Today I have decided
To dream no more....
To not let my mind dwell in the past or future...
To learn to be able to walk away from things that I desire...
To not find faults with people...
To not blame anyone for their actions...
To not let emotions cloud my judgement...
To nurture emotions which help me make the right choices...
To remind myself again that we are all but slaves of our nature...
That key is to free oneself from this nature...
To accept the frailities and fickleness of life...
To replace hate, anger, frustration with indifference...
To act with purpose not expectation...
To trust my judgement, to respect my choices...
Today I have decided to live life...
The way I think it should be...
Thursday, July 30, 2009
Thursday, May 7, 2009
Beliefs
I was reading an essay by Bertrand Russel and one of the assumptions he destroys is that people who are not very knowledgeable think that they have little idea about the world around them. On the contrary, these very people have a detailed set of beliefs which gives a structure to their world. They have a rain God who causes rain, the sun God which gives light, the moon God which gives light at night etc. etc.
There are people who do not see the pattern that these people see in the world. I guess the more mentally capable have a different structure that defines their world. Their need is much more than mere material. God, Reality, consciousness, Nature, Purpose, Cause and Effect - the list of mental constructions to give more structure to and hence more control on our world for them can go on and on.
And all these constructions are based on our need. There are people in this world, who only need good material things and their mental constructions of the world that they observe very much satisfy that need. So they create a God who takes care of the things around them that they can not control, and all they have to do is to pray once a day. They believe that doing what they do is the right thing, by word of God, at most times spoken by some spritual Guru they worship, and doing it will take them closer to their God. They have assigned moral value to loving their family, city and country, mostly in that order. I often find that a Guru or a teacher should be a facilitator in helping people think. I guess when we believe in whatever the guru says, it becomes the outsourcing of the highest order, where we have allowed someone else to do the thinking for us.
That was a slightly different tangent, but what I want to assert here is that most people will not essentially accept that their life is nothing but a random collection of molecules on a random planet in a random solar system in a random galaxy in the universe. This thought is quite depressing. But rather than 'depression' being the cause many people don't quite know world beyond the work that they do and the society that they live in. So experts might get quite frustrated at why do people who know little about about climate and care less to accept what the experts say about the way we are damaging our environment. After all they are experts and these people are ignorant fools. Shouldn't fools be listening to experts? Hardly do the experts realise that how inconvenient it is to for them to accept what they are saying. I find it quite frustrating talking to a devout people, about the inconsistencies in the their religous books, which were written a few centuries ago, at a time when our awareness of the world was a minute fraction of what it is now. But, the experts should view this problem in a different way as I found out in my interactions with deeply religious people. It is not that the devout do not see the inconsistencies, they do not want to see them.
I often say that every one has the right to be happy. And in their pursuit of happiness they make assumptions about the world and themselves which makes their life worth living and more happy. For example, armymen are often made to believe that they are morally and socially better than any civilian, including the politicians, because they are serving their nation, and it motivates them to even risk their lives. Terrorists are totally convinced about their version of the world where God has chosen them to fight the infidels for Him and if they do eventually die they will be taken care of in heaven. And at times when I find myself quite frustrated with my meaningless life, I often convince myself that there isn't meaning to life anyway and if there are people who think there is, they have only made assumptions and hence what they think is not essentially true. So if I seem to be wasting my life, so is the Prime Minister of India.
But all these beliefs are extremely important, because without them we would not be able take a step in any direction. I can still use skepticism to show that moving in a direction might not be in anyway better than not moving at all, but if disproving everything is good, then we are stuck in a situation where we can disprove the good in the policy of disproving everything. I mean skepticism can be turned on to itself. So what is good is what makes you feel better. If that is the case what right do we have to object to others beliefs. They are after all beliefs that make them feel better. If they are wrong aren't we guilty too?
There are people who do not see the pattern that these people see in the world. I guess the more mentally capable have a different structure that defines their world. Their need is much more than mere material. God, Reality, consciousness, Nature, Purpose, Cause and Effect - the list of mental constructions to give more structure to and hence more control on our world for them can go on and on.
And all these constructions are based on our need. There are people in this world, who only need good material things and their mental constructions of the world that they observe very much satisfy that need. So they create a God who takes care of the things around them that they can not control, and all they have to do is to pray once a day. They believe that doing what they do is the right thing, by word of God, at most times spoken by some spritual Guru they worship, and doing it will take them closer to their God. They have assigned moral value to loving their family, city and country, mostly in that order. I often find that a Guru or a teacher should be a facilitator in helping people think. I guess when we believe in whatever the guru says, it becomes the outsourcing of the highest order, where we have allowed someone else to do the thinking for us.
That was a slightly different tangent, but what I want to assert here is that most people will not essentially accept that their life is nothing but a random collection of molecules on a random planet in a random solar system in a random galaxy in the universe. This thought is quite depressing. But rather than 'depression' being the cause many people don't quite know world beyond the work that they do and the society that they live in. So experts might get quite frustrated at why do people who know little about about climate and care less to accept what the experts say about the way we are damaging our environment. After all they are experts and these people are ignorant fools. Shouldn't fools be listening to experts? Hardly do the experts realise that how inconvenient it is to for them to accept what they are saying. I find it quite frustrating talking to a devout people, about the inconsistencies in the their religous books, which were written a few centuries ago, at a time when our awareness of the world was a minute fraction of what it is now. But, the experts should view this problem in a different way as I found out in my interactions with deeply religious people. It is not that the devout do not see the inconsistencies, they do not want to see them.
I often say that every one has the right to be happy. And in their pursuit of happiness they make assumptions about the world and themselves which makes their life worth living and more happy. For example, armymen are often made to believe that they are morally and socially better than any civilian, including the politicians, because they are serving their nation, and it motivates them to even risk their lives. Terrorists are totally convinced about their version of the world where God has chosen them to fight the infidels for Him and if they do eventually die they will be taken care of in heaven. And at times when I find myself quite frustrated with my meaningless life, I often convince myself that there isn't meaning to life anyway and if there are people who think there is, they have only made assumptions and hence what they think is not essentially true. So if I seem to be wasting my life, so is the Prime Minister of India.
But all these beliefs are extremely important, because without them we would not be able take a step in any direction. I can still use skepticism to show that moving in a direction might not be in anyway better than not moving at all, but if disproving everything is good, then we are stuck in a situation where we can disprove the good in the policy of disproving everything. I mean skepticism can be turned on to itself. So what is good is what makes you feel better. If that is the case what right do we have to object to others beliefs. They are after all beliefs that make them feel better. If they are wrong aren't we guilty too?
Friday, January 23, 2009
Another view on Slumdog Millionaire...
I haven't seen the movie but every day I read about a raging debate on its potrayal of India. Most Indians are irritated that the movie shows everything that is worst in India. And what is the chance that it all happens to one person? They say it is not a balanced view. I have a slightly different perspective.
Will start with an excerpt from rediff.com
Shyam Benegal [Images], veteran film maker who is credited as the pioneer of art house cinema in India refuses to take sides and says "I have not seen the film but answering the question from a theoretical point of view, as a foreign director filming in India, Danny would view his surroundings as a foreigner would and that is natural."
"Richard Attenborough made a film on Gandhi in 1982 and it went onto win eight Oscars; I too made a film on Gandhi but it did not get that sort of response. That is because Attenborough could place Gandhi in a cultural context that could be easily understood by a western audience," Benegal says.
"But an Indian film made by an Indian director is different because he brings a completely different perspective to the table, one that might not be well understood by a foreign audience," Benegal told PTI.
Benegal has put it perfectly. We keep complaining about west's potrayal of India but forget movies like 'Purab aur Paschim' or even 'Pardes' which were both immensely successful, and I believe even won awards in India. I haven't heard of an American or a British complaining of these movies showing the western culture in a bad light. Up until Aamir Khan started taking some real actors from the west and giving them some real roles, most goras in Indian films were dumb side-kicks (Remember the 'hawa hawai' song from Mr. India). Tom Alter made a career playing such roles, speaking Hindi in a so called British accent. I also don't hear the Americans or British complaining when our directors make movies 'inspired' from hollywood movies. But the minute some guy uses a part of an Indian song, our fat music director complains. The reason is the west doesn't care about what we think of them.
My point is, why do we care about what they think of us? India churns out more films than hollywood. More people watch Indian films than they watch hollywood films. Indian economy is doing well. Indian army is one of the strongest in the world. Indian cricket board has more money than any other cricket board. Indian cricket team among the top teams. Then, why be defensive? The only thing that our irritation at this western potrayal of India shows is, as my wife would say, our lack of confidence. India is now among dominant forces in the world. It is high time it should start feeling like one.
Will start with an excerpt from rediff.com
Shyam Benegal [Images], veteran film maker who is credited as the pioneer of art house cinema in India refuses to take sides and says "I have not seen the film but answering the question from a theoretical point of view, as a foreign director filming in India, Danny would view his surroundings as a foreigner would and that is natural."
"Richard Attenborough made a film on Gandhi in 1982 and it went onto win eight Oscars; I too made a film on Gandhi but it did not get that sort of response. That is because Attenborough could place Gandhi in a cultural context that could be easily understood by a western audience," Benegal says.
"But an Indian film made by an Indian director is different because he brings a completely different perspective to the table, one that might not be well understood by a foreign audience," Benegal told PTI.
Benegal has put it perfectly. We keep complaining about west's potrayal of India but forget movies like 'Purab aur Paschim' or even 'Pardes' which were both immensely successful, and I believe even won awards in India. I haven't heard of an American or a British complaining of these movies showing the western culture in a bad light. Up until Aamir Khan started taking some real actors from the west and giving them some real roles, most goras in Indian films were dumb side-kicks (Remember the 'hawa hawai' song from Mr. India). Tom Alter made a career playing such roles, speaking Hindi in a so called British accent. I also don't hear the Americans or British complaining when our directors make movies 'inspired' from hollywood movies. But the minute some guy uses a part of an Indian song, our fat music director complains. The reason is the west doesn't care about what we think of them.
My point is, why do we care about what they think of us? India churns out more films than hollywood. More people watch Indian films than they watch hollywood films. Indian economy is doing well. Indian army is one of the strongest in the world. Indian cricket board has more money than any other cricket board. Indian cricket team among the top teams. Then, why be defensive? The only thing that our irritation at this western potrayal of India shows is, as my wife would say, our lack of confidence. India is now among dominant forces in the world. It is high time it should start feeling like one.
Friday, January 2, 2009
Love
I wrote this blog some time back, but did not post it. Thought I might as well do it now.
I sometimes find the term 'innocent civilians' naive. I mean, if India is waging a war against the believers of a certain ideology, your Indian identity makes you a participant in the war. It is the taxes you pay that are being spent on the army which is fighting against them and this gives them right to try to kill you. They call it a war of civilisations, I call it a war of ideologies (the difference being people and ideas). Religious freedom vs religious fundatamentalism. Freedom of speech and thought vs adherence to a single ideology. Love of life as we know it vs contempt for it. And we all are soldiers in this war.
Long time back I posted on my blog that reason can not answer everything, and emotion or personal likes and dislikes, are a major determinant of ones decisions. It was a major milestone for me because until then I had been made to believe that reason or intellect is the end all of human thought. I have since not been able to write anything worthwhile.
My point is that one can argue for argument sake about different ideologies and religions to prove which is better. Ultimately the decision we have to make is which ideology appeals to us. Hence our motivation can not stem from the fact that we are right, because that is impossible to prove, but simply from our love for an idea. I love the idea that I get to determine the course of my country by voting. I love the idea of being able to protest and make my voice be heard when my government does something I dont agree with. I love the freedom of thought, expression and belief that a democracy offers me. And love needs no reason. I love my wife and I don't care about proving that she is better than anyone else.
And quite similar to us, the terrorists too love an ideology. The belief that one's life has a purpose which is higher than fulfilling the daily needs of oneself and family, is intoxicating enough to die for. We too need to be intoxicated by our love for our beliefs and rather than be 'innocent civilians' we should all be 'active soldiers', not weilding guns, but armed with our zeal to protect and nourish our idea of a good life. Not by shooting people but by being socially active to make our opinion count. Because, by not having an opinion at all against terrorism or being ambivalent in our views, we are actually being complicit in terrorism. Hence people who died in Mumbai during the three day hiest, were martyrs for one cause or the other.
Seeing the way the whole of India came together after the attacks, and the way different countries are standing behind India, it is heartening to know that people do stand for what they love.
I sometimes find the term 'innocent civilians' naive. I mean, if India is waging a war against the believers of a certain ideology, your Indian identity makes you a participant in the war. It is the taxes you pay that are being spent on the army which is fighting against them and this gives them right to try to kill you. They call it a war of civilisations, I call it a war of ideologies (the difference being people and ideas). Religious freedom vs religious fundatamentalism. Freedom of speech and thought vs adherence to a single ideology. Love of life as we know it vs contempt for it. And we all are soldiers in this war.
Long time back I posted on my blog that reason can not answer everything, and emotion or personal likes and dislikes, are a major determinant of ones decisions. It was a major milestone for me because until then I had been made to believe that reason or intellect is the end all of human thought. I have since not been able to write anything worthwhile.
My point is that one can argue for argument sake about different ideologies and religions to prove which is better. Ultimately the decision we have to make is which ideology appeals to us. Hence our motivation can not stem from the fact that we are right, because that is impossible to prove, but simply from our love for an idea. I love the idea that I get to determine the course of my country by voting. I love the idea of being able to protest and make my voice be heard when my government does something I dont agree with. I love the freedom of thought, expression and belief that a democracy offers me. And love needs no reason. I love my wife and I don't care about proving that she is better than anyone else.
And quite similar to us, the terrorists too love an ideology. The belief that one's life has a purpose which is higher than fulfilling the daily needs of oneself and family, is intoxicating enough to die for. We too need to be intoxicated by our love for our beliefs and rather than be 'innocent civilians' we should all be 'active soldiers', not weilding guns, but armed with our zeal to protect and nourish our idea of a good life. Not by shooting people but by being socially active to make our opinion count. Because, by not having an opinion at all against terrorism or being ambivalent in our views, we are actually being complicit in terrorism. Hence people who died in Mumbai during the three day hiest, were martyrs for one cause or the other.
Seeing the way the whole of India came together after the attacks, and the way different countries are standing behind India, it is heartening to know that people do stand for what they love.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
