Justice and Markets

"Philosophy estranges us from the familiar, not by supplying new information, but by inviting and provoking a new way of seeing, but, and here’s the risk: once the familiar turns strange, its never quite the same again. Self-knowledge is like lost innocence; however unsettling you find it, it can never be unthought, or unknown. "

That is how Professor Michael Sandel ends his first lecture on Justice, a Harvard course running for the past 20 years. If you haven't seen its lectures available online, I highly recommend that you do. In this post, I intend to discuss one particular topic Prof. Sandal talks about, that of Morality and Efficacy of Markets. No, we are not going to talk about economics, or debate free market vs regulated one. We will instead talk about moral value of things, and of markets. 

"Too much and too long, we seem to have surrendered community excellence and community values in the mere accumulation of material things. Our gross national product...if we should judge American by that - counts air pollution and cigarette advertising, and ambulances to clear our highways of carnage. It counts special locks for our doors and the jails for those who break them. It counts the destruction of our redwoods and the loss of our natural wonder in chaotic sprawl. It counts napalm and the cost of a nuclear warhead, and armored cars for police who fight riots in our streets. It counts Whitman's rifle and Speck's knife, and the television programs which glorify violence in order to sell toys to our children. 

Yet the gross national product does not allow for the health of our children, the quality of their education, or the joy of their play. It does not include the beauty of our poetry or the strength of our marriages; the intelligence of our public debate or the integrity of our public officials. It measures neither our wit nor our courage; neither our wisdom nor our learning; neither our compassion nor our devotion to our country; it measures everything, in short, except that which makes life worthwhile. "

- John F. Kennedy, 1968

Prof Sandal might be considered old-school, in that his views are more strongly influenced by Archimedes theory of Telos, the end-purpose of things. Unlike theories of Utilitarianism(maximum good for maximum people) and Libertarian (rights of the individual), which are always at odds with one another and does not consider differences among people, societies and situations, the theory of Telos is applied always specifically to the situation at hand. It postulates that to determine the justice in any situation regarding an social institution, we must first decide what was the purpose of creation of that institution, what role it satisfies in society. 

Would you pay your child to learn? This would make it a more free-market situation, compared to coercing the activity out of her. But would you consider it amiss if I say something is lost, when you start rewarding activities which should be inherently pleasurable. How many of you have noticed that once your hobby becomes a more directly rewarding, it is not so pleasurable any more.

I do not know whether it is because of my upbringing or an individual choice (it doesn't matter), but my own views have started reflecting Prof Sandal's. To have a world where a life of meaning is still possible, we need to have a better look at what our institutions mean and stand for and what we are doing with them (big words, probably silly and precocious, but I let them be uttered).

What is the Telos of a business? I would like to believe it is 'to make money satisfying the needs of society'. But the public-company institution, by separating the owners and executioners, it is no-ones responsibility to look after the society. No-one is culpable. Marketers intend to 'create needs' and demand, rather than satisfying them.

Consider the Quota debate of IITs. The objectors lay a monomaniac emphasis on the impact quota will have on 'quality' of students. I am a supporter of affirmative action but in this case, the IITs have for too long and too loudly blown the trumpet of academic excellence and selecting the cream (and socially inept) of students through JEE. The government has been in on this. Hence my opinion is that the IIT directors and government as well as the general public, should have a common opinion of what the mission of IITs is, not what was written some 50 years ago, for have a peaceful debate. 

---------------------------

Most of us are firm believers of meritocracy. We believe that each of us should have equal opportunity to success in life and are pained that it is not so. However, even if a person, has equal opportunity, is he sufficiently equipped to access it? With prices of higher education and even good primary schools ever increasing, even a free job-market does not imply equal opportunity. 

But this is very basic reasoning. My question is, even if we receive equal preparation, and are renumarated according to our skill and determination, then, is it fair to say that, we deserve what we have? That we have earned it? That is a tricky question.

Shackled Thought

Lately, I have become obsessed with the 'mind' or the inner experience. Not the word 'mind' or the scientific literature (psychology/neurology/artificial intelligence) par se but the internal experience we have of it. In fact, it is not even clear whether I can say a thing like 'internal experience we have' as I can't define any sharp line between what we define to be ourselves and what we define as these internal experiences. I am thinking here of the first half Cartesian duality of soul/mind and body. The difference between knowing the light frequency corresponding to color 'red' and actually seeing the color red (I hope you follow). It is remarkable, we essentially live, exist, in our minds and yet we don't know anything about it. All we can do is match our emotions or thoughts to various regions of the neural network. But what of the qualitative, internal, experience, that 'I am ME'?

I should say I am heavily influenced by these very venerable people, just so you don't consider me the the next Wacko:

Tony Robbins (Motivation Speaker), Sam Harris, Chade-Meng Tan, Richard Davidson, Matthieu Ricard, Shelly Kagan, Paul Bloom, Dan Gilbert among others. 

I do believe there are different types of consciousness, we all experience the world differently (no way of verifying until we get the ability to hook up to other people's minds and experience what they are experiencing), and each one of us perceives the world in different ways at different life stages. Sometimes, I feel the children are the most awake of us, experiencing the world in a much richer fashion, and as we grow up, we live more in a synthetic experience created by the mind (as a result of our past experiences) than in the world surrounding us. 

There are definitely different ways to perceive the world, even limiting ourselves to the senses we have. Indians must perceive it differently than Americans, than French, than Chinese and likewise. We perceive it differently under the influence of alcohol or drugs, and I am talking of how you experience the world around you, not how you handle your own balance. 

Most of us see our 'self' as situated behind the eyes, looking at the world from that vantage point. Close your eyes, focus on your breathing, and that vantage point will shift to your nose. 

Personally, I think there was a time as a child when I used to experienced the world in 3D, being actually aware that a 'chair' in front of me exists. Nowadays the world feels more like just something I am seeing and processing, and I have to respond to. 

Modern science can pin-point which emotion or thought excites which part of the brain. This prompted Richard Davidson (Professor, Psychology) decides to take a Monk (Richard Mattieu) and another regular Joe, hooking up their brains to a brain scanner, and see their neural networks' response to various graphic images. The result: The centers in the brain associated with Happiness are triggered much more (several standard deviations more) in Matthieu Ricard. You want to be truly happy you say? Why not become a monk I say.

So the brain works analogous like the rest of the body. You need strength to lift weights, you lift weights to gain strength. Similarly, the neurons in the brain are responsible for your thoughts n emotions, and these neurons can be trained by just thoughts. Enter Meditation. The age old method of training your brain which most of us consider a quaint hobby. As a logical flow of this thought trail, I am trying to read more on it and practice meditation. Richard Davidson is convinced that by 2050 they will have enough scientific precise evidence backing Meditation, and it will be in the core curriculum of all schools (making the world a better place?).

I also believe that in explaining and developing these inner experience, the eastern and Indian civilizations have gone much further than the west. But since the topic is not easily explained, the eastern texts are not as easily accessible as the direct, explanatory texts of western philosophy. Like the chicken and egg problem, Indians (including me) also always strive for a western acceptance of their own traditions(like yoga) and so these texts remain unexplained, in colloquial language which people like me, modern college grads might get. 

In a way, our 'mind' is an entire universe, with its own rules, entities and existence. Who says a universe should have physical dimensions? 

In the end, it is all about figuring out 'What am I?', which has to be answered before 'What is death?'. 

Is it not silly that we are focusing so much on our outside world, what we achieve and how the people perceive us, when the inner self remains a mystery?

On a related note, one thing the MBA had given me is an elevated respect and cognizance for the omnipresent human-institutions which exist only in thought, but determine how the world is run. We accept and learn these institutions by imitation, looking at how other people are behaving and what is acceptable. For example, railway is a technology, but without a ticketing and reservation system, concept of train stations, it would be for naught. Similarly, concept of buying-selling, of property rights. Just sitting here writing this post, I am an 'employee' of some 'company', a 'citizen' of a 'country', with an over-arching 'government' maintaining some 'law'. I am connected to support groups, of my family, friends, colleagues, batch-mates, countrymen. All this is necessary for existence, survival and meaning. But this also means, that we will never experience the 'state of nature', of what it means to be creatures, individuals, just living beings, in this universe. 

Maybe I am over-dramatizing. But that is why I am writing this blog so I can get feedback on my views and questions.

Apathy

A persistent problem for me for sometime now has been a mediocre-ish academic performance along with a sense of boredom as such with the term upon term of different courses. Even the quantitative and analytical courses, supposed to be my forte, are not untouched. Hence, I think it is about time I analysed this phenomenon in some depth, and even though no 'solution' is expected, its almost incumbent if I am to maintain my self-image as a deep thinker.

I numerate the likely causes of my apparent lack of interest:

• Because I am not good at it (if marks are any indication): The classic chicken and the egg problem. Whether I am not performing because of my apathy, or whether I am apathetic because of my non-performance? A reinforcing circle, it is. Also, I might simply not be as intelligent as I like to think(or pretty dumb), specially for handling systems like 'courses'.
• No novelty: Another term, another set of courses. 22 years is enough time to get bored living the same cycle. The courses are also hardly ground-shaking.
• Superficial coverage of material: It seems as though the further I go in my studies, the more hurriedly and flippantly the topics are being covered. Engineering gave one semester for each course, management reduces it to 3 months. And moreover, neither the professors nor the administration expects you to be serious about studies. 
• Bad instructors: Well, I will certainly not generalize this to all courses. But in courses with good instructors, I am almost always vigilant. And that seems to be less and less these days, although the minima would have come been sometime in my undergrad.
• Non-basic courses: For quite some time now, I have been convinced that mathematics is the only subject worth studying (and maybe physics). For all other qualitative/analytical courses, the general methodology is to assume some logical framework, and derive results. Now of course mathematics will play its part and you will get some pretty outcomes. Is that creating new knowledge? Even if you are interpreting new phenomenons about the world, as a student, what am I learning?
• Apathy of students towards education: I see hardly any of my classmates concerned with taking the theory further or connecting things or reading a subject outside curriculum out of interest. Personally, I find this rather depressing.
• Inconsequential topics: Hardly 10% of the material I learn will I need over my lifetime. And most high-scorers I know remember less about subjects or their implications than me. Overall, this questions any motives I may have of increasing effort.
• Inconsequential rewards: My favorite excuse. The grades are hardly a reflection of my expertise of the subject or my intelligence. It has also hardly any impact on my future career (although this might not be true as a whole, for a single individual subject, it rings true).
• Laziness: To all readers, I am lazier than thou. And I hold the label as an achievement. 
• Attention Deficit Disorder(?) : Concentrating in class has always been difficult for me. For most of my engineering, most of the subjects I learned have been through re-reading the books, which is infinitely tougher when you are not enthusiastic about it.
• Deep Thought: (I like to think .. ) I think too much, as evidenced by this post. I also like fantasizing. Apart from the direct consequence of time wastage, I cannot remember a theory/formula until I know for myself it is perfectly sound given its premises. 
• Inability to prioritize/Distractions: Like writing this post when I should be preparing for mid-term examinations, I do a lot of things at the wrong time and at the wrong place. This does not explain apathy, but rather lack of performance.

So some factors seem to be internal(laziness, deep thought), some course related(inconsequential) and how it is conducted(superficial, bad instructors), and some systematic(apathy of students, no novelty). 

Any solutions?

Some proverbs which come to mind are - 

1. Hard work beats intelligence
2. The classic Gita proverb 'karm karo, phal ki chinta mat karo'. (Do your duty, don't worry about outcomes)
3. Hell is other people

ImpossibleHard to implement.

PS - I hope no future employer will judge me adversely on reading this post, for I have just been a little honest (at least as much as I mentally find myself to be at the moment). 

Not your optimistic afterlife

For any religion to be worth its salt, it must offer its followers perspectives on three things:
1) A view of Life, the Universe and Everything.
2) A method for going through everyday life. After all, its tough \m/
3) Some history as to the faith's origins.

For this post, lets consider what the biggest religions have to say about the first of these.

(Borrowed extensively from thinkquest.org)
Christianity

The body dies, but the soul lives forever. The big question is where each person will spend eternity. Heaven is a glorious location where there is an absence of pain, disease, sex, depression, etc. and where people live in new, spiritual bodies, in the presence of Jesus Christ. Hell is a location where its inmates will be punished without any hope of relief, for eternity.

Muslim

The Islamic holy book, the Koran, says that salvation depends on a man's actions and attitudes. However, repentance can turn an evil man toward the virtue that will save him. The final day of reckoning is described in awesome terms. On that last day every man will account for what he has done, and his eternal existence will be determined on that basis.

Muslims recognize that different individuals have been given different abilities and various degrees of insight into the truth. Each man will be judged according to his situation, and every man who lives according to the truth to the best of his abilities will achieve heaven. However, infidels who are presented with the truth of Islam and reject It will be given no mercy. God judges all men, and the infidels will fall off the bridge al-Aaraf into hell while the good men continue on to heaven.

The Koran has vivid descriptions of both heaven and hell. Heaven is depicted in terms of worldly delights, and the torments of hell are shown in lurid detail. Muslims disagree as to whether those descriptions are to be taken literally or not.

Hinduism

The final goal of salvation in Hinduism is escape from the endless round of birth, death, and rebirth. 

Four ways of reaching such salvation, are described. Jnana yoga, the way of knowledge, employs philosophy and the mind to comprehend the unreal nature of the universe. Bhakti yoga, the way of devotion or love, reaches salvation through ecstatic worship of a divine being. Karma yoga, the way of action, strives toward salvation by performing works without regard for personal gain and Raja yoga, "the royal road," makes use of meditative yoga techniques.

Buddhism

You die, you reincarnate. The type of rebirth(whether as a mosquito, a pig or a human etc) will be conditioned by the moral tone of the person's actions. The Buddhism sees ignorance rather than sin as the roadblock to salvation. That is, the belief that the world and self truly exist, keeps the illusory wheel of existence rolling - only destruction of that belief will stop the mad course of the world. The Buddha described Nirvāna as the perfect peace of the state of mind that is free from craving, anger and other afflicting states. It is also the "end of the world"; there is no identity left, and no boundaries for the mind.

Some glaring problems with issues of afterlife. 
1) Personal Identity: Do we keep our memories or leave them with the body? If we indeed leave them, its like a total refresh, everyone is the same blank slate. Does surviving this way have any point at all?
2) Why is the afterlife so similar to this physical world? Do the genders exist? 
3) There are hypothesis about the future, death and the afterlife(which might last for eternity), but what about birth? Are new people being created or like in Hinduism/Buddhism, just being recycled? 


I don't believe in religions anyway, so why am I analyzing them? Well, firstly to see how having stood for over thousands of years, these are still not without basic logical shortcomings. Secondly, just to see what different perspectives are possible. And thirdly, to make a brand new adaptation of mine, even though it might not be palatable to many.

A new approach
Lets consider dying = a bad thing. After all we are all sad/afraid of it. 
So unlike conventional schools, lets conclude Earth is Heaven and Afterlife is Hell (for lack of better terminology). 
This makes our natural state as Souls in Hell, from where we are allowed breaks when we visit Earth. 
Now this reminds me of prison more than anything else, so extending this mind-trip further, maybe we are all prison inmates in some uber-world, and are allowed parole on Earth from time to time. 
Perfect. Now we have a perfect reason for associating sadness with death, for this is when we are going back to our hell prison. 


On the upside, this gives a concrete objective for mankind as a whole. To achieve immortality, here in the physical world, so that we need not go back. Hence the constant race for technological progress. 

Extra: Existential

The Existential system of beliefs is very simple - nothing comes after death. We simply cease to be.

Also you might like to check this out, its the most awesome post I have read in some time.  Thanks Kinari for sharing.

Festival breakdown

I have been able to group holidays, or rather observance of special days, in six broad categories :
(no great insights here, just writing this post to organize some thoughts I had during DP break)

1. Cultural/Religious - Diwali, Christmas, Durga Puja, Thanksgiving etc
2. National/Memorial - Republic day, Independence day, Gandhi Jayanti
3. Scientific based - New year, New/No moon(is this a holiday), Harvest festivals
4. Personal - Birthday, anniversary
5. Consumerism based - Valentine's day, Mother's day, Friendship day etc
6. Modern/popular culture - April's Fool, Pi day(14th march), Star wars day(May the fourth) etc

Can you think of anything else? Leave comments.

Now for some analysis. Some questions we can ask are -

• Are these categories really different?

The first four seem largely separate. But Cultural(1), Consumerism(5) and modern culture(6) do have overlaps. A quick wikipedia search reveals Valentine's day was previously a christian holiday till 1969 when Pope Paul XVI deleted it. The 20th century has then on seen massive commercialization of the festival, extending from paper greeting cards to roses, chocolates and further to (to the dismay of competing smitten males) diamonds.

Mother's Day also has some antecedents in the worship of some goddess' related to motherhood, but the modern celebration in India, a wiki search reveals, is a rip of US's which was started by President Woodrow Wilson. It has been so commercialized that some refer to it as "Hallmark day".

Actually, scientific and cultural also overlap. Case in point specially the harvest festivals like Pongal, Chatt, Baisakhi, Thanksgiving. These are by nature products of the season cycle, but these events were so entwined with people's lives that they have become something more.

• Are any of these celebrations dangerous and should be discouraged?

I don't know. I guess someone having read some previous posts would expect me to cry out and say 'Religion' but I don't think so. Religious events are celebrated with the most gusto around the world, and are great for getting children into the societal fabric. Some particular customs I can always oppose, which might have made sense in some day and age but have no significance now, but everything evolves.

• How have the old holidays evolved?

With mega dozes of consumerism. Think diamonds, think booze, think Ekta Kapoor's soaps, think designer kurtas etc etc.

• What I think should be encouraged?

More scientific ones please, just due to the fact of being purely secular. As a bonus, any extraterrestrials we encounter can automatically be imbibed in.

• National holidays or Religious Holidays?

National holidays generally celebrate some majorly goody stuff, like independence or establishment of a republic. On the other hand, inside a nation, I think an individual individualizes more with his religion and would consider (1) more special.

Lessons from the tree

Finally, a moment of serenity. Its been a pandemonium recently. But I guess a good all-immersive experience in a different sort of world which I always felt alienated to. Is it a good thing to always be rational and not go for hype? Don't you get more out of life if you let yourself get lost in the crowd, flowing around with events happening around you and to you, instead of holding steadfast and resisting change?

Its so peaceful to look at a tree, the clouds, the moon. The omnipresent symbols of the fact that the world is not about me,the individual, but is something greater. I am but an evanescent existence. The clouds, the mountains are the things which have always been, and will be. Do they attach any significance to that I made it to IIT? to IIM? or whatever I am going to do in future? They have seen generations, will see many more. Each with its achievers, with its drivers, with its sheeple. No matter what I may like, humans haven't really changed over the ages. Things around them might have, but we still think the same thoughts, have the same apprehensions, same desires, same happiness, and so on. Asimov's psychohistory(a fictional branch of science where you predict the future development of large masses of people) makes more and more sense as I grow up.

A tree is so peaceful and tranquil, no pain, no arrogance, no desires. Who am I to believe my existence is more fulfilling? But then, fulfillment is itself just a human 'concept'. So are 'pain' and 'desire'. Am I attaching more importance to non-intelligent life than it deserves? But who is to decide who deserves what?

I find it amazing that both man and tree can results of the same evolutionary process. Are these two the only stereotypes in which life may evolve? Sometimes I feel we classify that we define tree as 'life' just due to lack of imagination. But we do share ancestry, right? So I may be wrong. But still, is Life the only exotic stuff universe produces? Try as I might, I am too bound with my own mental blocks to progress on this line of thought. Maybe that is for the best, intellectual masturbation should have its limits.

The moon. I was surprised recently on realizing how long I have gone without the feeling of wonder that comes with watching the night sky. Education has so ruined us. But if nothing else, it is amusing to think how many loners are looking at the moon the same time I am, and how many have looked at the same sight from era to era.

On a side note I have recently become a fan of Craig Ventor, the guy who first sequenced the human genome, and has recently created the first cell with a synthetic genome. In effect, a whole class of organisms should in the future consider him their god, their creator, in the truest sense. But that aside, this is quite a landmark event in human development. Even if we don't develop genetically-engineered humans in the near future, our physiology will definitely be affected by the modified-medicines, food, and maybe insects/animals we will be living with.

Post college musings

College is finally over, and I have an entire new set of confusing thoughts to deal with, most of them to do with future prospects and so on. Would a masters in a non-English speaking country be a good experience even if the institute is good? Or should I just do a job for a few years and then make a decision? That seems to be the sensible option. And I still want to return to India after whatever degree I get abroad. So maybe it would be better if I never leave, unfortunately then the IIMs seem to be the only option.

The ideal thing would of course have been that my grades and projects would have been bad enough or good enough to give me enough conviction to make a strong decision. But they're hovering around the mediocre range...which is not very encouraging, and you always feel tempted to think you'll get your act together later on.

The sensation of leaving college and going out on your own, taking your own decisions, managing your own money, hasn't quite sunk in yet, but I think I'm starting to get premonitions of what it would be like. I had something of an argument with my family over what I should do-with them arguing for a stable, well-paid job 5 years down the line, and me giving vague arguments about what I want to do right now, with no idea about after 2 years, or even next year for that matter. In the process, I thought a lot about money matters, responsibilities, future plans and so on. Anyway, that matter has kind of subsided for the present. So I suppose I'll be writing a similar blog later.

Speaking of future careers, a senior from our college wrote a horrible, horrible book, called "the equation of my love" or something similar...it got plenty of us thinking, how hard could it be to become a full time writer, plenty of idiots do it, i suppose writing styles could be developed, and you might even turn out something decent given the right amount of hard work and time. Not only that, this guy is supposed to be working in Schlumberger, which is supposed to have a realllly busy job profile, and he found the time to write this book inside an year. Well maybe that explains why it is so lousy, but the guy, by all first hand accounts, was an idiot to begin with.

Varun tells me some guy from IIT D got a degree from a film school and returned to make a movie called 'formula 69', if I remember correctly. Then there's this one senior from my college who's completely left engineering and is presently researching snakes in the north east. He apparently did an internship in the jungles of the Western Ghats, and his work in the North East is supposed to be one of a kind, in that there has never ever been a study of the snakes in this region. It's supposed to be important enough to get multiple publications in Nature. He is currently living in a hut beside the Brahmputra, which is not cool, but you do have to admire the guy's conviction. Then there's this good friend in the college band, who is now going to Paris, and I suspect he will almost definitely join some sort of band there, successful or not is a different matter. And these are both people I know personally.

Plenty of people are coming back after doing Phd's abroad, at least according to an article I read recently, and rumours are that a 4 person team from IIT D came up with their own version of iPad, which is supposed to be much better, in that it has multi-tasking and multiple ports, and a bunch of other extra features.

So I suppose things are a lot different from even 5 years before...when we started college, and doing something different seems to be more and more normal. If you open up the option, then the number of careers you could switch to is infinite, isn't it?

This example is outside India, but still- I came across a professor's profile, he got his bachelors in mech engg from princeton, then got a masters in mech engg from stanford, then after an yr, he joined harvard law school, and is currently a professor in law, and his articles are cited by judges in the Supreme court, of the US. Though I suppose given the fact that law is so highly paid in the West, this would actually be something like IITians going into marketing or something after IIM. So it's not that remarkable.

Of course, the thing to remember is that all of these people must've been incredibly committed to what they were doing. I definitely can't imagine switching at this point, and I can't imagine I will be at any point in the future. I did think of law, after watching Boston Legal, and debating for a while. But I was brought to my senses by my lawyer sis, who told me it is way different than on TV-you won't be arguing big civil rights cases, mostly boring simple cases. And of course that I should try out my own field first.

This was thankfully way back in 2nd year, or I would have another thing to get confused about. Though I honestly don't think it's that different from switching from engineering to an MBA.

Blogging, podcasts, the US

It has really been a long time since I have written anything because I wanted to, in this blog or otherwise. I think I owe Varun something of an explanation why I haven't been blogging more frequently. Of course the normal thing to do would be just to ping him, but doesn't look like there are too many readers of this blog besides the two of us....at least regular readers.

Well if you look through the blog, you can immediately notice the line Varun takes- he is deeply philosophical-loves to do it. I wasn't even aware he has gotten so much into it. I suppose it's kind of a good thing. His thinking has really started to mature over time. But now when I want to write something, I generally want to write about the movies I watch, the news items I read, or hear and so on. I guess most of my ideas are borrowed, I wouldn't go so far as to say they're copied- but still I simply haven't ever thought up any "thought experiments", nor am I likely to do so. So I guess I think my blogs sound pretty banal when they sit besides Varun's.

Anyway, I'll try to make up for it, if that doesn't harm the tone of this blog. I am really pleased to see Varun has kept up with it, and the blog definitely seems to have got its own "identity", if that's the right word.

Anyway, the reason I decided to write a blog after so long is that my BTP is finally over, the only thing remaining is to write a paper on it. So I seem to have free time, and I thought I might as well use it productively.

Varun recently gave me a good tip: podcasts. I had no idea what they were until 2-3 months ago (my apologies to the tech-literate). I've had a great time browsing through a load of different varieties of them. I don't know the reason why, but the ones from Britain seem to be somehow way better than anything else anyone else produces, and it's mostly the BBC which produces them.

I've spent most of my college life watching American soaps, reading articles on time.com, nytimes, washington post etc. I wasn't aware that such a huge difference in cultures exists across the Atlantic. I had generally assumed that no matter how much fun they make of each other, they are after all, Westerners, sharing more or less the same values.

So I was listening to this comedy podcast the other day-I forget the name. This Brit was making fun of an American who claimed a First Amendment right to give a policeman a middle-finger- that is it was his right to freedom of expression. Funny as that was, the guy said this was possible only in America. They are probably the most obsessed with matters of principle, rights, freedom than any other country in the world. In fact, I think, it is actually possible George Bush was sincere when he said he wanted to go to Iraq to free the people. They really are that kind of people, and he was stupid enough to believe that he was the liberating hero too.

So then I did some rethinking about the soaps I watched, the kind of jokes I've picked up from them, and I discovered I've picked up a lot of stupid American ideas. First, and I think this is fairly common among others too, is this habit of referring to not just people, but objects, colours etc. as 'gay'. Now some things really do deserve the label, but I recently heard this guy critiquing Herman Hesse's Siddhartha. I really like the book, but according to him, it's gay, because Siddhartha's friend really admires him, and describes him accordingly. I've heard people do it with classical music, even hindi music at times, the opera-which I think has also been wrongly defamed by Americans and so on.

I think the idea is that whatever comes from Europe, has to be gay. I didn't realize this until I heard one die-hard Simpsons-Southpark fan express something similar.

Then there's the obsession with ideals. I was quite interested in the Capitalism-Marxism debate in my second year, before realizing how stupid the debate was. If you had been following the news over Obama's health care reform, people in America opposed it just because it's "European", and "it sounds socialist".

I have even started forming a theory that nearly all the modern stereotypes-of gays, chinese, indians, brits, africans etc. can all be traced back to the US.

Oh and a word on Star Trek and Star Wars- though I still like both franchises, I've become kind of disillusioned with them. I've only seen the Star Trek movies, so I'll take an example from Star Wars to explain. If you might remember, whichever planet they might land on, their would be these natives who would always be inferior to them, they would immediately challenge their top leaders, find something wrong with them, and show them a better way. Doesn't that sound more than a little American? Then there's only one black guy in the entire main cast, which totally doesn't make demographic sense (you're talking about the whole galaxy here), and the ones who are non-human, generally get killed off as soon as possible, preferably with no major fights. Only exception is Yoda, who, being primitive, is outsmarted by the genius of the enterprising Darth Sidius, and everyone has to be saved by the fair-haired, young, upstart and obviously American hero.

I might be overanalysing, but even if you consider the fact that Americans will make movies having their own audience in mind, it still doesn't make it right. America is very diverse, and its media should reflect that. Moreover, I think it reflects a really bad perspective of the rest of the world. And I think you can find enough evidence of that in their soaps and movies.

So you get the idea. I am in a really anti-US mood right now. I think I've rambled on enough. I'm off to sleep, and hopefully tomorrow this blog will still seem like it has some sort of coherence.

Thought Experiments

I have a big deadline tomorrow, my B.Tech project report submission, so instead of wasting* time, I decided to post a post.

Is there a limit to human thinking? I do not allude to the cultural grooming here, but a more fundamental limit, something which excludes entire plains of thought from the our carbon based biological brain. Consider, try thinking of a four dimensional space. No problem? Try five(Four is possible if you take time as one dimension, which engineers might naturally take). Now you are probably instinctively trying to break it into simpler models involving graphs and axes. I would consider any claims of otherwise with high suspicion. So how can we be sure that the three dimensional view of the universe we get through our five simplistic senses, is not laughable? Lets analyze -
(i) We sense the vibrations(of limited range) in the all-consuming atmosphere as 'Sound'
(ii) Electromagnetic waves(whatever those are) of particular wavelengths, we experience as 'Light' or 'Sight'
(iii) Inhaling atoms of various other forms gives us 'taste' and 'smell'
(iv) Finally, force from other objects is experienced as 'touch'.

Well, on a crazier analysis, what we experience is actually the energy transferred by these phenomenon to the well designed receptors of our body, and then its analysis in the brain where it matches it up with the whole framework of the world already present in our mind.

I have been watching Star Trek(highly recommend) recently, and it comes as a relief that I am not alone with such deranged epistemological issues. ST regularly deals with aliens of different kinds and forms. However even ST seems to take a conservative approach sometimes, probably due to lack of budget or constraints of connecting with the audience. Most of the species differ just in cultures and makeup. There's some talk of alternate dimensions and omnipotent beings, but all very timidish.

Now to justify the title of this entry, I present three thought experiments, nothing scholarly vindicated, but interesting experiences -
(a) Look somewhere. Now consider yourself as a creature, without any history, obligations, ambitions. Think of yourself in the world and what makes you happy.
(b) Visual sensation generally overwhelms other sensory inputs. Next time, close your eyes while doing some regular activity. Try brushing, eating food, listening to music, and consciously focus on taste, touch, sound.
(ba) In a related activity, lie/sit down at a peaceful place, close your eyes, and one by one feel every part of your body, starting from toes to heels to ankles etc etc to forehead. Notice where you suddenly feel uncomfortable. Respect the sheer quantity of (mostly redundant)experiences you are constantly filtering out.
(c) This one is complicated. Imagine a landmark event in your future, some exam, passing out, meeting parents, anything. Imagine what all it will be like. And now pay attention to everything around you, capture the present instant, your location, objects in the room, your eagerness for the future etc. Now Wait(days? months? years? depends on your event). When the time comes, you will automatically reflect upon the younger yourself, and notice the changes in yourself(and smile).

People can also checkout a related post revolving around limitations of logic by Bharat Hariharan.
*Time enjoyed is ideally not time wasted, but we will go by the conventional definition here.

Blank Spaces

So all immediate concerns have been taken care of, and all that's impending isn't gonna be a concern for some time, at least for a few hours. Isn't a time like this, the blank spaces, the void, moments we are all living for? When survival needs have been taken care of, and the time is truly ours to utilise howsoever? But the dilemma I am faced with, is what exactly to do now? I could maybe watch a movie, read a novel, like the normal college student, but that's just a source of filling time, awaiting something else. Custom dictates I could follow my passions, hobbies, like paint/write something, but I don't feel particularly inspired for that(this post is written later in retrospect). I am tired of philosophical ranting. I could hang out with friends, chat up, go somewhere. A good option, man is a social animal after all, and exchanging banter enormously pleasing. But is that in the end what it's all about? The reason for all of us working, surviving, cursing, drudging along? I don't really have an answer. I ended up reading a few articles on net, not extremely revelatory. A simple additional act of constructive commenting gives disproportional satisfaction.

Maybe creation is the key. Self-actualization(full realisation of one's potential) is described by psychologist Maslov as the most basic as well as the highest necessity of any organism. Creating something in the world would I think certainly make one's ego feel closer to self-actualisation. The thing about hobbies, passion might also be right after all then. Of course, learning something new would be self-actualization. But as we soon discover, the cornucopia of things to learn is too large for random traversal. And you tend to forget stuff, which is really frustrating. Creation also lets you leave memoirs everywhere you tread upon, an evidence of you existence, whereas a skill you learned and forgot doesn't offer much boasting potential. After all, we do live to impress our neighbors rite? No? Well, than I can't help you much. Or myself.

Probably I should have bigger concerns as I grow up, career, family etc. But then these aren't exactly 'blank spaces'.

The Meaning of Life

(A Humanities Course Term Paper)
(Some lines are direct rip-offs from sources, hopefully no-one will complain. I couldn't think of framing them better)

A natural characteristic of conscious and rational minds is to try to explain its own existance. Deconstruction the statement, 'meaning' implies intention, aim or design, typical features of intelligent life. 'Life' is tough to explain philosophically, it automatically implies a period of existance, and non-existance(i.e death) of a consciousness. Further, the essense of life as implied in the 'Meaning of life' question, is in the first person. Of what significance is my life?

Humans have struggled for millennia to tackle this question, various philosophical and religious interpretations appearing over the years. Wars have been fought over them. But as much as these questions cause people to lose their heads (sometimes figuratively, sometimes literally), the bottom line is that these are very practical questions. The meaning of life is deeply mixed with the philosophical and religious conceptions of existence, consciousness, and happiness, and touches on many other issues, such as value, purpose, ethics, good and evil, free will, conceptions of God, the soul, and the afterlife. If we could claim ascertaining the true meaning of life, we could possibly answer other questions like 'What does it mean to be alive?' and 'Do I have free will?'.

The beliefs, principles and memories of an individual form his personal reality, and in our personal belief system, we attempt to find motivation for going about everyday tasks. However, this mirage is shattered, when one tries to takes an perspective from outside oneself, a view of our actions at a cosmic/philosophical stage. This starts an open discussion on the significance of anything we do, of going about life itself, if as soon as two hundred years in the future, our life and most traces of it will cease to exist.

We might try to derive meaning of our lives by association with something inherently bigger. Like, considering we influenced the lives of others(our friends and relations), were a part of an ecological system, played one generation of evolution, or were a part of a social, ideological movement. But then the question of meaning just switches to this bigger phenomenon. What makes this more meaningful with respect to true reality? Case in point , what is the point of human generations? All of human history? We might try to explain in terms of still bigger associations, but they continue to pose the same question. Now either we chance infinite regression, or we satisfy ourselves at a point where we consider reason not necessary. Where an act just exists, and no meaning is required for its existance. Since the claim of knowledge of true reality is itself dubious, we will have to settle for an answer which satisfies just our concept of reality. And hence, the justification of 'no reason required for phenomenon P' is satisfactory for anyone who truly believes it. But if no reason was required for P, why not for an earlier iteration, or for the first iteration, i.e our individual life. Why did that not satisfy us in itself, and this does?

This is exactly the attribute which makes religion very appealing, in its seeming ability to give automatic reason to anything and everything. The idea of God seems to be the idea of something that can explain everything else, without having to be explained itself. No one asks “What is the reason for God?”, but following the path of God, and God as the ultimate explanation, always makes sense. Some religions outrighly, while others subtly declare the methods of God beyond human comprehension, and thus beyond question. We are in essence given the retort to the meaning of life as that we can't understand it. However, a tentative analysis gives the following as the aims of life as described commonly in religion includes:
a) Worship of a supreme transcendental God, or
b) To serve as a training ground for a higher reality
c) To help and support his fellowmen,
d) Attainment of skills and knowledge.
All these can be thought of as attaching oneself with a higher noble goal, which as discussed, still leaves the meaning question unsettled.

It seems remarkable that people, experiencing this dilemna as a natural followup of their existance, find it in themselves to go about their daily activities. The trick, so to speak, is to keep our field of perspective narrow, and focus on what's in front of us, and see their existance as their justification. The fact that our existance might be pointless if overwhelmed by the fact that we exist. We can also argue that “Does it matter that it doesn't matter?”, which is perfectly acceptable. The perpetual discussions might be depressing or maddening, but are seldom satisfactory.


Bibliography
1)“What Does It All Mean?” Oxford University Press, by Thomas Nigel.
2)Wikipedia, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Meaning_of_life
3)http://aristotle.net/~diogenes/meanmind.htm

End of Fantasy

Do what you want they* tell you. How does life stop being a stereotype? Are we relegated to being just another 'brick in the wall'? Can't we take delight in just being 'normal'? Why is the inner world so dissociated from the outer world, that we cannot realize everything is exactly as we experience it, and nothing else?

God doesn't matter. You are truly and fully responsible for all your actions. In a small way, the state of the world is my own making. Non reversible, not recoverable. Is that a bit scary? Either you do a thing, or you don't. The statement 'I could have ..' is moot.

I am writing exactly the kind of post I never thought I would.

I can see the whole world working, every incident opening the possibility of myriad others, only waiting for me to choose one. But will anything be different whatever I choose? Isn't it all circles ending at the same predefined course of my life? Will I be happier? Happiness can be synthesized, its a mind state. The only things stopping everyone from being happy is a) competition with neighbors, and b) non self actualization. Temporary happiness doesn't require much, and its probably the only true happiness.

JEE, CAT, is anyone even thinking? High schoolers don't have any idea what engg is, undergrads have no idea what management is.

Its so easy to let the crowd make your decisions. Easy to behave as you are expected to behave. So tough to remain proactive when you are on a different route. But why should you be on a different route? A person doing correct things unconsciously is happier than a conscious person unable to do the correct things.

Is there such a thing as 'your calling'? The concept is almost as ridiculous as a soulmate(You might guess I don't like Paulo Coelho). It feels like a mirage we like to believe in to make excuses for our less than perfect present with hopes of a more perfect future.

You are what you are. This is what it is.

Plus two

This is a topic I have long procrastinated posting, three years to be exact. I cannot be sure what exactly has kept me, lack of enthusiasm, lazyness, 'guts' or whatever. But it might just be the most controversial topic to be raised yet, but probably I am just overreacting, and anyways the blog has hardly any readers.

Well I think every IIT 'qualifier' has a story to tell, some words of wisdom to depart, except me. I truly admire people who have had to switch cities, adopt a totally new lifestyle, broaden their horizons, and gruel for two(or more) whole years preparing for the venerable exam. But first things first. How/Why did I decide to give the JEE?

It was almost an automatic decision. It was love at first sight when I saw my first computer, in class II probably, at a friend's house, and I used to be pampered and allowed to play Alladin, Prince, Wolfenstein 3d hours on end. Taking up medicine was out of the question, and that doesn't leave much left. (The blunder of taking Electical as a major, is quite another story.) It must be noted that I havn't ever had the habit of working for stuff I want, but given the ambience of the period, there was little else you could do. I still consider two years for any one exam a very silly affair, specially since everyone almost unanimously says they didn't do anything while in 11th; which might be an unfaithful answer, but thats not the point.

And so we joined FIITJEE, which meant we got to just go to a nice AC room(where we were delivered by a chartered auto), get (arguably)good education and ready made study packages, all in the name of preparing for the career. Of course the whole group at school was together there too, which resulted in regular hilarious lunch breaks(at someone's expense), not to discredit the lectures, which were equally jovial.

I run the risk of portraying myself as a arrogant slob, when I say I never considered JEE tough. In fact, one of my main motivations for preparing was actually to prove it, to flout the 'toughness'. And I still believe it. JEE is more of a hype created by training institutes than anything else. So its give by 300k people, but out of those less than 50k should even be considered as fair competition. I think if its just qualifying you are after, it should be breakfast. The main challenge is getting a proper rank. Its like people are making an effort to be stupid.

There are I would say are two defects which barr me from being the perfect candidate for JEE. One, my laziness, and two, I have a really pathetic memory, specially for numerical figures. However, these were resolved quite conveniently and automatically. One of the recurring features of the two years was my talking on the phone for hours solving people's doubts and clarifying concepts. Some of these concepts being which I had not read and hence I would ask them to explain to me first before solving the questions. This took care of my complacency delightfully, as I would always be in the know of the tougher questions and at least upto date with whatever others had studied. The problem of memory is more interesting. I am simply unable to memorise formulas or methods, and hence I had to understand the proofs and workings, making sure I found it obvious to proceed in the particular way. Although this hasn't been so successful in college, it always worked like a charm at the time, IIT being tailored with questions relating to proofs and concepts.

It did not dawn upon me until the very end the implications of being unselected, I always considered a done and out deal. The realisation came at the very end, I expect the period was after boards and before the exam, a good time to have your pants on fire.

An underrated attribute of the whole preparation phase is the importance of confidence. Confidence that you can solve a problem. That the question was made by a human, and it is meant to be solved, not handed down by some divinity and only to be touched by the gifted. This paranoia effects more people than you expect, some very good minds faltering just because of the destruction of their self-confidence.

Anyway what I pride myself of the period more than anything, is not falling for any of the foolhardy hypes or fads. It is actually intriguing to see folks just whiling away time in anonymous pursuits and then considering themselves not good enough for the exam. Well, in a way its true. Also, (and this is true for college as well, however here I find myself in the foolhardy category)another hilarious statement you get to hear is "If I study that much, I will be a lot more ahead." Right, really smart.

The German Misadventure-1

Well it really has been a long time since I posted. I don't seem to recall my last post-it might very well have been about my last intern, but I'm feeling too lazy to check.

Anyway, to be honest, this post doesnt have much to do with a sudden reawakening of my desire to be part of the blogosphere again. The thing is, I haven't made any real human contact in like 3 days. It is finally starting to get on my nerves.

But first, about the place. What strikes you first, more than anything else, is that Germany is ordered-almost frighteningly so. You know how in India the cars at a traffic light(if there is one) always stick fender-to-fender? Well in this town at least, they seem to unerringly maintain a distance of at least 1 m. They never deviate, not even in the middle of the day during office hours.

That experience might of course be different in some other town. My town, Aachen, is a relatively small town, things would probably be different in Berlin or Frankfurt.

The people are unhealthily polite. I've been 'hallo'-ed by perfect strangers not just inside my dorm, but also on the road, in the station, in the airport and of course in the university. And its not as if they want to start a conversation or anything- most of them either can't speak in English, or are uncomfortable speaking it.

Now I had the misfortune of being alloted a single room, with my own kitchen. Also, I can login to my university's lab from my room, so I don't really have to move out of my room. Add to that the fact the net is incredibly fast here and you can download anything you want, its amazing I've even stepped out of my room. But then, as I have come to realize, one does eventually need to talk to people.

There are of course those who have come here on an intern of their own. 2 others from my college, some assorted people from NITs, and one guy from IIT B. Anyway, I didn't exactly hit it off with them, despite my best efforts, so this weekend I found myself opting out of a trip to Paris with them and staying home sitting on my ass.

As I said, I haven't had any human contact in 3 days...since people can cook their meals in their rooms, they dont have to step out at all, and they don't. Its becoming so annoying that I probably will have to go to work tomorrow, and make friends with the rest of the guys.

There have been some benefits- I have learnt the rudiments of cooking and I have seen several good looking girls-good looking not just by iit standards, but generally, and of course this has forced me to start innovating to find things to do-which I believe is a good thing, however depressing it might be.

I hope to make a trip to Brussels next weekend, but I can't be sure. Expect my next post soon!

Bangaluru week 1

So an year after Rahul romping his curls on the streets of this maddu-land, I find myself banished to the same fate, albiet without the curls. As expected, the first week was a hotch potch of over-charging auto drivers, dosa-sambhar, catching wrong buses and dosa-sambhar again. (Btw, you really feel the power of cultural segregations on a southie trip, all the advertisements you can see only have Deekipa Padukone, Madhavan+Vidya Balan, or Asin. Its literally scary to imagine if suddenly the Tamils declare a fatwa against all outsiders while ur there. Sheer numbers matter) Currently, we happen to be in search of safe havens where the white-collars hang out. MG road has been rumored to be one, (our office is its wrong end, so havnt been there yet), and Forum confirmed as.

Some facts to be noted:
1) All north-indian eating joints(dhabas) are punjabi house.
2) MacDonalds is cheaper here.
3) The buses actually have the front seats reserved for women, as the well-informed ladies are quick to point out, which makes you imagine a (very-successful) ad campaign by the government (sporting a very forward feminist lead) to sensitise the women of the facility.
4) Some buses have tickets, some have bills, some have neither. And the rate differs between them. The ticketless being the cheapest.
5) Bangalore is big, bigger than Delhi maybe. You end up spending 3 hours in buses if your not careful.
6) Locals can't multi-task, never. Its fruitless to ask an attendant a question while he's in the middle of billing a customer.
7) When ur taking an auto, the driver is doing you a favor.
8) Autos won't get a passanger back from your destination, never mind that its 8 pm and ur going to a hustling market place.

Anyway, the post can't be complete without mentioning the workplace. Its cool, a cafeteria, flexible work hours, high speed net, no strict supervision, doesn't take much to make us happy. Video conferencing company == cool big screens in office. PtbN, lunch makes you sleepy. Coffee half an hour later must.

We got a house, yay, we rented a flat to stay. 6 of us, 6 of us two floors up, ruchus all around. Getting in the cooking atmosphere, starting with sandwiches, maggi, french toast, tea. The bathroom tap makes an eiree noise. TV is a ban. Especially when theres an IPL match everyday and your not the biggest fan.

What else? Went to Nandi hills, Lumbini Gardens on the weekend. Timepass places, won't specially recommend to anybody, but Bangalore doesn't seem to offer much else. Learned a few planning and money managing tips from veterans.

Now to the end, I am wondering why I wrote this blog. Well, we were supposed to maintain a diary, maybe this will do?

PS: Beru, brokerage, research papers

Of Indecision and the rat race

Havnt felt more like a rat ever. The sense of anonymity dawns upon you as you move through the myriad lanes and side streets to reach your destination, one of the dozens of coaching institutes for CAT in the locality, basically folks banking on a rat's hopes to leave the pack behind, by a little leg up. Its basically the rats in the middle of the race who treasure the bait, folks ahead can have a clearer vision about the scenario, the destination, while folks at the tail can look at other avenues and easily slide off. It's the rats in the middle who find it impossible to dislodge, stuck in a loop, unable to race out, or fall back.

So how did I land into this? How do I find myself yet again, looking at a classroom of 30 youths having paid a small fortune of their parents, to listen to a guy who's just found a way to survive the economy crack? Its indecision, I tell you. The way Indians are brought up, is not to leave anything be, not to take decisions with uncertain outcomes. Not to ratify your realm, and stay put. A greedy algorithm, if you will, for all the cs grads there. You take whatever looks the best at the moment, without looking at all the previous dots connecting your life.

Now for thoughts ravishing my mind this afternoon -

Its sunny today, not hot, but warm, the beautiful weather as you would say. Its reflecting on all the faces, which I silently gaze as I sit on the embankments in front of the coffee shop, waiting for a friend. People hanging out in groups, chatting off before heading off their ways, Profs students alike, everyone with bags. A dog on the sidelines playing with a polythene. Its amazing to think that each of this chappies, just another conscious individual, houses a infinum of space between his/her ears. A million simultaneous, unrelated thoughts raging inside each mind, each his own problems, each his own ambitions, or the lack of. Language, that indispensable link for us to communicate and correlate those thoughts. The improper use of(it can be heard). Everyone is a single entity in essence, yet when we see outside ourselves, we see a hierarchy, a society.

People seem busy, everyone moving with a certainty of knowing what needs to be done. Yet its amazing, for all the advances of ours, we ourselves remain temporary, a piece of a wave on the sea shore coming in, just to be replaced by another in a moment. So how can we be busy? Or we need to be busy to avoid thinking about all such nonsense. Homework needs to be done, classes slept though, events attended. As would be done by the next wave, and the next. As I gaze longer, a shadow begins to appear around people's eyes, or it was there all the time, and I just begun to notice it. A lingering giveaway of a late bedtime, a sign of tiredness, weariness with it all.

Why are people following through? Its indecision, I tell you.

Ghajini

Spilling it while its hot. Here's a too-good-to-believe value deal. Give 5 minutes to read this, and save yourself three hours of the crucifying existence that is Ghajini.
Having loved momento, I was prepared not to be dazzled, but rather curious of the Hindi(rather Malayalam/Tamil/) take on it. I was however left quite appalled. I think the director was confused on what to shower his epsilon sized concentration on, a love story, an action thriller, larger than life altruistic humans, a brother of devil villain, or Aamir Khan's shiny new eight-pack. The movie tries to bring everything, excellence(in any) is a word unheard of. Just touch all famous formulas, and it can't go wrong eh? Well, it can, if you try.

The plot is all too predictive, so are the dialogues. Actually the predictability becomes amusing sometimes, but only when you have already given up hope.
The abstruse depiction of 'short term memory loss' phenomenon(mouthed lavishly by Pradeep Rawat(the villain)) to suit convenience is a gross headache. The memory lasts as long as the scene requires, and loss-moments occur at the most predictive locales. Probably which you already saw in the trailers. The director is just confused whether he is dealing with short-term or long-term memory loss, as when the bad guys beat up our hero and erase his markings(ooopss!! just spoiled a plot point for you), he doesn't remember anything of his romance(which happened well before the incident which took his memory). Hey, but the courtship is well documented in his diaries so not to worry. Our hero is just as pumped up after reading the heart warming diaries. No mention whether he remembered anything of before his hormones kicked in. Also a maniac, animus instinct for howling, muscle flexing and eye popping action seems to accompany this brain handicap.

Action scenes are run-of-the-mill Mithun-da wannabe. All accompanied with a constipated grumble on Aamir Khan's face, every indication that someone slept on the wrong side of bed. A little inspiration from Rajnikant might just have saved the film. Really.

Some things seemed on the right track, the stuff Bollywood excels in. A love story(rich guy, not so girl), a rotten-to-core-with-no-hope-of-redemption villain and the typical bubbly the-world-is-so-beautiful every-mothers-dream-daughter heroine accompanied with the so-not-possible-situational humor. But only to end this delusion, the story-writer decided more ingredients were required to make a really spicy treat so in comes a social cause, full with the coverings of IBN live. The casual attempt of sudden inclusion of real life issues with too-reel story just leaves a bad taste in the mouth. Not to mention a god-so-nosy medical student who one wonders wither came from.

Even the camera angles seem wrong(not in the flashbacks, Bwood has learned that by now). All low cameras with hardly an overhead shot of the famous moon cut, as if the glare off it would ruin the film. Seriously, this was a huge disappointment from an Aamir Khan movie. Its I suppose become the top grosser of 2008(in one week). At least the marketing team seems to be getting the act together, what with the Khan himself offering haircuts for people to save Rs10 for that extra popcorn.

Was I too rough? Maybe, but I haven't blogged in a while, so quit complaining.

Geeky Abstract Thinking

(What's engaging my mind...please don't hate me)

Have you considered the colors you see might not be the ones the next guy does? Blue might be green and green red. Color is just the processing of wavelengths of light by the mind, with no chance of knowing differences between individuals anytime in life.

I don't understand why astronomers search for 'earth-like' planets for chance of life. Life is just universe complexity gone berserk, it might need carbon(for the complex structures), but otherwise temperature and chemicals on earth shouldn't have much significance. Consider, if earth had no floral population, would we have ever imagined life in the form of a tree? (By definition, life is something which has the ability to reproduce)
This would lead on to the consideration how rare 'intelligent' life would be even among lifeforms.

Language has a profound, too profound an effect on our thinking. Analysis of an object is mightily facilitated just by giving it a name. Else, much of the thought process is limited. Indians are surrounded by relatives, hence have developed an assortment of different names to cope with every shade of it. Eskimos similarly, have many names for snow.

Why is there technological advancement? Its obvious technology does not result in greater happiness. Happiness relates to not our convenience, affluence, but to our expectations. If telephone was never invented, we would be just as happy without a cell phone in our pockets. Exploration and achievement, looks more like a basic ingrained requirement of the human mind, driving our science forward.

Why does science follow mathematical laws? Why can an equation represent a trajectory of an object? The shape of a curve? Maybe human intuition(==maths), is itself shaped by the continual observation of these phenomenon. Hence what we call logic, is itself the basic playground of nature.

A really geeky one. A charged object moving in a magnetic force needs to have a force applied to keep it in uniform speed. While the magnetic force may be just permanent magnets with no expenditure of energy. See the absurdity? It could have been the other way.

How can two objects, inanimate, kept at a distance, exactly apply forces on each other??(Gravitation, electromagnetic) One of the fundamental things teaching children at a too young an age keeps them from seeing the wonder of. How can waves travel in space, void? I can understand the equations, the E and M fields dancing, enforcing one another, but that's it. Qualitatively its a mystery.

If you could develop an exact clone of yourself, complete with all experiences, memories and your sense of self, would you leave him in your place when you die? You could be immortal this way, but you yourself, would be dead.

Family is a concept, one of the oldest and most ingrained concepts in animals. Marriage is a concept.

'Friend', 'Internet', 'Success' are just words, a collection of alphabets. Its amazing how feelings and ideas have become interwined with such constructs. Its an interesting experience to think of the concept without the associated lingo, what it represents.


....maybe I will detail on some of these later.....

Oh Gawd...

Its a well excepted fact that we guys in engineering colleges have way too much time in our hands. And we make the best use of it trying to learn from others' mistakes, well documented, although arguably a little glamorised, in the paraphernalia of movies, serials, virals and such. However, eventually we do get exhausted by the knowledge onslaught and decide to take some time out. It is an outcome of a multitude of such breaks that I decide was worthy enough to present to you. After my long hibernation, I know this won't be sufficient, but remember the Grinch, and keep a mighty heart.

No issue perplexes us engineers, men of science, more than that of "God". This word, which middle-school maths teachers have great fun equating with {D,O,G} in introduction to set theory, is a concept their students are forever be mystified by. After all, in a world full of laws and equations and probabilities, is there enough maneuvering room for God to even exist? What follows, you are foretold, are my personal views, which I am sharing for discussion purposes. I hope to offend noone, but would be delighted if you leave a comment about your own views on this delicate topic.

What is God? I believe people consider him an omniscient, omnipotent person. By person, we comprehend a human. But arn't we evolving creatures? We know we have a vestigial appendix and the reminiscent of a tailbone. But of course we should talk of the spiritual realm, look beyond the physical. But this spiritual realm is a topic in itself, that would mean we all have souls inside us!(I am not disagreeing, lets just say the discussion is beyond the scope of this post). But why should this spiritual domain be given precedence over our 'real' world? Are we in some kind of matrix-like virtual reality? A version of mythology comes close saying that this whole world is to test our faith....but isn't that too snobbish on God's part? Why is there really is a need for a real world at all when we have this spiritual world(A more serious closer to heart question actually is - What is the need for the universe to exist at all?) Also, this world is too complete, too perfect, too complicated I consider to be a farce. God should instead be detached from all these worlds, like in a 13th dimension with 12 dimension world(s). But there is a better opinion. We should dispel the idea of a person(or maybe you didn't have it from the beginning, and I have totally bored you) and consider 'consciousness' as such.
(Sentient - endowed with feeling and unstructured consciousness; "the living knew themselves just sentient puppets on God's stage"- T.E.Lawrence)

So what is God? I believe what we truly consider by God is "the sentient force controlling the whole universe and which is able to take conscious decisions". But then, puff goes religion. Working on such a magnanimous scale, why would God take the slightest interest in the not-even-speck-of-dust planet like ours? Well, maybe because he specially made life possible here and we are his really dear children. In fact, this has some weight, as out of the thousands of scientific constants, (I have heard) even if one was slightly off by the fraction of a decimal, the universe would have a totally different structure, with probably no humans. But then, there would not have been anyone to ask of the existence of God, would there? Or maybe life would come out in a marvelous new form whose weirdness to us would only be comparable to our weirdness to them. But I am digressing.

So we see how god might exist in my world. Since, I keep hearing about people (intellectuals) passionately denying the existence of God, I would for once try to take the other side. The universe has just one more complication, one more singularity, one more infinity to be evolved. I do tend to get an unreal feeling when I consider these abnormalities. Consider, did universe have a beginning? If it had, what about before it? Yes I know, the beginning of universe was itself the beginning of time, but what exactly does it mean? Similarly, does universe have a boundary? Its kinda absurd to say it extends forever. But if it has, what's beyond it? This questions might already be clear to some, but personally I find them really perplexing. In the end, lots boil down to just faith. I have faith that the science laws, which predict the big bang, I have faith in the existance of America, even though I have never been there. The world might just be created this afternoon, with all our memories and ideas planted in place!

Now we come to religion, about which again I have my own two cents. I have absolutely no interest in worship of idols or rituals and various festivities. In my opinion, even if God is overseeing us, why exactly the all-powerful scarcely care that are remembering him or not? Won't he be much above these things? However, I do not detest religion. I accept and hail its therapeutic and psychological effects. It is a means of bringing people together, of giving people purpose in life(and also an economic model in itself). In fact, I believe one of the major tasks of the subconscious mind is preventing an individual knowledge of his own insignificance. We are but less than an evanescent flicker in the fabric of space-time, full realisation of which(I don't have it either) would surely destroy a person. Religion, origin of the immortal soul and life-cycles I imagine had this at the heart of their genesis, the self-defence of sub conscience mind at work. And this will be true always, no matter the technological age.

So the conclusion....
After all my efforts in the philosophical banter, there is finally a conclusion. Existence of God, does not matter....Yes, you read that right, scroll back and read again. At least, it doesn't matter in the way you should live your life. You should do what you like, and enjoy, but of course it should be a sustainable living. Because God, is too busy to care, and you are too insignificant to be cared about. By sustainable, I mean, you can't just spend life idling away, and maybe thief/rob when you need money. Not because it is immoral, and God will punish you, but because it is not sustainable, the society will punish you, and you will end up in jail, which you might not enjoy. Hence, morals have not lost their value, because they should only increase your enjoyment; the kinder you are, arguably the more kinder people will be to you. Principals also havn't lost their value, but you should only have them if they give you satisfaction, fulfilment. Be a vegetarian because you like the thought, not because it is ungodly.

We have come a long way. Let us summarise.
Today, lordvarun explained to you his own take on the stuff he hardly understands anything about. He convinced you he isn't capable of forming any opinion on this 'overseer' business. He said he doesn't doesn't understand religion but sees no harm in it. And the final outcome, to the thrill of all present, was that everyone should live happily and promote world peace.
Thank you for your time

Vocab blues

I have always been a bit of a snob when it comes to my English, even when I was in an ICSE school. Following that up with 4 years in CBSE didn't help to dispel that notion.

However, I was certainly forced too disabuse myself of any such ideas after coming to college. Here I found people who'd read Karl Marx and the Communist Manifesto in Class 10th (if you havent heard of it, suffice it to say that it's a pretty big deal), then there were national level debate champions and so on.

I hope I don't sound toooo smug, but after 2 years of college, I have fared reasonably well even with all these new threats to my position. Now, it's time for the GRE.

The GRE is of course, not a particularly gruelling test, but it does require a certain degree of command over the English language. Moreover, I enjoy finding out new words, a past time you may or may not have experienced. The problem with using these abtruse words (now there's an example!) is that they make you sound all pedantic and anal....an image I'm not anxious to project in coll.

Anyway, I came across this site called freerice.com, and have spent an entertaining 2 days guessing completely into the dark. Here are some examples:
setaceous:
1. bristly, 2. lucky, 3. furious, 4. sexless
If you already know the meaning, you should really not read any further. There are only more words of a similar sort.
Now the meaning is of course not so important as the process, which is the fun part.
now do you call a lucky person,' he is setaceous in all he does'....or,
'he was setaceous when he got her letter'....or, 'Varun is setaceous when it comes to girls'....
the last one might be construed to have some meaning but only by a stretch, but the rest obviously don't sound right.
The answer is of course, bristly.
Another one is hyssop-is it a herb, or a monster. The answer here as well can be had by groping around with sentence...it turns out it is a herb
Now here's where my strategy failed- decorticate. How on earth did someone coin this word for peeling I don't know. In a sentence: "He was decorticating the banana". Even those snooty professors in Harvard wouldn't do that....but apparently someone does.

As I came across more and more weird words, I stumbled onto a site which specialises exclusively on weird words, and pretty interesting it was too.

For example, did you know of the word 'lollapaloosa'? Here's the history of the word:
"You can’t easily misunderstand the meaning of this American word, since it’s so obviously contains within its sounds the idea of something excellent or highly desirable, just right as the name for the annual Lollapalooza pop festival. It has been spelled just about every possible way down the years (the Oxford English Dictionary has it under lallapaloosa). Its extravagant enthusiasm may be judged from an early appearance, in Miss Minerva and William Green Hill by Frances Boyd Calhoun, dated 1909:
“Lordee, Lordee,” he gazed at them admiringly, “you sho’ is genoowine corn-fed, sterlin’ silver, all-wool-an’-a-yard-wide, pure-leaf, Green-River Lollapaloosas.”
Another early example is in a baseball game report in the Fort Wayne Sentinel of May 1903, one we may be glad to have missed (the reporter said disgustedly that one pitcher was all too accurate, since he hit the bat almost every time):
There wasn’t enough ginger in the players nor audience, either, to keep a colicky baby awake, the only excitement being furnished by a loquacious individual in the grand stand who was rooting for Evansville, and he rooted right, too. He proclaimed himself the High-past-potent-grand-mufti-lallapaloosa of the Amalgamated Knockers’ Brotherhood and had a bigger assortment of mallets on hand than a croquet factory.
That was one of its earliest appearances in print, since it seems to have been around in the language for only a few years by then. Other early usages suggest an origin among card players, such as in an 1899 report in the Daily Herald of Delphos, Ohio, about card sharps fleecing a hick: “Another got a lallapaloosa, consisting of three clubs and a pair of spades, and took $85 of the farmer’s money.” In 1897 the Idaho Daily Statesman had another: “‘A lalla-pa-loosa,’ answered big John, and threw his hand to Scovel. There was a jack of hearts and a deuce, tray, four and five of diamonds.”
Where it comes from is uncertain. Lulu and lolla, both also meaning something good, are recorded earlier, and lollapaloosa may be an extravagant outgrowth of the latter. Suggestions that it may derive from appaloosa, the name of the famous breed of Native American horse, are ruled out on grounds of date."

This is of course just one out of thousands. Imagine, a single word carrying an entire history with it. Etymology, as the science of studying words is called, is particularly fascinating, as you may might discover by just digging into the word roots of common words.