyanna one etharam lassanata 5 veni karanaya ta kemathi venna anek karana 4 ma godak pitivhalak vuna bava. Obata jaya ha satuta pathami.
Towards the end of the video Ruchira discusses that you can be a bad person but as showing the society as good and vise versa but I believe that it isn’t possible because if you are actually a bad person it takes only a fraction to changes your image to the opposite therefore may be possibility to act on short period but definitely not in longer terms. Ruchira is brilliant we are learning philosophy in practical terms with his excellent explanation Thank you 🙏
It seems Glaucon presented a hypothetical argument, contrasting two extreme scenarios. His aim was to investigate whether virtue possesses the capability to generate genuine inner happiness.
This is a great illustration of the limits of binary thinking or logic... Greek philosophy is binary and non empirical. However at this point of time we have empirical evidence of zoological inclinations, where species showing empathy towards others who are not part of their herd... The Extreme examples used by glaucon are not realistic scenarios and cannot be used to make reliable inferences about society.. IMO in reality people are at different points of a spectrum of goodness and it can be proved empirically that moral behaviour also has both an intrinsic value (I)as well as utilitarian value (U) and if moralness = x*I+(1-x)*U , x is the moralness variable thst changes from person to person
scenario of choosing easy task with a reward then it would be ethical to ask for a selection to determine who is going to do the task first .like flipping a coin (Toss) giving equall chance for everyone involved.
