TITLE

Is Non-violence the next evolutionary step?

AUTHOR

Dr Alok Bajpai
Consultant Psychiatrist and Educator
Independent practice
And
Counselling Cell
Indian Institute of Technology
Kanpur
India

Email- alokbajp@gmail.com

Author is a Psychiatrist at Kanpur ,India and works in close conjunction

with educational Institutes for Life skills workshops and Art of teaching,
He does an interactive programme on Mahatma Gandhi named ‘An Hour
with The Mahatma’ to introduce Gandhi to youth.

Abstract:
Evolutionary Psychology ascribes human mind with inherent violent
patterns that man has accrued in the race for survival. But man has also
learnt to survive together. This dialectical tension between violence and
non-violence is ever present in sentient being but only few like
Mohandas Gandhi could consciously address it, He has left a model that
he experimented with, This article discusses the pertinence of this
process in the contemporary opportunities for Non Violence with an eye
on Neuro-scientific findings and futuristic vision.
Is Nonviolence the next evolutionary step?

PART 1
If we fast-forward the evolutionary process in time from the big bang
(provided you believe it!) to 6 million years from now when our
ancestors the HOMO species started separating from their nearest
cousins the chimpanzees (in social behaviour we may be near Gibbons
but genes link us to chimps) and trace it to this instance the natural
question will be—what made us different?
The brain areas that we have may be similar to the chimps and other
mammals, as modern neuroscience says; yet it differs in complexity and
connectivity. The seeds of our differences are evident in them.
-Erect posture made the hands free, altered the vision, the sexuality
changed from cyclical to all pervasive, the facial changes and shedding
of hair and few other adaptive changes set us rolling but the real jump
was in the brain. Though the chimps have same range of primary
emotion and possibly some thinking too but the neo cortex in human
gave it the power of ‘thinking’ and so called reason…the deeper motor
structures do have decision making capacity but largely in response to
environmental stimuli and preservative in nature. The Homo sapiens
survived over others due to a unique ability to of conation and
cognition. As the complexity of neural network grew in response to
exploration, imitation and invention the behavioural output itself
became complex. Fire, wheel, tools, weapons to the satellite and mobile
and further to Cyborgs, is a story of man’s play with the natural forces.
Why?
The basic push of life is the need for genes to survive and reproduction
is the answer to the threat of elimination, nervous system being the
interface between the organism and environment and that does not
reproduce (all other cells do). Neuron once activated shuts off only with
death and thus it keeps firing to express itself and modulate behaviour
eventually altering genes for a better adaptability. They are like
sentinels continuously sending messages to the inner chamber all to
adapt in life and transmit that information to the future being. This
process is universal from amoeba to man. Probably one adaptive
strategy that switched on Homo – was exploration and mimicking.
Instead of being tied to natural pressure, poke and change, for food, for
safety, for hoarding, all for survival and reproducing. The sensorimotor
capabilities may have got restricted as compared to other animals but
that set the cognitive –imaginative dimension free. He climbed up the
food chain and as food became secure he had gotten into the habit of
poking, in modern parlance for sex, power, money, fame.
The brain as it evolved from old to new it learned to survive not alone
but together. Being together proved to be the biggest benefit to man,
aided with skills like communication, language, anticipation, prediction
brought in two contradictory elements in human life. The primary
emotions and primitive communication pattern of other mammals and
apes on one hand gave rise to Violence as a group and on the other
tamed emotions to give them meaning in social context. The sacrifice of
self -interest for the group mediated by ‘mirror neurons’ and the
attachment –bonding spectrum by limbic system (oxytocin hormone as
the latest research shows) evolved man as a social being. The gender
role gave it a further impetus where men did the hunting and women
remained back to nurture kids in lieu of protection and food.
The limbic system remained out of conscious though (we are conscious,
animals are aware or may be nonverbally conscious …who knows!!).
The mythology built up in the unconscious as did God but the reason
and will was given precedence in philosophy as man triumphed nature
outside himself till Freud revived the unconscious only to fade away
post 1950’s. Behaviourism ruled out will and unconscious turning man
to nothing more than a conditioned animal and later cognitive
psychology brought back reason and thinking as the basis of human
behaviour. But the discoveries through the last 2 decades may have a
different story to tell- the world as it is perceived is largely a
unconscious processing of external stimuli in deeper structures of the
brain, it is the thalamo-limbic-basal ganglia or the motivation-affective
circuits that give meaning and relative weightage to multiple stimuli and
the patterns generated by them. Multiple frames of reality generated
from within (memories and maps) and externally driven are compared,
inhibited in recurrent loops between limbic structures- hippocampus-
thalamus and cortex through salience and default mode network,
affective coating and relevance hierarchy determined before a refined
version is chosen by the conscious brain to act upon. The reflex actions
that are essential for bodily survival are thus kept out of conscious
reach till executed because the body cannot afford the 200ms -500ms
delay in executing flight or fight.
Does the conscious act only on the behest of unconscious or the intent
or will has a separate existence? Does the will once initiated further
modifies the deeper processes or is bound to it without an independent
existence?
Or
The awareness of attentional-motivational – affective mechanisms is
will or intent?
These frames of realities progressing in time and bound to space are
united by some binding activity that gives a sense of continuous self
interfacing with external reality and reality may not be anything but a
cloud of thoughts, emotions action, one’s own cloud interacting with the
cloud of the other and giving rise to the myriad clouds of human
interaction and we think we are doing it!!
Reason may have been the wish of cognitive superiority but we know
that emotional surges shatter reason’s castle or as Shaw said-reason is
wrong 9 times out of 10 and when it is right it is impotent. So follow
instinct.

What seems to be the case is that each human bound in time- space
made of external fixed realities, memory and a concept of self even if
illusory acts in he world in relation to other human beings and often the
story of the self is the story as determined by the others in life….a trick
maintained and perpetrated by mirror neurons. Through empathy,
anticipation, predicting the behaviour of others we continually modify
our behaviour. Emotional may become uncontrolled in face of threat but
in peacetime reason or conscious brain does work well to channelize it
and mostly in response to the other –be it individual or group. Call it
conditioning!!
The big question will be whether emotions control thought or vice
versa?
The struggle is nowhere more evident than in the two processes that
engulf all spheres of human behaviour- survival and reproduction
entwined with violence and sex. Individual and intergroup violence is
known in chimpanzees but spontaneous and planned aggression is rare.
It is another uniqueness of human.
 The survival related violence of ‘hunter’ existence continued into the
present times of relative safety. From the survival need of being violent
and food gathering of a single person, the groups tended to become
violent towards other groups and not only humans but to other versions
of HOMO species as well.
In a not so charitable history Homo sapiens destroyed and burnt the
fauna to rise in the food chain (the colonial expansionist mind-set till
last century has the similar process of capturing).
As population grew and resources dwindled, the individual to Nations
grouping with this intermediate constituents like family, state, caste,
community, religion all fostered a categorization in mind expressed as
division in real life to keep life certain and controlled. Here was the
paradox—
This required humongous violence and as it became inherent to human
nature a parallel process of empathy made him subdue and sacrifice
aggression for survival within and of the group he belonged to. The
modern human Institutions are just being an edifice of the basic need of
togetherness.
Mind was greedy and wanted to have yet it knew that to survive it has
to be together and that is hoe Sapiens evolved to arrogance of ‘ruling the
world’, as a group eliminating others, within themselves remaining non-
violent albeit with the potential of violence that contracts itself in a
hierarchy depending on intra and intergroup power play
Wars and history are proof enough. As the wars descend on the border
of the geography space the groups unite to fight the adversary, if it is far
away in the distant space –time the intragroup dynamics is peaceful but
violence contracts within individual minds
Defence establishments are a proof of the lurking fear of extinction even
at the level of nations and it’s behind the scene violence. May be the
whole humanity will unite under the threat of alien attack.
This dynamics of violence and it’s potential eruption vs. the attachment
altruistic –empathic –sacrifice spectrum, the ‘we and me’ vs. others has
multiple shades with blurred boundaries.
Biology is the cause or conditioning has entrained limbic –frontal axis?
The resolution of this will provide us future evolution of human mind,
the intelligent design that works on itself beyond making computational
machines. The next design may be a Homo Roboticus but Sapiens can
turn itself to Sapiens Empathicus. An optimal sharing is the only way to
avoid self -annihilation streak of human beings. In fact violence is
changing shape or is it decreasing. Globalization and vested common
interest in money and wealth is making nations limit themselves to
verbal dual. No doubt aggressive invasions still happen but they are
more economic.
But if we believe Carl Jung, the absence of enemy at the border leads to
shadow wars within in democracy. Whether Individuals will become
peaceful is the question or the epidemic burst of psychiatric illness itself
a sign of introjected violence.
It will require more than money, an integration of emotion and reason
in the human mind.
We have to look for the black swans, those who did it because they
prove the possibility. Prophets, Scientist, artist many could channelize
their primary and secondary rage to creative use for themselves and
others but none did at the scale and systematically as Mahatma Gandhi.
He did not leave a tome of theory but a model of experimentation that is
available to us, thus placing this dialectical drama between violence and
nonviolence beyond the realm of myth into history. The time is
opportune to understand his process before he passes on to the
pantheon; he still is a man with his fallacies and pitfalls trying to scale
the raging tsunamis of emotions with his reason and benevolence.
He knew that ‘History is a record of discord and not harmony’ and that
is what he was creating –harmony within and without. And he did not
talked. He realized that confrontation between emotional urges and will
is waste of energy and the war between conscious and unconscious can
be won only by incessantly modulating the latter to the tune of will.
He experimented at the micro but expanded to the macro, from an
individual to the cosmic. Traditional yet radical, ascetic yet worldly,
political yet saintly, Gandhi walked many such tightropes in his life
simultaneously but his continuous struggle was in the duel between
violence and nonviolence, even his struggle with sexuality was
subsumed in it.

Part 2

Non-violence as practiced by Gandhi is analysable as a paradigm and

scientific rigor applied to it, observable and comparable to its flipside –
violence.
Whether MG was different biologically? The answer is unlikely .He was a
human like us beset with lust, rage and all other potentials for
secondary cognitive emotions like love, hate, selfishness and the
opposites –sacrifice, altruism, attachment etc.
It is amply evident from his biography and we can safely assume that he
had a brain like rest of us (we missed studying the structure!!).
Whether he had an overgrown insula or mirror neuron assembly and a
shrunken amygdala will remain a conjecture. However a different
approach might make us wiser. That his life was all action is evident and
is sufficiently detailed in his biographies and 100 volumes of his writing.
He thought not only in his speech but also in his economical writing. He
practiced nonviolence and altered the basic psychological processes
through ‘will’ is an easy conclusion. He may not have described the
process in the modern psychological terms but a closer fit of his life with
psychological constructs reveal that it was a cognitive –emotional work
in movement and that too in the dust and din of real life .He went
deeper than principles and explanations to hit the basic core from
where the tussle and vacillations start in human mind. He was
successful in altering himself and a vast population for a substantial
period and affecting the minds that were far removed in space-time.
This gives a huge hope to those who dream of training the mind for
benefit of all.
HOW did he do it?

First and foremost, it was a conscious decision, an act of will to follow

this path. The urge may have been from the unconscious or conditioning
(Gandhi had his share of conditioning both in sense of positives and
negatives) but the decision to persist beyond an act of sporadic
nonviolence and truth to seep his life into his chosen way requires
nerves of steel and a capacity to master the unconscious pressure of
conditioning. This is the same will that makes people suffer and sacrifice
to attain their goals. That Gandhi did not only for himself but also for the
humanity called for a greater suffering. It is difficult to empathize with
him though he could easily do with people but that later.
On the transformational night at Pietermaritzburg in South Africa, after
being thrown out on the platform, he had a choice to run away, suffer
indignity and survive but something changed in him almost non linearly
–he chose to fight back not violently but non-violently. Further years in
SA brought lot of violence on his body and mind but he retorted with
Satyagraha and the belief in the conscience of the adversary. His
nonviolent positioning was not an altered mental state that was
switched on once for all rather a continuous striving to live in it. He was
aware of the aggression within and the potential to burst open, aware of
the hatred that could have taken over in moments of being a victim, he
watched himself. This is where the human mind shines in all its glory in
MG and all others who strive to overcome their weaknesses. Whether
this is a fresh adaptation to a different future is for time to tell but
examining the process is worthwhile but from what lens or no lens.

A bit of foray into neuroscience should clarify –the tentative models of

brain and behaviour recognize critical periods of brain growth directed
by genetics but in response to environmental challenges and comfort.
Neural plasticity, synaptic growth and pruning determine the
connectivity patterns in brain, a drama at cellular level that writes the
story of and adult in childhood. Though plasticity is subject to
modification in adulthood yet the core remains. Behaviourally
translated it may be called conditioning of the mind. Detractors of ‘will’
may scoff and say Gandhi was conditioned to be nonviolent but he had
his share of fallacies and falls too. We all suffer emotional tsunamis but
to grow out of this panoply of emotions requires remembering and
acknowledging the impulses but also conscious intent to tame,
sublimate, channelize not in some phasic, meditative silence but in each
living moment because history is witness to many a rope walker falling
to this vicious cycle of suppression-repression and subsequent breaking
of boundaries of control.
The integration of emotion with reason in a reciprocal modulatory
manner is a slow process for a long lasting change. And the brain does
respond as did with Mg in 50 years of incessant
He turned mirror neurons to Gandhi neurons …probably a strong
inhibitory cortex controlling limbic system, which included the frame of
the other in self …not unconsciously but in full awareness.
In other words –EMPATHY…
MG was known for this sense of identification he could induce in people
be it the poor of India or the clergy, each community felt that he was
theirs and that too in India but why only India the working class in
Britain or the Blacks all felt the same even the two police constables
who moved with him in RTC 1931.
Even after decades peace revolutionary find him within himself. This
was part natural but part trained .His belief in ALL is One may have
been derived from childhood religious influence but Gandhi expanded
his consciousness in an INCLUSIONARY process that made him see the
connections between all that exists, he strived to develop an eye that
could see each human being without differentiating .Not that it had not
been tried before but none the way Gandhi did it. His compassion was
not developed in a jungle or cave and not in academic theory but right in
the grind o lie, between people, the way Krishna taught Arjuna not in a
cool chamber but in the heat of war.
In the flow of life he demonstrated what LOVE could achieve,
interchange the word to empathy and respect if you wish so. Whether it
was an act towards environment care or his writing style or care of
immediate space and people over long-term issues or giving importance
to people over the absoluteness of truth (the only uncompromising
principle was NONVIOLENCE).
He changed ‘GOD IS TRUTH’ to ‘Truth is God’ because former appeared
divisive and exclusionary. Small incidents in his life had big message-
-His allowing meat to coexist with his food in a guest’s house.
-Allowing Maulana Azad to smoke in front of him.
-his obsessions with not wasting pencils and paper or even the neem
twig he used for brushing teeth.

Compare with other self styled ascetics who are enraged if their rules
and routines are challenged MG could easily accommodate without
compromising himself. This art of staying within and yet connected to
outside made him malice free.
“I can have a room with windows and lot of air but refuse to be swept
away by the wind”
MALICE free he was because he had dropped out of any competition or
race to material success.in fact he abandoned the material success he
had and never pined for all that rest of us live for, not even bothering
about the next meal, such was the faith.
Aparigraha (dispossession) killed the greed in him and he expanded to
make the world his family.
When you don’t need you do not steal (Asteya)
When you don’t steal you do not lie and when lie is gone truth shines
and the need to power vanishes and the deep hidden need for personal
immortality does not press anymore. One is free then to attain an
impersonal immortality.
This freedom and autonomy of thought Gandhi worked for, for himself
and for all, individual and group alike, and as the divisions in mind fell
arose FEARLESSNESS.
Fearlessness not to gain or destroy but to forgive, love and sacrifice the
self before others.
If all this sounds as some religious-mystical fairy-tale, wait!!
Even these processes are a product of mind and are as valid as violence
and hatred.
MG practiced forgiveness all through even while being hurt, physically
or verbally (on multiple occasions in South Africa where he was beaten
to death, where he walked to a potential killer to present himself, and
verbally all his life by detractors), till he bowed in the final act before
being shot. His only concern was that at the moment of being hit or shot
hatred should not raise its head in his mind. That he was free of hatred
in brain is impossible with same brain dynamics. The way he countered
this strong omnipresent hatred that burns us was simple yet tough to
apply- while most want to eliminate or overpower adversary he tried to
appeal to his conscience and remove the hatred in the adversaries heart
(than be it Smuts or Jinnah, Hindu Mahasabha or Muslim league).
Satyagraha was a science of this process.
One had to risk his/her life though. This jump between clinging to life
and facing death was a step that MG had taken early in life. He
recognized almost in cognitive behavioural mode that fixations and
bonding to people and matter is the source of subsequent violence. The
need to live, as he told one client in SA – “why is it so important to live
that you have to commit a crime”, makes us retaliate in an attempt to
survive and that is a biological instinct. Moving against the instinct is
not only difficult but inconvenient too and that sure was Mahatma
Gandhi. It requires the most important cognitive process—
COURAGE – courage to lose the SELF. Because if self is decimated the
world becomes one and fear is gone in the larger perspective. It is
when we cling we fear. MG adopted the bravest strategy possibly
learned from Christ though MG almost was in battle like Prophet
Mohammed did.
SERVICE – to all and especially to the poor and marginalized was a
continuous action he was involved in. The subsequent feeling is the
greatest source of non violence because once the self is surrendered
voluntarily to the other’s needs and the other is recognized as an
extension of self, whom are you going to be violent against.
Being non violent, non aggressive, poor and self sacrificing, non greedy
and non coveting in all acts of life consciously, as far as is humanely
possible is a suffering that can break most of us. The impossibility of this
is the risk Gandhi faces now, the risk of being turned into a GOD.
This impossibility, inconvenience makes him appear a failure in political
arena. Because politicians and populace followed him in this swim
against nature till it saved and served them from British aggression but
once that was removed the inner suppressed violence introjected as
evident in partition. The preceding 20 years were indeed an attempt to
change albeit superficially. MG knew it. He within himself struggled with
the cousin of violence, sexuality till the end of his life and knew the
suffering so he kept creating situations with the potential of violence yet
controlling people and directing them to nonviolence in a greatest
experiment of constructive mass therapy. Provoked he certainly not
only to strengthen the freedom movement but also to change the British
heart through demonstrating the resolve of India towards Nonviolence.
He knew that the poor masses of India (and not the few handful British
educated population) may indulge in an impulsive violence but do not
have the resources to survive the retaliation by state. This made him
take back the civil movement after Chauri Chaura violence in 1922. He
waited and trained the country through constructive programme
himself setting an example of being in jail till he provoked again, this
time to show the biggest experiment in Nonviolence successfully and
pulling out the nail from the British Empire’s wall painting. It was The
Salt March .In an innovatively designed movement with something as
innocuous as salt MG not only drew the world’s attention but also left
them anticipating about what model of India would emerge after
freedom. They hoped that MG’s country would give them a peaceful
model we did it only partially. India had turned nonviolent for at least
two decades we still are largely Nonviolent but the legacy has grown
worldwide.
But the biggest war that MG fought was an Inner Jihad, that with his
sexuality. He had a married life with children but for him sex remained a
guilt -ridden issue. Probably the traumatic event of his father’s death
while he was with is wife triggered it or possibly his religious
conditioning but it took him a lifetime. He became celibate at the age of
37 but he never shied away from women, on the contrary he shared life
with women at all levels except sexually, and that too not in a hidden
way but under the eyes of scrutinizing eyes. None could find a fault or a
hidden agenda. There was a hidden agenda though.
Whether erroneously or may be physiologically correctly he linked
sexuality to violence, the very act of male sexuality is an aggression,
many have believed it but MG went on to counter it.
Mg in a subtle process was evoking the feminine within him not only
mentally but almost entering into a women’s world. That is why women
felt safe and attached to him. He did all the daily chores allotted to
women and all the kindness too that women are capable of in care of
immediate environment. His attempts at Nonviolence no doubt
stemmed from this process of which he was acutely aware. He got
conditioned from his mother and maid but the woman who taught him
was his wife Kasturba. He himself knew this. She set him an example of
tolerance that Gandhi imbibed not by sermons but both evolved in the
dialectical tension they lived in till their 50s.Ba never complained about
the self controlling Gandhi losing his temper, she remained firm, yet non
aggressive .She probably knew that these micro-experiments and
Gandhi’s failure at home front are the buttress on which he would erect
the solid castle of NV, because for Gandhi even guilt was a conscious
experience.

The future of Non Violence or ‘the science and art’

Man grew to be a social animal and all his experience, emotions,

thoughts and ‘self’ does not mean anything out of the context of the
relation to society. The brain too develops on stimulation from
environment and people. So each self contains many selves in deeper
recesses. Each mind’s space-time is not only determined by the clock
and calendar but also his memories and maps. Even as the ambitions of
computational biologists and AI researcher move them closer to making
a cyborg or machine that resembles man, the uniqueness of experience
still casts an enigma. But what are they trying to achieve…look at it
closely. They are trying to make a machine that is free of human
emotionality and its subsequent uncertainty, something that can be
used for peaceful development and existence be nonviolent essentially
though a potential of violence can be triggered due to wrong
programming. It is the human mind that wants to get rid of its
weaknesses. So if a human brain can design such a machine why can’t it
train itself after all the master is the one that programs the slave.
It is a very important moment in evolution where two can exist
simultaneously as in the past Sapiens existed with Neanderthals and
Habilis. Do humans wants to annihilate themselves and leave the robots
behind? But for whom, the social implications are huge. To survive
Sapiens have to survive together in a resource dwindled earth.
The man has to work on himself and not bank on the external creation
and the opportune moment is now because globalization has broken the
boundaries and we share as never before.
Leave Gandhi behind; look at the process of integrating emotion and
reducing its destructive streak that ravages other men and environment
too. The reason has to be trained to acknowledge emotion and vice
versa. Can the adult conditioned mind do so? Yes but the real future is
kids and they should be trained scientifically from early childhood not
to indoctrinate nonviolence but to be able to think critically, to be able
to focus on that millisecond gap where rage appears, to step out of their
self and learn that is derived from others.
To expand their consciousness as far as training and temperament
allows to survive and enhance together in a mutually beneficial way
then when the Roboticus appears, sapiens will be able to live in the
human way.
Multiple disciplines have to come together without prejudice and
examine ways to do this, to enhance empathy. Gandhi may be one way.
The desire to be an intelligent designer shall be fulfilled by bringing in
an evolutionary change in us and then we may not require a GOD.
REFERENCES:

Baars B. J. “A cognitive theory of consciousness”; Cambridge University Press,

New York (1988).

Baars B. J., Newman J. & Taylor J. “Neuronal mechanisms of consciousness: A

Relational Global Workspace framework”; in Hameroff, Stuart and Kaszniak,
Al and Laukes, James, Eds. Toward a Science of Consciousness II: The second
Tucson discussions and debates, MIT Press, chapter 24, 269-278
(1998);http://cogprints.ecs.soton.ac.uk/archive/00000946/.

Bogen J. E. “On the neurophysiology of consciousness: An Overview”;

Consciousness & Cognition 4: 52–62 (1995).

Chalmers D. J.  "What is a neural correlate of consciousness?"; in Metzinger,

Thomas, Neural Correlates of Consciousness: Empirical and Conceptual
Questions, MIT Press (published September 2000), ISBN 0-262-13370-9,
(June 1998).

Crick F. & Koch C. “Towards a neurobiological theory of consciousness”;

Seminars in Neuroscience Vol2, 263–275 (1990).
Crick F. C. & Koch C. “Are we aware of neural activity in primary visual
cortex?”; Nature 375: 121–3 (1995).

Dehaene S., Sergent C. & Changeux J.P.  “A neuronal network model linking
subjective reports and objective physiological data during conscious
perception”; Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 100: 8520–5 (2003).

Dennett D. & Kinsbourne M. “Time and the Observer: the Where and When of
Consciousness in the Brain”; Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 15, 183-247,
1992. Reprinted in The Philosopher's Annual, Grim, Mar and Williams, eds.,
vol. XV-1992, 23-68 (1994); Noel Sheehy and Tony Chapman, eds., Cognitive
Science, Vol. I, Elgar-1995, 210-274 (1992).

Kandel E. R. “In search of memory: The emergence of a new science of mind”;

W. W. Norton & Company. ISBN 0393329372 (2007).

Koch C.  “The quest for consciousness: a neurobiological approach”;

Englewood, US-CO: Roberts & Company Publishers. ISBN 0-9747077-0-8
(2004).
 Koch C. & Crick F.C. “On the zombie within”; Nature 411: 893 (2000).

Koch C. & Hepp K. “Quantum mechanics and higher brain functions: Lessons
from quantum computation and neurobiology”; Nature 440: 611–2 (2006). 

Laureys S. “The neural correlate of (un)awareness: Lessons from the

vegetative state”, Trends Cogn. Sci. 9: 556–9 (2005).

Rees G. & Frith C. (2007) “Methodologies for identifying the neural correlates
of consciousness”; in The Blackwell Companion to Consciousness, Velmans M
and Schneider S, eds., 553–66. Blackwell: Oxford, UK (2007).

Schiff N. D. "The neurology of impaired consciousness: Challenges for

cognitive neuroscience."; in Gazzaniga, Michael S., The Cognitive
Neurosciences (3rd ed.), MIT Press, ISBN 0-262-07254-8, (2004).

Squire L. R. “Fundamental neuroscience”; (3rded.) Academic Press, 1256,

ISBN 0-12-374019-3 (2008).

Tononi G. “An information integration theory of consciousness”; BMC

Neuroscience. 5: 42–72 (2004).

BOOKS
Brahmacharya -Gandhi & his women associates: Girja Kumar,
Vitasta Publishing Pvt. Ltd

Catching up with Gandhi: Graham Turner, Penguin Books, India

Collected works: M.K. Gandhi, Navjivan Publications

Day to day with Gandhi: Mahadev Desai, Sarva Seva Sangh

Prakashan

Debating Gandhi: A. Raghuramaraju, Oxford University Press

Gandhi his life and thought: J.B. Kripalani, Publications division,

Govt. of India

Gandhi, Ronald J. Terchek: Vistaar Publications

Gandhism an analysis: Philip Spratt, Radiance Publications

Hind Swaraj: M.K. Gandhi, Rajpal & sons

Mahatma Gandhi, Pyarelal: Navjivan Publications 155

Mahatma: D.G. Tendulkar, Publications division, Govt.of India

Mahatma Gandhi purnahuti: Pyarelal, Navjivan Prakasahan Mandir

Mahatma Gandhi his life & ideas: Charles F. Andrews, Jaico publishing
House ,India

Mohandas: Rajmohan Gandhi, Penguin Books India

My days with Gandhi: Nirmal Kumar Bose, Orient Longman India

My experiments with truth: M.K. Gandhi, Navjivan Publications

My life in my own words: M.K. Gandhi, Navjivan Publications

Non- violence :the History of dangerous idea: Mark Kurlansky, Modern

Library

Revolutionary Gandhi: Pannalal Dasgupta, Jayasree Press

The epic fast: Pyarelal, Navjivan Publications

The good boatman: Rajmohan Gandhi, Penguin Books, India

The Great Indian way: Raja Rao, Vision books

The life and death of Mahatma Gandhi: Robert Payne, Rupa

Publications

The Life of Mahatma Gandhi: Louis Fischer, Harper Collins Publications

The Mahatma and the ism: E. M. S. Namboodiripad, Leftword

Publications