DESIGNS OF LIFE-PART 1
DESIGNS OF LIFE-PART 1
These days, driven by an inexplicable urge, I am in a search for ‘designs of life’. The caption might appear spiritual, perhaps it is so, but I am literally in search of design forms, both divine and man-made! Can be an intriguing topic in itself, but rather difficult to express in text.
From the angle of art and aesthetics, it is really a wonder whether we interpret nature to be an artist- infact an artist per excellence! The mute point is for nature to be an artist, nature requires a thinking process or a conscious mind! You might be surprised to know that many of the top scientists and technocrats today are inclined to believe that nature is a conscious entity. The reason for them is pretty simple though, every action in nature brings in a balancing reaction- just a little jugglery of language for the Newton’s third law. But to create a precise balancing action requires a conscious effort- this particular line of thinking is now prompting top scientists and technocrats to assume that nature is very much a conscious entity. So, nature can scheme things or create a plethora of designs based on actions and reactions.
All these makes ‘design’ a very integral part of our life. Santiniketan, since a long time nurtured this sense of design within its sphere of activity including social activity. In reality design is most probably the oldest form of art which the human clan indulged in with great interest. Looking at visual life from the angle of ‘design’ can be intriguing to say the least. For some time now I remain fascinated with this idea; but to express this in text seems to be a tough proposition.
All I can comprehend, while being at the desk desperately trying to form some text for this article, is that nature, life and human artistic expressions are essentially inter weaved. However individualistic or original an artist desires to be; he is in essence trying to find the perfect balance of expressions with his artistic soul and the life around him. An artist without this balance is actually groping for an identity in the vast sea of haziness. Well, after all it is my interpretation of an ‘artist’; but I would definitely prefer to stick to the idea never the less!
Since in what form design is to be soaked in, ofcourse remains open to personal attitude and preferences. And this is exactly where interpretations start to become personal. This is also exactly the point I stumble upon a philosophical (or scientific?) hurdle. From a purely scientific point of view I am very much inclined to believe that ‘nature is a conscious entity’; but is it personal? Does the rose in your garden essentially different from the rose of same variety in your neighbour’s garden- though both your personalities are different? Not really! So, even if nature is believed to be a conscious entity, it is not personal in nature! So we come across a tough term ‘impersonal consciousness’.
The term ‘impersonal consciousness’ might appear a bit unheard of or a purely crazy term; but in essence we are all familiar with this term in some form or other. From this very ‘impersonal consciousness’ the idea of spiritualism (and eventually religion) springs forth. All kinds of spiritualism or religion essentially asks us to be conscious but on the impersonal level. So, this can be the ulterior design of life and nature- to become impersonally conscious!
This particular trend of thinking is hovering along with me for quite some time now. My interpretation of science essentially urges me to accept nature as a very astutely conscious entity, yet I am very much an atheist, and hence I am in a dilemma how to interpret ‘impersonal consciousness’. Interestingly I feel inclined to search the ‘designs of life’ (almost literally!) to get a clue. It is very intriguing; I shall soon reach out to all of you on this.