10.02.2010

I suppose there comes a moment in all our lives when we are torn between what could have been and what is. And certainly not all of us are bestowed with capacity and audacity enough to look back on such times with a ((gratifying)) smile on our face, satisfied for the gleam of experience that grew henceforth than be disheartened by the darkness that veils the road not taken. Perhaps, living in the past is not such a good pastime. Sometimes. Sometimes is something I have acquired the habit of using a great deal. The worst follows when the shadow of past overwhelms us on our way, to haunt us through the future, sometimes stabbing us dead in one stroke, sometimes gently piercing through into our imagination inflicting wounds that soak and suck the life spirit bit by bit... Choices. Are they not the vantage points for these phantoms to rest, respire and resile. A good piece of writing is like the subtle intoxication which creeps up slowly, spreading its myriad tentacles all across before it overcomes the prey completely and draws it into a (paradoxical word needed) submission, it is like the altering of a soul, the reader no longer is external to what he reads, instead he relinquishes his soul, his passion and his emotions for the story to build on, for the characters to thrive on...It would have been wonderful to be able to choose from the past and see for the present.

Why do we need Religion ?

Why do we need a religion in the very first place ? Why is it so important to deal with the existence of God when our own is in jeopardy ? Is religion a need or a tool man created to use and manipulate the masses ? The mist clears a little if we take a look at the evolution of man through the ages. As we trace the human civilization back to 3000 years, we realize that man is the most developed of all organisms on earth and was even back then, What separates man from the rest is his mind or ability to use reason, ability to create and assimilate knowledge and use it for his purpose. The sustenance of life on earth requires a certain minimum in terms of food, clothing and shelter. The primary quest for early man was to somehow ensure this existence with as minimum hurdles as possible. One of the major reasons why man came together as a society. Once man started off in a society he faced troubles from not only the animals and organisms around but also from the nature. So there was an urge to explain the natural phenomena and somehow curb or use it to one's advantage. As we see the earliest form of explanations that rest with us are in terms of myths which constitute together the mythology for a civilization to explain these natural processes. As time went on philosophers came who felt that reason was a better tool to understanding the nature and its functioning. With time these philosophers proposed certain theories to explain man, the universe ,its origin & end e.t.c. However some of these theories were such that the proofs for them were not always in the realm of sensory perceptions or reason. This was the time of the Classical Philosophers. Then came the Hellenistic period. The time when we see individuals using these theories to further upon them. Jesus was one of them. This was the period when the lines between philosophy and religion were blurred. As what these individuals explained was somehow accepted by a majority and since it had attempted to explain the phenomena incomprenhensible hitherto it also put down the urge inside man to look out for any more explanations(Not commenting on all, but a general feeling was as such).What i am trying to point out is that in all periods and at all times this has been an inner urge and need of man to understand the surrounding and that which can cause it pain or pleasure. Consequently , since religion attempts to define a lot of it , even if the proof for it may not always be given in rational terms or a kind which can be comprehended by the senses, it is generally accepted. So, its basically that the inner urge of man , the curiosity to what is everything, about the origin and end,is what is in the nature of man as it has a direct impact on his existence. This attempt to understand the surrounding is explained to a large extent by religion, thus gratifying man's urge and giving him a sense of security as it is in our nature that we supposedly feel more comfortable & confident of something we have a knowledge about, its origin , end working etc. This could also be the reason why religion lost its followers as science developed, one man could not have accepted two reasons for the same phenomena. This also explains why religions wields much more power over the illiterate classes.

Identity

"You have no idea to the kind of things that people can get used to."

Well I suppose the following article is not gonna be applicable for the existentialists, or for everyone who feels he is his own master and derives his identity by choice than by chance or compulsion. Who am 'I' ? Sounds cliche, i realize that. Most of the times when we encounter a question which demands an explanation for 'I' we ignore it thinking that the answer lies perhaps in the realm of spirituality, or else the answer is explicable only in terms of experience and phenomena beyond the "Ordinary" human reach. Consequently everyone's has had a chance to manipulate the answer as per his/her benefit or will. However the questions still lies there , how does one identify himself. The problem with an identity is that the moment you begin to identify yourself with certain charecteristics , you basically have a choice to choose between that identity and some other. This choice thus nullifies the concept of identity, ie identity would be something eternal and not transient depoending on the person's choice. Thus every possible identity that we associate with ourselves gets squared out by this principle . So can we imply that we are all devoid of identities.
May be or May be not. I don't know.
However i stressed upon the point that the concept of identity would fall apart only in the awareness of the knowledge of the choice one possesses in terms of his/her identity. Most people we encounter, perhaps do not go so deep into analyzing that there's a principle within all of us which is manipulating our actions. This principle for some is a matter of choice whereas for most others is build up gradually and unconsciously thus taking away their power to choose.
Talking about these 'most', this is what becomes their identity, furtther building the foundations for their ego. Why do you think are we all so hesitant to change ? Coz their are circumstances and our reactions to them which have over time become the basis for identifying ourselvbes. You wanna destry a person, destroy the basis of his identity.
However the knowledge that such an idenity is a matter of one's own choice is what i believe can save one from this gross destruction of self and identity.

Fear As an Emotion

Article in Sunday Times- O-Zone by Vinita Dawra Nangia

[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[
We are often warned not to push anyone into a corner because that is when they fight their best and most vicious battles . A good hunter will never force a wild animal in a situation from where it percieves no escape, the animal must feel there is still some escape route. Because it is when the animal loses hope of escape , that it will fight at its wildest and cause the worse harm.
A cornered creature man or animal is dangerous even vicious . For that is the point at which one loses all fear . You become fearless when you lose that which you value the most . Because when that happens , the rest really doesn't seem to matter as much . And you also realise the futility of having lived in fear of something that is now beyond reach.
You understand that you could possibly have been able to enjoy the finer intricacies of your object of desire much more if you hadn't lived in constant fear of losing it. When you lose it you see the futility of all the anxiety , the heartburn over it. You start looking for and find ways of living wothout it. And the human mind and spirit , amazingly resilient as they are discover reasons and conviction for why you are better off without that which is now lost.
And that is the point at which you start enjoying the positive aspects of fearlessness . For when you fear nothing , nobody can manipulate you anymore . You would be your own person and not dependent on anyone for your happiness or peace of mind .Your best bouts of courage are reserved for times when you have nothing to lose.
In ancient warfare , commanders would often burn the boats their army arrived in order to obliterate any threat of their soldiers turning tail and escaping. With their only means of retreat cut off , the only way to safety for the soldiers was to fight till victory or they would be literally fighting till death. That's how the phrase burning one's boats or burning one's bridges originated.
Most manipulations in relationships occur because we hand over the weapon of our fear to be used against us to those we love most. A lover is able to manipulate his beloved's emotions by threatening withdrawal of love and care. He will sulk , not talk or withdraw caring gestures - all the things that a loved one values . So you give in , bow to the will of the lover , and make compromises , all for fear of losing that which is cherished.
On the other hand if the lover overplays his hand and carries on the withdrawal act beyond a point , the beloved may finally get used to the idea of rejection and taking the loss as a fait accompli , lose all fear in the relationship.
Fear of losing leaves you impotent not just in relationships but also in everyday situations such as your work life , with friends or relatives and even with strangers . It extends beyond material things to prestige , respect , happiness , peace of mind , etc.
At work how often we let people get away with delivering shoddy work , doing an injustice to someone or cheating us just because we fear losing our peace of mind over an altercation! we allow incompetent people to underperform for fear of creating a situation and so losing our calm.
For courage is not just required for doing battle but also for maintaining a sense of calm , for making money , for living a good life - in short for everything . The fight or flight syndrome kicks in irrespective of the fact whether the thing we fear losing is physical , mental or a financial threat.
Those who can learn the trick of transcending this fear of loss , would find the courage to enjoy that which they love most while they still retain it. Says Dale Carnegie, "You can conquer almost any fear if you will only make up your mind to do so . For remember , fear doesn't exist anywhere except in the mind."
]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]

a)The article has beautifully described fear as an emotion and also the source of it. However since it argues its pont on the basis of facts{and goes on to show only one side of the picture} , it is very much probable to counter it with an alternate viewpoint, as in The loss of fear as an emotion occurs only when the person is convinced completely of the fact that there remains no other way. This conviction on part of the person is based on his knowledge of the circumstances , basically that it is relative and nothing absolute, so two different persons in the same situation with a different information set are to act differently, depending upon whether they believe that alternate ways of escape from the situation exist.
b)Secondly, it has also described emotions which are the result of Fear of Loss.
c)Thirdly , it describes how one practically makes use of this emotion to carry out one's objective, as studied in game theory.
d)Fourthly, it has differentiated between the emotions when there is a Fear of Loss and when there isn't.
e)Lastly, it emphasizes that the knowledge of the emotion of Fear of Loss gives him the ability to choose.

The article also describes that the possibility of a choice does not always strengthen one's position, as is evident by the examples in the above article for someone who has a choice between a difficult escape route(with no loss) and no escape (with a complete loss) , it is easier to manipulate someone in a dilemma unable to make the choice than someone who firmly stands for the choice he's made.

@The Dilemma of 'The Calling In Life'@

Is there a thing called passion or rather what we say 'the calling in life' and if there is then for someone who died cleaning toilets and gutters , are we ready to accept this as his calling or do we believe that only the chosen few in this world get that privilege . The existentialists would of course deny the possibility of such a calling for they believe in the freedom and choice of each individual therefore each one's calling is a matter of his or her own choice . If that be the case how is anyone to decide his or her calling. Death is supposedly the best thing that could have happened to man. In the face of immortality would you and I have been able to prioritize and make choices and thereby decide upon the calling of life. The fact that we all have a limited time here on this earth to choose and enjoy, to choose and suffer accordingly is perhaps what helps each one of us to prioritize. As per existentialists if we go believing that essence is a matter of choice which follows existence with no prior given nature , how is man to decide his calling. The very fact that a person makes a choice , chooses one over the rest , implies he has a guiding principle which in turn emphasizes that he has a certain nature in accordance with which he made the choice . I also agree to the fact that often this principle is a matter of choice , but even then, the fact that man makes a choice in terms of his principles, again implies that there lies a given nature which overrides the principle and thus helps man to choose. The choices that we make are all towards the same end( seek pleasure and avoid pain) and so it is akin to saying that a multitude of roads start and end at common points. The choices that we make are perhaps then an illusion we tend to indulge ourselves to achieve the common end. In such a scheme of things the choices are all significant or insignificant . Their worth depends solely on the amount of importance we attach to it and also by its coherence with the given nature . This nature of man is the pursuit of pleasure or satisfaction and the abstinence from pain or discontent.

Can Faith Be Blind ???

Man's ability to rationally relate the causes and consequences and thereby further integrate his knowledge on its basis is perhaps one of the most important factors to which we owe the overall process of evolution. How far is it correct (on a moral and ethical basis) to snatch away from him a right such as this. Rationality is perhaps in the nature of man. Do we not take away from him a tool , a means and render him handicapped and at the mercy of others who still wield this power of rationality and logic. Can we ever explain 'Blind Faith' logically? Can faith be blind? Let us see the issue from a logical perspective . Considering that a person X says he has blind faith in another person Y. Now the fact that he could choose between this 'Blind Faith' and some other or between a 'Blind Faith' and 'No Blind Faith' implies that he has a certain principle which he considers the basis for having made this choice . This indicates that the 'Blind Faith' is based on some principle which overrides it and his blind faith shall continue only as long as the 'Blind Faith' and his principle are coherent. In the event of a conflict between the choice taken and the underlying principle a person will have to disregard either the choice or mould his principle accordingly to finally make them coherent. What can be concluded , is that even when one makes a choice unconsciously there lies an underlying principle of which he might be oblivious . But the fact that there lies such a principle negates the notion of a 'Blind Faith'.

The Paradox of Freedom Of Choice

"To think is to Realize the Ignorance that Deludes the Sense of Freedom"

"When you start thinking you realize you have stepped on the road to freedom, by the time the realization sinks in completely you have traded your one form of subjugation for the other, feeling contented that now you are free.May be we were all born to look for the corners in a circle."

Make people feel that they think and they will love you, make them think and they will hate you. I don't remember who put this intelligent notion to words but he was right for a major part of the herd, leaving of course those who could be clubbed as 'extremistan'. The above quote beautifully points out the irony and the resentment that goes along with freedom. I believe that once you have satisfied your basic needs which are the ones needed for survival everything that you do thereafter is a choice and thus a manifestation of your freedom. To make choice is to assert freedom is what I believe. But do you really wanna make it , Yes you think so, NO you don't want to, why? Coz with freedom comes a responsibility , a feeling which opens up each time you retrospect your decisions , you are encompassed in guilt feeling responsible for your failure , a feeling which rises each time you judge yourself no matter on the basis of whose standards your own or those you believe to be your own.

The principles that guide you now may not be the ones you followed when you committed the act currently in retrospection. These principles are your standards the lenses you use to look at the world around, the yardstick you use to judge yourself and those around These principles are your chains of freedom.

The freedom we so often talk about and believe to be each one's right is something probably very few of us understand in its true sense and its true implications. As Oscar Wilde put it "When God wants to punish man he simply answers his prayers"

The freedom we desire is one from responsibility, freedom from our own nature, freedom from our own self, freedom to not answer, freedom to do wrong consciously, freedom from guilt. But are these possible , can i run away from who i am , can i be perfectly logical and ideally selfish, an epitome of free dom.
I believe the answer is no. We all live with some form of principle guiding our lives consciously or unconsciously , chosen or imposed, rejoiced or suffered, This guiding gleam in our lives is both the support and the handicap of our lives.The fact that there is a principle which guides our lives means that there is an idea we believe which overrides our existence thereby crumbling the sense of freedom so far developed. To say I am free is to say I follow no rules , no principles. No principle overrides the choices[I make these choices coz me and others here on this earth are not immortal and i have a limited amount of time ,thus to choose and do what i like the most ] I make , but each of your choice has to be guided by a motive which in turn has to be guided by some form of principle thereby absolute freedom in life is a contradiction unto itself.

But the form of imposition laid on us is something we can undoubtedly choose. For instance you could choose to be a slave of your own impulses or the long drawn traditions , you could agree to submit before what others desire of you or submit before those same desires considering them to be your own, The choice we have now is not between freedom and 'no_freedom' but rather between the form of 'no_freedom'.

Choose your form of subjugation, the principle you would like to live by is the chain you have chosen to restrict yourself.