Knowledge and wisdom are two factors responsible for the steady development of both the state and society.
In both developed and developing societies, these two features play out, which are measured and analysed in a systemic and perfunctory method, depending on the degree and extent of the status of development.
The more the state and its society are developed, the more systemic measurement appears.
The less the state and its society are developed, the more indistinct its outcome becomes.However, the population and its behavioral actions of a different state and society would not and could not be similar.
For example, the society of Switzerland and that of Nepal could not be lumped together as the degree and extent of societal development of the two are far apart.
The differences would remain at the level of huge statistic quantity and quality, and the outcome naturally is neither comparable nor measurable.
Government committed to bringing those responsible for grave human rights violations to justice: PM Dahal Probe holds child correction centre responsible for death, mayhem But, we need not forget that the main components of humans are similar, that is, blood and flesh that enable and empower them to live and work under different circumstances.
Feeling and sensing are different from one another with different thoughts and outlook about the nature and structural composition of the state and society.
That in the long run differentiates the patterns and trends of living and working on their own rights.Despite the dissimilarity and non-conformity of the state and society from one another, humans are human beings.
They form an integral part of the state and society without which the existence of humans intrinsically becomes impossible to survive in an environment that is isolated, not being able to talk and walk as they would be impelled to survive without hobnobbing and mixing and mingling in the group of individuals in various societies and states.
While we talk about humans and societies down from ancient and medieval times to modern days, we are taught and told about the Greek city states and their lasting contributions to modern civilisations.The study of politics, economy and philosophy, including literature and culture, remains incomplete and incomprehensible without conceivable reference to the Greek contributions since ancient times.
Prominent scholars and authors take note of and make references to Greek contribution in the study of historical accounts of international affairs and diplomatic functions.In political science and its discourse, Greek contributions figure prominently.For example, noopolitik, formed by the appropriate joining of the Greek words voos, noos (knowledge) and politikos, is basically a network-denoted geopolitics of knowledge.
Two U.S.
experts of defense affairs John Arquilla and David Ronfeldt invented the term in the report of the Rand Cooperation study in 1999.The term noopolitik since then frequently appears in connection with what is now often called smart power, meaning the combinations of hard power and soft power in modern terms.
Experts say noopolitik is information relative to the strategy of basically manipulating processes of the general public through the means and use of mass media of positive or negative attitudes to the internal and external policies of a state to create a positive andas much as by state actors negative image of ideas and values.It is pointed out that noopolitik differs from real politik, as real politik is generally equated with hard power and noopolitik with soft power, although both are broader in their embodiment of the form of an organisation.True, real politik is not limited to hard power and coercion, but embodies a hierarchical form of organisation.Similarly, noopolitik is not limited to reliance on knowledge and soft power, but embodies a networked form of organisation as pointed out by experts on the subject.
The appearance of noopolitik is indeed an emerging form of statecraft that emphasises the need of sharing ideas and values globally, with the embrace of a new approach to statecraft of the day.By noopolitik, we mean an approach to adopting statecraft to be initiated and undertaken by nonstate actors as much as by state actors, which stresses the role of international soft power.
We understand that both experts, Arquilla and Ronfeldt, developed the term noopolitik as a political strategy concentrating on the use and denial of the theory of information.Another term noosphere, which is interpreted as knowledge, or mind literally, is also referred to as the mind sphere.
Anyway, noosphere is the sphere of human consciousness and mental activity specifically with regard to its influence on the biosphere and in relation to human sensitivity and activity.No doubt noosphere is the sphere of human thought.
The word is also derived from the same voo (noo "mind") and (spharia "sphere") in lexical analogy.The above word noosphere, literally mind sphere or earth's mental sheathe, is a word and concept coined by the French philosopher, Eduard Le Roy.
Noosphere means the planetary sphere of mind or thinking layer of the planet earth.
To grasp the idea of noosphere, we must evaluate our human consciousness.One of the key concepts of Teihard de Chardin's philosophy is noosphere, which he believes in the next phase of human evolution.Evidence suggests an emerging noosphere or the unifying field of consciousness described by sages in all cultures and societies.In noosphere, he called this evolving sphere of noosphere and described it as "a living tissue of consciousness" enclosing the earth and growing ever more and more as time makes its eternal journey.The noos are indeed Greek words suffixed by the word sphere, which have eventually been developed by U.S.
and French experts, who have contributed to enriching and expanding social sciences, including international affairs and diplomatic studies equally.A version of this article appears in the print on September 04, 2023, of The Himalayan Times.
.
This article first appeared/also appeared in https://thehimalayantimes.com