69
edits
Progressive Utilization Theory: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Progressive Utilization Theory (view source)
Revision as of 20:03, 15 October 2013
, 15 October 2013A slightly improved version.
(→External links: Cat fix) |
(A slightly improved version.) |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
[[File:PROUTlogo.gif|thumb|220px]] | [[File:PROUTlogo.gif|thumb|220px|PROUT logo]] | ||
'''Progressive Utilization Theory''' or '''PROUT''' is a broad [[social theory]] propounded by Indian philosopher and spiritual leader [[Prabhat Ranjan Sarkar]] (1921–1990). | '''Progressive Utilization Theory''' or '''PROUT''' is a broad [[social theory]] propounded by Indian philosopher and spiritual leader [[Prabhat Ranjan Sarkar]] (1921–1990). | ||
| Line 182: | Line 182: | ||
==== Criminals due to nature ==== | ==== Criminals due to nature ==== | ||
Such criminals are born with a mental derangement that may have physical roots (for instance, glandular or chromosomal). To some extent, their mental development is stunted. In consequence, they may have a more highly developed set of instincts than most human beings. | Such criminals are born with a mental derangement that may have physical roots (for instance, glandular or chromosomal). To some extent, their mental development is stunted. In consequence, they may have a more highly developed set of instincts than most human beings. These criminals may be subdivided into two groups: | ||
* | * This group of born criminals is typically quiet and mentally underdeveloped. They may take a long time to learn how to walk, and they have a tendency to drool. They cannot distinguish between right and wrong, and they take pleasure in lying and hurting others. They usually become petty thieves as opposed to armed robbers, because they lack the courage to perform antisocial activities openly. They may act on their own initiative or at the prodding of others. | ||
* | * This group of born criminals revel in cruelty, provoked or unprovoked. They have a natural inclination to maim and murder. They consider compassion and conscience to be frailty. They generally do not engage in petty theft, as they consider such activities below their dignity. Though they may be lack wisdom about some worldly affairs, they are not fools. These criminals have a tendency to join criminal gangs. | ||
According to Sarkar, while trying born criminals, the magnitude of the crime should not be the only concern. As these criminals are mentally ill, there should also be [[Neohumanism|humanistic]] concern for their cure. In this respect, Sarkar points out that born criminals cannot be successfully treated by [[psychologists]] alone. Assistance will also be required from physicians and [[sociologists]]. | According to Sarkar, while trying born criminals, the magnitude of the crime should not be the only concern. As these criminals are mentally ill, there should also be [[Neohumanism|humanistic]] concern for their cure. In this respect, Sarkar points out that born criminals cannot be successfully treated by [[psychologists]] alone. Assistance will also be required from physicians and [[sociologists]]. | ||
==== Criminals due to habit ==== | ==== Criminals due to habit ==== | ||
Three factors are | Three factors are important in respect to criminals due to habit: | ||
* Moral integrity | * Moral integrity | ||
* Mental strength | * Mental strength | ||
| Line 198: | Line 198: | ||
According to Sarkar, habitual criminals become leaders within the criminal community. Sarkar also alleges that many habitual criminals become politicians, as that occupation affords them scope to further their selfish ends and cheat the public on a regular basis. | According to Sarkar, habitual criminals become leaders within the criminal community. Sarkar also alleges that many habitual criminals become politicians, as that occupation affords them scope to further their selfish ends and cheat the public on a regular basis. | ||
With respect to habitual criminals, Sarkar asserts that judges should place primary importance on the provisions of the [[criminal code]] rather than any humanitarian sensibilities. According to Sarkar, this would be of greater benefit to society and also to such criminals. Sarkar points out that such criminals sometimes try to influence judges (through bribes or threats). Hence, Sarkar argues that judges require much more power than they have today if they are to successfully rein in such type of criminality. | With respect to habitual criminals, Sarkar asserts that judges should place primary importance on the provisions of the [[criminal code]] rather than any humanitarian sensibilities. According to Sarkar, this would be of greater benefit to society and also to such criminals. Sarkar points out that such criminals sometimes try to influence judges (through bribes or threats). Hence, Sarkar argues that judges require much more power than they have today if they are to successfully rein in such type of criminality. | ||
==== Criminals due to environment ==== | ==== Criminals due to environment ==== | ||
| Line 207: | Line 207: | ||
External circumstance might be environmental pressure from parents or an unfair work environment. Degrading company could be colleagues or peers, real or virtual. (In other words, according to Sarkar, even popular but degrading cinema might lead to such type of criminality.) Sarkar points out that most people think that they are immune to the influence of others, but the facts speak otherwise. | External circumstance might be environmental pressure from parents or an unfair work environment. Degrading company could be colleagues or peers, real or virtual. (In other words, according to Sarkar, even popular but degrading cinema might lead to such type of criminality.) Sarkar points out that most people think that they are immune to the influence of others, but the facts speak otherwise. | ||
With respect to criminals by environment, Sarkar asserts that judges should give priority to humanitarian sensibilities rather than the criminal code. In these cases, the criminal generally does not have any inborn defect. Therefore, as long as the criminal has not become habituated in crime, rehabilitation is relatively easy. The main factor is to remove the criminal from the unhealthy environment and replace the unhealthy environment with a healthy environment. However, if such criminals have become habituated, then care must be taken in the prisons regarding their accommodation, because then there is a great possibility that their bad habit might spread to other prisoners. | With respect to criminals by environment, Sarkar asserts that judges should give priority to humanitarian sensibilities rather than the criminal code. In these cases, the criminal generally does not have any inborn defect. Therefore, as long as the criminal has not become habituated in crime, rehabilitation is relatively easy. The main factor is to remove the criminal from the unhealthy environment and replace the unhealthy environment with a healthy environment. However, if such criminals have become habituated, then care must be taken in the prisons regarding their accommodation, because then there is a great possibility that their bad habit might spread to other prisoners. | ||
==== Criminals due to poverty ==== | ==== Criminals due to poverty ==== | ||
Sarkar maintains that most crimes in the world are committed due to poverty. | Sarkar maintains that most crimes in the world are committed due to poverty. Though poverty is an environmental circumstance, it merits a category of its own because here one's very existence is at stake. Within each living being is a survival instinct. Hence, when confronted with a choice between starvation and stealing, many if not most people would instinctively steal. (Of course, some impoverished people do refrain from stealing out of a high sense of morality. And still more impoverished people refrain from stealing due to their vitality being sapped by hunger.) | ||
This group of criminals poses a very knotty problem. Many of the persons who resort to such crimes of desperation have a strong sense of morality. They simply find no other recourse to meet the needs of themselves or their families. Sending such type of criminal to a prison only risks hardening them in the ways of crime. Furthermore, the question of guilt is complicated by the fact that society has failed in its obligation to provide such criminals with their [[#Minimum requirements of life|minimum requirements of life]]. So, on one hand, there is a strong humanitarian concern. On the other hand, such type of crime is technically (though perhaps not gravely) immoral. It is theft, and the motive is selfish. Furthermore, those who repeatedly ignore their conscience by committing crimes due to poverty eventually become habitual criminals. Even if the opportunity to earn an honest living were presented to them, they might spurn it in favor of crime. | This group of criminals poses a very knotty problem. Many of the persons who resort to such crimes of desperation have a strong sense of morality. They simply find no other recourse to meet the needs of themselves or their families. Sending such type of criminal to a prison only risks hardening them in the ways of crime. Furthermore, the question of guilt is complicated by the fact that society has failed in its obligation to provide such criminals with their [[#Minimum requirements of life|minimum requirements of life]]. So, on one hand, there is a strong humanitarian concern. On the other hand, such type of crime is technically (though perhaps not gravely) immoral. It is theft, and the motive is selfish. Furthermore, those who repeatedly ignore their conscience by committing crimes due to poverty eventually become habitual criminals. Even if the opportunity to earn an honest living were presented to them, they might spurn it in favor of crime. | ||
In such cases, judges become mere figureheads, having legal but not moral authority. In such cases, physicians, psychologists, and sociologists have nothing to contribute in respect to rehabilitation. Society requires rehabilitation far more than the poverty-stricken criminal. According to Sarkar, the only solution to this type of criminality is the creation of a sound socioeconomic structure. Until such a socioeconomic structure is established, Sarkar argues that the only honest solution is to exhort such would-be criminals by poverty to the path of [[#Revolution|revolution]]. In a revolution, wealth is redistributed for the welfare of all. The revolutionaries who fight for such a redistribution take risks on themselves for the welfare of society, not merely for their own selfish gain. | In such cases, judges become mere figureheads, having legal but not moral authority. In such cases, physicians, psychologists, and sociologists have nothing to contribute in respect to rehabilitation. Society requires rehabilitation far more than the poverty-stricken criminal. According to Sarkar, the only solution to this type of criminality is the creation of a sound socioeconomic structure. Until such a socioeconomic structure is established, Sarkar argues that the only honest solution is to exhort such would-be criminals by poverty to the path of [[#Revolution|revolution]]. In a revolution, wealth is redistributed for the welfare of all. The revolutionaries who fight for such a redistribution take risks on themselves for the welfare of society, not merely for their own selfish gain. | ||
Sarkar notes one exception in this category of criminality. Not everyone who commits crime due to poverty is poor due to an unjust socioeconomic structure. Sometimes, wealthy people indulge in vices (drugs, gambling, luxurious lifestyle, and so on). In such cases, their addiction may reduce them to poverty. Then, after falling into debt, such persons often engage in various types of crime. This variety of criminals due to poverty are themselves at fault. Though privation is the immediate cause of their crime, it is not society that is to blame for that privation but rather their own bad habits. Hence, for such variety of criminals due to poverty, corrective measures must be taken for their rehabilitation. In such cases, the key is to cure their addiction. | Sarkar notes one exception in this category of criminality. Not everyone who commits crime due to poverty is poor due to an unjust socioeconomic structure. Sometimes, wealthy people indulge in vices (drugs, gambling, luxurious lifestyle, and so on). In such cases, their addiction may reduce them to poverty. Then, after falling into debt, such persons often engage in various types of crime. This variety of criminals due to poverty are themselves at fault. Though privation is the immediate cause of their crime, it is not society that is to blame for that privation but rather their own bad habits. Hence, for such variety of criminals due to poverty, corrective measures must be taken for their rehabilitation. In such cases, the key is to cure their addiction. | ||
==== Criminals due to momentary weakness ==== | ==== Criminals due to momentary weakness ==== | ||
Sarkar's last category of criminals is those who commit crime due to momentary weakness. The urge is temporary. It comes and goes under specific circumstances. A good example would be [[kleptomania]]. | Sarkar's last category of criminals is those who commit crime due to momentary weakness. The urge is temporary. It comes and goes under specific circumstances. A good example would be [[kleptomania]]. | ||
Sometimes the urge to commit a crime gets expressed immediately. Other times the urge builds over months or even years. Though one might imagine that the former case (an immediate crime) is less culpable than the latter case (a crime that is a long time in the making), Sarkar asserts that the root cause of both crimes is the same. The cause is mental weakness. The only way to rehabilitate such criminals is to help them attain greater [[mental strength]]. | Sometimes the urge to commit a crime gets expressed immediately. Other times the urge builds over months or even years. Though one might imagine that the former case (an immediate crime) is less culpable than the latter case (a crime that is a long time in the making), Sarkar asserts that the root cause of both crimes is the same. The cause is mental weakness. The only way to rehabilitate such criminals is to help them attain greater [[mental strength]]. | ||
Sarkar notes that people who lack mental strength may become deluded into believing that they committed crimes that they did not. By speaking loosely or by making false confessions, they may easily get wrongly convicted. Sarkar points out that if there is even a slight defect in the investigative process, the efficiency of the police, or the acumen of the judge, an innocent person is likely to be punished. Keeping in mind the unavoidable possibility of innocents being sent to prison, Sarkar asserts that it is imperative for such institutions to be corrective in nature rather than penal | Sarkar notes that people who lack mental strength may become deluded into believing that they committed crimes that they did not. By speaking loosely or by making false confessions, they may easily get wrongly convicted. Sarkar points out that if there is even a slight defect in the investigative process, the efficiency of the police, or the acumen of the judge, an innocent person is likely to be punished. Keeping in mind the unavoidable possibility of innocents being sent to prison, Sarkar asserts that it is imperative for such institutions to be corrective in nature rather than penal: | ||
=== Democracy === | === Democracy === | ||
| Line 473: | Line 473: | ||
PROUT defines ''sadvipras'' as those ''spiritual revolutionaries'' who, while strictly adhering to the principles of [[#Morality|morality]], work relentlessly and systematically to achieve [[#Progressive|progressive]] changes for human elevation.<ref>Sarkar, Prabhat Ranjan (1959). "The Place of Sadvipras in the Samaja Cakra" in ''Idea and Ideology''. Ananda Marga Publications. ISBN 81–7252–001–8.</ref> Sadvipras are not a social class – neither economically nor socially. They come from all walks of life and all backgrounds. Sadvipras are not ''appointed''. Rather, they are ''recognized'' by their "exemplary conduct, selfless service, dutifulness, and moral integrity".<ref name="Sarkar, Prabhat Ranjan 1969">Sarkar, Prabhat Ranjan (1969). "Sadvipra Boards" published in ''PROUT in a Nutshell Volume 4 Part 18''. Ananda Marga Publications.</ref> | PROUT defines ''sadvipras'' as those ''spiritual revolutionaries'' who, while strictly adhering to the principles of [[#Morality|morality]], work relentlessly and systematically to achieve [[#Progressive|progressive]] changes for human elevation.<ref>Sarkar, Prabhat Ranjan (1959). "The Place of Sadvipras in the Samaja Cakra" in ''Idea and Ideology''. Ananda Marga Publications. ISBN 81–7252–001–8.</ref> Sadvipras are not a social class – neither economically nor socially. They come from all walks of life and all backgrounds. Sadvipras are not ''appointed''. Rather, they are ''recognized'' by their "exemplary conduct, selfless service, dutifulness, and moral integrity".<ref name="Sarkar, Prabhat Ranjan 1969">Sarkar, Prabhat Ranjan (1969). "Sadvipra Boards" published in ''PROUT in a Nutshell Volume 4 Part 18''. Ananda Marga Publications.</ref> | ||
Sadvipras serve two main roles in relation to the [[#Social cycle|social cycle]] | Sadvipras serve two main roles in relation to the [[#Social cycle|social cycle]]<ref>''Cakrakendre sadvipráh cakraniyantrakáh. [Located in the nucleus of the social cycle, sadvipras control the social cycle.]'' Anandamurti, Shrii Shrii (1962). Sutra 5:2 of ''Ananda Sutram''. Ananda Marga Publications. ISBN 81–7252–027–1.</ref>: | ||
* When an era decays to a state of rapacious exploitation by the dominant sociopsychic class, the sadvipras apply requisite force to rotate the social cycle to a subsequent era, typically the next era. | * When an era decays to a state of rapacious exploitation by the dominant sociopsychic class, the sadvipras apply requisite force to rotate the social cycle to a subsequent era, typically the next era. | ||
* When a particular [[#Administration|administration]] in any era becomes corrupt, the sadvipras apply requisite force to replace the persons in power.{{#tag:ref|As Sarkar observes, the [[#shudras|shudra era]] is always short-lived. Unskilled laborers have no aptitude for or interest in managing society. Hence, the only role of sadvipras in a shudra era is to rotate the social cycle to a subsequent era, typically the [[#ksatriyas|ksatriya era]].<ref>Sarkar, Prabhat Ranjan (1967). ''Human Society Part 2''. Ananda Marga Publications.</ref>|group="nb"}} So, for example, if a particular administration in an early capitalist era becomes exploitative, the sadvipras might contest elections to replace that administration.<ref>Sarkar, Prabhat Ranjan (1959). "The Place of Sadvipras in the Samaja Cakra" in ''Idea and Ideology''. Ananda Marga Publications. ISBN 81–7252–001–8.</ref> | * When a particular [[#Administration|administration]] in any era becomes corrupt, the sadvipras apply requisite force to replace the persons in power.{{#tag:ref|As Sarkar observes, the [[#shudras|shudra era]] is always short-lived. Unskilled laborers have no aptitude for or interest in managing society. Hence, the only role of sadvipras in a shudra era is to rotate the social cycle to a subsequent era, typically the [[#ksatriyas|ksatriya era]].<ref>Sarkar, Prabhat Ranjan (1967). ''Human Society Part 2''. Ananda Marga Publications.</ref>|group="nb"}} So, for example, if a particular administration in an early capitalist era becomes exploitative, the sadvipras might contest elections to replace that administration.<ref>Sarkar, Prabhat Ranjan (1959). "The Place of Sadvipras in the Samaja Cakra" in ''Idea and Ideology''. Ananda Marga Publications. ISBN 81–7252–001–8.</ref> | ||
| Line 592: | Line 592: | ||
==Critiques == | ==Critiques == | ||
In a recent book,<ref>Lewis, James R. ''Violence and New Religious Movements''. Oxford University Press, 2011. ISBN 0199735611.</ref> | In a recent and well-researched book,<ref>Lewis, James R. ''Violence and New Religious Movements''. Oxford University Press, 2011. ISBN 0199735611.</ref> [[James R. Lewis (scholar)|James R. Lewis]] asserts that there is a "dramatic" number of correlations between [[Ananda Marga]] and [[Mark Juergensmeyer|Mark Juergensmeyer's]] "description of [[#Religion|religious]] groups inclined toward terrorism". After considerable analysis, Lewis concludes that it is probably more appropriate to describe the followers of Sarkar as [[#Revolution|''revolutionary'']] rather than ''terrorist''. As such, Lewis classifies them as "revolutionary sociospiritual [[Utopia|''utopians'']]". | ||
==See also== | ==See also== | ||
| Line 670: | Line 670: | ||
{{DEFAULTSORT:Progressive Utilization Theory}} | {{DEFAULTSORT:Progressive Utilization Theory}} | ||
[[Category:Social theories]] | |||
[[Category: | [[Category:Economic ideologies]] | ||
[[Category:Political ideologies]] | |||
[[Category:Law]] | |||
[[Category:Criminology]] | |||
[[Category:Sociocultural evolution]] | |||
[[Category:Revolution]] | |||
[[es:Teoría de la utilización progresiva]] | [[es:Teoría de la utilización progresiva]] | ||