Off late I am becoming more of a tragic king - if I could be called that and abhor all the hedonistic, selfish and uncaring nature of the world society. I look helter - skelter for a dim ray of hope in this abysmal darkness for deliverance.
I believe that people are in general wanting to get delivered. They look for heroes and true once are hard to come. The most talked about heroes are the generally the cricket players, football forwards or celebrities. Not disparaging their achievements, getting their due after much of hard work and learning to thrive in this putrid corrupt society, we need real heroes!! What is disheartening is the absence of heroes in politics. People with power to do good for society, people who channel the crores of crores of rupees of the income of hardworking people for effective society building, people who raise hope of the masses and people who lead the aspiration of a nation. By leading people today has been amusingly seen as politicians leading a group of ruffians to go about pillaging well-to-do shops or burning down buses for a cause which most generally trifle things like "how can he say like that ?" Where do I go from here if all these politicians bring grave discredit to democracy? Corruption, vile and racist tactics seem to be the order of the day and my heart struggles for deliverance.
The second most likely place where one can look for heroes is in religion. Quoting Karl Marx in German - "De Religion ... ist das opium des volkes" meaning Religion is the opium of the masses. It is one of the most quoted lines and essentially summarizes the higher ideals religion stands for. Reiterating Marx's words - Religion is the heart for the heartless world, a soul for the soulless creature and the sigh of the oppressed. How far have we got with regards to what it was meant for? Religion today is a plea for fundamentalism and an harbinger for bigotry. Wars, proxy wars have been fought in the name of the religion. The middle east is in crisis. Religion dictates the clothing of a tennis star. Religion attributes the nature of people and some of the least important ideals it stands for (Those meat eaters!! ). Religion has become a code of conduct - with emphasis on the most insignificant or rather the most misinterpreted doctrines of the holy text. People forget about the need for doing good to others as an ideal but rather fancy trying to depict what harsh treatments one should get in hell. The ever acting god has been translated into a mute spectator, watching events of how his work and his world is being washed away with avarice. The higher ideals of religion is not what you practice in church or the recital in the mosque five times a day or the act of getting free delicious food at the temples. Religion is the way of life and is like a good clothing to the unclothed. It is the values you stand for, something that gives you meaning to your existence. It is the deliverer of the oppressed from the corrupt. But here I am being hypo critic. Now who determines who is corrupt and who is oppressed. Now if the whole world is nuances of grey then who is white and who is dark. Religion being racist as it is today, only denigrates the blood of the youth. Holi and Ganesh chaturthi, the holy festivals of the Hindus are today mob procession and is seen as oppurtunities for the lascivious uncontrollled youth to perform their gleeful degrading acts. The search for happiness in corporeal pleasure seems to be finding its say in religion too. How debasing could it be to the religious founders!! I would like to rephrase Marx's statement with a my tinge of lamentation - Religion is the dirty stimulant of the masses.
Where else do I look for heroes? Education and scientific achievers of our times who stand for pursuers of truth? This field for all the objectivity it stands for is not true. Misunderstanding over contribution levels, pathetic nature of "spamming research journals" with substandard research, fudging results for a name in the paper all seem to be such dastard and deplorable acts. Is this where I can look for heroes?
Desultorily hopping from field to field, profession to profession, I only see heaps of filth degraded further by human selfishness. Where are we wrong? To answer this question it would be better if I ask are we like this? A prolific writer and ecologist - Prof Richard Dawkins in his controversial book "The selfish gene" seems to have ringed a few bells in my ears. Is all nature governed by selfish principles? Group theorist proclaim that even altruistic nature displayed is only to satisfy individual selfish needs. Choosing your partner, marriage and even powerful thoughts of love is only a fake desire to attain your unconscious resolve to spread your gene and make sure it is eternal. Bah !!
I wonder whether this kind of theory would explain why we are degrading to a point of no return. Weren't people who thought up the higher ideals and preached of truth and non - violence made up of the same selfish gene? We are knowingly or unknowingly seem to be obeying a law of nature.
I think society is made up of homes and home is where one must build the nature. All of the world is in good, healthy homes and all of the homes is in a good, healthy world. I fervently hope that the inchoate years of a child is moulded into the great man he is to be become, simply great for he stood by high ideals. An ideal and a cause greater than his century of existence. The existence to survive. He must stand for a true cause where the benefit for him comes through the benefit of humanity. There i hope is where true heroes can arise!!
Self is just a created image always trying to blend into the world image. Quoting Mahatma Gandhi whose teachings and ideals stand for all times like the mountains and the seas (well geologically they did not :)) - "If in doubt and your self encompasses you, remember the face of the poorest and the weakest man you have seen and ask yourself if the step you are going to take is going to improve him, then all doubt ceases ". It is here and then that one becomes a personified clarity of thought.
Saturday, September 29, 2007
Saturday, December 23, 2006
Meditation and the time wrap
Well meditation is a terminology that has baffled philosophers, scientists and the common man for ages. It is a term which in the hindu mythology takes you out to a transcendental experience where the common soul becomes one with the infinite soul. Sometimes when I ponder what this could be, I am stumped with lack of data about what this feeling is. Sages say that you are a mute spectator to events happening to your body. With such a comment I am compelled to address it with science or rather metaphysics to try address this position with the little knowledge that I possess in the field.
Time is an event, or is it a scale where the clock tells what point you are measuring. Or are we in a stationary world with time moving or time stationary with events happening. The same apple kept on the table is not the same yesterday and today, though the spatial location may be unchanged. The theory of relativity, which I donot understand talks of the fourth dimension of reality namely time.
Time is an event, or is it a scale where the clock tells what point you are measuring. Or are we in a stationary world with time moving or time stationary with events happening. The same apple kept on the table is not the same yesterday and today, though the spatial location may be unchanged. The theory of relativity, which I donot understand talks of the fourth dimension of reality namely time.
Tuesday, December 19, 2006
Utopia
Well the word Utopia has raked pholosophers, socialists, communalists and has been the aspirations of the common man from time the man has supposedly become civilized. There is an cruel irony behind this concept. A civilized man wanting a more civilized society! Questions of these kind take up to the top notches of discussions of evolution, where the survival of the gene is of paramount importance and this renders the path to societal development. Every thinker has had his idea of utopia and I propound one.
The idea comes from the multitude of events I have witnessed in my times, global wars fought over piece of land, wars on the name of religion, racism and many others deplorable activities that man inflicts on man. The Utopian land is not a remote island but I am briefing you about how my concept could nullify all these problems that the world currently faces. I talk of a unified world. A world with common currency, common government and more importantly without any boundaries. A man can migrate from one place to another without any prohibitions on his movement. The resources of the entire world belong to each and everyone of humanity.
Just take the example of two bloody terriost wars being waged now. The solution to the India - Pakisthan conflict over Kashmir would be solved if there is no India or Pakisthan, or rather it is one country. Then what would one fight for? Similarly If Israel, Palestine and Arab countries were one nation, then where is there a question of one holy land. It belongs to all the worshippers.
There is always a society, following socialist darwinism. A concept wherein there is a difference in allocation of resources to the people, the rich get richer and the poor gets poorer. The concept of rich and poor is something that cannot be so easily be done in democracy where people have a right to action and representation. This should not be done with. It would just lead to decadence of humanity as a whole. A communist idea could lead to losing of words in the english dictionary like hard work, dedication, ambition and other beautiful terminologies that depict the ascent of man. Without a difference in wealth and resource allocation there would be no dynamism in society, it would come to a disturbing halt.
I had rallied for a long time about the need for money. I was thinking that no money in this world would be ideal. For example, a farmer would just farm his land and sell his crops. If he wants fertilizers, he would go to the fertilizer shop and procure one without any monetary transaction. The fertilizer shop owner would just have to go to the farmer if he wants food and this web of events without any monetary activities would go on. But there seems to be a problem. There could be a dearth of quality and improvement of the products. People will stop being hard working and innovative, in other words there would be a decay of society. So money is of paramount importance in running the civilization and can not be done away with in my Utopia.
The law and government should be ideal in defining a Utopia.
The idea comes from the multitude of events I have witnessed in my times, global wars fought over piece of land, wars on the name of religion, racism and many others deplorable activities that man inflicts on man. The Utopian land is not a remote island but I am briefing you about how my concept could nullify all these problems that the world currently faces. I talk of a unified world. A world with common currency, common government and more importantly without any boundaries. A man can migrate from one place to another without any prohibitions on his movement. The resources of the entire world belong to each and everyone of humanity.
Just take the example of two bloody terriost wars being waged now. The solution to the India - Pakisthan conflict over Kashmir would be solved if there is no India or Pakisthan, or rather it is one country. Then what would one fight for? Similarly If Israel, Palestine and Arab countries were one nation, then where is there a question of one holy land. It belongs to all the worshippers.
There is always a society, following socialist darwinism. A concept wherein there is a difference in allocation of resources to the people, the rich get richer and the poor gets poorer. The concept of rich and poor is something that cannot be so easily be done in democracy where people have a right to action and representation. This should not be done with. It would just lead to decadence of humanity as a whole. A communist idea could lead to losing of words in the english dictionary like hard work, dedication, ambition and other beautiful terminologies that depict the ascent of man. Without a difference in wealth and resource allocation there would be no dynamism in society, it would come to a disturbing halt.
I had rallied for a long time about the need for money. I was thinking that no money in this world would be ideal. For example, a farmer would just farm his land and sell his crops. If he wants fertilizers, he would go to the fertilizer shop and procure one without any monetary transaction. The fertilizer shop owner would just have to go to the farmer if he wants food and this web of events without any monetary activities would go on. But there seems to be a problem. There could be a dearth of quality and improvement of the products. People will stop being hard working and innovative, in other words there would be a decay of society. So money is of paramount importance in running the civilization and can not be done away with in my Utopia.
The law and government should be ideal in defining a Utopia.
Monday, November 20, 2006
The little man
The word man seems to echo an all powerful being in this modern age. An age that defines the beauty of man, an age that defines the character of man, an age that illustrates the thinking and intelligence of man, an age that answers to the domination of man. Mankind is a defining turn in the history of the earth, and each of the 6 billion of us have played a role shaping it.
Or so we say!!
This time and cosmos is such a gigantic concept that a man in his lifetime would fail to perceive and understand. Just thinking that Himalayas grow at the rate of 1 inch a year should talk about how long it would have been as the earth geology started being formed. Each one of us lives a few 10s of years and nearly 3 generations are made in a century. We ought to be talking of 100s of such centuries for us to understand the real beauty and vastness of this universe.
It has been repeatedly pointed out that man is just a chance accident in evolution, and yet here we are trumpeting that we are the creatures specially designed by god to take care of other beings. Where did we get all this false pretext about our greatness?
The dinosaurs dominated the world for nearly 2 million years, and this "intelligent" man hardly started to live a civilized life for a few thousands of years. There has been and will be so much diversity of life that homosapiens is just one of the billions of its grandeur. Man is not the fastest being, nor is he the most strongest and neither the most flexible and agile. The only amazing advantage he has over all the creatures that have walked this earth is his thinking. We talk of these gifts as talents, something godsend, but think again..ponder over the other facets of gift given to the other being. Striking a gazelle by the tiger seems to be evolutionary advantage that the tiger has in slowly crawling and knowing the exact time to attack his prey. Yet we talk of our purpose, our rights, freedoms as if these were things we invented. These are all a different form by which nature offers us to survive. It is all another way man is being made to survive, this nothing much to pat ones back for.
The cosmos through's out an entirely small picture of man. We talk of light years as if it were a few minutes walk to the grocery shore, but imagine its vastness. The stars we see today, at this current point of time is never there, maybe eaten by a black hole or undergone a supernova explosion. We can hardly see whats at the end of a street, when people are talking of many universes. I heard that the scientists of the apollo when they wanted to take the picture of the entire solar system, found that earth was one small blue dot smaller than the pixel of the monitor.
And admists this vastness of space and time, you and me go on carrying our worldly affairs, and talk of greatness!!
Or so we say!!
This time and cosmos is such a gigantic concept that a man in his lifetime would fail to perceive and understand. Just thinking that Himalayas grow at the rate of 1 inch a year should talk about how long it would have been as the earth geology started being formed. Each one of us lives a few 10s of years and nearly 3 generations are made in a century. We ought to be talking of 100s of such centuries for us to understand the real beauty and vastness of this universe.
It has been repeatedly pointed out that man is just a chance accident in evolution, and yet here we are trumpeting that we are the creatures specially designed by god to take care of other beings. Where did we get all this false pretext about our greatness?
The dinosaurs dominated the world for nearly 2 million years, and this "intelligent" man hardly started to live a civilized life for a few thousands of years. There has been and will be so much diversity of life that homosapiens is just one of the billions of its grandeur. Man is not the fastest being, nor is he the most strongest and neither the most flexible and agile. The only amazing advantage he has over all the creatures that have walked this earth is his thinking. We talk of these gifts as talents, something godsend, but think again..ponder over the other facets of gift given to the other being. Striking a gazelle by the tiger seems to be evolutionary advantage that the tiger has in slowly crawling and knowing the exact time to attack his prey. Yet we talk of our purpose, our rights, freedoms as if these were things we invented. These are all a different form by which nature offers us to survive. It is all another way man is being made to survive, this nothing much to pat ones back for.
The cosmos through's out an entirely small picture of man. We talk of light years as if it were a few minutes walk to the grocery shore, but imagine its vastness. The stars we see today, at this current point of time is never there, maybe eaten by a black hole or undergone a supernova explosion. We can hardly see whats at the end of a street, when people are talking of many universes. I heard that the scientists of the apollo when they wanted to take the picture of the entire solar system, found that earth was one small blue dot smaller than the pixel of the monitor.
And admists this vastness of space and time, you and me go on carrying our worldly affairs, and talk of greatness!!
Friday, November 17, 2006
Philosophy and Science
Well I have always wondered, how one could ever think of more than 3 dimensions. It is hard enough to visualize systems in three dimensions, let alone when groups of scientists talk about reality existing in 10 spatial dimension and 1 dimension of time. Well thats the essence of the latest version of the string theory - M theory.
I ponder and ask if this is science, philosophy or fanciful imagination, which man is so good at!! Well it is science, simply because it tries to balance the equations. Some thinkers say that science is more philosophy. Well, I would like to clarify my thoughts on how science and philosophy should and i believe inherently different. Suppose there is an equation y > 10. And some where down the road of measurement one determines y to be 6. So a scientist would quickly jump from where he is pondering and say - lo ! there is an extra variable defining this system . Lets call it 'x'. So x = 10 - y or x = 4. Then he goes on and tries to unearth the qualities of x.
Philosophy does something else. Seeing that there is an x - it starts giving out or tries defining 'x' in a logical or rather imaginative way. It says - 'x' is a map of vector z from the 7th dimension and is the sum of z and its conjugate, without going further to prove them. Well he may be right and the scientist may end up with the same result as the philosopher, but more often than not, these are figments of imagination, which as a philosopher would emphatically quote - " the spirit of truth reins in the heart of all imagination". Well, philosophy is much more deeper and profound subject only lame because it relies on arguments and logic unprovable to many relying on common sense, their sense organs and so on.
But as i venture to unearth how science and philosophy differs, I find subtle indications that all are heading towards the same direction. They both start off as a search for truth, in fact philosophy comes from the greek word - philosophie meaning "Love for Wisdom". It too aims to unravel the mysteries of the universe by asking questions on whether god exists, what is the place of each object in this cosmos, What defines reality and so on. In fact one of the main branches of philosophy is metaphysics - crudely "after physics". Both philosophy and science try to unify this entire cosmos. Science says all physics stop when it will find one energy from which all others are manifested. The science of biology stops when it would discover that very cell from which all life originated. So all also philosophy stops when one discovers the one truth, one god from which all creations are simply different manifestation (well philosophy goes sometimes beyond god and religion, but this is one central topic). Well, if there is so much of similarity where lies the difference or is our perception wrong. Is science a way of philosophy or is philosophy a way of science.
The simpler way out of this mess - philosophy and science has been coexisting from the time of ancient indians and greeks. Let us wait and watch whether both reach the same TRUTH!!
I ponder and ask if this is science, philosophy or fanciful imagination, which man is so good at!! Well it is science, simply because it tries to balance the equations. Some thinkers say that science is more philosophy. Well, I would like to clarify my thoughts on how science and philosophy should and i believe inherently different. Suppose there is an equation y > 10. And some where down the road of measurement one determines y to be 6. So a scientist would quickly jump from where he is pondering and say - lo ! there is an extra variable defining this system . Lets call it 'x'. So x = 10 - y or x = 4. Then he goes on and tries to unearth the qualities of x.
Philosophy does something else. Seeing that there is an x - it starts giving out or tries defining 'x' in a logical or rather imaginative way. It says - 'x' is a map of vector z from the 7th dimension and is the sum of z and its conjugate, without going further to prove them. Well he may be right and the scientist may end up with the same result as the philosopher, but more often than not, these are figments of imagination, which as a philosopher would emphatically quote - " the spirit of truth reins in the heart of all imagination". Well, philosophy is much more deeper and profound subject only lame because it relies on arguments and logic unprovable to many relying on common sense, their sense organs and so on.
But as i venture to unearth how science and philosophy differs, I find subtle indications that all are heading towards the same direction. They both start off as a search for truth, in fact philosophy comes from the greek word - philosophie meaning "Love for Wisdom". It too aims to unravel the mysteries of the universe by asking questions on whether god exists, what is the place of each object in this cosmos, What defines reality and so on. In fact one of the main branches of philosophy is metaphysics - crudely "after physics". Both philosophy and science try to unify this entire cosmos. Science says all physics stop when it will find one energy from which all others are manifested. The science of biology stops when it would discover that very cell from which all life originated. So all also philosophy stops when one discovers the one truth, one god from which all creations are simply different manifestation (well philosophy goes sometimes beyond god and religion, but this is one central topic). Well, if there is so much of similarity where lies the difference or is our perception wrong. Is science a way of philosophy or is philosophy a way of science.
The simpler way out of this mess - philosophy and science has been coexisting from the time of ancient indians and greeks. Let us wait and watch whether both reach the same TRUTH!!
Sunday, November 12, 2006
Starts
Well for those who care to read
This is a blog done entirely for and by be...The thoughts penned , rather typed down would make no sense to any thinkers , since individuality is a prerogative of the one who thinks. Tinkering with my mind gives a plethora of subjects ranging from war of the sexes to spontaneous evolution, if the computers of the 50s played need for speed, the addiction of the internet, poverty and pity, dreams and the unreality, the zeroth dimension of reality, the inverse of E = mc2., and the lookout for the spiritual neuron, science of religion, the energy crisis, my college, corruption and many others...
Being new to blogging i do not know who would care to read these blogs...And if it all anyone would comment on these...
Nevertheless this is an attempt by me to compile my thoughts which maketh me!!
This is a blog done entirely for and by be...The thoughts penned , rather typed down would make no sense to any thinkers , since individuality is a prerogative of the one who thinks. Tinkering with my mind gives a plethora of subjects ranging from war of the sexes to spontaneous evolution, if the computers of the 50s played need for speed, the addiction of the internet, poverty and pity, dreams and the unreality, the zeroth dimension of reality, the inverse of E = mc2., and the lookout for the spiritual neuron, science of religion, the energy crisis, my college, corruption and many others...
Being new to blogging i do not know who would care to read these blogs...And if it all anyone would comment on these...
Nevertheless this is an attempt by me to compile my thoughts which maketh me!!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)