The Madraasis

I'm bad at small talk. Terrible at it. I can't even talk about the weather. I sit comfortably in between ominous silences, when you can hear each other breathe, and usually put the onus on the other person to entertain me by sparking a conversation. But this time I decided to start changing myself.


"So...you're also a tamilian?", I inquired Ms. Babe (having heard her utter "aiyoo" somewhere, apart from her unmistakable last name)
"Yeah....", she drawled ruefully, her face wilting, "But I'm from Mumbai, was brought up there and lived my whooole life there!", she clarified, with her eyes turning moist at the thought of her hometown.
"Where are you from?", it was now her turn.
"I'm from Madras", I stated.


Now Ms. Babe is as trendy and hep so as to set a fashion statement on behalf of all the Indian ladies. Latest hair style, bold clothes, and the whole ensemble(Bold clothes = wearing a mini-skirt and a sleeveless shirt in the middle of frigid January, when the wind howls and the temperature is below -20 F... no exaggerations). Anyway, Babe surely must have gathered my native origin -- my darling daddy's 13 lettered last name and the trademark stamp of Madraas-filter-Kaapi Kalai on my face were enough evidences.


But, out of this Babe's mouth came these words, "Oh!!! Really?! I didn't know! (wide eyed). You don't look like a Madraasi! I thought you were from Bangalore...", she trailed, looking at me incredulously. Talk about bitter sweets... I didn't know whether I recognized it as a compliment because I was "elevated" to the state of Bangalorean from my drudged Filter-Kaapi self, or as a brutal dish out to my "madraasi community".
"Oh? Why?", I asked in my customary ringing tone. (My father taught me early on to be interested in "Tell me Why" books and I religiously started asking "why" till people tear their hair out)
"You know... you're not like one of those typical Madraasis... ", she said, scrunching her pretty little nose and curling her lips as if on seeing a miserable rat.
"Oh...", I said, trying to put on a plastic smile and wondering if I should ask another "Like how" question and risk piling more insults to my clan. While my mind was running wild on thoughts, Babe was more accepting and friendly of me and started chattering more.


Now, this is not the first time I've heard this. The popular G, scorned at me as I offered to shake his hand during our first meeting, seething the words, "You're from Bangalore, aren't you?" Why? I ask again. Madras girls know enough etiquette to shake hands with new people they are introduced to, especially in a professional setting...( only our tamil heroines say "namaskaram" with joint hands and refuse to touch a man's hand) or is there some other aura around me that makes me less of a Madraasi? Not that I'm fanatically oriented towards my place... I don't care which city's spirit I emanate... I am me. But I don't understand the sense of disgrace and inferiority associated with Madras -- the only metro in India that is not considered good enough.


I perfectly relate to and understand a person's detachment to their native place when they have lived their whole lives in another city. Their identity and memories are towards the place of nurture and it's irrational to expect a sense of pride or attachment to a place they visited during occasional vacations. So Babe's detachment to Madras can very well be understood... but why the disgust, the distaste? And I don't understand the sense of detachment and/or disgust among those Madraasis who have lived their whole lives in the city. I have hardly met any Indian from any other metro/city who abuses their hometown. Hometowns are proudly praised and hailed high, and people weep with nostalgia on their reference. But Madras is not so privileged.


Obviously Madras is a tad more conservative than the other metros, no doubt, but the poor thing is trying its best to catch up fast with the rest. And I by the way, am the country-bumpkin dunderhead in my elite hep group of friends from Madras. So if babe considered me good enough to be a Bangalorean, she ain't seen nothing of Madras and its girls. But this is a common perception. Even within Madras, guys would lament that the best-looking girl in Madras was the worst-looking girl in Delhi. The maamis of my household will return from a wedding and proclaim, "Ponnu chekka-chevernu, north-indian ponnu madri irruka" (the bride looks fair and lovely like a north-indian girl). This statement, when the girl would be an agmark-tamil-Madraasi. A well groomed, fair and lovely Madraasi is always seen as an aberration, even by the locals, betraying total lack of pride or appreciation of one's own clan. I know of Tamilians who go out of their ways to mask their origin, to remove every trace of evidence linking them to the city, and try every possible way to link themselves to a sophisticated Bangalorean, Mumbai-ian, Delhi-an, or pretty much any Metro falling above Tamil Nadu's border.


I know of my own schoolmates and college-mates who, having lived their entire lives in Madras, would cringe to publicly state so. They will proudly feign complete lack of knowledge of Tamil and stutter when they have to speak to the auto-driver. One claims that she is half-north-indian because her dad was raised in Mumbai. And that esteemed link to her was golden. Chicks change their last names to eliminate that conspicuous old-fashioned ring to their names, by appending a generic "Iyer", while some truncate their poor daddy's longish name. "Krishnaswamy" becomes "Krish", "Ramamoorthy" becomes "Ram" and "Mahadevan" becomes "M'Devan". Believe me, I realize how agonizing it is to wait for the American on the other side to stutter and mince my father's name in their effort to recite my full name, as I beg and wail to leave his name alone. But the above name-changing-chicks reside within Hindustan, specifically near Marina Beach. While it's none of my business on how people change their names, the pattern somehow seems to be around Madraasis, centering around the intention to wipe off any trace of south-indianism. I have never heard of Kulkarnis, Deshpandes shortening/changing their names.


And the other extremes are the tamil-fanatics, who will chatter only in loud-localized accents and will abuse and scorn at those who utter two words in English/Hindi and exhibit the slightest sense of modernity/refinement (thoughts included) that don't conform to the local rules. These people set the standards on how to be a great Kumbakonam-maama and Thanjavoor-maami. They will gossip better than my great-grand-aunt and will be the moral police to uphold the "tamil culture" better than our cuckoo Chief Minister. Maybe Babe's impression of Madras was tainted by such people. But doesn't every state, every city, every metro have their share of irritants who bring down the name of the place? Thackareyism is at the tip of my tongue. Or am I biased in my view of my hometown? Does Madras really have so many reasons to be ashamed of?


It's sad that such people's sense of identity is based on global perceptions of a city's westernization and modernization. There are obviously those minority middle grounders who share a loving bond with the city, despite its sweltering heat, incorrigible auto drivers and gossiping maamis. And I hope in the coming years, this minority section grows and the other extremes dwindle.

On Education Reforms

Life has suddenly gotten busy and nerve wracking, thanks to the semester winding down and all the scores of deadlines staring at me in the face with an evil laugh that I'm behind most. Friday afternoons lend themselves well to a beautiful nap, especially when the weather chooses to be good. So in order to get myself a short break I thought I'd post something. But since I can't spend time writing one, I thought why not recycle my old writings that I recently uncovered :).


Since in the previous post on Capital Punishments, we touched upon the subject of education as a primary means of reformation, I'm pasting my thoughts on education reforms in India.


************************************************************************************
From December 2004


The fundamental framework and thinking of people all over India still remains stringent. Lets think on the following
1. why are there still Indian software engineers(and the like), working abroad, who still demand or never question dowry? These people take it as yet another fact of life--I’m a guy earning well in a country away from my homeland. I’m just worth so much of dowry.
2. why is the birth of a second girl child into a family(no no I’m not talking abt the so called lower or down trodden section. I’m talking abt the so called upper middle class), bring about the reply----“Ah, it would have been better otherwise. Hmm...you better start saving up dear fellow.”
3. why do eyebrows raise when you demand to get into a profession other than medicine/ engineering?
4. why do comfortable commuters in a train, flinch with disgust on seeing a haggard man/woman/child(a fellow being of their nation), begging for money and food?
5. finally………the cream of it!
Why is it that 75% of final year engineering students never know how to fix a simple failed brake, a leaking faucet, a dimming monitor, change a fuse, fix a fan, when all through four rigorous years they were taught and made to pass far more complex stuff.
Now all these above said people are educated…well-educated as a matter of fact(hey engineering is no joke :-)). So how exactly has education served its purpose? An educated mind is supposed to cross the petty fences laid out by society to think beyond the horizons to implement positive reformations. It is to cull out the old and rusted principles and customs and to replace them with bright polished ones. A broader perspective, an open mind amicable to changes and suggestions……well I could go on.


‘Educating’ the masses alone isn’t enough. The real sense of that word is long buried deep. It is imperative to infuse ethics with learning. Our system of education has to evolve into a more healthier version where
· morals and ethics are not rhetorically told to be mugged up and reproduced
· the teacher is no monster near the black board and the students are no subjects. A more impersonal atmosphere encourages learning and more interaction.
· Corporal punishments, such as caning, beating, kneeling, verbal abuse, etc need to stop.
· Textbooks should not be encouraged as sole bibles without knowing whose every line and verse, the student is made to dread a mortal fear of ‘failing’.
· There’s freedom to explore and learn on a higher plane. There’s no stifling of potentials because of societal norms
· Its not mere numbers that determine a person’s ‘success’ in life, but it is the wholesome knowledge and personality gained out of schooling.


All these are easier said than done. But what I’m driving at is, the art of imparting education has lost its true sense. People are neither taught to gain knowledge, nor to survive. Its all on a short term basis--- how to get good marks in this particular test/semester, how to get into those companies, how to improve the pass percentage of the school. The aim has become shallow and fails to look beyond the present.


If we want our future generations to carry on with our struggle, we need to pass on the torch to people who truly understand the crux of our problems with an astute mind driving towards progress in its wholesome sense. These qualities need to be inculcated in the young. As they grow, schools have the responsibility of pruning their tangential characteristics and fine tuning their latent talents. All these cant be accomplished with a cane in hand and a rigid inflexible mindless rigmarole of memorizing and spitting out Newtonian theories.


One thing I glaringly find missing is---the dignity of labor. I still remember a documentary on the discovery channel that was a three hour session wholly dedicated to the study of sea-weeds. I really admired the professionalism and seriousness with which any topic or study is handled without being discarded as useless. Anything started on, is delved into its core and deepest trench and depths. I’m not advocating the study of weeds. But its that kind of passion and enthusiasm for learning and experimentation that needs to be developed. In simple words--teach the brain to think, appreciate the mind to explore, make mistakes and learn, while holding stiff the reins of discipline.


The Chinese saying--“teach a man to fish”, speaks well. It can be extended to teach a man to hunt. I say why restrict with fishing? What if the river dries up? It is essential he knows to explore his surroundings to survive.


Once there are bright ‘educated’ minds out to strive for the nation, social evils would diminish and erode away, as every generation passes, leaving behind healthier and more wise remnants(or shall we say leaders), who would flourish the nation with progress.
************************************************************************************
After a little more than 4 years, I still would hope for such reforms in Education. How exactly, and what tangible steps to take, I don't know. This requires a change in attitude, scratching the syllabus and starting from scratch. Some schools have started exploring such things, but today, with engineering colleges still mushrooming in every street corner, and job opportunities getting more stringent, I'm sure it will take a good 2-3 decades before we can expect changes.

On Capital Punishments - Old and New

I had a lot to say on Capital Punishments, and now I'm parched to say anything more. Below is my argument against capital punishments, when I was all of 20 years old. I shamelessly showcase my weak arguments that carry an air of amateurish faith in humanity. I had no concept of brevity, so excuse my rambling and silly analogies. I didn't want to edit and tarnish my pitiable innocence/stupidity.

**************************************************************************************

My thoughts as they were in May 2004

Its very true that practically speaking, we have no time on our hands to actually sit down and have a diplomatic talk over a cup of tea and try to sort things over with terrorists; because when we’re busy talking, a minimum of 200 new problems seem to crop up. With terrorism and ruthless violence at their hilt, we have no patience to talk about reforming people. I mean its hard enough to make someone close to you, understand your viewpoint, how the heck is a hard core criminal going to be reformed by you?? So I guess all that justifies us to play God and arrange for these people to be shipped to what we call as hell.


Consider this analogy. At 5, when you loved to doodle on the walls (well, I used to), and your mom wagged her rolling pin at you, and said “next time I see you scribble you’re going to be spanked like crazy!”, did you stop doodling or whatever sin you were prohibited from doing?? Well, I found a way though…I started doodling at the back of our bed, the side of the fridge not visible to my mom, and on the last page of my dad’s files. It wasn’t until packing day that my parents realized that they had a sly imp living with them! One of my friends always says that he invariably makes it a point to execute that deed that he’s begged to not do. Tell a child not to put down that glass vase cos it will break and give him a dire threat, and you’ll at once see a twinkle in his eyes and he’ll make sure that it shatters into a million dazzling pieces in front of your horrified face. Well the child is not evil, he just loves the pleasure of seeing something created……he cant create a glass vase at 3 (he realizes that), but he can always create a mess; a million sparkling pieces of glass is according to him a new creation or ‘evolution’ of that drab vase, which his mom used to love, when he was supposed to be the only one there to be loved. How many of u guys have been obedient sons in listening to your dad in coming home early? Although the punishment is severe you’ve always found a way out to smuggle into the house and out of the house, thanks to darling mama’s help.


My point is, do corporal and brutal punishments serve their purpose of getting the ethics into our head? Copying during exams is considered a major ‘crime’, and severe punishments are meted out. But then why do I still find the guy sitting next to me, turn a complete 180 degrees to mime out the answer to his friend, when the invigilator turns her back? If bits are out, a new style comes in; make noises with ur bootstrap…the number of times the velcro is stripped out indicates the question no., a small dull ripping sound, indicates “sorry buddy have no clue.”, a nice enthusiastic rip, kinda like a roar means “yup! I know that……”, and several more that I couldn’t spare time to gauge.


I know what u’re thinking...doodling or breaking a vase isn’t a crime. We’re dealing with hard core rapists and murderers. All the same we are dealing with people whose minds work just as bizarre…only differing in magnitude. America seems to be Laden’s glass vase that’s all. Its weird to be wagging a lethal injection, or swinging a threatening sword to warn people from indulging in what the ‘society’ calls as a crime. In one culture, it’s a moral privilege for a man to have more than 1 wife, yet in other cultures it’s a mortal sin. In Saudi, a dad has the right to execute his daughter or cut off her arm, if the tip of her hand is accidentally shown. So what is ‘right’ and what is ‘wrong’?? We are humans...not animals to be exterminated when considered pests.


Every time a brutal punishment is meted out to us, God knows how we cringe and crib inside with the injustice of it all, the atrocity and the humiliation that we swear passionately to make the scores even...but if u’re dead, u don’t have a chance. So now that’s the whole point isn’t it? remember the time u got spanked and humiliated...can u remember feeling that hate, anger, bitter resentment(at being caught……) and most of all that feeling of being so helpless in the midst of savage people who know nothing abt fair play. From the time we got our first black mark for coming late to school to this day when our internals zoom down, we never seem to realize where we’re going wrong. Have these punishments served their purpose? Its always considered the height of cruelty and injustice when u’re suspended from college for punching another guy’s nose to a pulp, because the child inside u is whining, "u don’t know the whole story, u don’t know who started the fight, u don’t know why I hit him, u don’t know he hit me first, u don’t know that he provoked me, u don’t know that I’m not a heartless guy to rip another fellow’s nose…!”. There u go u have a reason, and u didn’t do it in the heat of the moment, and had actually planned and called for a fight at the back alleys to settle things out -man-to-man.


If we can get so passionate and if we can so virulently support our cause, over a simple college fight, why cant we extrapolate this to more serious matters and more passionate people. I’m in no way trying to justify crimes……not at all. Ask yourself whether u’ve ever felt justified at being punished, brutally. When did u finally realize that its wrong to hurt people physically?


a) when your mom had a heart-to-heart talk with u
b) when your dad yelled his head off abusing u unfairly
c) when your teacher caned u with that mean stick


Conclusion:


I understand that things have gone far out of our reach to actually mend in a more rational way. I know capital punishment in India is not meted out with a snap of one’s fingers, thanks to our judiciary. I realize that it does solve the purpose of curbing a country’s crime rate, but our Vedas state “Saama…Dhaana…bedha…dandam”, escalating towards brutal punishments as a final resort. The essence of punishments always is towards reformation of the individual, and not to seek out revenge or to brutally afflict physical pain that is only going to madly fuel his already insane passion and anger. I’m therefore strictly against mutilation. With capital punishment, a rapist or a hard core terrorist dies with the helpless thought that he cant get even with this cruel world, not a whit of remorse for having killed any innocent person, as a matter of fact he would love to stab his executor…if only he wasn't tied up.


Sadly, that is the plight of our present crisis; no time to reform, no time to realize abt ethics of punishments. So call out those docs and let them poke out as many terrorists as they can snare. God knows that the doc is no paragon of virtues himself, but aint he clever enough to not get caught?? That’s all that matters. Sorry if I’m sardonic, but my heart can never accept the concept of a fellow human being killed, in the name of punishment. It can be argued as the need of the moment, but call it termination, please do not word it as a ‘punishment’. Punishments must have a post-period…a period of realization.


Punishment is to make a man realize his deeds and it thus hopes to reform him. If we are too busy for all that, terminate him…but don’t call it punishment, for the man no longer lives to realize that.
************************************************************************************


And now, 5 years later - "America seems to be Laden's glass vase", whatever did I mean by that?! That's such a hilarious statement. The essay above had little to do with capital punishments and more to do with the topic of "corporal punishments - their ethics", or "reforming kids in school". Or maybe not even that. Notice how I've eluded from giving a solution - I've argued against brutal punishments, but offered no solution except "reformation "- just by showing compassion and treating terrorists through counseling or psychotherapy. I seriously thought it would be that easy to reform criminals? I compare college kids to criminals and argue they are same in principle and a little different in magnitude... religious fundamentalists versus silly teenagers?!! Thank god I rambled in an electronic media unaware of all the sneering and swearing and rotten vegetables spewed on me.


I no longer can find enough energy or words to argue or say anything on capital punishments. With my throat and mind resembling a parched well, I can't even find enough words, or reason to make a loved one merely glimpse at my side of the coin. Reformation of hardened fundamentalists by banking on implicit human goodness? Not going to happen. Long term solutions - plenty to speculate, but not enough fire to voice them. I resign to change the term to "termination" and make peace with it (ah, the oxymoron and irony). Either they live and wreak havoc for us, or they die and we are guilty of not resorting to more "humane" forms of reformation for their inhuman heinous crimes.

The Old and the New

I was clearing and organizing my email yesterday, and I dug out quite a few memories and thoughts that were tucked away in the safe crevices of chaotic electronic folders. Suffice to say that I spent the rest of the evening drunk on nostalgia. I was a little rattled that I couldn't identify with my own writings, my own thoughts and well, the person I was 5-6 years back. It was less than a decade ago and yet there has been a surprising leap of time, thoughts, and views. If it weren't for the convincing evidence that all the emails were signed off by me and had emanated from my email address, I would have probably not been convinced as much that I was indeed the author (I still hold a 1% chance that my account was hacked!).


In college, under the auspices of a revolutionary go-getter, a group of rebellious , opinionated (or so we called) and enthusiastic people formed a yahoo group to debate on a variety of topics. The members of the group grew from young college students to include a huge gamut of members with different backgrounds, education and views. Posts were fired regularly. I wrote with passion, my arguments fueled with optimism and conviction. My thoughts reflected my utter naivete and belief that there was a tangible solution to every issue the world was plagued with. It was quite amusing and entertaining to hear me debate as if I knew everything there was to know :)


And now, I look back and pity the young girl, shrouded with idealism and insane optimism. Now reality has eroded most of that pristine optimism. Thoughts have evolved and I see myself shaking my head at the very words I penned with such unshakable conviction. Still in the "prime of my youth" I seem to have lost most of the fire in me. Is it just a natural part of growing up, or am I growing too old, too fast?


Since this blog is turning out to be a collection of all my thoughts, I thought I would include some of my "old thoughts" in here, and have a fun time arguing with myself :). It will be all the more interesting, when in the year of 2019, if my blog and I are still around, I could read my thoughts from 2004-2009 and introspect on how much more I had "evolved" :). Hopefully I'll reach a point in my life when I'll stop contradicting and arguing with myself.

Achilles and The Tortoise

Long long ago in Athens, there was held the man-tortoise run off. Achilles made a nice (arguably so) gesture of giving Tarquin the tortoise a 100-yard head start. Tarquin's tactic was to keep moving constantly, however slow it might be. If Achilles wants to overtake Tarquin, logic states that he must first get to where Tarquin is, when the race starts. This will take a few seconds. In these few seconds, Tarquin who is focussed on constantly moving, is sure to have moved a short distance away from Achilles. Achilles needs to now get to this distance, by which time Tarquin would have moved a teeny distance further. And so on...you get the drift? It seems as if it's "logically and mathematically impossible" for Achilles to beat the tortoise. But as we all know, Achilles did win the race, overtaking poor Tarquin. (Source: "The Ancient Paradox of Achilles and the Tortoise", attributed to Zeno (born c.488 BCE))


The feeling one has when one knows the implicitness of a situation/outcome and yet cannot verbalize in as many intelligent words and logical statements to prove it, is indeed very pitiable. It's always crippling when I can no longer use mere words to churn out a logical proof and need to resort to mathematical means to prove a point, however implicit it may seem. I'm never good with abstract mathematical proofs (as you will or have evidenced before), but let's see how far I can get with mere words alongside some logic.


The basic logic holds true - in order for Achilles to overtake the tortoise, he needs to first get to the current state of the tortoise by which time the tortoise may have moved a little farther away. But will this turn out to be an endless loop that can't be won over? Intuitive sense argues no. Time and space if viewed as being continuous chunks, it is reasonable to envisage dividing space into 'n' points... is n is close to infinity? I don't know... we can get down to an atom and a molecule but beyond that I haven't kept track of Physics to know more :). But if "n" could be infinity, does it make sense? In a physical sense, where do we draw the boundary on "space"? My room, my home, my street, country, continent, world... universe? I think scientists have conceded that "space" does tend to extend to infinity. But in this particular example, space would be with respect to distance between Achilles and the tortoise; this is obviously finite by itself, but seems infinite to the extent to which it can be divided. Anyway, having chunked up space into so many such divisions, we move onto time. We start dividing time into infinitesimal chunks. Then it follows that, due to this phenomenon called "speed", the rate of movement of Achilles is such that he traveled at a dimension of space and time, wherein the tortoise's motion was almost non-existent for a certain extent of space and time, thus causing him to overtake the tortoise.


I guess Achilles and tortoise makes this reasoning sound more plausible, for the two are such stark contrasts. It's quite conceivable that if we were to freeze the time frames of the race, the tortoise would seem to appear immobile for several frames. But what about the blindly whizzing cars in formula-one races (or other such races)? To what extent should space and time be divided to fathom a stage where there was no motion?


Does this make sense? As always, please help me out with your views :)

Dutiful Sacrifice

Private Kenny's family was engulfed in grief and pain on his recent demise. In a recent bomb attack, he had thrown himself to save his comrades by smothering a grenade. Private Kenny's family had no consolation but the pride they held on account of his heroism to have fearlessly sacrificed his life, quelled their grief. But just as his family tried to cope with his loss, their shred of honor and pride was snatched by the regiment, which refused to acknowledge Private Kenny's act through the prestigious award - The Victoria Cross for Bravery. Shocked, his family demanded an explanation. The regiment politely and apologetically stated, "It has been the practice in the past to reward such actions with the appropriate medal. However we have decided that it's a mistake to consider such acts as requiring an exceptional devotion to duty. All military personnel are required to act in the interests of the whole unit at all times. To suggest that Private Kenny's act was over and above the call of duty, therefore suggests that it might be acceptable sometimes not to act in the interests of the whole unit. This is clearly absurd. Therefore we no longer reward such acts with posthumous awards. Although we appreciate this is a painful time for the family, we should also point out that Private Kenny would have died in the blast anyway, so it's not even the case that he sacrificed his life for his colleagues." The cold letter added insult to injury. Is the regiment's take on this incident justified? (Source: The Pig That Wants to be Eaten, Julian Baggini)


It's quite possible that your initial reaction on reading the letter from the regiment was of anger or shock, or perhaps just intrigue. I was shocked and furious, although Kenny is but a fictional character and I've had no one in the army to even realize the true emotional implications. I was not necessarily shocked because of the regiment's cold-hearted logic in refusing an award, but because I equate the loss of a life in the name of war, as just a horrible exploitation of human beings. This is probably out of naivete, but I can never fathom why we humans need to still resort to physical duels to resolve issues. My God, we have been through millions of years of evolution, isn't it time that we stop acting so animalistic and territorial, literally butting heads, or clawing each other to let our "brawn" and physical might determine the "winner"? How ridiculous that we still can't use our developed brains and ability to reason as tools to come to a solution! It deeply saddens me when I hear of soldiers dying every single day trying to "fight" the "bad" guys. Sadly that's how the world is and we have not really civilized beyond knowing how to dress well and put on social charades.


I should probably stop attributing humans as being "special" just because we are at the highest level of the food chain, and we have a 6th sense to boast about. Survival is still our prime instinct. So anyway, having resigned to that, I must say that for someone to look beyond their personal interest and survival and to have sacrificed their life does merit a proper recognition. It does take immense courage. Doesn't matter if they merely executed their duty and moral code. A person who enters the army knowing fully well that he might lose his life as part of his duty, by itself deserves merit. The duty poses a threat to our very basic instinct of survival, and to act selflessly at that tragic second requires tremendous will to push aside the basic survival instinct. For a person to stare straight at death and still not have his thoughts and body reflexively protect him, is indeed a feat.


Besides, incentives, encouragement and motivation are necessary elements for effective performance. Yes, it's the duty of every student to excel in every class in school. Why then are their awards for top rank holders? It's the duty of parents to take care of their children. Why then should mothers and fathers be revered and appreciated? We keep imposing a lot of idealism, regardless of whether we are equipped to naturally be so accomplished. Incentives are those that drive us - for many, recognition is what fuels their motivation and brings meaning to their lives. Our scriptures preach that our motivation and sense of duty should be independent of the results/consequences/incentives. But that doesn't justify indifference to a duty well performed. Incentives need not be materialistic, a sense of respect and honor are higher awards.


An oft repeated pattern in all moral dilemmas is the delicate balance between doing "good" versus self-interest. For someone to take that extra leap to save a child from a frothing sea or a burning building, risking their own lives is surely extraordinary and heroic. Does that make the rest of us, who do value their life higher than others, moral failures? Or as I mentioned, are we just trying to impose idealism that is against the way nature made us?

Dismal Rant

Warning: This is a literal brain dump of trite questions and rants... a boring long winded ramble, which had to be vented. But if you can offer me some answers, I'll be grateful.


What does it mean to be a human being? What characteristics would you signify? Emotions? Ability to think, to discern, to reason? Making mistakes?

I've lately been very intrigued by ascetics and those in search of the truth, who abandon all qualities of human nature to elevate and transcend beyond average human consciousness. For years I've been familiar with the Indian philosophy of emotional detachment from worldly desires, pleasures and materialistic needs to attain salvation or enlightenment. But I've also been familiar with the Hindu/Vedic principle of going through all 4 stages of life - having experienced everything there is to in life, and then gradually detach from the material world to reach spiritual enlightenment. So when do we start on this quest for truth? Should I search for the truth only after having abandoned all material bonds? Will my consciousness naturally elevate itself if I get to a state where I no longer attach any emotions on anything/myself?

Why all these questions? Well, I recently came to know of a sect of ascetics who go through extremely primitive and crude practices in their attempt to attain enlightenment; their primitive and even disturbing practices (well disturbing to you and me) is a symbol of their philosophy to totally abstain the body from any kind of pleasure, and to go through extreme conditions that would otherwise scare and disturb normal human beings. They thus conquer all emotions and reign control over their mind; they thus look beyond the illusive world and our social conditioning of what is good, bad, ugly, dirty, clean, beautiful, scary etc. Almost like facing one's fear of drowning by jumping into the water and learning to swim. What if one is to face the ultimate fear - fear of death and meaning of life beyond? Let your imagination run wild... I don't want to name the sect of ascetics here, because my post is definitely not on them. And if you're the sensitive kind, whose mind hardly needs a reason to go haywire, please do NOT research and find all that you could read about them, like I did. I don't know whether I regret it.... but I have been definitely unsettled.

Anyway, my little research made me bring back those trite, elusive and deep questions that periodically surface and then go back into their shell, because I get tired of not knowing how to find answers. But now, especially at this point in my life, I really would like to get some answers. From whom and how I don't know. Books are not helpful beyond a point... I don't know how to achieve that inner realization, as they call it. But I had to at least rant and get it out of my system.

Everything in life seems insignificant to me these days. Looking around me everything seems silly... we constrain ourselves with so many rules, bound with so many complicated emotions, relationships, elusive ambitions, illusive desires. I remember my father telling me a story about the great Alexander who craved to conquer the world. A wise saint comes to him and asks him, "Ok, imagine you have conquered the world. Then what?". Alexander couldn't answer, so he got furious. I ask myself that... I struggle and toil everyday. What after I've solved all my issues and accomplished my ever extending "goals"? Will I be happy and content... well for a few months maybe, then what? I don't know. So is it even worth fighting and struggling for such aspects in life that will never leave us with lasting peace and contentment?

My life currently cannot be more tightly coupled with emotional issues. It almost saddens me that my life revolves around people dear to me. In many ways I'm crippled without them, and I don't know how to objectively detach from so much emotional bonding, that is clearly causing me so much pain. And I can't help but wonder what my purpose and real duty in life is. To whom is my duty bound to? To my parents as my culture/religion states, or myself alone like the ascetics practice? Should I stop perceiving situations as problems by detaching myself from these claws of emotions regardless of whom it hurts, to attain that blissful inner peace? Won't that be counted as bad Karma, and running away from my "duties"? Is my duty to wander and search for truth/inner peace, being born as a creature with six senses? Or is it just beyond my level of consciousness to even try and explore such dimensions of life, and should I just accept my current "human" state slurred with emotions and ignorance? Are ascetics and saints an evolved state of human beings, with their intelligence and mental faculties far exceeding ours, making them sensitive to perceive and understand those concepts that we can't? Will we eventually evolve to their state? Is this kind of evolution the meaning behind countless rebirths till we eventually understand the meaning of life and attain enlightenment/true wisdom?

This is by far my most skeptical phase in life. I've started to believe that we do live in an illusive world of Maya. Illusion on our freewill, our "intelligence", our purpose and calling in life. My friend once observed a tank of fish and commented, "I feel sorry for them. They swim here and then there, eat food and again swim here and there. They seem to have no purpose... ". In reality we all have such similar short-term goals, that make us wander here and there. We are all trying to believe we have a final purpose in life by solving problems and building a community, and creating more problems for ourselves; in the grand design, we all seem like those fish swimming here and there with no ultimate purpose.

The Generous ATM

John received quite a pleasant surprise at the ATM last evening. He had punched in $100 to be withdrawn and instead saw stacks of notes pouring out of the ATM. Aghast he collected all the notes and counted them to a staggering $10,000! He peered at the receipt from the ATM and the receipt mentioned an innocent $100 off his account. With the notes stacked neatly, he looked around and saw nobody in the vicinity. He put the notes in his bag and walked away trying to think coherently on what he needed to do. He put the money at home and waited for a few weeks, expecting the bank to call him and get back the money. Weeks flew and John was still buried in doubt as to what he should do with the money. Part of him wanted to go to the bank and tell them of the mistake... but then would it be so wrong if he used it on himself? After all he didn't steal the money, he didn't rob the back... it was given to him! And such a small amount was a drop in the ocean for the bank, but for him it meant a decent home, a decent car, probably a good vacation...things he truly deserved in life and lady luck was kind enough to offer them at last. He thus continued his rationalization... (Source: The Pig that wants to be Eaten, Julian Baggini)


This just seems like an open-shut case! Little kids in kindergarten would tell us what the moral of this story ought to be... honesty. Yet, it is somehow not surprising that many a times we don't adhere so strongly to honesty or morality and we tend to rationalize our qualms with reasons justifying our needs. What if John had received $150 instead of $10,000? That doesn't sound so big a crime... it's probably a hassle to spend $20 to get to the bank to handover the extra $50; $50 is merely one week's worth of grocery, can't the bank afford so much?! Even $10,000 would just be a small trickle in the ocean for the bank (not in today's economy though...). So can we draw a line on the intensity of the crime/greed/dishonesty?


What if John had an ailing parent at the hospital (the classic morality check the hero goes through in cinemas), and he didn't have enough money to save them? What if John himself needed the money for curing some ailment of his? What if he needed the money for dire needs - paying the rent, buying groceries for him and his children? Bring to mind Will Smith, from The Pursuit of Happiness.... having spent a night at a public restroom with his son, wouldn't you beg him to just take the money if he found such an ATM? So can the needs justify the action?


What would I do? If I were in dire need of money, I'm sure to be caught in a dilemma - my survival weighed against plain morality/honesty. But if I rationalized to keep the money, however much it justifies the need, it is a theft nonetheless. Honesty is perhaps the most difficult tenets of morality. Our bias to self-interest plays in heavily in the context of honest/moral decisions and it's a constant struggle to figure out how to do the right thing while still being in the survival race of the fittest, in this large hostile world.

Colorful Senses

Mary is a scientist who has specialized in Vision and Colors. She knows everything there is to know about colors and vision; how we see objects, how light gets reflected, what neurons in the brain decipher the perceptual signals, what are colors, their wavelengths, their nature, their combination, etc. Anything you need to know on colors and vision, Mary has the answers. Yet, Mary herself is an achromat - she has no color vision. She views the world in just two colors; black and white. The cones in her eyes are not defective themselves; the part of her brain responsible for processing the color signals are defective. Of course, with advances in neuroscience and surgery, this can be fixed. Mary is all set for her surgery, curious to know how the world would look, bathed in all the colors she has meticulously studied. Hmmm... why would a scientist who has expansive knowledge of all colors, wonder how the colors would look like to her? Seems like despite knowing everything there is to know about colors, she still doesn't know quite a few aspects about these colors... (Source: "What Mary didn't know", by Frank Jackson)

This is quite a classic hypothetical scenario used by dualists (those who believe in two entities- mind and body, interacting with each other) to spark a debate with the physicalists (those who believe in only the existence of a body and try to explain/reduce mental states through physical states). I am a dualist (else I wouldn't be using the word Mind all over my blog;)). I do believe in an entity that is separate from a physical body, and assert that not all mental states can be reduced to physical states. Therefore I'm sure to bring in my biases as I put forth my views, but argue with me to help me question my biases :)


It's one thing to know about the physical attributes of perceptual stimuli but it's another aspect to feel them for yourself. Mary might know everything about the color green, yet when she sees a palette of colors, she needs her sensory stimuli to know which color is green. Beyond the work of her sensory stimuli (which is reducible to physical states), is a mental state - a feeling that is associated with the color green. This feeling is impossible to be measured and is highly subjective. This subjective qualitative experience of perceptual stimuli is called qualia.


A related aspect is the inverted spectrum problem. My visual experience of looking at green, might be your visual experience of looking at the color red. This can extend to many other experiences. Pain, happiness, taste, smell etc. I can read everything about a vegetable I have never tasted - I might have heard that it tastes sweet, crumbly and hard to chew... yet I wouldn't know the exact taste of the vegetable, and neither would I know what sweet and crumbly are, unless I've experienced them. I can ask millions to gather more adjectives, yet the essence of the taste cannot be verbalized, neither can it be expressed in physical terms. It is a combination of sensory experiences, that are quite subjective. With advances in Neuroscience, one can probably understand the neurons that fire when people eat an apple and can compare that against thousands of samples to statistically prove similarities in patterns. Yet, there is noway for us to prove that the quality of feelings associated with the neurons are the same.


Consider another example - we measure the activity of neurons when a standard bob pin is poked (using a uniform pressure) into 100 individual's arms (let's make this experiment clean by considering a homogeneous sample of same age, same, gender, same weight). The pain measured via the neurons being stimulated might look similar, yet if we are to ask the participants' rating of their pain, it is going to be highly subjective! There is no way to verify person X's feeling of the pain, with person Y's feeling of the pain! Don't they say it's all in the mind?! There are some brave souls out there going through surgery without anesthesia (in the name of hypnosis, but that is a tangential topic).


There is active research on transferring tactile sensations from expert to novice through haptic devices that try to replicate and simulate force-feedback sensations as experienced by the experts. Yet only a diluted extent of parameters are feasible to be measured (and precision is another issue). But let me not get too emphatic. With progress in neuroscience and haptics , maybe qualia can one day be expressed in physical terms. But the impossibility of verifying qualia against different people (unless we transpose from one body to another), still leaves the stone unturned.

An Incomplete Wish

Oh girl, a fairy tale was all that you wanted.

Trapped in a tower,

A possessive sorceress in power,

Vicious dragons all over,

Flaming ivies sending knights to cower

A fairy tale was all that you wanted.

Aye you wretched soul, how long does this battle wage?

As the sorceress fuels with unabated rage,

How large was an error in your gauge?

Many more eons await you in her cage,

Pucker up, this tale will run many a page,

After all, a fairy tale was all that you wanted.

Oh you girl shuddering beneath your window

Look down to see your knights defeated in woe

Brave they are, to face the dragon's fiery blow,

Alas, your tears are wasted on their fatal blow,

The agony of your pain doesn't vanish their vow,

But then, a fairy tale was all that you wanted.

Girl, don't you romanticize the action?

Isn't the drama to your satisfaction?

What are those angry sparks I see of friction?

Is that you breaking your shackles to end your predilection?

Pray, where will you land spurring the sorceress's affliction?

After all, a fairy tale was all that you wanted!

Bound you are to an eternal curse,

A curse that befalls no matter what your ruse,

Flee from your shackles, but the curse shall abuse,

Yet another runway of thorns, fear not the bruise,

Alas, trapped you are in a fairy tale you wished,

You foolish girl, you forgot to wish it to end.

Picasso on the Beach

As Roy looked down from the cliffs, he saw a man drawing on the sands of the beach. He peered closely to take a look at the image and his heart jumped a beat as he viewed the emerging drawing that showed multiples angles of an extraordinary face. It seemed like a Picasso! He lifted the binoculars to his eyes and he was dazed as if he was in a dream, for the man drawing on the beach was Picasso himself! He was painfully aware that the high tides of the beach would soon erase an original Picasso and his thoughts were racing to find some means to preserve the work of art. Well, he couldn't try to hold back the sea, nor could he try to save all the sand holding the drawing. He could perhaps run home and fetch a camera to record the picture, which would anyway just be a record copy and not the original. But if he did try to run home, he would never make it in time to save the work from the waves. Perhaps the only thing he could do was to enjoy the experience of the work of a magnificent piece of art from the master himself. Yet, Roy had mixed feelings and didn't know whether to smile or cry (Source: "In a Season of Calm Weather" by Ray Bradbury)


It's obvious from the excerpt that this is not exactly a puzzle to be solved; there isn't really a solution to Ray's dilemma. I guess the essence of this hypothetical scenario is to reflect on our views on art, the immortality we tend to associate to visual arts, and probably how the spirit and essence of participating/experiencing art is often overridden by the materialistic significance attached to the physical form of art.


Is it trivial of us humans to try and preserve Art? If Michelangelo's, Picasso's, Monet's works were not preserved, wouldn't our generation be deprived of reveling in their splendor? If Beethoven's, Mozart's and Bach's musical notes were never recorded, I would acknowledge that it is indeed a loss. But at some level, is the real spirit of the original piece lost when there are reproductions of these master pieces? There can be millions of color prints of Monet's paintings, but none of those come close to the actual piece, or is it really so? Is our intent behind preserving master pieces a vain attempt to immortalize the artist and the work, in a denial to acknowledge our own mortality, and the inevitable mortality of the physical form of art?


I've always seen the preservation/restoration of Art as one way of passing on a rich heritage and culture to the future generations. Art evokes sensory and spiritual pleasures and it seems quite reasonable for us to want to cherish the sensory treats and expose the next generation to those. So in that regard, was it a tragedy that Ray could not find a way to preserve the Picasso on the beach? It is indeed a loss for millions of art enthusiasts and future generations, but what Ray experienced is priceless in comparison to the loss. Ray not only got to view a masterpiece, he was also privileged to experience it's creation. The Native Americans believe that a part of our soul and spirit fuses into our creations. In that sense, Ray participated in the creation of the art work, thereby experiencing a level of spiritual and visual treat incomparable to just viewing the physical proof of the work.


I've always craved to see an artist at work; observing a painter from their very first stroke, a composer humming the very first set of notes to weave together a musical piece, even a cook starting from the very first ingredient... experiencing creativity is something subliminally beautiful and awe inspiring....at least to me. Another aspect which is special about visual arts is our perception that the significance of their portrayal is immortalized, coagulated in time. Is it an attempt to not acknowledge our mortality? Well, I feel it is our acknowledgment of mortality that creates a sense of awe on the art piece that was not only present before our lives, but will probably be so, even after the end of our lives.


The following beautiful lines from John Keats' immortal poem, Ode on the Grecian Urn is what comes to mind.
".....

Fair youth, beneath the trees, thou canst not leave

Thy song, nor ever can those trees be bare;

Bold Lover, never, never canst thou kiss,

Though winning near the goal—yet, do not grieve;

She cannot fade, though thou hast not thy bliss,

For ever wilt thou love, and she be fair! O Attic shape! fair attitude! with brede Of marble men and maidens overwrought, With forest branches and the trodden weed; Thou, silent form! dost tease us out of thought As doth eternity: Cold Pastoral! When old age shall this generation waste, Thou shalt remain, in midst of other woe Than ours, a friend to man, to whom thou say'st, 'Beauty is truth, truth beauty,—that is all Ye know on earth, and all ye need to know.' "

Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind

Someone once said, Happiness is nothing but bad memory. There have been popular movies, notable one being the Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind, in which Jim Carrey tries to go through a surgery/procedure that attempts to pick out all his memories with his ex-girlfriend and remove them from his brain/mind to relieve him of the pain of separation. This was viewed as a weird science fiction not many years back, and now scientists seem to be on a path to do just that (although they are miles away from doing it)
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/7892272.stm


If you read the article, there are obvious ethical concerns raised by other scientists. Are we compromising on our identities by losing our memories? How much impact will it have on what we've learnt through experiences? Is it worth all of that than to relive a trauma till time eventually wanes the memory down?


On one hand, I would be tempted to attempt this procedure if I get to a stage in my life where my past and memories haunt me beyond my capacity to live normally. But does it boil down to escapism and running away from reality... almost like being on drugs? But yet, some of the benefits would be overwhelmingly helpful to some people and humanity in general.


The cases that pop into my head are those of the lives of terrorists and mentally disturbed people around. There are tonnes around. These days I'm beginning to lose hope on psychotherapy, but if there were some way to make such troubled people forget their disturbing pasts which is causing them to develop into the personalities they currently are, isn't that miraculously wonderful? Wouldn't it be like a magical wand acting on all our heads? As I write that sentence, it spells out the incredible danger such a procedure can have... talk about controlling the universe and ruling it, if all you had to do was make people unlearn everything and convince them that you are God! I'm getting carried away... But would you consider taking such a procedure at some hypothetical instance of your life? Would you advocate and encourage more of this research?

A Pat on the Back

It's interesting how we humans cannot isolate our emotions and need for social interactions, however restrained an environment gets and find ways to break down barriers :). Many believe that blogs were originally started as a medium to exchange thoughts, ideas and focus on neural communications. But as we meet new people virtually, it's quite hard to restrict interactions to be solely through the abstract space of ideas and thoughts; every new person is a potential budding friend and there is an ever so slight curiosity and temptation to know more about the person behind the gray brain, to put a face and personality to the blogger, and to find ways of expressing emotions through virtual ways. There are tags/memes that are entertaining, a little introspective and above all a conduit to know more about the person/blogger, and there are virtual symbols of appreciation to substitute the inadequacy of meeting/talking and other direct forms of expression. An anthropologist could learn so much more about human interactions and ways of communication in virtual environments! :)

I got a pleasant surprise from Oorja this week. She is very generous and kind to have lauded my blog with so many virtual awards. Thank you very much :). A short while ago my blog was dusty and rusty, so it's nice to be pepped, although I know I don't deserve all of them :). I have been ignorant of many novel concepts circling within the blogging community; I've come to know about tagging and awarding this month, and hopefully will learn more soon.

Thanks again Oorja, it is nice to have come across you and your blog and to share insightful views with you! There are more blogs/bloggers that regale me and I'm glad to have come to know them. To carry forward the spirit of expressing appreciation, as a symbol of my appreciation and adoration towards their posts/thoughts, these award-symbolisms are passed onto these three lovely ladies:

SUMI - Truly inspiring and multifaceted; art, music, philosophy, science and so much more. A treat to both my left and right brain :)

Second Sight - Adore your unique, insightful and poetic style of writing. I fortunately have more chances of "real" interaction with you :)

Perception - You have the gift of looking at every simple aspect of our so called mundane life through colored glasses! Your posts are so refreshing since they capture all the simple pleasures of life :)

I'm getting to know of new interesting blogs, so my list will sure keep building over time :)

The Ship Theseus

Ray North was an International Master Criminal who had the reputation of getting his job done. His latest client had ordered him to steal the famous ship Theseus, from which the British Newspaper magnate Lucas Grub had thrown himself into the arms of death and had been the scene of murder of a famous LA rapper. Above all it had historical significances associated with it that made it worth millions of dollars. But Ray was now dubiously standing at the dock where the ship had just been repaired, confronted by a dilemma he didn't know how to resolve. There were two seemingly identical ships standing in front of him. He held the security man at gunpoint and bellowed, "If you want to live, better tell me which one of these is the real Theseus!"


The man nervously swallowed and said, "That depends... when we started to repair the original ship we realized we had to change a lot of its parts. So we replaced virtually most of the old parts of the ship with new ones. But instead of discarding the old parts, the boys thought it would be a nice idea to use all the old parts and create another version of Theseus. So on the left, stands the Theseus repaired and on the right, the Theseus restored from the old parts. "


"So which one is the original Theseus", exclaimed Ray. The guard screamed for his life as he said, "I've told you all that I know! Spare me!!"... Ray was indeed caught in a conundrum. Which ship is the real Theseus? (Source: Leviathon by Thomas Hobbes (1651))


The timing of this paradox fits well with my laptop crisis. As an aside, I replaced the LCD screen with a used one, as this seemed the most efficient, cost-effective fix. Mr. Thinkpad seems well recovered and looks happy. But is he the same Mr. Thinkpad, or is he a different one? Here is the crux of my reasoning - if I anthropomorphized my laptop, then replacing the LCD screen is probably equated to an eye-transplant, or corneal replacement. If a person went through such a surgery (or for that matter even a heart transplant) is he any different from who he was? No.... for his consciousness never ceased to exist and according to me, that is what defines who he truly is. It therefore follows that my laptop is the same one, since I equate it to a human form. But if I didn't equate my laptop so (for it's tricky to define the "consciousness"/identity of my laptop), and viewed it as a combination of physical objects that define it, then replacement of a part of it, breaks down the definition of it's earlier form. Hence my laptop is not entirely the same one. This paradox is along the same lines of the one discussed in the post, "Beam me up". SUMI added a good point about adding dimensions to the person/object in terms of their existence as defined by them, and a third person along the time axis.


So it all boils down to our perceptions and definitions of what constitutes a system or a person, to the point where their uniqueness/identity is not compromised. Aristotle describes a system in terms of four causes - the formal cause, the the material cause, the final cause and the efficeint cause. The formal cause is the formal design of the system (the unique engineering design of the ship, or the laptop), the material cause is the set of all materials/matter that comprise it (the planks, boards, iron, steel, screen, etc), the final cause is the purpose or functionality of the system (to transport people, run software etc), and the efficient cause that signifies who and how the system is made (the workers, the methodology, the tools etc). Now we know for sure that the material cause does change over time, and probably so does the efficient cause. But the formal and final causes remain the same. Does this mean the old ship is the true Theseus? Well, the other ship built out of the old parts does seem to satisfy the formal and the final causes as well....


We don't have precise information as to how much of the ship was replaced and what constitutes as the heart/soul of the ship. Hence being a physical entity, I would define the system as the set of all the material and formal causes. Although the formal cause remains the same, the materials that define the ship's heritage and history are patched in different places. Thus, the real Theseus no longer exists. Both the ships are "new" creations, which hold parts of the material from the original (sort of like children holding some genes from the parent). The guys need to pick the ship that has the most material symbolizing the old ship. And that's tricky too... for I don't know if the mere quantity of materials would matter as much as the weights attached to them.


But if I anthropomorphized the ship, then I can perceive different parts of the ship as metaphors to the human body/brain and claim that the skeleton of the original ship that continued through the time dimension, is the original Theseus (since there was continuity of existence), although the materials/organs it comprises of are different. And that's what we do with cars, laptops and other machines and gadgets around us. But it's an obvious fallacy :). Humans can be associated with an identity due to their conscious state and existence, what sort of identities do physical entities have?

I Don't Want to Say Goodbye

Our relationship is something really special. Three and a half years is by no means a trivial length of time. And to think everything might spiral down soon, pains me deep. But you're slipping away from me.... you seem to have no other choice. But I want to try harder, try to salvage this precious bond between us as long as I can. I hope against hope that you don't leave me...forever.


I dread the day when I'd walk towards you in the morning and lovingly try to wake you up and you'd refuse to come aglow with your usual cheerful self. What will I do without you? How will I carry on after such a loss? Who will be with me through every phase of my day, helping me learn, helping me work, helping me smile? I've confided to you things no one in the world knows. You've been a part of almost every travel, every little journey. Never have you once complained or made a fuss... you were with me all those days when the rain lashed, the wind howled as the snow crumpled, and the sun angrily shone; holding my shoulders affectionately, never complaining that the umbrella didn't cover you enough...will I ever find such a companion? Without you who would have regaled me endlessly, and patiently listened to every word I had to share when I had noone around me those dreadful weekends? Now you claim our relationship is too old to last any longer.


I try to prepare myself, but it's too hard. You cannot be replaced... no part of you can be replaced. You are priceless. You know I will go to any lengths to nurse you back. As I cradle you everyday trying to ease your pain, I mutter silent prayers refuting the thought that you maybe at your deathbed. Everyone around me says so.... they say your time has come and I should be brave. Some advise that I need to move on and find.... your replacement. Ah, how those words wrench my heart. How can I think of looking at someone new?! Your dark and handsome face, the heat of your body, your sturdy yet delicate features, your silly little whines, the way you chatter and giggle as I touch you.... oh will my fingers ever feel the same warmth and comfort as caressing your features? So many memories... words cannot describe all the moments we've shared. You know it will never be the same.


They say you need a surgery, an expensive one at that... but they say you may never make it for it's far too much of an organ replacement. I'm torn...do I risk seeing you being torn apart, only to realize you may never see me again with that familiar glint? Or do I save you the surgery and try to nurse you tender as long as you care to stay with me? But then you can't come out with me everyday my dearest... you need to rest and sleep. Our conversations and interactions will dwindle, but you will still be with me. But I may have to move on... find another companion. Oh what terrible crossroads has fate set me on, my darling Thinkpad!
**********************


My thinkpad's monitor is dying :(... It just gets dimmer and dimmer and I fiddle around with the standby button and with some magical combination it springs to life. The backlight and inverter seem to be the culprit but IBM doesn't sell those parts :(... A monitor replacement of $500 is recommended, although the chances of it being set right doesn't seem all that high. Some say this is a phase because of the terrible winter temperature messing with some internal springs causing loose connection (This is my first time within US that I have the privilege to stay in such a frigid place). Maybe its time for a new laptop...any other ideas to salvage my laptop? Help :(

The Veil of Ignorance

Imagine 20 civilians being selected to go and live on Mars. There would be a number of goods on the planet, including accommodation, food, drink and luxury items. The people who were selected to live on Mars had to decide how the goods should be distributed amongst them. All of these people knew they were going to be living on Mars for an extended period of time and they had to do tasks that were part of the Mars colony (which is one of the main reasons for them being sent there). However none of these people knew what sort of tasks awaited them in Mars, and if they were equipped for them. All the work could be manual, or none of them. So the first suggestion was to equally divide the goods amongst everyone on the colony: from each according to their abilities to each according to their means. However there was an objection - what if there were some who neglected their work, failed at their work, or worse, refused to do their share? Wouldn't it be unfair to give them a share of the goods they didn't deserve? Isn't incentive a good way to make people contribute? As much sense as the objection made, it lead to more problems on resolving what fairness really meant. Is fairness different from giving everyone the same share? (Source: A Theory of Justice, by John Rawls)


This is quite a popular piece. I remember having read this is in one of my Ethics books in the context of Rawl's popular Social Contract Theory, but I don't remember if I ever had a discussion.


The Social Contract Theory emphasizes the need for a social contract amongst people coexisting within a country/colony/community, to ensure liberty and equality for all. In simpler terms, the contract is a set of duties and responsibilities that people need to abide by, and this brings forth the basic principle that freedom and responsibility go hand in hand. It also emphasizes reciprocity of 'good' deeds. The people being sent to Mars are in the process of figuring out their Social Contract, or so it seems to me. But here is their core problem - all of them are shrouded in a metaphorical veil of ignorance since none of them have any clue of how their talents and abilities will benefit them in Mars. For all they know, a person who is a scholar on Earth maybe reduced to a nobody on Mars, and a bus driver on Earth maybe the most sought after person on Mars, based on the needs and work conditions. With such bleak understanding of life on another planet it now is a challenge to come up with a Social Contract.


Rawl's philosophy is that, given such a situation, people's general tendency is to be cautious from the danger of ending up in the lower rungs of the new society. Hence everyone would try to come up with a contract that ensures maximum/equal benefit to the least advantaged (the maximin rule). This, in his view is a good experiment for determining democracy - the liberal form of democracy. Is this form of equality really fair? Or are there prejudices despite the veil of ignorance which get carried onto framing the new Social Contract?


I've been putting off writing about this for a while now, for all I know about political "science" are the meaning behind capitalism, socialism, communism, democracy, dictatorship, monarchy and anarchy... enough to have some opinions, but probably not deep and robust enough. I'm not a person who follows enough of the political arena or analyzes history to have opinions on what works when, how and what fails, when and how. Therefore, with this limited extent of knowledge I try to analyze this chapter.


In my view (political definitions apart), I think it is impossible to guarantee equality to all... it is inherently impossible with the way the world is structured. I say this by popping onto a higher level, if we are to assume ourselves to be ruled by God/Nature. Call it Karma, or any other term, I believe one is entitled to what he deserves through his actions/deeds, and not every person can receive the same form of equality. Not all of us can be rich, none of our lives can be "equal" in the truest sense. None of the guys who will land in Mars have the same type of "equal" opportunities awaiting, and therein equality starts to crack even before there can be a contract.


So, would being behind the veil of ignorance help in shaping better social contracts that at least mitigates the state of the lower rungs? Yes, it appears so. Isn't our existence the survival of the fittest? Why bother rescuing those who can't survive on their own, by compromising on what the winners truly deserve? Well, I think this question borders on the principles of Capitalism versus Communism... or probably Socialism to some extent.


My view is that each person should have all the basic rights and basic amenities available. But then, how much of the share he is entitled to is dependent on how much he contributes to society/community, for rights and duties do go hand in hand. Every person will/and should have some way to contribute to the community. If one cannot contribute due to severe disabilities then is he doomed? No that is unfair. So should he get the same share as a person who works and toils everyday. No that's not fair either. He should still be entitled to basic amenities (out of dignity and empathy to his life), but the person who works will be entitled to more than just the basic. Now what exactly is the definition of "basic"? What if there aren't enough resources to help the disabled? Should the rest pool in and compromise on their rewards to be shared with the rest? Is that the true meaning behind the maximin rule? Maybe.


It takes a humanitarian turn. So yes, being behind the veil does give us a sense of uncertainty, of the need to save ourselves if we become helpless, and that attempts to tug at our humanitarian conscience, which is necessary to be in place while framing Social Contracts.


Those with more political insight, I would love to hear your views! :)