A Quote by Devdutt Pattanaik

There is no such thing as an objective interpretation. — © Devdutt Pattanaik
There is no such thing as an objective interpretation.
The truth is, the way you write music, it's a code. It has to be very precise. It's scientific, but ultimately it also depends on interpretation. It's very similar to how you grow a master plan: it's an objective document, but at the same time it is a lyrical document which allows through interpretation to become a harmonious work of art.
I don't pretend to be objective. There is no such thing as being an objective journalist.
Wars are fought to gain a certain objective. War itself is not the objective; victory is not the objective; you fight to remove the obstruction that comes in the way of your objective. If you let victory become the end in itself then you've gone astray and forgotten what you were originally fighting about.
The most terrible fight is not when there is one opinion against another, the most terrible is when two men say the same thing -- and fight about the interpretation, and this interpretation involves a difference of quality.
That's one of the central problems of history, isn't it, sir? The question of subjective versus objective interpretation, the fact that we need to know the history of the historian in order to understand the version that is being put in front of us.
You know the first objective is to get out of your hometown, second objective, get it together in the capital. The awful thing about left the school, is that you'd feel you'd be important. It would matter what you did.
The challenge for a writer looking at history is to figure out what is history and what is myth. After all, what you are looking at is an interpretation of history, and so at some level, it becomes an interpretation of an interpretation.
Every interpretation is but an introduction to another interpretation, and that is how Talmud pages are printed.
Art is the ability to communicate through an intermediary and to convey one's feelings through an isolated object. It's inspiration and incubation. Putting my subjective feelings into an objective form and then on to you for a subjective interpretation.
All things are subject to interpretation whichever interpretation prevails at a given time is a function of power and not truth.
The real problem is not the religion itself, but its insistence that the interpretation it offers of the world is the only valid interpretation.
Policies change, and programs change, according to time.But objective never changes. You might change your method of achieving the objective, but the objective never changes. Our objective is complete freedom, complete justice, complete equality, by any means necessary
In the performance sense, I find that interpretation is improvisatory in nature. You can go anywhere with an interpretation on any given day.
ISIS itself, it draws its central belief system from the Koran and from the writings of the Prophet Muhammad. That is undeniable. And it's a medieval interpretation of it. It is a literal interpretation of it.
We cry. The Greeks cry because we have not an objective today. Yesterday we have objective to put off the dictatorship. Today the objective is to find ourselves.
If you're coming from America to Iraq, then how are you supposed to be objective? I mean, you could pay lip service to being objective, but how are you going to objective when you're embedded with the Marines? The Marines are saving your life every day and they're protecting you.
This site uses cookies to ensure you get the best experience. More info...
Got it!