1. P R E F A C E
Never in the human history world required true
philanthropists and philosophers as the world requires
presently. From Socrates up to about eighteenth century
philosophy, science, arts and all social sciences were studied
together and a very well defined correlation existed between
all these fields so as to understand the universe and every
living and non-living thing which exists therein. Considerable
progress was made in all fields of study and some pioneering
work was done in political science especially by Plato and
Aristotle. During last two centuries philosophy and different
fields of study got divorced and studies became highly
specialized and compartmentalized for the researcher or the
group of researchers. Whatever be the purpose of study and
research of the individuals, the fact remains that everybody
has contributed to the human knowledge and
understanding. Resultantly a sea of knowledge and
information is available to us for finally to understand the
universe and the human beings. Philosophers are required
now, though late, who could put together and analyze all the
relevant knowledge and information to understand the
purpose of all creation. Human beings have to be primary
concern of all the studies and the task of all studies is almost
accomplished if we understand what the human being is and
what could be the purpose of human being on this planet
and how to fulfill that purpose.
1

2. Human beings, whether created or evolved, which
would be thoroughly discussed in this endeavor, is born and
lives for some period of time and finally dies. Every study,
scientific or otherwise, agrees that the death of the physical
body of the human being is inevitable and in no case death
could be overcome. Apparently the purpose of every human
individual is to live on this planet for some time. It should be
sole purpose of the life of the true philanthropists and the
philosopher to work out the ways and means to fulfill this
apparent purpose of human beings in the most comfortable,
fulfilling and just manner so that there is no injustice,
confusion, confrontation, exploitation, corruption and
bloodshed on this planet.
Philosophy has to be revived to use the sea of
information and knowledge available to us so as to
accomplish the task of fulfilling this apparent purpose of
human life because it is only through philosophy all the
information and knowledge could be analyzed and processed
so as to understand human beings and the universe. The
information and knowledge has been utilized in this
endeavor to revive the philosophy in order to understand
the human being and the universe and efforts have been
made to know the ways and means by which humans could
live on this planet peacefully without injustice, confusion,
confrontation, exploitation, corruption and bloodshed.
After Kant (1724-1804) almost no philosopher has
paid due attention to this field of study in a positive sense by
utilizing the present day knowledge and information. The
endeavor is written in such a manner that the knowledge of
2

3. philosophy is not a pre-requisite to understand the message
of this endeavor. However the knowledge of philosophy,
physics and political philosophy will be of great help in
understanding this work in true perspective. Besides the
reader need not be highly qualified person to understand
this endeavor but anybody of the level of under graduate
education could easily do so.
The individual human being and the collective social
structure is the primary concern of this endeavor. Since the
studies and research was compartmentalized in narrow
fields of study and the researchers confined to these narrow
fields of study, none of philosophers attempted to utilize the
relevant scientific and other knowledge and information to
derive the exact nature and purpose of human life and a
social structure required for peaceful existence on this
planet. There had been great philosophers in the past from
Socrates to Kant, but due to lack of scientific evidence and
verification of their knowledge, their philosophies remained
as ideas and no one has tried to apply scientific information
to test and verify the knowledge they gave to the world
especially during the last two centuries. This is high time,
though late, to reveal and to make all human beings to
realize that this is what you are, this is what your purpose is,
this is what you are supposed to do and this is how it could
be done at the individual level as well as at the collective
level.
All human beings at one time or the other have been
misled, exploited, confused, corrupted, massacred and
terrorized by a few for one reason or the other. A state of
3

4. total confusion is prevailing and human beings are simply
reduced to animals who strive for their survival and
materialism. Religious corruptions prevail in almost all
religions as the result of which religions are reduced to the
doctrines of illogical beliefs which cumulatively adds to the
state of confusion. Basic and fundamental concepts require
to be clarified so that there is no confusion and exploitation.
The individual life and collective social structure are closely
interdependent and change in one cannot lead to the change
in the other. At both levels a simultaneous change is
required and this endeavor is precisely meant to effect the
change. One might feel that this endeavor reveals some
miraculous findings or some highly complicated and
technical matters, beyond the comprehension and
understanding of the common human being, through which
the change is contemplated but this endeavor discusses &
uses simple, basic, fundamental and understandable axioms
so as to realize the importance of the change in the
individual life and the collective social structure and by using
simple, basic, fundamental axioms this endeavor works out
the alternative world order.
At the individual level people especially educated and
even the uneducated but intelligent people find the religious
beliefs as illogical doctrines which they do not dare to
challenge. What they understand about religion they find it
neither applicable nor practicable in the world. There is
confusion as the result of which they simply hold their faith
and belief without any conviction. They do not feel any
desire to ponder on their faith & belief and nor take up in
4

5. depth study of their faith & belief. Those who take the faith
and belief seriously and take up in depth study of their faith
& belief find certain fundamental facts of the faith & belief
illogical and irrational and their confusion cumulatively
increases. When they turn to the religions scholars and
preachers for the answer the reply is not at all convincing
and in some cases the reply is that for faith and belief the
rationality and logic does not apply.
There are serious fundamental problems with the
present world order but it has to its credit the progress in
education of all sections of society. No educated individual
will accept, with total conviction, the faith and belief systems
which are not based on rationality and logic. It cannot be
denied that a small percentage of people in orthodox
societies keep faith & belief with total conviction without
going deep into the philosophical defects in their faith and
belief. But in those societies also educated and intelligent
people keep their doubts and confusion with them and no
one dares to come out with the problems with their faith &
belief. These confusions about the faith & belief systems are
one of the basic factors for the evolution of the present
agnostic world order. Charles Darwin was a genius of his
time and keen study of his life history would reveal that he
initially intended to associate with the church and because of
the fundamental defects in his faith and belief system he
turned into an atheist and proposed Darwin’s Theory which
being a great instrument for evolution of the present
agnostic world order. This endeavor attempts to put a final
nail in the coffin of the Darwin’s Theory.
5

6. Every individual in the world, irrespective of their
faith, is convinced that the social structure which is evolving
because of the present world order is bad and with time it is
getting from bad to worst. Every individual is also convinced
that the world order and the social structure would require a
change. But every individual, though convinced, is
apprehensive above the alternative world order and
secondly realizing the dimensions of the efforts required to
change the world order; every individual acts as a mute
spectator of whatever is happening in the world. The
advocates of the present world order have made it clear to
the world that it would be absolutely futile to even to think
of any alternative world order especially the world order
based on faith. Any efforts of changing the world order, even
on a small scale or localized level is being suppressed with
ruthless force. People at large, irrespective of their faith and
even the atheists, have to realize that there has to be a
world order and a social structure which could be
practicable, acceptable and applicable to the whole world.
Every philanthropist, philosopher, thinker, intellectual and
true leader should not leave any stone unturned to identify
and devise a new world order which could be practicable,
acceptable, compatible and applicable to the whole world so
that there is no injustice, confusion, confrontation,
exploitation, corruption and bloodshed in the world. This is
high time to accomplish this task and it will be greatest
service to the humankind and the generations to follow.
The present world order is basically agnostic and the
social structure which has evolved encourages the agnostic
6

7. values. Though at the personal level one is free to practice
any faith but has no power to interfere in the evolution of
the agnostic social structure. Nobody can deny that the
present scientific and technological advancement, abolition
of slavery and progress in education of all sections of
societies has taken place during the present world order. But
that does not mean that with some other world order these
achievements could not have been possible. The civilizations
would not have survived if world order had not allowed
these achievements. Unfortunately the present world order
has failed in every other sphere of activity of the humankind;
the most important aspect of human life which has badly
suffered because of the present world order is faith. The
present agnostic world order is responsible for moral
degradation of the human beings to an extent that it will be
a herculean task to repair the damage. The family structure
has almost collapsed all over; the collapse is almost
complete in the developed countries whereas in the under-
developed countries the degree of collapse is lower. The
moral and human values are at the verge of annihilation. The
present agnostic world order encourages the adoption of
materialism as the true religion, where anything other than
materialism is not of any importance. Every sort of
corruption, exploitation, confrontation, injustice, bloodshed
is the order of the day in the present world order.
This endeavor undertakes the task of understanding
the human being scientifically, philosophically and
psychologically so as to work out the most suitable and
practicable ways and means of living a satisfying and
7

8. peaceful life at the individual as well as at the collective
level. A new method has been conceived for this purpose.
Available scientific, philosophical and psychological
knowledge and information shall be analyzed and discussed
in great details to derive the basic tenets of the religion and
the world order. This study could be applied to the different
religions so as to identify the corruption in the religions and
the present world order, so as to rectify the corruptions in
the religions, which exists in almost all the religions and on
the basis of this study the possible and practicable world
order would be derived so that human beings could live
peacefully individually and collectively.
8

9. 1. Impracticability of Democracy
I. Human Being – Life & soul
II. Human Being – Nature & Purpose
III. Political Systems & Impracticability of
Democracy
9

10. I. Human Being – Life & soul
Human being is the most intelligent and perfect
creature on this planet and our basic and primary concern
should be to strive to understand the origin, constituents
and purpose of human being. Unless and until correct, logical
and rational answers are found, nothing could be right about
the life of the human beings on this planet. Human beings
have reached almost to the point of climax of scientific and
intellectual development and with the available knowledge
& information, it is high time and it should not be very
difficult to find out answers of these basic and fundamental
questions.
Presently the human life is in a state of confused
existence and will continue to be so, if the task of finding the
answers of these basic questions is not undertaken.
Let us first consider the origin of human life. There
could be only two possibilities as to how life on this planet,
including the human life, came into existence. Either the life
came into being by itself or life has been created by some
creator. One has to bear in mind that either of the two
possibilities could be right.
Human knowledge is basically information regarding
the effects and in some cases the mechanism of effects and
in almost all the cases have no knowledge of the cause.
Scientists present hypothesis, theories and even conclude
that they possess the knowledge, but they basically have
either the information of the effect or information regarding
the mechanism of the effect. This applies to most of the
physical sciences, especially the biological sciences. To
10

11. substantiate this a few examples are quoted here. Newton
was basically a philosopher who concluded that matter
attracts matter and called it gravitation by philosophically
observing and analyzing the falling of an apple from the tree.
This is a universal fact and scientists have put forward a
theory that gravitation is due to the exchange of gravitons,
which being the infinitely small particles. The gravitation
being the effect and the theory of exchange of gravitons
being the mechanism of effect but the actual cause of this
effect shall continue to be the mystery till the causative
factor of gravitation is discovered. Physicists know that the
opposite charged particles attract and the same charged
particles repel. These are the effects which physicists know
but the actual cause of attraction or repulsion is not known.
To explain the mechanism of attraction or repulsion,
physicists say that the attraction or repulsion is due to the
electric field which in turn, according to some theoretical
physicists, is due to exchange of infinitely small particles, but
what is the actual causes of emission of such particles is not
known. Thus the actual cause shall continue to remain the
mystery. The cosmological theories are simple theories of
the effect, but the actual cause is unknown. The Big Bang
Theory concerns the effect as the cause remains a mystery.
Fertilization is an effect and the cause of the fertilization
shall remain a mystery, unless and until serious attempts are
made to know the cause.
With this background let us explore the first possibility
that life came into existence by itself. There is one theory
which has been put forward which claims that life evolved
naturally in time by mere chance under the influence of the
11

12. environmental factors without any intervention from any
external factor; which is called Darwin’s Theory of Evolution.
Before we examine the Darwin’s Theory let us look into the
life history of Darwin. It has to be accepted that Darwin was
an intelligent person of his time. Initially he got associated
with the Church for some time and after remaining
associated with the Church he could not reconcile with some
irrational and illogical concepts of Christianity as the result of
which he disassociated with the Church. To justify his
disassociation with the Church he looked for ways & means
to defy the existence of God. I would like to reproduce his
three quotes and make comments on his quotes. The first
quote is ‘Believing as I do that man in the distant future will
be far more perfect creature than he now is, it is an
intolerable thought that he and all other sentient beings are
doomed to complete annihilation after such long continued
slow progress’. The present day science has made it crystal
clear that the life on this planet has to end sooner or later.
The universe as well as the world is living on the edge and
the whole equilibrium can get disturbed at any time. Sun is
emitting the radiation in space around it continuously as the
result of the nuclear reaction called nuclear fusion. The
reaction could stop at any point of time and emission of
radiation could stop and this radiation being the source of
life on this planet and resultantly the life on this planet
would annihilate. Secondly without doing any calculations,
the nuclear fuel in the sun has to exhaust at one time,
however long it may take, as the result of which the life on
this planet is destined to annihilate. Thirdly the sun is
emitting radiation continuously and a small portion of this
12

13. radiation reaches this planet. Part of this radiation is
reflected and part of it is being absorbed by this planet by
means of photosynthesis and other mechanisms. Thus the
energy level of the atmosphere of this planet is continuously
increasing resulting the average temperature of the
atmosphere is also increasing with time. Let us not take into
account the increase in temperature due to artificial carbon
and other gas emissions. Thus the average temperature of
this planet will continue to increase as long as sun emits the
radiation and water level will continue to increase in the seas
due to the melting of the glaciers; all or most of the land
mass will be drowned, if the glaciers contain that much of
water which could drown the whole land mass otherwise
land mass will be partly drowned. The drowning of the land
mass will annihilate most of the life forms of this planet. This
should prove that Darwin had wrong beliefs which cannot
stand the test of science.
The second quote of Darwin (Introduction to the
descent of Man, 1871) is a very beautiful quote and I wonder
had he pondered on this quote with an open vision, he
would not have presented his Theory of Evolution. The quote
is ‘Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does
knowledge; it is those who know little, not those who know
much, who so positively assert that this or that problem will
never be solved’. Keeping in view the scientific knowledge
available today, Darwin’s knowledge could be compared
with ignorance of today. He did not imagine that the basic
unit of life which is a cell could be studied with the help of
modern technologies to the extent it is being studied today.
Had he foreseen the complexities of the cell and that of the
13

14. DNA, he would have considered himself as an ignorant being
and would not have tried to solve the problem of
understanding the origin of life with his virtual ignorance. His
theory draws inferences, without considering the cause, on
effects and assumes that the cause is a natural phenomenon.
The cause as such is taken for granted and thereby denied.
Unless and until the possible causes or mechanism of any
phenomenon are discussed and proper provision kept in the
theory for the mechanism or causative factors, the theory
cannot be justified. Darwin closed the doors of any
possibility of finding the mechanism or the cause and
declared nature, time and environment to be the cause. This
reveals that Darwin had the wrong conception of the basic
principles of science.
The third quote of Darwin (Descent of Man) is ‘false
facts are highly injurious to the progress of science, for they
often endure long, but false views, if supported by some
evidence do little harm, for everyone takes a salutary
pleasure in proving their falseness; and when this is done,
one path towards errors is closed and road to truth is often
at the same time opened’. It we analyze this quote, it is not
the false facts which are injurious to the progress of science
because sooner or later science will prove false facts to be
false. But false views, if supported by some evidence about
some obscure matter are more injurious to the progress of
science. The views whether false or true views continue till
the obscurity of the matter is resolved. Since the obscurity of
the origin of life has not been solved till date, Darwin’s views
continue to be held despite the lapse of about one and half
century. If we assume, at this stage, that Darwin’s views
14

15. were wrong then humanity after assessing the damage
Darwin’s views have done to the humanity scientifically,
socially, politically and morally, will never forgive Darwin for
his false views. Darwin never considered this possibility
whatsoever, which reveals that he had wrong understanding
as well.
From the quotes of Darwin it should be clear that
Darwin had wrong beliefs, wrong conceptions and wrong
understanding. This endeavor will prove this scientifically as
well as philosophically.
In this endeavor I do not intend to repeat what is
already written so as to keep its size within limits. Scientific
difficulties of Darwin’s Theory on the same principles on
which it was derived are well known and well written about.
Instead of repeating what is already written I will refer to the
collection of books wherein all the information regarding the
difficulties of Darwin’s Theory are discussed in great detail.
These books have been written by Adnan Oktar under the
pen-name Harun Yahya which are available on the website
www.harunyahya.com, which are: -
01. The Evolution Impasse
02. If Darwin Had Known About DNA
03. The Skulls That Demolish Darwin
04. What Darwinists Fail to Consider
05. Confessions of the Evolutionists
06. Darwin’s Dilemma; The ‘soul’
07. The Cambrian Evidence That Darwin Failed to
Comprehend
08. Atlas of Creation
09. The Intellectual Struggle Against Darwinism
15

16. 10. The Error of the Evolution of Species
11. The Transitional Form Dilemma
12. The Collapse of the Theory of Evolution
13. Once Upon A Time There Was Darwinism
14. The Social Weapon, Darwinism
15. Charles Darwin & His Magic Barrel
16. How Fossils Overturned Evolution
17. The Religion of Darwinism
18. The Dark Spell of Darwinism
19. New Research Demolishes Evolution
20. The Evolution Deceit
21. The Disasters Darwinism Brought to Humanity
22. Fascism: The Bloody Ideology of Darwinism
23. Darwinism Refuted
24. A Definitive Reply to Evolutionist Propaganda
I would request the readers to go through at least
some of these books and read from purely scientific
perspective as some of the material in these books has been
written with religious perspective. Reading these books is
not a pre-requisite for understanding the contents of this
endeavor, but those readers who are interested in scientific
analysis of the Darwin’s Theory should go through these
books. These books give sufficient proofs that there are very
serious problems with Darwin’s Theory scientifically and as
such the theory is not tenable logically and scientifically.
The basic unit of life is a ‘cell’ which is common to all
life forms. Biologists now know almost everything physical
about the cell as to what are the constituents of the different
types of cells, plant and animal, and what functions different
cells perform; of which Darwin at his time was not aware of.
16

17. The cells, plant or animal, could be in three states; dead,
living but dormant and living. Again dead cells could be of
three types; firstly dead cells with food supply stopped and
constituents of the cell intact, secondly dead cells with food
supply intact but constituents of the cells
damaged/disturbed and thirdly dead cells with food supply
intact and constituents of cells intact. The existence of third
type of dead cells is a phenomenon which cannot be
explained by any scientific demonstration, not to speak of
Darwin’s Theory. According to Darwin’s Theory the cells have
life as a natural phenomenon and there should be life in
every cell with food supply intact and constituents of the
cells intact. The very existence of dead cells with food supply
intact and constituents of cells intact defies the Darwin’s
Theory on simple & fundamental facts. It is believed that
DNA molecule in the nucleus of the cell contains all the
information pertaining to the cell, organ or organism and to
know about the cell and the DNA I will again refer to two
books again written by Adnan Oktar under the pen- name
Harun Yahya which are available on website
www.harunyahya.com namely
01. The Miracle in the Cell
02. The secrets in the DNA
This has been done to avoid writing what is already
written and to limit the size of this endeavor. Again I would
request the readers to read with purely scientific perspective
as in these books some material has been written with
religious perspective.
With this in the background, recently the DNA of the
chimpanzee has been matched with human DNA (R.J. Baitten
17

18. 2002) and it has been demonstrated that the two DNA’s
almost (95%) match. This defies the Theory of Evolution and
almost puts the final nail in the coffin of the Theory of
Evolution, because two species with almost matching DNA
differ so much in physical and instinctive characteristics
proves loudly and clearly that DNA is not containing all the
information regarding the cell, organ or organism and the
inheritance & modification over time and environment is not
based on facts. Darwin had conceded that ‘if it could be
demonstrated that any complex organ/organism existed,
which could not possibly have been formed by numerous
successive slight modifications my theory would absolutely
break-down’. This is exactly what the matching of
chimpanzee & human DNA’s demonstrates. Two species do
exist which have almost same DNA and even the cell
structures, proves that one species has not proceeded from
another and live differently and separately. There is no
question of any modification. Thus this should be taken as
scientific collapse of Darwin’s Theory of Evolution which
even Darwin himself had conceded.
Let us analyze the Darwin’s Theory of Evolution
philosophically. There are some basic, fundamental and
simple facts which need to be considered to understand the
phenomenon of life. Molecules and chemicals are known to
have physical and chemical properties. Outside the cell, the
basic unit of life, molecules and chemicals in any
composition or in any set of arrangement do not and cannot
have the property of reproduction, growth, sense of
identification of harmful and beneficial molecules and
chemicals and many other senses. How it is that all the
18

19. constituents of the cell when in the cell possess senses?
Whatever the extent of information contained in the DNA, it
cannot give the senses of reproduction, growth and many
other senses to the cell, organ or organism; DNA can, at the
most, be responsible for definite physical and chemical
characteristics of the cell, organ or organism. The life in the
cells or organic being cannot be due to the mere
arrangement of chemicals & molecules and by any means
the instincts cannot be stored and transmitted. Darwin and
evolutionists assume that because of special arrangement of
chemicals and molecules in the cells and elsewhere, life
exists as a natural phenomenon and the instincts in the
organic being could be stored, transmitted and modified by
the numerous, successive and slight modifications. This is
due to the lack of philosophical mind on the part of biologists
which includes the evolutionists. We need to understand the
phenomenon of life before we could decide upon the origin
of life. It will be proved that evolutionist’s basic presumption
that life exists due to mere arrangement of chemicals &
molecules in the cells, organs or organisms is wrong.
Philosophically it has been concluded, decades before, that
the process of evolution as the origin of life is not tenable
and there is something wrong with the theory of evolution
and explanation of phenomenon of life as understood by the
biologists. This would be clear to the readers by the passage
from Wildon Carr which is quoted as follows;
‘If intellect is a product of evolution the whole mechanistic
concept of the nature and origin of life is absurd, and the
principle which science has adopted must clearly be revised.
We have only to state it to see the self-contradiction. How
19

20. can the intellect, a mode of apprehending reality, be itself an
evolution of something which only exists as an abstraction of
that mode of apprehending, which is the intellect? If intellect
is an evolution of life, then the concept of the life which can
evolve intellect as a particular mode of apprehending reality
must be the concept of a more concrete activity than that of
any abstract mechanical movement which the intellect can
present to itself by analyzing its apprehended content. And
yet further, if the intellect be a product of the evolution of
life, it is not absolute but relative to the activity of the life
which has evolved it; how then, in such case, can science
exclude the subjective aspect of the knowing and build on
the objective presentation as an absolute? Clearly the
biological sciences necessitate a reconsideration of the
scientific principle.’
The readers should bear in mind that every living
organism has the intellect of survival, growth & reproduction
as the natural instincts. It is due to the compartmentalization
of different fields of study that the biologists and
evolutionists have not taken notice of such basic &
fundamental philosophical problems of evolution &
phenomenon of life.
Newton’s observation of gravitational force between
matter was accepted as a natural phenomenon without
going into the reason of attraction. This was accepted as a
universal fact and physicists did not bother to look for the
reasons or mechanism of attraction between the matter for
several centuries. Now the physicists have come forward
with the theory that matter attracts matter because of
exchange of infinitesimally small particles called gravitons.
20

21. Similarly the processes which take place within the cell,
biologists assume that these processes are a natural
phenomenon and no biologists has gone further as to how
such processes take place within the cells and have given the
names like protein-synthesis, cell-metabolism to cover up
the mysterious functioning of the cells. The biologist have to
give an explanation of causative factors for all the processes
which take place within the cells and none of the micro-
biologists, including molecular biologists, bio-chemists and
genetic scientists have even thought of any explanation. The
food material being converted into amino acids which in turn
are converted into 2,00,000 types of proteins in the cells as
the human body uses this number of proteins. It is presumed
by the biologists that the information of protein formation is
encoded in the DNA and also the information of the proteins
to be utilized within the cells & those which are to be
exported outside the cells. This is the illogical argument held
by the biologists to avoid defining the actual cause of the
functioning of the cell. Unless there are means of
communication between the DNA and the actual constituent
of the cell where the protein synthesis and other functions
take place and these means of communication have to be
identified which could pass on such information. No such
means of efficient communication have been conceived not
to speak of the identification. The functioning of the cell is
accepted as a mystery which needs to be resolved.
There has to be a theory to explain the mysterious
functioning of the cells and that of organs and organisms. If
the theory can explain all the phenomena which have not
been explained so far by scientists and the philosophers then
21

22. one has to consider the theory seriously. The theory has
been conceived and is presented herein. If that is done, the
Darwin’s Theory summarily fails to explain the origin &
phenomenon of life.
There has to be a driving force within the cells, organs
or organisms which could be responsible for livingness of the
cells, organs or organism. Human beings have to look for this
driving force which gives life to the cell to know the origin &
phenomenon of life. It has to be done scientifically as well as
philosophically.
The existence of the dead cells with the food supply
intact and the constituents of the cells also intact is a
phenomenon which in no case could be explained by any
scientific demonstration with the presumption of biologists
that life exists as a natural phenomenon in the cells. This
phenomenon could be explained by existence of some
driving force of livingness within the cells. There is absolutely
no other alternative but to accept this driving force or
livingness or essence within the cells to explain existence of
dead cells with food supply intact and constituents of cells
intact.
Secondly matching of the DNA in two species to the
extent of 95% or more and their differences in physical and
instinctive characteristics, as wide as that between
chimpanzee and the humans, loudly and clearly proves the
existence of some other substance, the driving force or
livingness or essence as the cause of differences in the
physical and instinctive characteristics.
Thirdly despite tremendous advances in the molecular
biology, bio-chemistry and genetics the functioning of a
22

23. living cell remains a mystery. Unless and until we accept the
existence of a driving force or livingness in the cell, this
mystery cannot be resolved. This substance within cell as the
source of life has to be highly complex; more complex than
the cell or DNA.
Fourthly we might know the processes from
production of sperm or pollen and its fertilization then birth,
growth, survival, reproduction and finally death of the
organisms but science has so far failed to assign or explain
the causative factors to all these processes.
Fifthly there are many other phenomena such as
sleep, mysticism or spirituality, mystical curing of diseased
human beings, evil spirits etc. All these phenomena could
only be explained by the existence of this complex substance
within the human beings.
The physical characteristics of this complex substance
are described as under: -
01. This substance has to be invisible to the naked eye,
microscope, electron microscope etc. because till date
no such substance has been seen or imagined to be
existing in the cell or organic being except some vague
imaginations by some philosophers like Plato,
Aristotle, Leibniz, Avicenna and Averroes etc.
02. This substance has to be highly complex and
interactive within the cells; otherwise this substance
has to be inert and inactive with respect to other
matter outside of the cells. This is due to the fact that
physicists have not made any observations regarding
such a substance. It has to be more inert than
neutrinos outside the cells.
23

24. 03. This substance when interacting with the constituents
of the cells or organic being gives senses of
reproduction, growth, understanding or simply life to
the cells or organic being.
04. This substance has to be highly interactive and
communicating between different units of its
existence within the organism & capable of having
independent existence also.
Evidently the substance could be highly complex
‘energy’ which could have its independent existence as well.
This ‘energy’ is the source of life of every living thing, plant &
animal.
At this stage, readers might feel that I am trying to
resolve the mysteries of cell function and life or human being
by introducing some mysterious ‘energy’. But I will prove the
existence of this ‘energy’ indirectly by explaining everything
which hitherto could not be explained by science or
philosophy; besides a direct proof will be given to the human
beings when they could simply feel the presence of this
‘energy’ within them.
The humankind being a special and perfect creature
and our primary concern, let our attention be on the human
beings only. This ‘energy’ is the source of life for all living
things and in so far as the human being is concerned in this
‘energy’ is embedded the ‘ego’ of the human being. This
‘ego’ is the ‘soul’ of the human being. Thus living human
being is not simply a set of different groups of cells but
besides these cells, human being has this ‘energy’ as the
source of life and a ‘soul’. The physical body of the human
being, ‘energy’ and the ‘soul’ can have their independent
24

25. existence also. The physical body in the form of a dead body
has neither ‘energy’ nor ‘soul’. In the condition of sleep
human being has physical body and ‘energy’ only. Acceptable
explanation of all the phenomena by this design is a proof of
existence of ‘energy’ and ‘soul’.
The body and the ‘soul’ independently are inactive
and with the help of interaction between the body, the ‘soul’
and the ‘energy’; human being is a living being capable of all
the activities which human being perform.
Due to the interaction between the ‘energy’ and the
human body thoughts are created either due to the external
stimuli or in situ. These thoughts after giving some feelings
reach the ‘soul’, where final decision of action is taken and
opinion is formed. The ‘soul’ of the human being has the
innate knowledge of right & wrong of every action, thought
or opinion. Now if we prove that innate knowledge of right &
wrong exists within the human being that will indirectly
prove the existence of ‘energy’ and ‘soul’.
I have done intense research by interacting with
people of different education levels and intelligence
quotients, of different classes of societies and of different
financial status and even observed the children of different
ages of above mentioned classes of people. Every adult
human being has agreed of having the innate knowledge of
right and wrong irrespective of religion and social taboo. Any
intelligent reader will agree to it and he is free to consult any
number of people; then he will simply confirm that every
individual including the children have the innate knowledge
of right and wrong of all his actions and thoughts. This is the
most convincing indirect proof of existence of the ‘energy’
25

26. and ‘soul’ to all the people of the world and resultantly
indirect proof of the ultimate failure of Darwin’s Theory of
Evolution.
The destiny of the human being lies in as to how he
applies his innate knowledge of right and wrong to all of his
actions and thoughts.
Due to the external stimuli or in situ thoughts are
created in the human being as the result of the interaction
between body and the ‘energy’. This gives rise to the
formation of feelings, which may require action or may not
require action, and in ‘soul’, with the innate knowledge of
the right and wrong, decisions are taken about the action
and opinion. Thus an attitude of a human being is formed by
the way he acts and with time he develops a habit and finally
a type of personality is formed which determine the destiny
of the human being. This all is represented in the figure 1 for
easy and quick understanding.
26

27. 27
Fig 1
External Stimuli
Body Energy
In situ
Body Energy
Thoughts
Feelings
Requiring Action Requiring No Action
‘soul’
OpinionAction
Attitude
Habit
Personality
Destiny
Having innate knowledge of
right & wrong and decides
about action and opinion

28. Evolutionists assume that habits or instincts are inherited
and transmitted to the off-springs by their parents. But
through genes only the physical characteristics are
transmitted to the off-springs. This fact is confirmed by the
fact that the DNA’s of the chimpanzee and the human being
match to the extent of 95% because it could be acceptable
that difference of 5% in the DNA’s of chimpanzee and human
being could account for the physical differences between the
two. But the difference of 5% of DNA’s cannot explain the
huge difference of physical and instinctive characteristics
between humans & chimpanzees.
Since physical characteristic could be stored and
transmitted through genes as such for all the plant species
the type of ‘energy’ required as source of life could be
uniform ‘energy’. But for the animal life the ‘energy’ has to
be different for different species, because instinctive
characteristics of different species are different. Evidently
there is no need of any ‘soul’ in respect of plant life on the
whole and all of the animal species except human being.
Keeping in view what has stated herein and trying to
understand the human being to be in a state in which we
find him, we could easily draw the inference that the Theory
of Evolution fails scientifically as well as philosophically. But
the fact remains that the origin of life has to be explained
which I will do hereunder.
It stands cleared that the cell and ‘energy’ in respect
of plant life and all of the animal species except the human
beings and cell, ‘energy’ and ‘soul’ in respect of human
beings contain all the information of physical characteristics
and instinctive characteristics including the senses of growth,
28

29. reproduction, etc. The cell being the basic unit of life
wherein the ‘energy’ is the source of life or driving force or
livingness and in respect of humans cells contain besides
‘energy’, the ‘soul’; the most convenient and acceptable
origin of life has to be the cell but unlike Theory of Evolution,
cells have to originate for different species separately and
independently and secondly the place of origin of the cells
have to be water and thirdly the cells have to originate at
different places on the planet as different species, plants and
animals, survive in different climatic zones. Human being is
one of the species which can survive naturally in every
climatic zone. In respect of human being we could accept
that the whole humanity originated from the couple of cells;
one cell of the male and another cell of the female. In that
case one has to understand that the combination of cell and
‘energy’ especially the ‘energy’ in respect of initial two cells,
one male & one female to be slightly different, to allow for
the fending in the initial stages of the first human male and
female like some of the animal species who survive in
absence of the parents.
Having solved mystery of the functioning of the cell
and proposed a theory of origin & phenomenon of life; the
question as to whether the initial cells for every species have
originated by itself or have been created, needs to be
answered. After analysis of all the studies conducted
regarding the cell and the DNA and also keeping in view what
is contained herein one can easily conclude that there is
negligible probability that the cells could come into being by
itself. How could such a complex and perfect entity come
into existence without the intervention of the perfect
29

30. designer or creator? Any statistician, biologist or a
philosopher after due consideration of all aspects of science
and philosophy would simply arrive at one and only solution,
that the initial cells of every species have been created by a
perfect designer or creator. Even if scientists may be in
position to assemble the cell but to give life to the cell would
be beyond human reach because the ‘energy’ required for
the cells to be live and functional is not under the control of
human being. This also substantiates the existence of perfect
designer or creator for as the only cause of creation of all life
forms on this planet.
The theory & design of the human being which has
been conceived herein had not been thought of by scientists
so far but several philosophers in the past have vaguely
conceived the existence of such a design of human being.
These ancient philosophers namely Plato, Aristotle, Leibniz,
Averroes, Plotinus, Avicenna etc. were the first who
suggested the somewhat similar design of human being, but
since no scientific evidence & verification was possible at
those times, the designs remained only as ideas and virtually
faded away with time. Since during last two centuries
philosophy was an almost forgotten field of study no
scientist or researcher, also due to compartmentalization &
specialization of scientific study, paid any attention to the
great works of these ancient philosophers. Out of all the
philosophers whom the world has produced till date Plato
stands out as the visionary philosopher, which shall be
proved by the contents of this book also because his
philosophy had a divine touch. The contents of this work will
make it clear that Aristotle, though a genius of his time,
30

31. except his borrowed concept of ‘Ousia’ which he borrowed
from Plato, all his philosophy especially his political
philosophy had been on wrong foundations. Plato’s concept
of ‘forms’ and his belief that the material world as it seems
to us is not the real world, but only a shadow of the real
world, has been conceived & evidence gathered is this work.
Leibniz had also put forward the concept of ‘monads’ in
place of ‘energy’ of this work as the source of life. In the
‘soul’ of the human being there is the concept of perfect
universal creator which human being feel as intuition which
Descartes realized and suggested that since humans have
the feeling that God exists; God must exist. This design
confirms the basic concept of Descartes. Descartes’ concept
was rejected by Kant later-on on the basis of his confusing
philosophy which was not based on the right principles.
However, one must admit that a few of the inferences which
Kant drew from his confusing philosophy do hold good
because he in his philosophy accepted the existence of ‘a
priori’ but his definitions and classifications of ‘a priori’ are
not tenable. Avicenna tried to apply the Greek philosophy
especially the Aristotle’s philosophy, to the religious thought
but encountered certain genuine difficulties which he spelled
out in his works because the existence of perfect universal
creator has some serious difficulties in the Greek philosophy
which have been resolved in this work. Algazel did
painstaking work to point out certain basic difficulties in the
Greek philosophy and tried to solve the basic difficulties of
religious thought in his work namely “The Incoherence of the
Philosophers” but failed. His failure of giving proper &
justified explanations of the difficulties in the religious
31

32. thought has been described by Averroes in his work “The
Incoherence of the Incoherence”. Averroes rightly concluded
that the difficulty cannot be explained by another difficulty.
However Averroes had also proposed a somewhat similar
design of human being as contained in this work but lacked
in details & description and scientific demonstration. Finally
after Kant philosophy as a field of study was neglected by the
world. This was all due to the fact that the Greek philosophy,
especially the Aristotle’s philosophy, and subsequent
philosophies were based on wrong axioms of matter as the
base material of everything in the universe and imagination
of anything other than matter as the base material did not
occur to any philosopher except a few philosophers like
Russell but the application was vaguely done, as the result
they could not derive other philosophical conclusions
correctly. With the scientific knowledge presently available
this foundation of philosophy has been challenged in this
work with scientific evidence.
To summarize the theory & design of the human
being; human being consists of the body, ‘energy’ and ‘soul’.
All the three constituents of the human being are capable of
independent existence. The body occupies the defined space
whereas ‘energy’ and ‘soul’ have no defined space as they
have no limitations of space. The body acts as material base
and ‘energy’ is the source of life, the driving force or
livingness or essence within the body and has abundant
properties; ‘energy’ could be initially uniform with all the
human being and once in a human being it stores the
information and subsequently gets labeled as ‘energy’ of a
particular individual. While interacting with the body it gives
32

33. the senses of growth, reproduction, feelings, emotions and
most importantly produces the thoughts of right and wrong
desires as the result of external stimuli or in situ. This
‘energy’ under special conditions can have the senses of
hearing, seeing and movement independent of the body so
much so this ‘energy’ can perceive the existence of other
‘energy’ and know its content and quality and interact with
the other ‘energy’. Besides it stands already described as to
what the ‘energy’ in itself has to be.
‘soul’ as already discussed is embedded in the
‘energy’ and capable of independent existence also wherein
the concept of existence of the creator is already existent
besides it has the innate knowledge of right and wrong and
the decision of action or opinion lies with the ‘soul’ and
finally the ‘souls’ of every individual are already created with
defined identification as every ‘soul’ has an ‘ego’ associated
with it.
This final design of human being would require some
more clarification. As already clarified that due to external
stimuli or in situ interactions between body and the ‘energy’
thoughts are created. These thoughts give rise to desires and
these desires could be right or wrong. Since these desires
have to have the approval of the ‘soul’, this has the innate
knowledge of a desire being right or wrong, before the
human being could take any action or form an opinion. It
needs no clarification that the ‘soul’ of an individual has to
be specific and no two ‘souls’ could be similar or equivalent.
The most important point which needs clarification is that
the ‘soul’ has the innate knowledge of existence of the
perfect universal creator. The manifestation of this innate
33

34. knowledge is that most of the human beings hold on to the
perception that there exists a perfect universal creator
irrespective of the religions they believe in. The intelligent
human beings who study the religions deeply find that most
of the religions are illogical and irrational but yet hold on to
the perception that there exists a perfect universal creator.
They also understand that the religions are corrupted, one
more than the other, and even though having rejected the
religious beliefs (as most people of the Europe and America
and of advanced countries have) yet in the heart of hearts
they know that there exists a perfect universal creator. This
could be sufficient proof to every intelligent human being
that the ‘soul’ has the innate knowledge of the existence of a
perfect universal creator.
The ‘energy’ under special conditions can have certain
properties/senses; could now be discussed to explain certain
phenomena which hitherto have not been explained by
science or philosophy.
It has been already clarified that thoughts give rise to
desires in the human beings. The pre-requisite for spirituality
or mysticism is to have the monotheistic belief, irrespective
of religion, and one has to sacrifice all the human desires
right as well as wrong except the desire of feeding oneself to
survive for the sake of one perfect universal creator. Besides
there is another mode of mysticism; that is to adopt any of
the monotheistic religion and carry out all the duties
prescribed under that religion as a normal human being,
then under the guidance of a spiritual guide and defined
practices one can attain the spiritual power. By spiritual
power is meant to have the control over his ‘energy’ through
34

35. which he is exposed to different experiences which cannot
be expressed by him. The mystic or Sufi has the control over
his ‘energy’ and the degree of control varies from mystic to
mystic depending upon the purity of his mind and intention.
With time the mystic attains the perfection through increase
in control over his ‘energy’; if he sustains the hardships and
maintains his purity of mind and intention. Through ‘energy’
within him, the mystic can have the senses of hearing, seeing
and movement independent of the organs of hearing, seeing
and those of movement of the body. The perfection of the
mystic could reach the climax when the mystic attains the
power to influence the ‘energy’ of the other human being.
Since life in the human being is due to the interaction
of body and the ‘energy’ and through the influence on the
‘energy’ the diseases of the diseased could be cured by
mystic, whereas doctors through chemicals, which influence
different organs of the patient, cure the patients; besides
doctors repair the damages of different organs/tissues
through operations to cure the patients. Most of the
diseases are due to some malfunction of the cells/tissues
either due to the attack of bacteria or viruses or otherwise or
else because of the malfunction of the ‘energy’ within the
cells/tissues. The mystic through the influence on the
‘energy’ within the cells/tissues can cure both types of
diseases whereas the doctors could cure the cells/tissues by
chemicals or operation. This should explain the mystic curing
of the patients which hitherto has been an unexplained
phenomenon by science, theology or philosophy.
In many religions also there are also such practices by
which they attain the control over the ‘energy’ of the self or
35

36. other human being. The readers should know that mysticism
or spirituality is also a way of life and some people sacrifice
their lives for this purpose. The existence of mysticism or
spiritually or even poetic mysticism should be indirect proof
of this design of human being.
This design of human being will also help in scientific
study of sleep, dreams and psychology.
Lastly this design of human being rejects all the
materialistic philosophies. I could discuss all materialistic
philosophies one by one and prove them to be wrong.
Keeping in view that readers are not supposed to have
knowledge of philosophy and also keeping in view that this
work has to be concise and precise, instead of that all efforts
will be made to prove the correctness of this design of
human being by providing sufficient evidence in chapters
ahead.
36

37. II. Human Being – Nature & Purpose
The human nature has been studied and written
about in great detail by most of the philosophers from
Socrates to Iqbal. The human nature is so complicated that
hundreds of books written so far about it have not described
it completely. There is no need to repeat what is already
written. However I have tried to describe the human nature
in the simplest possible manner.
Before describing the human nature it would be
desirable to analyze & redefine certain concepts which are in
use to describe the human nature, in view of the design of
the human being introduced herein. As per the design the
mind is the collective activity of the ‘energy’ and ‘soul’.
‘Energy’ has the capacity of storing the information and the
‘soul’ has the capacity of reasoning. Understanding is also a
collective activity of the ‘energy’ & ‘soul’. Virtue is the
capacity and content within the ‘energy’ of the human being
which by interacting with the human body is capable of
performing acts which are good for the human being himself
as well as other human beings. Vice is the capacity and
content within the ‘energy’ of the human being which by
interacting with the human body is capable of performing
acts which are harmful/damaging for the human being
himself as well as other human beings.
The state of nature of the human being is that he
possesses varying quantum of vice and virtue and the same
human being is capable of actions which are worst than the
ruthless wild animal and virtuous actions of the noblest
human being. Since by the judgment and approval of the
37

38. ‘soul’ the human being is capable of performing an action,
thus it is because of the ‘soul’ a human being may be
virtuous or evil. Besides it has been already stated that ‘soul’
has the capacity of reasoning to analyze the genuineness of
the innate knowledge of right and wrong of a particular
action and finally the ‘soul’ has also the innate knowledge of
existence of a perfect universal creator.
Plato believed that man is immortal ‘soul’ corrupted
by vice and purified by virtue, of whom the body is only an
instrument & he has also stated that the ‘soul’ must be freed
from vice; which should be the ultimate goal of the human
being. In principle Plato was very right but actually vice and
virtue are created by the creator and shall continue to be
within the human beings as long as human beings live on this
planet. There is more of the vice than virtue in the human
being and for controlling the vice human being has been
spirited with the ‘soul’.
The vices in the human beings could be divided into
three classes namely: -
01. Major Vices
02. Medium Vices
03. Minor Vices
Major Vices are of seven types
01. Desire of Power (financial power & authority)
02. Sex
03. Selfishness & Greed
04. Unjust & Hypocrisy
05. Anger & Cruelty
38

39. 06. Envy & Misanthropy
07. Superiority, Pride & Arrogance
Medium Vices are also of seven types
01. Ungratefulness & Negligence towards duties
02. Apathy towards poor, orphans & disabled and people
in trouble
03. Backbiting, Scandalousness & Mischievousness.
04. Corruption & Nepotism
05. Untrustworthiness
06. Suspicion
07. Deceit & Cheating
Minor Vices are also of seven types
01. Impatience
02. Animosity
03. Cowardice
04. Imprudence
05. Intolerance
06. Lethargy
07. Extravagance, Love of comforts, luxuries &
merrymaking with least efforts
However there could be many more vices which
would fall in these classes of vices or types of vices. The
virtues are opposite of vices. But one has to bear in mind
that desire of power to the reasonable extent with justified
and honest means cannot be a vice. If a human being has the
capacity of doing good in a place of authority and his desire
to have authority is not a vice. The intent and means of
desire of power makes it a vice or a virtue. Similarly sex, of
course created by the perfect universal creator, to the extent
permissible by the ‘soul’ is a virtue rather than a vice.
39

40. Demand of remuneration for work is not selfishness or greed
but a right but desire of remuneration much more for a small
quantum of work is selfishness and greed. To desire good
things for the self by honest means is a justified desire
whereas feeling jealous about the possessions of others is
envy and is not justified. Thus it has to be born in mind that
virtue and vice are the two sides of the same coin, only the
intent and the means makes an act a vice or virtue. The ‘soul’
has the innate knowledge of whether an act though
apparently a vice is actually an evil or a virtuous act because
the intent and means of the act is known to the ‘soul’. If
desire of power is based on doing good then it is justified
and ‘soul’ is in complete knowledge of its intent and declares
it to be right.
A same act may be virtuous act in view of some
people and an evil act in view of other people. The most
important question to decide about such an act is how to
decide virtuousness or evilness of an act. The simplest way of
presenting the example of such a situation is the sexual act
between a male and a female who are not married, when
male and female mutually agree to the act. This debate has
not been settled till date and would remain an unsettled
debate for centuries to follow unless and until
philanthropists & philosophers intervene. The simplest of the
solutions to such matters is let the ‘souls’ of the human
beings decide the matter. Let there be wise men who could
analyze the decisions of the ‘souls’, irrespective of the
religious beliefs and social taboos. It is not much difficult
with the present day knowledge of psychology to know the
feelings and decisions of the ‘soul’ about rightness or
40

41. wrongness of an act and let those conclusions be debated.
The human beings themselves also know the decisions of the
‘soul’ about an act; intelligent human being easily
understand these decisions whereas less intelligent also do
understand these decisions but after some explanations by
the psychologists. The right and wrong stands already
decided by the creator of the ‘soul’ and human being is
simply to decide whether to do right or wrong.
The perfect universal creator having created the
‘energy’, wherein he has put virtue and vice, and the ‘soul’
wherein he has kept the innate knowledge of right and
wrong of the act; the only thing left with the human being on
the whole is the ‘freedom of action’. The philosophy of
human being having the ‘free will’ cannot be right, because
the will or desire depends upon the content of virtue and
vice in the ‘energy’ which being the creation of the perfect
universal creator.
The human beings have the ‘freedom of action’ and
through their actions they could decide to be virtuous
human beings or evil human beings. It has been already
stated that ‘soul’ has the faculty of reasoning though it also
has innate knowledge of existence of the perfect universal
creator. This is the ‘Natural State of Nature’ of human being
and has been studied by several past philosophers.
Having understood the nature of human being we
could now discuss the purpose of human life. Human beings
are created and they live for some period of time on this
planet and finally die. The apparent purpose of the life of the
human being is to live peacefully on the planet? The
question now arises what the human being is supposed to do
41

42. on this planet. We will not discuss here the purpose of the
creator for creating the human being, which we will discuss
later in this work. The first & foremost purpose of the human
being is to live peacefully on this planet and we will have to
search for the ways and means by which we could live
peacefully.
The philosophers as genuine philanthropists have very
rightly concluded that mankind can have peaceful existence
on this planet only through the prevalence of virtue in the
individual life and in the society and that should be the
ultimate goal of the mankind. It will be stupidity to question
or challenge this conclusion. This task could be accomplished
if and only if the majority of the people, especially the
people in authority are real philanthropists. But mankind by
nature is a selfish creature and he could wish good to others
only after doing good to himself and there is no limit to his
desire of doing good to himself. Thus the state of nature of
the human being is that he cannot be a philanthropist at all
even if his ‘soul’ has the innate knowledge of right and
wrong and also the innate knowledge of existence of a
perfect universal creator. Hence the peaceful life of mankind
on this planet and state of nature of mankind are
incompatible and there is one and only one condition under
which the state of nature of mankind and peaceful existence
of mankind on this planet could be compatible. I have
thought over this serious problem for years and have not left
any relevant literature unread, which includes science,
philosophy, political systems and theology and interacted
with wide range of people and reached one and only one
conclusion that human being has to be answerable &
42

43. accountable for his evil acts after death before the perfect
universal creator. The human being cannot be answerable &
accountable for the content of his vices because the vices
are innate in the ‘energy’ over which human being has
absolutely no control of creation. The human being can
exercise control over the acts of vice through ‘soul’ as the
human being has the ‘freedom of action’.
Plato has held that ‘human body is just an
instrument’, the ‘energy’ and the ‘soul’ being immortal and
these two constituents of the human being contain all the
information of the human being itself as well as the actions
done by the human being during his life time.
This is my challenge to the whole humanity to unravel
any other alternative by which virtue will prevail in the
individual lives and the society so that there could be
peaceful existence of mankind on this planet. There is
absolutely no alternative.
It has been already made out by the philosophers that
laws have to be based on the human nature and purpose.
The innate knowledge of right and wrong about all actions
with the ‘soul’ is the virtual definition of laws wherein the
permissible and prohibited actions are defined thus we have
to accept that laws are already defined by the perfect
universal creator and are contained in the ‘soul’ of the
human beings. As the ancient philosopher namely Aquinas
has called these laws as Natural Laws I too will call these
laws as ‘Natural Laws’. Thus we need genuine philosophers
to know the Natural Laws as contained in the ‘souls’ of the
human beings, with the help of reason it would not be a
difficult task to unravel these Natural Laws.
43

44. No law, right or wrong could be enforced unless and
until it is derived from ‘Natural Laws’ of which human beings
have innate knowledge of its correctness and secondly the
people are convinced about answerability and accountability
of evil deeds after death. No judge would judge an act
correctly to be right or wrong unless and until he too is
instinctively convinced about the rightness and wrongness of
the act and secondly he too is absolutely convinced of basic
axiom of answerability & accountability of evil actions after
death. Thus laws are useless unless and until this basic axiom
is accepted. Thus if we do not accept the answerability and
accountability after death, there can be no laws and no
virtue in the individual lives and the society and no peaceful
existence of human being is possible on this planet.
Just as in the cells the information of everything
physical about the human being is contained, similarly the
actions of the human beings arise because of the thoughts.
We derived the origin of the human being from the cells so
we have to derive actions which the human being is
supposed to do from thoughts. The perfect universal creator
must have kept the whole information in the human being
which we will have to unravel. Neither thoughts are within
the control of the human being nor the decision about the
action to be right or wrong is within the control of human
being, the only thing on which the human being has the
control is ‘freedom of action’. As already explained thoughts
arise out of the interaction between body and the ‘energy’
whereas the ‘soul’ has the innate knowledge of right &
wrong about all the actions and power of the decision of
action. The ‘freedom of action’ is with the ‘soul’ of the
44

45. human being. The human being has to do the virtuous
actions, which the perfect universal creator wants from the
human beings which the design of the human being as
created by the perfect universal creator would suggest. As
already clarified that by virtuous actions of the human beings
individually as well as collectively the peaceful existence of
the human beings is possible on this planet; thus it has to be
purpose of perfect universal creator and that of the human
being that people should live peacefully on this planet and
the perfect universal creator has already kept the reason and
means of living peacefully within the human being. As
already mentioned that only means by which human beings
could do virtuous actions is that human being has to be
answerable and accountable for his actions and the perfect
universal creator in his perfect wisdom has chosen the time
after death to be the time of answerability and
accountability. This reveals that human being has to live and
do what is right as defined in the ‘soul’ and accept
answerability & accountability after death.
The second most important and general purpose of
life of the individual human being is to be grateful to the
perfect universal creator for creating the individual and pray
the perfect universal creator for help and guidance for
spending the life so as to fulfill the purpose of life.
The third purpose of life, of those human beings who
have the means, should be to know and understand the
perfect universal creator and all his creations and educate
others. The last important purpose of life of the human being
has to be to use whatever the perfect universal creator has
created on this planet justly so that the human being could
45

46. live peacefully on this planet and fulfill his purpose of life
from his point of view and from the perfect universal
creator’s point of view.
46

47. Political Systems
&
Impracticability of Democracy
A. Political Systems
B. Impracticability of Democracy
47

48. A. Political Systems
It has been already stated simple, basic and
fundamental facts & axioms will be considered to draw
inferences and conclusions. I have no intention of convincing
the readers with lengthy discourses or jugglery of words. The
political philosophies have been written in detail by
philosophers like Plato, Aristotle, Hobbes, Locke, Aquinas,
Russell, Rousseau, Eliot, Hegel, Marx etc. and I will not
repeat what is already written excepting quoting their
conclusive statements.
Hobbes has rightly stated that without the
government world would be place of war where all will be
against all. Every government has to be based on a political
system. Hobbes had also stated that the government
without sound political system would be a government
wherein everyone will try to deprive every other person of
everything he has. I need not go into unnecessary discourse
to prove the correctness of both these statement because
readers would find no reason to deny these facts.
The original work on political systems has been done
by Plato and Aristotle and all subsequent works on political
systems are simply extensions of the works of Plato &
Aristotle. They have identified six political systems which
would cover all types of political systems which existed in the
past and which exist even today.
1. Monarchy
2. Aristocracy
3. Polity
48

49. 4. Democracy
5. Oligarchy
6. Tyranny, Patriarchy & Matriarchy
These political systems in simplest possible terms
could be defined as
Monarchy: - Monarchy is the rule by one man for the
common good of all the inhabitants of a piece of land; the
one man is called the monarch.
Aristocracy: -Aristocracy is the rule by few for the common
good of all the inhabitants of a piece of land.
Polity: - Polity is the rule by many for common good of
all the inhabitants of a piece of land.
Democracy: -Democracy is the rule by the ruled or rule of
many in their own interest.
Oligarchy: - Oligarchy is the rule by a few in their own
interest and not in the interest of all the inhabitants of a
piece of land.
Tyranny, Patriarchy & Matriarchy: - Tyranny is the rule
by one in his own interest. I have also included patriarchy
and matriarchy in the same category of political system
because philosophically all the three political systems are
almost the same. Dictatorship, military rules, anarchy have
no political system and are extremely dangerous for
existence of mankind and so need not be discussed.
As already stated every government has to be based
on a political system. The political system defines guiding
principles of the government. The rule of a government is
implemented through laws. Thus the laws depend upon the
guiding principle of the government, which is the political
system. Hence laws and the political system are
49

50. complementary and the laws of one political system cannot
be valid or applicable for other political system and vice
versa.
On the other hand the laws have to be based on the
human nature and purpose. If the laws are not based on the
human nature & purpose then the government sooner or
later has to fail.
The purpose of laws is to enforce virtue in the
individuals and the society. Thus through laws it is aimed
that the society and the individual are virtuous as almost all
philosophers have held that ultimate goal of mankind should
be that virtue should prevail in the social structure and the
individual lives for peaceful existence of mankind on this
plant; otherwise there has to be injustice, exploitation,
corruption, confusion, confrontation, plunder and
bloodshed.
Mankind has sincerely worked hard to gather
sufficient knowledge of the creations of the perfect universal
creator but unfortunately besides the source of life the most
important aspect of mankind, the ways and means of living
peacefully on this planet has not received the sincere
attention. Several philosophers have made efforts but due to
one reason or the other have made mistakes resultantly
none of the philosophers has put forward the practical and
acceptable method of living peacefully on this planet.
Plato has preferred the rule of philosophers but has
failed to identify the philosophers fit to rule and instead
imposed some unreasonable restrictions on the rulers. Plato
has opposed polity and democracy because human being is
generally corruptible, irrational, driven by human
50

51. weaknesses with false or even irrational beliefs, unjust and
criminal tendencies besides because of equality, power
seekers driven by personal gains than the public good, and
unlimited power would lead to anarchy and corruption
(Republic). Aristotle has preferred polity and democracy
without going into the natural state of nature of the human
beings. According to Aristotle three things are essential for
those who hold the offices, of course, besides selecting them
very carefully: -
i. Belief, trust, conviction and affection for established
regime
ii. Virtue & justice
iii. Capability to work as involved in the rule.
But keeping in view the natural state of nature of the
human being; no human being can have these qualities
excepting under one condition which has been already
stated that is mankind has to accept that he will have to be
answerable and accountable for his actions before the
perfect universal creator after death. There is just no
alternative by which human beings could adopt the virtue as
his way of life which can result in the virtuous social
structure. Mankind needs the existence of the perfect
universal creator for the peaceful living on this planet.
Excepting tyranny and oligarchy the aim of all political
systems is common good as such no philanthropist
philosopher will advocate political systems of tyranny and
oligarchy. A careful analysis would prove that aristocracy
sooner or later turns into oligarchy, which history has
already proved in Rome and France.
51

52. Plato states ‘the human race will have no respite from
evils until those who are real philosophers acquire political
power or until through some divine dispensation those who
rule and have political authority in the nations become real
philosophers’. Plato seems do have concluded that real
philosophers are the people who are devoid of vices which
includes the self interest. But it is impossible to find a person
who is without the vices and the philosophers could not be
the exception. There has to be divine dispensation through
which philosophers could be the philanthropist also. This is
exactly what philosophers should have looked for. Plato has
criticized polity & democracy because human beings being
generally corruptible, as these political systems have already
failed in Rome and Greece before Christian era. Presently in
the world there is only one political system, the democracy,
which is the political system of governance in one form or
the other in all countries excepting nominal exceptions like
Saudi Arabia etc. Democracy has strong advocates all over
the world and there are many pseudo-scholars of different
religions who advocate democracy as the political system of
their religion; forgetting the fact that the underlying principle
of democracy is agnosticism. The most important aspect of
democracy which needs to be discussed is Lockean right of
conscience and religion; which means the religion and
conscience as to be the personal matters of individuals.
Locke while advocating democracy has said ‘God in his great
mercy & beneficence has relinquished even religious rights
to the discretion of the magistrate’. He had probably
forgotten that the conscience being the personal matter of
the individuals and there being no modus operandi for
52

53. testing the conscience and in fact no need of testing the
conscience of the magistrates then the simple question
would be to consider; could we trust the magistrates with
the fate of the nation & the people?
We have already concluded that through virtuous
individuals and the social structure we can have the peaceful
life on this planet and that is possible only when mankind
accepts the answerability and accountability before the
perfect universal creator after death. This could be done only
through religion. As I have already explained that ‘soul’ has
the faculty of reasoning besides has the innate knowledge of
existence of a perfect universal creator but the ‘soul’ has no
knowledge of accountability and answerability before the
perfect universal creator. The ‘soul’ of the human being will
not accept any religion which does not satisfy the reasoning
to the minutest details and this should be basic axiom to test
the genuinely of any religion. Thus any religion which is not
rational cannot and should not be acceptable to the human
being. As already quoted according to Plato ‘the human race
will have no respite from evils until those who are real
philosophers acquire political power or until through some
divine dispensation those who rule and have political
authority in the nations become philosophers’. I have
respect for the vision of Plato. He had presumed that real
philosophers would naturally be the philanthropists; here I
disagree with Plato. But future philosophers should have
searched for this divine dispensation by which rulers could
be philosophers and philosophers could be philanthropists. If
divinity exists then there had to be some faith & belief
53

54. system which could be responsible for this divine
dispensation.
Unfortunately most of the religions have been
corrupted and misinterpreted, one more the other and no
religion satisfies the reasoning of the ‘soul’. The irrationality
of the religions is evident by the fact that almost all religions
have sects and sectarianism in itself is corruption or
misinterpretation. Instead of rectifying the religions of the
corruption & misinterpretations, most of the philosophers
proposed the separation of church & state, and this concept
got impetus by Darwinism and thus democracy became the
only possible political system. Aquinas is the first philosopher
who made the mistake by proposing that Christianity does
not prescribe any political system of governance as had been
the concept with Augustine. Aquinas rejected the
applicability of the ‘law’ of the old testament and from the
gospel ‘render unto Caesar the things that are Caesar’s’
(Mathew 22-21) he inferred that Christianity does not
provide for conduct of civil society and Christianity could
flourish under any political system. Augustine had also
similar ideas and held similar perspective of Christianity.
They did not visualize that from the ‘Law’ as in the Old
Testament a political system could be derived after removing
the corruption, misinterpretations of the scriptures. Some
philosophers like Eliot did criticize the democracy as such
societies rejected the advantage of wisdom of belief system
resultantly would degenerate into tyranny, social & cultural
fragmentation, exploitation of natural resources by a few,
corruption and moral decay. But due to Darwinism no
attention was paid to such philosophies. Under the influence
54

55. of Darwinism philosophers like Nietzsche rejected the idea of
divinity by stating ‘God as the protector of the weak, though
once alive, is now dead, and that we have rightly killed him’.
Similarly Marx, an atheist, rejected faith and said religion to
be ‘opium of people and religion is the heart of the heartless
world’. Russell also concluded as a pseudo-philosopher
‘Religion is based, I think, primarily and mainly upon fear’ he
further adds “A good world needs knowledge, kindliness and
courage, it does not need a regretful hankering after the past
or a fettering after the intelligent words uttered long ago by
ignorant men”.
Before concluding the discussion about political
systems I would like to clarify that the laws of one political
system cannot be applied in the government of any other
political system. To illustrate this, the tyranny and the
monarchy are the one man rule but the objective of the two
being different, so the laws of the two political systems have
to be different depending upon the guiding principles of the
political system. There are some pseudo-scholars of Islam
who think that Islam can be practiced in democracy and
there are also other set of pseudo-scholars of Islam who
think that democracy is the Islamic way of life and the
Shariat Law could be applied in democracy. They fail to
understand that the underlying principle of democracy is
agnosticism & liberty of religion and conscience and Shariat
Law and agnosticism being contradictory; these two
contradictory principles cannot exist together. The six
political systems mentioned herein have to have different
set of laws and the set of laws of one political system cannot
be applied in other political system. The laws have to be
55

56. based on the guiding principles of the political system and
objective of the political system.
Finally since there is only one political system, in one
form or the other, being practiced almost all over the world
as such the practicability or impracticability of this political
system will be discussed in detail.
56

57. B. Impracticability of Democracy
As a rationalist and realist one has to realize that
presently there is absolutely no alternative political system
to the democracy. Also realizing that most of the religions
are corrupted, misinterpreted and unexplained, thereby
making these irrational doctrines, besides there are sects in
most of the religions thereby proving the corruption of the
religions. Under these circumstances neither one could be
justified to advocate accepting the irrational religions nor
mixing up the state and religion in the political systems.
Readers need not bear in mind what has been written
in previous chapters or even the title of this chapter to avoid
any bias against the democracy. One has to sincerely try to
analyze democracy, if by any chance it could be practicable
for common good and peaceful existence of mankind. Under
these circumstances the underlying principle of agnosticism
with freedom of religion & conscience in democracy is
justified. All forms of governments with democracy as the
political system have underlying basic principles of
agnosticism with freedom of religion & conscience and
equality, liberty & fraternity. As already clarified that there
has to be government and for any government there has to
be a political system. The government is effected through
laws and as Aristotle has put it ‘for where the laws do not
rule, there is no regime or government’. Firstly we will have
to discuss the process of enacting of the laws. In almost all
forms of governments under the political system of
democracy there is a body of representatives of people
called legislature where the laws are enacted. Some laws
57

58. could be enacted by referendum where under people
directly decide about the enactment of a law. Theoretically
under the method of referendum the opinion of 0 – 49%
people of the nation will carry no weight and as such the
laws of a government cannot have the consent of all the
people. Theoretically in case of legislature enacting the laws
through public representatives, even if the public
representation are true representatives of the people, the
laws would have the consent of 26 – 100% (51% votes for
each representative with 51% seats in the legislature) of the
people and as such the opinion of 0 – 74% people can carry
no weight. Theoretically speaking under democracy the laws
cannot have the approval & consent of all people of the
nation and since there would naturally be people who are
against the laws, that would lead to lawlessness and
instability in the nation.
This is the inherent problem of democracy which
under any democratic form of government cannot be solved
as the result of which there have to be sections of the
society who cannot have affection, belief, conviction and
trust in the government; which as per Aristotle are essential
for a regime. Now let us assume that the government is in
the hands of real philanthropists and the representatives of
the people are genuine and wise and the laws will be
enacted very wisely keeping in view the aspirations of all
people and all the people have faith, trust and affection for
the government on this score.
We will now discuss the nature of laws. Before doing
that I would like to clarify some aspects of the need of
‘Laws’. Laws are enacted to restrict certain harmful actions
58

59. of individuals against other individuals or even actions
against themselves for smooth conduct of society. There
could be civil laws, social laws and criminal laws. Besides
there are constitutional laws and international laws. There is
the Natural Law Theory of Aquinas which comes under the
category of present-day Overlap Thesis where under laws
are divinely dictated. Since democracy has an underlying
principle of agnosticism, as such, such divine Natural Laws
cannot be adopted in democracy. Other alternative for
nature of laws in democracy fall under purview of Legal
Positivism and there could be three types of laws under
Legal Positivism.
i. The Social Fact Thesis
ii. The Conventionality Thesis
iii. The Separability Thesis
Under i & ii laws validity is tested with respect to
social behavior and social conventionality respectively. These
theses cannot be adopted or acceptable under democracy
because social behavior and conventionality depending upon
age old traditions & practices which have their origin in the
religious beliefs of the people. But since democracy has to
assess the validity of laws from agnostic view point and also
the guiding principle of liberty, thus all the laws which could
be legitimate under democracy would come under the
purview of the Separability Thesis. However some laws
which could be tested by the Social Fact Thesis & the
Conventionality Thesis as valid could also be enacted
provided the laws fulfill the guiding principles of democracy.
The Separability Thesis envisages that law and morality are
conceptually distinct which is consistent with the basic
59

60. guiding principles of democracy. This is a serious limitation of
law formation in democracy. The second most important
limitation in democracy is in so far as the laws connected
with the individual behavior, wherein no other individual is
harmed or benefitted, cannot be enacted. This has been put
forward by John Stuart Mill “the only purpose for which
power (of enactment of law) can rightfully be exercised over
any member of a civilized community against his will is to
prevent harm to others. His own good either physical or
moral, is not a sufficient warrant. Over himself, over his own
body and mind, the individual is sovereign”. This is in
accordance with the spirit of democracy. Thus we can now
draw following conclusions;
I) In democracy the laws which impose restrictions on
the individual behavior (self regarding actions) where
under no harm to others is involved, cannot be
enacted.
II) The democracy having agnosticism & liberty as
guiding principles, no restrictions on the basis of
religious morality can be imposed. Hence no law can
be enacted which is on the basis of religious morality
and challenges the liberty of the individuals.
This is inherent problem of democracy and as such
cannot be solved. Whether committing suicide is permissible
or not cannot be decided in democracy. Similarly is sex
permissible between two individuals of same sex or opposite
sex, out of wedlock, with their consent will remain a debate
so long as democracy is there. However some nations have
enacted laws coming under above mentioned two categories
under Legal Moralism but those laws have been enacted
60

61. against the spirit of democracy. Sooner or later, as
agnosticism would find its deep roots in the society, these
laws shall have to be repealed. Since we have no alternative
to democracy, so we will have to manage with these
limitations; meanwhile in religious terms let there by moral
decay so much so the basic unit of society, the family
structure may be demolished and the only purpose other
than materialism, that is living for the sake of the children
may also vanish. However assuming that people will behave
the way they deem proper as they have freedom of religion,
and the state would in no case interfere with their faith &
belief.
Another serious problem with democracy is if laws are
enacted, that which are necessary but which are somehow
against the religious morality, then democracy has to face a
revolt. The point which I intend to make clear is that the
concept of liberty and freedom of religion in the democracy
are contradictory and this serious problem has evidently no
solution. Similarly liberty and fraternity are also logically
incompatible. However since there is no alternative to
democracy, we have to find ways & means how to live with
the limitations which are inherent in democracy.
Now laws have to prescribe punishments for offensive
acts against the individuals, society, property of individuals
or society. The punishment is to inflict discomfort on the
criminals for retributive, deterrence, preventive,
rehabilitative and restitutive purposes. All over the world
there are laws prescribing punishment but ‘the point is not
that the offender deserves to suffer; it is rather that the
offended party deserves and desires compensation’ (Barnett
61

62. 1977). Accordingly laws have to be changed so that the
offenders convicted of wrongdoing are sentenced to
compensate the victim in proportion to the victim’s loss. The
punishment of imprisonments is also logically wrong because
if the criminal is married, the wife and the dependent
children of the criminal have also to suffer for none of their
faults. Excepting those advanced & resourceful countries
where unemployed and disabled persons are paid by the
state; in other countries there is no social security and such
people are not being paid and if these people commit theft
to feed themselves and those dependent on them;
apparently he has committed a crime but keeping in view the
guiding principle of equality the criminal act has taken place
because of failure of state of providing the individuals with
the basic requirement of life. The laws all over the world do
not take these matters into consideration. However since
there is no alternative to democracy, we will change the laws
and punishments and keep the duties of the state in mind
while framing the laws.
There are Critical Theories of Law & Legal Realism
which envisage that the laws are generally indeterminate &
inconsistent; then judges nearly always decide cases thereby
make a new law which is against the guiding principle of
democracy. Further where there are indeterminate &
inconsistent laws or the cases are indeterminate judicial
decisions are influenced by judge’s political & moral outlook.
The Critical Legal Studies Theorists argue that cases are
radically and globally indeterminate in the sense that the
class of legal material available rarely, if ever,
logically/casually entails a unique outcome. Critical Legal
62

63. Studies Theorists also view the content of the law in liberal
democracies reflects ‘ideological struggles among social
factions in which competing conceptions of justice, goodness
and social & political life gets compromised, truncated,
vitiated and adjusted’ (Altman 1986) resultantly there is
profound inconsistency permeating the deepest layers of
law. Since the law is inconsistent, a judge can justify any
number of conflicting outcomes.
There is another problem with the laws in democracy
which have been identified by philosopher of law namely
Fuller (1964). According to him law’s essential purpose of
achieving the social order cannot be fulfilled, if following
eight conditions are not fulfilled.
1. Laws must be expressed in general terms.
2. Laws must be publicly promulgated.
3. Laws must be prospective in effect.
4. Laws must be expressed in understandable terms.
5. Laws must be consistent with one another.
6. Laws must not require conduct beyond the powers of
the effected parties.
7. Laws must not be changed frequently, that the
subjects cannot relay on them.
8. Laws must be administered in a manner consistent
with the wording.
According to Fuller ‘such a system cannot be called a
legal system at all’ if all these conditions are not fulfilled. On
the one hand judges change laws by justifying all sorts of
conflicting judgments and on the other hand in most of the
democracies laws do not fulfill all these conditions. However
since we have no alternative to democracy we will change
63

64. everything about laws and make them determinate and
consistent and judge would not be allowed to play with laws
and the law making will be left to legislators only.
Legislators are generally with different educational
background and in some under-developed countries and
developing countries legislators are illiterate and having
nominal education. A limited percentage of legislators have
the background of law. But legislator’s knowledge of law, as
it is, cannot be of any help because legislators being law
makers, they should be aware of the implications of law and
possibility of misuse of law at all the stages. Thus the
legislators should be the philosophers of law, so that proper
laws are enacted and old indeterminate and inconsistent
laws are replaced by determinate and consistent laws.
However since there is no alternative to the democracy so in
order to frame proper laws we will keep a condition that
only philosophers of law will be eligible to be the legislators.
Justice depends upon laws and if laws are not proper then
injustice prevails. Plato has very rightly clarified that injustice
causes civil war, hatred and fighting in the society besides
the loss of faith and trust in the governments. But because of
contradictory guiding principles of democracy we cannot
frame laws properly as such there cannot be justice so we
have to be always ready to face the consequences as
predicted by Plato. This is the inherent problem of
democracy with which we have to manage.
The governments under a democratic political system
rules with the help of functionaries; whose functions would
fall under following four classes of functions.
1. Legislature
64

65. 2. Judiciary
3. Executive
4. Media
It is globally and historically an accepted fact that the
main pillar of democracy is judiciary and if there is anything
wrong with judiciary the society has to collapse sooner or
later. If there are shortcomings with other three pillars of
democracy but the judiciary is perfect the society is likely to
pull on. It is a global phenomenon that judiciary is
independent and the decisions of judiciary are to be obeyed
by all. It is through judiciary laws are interpreted and
implemented and a civilized society cannot afford to take
any chances of allowing any flaw in the judicial system. But
we have seen the plight of laws in democracy and so is the
case with judiciary. But since judiciary is independent and so
it is not accountable to any forum in democracy resultantly
the judiciary is law onto itself and globally there is nothing
right about judiciary and nobody can dream of justice from
the judicial system in democracy. To begin with no
democratic country provides lawyers to the both sides as the
result of which justice is to be purchased. Thus though there
is right to justice but justice is to be purchased. The global
situation is that if any nation has something right about
judiciary, sooner or later that rightness is destined to vanish.
There are defined laws, criminal procedures and judicial
procedures and during last two centuries lawyers have
turned into experts in detecting drawbacks and loopholes of
the judicial system which includes detecting the procedural
mistakes in the judicial cases. Everything about judicial
system is exposed as the result of which criminals are
65

66. assured about acquittal and the plunderers of natural and
other resources have a safe shelter under judiciary. Since
laws are globally and generally indeterminate and
inconsistent giving the judges liberty to justify any number of
conflicting judgments under some consideration or
otherwise. On the one hand judges can justify any number of
conflicting judgments due to indeterminate and inconsistent
laws and additionally by using changed laws by some
superior judges in the higher courts and one the other hand
judiciary is independent and not accountable to any forum in
democracy. It seems that democracy has irreparable
drawbacks in laws and judicial system which would
ultimately convert the civilized societies into criminal
societies.
Globally laws are, besides indeterminate &
inconsistent, complex, complicated & lengthy and it seems
laws are made for understanding of the lawyers and not for
the common people who are under obligation to obey them.
Generally judges are concerned with laws, criminal
procedures and judicial procedures and any incomplete
formality leads to the acquittal of the criminals. The judges
and judiciary are insensitive to the rise in criminal activities &
corruption in the societies, because the surveys reveal that
the crime is on increase year after year which indicates the
failure of judiciary but judiciary is not accountable to any
forum. The judiciary, globally, is a lucrative business for the
lawyers and judges alike resulting in ever increasing crime
and corruption. In most of the democracies the civil as well
as criminal cases take decades for decisions thereby the very
purpose of justice is defied but judiciary being independent
66