First, the author begins by pointing out that Indian philosophy is necessarily religious in its insistence that the philosopher’s identity and destiny cannot be separated from his philosophizing. The Indian philosopher who would seek to know the truth – say about the nature of the universe or of the human person – must do so with his entire being, engaging his mind, desires and even body (hence the practice of yoga) in his quest for knowledge. Should he attain to the knowledge of the truth, this will automatically change who he is and where he is going.

In the west, we’ve rather accepted the notion that a person’s knowledge of the truth may have nothing to do with who he is as a person. He may know the truth as one knows any other fact – that is, with his mind – and it could have little bearing  on his personal habits, character or life. Philosophy in this modern, western sense is purely rational, an exercise of the mind as an end in itself.

This is helpful knowledge for me (hmmm….), since I was often told that I ought to have studied philosophy as an undergraduate but somehow never broke the ice on the subject. I wonder if the reason for my avoidance was precisely that philosophy – at least its modern practice – seemed far too abstract and rational, far too little actually concerned with what it means to live well.

I do think some good could come of having a blog, particularly for someone like me, who has, for as long as he can remember, been afraid to state his opinions, particularly in front of others who might disagree with him. Though no one will read this blog unless I explicitly direct them to it, perhaps writing out thoughts and opinions here in cyberspace where they could – at least in theory – be read by another, will help overcome this (vain) fear.