101 Research Titles: The Potential Conflicts Between the UN-Led Global Governance Initiatives and the Scientific Philosophy Advocated by Jamir Ahmed Choudhury

Jubaydah Tasneem

Abstract: A mango seed can only grow into a mango tree, not an apple tree. The core of the argument is that a system cannot produce consistent outcomes that contradict its foundational principles. A system based on opposites is inherently self-contradictory and unreliable, leading to "erroneous knowledge" that has internal contradictions and lacks objective truth. This erroneous knowledge is seen as flawed because it contains logical inconsistencies and lacks scientific soundness, according to IJSR. The statement also points to what it considers paradoxical scientific facts, which contradict the concept of an "equal and opposite" framework, as another source of this flawed knowledge. Jamir Ahmed Choudhury contends that such contradictory knowledge undermines the foundation of truth-based education. In his view, it diverges from the humanistic principles enshrined in international conventions such as Article 29 of the UN CRC. The global standard education is also incompatible with "ensured quality education" and values enshrined in the constitution mentioned in Section-29 of the RTE Act-2009, India. The statement implies that the current "well-established UN-led global paradigm" [assessed & accredited and evaluated & celebrated global standard education] needs "to address its internal contradictions" or "to resolve its paradoxical foundations". The UN's global governance initiatives and Jamir Ahmed Choudhury's scientific philosophy create potential conflicts due to their different perspectives on universal frameworks, especially when viewed through the lens of empirical evidence-based reasoning. Jamir's work, which draws analogies from nature-driven neutral science like Newton's Third Law - "Equal & Opposite", suggests that the UN's approach may be flawed, as it is based on a potentially self-contradictory, "global framework" rather than a more natural, "equal and opposite" structure, similar to the binary nature of systems like Einstein's binary pulsar. This article critically examines the foundational tensions between the UN-led global governance paradigm and the scientific philosophy advanced by Jamir Ahmed Choudhury, rooted in the concept of "creation in pairs" and nature's apriori truths. By interrogating the epistemological contradictions within internationally accepted human rights and education frameworks, particularly the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) and the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child (UN CRC), the study highlights how these systems may conflict with empirically grounded, nature-aligned principles. Drawing upon Newtonian mechanics, binary astrophysics, and logical frameworks like the dictum de omni et nullo, the author advocates for a paradigm shift toward truth-based education and governance. The methodology includes empirical critique, philosophical reasoning, and structured public engagement through seminars and discussions. The work challenges technocratic global norms, proposing a reorientation toward a humanistic, science-grounded model of rights and governance.

Keywords: Anti-natural Governance, Violation of Human Rights, Creation in Pairs, Truth-based Education, Inalienable Human Rights

How to Cite?: Jubaydah Tasneem, "101 Research Titles: The Potential Conflicts Between the UN-Led Global Governance Initiatives and the Scientific Philosophy Advocated by Jamir Ahmed Choudhury", Volume 14 Issue 11, November 2025, International Journal of Science and Research (IJSR), Pages: 1177-1263, https://www.ijsr.net/getabstract.php?paperid=SR251115152814, DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.21275/SR251115152814