Lakshmi

This article, “Vedic Philosophy Bred Social Inequality, Caste System, says panel,” published by the Deccan Herald on November 01, 2022, examines how historical interpretations of Vedic philosophies have contributed to the development and steadfastness of the caste system in India’s society throughout history. This object comments on how modern societal values are shaped by how religious texts have been interpreted over time, rather than the original texts themselves.

Many Vedic texts discuss ideas such as karmic retribution, which dictated the duties a person had in life and how that would follow them into their next life after rebirth. The original texts suggested that social status was linked to an individual’s actions rather than the family into which they were born. Over time, as these Vedic texts were interpreted by religious elites and governing powers, they became increasingly associated with family lineage, as it benefited the interpreters and their families. Due to the influence of royal families and religious people in India, these interpretations became deeply embedded into society, making the caste-system as accepted religious knowledge. This shows how interpretation plays a key role in shaping religious knowledge in a society. 

This article, along with an additional source, “Debunking the Myth of the Cast System through Vedic References," shows that due to the persistence of the caste-system in India, it has had a great influence on various parts of people’s daily lives, such as education, marriage, employment, and climbing the social ladder. Although present-day India is steadily moving away from a strongly religion-based social system, the legacy of these interpretations continues to linger and remain visible in daily life, ranging from social interactions to political decisions. This further suggests the importance that historical interpretation has on the development and solidification of current knowledge.

My second object is a transcription of William McKinley’s “Decision on the Philippines,” which was published in 1900. This document outlines how McKinley justified the United States' annexation of the Philippines after the Spanish-American War. This object can be used to examine how religion can be used to justify colonization, consequently manipulating the development of a community of knowers in relation to religious and political knowledge.

The document describes McKinley praying for divine guidance and thereupon using it as a sign that it is the moral duty and responsibility of the U.S. to “civilize” the Filipino people through their governance. By making a politically and militarily involved decision due to the religious intervention, McKinley uses religion as a justification to legitimize American colonization. This is a good example of how religion, a subjective belief, can be turned into knowledge due to its being used as a framework for justification.

During this time period, the dominant religion in the United States was Protestantism, which included values such as progressivism and moral superiority. Although the Philippines were already Catholic under Spanish rule, the Americans were continually annexing it and continually pushed for a promoted a Protestant way of life. This protestant influence reached from basic educational systems all the way to the government. Such religious dominance reshaped the Filipino community of knowers by redefining their values to what was the “morally right” way of thinking. This religious influence impacted access to education, administrative roles, and economic well-being and mobility, planting American dominance and Protestant values deep into this community of knowers and their everyday knowledge.

My third object is a History.com article titled “Galileo Goes on Trial for Heresy.” This article provides a detailed explanation of Galileo Galilei’s condemnation by the Catholic church as a result of his support of heliocentrism, which went against the beliefs of the Church. This object looks at how the distribution of current knowledge can be hindered by the assertion of religious dogma in relation to the concept of truth and the power of religious authority over the distribution of knowledge.

Galileo’s scientific observations provided empirical evidence for the theory of heliocentrism; however, during that time period, the widely accepted truth was the religious dogma asserted by the Catholic Church. The Church held authority both in institutional and social settings; therefore, it was able to restrict Galileo’s ideas by censoring his work and placing him under house arrest, as stated in the article. Galileo’s research being censored did not nullify his findings; what did happen was that the distribution of the scientific knowledge was significantly delayed by nearly 200 years. Galileo’s isolation led to a limitation in his ability to communicate his findings, restricting the spread of his scientific research. 

This delay shaped the development of modern scientific knowledge by slowing the acceptance of the heliocentric theory, which is now fundamental to modern physics. Scientific advancements such as Kepler’s law of planetary motion and Newton's laws of gravitation were built upon the heliocentric theory. The pace at which scientific knowledge was developed and accepted was set back significantly due to religious truth being treated as the dominant dogma rather than scientific knowledge or empirical evidence.