Why does the universe exist? An advaita vedantic perspective

Debates concerning causal explanations of the universe tend to be based on a priori propositions (e.g., Edwards, 1973; Smith, 1995; Swinburne, 1978). The present paper, however, addresses the metaphysical question, “Why does the universe exist?” from the perspective of a school of Hindu philosophy referred to as advaita vedanta and two of its a posteriori derived creation theories: the theory of simultaneous creation (drishti-srishti vada) and the theory of non-causality (ajata vada). Objections to advaita vedanta are also discussed. It is concluded that advaita vedanta has the potential to make a significant contribution to contemporary metaphysical debate in general and our understanding of the question, “Why does the universe exist?” in particular.

The making of the Hindu in Australia: a diasporic narrative

Contributed articles presented at "International Conference on the Hindu Diaspora", held at Concordia University, Montreal, in August 1997

Plato's legacy : How to do philosophy

Although it has its origins earlier, philosophy as we know it in the West took its shape from the Socrates of Plato's Dialogues. It is not implausible to regard the Dialogues as heuristic devices designed for engaging in philosophical inquiry. As such, they would model the process of philosophical inquiry as well as illustrate the common pitfalls or errors to avoid when engaging in such inquiry. So it will not be surprising to see Socrates, the character of the Dialogues, modeling questionable, even poor, inquiry techniques as well as good; admonishing other characters for poor technique and reminding them of lessons they should have learned earlier in their tuition. Plato presumably would expect students reading and role-playing a Dialogue to recognise when and where such instances occur. It is instructive then to take a close look at one of the longer dialogues featuring Socrates engaging in such inquiry, not with an untutored interlocutor, but with a professional, the sophist Protagoras, in order to identify the features of the inquiry itself. For this will reveal something of what Plato conceived to be the activity of philosophy to which we are the heirs. The Protagoras can be read as an illustration (not a definition) of how to do philosophy. And to aid this reading, I propose to focus on the logical form of the inquiry, the moves made by the characters and the techniques displayed, rather than the adequacy of the substantive arguments they mount.

What is the subaltern of the comparative philosophy of religion?

It is claimed that Comparative Philosophy of Religion (CPR) mistakenly builds on the dogmas of comparative religion (or history of religions) and philosophy of religion. Thus, the belief that there are things common and therefore comparable between two or more traditions and that these objects of comparison are of philosophical or theological significance are questions that continue to trouble the field. Just what does one compare, how does one choose what to compare or why, through what methodological and epistemic tools, and who is it that carries out the tasks? But what has remained unasked and unanalyzed are the larger meta-questions concerning the motivation, civilizational presuppositions, cultural parochialism, or legacies of orientalism, modernity, and (post-)colonialism that together affect the boundedness of certain key categories and thematic issues in the comparative enterprise such as God or the Transcendent, Creation, the Problem of Evil, the Afterlife, Sin, Redemption, Purpose, and the End. Is difference with respect to alterity and altarity permissible? If so, what a postcolonial, differently gendered, cross-cultural critique would look like and what is left of CPR are two such questions explored here.

Hindu temples in the Sri Lankan ethnic conflict : capture and excess

Developing Deleuze and Guattari's concepts of territorialization and the apparatus of capture, this article explores the role that Sri Lankan Hindu temples have played in the formation of ethnicity and ethnic conflict. Analyzing three contemporary events, the article introduces ways in which many different Sri Lankans (Sinhalese and Tamil) interpret their country's predicament and seek to resolve or prolong it. The events also reveal how scholarship becomes entangled in ethnic nationalism. I then examine in greater detail a village in which temple construction was a critical feature of identity formation during the creation of Sri Lanka as a colonialist and capitalist bureaucratic space. Through this account, I argue that the formation of polarized ethnicity in Sri Lanka is the product of multiple refractive forces, of which temples are one, and not the end result of a singular colonialist bureaucratic agency.

Defuturing an architecture of destruction: a reconciliation of Van Berkel and Bos to the new design philosophy of Tony Fry

For some time now Tony Fry has promoted the idea of 'The Sustainment', an idea that asserts a paradigm shift in attitudes to consumption. 'The Sustainment' recognises that increasingly human futures are products of self-determination and not chance. Fry’s hypothesis can be understood through his concept of Defuturing, a philosophy that questions the role of design and the responsibility of designers to facilitating the ability to sustain (Fry 1999).
Central to Fry’s philosophy is an awareness that it is in the best interests of designers and their clients, as inhabitants of cultures increasingly driven by technology, to be aware of the relationships between the products and theories of design and the processes and implications of technological change. This is an awareness that is central to the concepts, work, and methodologies of the ‘UN Studio’ of Van Berkel and Bos described and elaborated upon in Move – Imagination, Techniques, and Effects (Van Berkel & Bos 1999). Here, Ben Van Berkel defines the parameters and methodologies employed by UN Studio in an environment of technological and socio-economic change. The Dutch practice could be said to exemplify something of a zeitgeist in current architectural design that sees architects, as Van Berkel and Bos view them, as “fashion designers of the future, dressing events to come and holding up a mirror to the world (Van Berkel & Bos 1999, back cover).” It is a zeitgeist that Fry might see as aligned to the resilient hype of ‘new creativity’, ‘globalisation’ the ‘romance with technology’, and the vacuous-ness of the world of fashion. (Fry The Voice of Sustainment: on Design Intelligence 2005).
A source of breaking down such design propaganda is identified by Fry in the notion of ‘scenarios,’ which “provide a mechanism for politico-practice assemblage in which dialogues and narratives of change can be rehearsed in ways that enable participants to re-educate themselves via critical confrontations” (Fry The Voice of Sustainment: on Design Intelligence 2005). From such a perspective this paper aims to practically illustrate and ground the Defuturing of Fry by establishing a dialogue between his writings and the theories that have generated the architectural designs of Van Berkel and Bos and there UN Studio. This will be a ‘scenario’ that examines therefore an appropriation and transformation of the applied intellectual practice of Van Berkel and Bos. Through this confrontation we shall explore the question of why sustainability appears to be so low in the agenda of many pre-eminent contemporary architects, and how we might refocus therefore practice and theory on the ability to sustain.