Life is a learning experience and something I have learnt off late is very personal. Through a series of experiences I have learnt that at the end of the day, no matter what the situation, if there is a mistake it is my fault. This learning experience has made me not only sceptic of human nature but also bitter. Although emotional in my outlook I can also reason out this learning through looking at history.
Responsibility is a strong, subjective word. History shows that no one has been ready to accept responsibility. When one examines the causes leading up to the Second World War, the responsibility has been forced upon Hitler; a dead man who cannot speak for himself. Yet the victor countries have not explored their fault in the matter. Who were the ones to punish Germany to an extent that Hitler was pushed to power? Who were the ones to placate Hitler in the beginnings of an obvious crisis? Although Hitler was at fault, the major fault lies with the victor nations who allowed Hitler to continue with his aggressive acts. Yet these countries till date have not accepted their responsibility on the matter. This world history example can be linked to day to day life where people refuse to accept their responsibility on a fault.
Mistakes occur not just due to one cause. There are many causes involved yet the “blame game” does not allow for these various causes to be explored. Even it is a mere mistake of breaking a vase or a grave mistake like a teacher making an error with something that affects the lives of the student, taking responsibility is only taken by the bravest. Instead one aims to blame another. Personally I have been blamed for things that were not entirely my fault. The numbers of times I have been blamed has allowed me to thus learn to accept every mistake to be mine even is not. That helps in lesser fights and those people happy even if it does sacrifice one’s own peace of mind.
Wednesday, December 9, 2009
Wednesday, November 4, 2009
THE PURSUIT OF HAPPYNESS
MOVIE- KNOWLEDGE AT WORK
‘The Pursuit of Happyness’ is a 2006 American biographical drama film, directed by Gabriele Muccino and based on the true story of Chris Gardner. In ‘The Pursuit of Happyness’, Chris Gardner is a smart man who invests in a devise that is now finding trouble to find its place due to emergence of other technologies. Despite his valiant attempts to help keep the family afloat, the mother of his five-year-old son Christopher buckles under the financial pressure and leaves. Chris, now a single father, continues doggedly to pursue a better-paying job using every sales skill he knows. He lands an internship at a prestigious stock brokerage firm with no salary but only with hopes of a promising future. Due to the lack of money, Chris and his son are soon evicted from their apartment and forced to sleep in shelters, bus stations, bathrooms, or wherever they can find refuge for the night. Despite his troubles, Chris continues to be a loving and caring father, using the affection and trust his son has for him as a pushing force. Various knowledge issues can be seen in the film.
The knowledge issue dealt with here is the war between emotion and reason. Various emotions are involved when you are dealing with life. Chris goes through fear due to his financial troubles, jealousy of people with wonderful lives, sadness, love and then finally happiness. The movie in many forms is didactic. It teaches that that all hard work shall seek its rewards but in a theory of knowledge context, of how in the battle of reason and emotion, for happiness, reason should be a driving force. The root cause of all his troubles, the device known as the bone density scanner, was a judgement based on emotion. It was what everyone told him was the ‘in’ thing. Letting his emotions get the best of him, Chris did not reason out the evolution of life. Everything changes with time. Emotion led him to financial distress, reason leads him to happiness.
The way to reach knowledge is also one of the knowledge issues of the film. Experiences play a major role in informing Chris. Initially when emotion over rules him, all the knowledge Chris has is second hand through hearing what other people say. However as reason takes over him, he observes and talks to a stockbroker on the street and thus receives firsthand knowledge. First hand experiences of Chris develop him to be what he is even in his personal life.
‘I met my father for the first time when I was 28 years old. I made up my mind that when I had children, my children were going to know who their father was’.
His experiences with his father taught him to be there for his son. His son too became his source of determination through which Chris gained the strength to continue with the difficult task of living and surviving. The relationship that they share is built on understanding. Chris’ own experiences allow him to pass invaluable knowledge on to his son.
‘Christopher Gardner: Hey... Don't ever let somebody tell you... You can't do something. Not even me. All right?
Christopher: All right.
Christopher Gardner: You got a dream... You gotta protect it. People can't do somethin' themselves, they wanna tell you you can't do it. If you want somethin', go get it. Period.’
Thus one can conclude that the major knowledge at work issue is the struggle to succeed economically and personally. Reason and emotion is a contrast on which the success depends on. However in the movie we can see that money being is shown as the only way to achieve happiness. This is a bias. We see Chris with his son all the time smiling and laughing. Although he is with his son he is saying he is not happy is not ethical as family and love is what leads to happiness. The movie does take for granted the importance of money, cars and a lifestyle for happiness. It does not explore simple living as a happy living. This granted fact leads to the movie have a very fairy tale appearance which at the end of the day is not reality. In the sense, an unhappy man due to his hard work, succeeds and becomes very happy. This is not the truth. Even though there is a clear bias of only money leading to happiness, in the movie we so see the importance of both being shown
The struggle to achieve success economically and personally is the desire of any human alive. However the role of reason and emotion is very important. The movie serves to remind people to think with reason rather than emotions. Something that is very much needed to be understood in our society.
‘The Pursuit of Happyness’ is a 2006 American biographical drama film, directed by Gabriele Muccino and based on the true story of Chris Gardner. In ‘The Pursuit of Happyness’, Chris Gardner is a smart man who invests in a devise that is now finding trouble to find its place due to emergence of other technologies. Despite his valiant attempts to help keep the family afloat, the mother of his five-year-old son Christopher buckles under the financial pressure and leaves. Chris, now a single father, continues doggedly to pursue a better-paying job using every sales skill he knows. He lands an internship at a prestigious stock brokerage firm with no salary but only with hopes of a promising future. Due to the lack of money, Chris and his son are soon evicted from their apartment and forced to sleep in shelters, bus stations, bathrooms, or wherever they can find refuge for the night. Despite his troubles, Chris continues to be a loving and caring father, using the affection and trust his son has for him as a pushing force. Various knowledge issues can be seen in the film.
The knowledge issue dealt with here is the war between emotion and reason. Various emotions are involved when you are dealing with life. Chris goes through fear due to his financial troubles, jealousy of people with wonderful lives, sadness, love and then finally happiness. The movie in many forms is didactic. It teaches that that all hard work shall seek its rewards but in a theory of knowledge context, of how in the battle of reason and emotion, for happiness, reason should be a driving force. The root cause of all his troubles, the device known as the bone density scanner, was a judgement based on emotion. It was what everyone told him was the ‘in’ thing. Letting his emotions get the best of him, Chris did not reason out the evolution of life. Everything changes with time. Emotion led him to financial distress, reason leads him to happiness.
The way to reach knowledge is also one of the knowledge issues of the film. Experiences play a major role in informing Chris. Initially when emotion over rules him, all the knowledge Chris has is second hand through hearing what other people say. However as reason takes over him, he observes and talks to a stockbroker on the street and thus receives firsthand knowledge. First hand experiences of Chris develop him to be what he is even in his personal life.
‘I met my father for the first time when I was 28 years old. I made up my mind that when I had children, my children were going to know who their father was’.
His experiences with his father taught him to be there for his son. His son too became his source of determination through which Chris gained the strength to continue with the difficult task of living and surviving. The relationship that they share is built on understanding. Chris’ own experiences allow him to pass invaluable knowledge on to his son.
‘Christopher Gardner: Hey... Don't ever let somebody tell you... You can't do something. Not even me. All right?
Christopher: All right.
Christopher Gardner: You got a dream... You gotta protect it. People can't do somethin' themselves, they wanna tell you you can't do it. If you want somethin', go get it. Period.’
Thus one can conclude that the major knowledge at work issue is the struggle to succeed economically and personally. Reason and emotion is a contrast on which the success depends on. However in the movie we can see that money being is shown as the only way to achieve happiness. This is a bias. We see Chris with his son all the time smiling and laughing. Although he is with his son he is saying he is not happy is not ethical as family and love is what leads to happiness. The movie does take for granted the importance of money, cars and a lifestyle for happiness. It does not explore simple living as a happy living. This granted fact leads to the movie have a very fairy tale appearance which at the end of the day is not reality. In the sense, an unhappy man due to his hard work, succeeds and becomes very happy. This is not the truth. Even though there is a clear bias of only money leading to happiness, in the movie we so see the importance of both being shown
The struggle to achieve success economically and personally is the desire of any human alive. However the role of reason and emotion is very important. The movie serves to remind people to think with reason rather than emotions. Something that is very much needed to be understood in our society.
ARTICLE
KNOWLEDGE AT WORK
This article is a propaganda article that supports the Hindus. With the use of emotionally laden and manipulating language, the writer tries to push people into supporting an extremist Hindu political party RSS. The knowledge issue of the article is to be didactic of how being unswerving and strong is better. The reason for this didactic issue is to push into the minds of common people of how the other parties are bad because they do not stand firm unlike the RSS.
The article claims that that Dr. Syama Prasaad Mookerjee, who stood steadfast in joining a united Hindu movement and who managed to convert 90% of descendant Indian Muslims into Hindus, was an ideological firm icon. He never wavered from his decisions and wanted action rather than the appeasement that Mahatma Gandhi followed to mollify the Muslims. Blaming Jinnah as the root of many troubles, the article brings into light how Jinnah was following a direct action policy against the Hindus and hence the many massacres of, rapes of and attacks on them. They claim that Jinnah was not even a proper Muslim. He was very Anglican and did not even know how to speak Urdu. This was the man that was leading the Muslims to ‘their’ home. He was never steadfast in what he wanted, neither is BJP or Congress. They are never firm which shows their inefficiency.
The article claims may be justified to a level however after a while one understands that RSS approach is comparable to common zealots. One can understand their cause however the question to be asked is whether a hatred of the Muslims is valid after nearly 60 years of the partition. A new generation has come to India that looks beyond religious boundaries thus how valid is this article. The article is very biased against the Muslims and is obviously pro-Hindus even if it comes down to using violence. The person writing the article has taken for granted that all Muslims are in ways bad and only Hindus can live in India, the sacred holy land. This is not true. The bias shows in everything the writer is writing and thus many of the reasons have not been given any solid justification. The question to why are they patronizing a man Dr. Mookerjee who was in many ways leading a crusade and doing the same thing that they despised the Muslims for, was answered by the reason that he stood firm. That is no reason but a frail attempt to mould the minds of people. With the use of emotionally laden language, a fallacy of reasoning, common people are told about the valour of Dr. Mookerjee and the evils of Muslims in order to propagandise to people the betterment of following a particular party.
These bias run to deep to be eliminated yet one can find some reason in their argument. If Muslims have taken to deep measures to kill Hindus; why should the Hindus not retaliate? Thus in case the knowledge issue is true, one needs to see History and compare the brutality of both the sides during the partition and then perhaps decide. For me however the knowledge issue can in places be reasoned but can never be true. It is true overly fanatic for that.
This article is a propaganda article that supports the Hindus. With the use of emotionally laden and manipulating language, the writer tries to push people into supporting an extremist Hindu political party RSS. The knowledge issue of the article is to be didactic of how being unswerving and strong is better. The reason for this didactic issue is to push into the minds of common people of how the other parties are bad because they do not stand firm unlike the RSS.
The article claims that that Dr. Syama Prasaad Mookerjee, who stood steadfast in joining a united Hindu movement and who managed to convert 90% of descendant Indian Muslims into Hindus, was an ideological firm icon. He never wavered from his decisions and wanted action rather than the appeasement that Mahatma Gandhi followed to mollify the Muslims. Blaming Jinnah as the root of many troubles, the article brings into light how Jinnah was following a direct action policy against the Hindus and hence the many massacres of, rapes of and attacks on them. They claim that Jinnah was not even a proper Muslim. He was very Anglican and did not even know how to speak Urdu. This was the man that was leading the Muslims to ‘their’ home. He was never steadfast in what he wanted, neither is BJP or Congress. They are never firm which shows their inefficiency.
The article claims may be justified to a level however after a while one understands that RSS approach is comparable to common zealots. One can understand their cause however the question to be asked is whether a hatred of the Muslims is valid after nearly 60 years of the partition. A new generation has come to India that looks beyond religious boundaries thus how valid is this article. The article is very biased against the Muslims and is obviously pro-Hindus even if it comes down to using violence. The person writing the article has taken for granted that all Muslims are in ways bad and only Hindus can live in India, the sacred holy land. This is not true. The bias shows in everything the writer is writing and thus many of the reasons have not been given any solid justification. The question to why are they patronizing a man Dr. Mookerjee who was in many ways leading a crusade and doing the same thing that they despised the Muslims for, was answered by the reason that he stood firm. That is no reason but a frail attempt to mould the minds of people. With the use of emotionally laden language, a fallacy of reasoning, common people are told about the valour of Dr. Mookerjee and the evils of Muslims in order to propagandise to people the betterment of following a particular party.
These bias run to deep to be eliminated yet one can find some reason in their argument. If Muslims have taken to deep measures to kill Hindus; why should the Hindus not retaliate? Thus in case the knowledge issue is true, one needs to see History and compare the brutality of both the sides during the partition and then perhaps decide. For me however the knowledge issue can in places be reasoned but can never be true. It is true overly fanatic for that.
Friday, September 18, 2009
Three things I never knew before coming BD Somani
REFLECTION
As a child I never really understood the reality of the things and people that I awed the most. For me science is something that is fascinating however now I realise how limited science really is. In the sense the discovery of science has ultimately led to reality being lost. I was told ever since 6th grade when I started learning momentum that all a object only has momentum if it has a mass and speed. This is however negated now. Photons are small particle like substances that have zero mass yet still have momentum. This is covered by relativity. However this relativity opposes everything that we learn from the 1st to 10th grade. Even Newton’s three laws of motion are proved wrong via relativity.
Another pre misconception I had was that the leader of the Weimer Republic Gustav Stresemann, from the 1923-1929 period, was a very loyal and morally forthright figure. This is because all the history textbooks portray him as to be so. The truth behind him however is that while he portraying to the Western nations that Germany was this weak disarmed nation, in USSR German soldiers were being trained with the most modern equipment available.
Another notion of mine that was broken was the image of how benevolent the Banana Fruit Company of the USA really was. I had watched a documentary on the Banana Massacre and being from the USA point of view, it seemed much more of the fault of the South Americans. This view was broken after reading One Hundred Years of Solitude through which the magnitude of the massacre was shown to me without any propaganda or gain behind it.
As a child I never really understood the reality of the things and people that I awed the most. For me science is something that is fascinating however now I realise how limited science really is. In the sense the discovery of science has ultimately led to reality being lost. I was told ever since 6th grade when I started learning momentum that all a object only has momentum if it has a mass and speed. This is however negated now. Photons are small particle like substances that have zero mass yet still have momentum. This is covered by relativity. However this relativity opposes everything that we learn from the 1st to 10th grade. Even Newton’s three laws of motion are proved wrong via relativity.
Another pre misconception I had was that the leader of the Weimer Republic Gustav Stresemann, from the 1923-1929 period, was a very loyal and morally forthright figure. This is because all the history textbooks portray him as to be so. The truth behind him however is that while he portraying to the Western nations that Germany was this weak disarmed nation, in USSR German soldiers were being trained with the most modern equipment available.
Another notion of mine that was broken was the image of how benevolent the Banana Fruit Company of the USA really was. I had watched a documentary on the Banana Massacre and being from the USA point of view, it seemed much more of the fault of the South Americans. This view was broken after reading One Hundred Years of Solitude through which the magnitude of the massacre was shown to me without any propaganda or gain behind it.
Tuesday, September 15, 2009
‘What is history but a fable agreed upon’ - Napoleon
REFLECTION
History is classified as a group of chronological factual events that affected humans. But is it really this? My initial classification is a little ambiguous. Breaking it down, two more questions arise. Is History based on facts? Do these events affect everyone?
Throughout ages history is moulded to suit the people’s need. Not just the common people but also needs of the people in power. A perfect example of how history is moulded is given by a history textbook. If we focus first on just Germany 70 years ago at the time of Hitler we would see a propaganda textbook by Hitler based on glorifying him and negating the Weimer Republic. The history textbooks would undermine all religions and especially Christianity. It would make it seem that the Führer (Hitler) was the God and one should only just worship him. The problems faced by Germany were mostly blamed on the Jews and Christianity. These “factually incorrect” information as a form of propaganda was instilled into every child during the Nazi period. This thus helped in the creation of a militarized society which would both purge the national spirit and promote views to accept the war as a path of struggle so as to achieve freedom from the injustice of the treaty of Versailles and crimes inflicted by Christianity and the November criminals.
1.
‘At the back of Hitler's anti-Semitism there is revealed an actual war of God.
This is so, of course, only for Hitler himself. His party comrades had no notion of
the fantastic perspectives in which their master saw their concrete struggle.’ 1
This history was on the perspective of Nazi. If we would compare it to a textbook in France of Britain we would see a completely opposite appearance of Hitler. This was apparent in a Disney movie we watched in TOK about Reason vs. Emotion. This too was a cartoon filled with propaganda. It showed Hitler as a vile character who uses emotions to get his work done and had no reason in him. On the other hand it showed Britain as the reasoning country and proclaimed how both reason and emotions were in the “driving seat” of their mind. This cartoon had moulded some historical facts to appear as if Britain was completely justified in fighting Germany. Even now after 70 years while Germans desire to forget Hitler and only mention him in their textbooks as a disgusting human being who no one supported. In France and UK, case studies are done on him and what he had done. This is proof of how history is different for a different group of people. What a history book may claim may be a fact but the context it is used in or the way it may be written in, may not be true. That history also may not affect that group of people directly.
Napoleon’s quote ‘What is history but a fable agreed upon’ summarizes what I have to say. Histories are fables. They are stories based facts that have been slightly manipulated to suit their cause. Going back to Hitler’s cause, who is to say that he was not right. Yes he was wrong in his mass murder of the Jews but the Treaty of Versailles was also a really unjust treaty that was based on just completing the aims of the victorious nations and that was mostly to gain as much money possible by crippling Germany. For example the reparations clause stated that Germany was to pay £6600 million however the damage of the war that Germany caused was estimated to just £200 million. How could anyone expect a country that was battered by a war to pay so much? Also how come this fact was not explored in that cartoon? This only proves to show that history is made up of micro-histories. History that suit or agree with one person’s or a small group’s beliefs. Thus what is History? Coming back to my first classification, History is classified as a few chronological factual events that affected a group of people. These various histories are what can be explored to give an ultimate unbiased history. Yet that is an ideal that people in power do not help to achieve.
1http://www.questia.com/googleScholar.qst;jsessionid=KxPTJx01f1JmyykGsJwzmGlJTpZG044qr1LZzNLcVPKJWCQLDRWH!-174482761!1579770234?docId=77520568
History is classified as a group of chronological factual events that affected humans. But is it really this? My initial classification is a little ambiguous. Breaking it down, two more questions arise. Is History based on facts? Do these events affect everyone?
Throughout ages history is moulded to suit the people’s need. Not just the common people but also needs of the people in power. A perfect example of how history is moulded is given by a history textbook. If we focus first on just Germany 70 years ago at the time of Hitler we would see a propaganda textbook by Hitler based on glorifying him and negating the Weimer Republic. The history textbooks would undermine all religions and especially Christianity. It would make it seem that the Führer (Hitler) was the God and one should only just worship him. The problems faced by Germany were mostly blamed on the Jews and Christianity. These “factually incorrect” information as a form of propaganda was instilled into every child during the Nazi period. This thus helped in the creation of a militarized society which would both purge the national spirit and promote views to accept the war as a path of struggle so as to achieve freedom from the injustice of the treaty of Versailles and crimes inflicted by Christianity and the November criminals.
1.
‘At the back of Hitler's anti-Semitism there is revealed an actual war of God.
This is so, of course, only for Hitler himself. His party comrades had no notion of
the fantastic perspectives in which their master saw their concrete struggle.’ 1
This history was on the perspective of Nazi. If we would compare it to a textbook in France of Britain we would see a completely opposite appearance of Hitler. This was apparent in a Disney movie we watched in TOK about Reason vs. Emotion. This too was a cartoon filled with propaganda. It showed Hitler as a vile character who uses emotions to get his work done and had no reason in him. On the other hand it showed Britain as the reasoning country and proclaimed how both reason and emotions were in the “driving seat” of their mind. This cartoon had moulded some historical facts to appear as if Britain was completely justified in fighting Germany. Even now after 70 years while Germans desire to forget Hitler and only mention him in their textbooks as a disgusting human being who no one supported. In France and UK, case studies are done on him and what he had done. This is proof of how history is different for a different group of people. What a history book may claim may be a fact but the context it is used in or the way it may be written in, may not be true. That history also may not affect that group of people directly.
Napoleon’s quote ‘What is history but a fable agreed upon’ summarizes what I have to say. Histories are fables. They are stories based facts that have been slightly manipulated to suit their cause. Going back to Hitler’s cause, who is to say that he was not right. Yes he was wrong in his mass murder of the Jews but the Treaty of Versailles was also a really unjust treaty that was based on just completing the aims of the victorious nations and that was mostly to gain as much money possible by crippling Germany. For example the reparations clause stated that Germany was to pay £6600 million however the damage of the war that Germany caused was estimated to just £200 million. How could anyone expect a country that was battered by a war to pay so much? Also how come this fact was not explored in that cartoon? This only proves to show that history is made up of micro-histories. History that suit or agree with one person’s or a small group’s beliefs. Thus what is History? Coming back to my first classification, History is classified as a few chronological factual events that affected a group of people. These various histories are what can be explored to give an ultimate unbiased history. Yet that is an ideal that people in power do not help to achieve.
1http://www.questia.com/googleScholar.qst;jsessionid=KxPTJx01f1JmyykGsJwzmGlJTpZG044qr1LZzNLcVPKJWCQLDRWH!-174482761!1579770234?docId=77520568
Thursday, September 10, 2009
Religion
Qustions- Reflection
Religion is the way to channel one’s belief. To focus his or her personal faith in a direction one finds most suited. This according to me is the meaning of religion yet to a third party religion can mean something drastically different depending on their biases. Religion to a religious cult fanatic could mean that only his is the “true” religion and to someone more atheists, religion can mean nothing at all. Thus the term religion itself is very subjective but the agreeable norm for me is that religion is the path to address the divine entity that many feel exists.
What makes people believe in religion varies. It mostly depends on the cultures people follow, their parental beliefs and other experiences. Many just follow a religion blindly without questioning it because it has been followed for centuries and deeply rooted in the culture of the community. An example of this would be the religious wars within the boundaries of a religious sector- Christianity. When protestant Christianity flooded Europe, the Catholic Christians started to question their own path to God. They may have paid for elaborate churches but the point was that most priests were only stealing from the peasants. As rationality set in them, they began converting yet this took centuries. The reason for this long time period was simple, it was due to the culture that the entire community had followed for years and did not want to question it. Also due to parental belief, the child is mostly limited just to one view point and thus never gets to explore the ambiguity of some things. Another factor to make one believe in religion are experiences. Experiences can in many ways be life changing. There are many stories where after near death experiences, people resort to God, and to communicate with him chose religion as the path. A much more direct example would be the story of Ned Doughtry whose near-death experience combined with him being shown the future of the world including the 9-11 attacks.1 Other than these even there are smaller reasons like ethics, to explain ambiguous matters and societal pressure however the most important reason out of all mentioned is the need of faith. To believe in religion one needs to believe in what the religion says. It may be explaining hazy matter but only if it manages to appease one’s faith will one be able to believe in religion.
Conversion from some religion to another, in a world that is being gripped by rationalism, is pretty common yet not easy for the person converting. While the people of the new faith will be supported, the people of the old faith may not and that perhaps could include family and friends. Depending on the liberalism present in the particular society the person originates from, conversions can become easy or difficult. Sometimes conversion can even take place by force.2 Such conversions are traumatic in many forms thus are not easy. However a conversion from non-religious stance to a religious one is also pretty abstruse to just pinpoint its difficulty level in converting. Many find it easy after an experience of sorts which prove the existence of the God. Thus conversions again is subjective as it depends on the society and the person’s own faith.
Religion as a medium fulfils many needs. In many humans a common feeling is that of emptiness and the doubts of our origins and current existence. Religion quenches this feeling and the various doubts that crop up. Religion also represents a community of sorts. Many people find themselves brought together by festivals and same religious beliefs. It thus also provides a feeling of unity.
Although these needs are satisfied, religion has various limitations. There are many biases that enter within sects of religions these include zealot type love for the religion one follows and an inane hatred for others. People tend to term their religion as better than the others and do not even try to respect nor understand other religious viewpoints regardless of whether they are preaching about the same thing. Within religion itself there is a lot of discrimination sets in which leads to casts that are divided based on ‘purity’ of blood or religious beliefs. These biases squander away the true meaning of the religion. The most evident bias in TOK terms that exists within religion is the emphasis on emotions rather than reason. Reason is sidestepped with statements like ‘Only people who worship God every day go to heaven as that is God’s will’ that focuses on playing with the knower’s emotions and thus change his perception. Equivocation is followed by references to religious books and then playing with the ambiguity of the language within it. Many leaders also follow the fallacy of confirmation bias where they only look for proof that proves their point without looking at the counter evidence. These fallacies were dealt with in the film Khudha Kai Liye that depicts fanaticism in Muslim society that is leading to Jihad. Here a Muslim priest manipulates what the Quran says to only prove his point without second views. Such fallacies deepen the prejudices based in religion.
1 http://www.spiritdaily.org/Prophecy-seers/ned_dougherty1.htm
2 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Forced_conversion
Religion is the way to channel one’s belief. To focus his or her personal faith in a direction one finds most suited. This according to me is the meaning of religion yet to a third party religion can mean something drastically different depending on their biases. Religion to a religious cult fanatic could mean that only his is the “true” religion and to someone more atheists, religion can mean nothing at all. Thus the term religion itself is very subjective but the agreeable norm for me is that religion is the path to address the divine entity that many feel exists.
What makes people believe in religion varies. It mostly depends on the cultures people follow, their parental beliefs and other experiences. Many just follow a religion blindly without questioning it because it has been followed for centuries and deeply rooted in the culture of the community. An example of this would be the religious wars within the boundaries of a religious sector- Christianity. When protestant Christianity flooded Europe, the Catholic Christians started to question their own path to God. They may have paid for elaborate churches but the point was that most priests were only stealing from the peasants. As rationality set in them, they began converting yet this took centuries. The reason for this long time period was simple, it was due to the culture that the entire community had followed for years and did not want to question it. Also due to parental belief, the child is mostly limited just to one view point and thus never gets to explore the ambiguity of some things. Another factor to make one believe in religion are experiences. Experiences can in many ways be life changing. There are many stories where after near death experiences, people resort to God, and to communicate with him chose religion as the path. A much more direct example would be the story of Ned Doughtry whose near-death experience combined with him being shown the future of the world including the 9-11 attacks.1 Other than these even there are smaller reasons like ethics, to explain ambiguous matters and societal pressure however the most important reason out of all mentioned is the need of faith. To believe in religion one needs to believe in what the religion says. It may be explaining hazy matter but only if it manages to appease one’s faith will one be able to believe in religion.
Conversion from some religion to another, in a world that is being gripped by rationalism, is pretty common yet not easy for the person converting. While the people of the new faith will be supported, the people of the old faith may not and that perhaps could include family and friends. Depending on the liberalism present in the particular society the person originates from, conversions can become easy or difficult. Sometimes conversion can even take place by force.2 Such conversions are traumatic in many forms thus are not easy. However a conversion from non-religious stance to a religious one is also pretty abstruse to just pinpoint its difficulty level in converting. Many find it easy after an experience of sorts which prove the existence of the God. Thus conversions again is subjective as it depends on the society and the person’s own faith.
Religion as a medium fulfils many needs. In many humans a common feeling is that of emptiness and the doubts of our origins and current existence. Religion quenches this feeling and the various doubts that crop up. Religion also represents a community of sorts. Many people find themselves brought together by festivals and same religious beliefs. It thus also provides a feeling of unity.
Although these needs are satisfied, religion has various limitations. There are many biases that enter within sects of religions these include zealot type love for the religion one follows and an inane hatred for others. People tend to term their religion as better than the others and do not even try to respect nor understand other religious viewpoints regardless of whether they are preaching about the same thing. Within religion itself there is a lot of discrimination sets in which leads to casts that are divided based on ‘purity’ of blood or religious beliefs. These biases squander away the true meaning of the religion. The most evident bias in TOK terms that exists within religion is the emphasis on emotions rather than reason. Reason is sidestepped with statements like ‘Only people who worship God every day go to heaven as that is God’s will’ that focuses on playing with the knower’s emotions and thus change his perception. Equivocation is followed by references to religious books and then playing with the ambiguity of the language within it. Many leaders also follow the fallacy of confirmation bias where they only look for proof that proves their point without looking at the counter evidence. These fallacies were dealt with in the film Khudha Kai Liye that depicts fanaticism in Muslim society that is leading to Jihad. Here a Muslim priest manipulates what the Quran says to only prove his point without second views. Such fallacies deepen the prejudices based in religion.
1 http://www.spiritdaily.org/Prophecy-seers/ned_dougherty1.htm
2 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Forced_conversion
Thursday, August 27, 2009
Report to detail alleged abuse inside CIA secret prisons
Knowledge at Work
America is one of the most economically advanced countries. It is as said the democratic ideal that all countries strive to achieve; freedom to live and let live being her foundation. However this article is based on another side of the USA that gets hidden by the talks of personal liberty of speech and action, privacy and individuality.
The article is a news report based on the horrific behavior of CIA agents against caught terrorists. This is in complete hypocrisy to what the US law propagates of equality under the eyes of the law. The article expands on further on the incident it begins with where a CIA agent uses an electric drill and a gun to force information out of him. It then goes ahead to highlight different reactions in the Federal bureau upon hearing about this ruthlessness the police system. Various knowledge issues combine in the creation of this article. Although detached in its tone, several allusions betray a sense of disappointment yet at the same time the need to conceal the worst of the USA government. The most important of the knowledge issue I think the writer of the article highlight the fear that had been left after the 9-11 attacks on the World Trade centre. The ruthlessness of CIA was started by the name of an interrogation program that was begun by the Bush administration. The fear of another plausible attack on the USA has made the interrogators to not only be cruel but also inhumane. Another important knowledge issue is the way in which this brutality has been tried to be kept under the mat. The way in which the writer talks about reports yet specifies the fact that they have not been released proves to show how under the full knowing of “just law” such cruelty is exists.
The writer also makes a claim to know the insights into the depth of the incident. However the writer himself does not know any specifics to this report. All it knows is the existence of a report thus how can this claim justified with proof? It is however not a bias claim as it is factual and it does criticize those CIA interrogators on such “endorsed behaviour. The foundation of the facts is a little shaky as it is based on unrevealed reports. The report also lacks in any emotion. It is true that since it is an article one’s own perception should be left behind but as a reader I want to know why these interrogators are not punished for such behaviour. For all its worth, being an Indian I am always being looked at as a terrorist because of the colour of my skin, I could easily be trapped in a situation and be abused without charge. This phenomenon is seen in the movie Khuddha Kai Liye where consistent torture broke the protagonist in such a way that he wanted to become a terrorist. So the writer should have extrapolated on the injustice of this. As the media they have the right to question and via doing so put pressure on their government to take action. The writer is also taking for granted the fact that the US government is doing something about the issue. The fact that the issue is so hushed up shows that there is much more to the incident than what has been leaked out. Other than this the writer has, with whatever information available, managed to convey partially managed to convey the truth behind the CIA headquarters.
Even if there is a lack of sources regarding the incident that had taken place, the knowledge issue does serve to remind us about how even in a democratic country like America, one cannot be safe. Innocent until proven guilty is a famous proverb that applies in every context. Here however innocence does not matter. The fear of having another attack like 9-11 has made the interrogators ruthless. Their emotions have taken oven their reason. Such illogical behaviour can affect the lives of anyone of us. We see us Indians getting checked at USA airports exhaustively on the terms of a “random search”. If it is random then why are there only black and brown skinned people in the special security check line. Also it affects us in the sense the hatred that has spread in the minds of some Americans has become so dominant that their allegations of being a terrorist are baseless. Innocent people can be tortured so badly that admit into being a terrorist. This misfortune can be destiny of my family, friends or even me!
America is one of the most economically advanced countries. It is as said the democratic ideal that all countries strive to achieve; freedom to live and let live being her foundation. However this article is based on another side of the USA that gets hidden by the talks of personal liberty of speech and action, privacy and individuality.
The article is a news report based on the horrific behavior of CIA agents against caught terrorists. This is in complete hypocrisy to what the US law propagates of equality under the eyes of the law. The article expands on further on the incident it begins with where a CIA agent uses an electric drill and a gun to force information out of him. It then goes ahead to highlight different reactions in the Federal bureau upon hearing about this ruthlessness the police system. Various knowledge issues combine in the creation of this article. Although detached in its tone, several allusions betray a sense of disappointment yet at the same time the need to conceal the worst of the USA government. The most important of the knowledge issue I think the writer of the article highlight the fear that had been left after the 9-11 attacks on the World Trade centre. The ruthlessness of CIA was started by the name of an interrogation program that was begun by the Bush administration. The fear of another plausible attack on the USA has made the interrogators to not only be cruel but also inhumane. Another important knowledge issue is the way in which this brutality has been tried to be kept under the mat. The way in which the writer talks about reports yet specifies the fact that they have not been released proves to show how under the full knowing of “just law” such cruelty is exists.
The writer also makes a claim to know the insights into the depth of the incident. However the writer himself does not know any specifics to this report. All it knows is the existence of a report thus how can this claim justified with proof? It is however not a bias claim as it is factual and it does criticize those CIA interrogators on such “endorsed behaviour. The foundation of the facts is a little shaky as it is based on unrevealed reports. The report also lacks in any emotion. It is true that since it is an article one’s own perception should be left behind but as a reader I want to know why these interrogators are not punished for such behaviour. For all its worth, being an Indian I am always being looked at as a terrorist because of the colour of my skin, I could easily be trapped in a situation and be abused without charge. This phenomenon is seen in the movie Khuddha Kai Liye where consistent torture broke the protagonist in such a way that he wanted to become a terrorist. So the writer should have extrapolated on the injustice of this. As the media they have the right to question and via doing so put pressure on their government to take action. The writer is also taking for granted the fact that the US government is doing something about the issue. The fact that the issue is so hushed up shows that there is much more to the incident than what has been leaked out. Other than this the writer has, with whatever information available, managed to convey partially managed to convey the truth behind the CIA headquarters.
Even if there is a lack of sources regarding the incident that had taken place, the knowledge issue does serve to remind us about how even in a democratic country like America, one cannot be safe. Innocent until proven guilty is a famous proverb that applies in every context. Here however innocence does not matter. The fear of having another attack like 9-11 has made the interrogators ruthless. Their emotions have taken oven their reason. Such illogical behaviour can affect the lives of anyone of us. We see us Indians getting checked at USA airports exhaustively on the terms of a “random search”. If it is random then why are there only black and brown skinned people in the special security check line. Also it affects us in the sense the hatred that has spread in the minds of some Americans has become so dominant that their allegations of being a terrorist are baseless. Innocent people can be tortured so badly that admit into being a terrorist. This misfortune can be destiny of my family, friends or even me!
Friday, August 14, 2009
Are humans superior to animals?
REFLECTION- class 29th July
As the human population grows, multiplying faster than bacteria, airs about human strength and omnipresence plagues a human’s mind. People now believe that they are unstoppable. They teach to the newer generation that no mammal in the world is as clever as they are and thus they have the right to exterminate anything that is below them or tag things as worthy, useless etc. But what really baffles me is how can they think that when they know nothing of world beyond the walls of their body. A human’s perception depends on what he or she can see, hear and feel. What if everything they have the illusion of knowing was wrong? What if they were the only soul in the world and everything else was just a fictional story from their imagination? Perception depends on the individual; no man has ever gone into the soul of a cat or a dog thus how can they conclude that they are better than the animals! There is so much that humans cannot phantom. For example dogs and cats can hear frequencies much higher than the range of humans and elephants hear and speak at such low frequencies that man cannot even hear them. In our limited vision and hearing abilities, is it right to even try and find differences between humans and animals. The truth is that we don’t even know what other species can do beyond just what we think thus with our limited knowledge we cannot term ourselves as superior
As the human population grows, multiplying faster than bacteria, airs about human strength and omnipresence plagues a human’s mind. People now believe that they are unstoppable. They teach to the newer generation that no mammal in the world is as clever as they are and thus they have the right to exterminate anything that is below them or tag things as worthy, useless etc. But what really baffles me is how can they think that when they know nothing of world beyond the walls of their body. A human’s perception depends on what he or she can see, hear and feel. What if everything they have the illusion of knowing was wrong? What if they were the only soul in the world and everything else was just a fictional story from their imagination? Perception depends on the individual; no man has ever gone into the soul of a cat or a dog thus how can they conclude that they are better than the animals! There is so much that humans cannot phantom. For example dogs and cats can hear frequencies much higher than the range of humans and elephants hear and speak at such low frequencies that man cannot even hear them. In our limited vision and hearing abilities, is it right to even try and find differences between humans and animals. The truth is that we don’t even know what other species can do beyond just what we think thus with our limited knowledge we cannot term ourselves as superior
Thursday, July 23, 2009
Jean de Florette
Knowledge at work- July 7th'09
Jean de Florette is a French film based on the book. It has a simple plot of a greedy uncle (Papet) and nephew (Ugolin) in their own hopes and dreams of selling the flower ‘Carnation’ destroying someone else’s life. The plot is really simple yet your emotion is really played with in the movie. Jean de Florette, who ends up inheriting a property which Papet and Ugolin were eyeing and even committed murder for, moves in with his family. The knowledge issue dealt with here is basically the war between emotion and reason. Here emotion wins. He is of a jovial nature and is very happy to be there. He has wonderful plans for the future but there is one problem, there is no known water source close to him. The only one he knows is really far and no rain falls on his land. He is desperate for water and in the end dies leaving his child and wife alone with only memories of how happy life was when Jean was alive. Papet and Ugolin pretend to be very sad at the happenings but they knew all the while about a spring running in the land. In fact they were the ones who sealed the spring so as limit the water for Jean and his family and thus forcing him to sell the property.
The film in short highlights the evil in man and shows to what extent people can fall for money. Ugolin throughout the film is very friendly to the trusting Jean but he only has a motive behind that friendship. Moving this to a larger picture this movie becomes a perfect example of how reason ends up being blocked when emotion takes over. For Ugolin and Papet their ambition and greed clouded their reason. These acted as stronger emotions and dominated over the emotion of compassion. In the real world we see this happening all the time. People in order to get ahead are forever stepping over each other. When one watches the movie and sees Jean’s struggle, one feels it is over exaggerated but when I think about it, farmers are going through this all the time. In India itself farmers are committing suicide because of the lack of water and help given. Hence I really do not think that the writer of the film was missing out on points. Everything was covered from the way emotions ran, spiritual beliefs held and societal pressures that Jean had to face because of Papet. I do think that the writer is being a little too biased to Jean because yes it shows his brave determination but it also shows him irresponsible towards his family. Also the movie is supposed to show Ugolin very apologetic about what he has done which happens in the book yet the movie does not really show that which makes it a little unauthentic. We also have to keep in mind that it is a commercial movie hence a lot of scenes have been changed to suit the modern viewer and because of this the gist of that era (right after the first world war) has not been captured really well. Because of this we as a viewer do not get to see the side of Ugolin and Papet who have suffered under the war and thus just want money and a new life of leisure. Their side, even if one does not agree with, has been explained in the book but not in the movie where they are made to look like the really bad villains. Here I think the script writer of the movie has taken the stereotype that ‘all murderers are bad’ and used it to appeal to the modern viewer.
At the end of the day though whatever it may be, what Ugolin and Papet did by being driven by their greed was wrong. It is really important to understand this because on this earth we have brother killing their own brother, son killing his own father and friends turning against each other all for money. Right now money is being given so much importance that the planet we live on is being abused to a limit that she cannot take. We as humans need to understand that money is not everything and implement corrections in our daily lifestyle or every story in the world is going to end like Jean Florette’s!
Jean de Florette is a French film based on the book. It has a simple plot of a greedy uncle (Papet) and nephew (Ugolin) in their own hopes and dreams of selling the flower ‘Carnation’ destroying someone else’s life. The plot is really simple yet your emotion is really played with in the movie. Jean de Florette, who ends up inheriting a property which Papet and Ugolin were eyeing and even committed murder for, moves in with his family. The knowledge issue dealt with here is basically the war between emotion and reason. Here emotion wins. He is of a jovial nature and is very happy to be there. He has wonderful plans for the future but there is one problem, there is no known water source close to him. The only one he knows is really far and no rain falls on his land. He is desperate for water and in the end dies leaving his child and wife alone with only memories of how happy life was when Jean was alive. Papet and Ugolin pretend to be very sad at the happenings but they knew all the while about a spring running in the land. In fact they were the ones who sealed the spring so as limit the water for Jean and his family and thus forcing him to sell the property.
The film in short highlights the evil in man and shows to what extent people can fall for money. Ugolin throughout the film is very friendly to the trusting Jean but he only has a motive behind that friendship. Moving this to a larger picture this movie becomes a perfect example of how reason ends up being blocked when emotion takes over. For Ugolin and Papet their ambition and greed clouded their reason. These acted as stronger emotions and dominated over the emotion of compassion. In the real world we see this happening all the time. People in order to get ahead are forever stepping over each other. When one watches the movie and sees Jean’s struggle, one feels it is over exaggerated but when I think about it, farmers are going through this all the time. In India itself farmers are committing suicide because of the lack of water and help given. Hence I really do not think that the writer of the film was missing out on points. Everything was covered from the way emotions ran, spiritual beliefs held and societal pressures that Jean had to face because of Papet. I do think that the writer is being a little too biased to Jean because yes it shows his brave determination but it also shows him irresponsible towards his family. Also the movie is supposed to show Ugolin very apologetic about what he has done which happens in the book yet the movie does not really show that which makes it a little unauthentic. We also have to keep in mind that it is a commercial movie hence a lot of scenes have been changed to suit the modern viewer and because of this the gist of that era (right after the first world war) has not been captured really well. Because of this we as a viewer do not get to see the side of Ugolin and Papet who have suffered under the war and thus just want money and a new life of leisure. Their side, even if one does not agree with, has been explained in the book but not in the movie where they are made to look like the really bad villains. Here I think the script writer of the movie has taken the stereotype that ‘all murderers are bad’ and used it to appeal to the modern viewer.
At the end of the day though whatever it may be, what Ugolin and Papet did by being driven by their greed was wrong. It is really important to understand this because on this earth we have brother killing their own brother, son killing his own father and friends turning against each other all for money. Right now money is being given so much importance that the planet we live on is being abused to a limit that she cannot take. We as humans need to understand that money is not everything and implement corrections in our daily lifestyle or every story in the world is going to end like Jean Florette’s!
Science- Has it become too extreme for mankind’s good?
Reflections-22nd July'09
Science as most people would agree has been a boon to mankind. The discoveries of the machines and newer technology have made life so full leisure that now the newer generation cannot imagine life without it. We all can lazily get up from bed not do anything but switch on a couple of switches and we get hot water for our bath, ready- made tea or coffee, breakfast from the microwave. Etc. We now only have to dial a few numbers and we are instantaneously connected to someone living in USA. Compare this to writing a letter, sending it and then waiting for the reply as it was done in the olden days; a cell phone( even with all its network problem at times is so convenient).
Yet now that we have everything why do we need to want even more? The earth is now cramped with the number of electronic gadgets, industries and other technological machines. Science has conquered the world and now it wants to capture the universe which can never be possible whatever the scientists do. Now the boundaries need to be set as in the scientists quest of a science world our natural resources, wildlife and trees are being destroyed. The more science grows, virtual terrorism has begun to grow too. For all practical purposes, international boundaries have been eliminated in cyber-space. The growth of information technology and almost universal access to computers have enabled hackers and would-be terrorists to attack information systems and critical infrastructures worldwide. In fact in the recent 26/11 attacks in the Mumbai, blackberry messengers were being used for communication. Science has reached to a point that it is destroying all that is beautiful and really needs to be stopped.
Science as most people would agree has been a boon to mankind. The discoveries of the machines and newer technology have made life so full leisure that now the newer generation cannot imagine life without it. We all can lazily get up from bed not do anything but switch on a couple of switches and we get hot water for our bath, ready- made tea or coffee, breakfast from the microwave. Etc. We now only have to dial a few numbers and we are instantaneously connected to someone living in USA. Compare this to writing a letter, sending it and then waiting for the reply as it was done in the olden days; a cell phone( even with all its network problem at times is so convenient).
Yet now that we have everything why do we need to want even more? The earth is now cramped with the number of electronic gadgets, industries and other technological machines. Science has conquered the world and now it wants to capture the universe which can never be possible whatever the scientists do. Now the boundaries need to be set as in the scientists quest of a science world our natural resources, wildlife and trees are being destroyed. The more science grows, virtual terrorism has begun to grow too. For all practical purposes, international boundaries have been eliminated in cyber-space. The growth of information technology and almost universal access to computers have enabled hackers and would-be terrorists to attack information systems and critical infrastructures worldwide. In fact in the recent 26/11 attacks in the Mumbai, blackberry messengers were being used for communication. Science has reached to a point that it is destroying all that is beautiful and really needs to be stopped.
Wednesday, July 8, 2009
"The Reckoning."
"PAN-GERMAN: 'MONSTROUS, I CALL IT. WHY, IT'S FULLY A QUARTER OF WHAT WE SHOULD HAVE MADE THEM PAY, IF WE'D WON.'"
This cartoon is about the Treaty of Versailles of 28 June 1919, at the end of World War I published in the British Magazine Punch right after the terms were announced. The knowledge issue of this cartoon is the double standards of the German. Britain had been badly weakened by the First World War. Her economy was in a ruin and hence the main mood after the war was very anti- German. The British people wanted Germany to be punished for her sins. The cartoon since British has been obviously written in a British point of view and thus becomes a biased and misleading. The cartoon shows a German man holding a newspaper that has just announced the terms of the Treaty of Versailles. The Pan- German looks shocked and outraged by face yet it is not the £6600 reparation fee the Germans have to pay. After the terms of the treaty were announced the instant reaction in Germany was one of anger. The terms of the treaty with the reparations also stated that Germany was to lose all its overseas colonies, a lot of its own land (making 13% of her population a part of another country who perhaps was anti- German), 16% of her coalfields and half of her iron and steel industry. Worst of all was the clause that blamed them for starting the entire war. The artist of the cartoon is one of the many who initially believed that Germany was crying more than she ought to have. As the statement below states, he believes that Germany would have made Britain and France pay 4 times the amount in case she had won the war thus signifying the cruel nature of the Germans. The German portrayed in the cartoon is also pretty fat showing that Germany had still enough money to feed her people. This however the artist has really taken this fact for granted. The truth as shown many photographs were that women, children and men were starving and living on the street. The aftermath of the treaty included Hyperinflation (1923) where money became worthless paper. The artist is more driven via his emotion of anger against the Germans that reason to see how harsh the treaty really was. Hence this knowledge issue is really important as it signifies how emotion can blind people from seeing clearly. The results of the treaty on Germany were terrible and its’ harshness ended up being a cause for the Second World War. It is important to understand this inorder to learn from the mistake that was committed and hence avoid future wars.
"PAN-GERMAN: 'MONSTROUS, I CALL IT. WHY, IT'S FULLY A QUARTER OF WHAT WE SHOULD HAVE MADE THEM PAY, IF WE'D WON.'"
This cartoon is about the Treaty of Versailles of 28 June 1919, at the end of World War I published in the British Magazine Punch right after the terms were announced. The knowledge issue of this cartoon is the double standards of the German. Britain had been badly weakened by the First World War. Her economy was in a ruin and hence the main mood after the war was very anti- German. The British people wanted Germany to be punished for her sins. The cartoon since British has been obviously written in a British point of view and thus becomes a biased and misleading. The cartoon shows a German man holding a newspaper that has just announced the terms of the Treaty of Versailles. The Pan- German looks shocked and outraged by face yet it is not the £6600 reparation fee the Germans have to pay. After the terms of the treaty were announced the instant reaction in Germany was one of anger. The terms of the treaty with the reparations also stated that Germany was to lose all its overseas colonies, a lot of its own land (making 13% of her population a part of another country who perhaps was anti- German), 16% of her coalfields and half of her iron and steel industry. Worst of all was the clause that blamed them for starting the entire war. The artist of the cartoon is one of the many who initially believed that Germany was crying more than she ought to have. As the statement below states, he believes that Germany would have made Britain and France pay 4 times the amount in case she had won the war thus signifying the cruel nature of the Germans. The German portrayed in the cartoon is also pretty fat showing that Germany had still enough money to feed her people. This however the artist has really taken this fact for granted. The truth as shown many photographs were that women, children and men were starving and living on the street. The aftermath of the treaty included Hyperinflation (1923) where money became worthless paper. The artist is more driven via his emotion of anger against the Germans that reason to see how harsh the treaty really was. Hence this knowledge issue is really important as it signifies how emotion can blind people from seeing clearly. The results of the treaty on Germany were terrible and its’ harshness ended up being a cause for the Second World War. It is important to understand this inorder to learn from the mistake that was committed and hence avoid future wars.
Saturday, June 13, 2009
http://www.time-loops.net/nostradamus/Introduction1.htm
The prophecies of Nostradamus and the terrorist attack on the World Trade Center- Hoax or not!
The first 911 hoax was circulating by email within hours of the WTC attack. It said:
In the City of God there will be a great thunder,
two brothers torn apart by Chaos,
while the fortress endures, the great leader will succumb.
The third big war will begin when the big city is burning"
- Nostradamus 1654
Since Nostradamus died in 1566, it's rather unlikely he wrote this passage in 1654. The quatrain is not to be found in his published work. It isn't a question of whether or not it accurately predicts anything, he simply didn't write it.
In generally What bothers me about the hype around the predictions is the lack of self-criticism of the readers and followers. The renewed interest seems to be purely based only on the contents of the prophecies.
People reject or accept the prophecies of Nostradamus based on how they feel it relates to real events. What I don't understand however, is how people can accept the idea that someone from the 16th century could have been able to know our future, and the possible consequences that such a feat would have. Because some of the predictions might have become reality, many people seem to have accepted his work as something with value. The methods and techniques used, although not understood, are accepted as legitimate and genuine without any further questioning.
The public opinion about the work of Nostradamus appears to be divided in two camps: the believers and the non-believers. The first group bases their confidence on the 'eerie' coincidence of some main events which took place during the last centuries with some of the predictions in the quatrains. The none-believers revere to the complexity of the writing and feel that you can always match a quatrain with an existing event if you want to.
One of the main questions is whether Nostradamus was a charlatan, a gifted and talented cheat or was he really able to do something that no one has been able to repeat or explain.
If he was a cheat, then he was truly gifted and talented. He kept millions of people puzzled for many centuries and that is not a small feat.
Imagine creating prophetic quatrains with no more knowledge about the future than just the fact that 'history repeats it self', lots of fantasy and imagination and the desire of people to believe in true prophecy. By writing the way he did, believers can interpret the quatrains in many ways, allowing them to encounter and see in them wathever they look for.
NOSTRADAMUS AND THE GENUINITY OF HIS PROPHECIES
The title of this article is more a question which the writer answers throughout the article. The article’s is structurally divided into two parts. One is where the writer clears the air about irrational and emotionally driven rumours and the second is where he tries to prove how Nostradamus in total was a very clever cheat. The knowledge issue the article focuses on is the genuinely of Nostradamus’ predictions. Through the hoax after the September 11 attacks in New York the writer shows how when people are emotionally driven and reason is forced into the back seat people tend to believe a lot of things. They take the ambiguities in the writings of Nostradamus and make it mean sense to their brains. If they were being backed by reason then their brain would work in making them understand the prediction. This in TOK terms comes under fallacious reasoning where one plays on the ambiguities of language known as ‘Equivocation’ in TOK terms, manipulates it and presents it as if the other person is saying it. The writer through this understanding highlights how the gullible people believe this to be true without even questioning. He does say that people are divided in two groups, the believers and the non-believers and he does question again whether Nostradamus could be true, yet he is clearly biased for Nostradamus’ writings being a hoax and clearly states that it is impossible for a man to know the future. He also does not present proof for his belief. There are no scientific or historic facts. He just states his view point and deems it as obvious. His last paragraph ‘Imagine creating prophetic quatrains with no more knowledge about the future than just the fact that 'history repeats itself', lots of fantasy and imagination and the desire of people to believe in true prophecy’ is no more concrete as is the proof that Nostradamus’ prophesies are true. It is very hypothetical and the question that really comes to my mind is how does he know that Nostradamus had no knowledge of the future? He commits the reasoning fallacy of ‘circular reasoning’ as he believes it to be false and thus proves it as false by citing that it is false. Yet apart from this his argument about the emotional manipulation of the writings more than the actual sense flows logically. However to add his bias and thus the tone he uses is very convincing and makes the readers mood match his own.
Despite it there is a lot of logic in what he is saying. We humans in crisis immediately tend to switch off our reason and think emotionally. I truly believe that the writer’s argument is true because if I extrapolate it further myself, I see how language is manipulated by people. As shown in the movie Kuddha Ke Liye we are shown how the Mullah uses the ambiguities in language to manipulate innocent men into terrorism in the name of God. They use emotion and language to their advantage. This is parallel to what Nostradamus does as well. Thus people should care and be well informed about this trickery as it is one of man’s greatest flaws!
The prophecies of Nostradamus and the terrorist attack on the World Trade Center- Hoax or not!
The first 911 hoax was circulating by email within hours of the WTC attack. It said:
In the City of God there will be a great thunder,
two brothers torn apart by Chaos,
while the fortress endures, the great leader will succumb.
The third big war will begin when the big city is burning"
- Nostradamus 1654
Since Nostradamus died in 1566, it's rather unlikely he wrote this passage in 1654. The quatrain is not to be found in his published work. It isn't a question of whether or not it accurately predicts anything, he simply didn't write it.
In generally What bothers me about the hype around the predictions is the lack of self-criticism of the readers and followers. The renewed interest seems to be purely based only on the contents of the prophecies.
People reject or accept the prophecies of Nostradamus based on how they feel it relates to real events. What I don't understand however, is how people can accept the idea that someone from the 16th century could have been able to know our future, and the possible consequences that such a feat would have. Because some of the predictions might have become reality, many people seem to have accepted his work as something with value. The methods and techniques used, although not understood, are accepted as legitimate and genuine without any further questioning.
The public opinion about the work of Nostradamus appears to be divided in two camps: the believers and the non-believers. The first group bases their confidence on the 'eerie' coincidence of some main events which took place during the last centuries with some of the predictions in the quatrains. The none-believers revere to the complexity of the writing and feel that you can always match a quatrain with an existing event if you want to.
One of the main questions is whether Nostradamus was a charlatan, a gifted and talented cheat or was he really able to do something that no one has been able to repeat or explain.
If he was a cheat, then he was truly gifted and talented. He kept millions of people puzzled for many centuries and that is not a small feat.
Imagine creating prophetic quatrains with no more knowledge about the future than just the fact that 'history repeats it self', lots of fantasy and imagination and the desire of people to believe in true prophecy. By writing the way he did, believers can interpret the quatrains in many ways, allowing them to encounter and see in them wathever they look for.
NOSTRADAMUS AND THE GENUINITY OF HIS PROPHECIES
The title of this article is more a question which the writer answers throughout the article. The article’s is structurally divided into two parts. One is where the writer clears the air about irrational and emotionally driven rumours and the second is where he tries to prove how Nostradamus in total was a very clever cheat. The knowledge issue the article focuses on is the genuinely of Nostradamus’ predictions. Through the hoax after the September 11 attacks in New York the writer shows how when people are emotionally driven and reason is forced into the back seat people tend to believe a lot of things. They take the ambiguities in the writings of Nostradamus and make it mean sense to their brains. If they were being backed by reason then their brain would work in making them understand the prediction. This in TOK terms comes under fallacious reasoning where one plays on the ambiguities of language known as ‘Equivocation’ in TOK terms, manipulates it and presents it as if the other person is saying it. The writer through this understanding highlights how the gullible people believe this to be true without even questioning. He does say that people are divided in two groups, the believers and the non-believers and he does question again whether Nostradamus could be true, yet he is clearly biased for Nostradamus’ writings being a hoax and clearly states that it is impossible for a man to know the future. He also does not present proof for his belief. There are no scientific or historic facts. He just states his view point and deems it as obvious. His last paragraph ‘Imagine creating prophetic quatrains with no more knowledge about the future than just the fact that 'history repeats itself', lots of fantasy and imagination and the desire of people to believe in true prophecy’ is no more concrete as is the proof that Nostradamus’ prophesies are true. It is very hypothetical and the question that really comes to my mind is how does he know that Nostradamus had no knowledge of the future? He commits the reasoning fallacy of ‘circular reasoning’ as he believes it to be false and thus proves it as false by citing that it is false. Yet apart from this his argument about the emotional manipulation of the writings more than the actual sense flows logically. However to add his bias and thus the tone he uses is very convincing and makes the readers mood match his own.
Despite it there is a lot of logic in what he is saying. We humans in crisis immediately tend to switch off our reason and think emotionally. I truly believe that the writer’s argument is true because if I extrapolate it further myself, I see how language is manipulated by people. As shown in the movie Kuddha Ke Liye we are shown how the Mullah uses the ambiguities in language to manipulate innocent men into terrorism in the name of God. They use emotion and language to their advantage. This is parallel to what Nostradamus does as well. Thus people should care and be well informed about this trickery as it is one of man’s greatest flaws!
Saturday, May 23, 2009
Knowledge at Work
Secret Victims- Where has democracy gone now?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yFvO2BKhWqg&feature=related
Secret Victims is a documentary based on the knowledge issue of the unethical yet undisclosed kidnappings of the South Koreans. Although centred around this idea this idea, the documentary also manages to point out the situation between North and South Korea and their current relationship, the divide in the South Korean people and the difficulties the family of the victims have to face. All this combine in the end to ask a really powerful question on whether democracy is what the idealists claim?
Democracy means freedom of speech and rights, yet where are the rights of these people? Is it ethical for them to suffer just because their government is too scared of the North Koreans? The facts are clear that nearly 500 South Korean fishermen have been abducted and taken to the communist Korea for torture and brainwash. Maybe this fact may have the figure taken for granted, maybe some of those 500 people were spies as the South Korean government fears but the abductees are mostly common fishermen. Even if they were spies, what would they be able to tell the North Korean government? Also perhaps not all these victims may have been kidnapped, there can be a possibility that there was an accident in the sea and the family is assuming that the loved one was kidnapped. These are possibilities but since the number of victims is so high, it really does not make a difference. The Japanese government put pressure on North Korea for 15 Japanese people captured by the communist Korea and they got 5 back. If Japan can do this, why cannot South Korea.
The documentary is biased for the victims and their families and really does not show the side of the South Korean government who may be having its own concerns for picking this issue up with Kim Jong-II. North Korea has been an excessively aggressive in its foreign policy and South Korea has mostly been on its receiving end. In the years where one is hoping for peace and focusing on making the economy recover, why should the South Korean government aggravate their relationship with the DPRK? Although they are working for peace, they are doing so at the cost of their own people.
The fact that this is happening in the world is horrific and unethical. How can a government turn its back on people who have supported it? How can they be put forth as the criminals when they have not done anything wrong? People should care because procrastinating on such issues and appeasing the criminal will only exacerbate the future with the creation of another Hitler. What we are witnessing now is similar to the policy of appeasement followed in the early years of 1930. That only made Hitler confident enough to invade Poland. Additionally these kidnappings also defy basic human rights and are unethical to the core! Thus we should not only care but also show that we are for the South Korean Victims.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yFvO2BKhWqg&feature=related
Secret Victims is a documentary based on the knowledge issue of the unethical yet undisclosed kidnappings of the South Koreans. Although centred around this idea this idea, the documentary also manages to point out the situation between North and South Korea and their current relationship, the divide in the South Korean people and the difficulties the family of the victims have to face. All this combine in the end to ask a really powerful question on whether democracy is what the idealists claim?
Democracy means freedom of speech and rights, yet where are the rights of these people? Is it ethical for them to suffer just because their government is too scared of the North Koreans? The facts are clear that nearly 500 South Korean fishermen have been abducted and taken to the communist Korea for torture and brainwash. Maybe this fact may have the figure taken for granted, maybe some of those 500 people were spies as the South Korean government fears but the abductees are mostly common fishermen. Even if they were spies, what would they be able to tell the North Korean government? Also perhaps not all these victims may have been kidnapped, there can be a possibility that there was an accident in the sea and the family is assuming that the loved one was kidnapped. These are possibilities but since the number of victims is so high, it really does not make a difference. The Japanese government put pressure on North Korea for 15 Japanese people captured by the communist Korea and they got 5 back. If Japan can do this, why cannot South Korea.
The documentary is biased for the victims and their families and really does not show the side of the South Korean government who may be having its own concerns for picking this issue up with Kim Jong-II. North Korea has been an excessively aggressive in its foreign policy and South Korea has mostly been on its receiving end. In the years where one is hoping for peace and focusing on making the economy recover, why should the South Korean government aggravate their relationship with the DPRK? Although they are working for peace, they are doing so at the cost of their own people.
The fact that this is happening in the world is horrific and unethical. How can a government turn its back on people who have supported it? How can they be put forth as the criminals when they have not done anything wrong? People should care because procrastinating on such issues and appeasing the criminal will only exacerbate the future with the creation of another Hitler. What we are witnessing now is similar to the policy of appeasement followed in the early years of 1930. That only made Hitler confident enough to invade Poland. Additionally these kidnappings also defy basic human rights and are unethical to the core! Thus we should not only care but also show that we are for the South Korean Victims.
Thursday, April 30, 2009
The Little Prince
Chapter 20
But it happened that after walking for a long time through sand, and rocks, and snow, the little prince at last came upon a road. And all roads lead to the abodes of men.
"Good morning," he said.
He was standing before a garden, all a-bloom with roses.
"Good morning," said the roses.
The little prince gazed at them. They all looked like his flower.
"Who are you?" he demanded, thunderstruck.
"We are roses," the roses said.
And he was overcome with sadness. His flower had told him that she was the only one of her kind in all the universe. And here were five thousand of them, all alike, in one single garden!
"She would be very much annoyed," he said to himself, "if she should see that... she would cough most dreadfully, and she would pretend that she was dying, to avoid being laughed at. And I should be obliged to pretend that I was nursing her back to life-- for if I did not do that, to humble myself also, she would really allow herself to die..."
Then he went on with his reflections: "I thought that I was rich, with a flower that was unique in all the world; and all I had was a common rose. A common rose, and three volcanoes that come up to my knees-- and one of them perhaps extinct forever... that doesn't make me a very great prince..."
And he lay down in the grass and cried
Human Nature is really what is explored throughout the book. The book is based on a number of emotions however in this chapter focuses on love. The theme of human narrow mind ness is highlighted by the prince himself as he immediately jumps to various conclusions and starts to criticize the common things he has.
The Little Prince characterizes narrow-mindedness as a trait of adults. In the very first chapter, the narrator draws a sharp contrast between the respective ways grown-ups and children view the world. He depicts grown-ups as unimaginative, superficial, and stubbornly sure that their limited perspective is the only one possible. Yet ironically enough as the Little Prince explores and becomes more experienced and learned (his growth is symbolic of the transformation of a boy to a man) he himself starts behaving like these adults especially in this chapter. The Little Prince after seeing the earth starts putting himself down as worthless and not as great a prince as he thought he was. His emotion of sadness overpowers his reason and he starts to cry. Ironically enough this would not have bothered him if he hadn’t come to earth and seen that volcanoes and roses exist elsewhere. The little Prince disregards the love that the rose and he share and does not see that the emotion of love is what makes his rose unique.
Reason begins to fail him and we see the joyful prince becoming a wreck as he matures to the world again symbolizing a child growing into an adult. His reasoning is fallacious because he does not look at the counter arguments, he follows the James Lange Theory of emotions where he lets his worry of the reaction of his rose when he tells her that she is a common flower culminate to the end of his self- confidence. He needs to be shown the truth through the eyes of another.
However the prince's love for his rose is the driving force behind the novel and leads to the realization of the responsibility of relationships which in this materialistic and science driven world that ends emotions is hard to come by.
But it happened that after walking for a long time through sand, and rocks, and snow, the little prince at last came upon a road. And all roads lead to the abodes of men.
"Good morning," he said.
He was standing before a garden, all a-bloom with roses.
"Good morning," said the roses.
The little prince gazed at them. They all looked like his flower.
"Who are you?" he demanded, thunderstruck.
"We are roses," the roses said.
And he was overcome with sadness. His flower had told him that she was the only one of her kind in all the universe. And here were five thousand of them, all alike, in one single garden!
"She would be very much annoyed," he said to himself, "if she should see that... she would cough most dreadfully, and she would pretend that she was dying, to avoid being laughed at. And I should be obliged to pretend that I was nursing her back to life-- for if I did not do that, to humble myself also, she would really allow herself to die..."
Then he went on with his reflections: "I thought that I was rich, with a flower that was unique in all the world; and all I had was a common rose. A common rose, and three volcanoes that come up to my knees-- and one of them perhaps extinct forever... that doesn't make me a very great prince..."
And he lay down in the grass and cried
Human Nature is really what is explored throughout the book. The book is based on a number of emotions however in this chapter focuses on love. The theme of human narrow mind ness is highlighted by the prince himself as he immediately jumps to various conclusions and starts to criticize the common things he has.
The Little Prince characterizes narrow-mindedness as a trait of adults. In the very first chapter, the narrator draws a sharp contrast between the respective ways grown-ups and children view the world. He depicts grown-ups as unimaginative, superficial, and stubbornly sure that their limited perspective is the only one possible. Yet ironically enough as the Little Prince explores and becomes more experienced and learned (his growth is symbolic of the transformation of a boy to a man) he himself starts behaving like these adults especially in this chapter. The Little Prince after seeing the earth starts putting himself down as worthless and not as great a prince as he thought he was. His emotion of sadness overpowers his reason and he starts to cry. Ironically enough this would not have bothered him if he hadn’t come to earth and seen that volcanoes and roses exist elsewhere. The little Prince disregards the love that the rose and he share and does not see that the emotion of love is what makes his rose unique.
Reason begins to fail him and we see the joyful prince becoming a wreck as he matures to the world again symbolizing a child growing into an adult. His reasoning is fallacious because he does not look at the counter arguments, he follows the James Lange Theory of emotions where he lets his worry of the reaction of his rose when he tells her that she is a common flower culminate to the end of his self- confidence. He needs to be shown the truth through the eyes of another.
However the prince's love for his rose is the driving force behind the novel and leads to the realization of the responsibility of relationships which in this materialistic and science driven world that ends emotions is hard to come by.
THE CASES OF SPECIAL PLEADING
REFLECTIONS
Wednesday 22nd April’09
Cases of special pleading spate the world we live today. It is a personal disease that is caused by the effect our emotions. The desire to be content and the selfishness that sprouts from it has led to the human race making rules that they themselves never follow but accept the world to never break it. Everyone is trying to manipulate facts and laws to get away with things they are unwilling to accept themselves and hence make exceptions for the law only for themselves and use conflicting reason when doing so.
In the movie ‘Khudha Kai Liye’ Mariam’s father hypocritically continues having a live in relationship with a white woman while refuses to let Mariam marry David. He tricks her and takes her in a remote village on the border of Pakistan and Afghanistan. Here he marries her to her cousin and then abandons the village saying that the toilet was really bad. This is a complete case of special pleading which is based on his desire of wanting his own sins to be forgiven but not losing his partner. He says he loves his partner but disregards the same feelings Mariam had for David. To add to the irony of the situation he says to his family there is no harm in what he is doing as everyone does it in Britain yet when it comes to Mariam who is actually a British citizen, it has suddenly become wrong. He uses the dual cultures that he belongs to and creates a mixture of reason that lacks any logic and empty from any other emotions but self-interest and desire.
Cases of special pleading have plagued the world’s history as well. For example Hitler as a leader advocated the use of a set timetable and the importance of working a lot with utmost precision however in contrast to what he said he stood for, Hitler used to get up at any time he wanted (usually very late) and follow no set pattern of the day. He also used to go to work really less. His words were mostly followed by the people and failure to keep with the set times often led to punishments especially in the youth camps.
Recently America asked India to reduce its Carbon footprint while the amount of carbon they emit is the most in the world. This hypocrisy was also followed at the end of the First World War when the unjust Treaty of Versailles was being forced upon Germany. Since Britain and France were the victor nations, they forced Germany to disarm to nothing but 6 battleships and 100000 men taking the excuse that it was one of the clauses of Woodrow Wilson’s Fourteen Points but later refused to do so themselves later. This caused anger in the Germans and became one of the reasons for the rise of the Nazis. These cases of special pleading mostly resulted in negative consequences. However they only affect the area of History and Ethics. Special Pleading is really not seen in science but for science examples including the numerous arms and technology races that have recurred in History and still is happening now, in India as well in the form of the Nuclear Deal.
Wednesday 22nd April’09
Cases of special pleading spate the world we live today. It is a personal disease that is caused by the effect our emotions. The desire to be content and the selfishness that sprouts from it has led to the human race making rules that they themselves never follow but accept the world to never break it. Everyone is trying to manipulate facts and laws to get away with things they are unwilling to accept themselves and hence make exceptions for the law only for themselves and use conflicting reason when doing so.
In the movie ‘Khudha Kai Liye’ Mariam’s father hypocritically continues having a live in relationship with a white woman while refuses to let Mariam marry David. He tricks her and takes her in a remote village on the border of Pakistan and Afghanistan. Here he marries her to her cousin and then abandons the village saying that the toilet was really bad. This is a complete case of special pleading which is based on his desire of wanting his own sins to be forgiven but not losing his partner. He says he loves his partner but disregards the same feelings Mariam had for David. To add to the irony of the situation he says to his family there is no harm in what he is doing as everyone does it in Britain yet when it comes to Mariam who is actually a British citizen, it has suddenly become wrong. He uses the dual cultures that he belongs to and creates a mixture of reason that lacks any logic and empty from any other emotions but self-interest and desire.
Cases of special pleading have plagued the world’s history as well. For example Hitler as a leader advocated the use of a set timetable and the importance of working a lot with utmost precision however in contrast to what he said he stood for, Hitler used to get up at any time he wanted (usually very late) and follow no set pattern of the day. He also used to go to work really less. His words were mostly followed by the people and failure to keep with the set times often led to punishments especially in the youth camps.
Recently America asked India to reduce its Carbon footprint while the amount of carbon they emit is the most in the world. This hypocrisy was also followed at the end of the First World War when the unjust Treaty of Versailles was being forced upon Germany. Since Britain and France were the victor nations, they forced Germany to disarm to nothing but 6 battleships and 100000 men taking the excuse that it was one of the clauses of Woodrow Wilson’s Fourteen Points but later refused to do so themselves later. This caused anger in the Germans and became one of the reasons for the rise of the Nazis. These cases of special pleading mostly resulted in negative consequences. However they only affect the area of History and Ethics. Special Pleading is really not seen in science but for science examples including the numerous arms and technology races that have recurred in History and still is happening now, in India as well in the form of the Nuclear Deal.
Wednesday, April 29, 2009
Terrorism
Knowledge at work
Terrorism is the most pressing issue of this century and needs a solution. Terrorism is the use of violence in order to create a general fear in a population and thereby to bring about a political objective. This is the main issue of the article is the terrorist attack that Mumbai faced on 26th November.
The writer of the article claims to know facts about the trial of the prime accused of the attacks. He is really not arguing for anything but is merely stating facts. However these facts do allude to many things that he has not explored. There is a sense of detachment and the writer is really not using emotionally laden language to communicate anything. The article is centred on the terrorist Kasab and his trial. Even though the writer gives information, one cannot help but see how late the trial has started as the article has been dated for April 17th 2009, nearly 5 months after the attacks. The writer does not expand on this fact and thus show the lax in the Indian government. He also does not expand on the reasons for the change in a lawyer and what really happened during the attacks which would give the article a holistic appeal. It is more filled with reason as the writer does not let the emotions of anger and sadness over power him and scrutinize Kasab. It in a way it is right. Terrorism is not really born naturally, as the movie Khudha Kai Liye shows it is instilled in the young men by religious leaders who use the Quran as a confirmation bias. These religious leaders present their own interpretation (backed by their emotions) of the Quran as the truth and brain wash the men with fallacious reasoning.
In the end it is going to be Kasab who is hanged and killed yet the fact is that he has been growing up in a culture and society that perceives whatever they are doing to be ‘the right’ thing to do. Even if they do object, they cannot voice their views out of the fear of being killed. There is a famous saying that states 'one man's terrorist is another's hero. This may really imply to freedom fighters like the Mau Mau in Kenya and the Bhagat Singh in India but in a small way it does fit in with the Pakistani and Afghanistan society as well.
Our reason enables us to perceive holistically as what they have done as wrong. But males in Pakistan are trained ever since they are 5 to kill and hate the western world. So can we really call Kasab evil? This is very debatable and has not been explored by the author.
Due to the detached tone the writer really does not seem to be taking anything for granted as such except the fact that his readers have really not been following the trials that closely and hence gives an overview of the whole issue.
What really impacts one as they read the article is how distant the writer is. Kasab and the other terrorists were responsible for murdering 184 people. The fact the he is still living after 5 months is astonishing. People should hence care about the issue as the victims deserve justice for the pain the families went through. The debate that he is evil from within is a different matter. The fact is that the government should press his trial with a sense of urgency and pressure in comparison to the other cases so as to atleat give some peace to the relatives of the victims.
http://news.outlookindia.com/item.aspx?658415
26/11 Mumbai Attack Trial Begins
Mumbai | Apr 17, 2009 PRINT
The trial in the November 26 Mumbai terror attack case has begun at a special sessions court in Mumbai's Arthur Road Jail, with the prosecution opening its case against the sole surviving terrorist Mohammed Ajmal Amir Kasab and two others.
Special Public Prosecutor (SSP) Ujwal Nikam opened the arguments against Kasab, Faheem Ansari and Sabauddin Ahmed for their alleged involvement in the 26/11 attack case in which 183 people were killed.
Kasab has already got a new lawyer with the court appointing noted advocate SG Abbas Kazmi on Thursday (April 16) to defend the Pakistani terrorist. Unlike Kasab's previous lawyer Anjali Waghmare, Kazmi is not from the legal aid panel.
Kasab, the prime accused in the case, would be charged with murder of 166 persons in the attack unleashed by Pakistan-based terror outfit the Lashkar-e-Toiba (LeT) on November 26, 2008. Kasab and two others have been booked in 12 cases related to the terror strikes.
Terrorism is the most pressing issue of this century and needs a solution. Terrorism is the use of violence in order to create a general fear in a population and thereby to bring about a political objective. This is the main issue of the article is the terrorist attack that Mumbai faced on 26th November.
The writer of the article claims to know facts about the trial of the prime accused of the attacks. He is really not arguing for anything but is merely stating facts. However these facts do allude to many things that he has not explored. There is a sense of detachment and the writer is really not using emotionally laden language to communicate anything. The article is centred on the terrorist Kasab and his trial. Even though the writer gives information, one cannot help but see how late the trial has started as the article has been dated for April 17th 2009, nearly 5 months after the attacks. The writer does not expand on this fact and thus show the lax in the Indian government. He also does not expand on the reasons for the change in a lawyer and what really happened during the attacks which would give the article a holistic appeal. It is more filled with reason as the writer does not let the emotions of anger and sadness over power him and scrutinize Kasab. It in a way it is right. Terrorism is not really born naturally, as the movie Khudha Kai Liye shows it is instilled in the young men by religious leaders who use the Quran as a confirmation bias. These religious leaders present their own interpretation (backed by their emotions) of the Quran as the truth and brain wash the men with fallacious reasoning.
In the end it is going to be Kasab who is hanged and killed yet the fact is that he has been growing up in a culture and society that perceives whatever they are doing to be ‘the right’ thing to do. Even if they do object, they cannot voice their views out of the fear of being killed. There is a famous saying that states 'one man's terrorist is another's hero. This may really imply to freedom fighters like the Mau Mau in Kenya and the Bhagat Singh in India but in a small way it does fit in with the Pakistani and Afghanistan society as well.
Our reason enables us to perceive holistically as what they have done as wrong. But males in Pakistan are trained ever since they are 5 to kill and hate the western world. So can we really call Kasab evil? This is very debatable and has not been explored by the author.
Due to the detached tone the writer really does not seem to be taking anything for granted as such except the fact that his readers have really not been following the trials that closely and hence gives an overview of the whole issue.
What really impacts one as they read the article is how distant the writer is. Kasab and the other terrorists were responsible for murdering 184 people. The fact the he is still living after 5 months is astonishing. People should hence care about the issue as the victims deserve justice for the pain the families went through. The debate that he is evil from within is a different matter. The fact is that the government should press his trial with a sense of urgency and pressure in comparison to the other cases so as to atleat give some peace to the relatives of the victims.
http://news.outlookindia.com/item.aspx?658415
26/11 Mumbai Attack Trial Begins
Mumbai | Apr 17, 2009 PRINT
The trial in the November 26 Mumbai terror attack case has begun at a special sessions court in Mumbai's Arthur Road Jail, with the prosecution opening its case against the sole surviving terrorist Mohammed Ajmal Amir Kasab and two others.
Special Public Prosecutor (SSP) Ujwal Nikam opened the arguments against Kasab, Faheem Ansari and Sabauddin Ahmed for their alleged involvement in the 26/11 attack case in which 183 people were killed.
Kasab has already got a new lawyer with the court appointing noted advocate SG Abbas Kazmi on Thursday (April 16) to defend the Pakistani terrorist. Unlike Kasab's previous lawyer Anjali Waghmare, Kazmi is not from the legal aid panel.
Kasab, the prime accused in the case, would be charged with murder of 166 persons in the attack unleashed by Pakistan-based terror outfit the Lashkar-e-Toiba (LeT) on November 26, 2008. Kasab and two others have been booked in 12 cases related to the terror strikes.
Wednesday, April 22, 2009
Hindu radicals vandalise Church near Nagpur, spread fear.
Knowledge at Work
Fanaticism because of religion is the main knowledge issue in this article, something that is evident by just glancing at the title. An event of 20-25 Hindus damaging a church has been summarized by the paper. They have injured at least two women and attacked despite the fact that children were there. They even destroyed property of the school run by the church all in the name of religion. The surprising factor is that the fanatics were from two political parties. This sad occurrence of how clouded religion makes one reasons. The ironic factor is that all of this violence is coming from a religion where peace is the base of it and also from political parties who we as public are supposed to choose in order to lead our country into the future.
The article alludes to a lot of issues in the society of India and across the world. One would be obviously being the involvement of uneducated and emotionally run fanatics in our government. Emotion as a base to make decisions is ultimately harmful. Anger of the Hindus is what led to this crime. Anger is also what led to the formation of the Al Qaida and thus the 9/11 attacks, 2006 Bombay blasts and the 26/11 attacks. The logic that science follows lacks in the action by the fanatics who follow more emotions as they are upset at the facts that the poor were converting their faith. What they do not see is the fact that their own faith has not done anything for the poor. At least the church funds go into the school and activities for the members. The money that the poor offer to the temples goes straight into the pockets of the pandits. History has many proof s of the frauds played by Hindu pandits who exploit the faith of the followers. How is any of this ethical? And to top it off committing a violent movement as this in which women are injured and proper facilities that the future of India needs to develop an educated mind is damaged, can hardly be called justified even on religious terms.
The bias of the article is that they have really made the entire Hindu community look bad which is not true. The people who committed the action do have a justified reason because the church is using money as a bribing factor for the poor to change their religion. Yet the fact is that the way they executed their action was unethical especially the fact that they were disrespecting someone else’s religious beliefs. Anger was what guided them and thus their actions lacked reason. A rational mind would have tried to use money to improve the facilities offered to Hindu worshippers which at the moment is hampered by the system of casts and status.
The circumstances of this situation are grave and based on religious differences. The fear that must have been instilled in the minds of those watching children may eventually lead to a desire for revenge. Religion is a clouding factor for reason, something that religious leaders use continuously as seen during the crusades of the middle ages and right now by the Taliban leaders. The movie Khudha Ke Liye is a perfect example in which one can see a mind being brain washed by beliefs. One should care as this is damaging to the unity with which one should live in this world. After the horrors of the first (1914) and the second (1945) world war, is it right to get trapped in another deadly universal war over God! Hence this is why people should care and give this a second thought because they should realize the fact that religion can make one do drastic things where reason has evaporated into nothingness.
Fanaticism because of religion is the main knowledge issue in this article, something that is evident by just glancing at the title. An event of 20-25 Hindus damaging a church has been summarized by the paper. They have injured at least two women and attacked despite the fact that children were there. They even destroyed property of the school run by the church all in the name of religion. The surprising factor is that the fanatics were from two political parties. This sad occurrence of how clouded religion makes one reasons. The ironic factor is that all of this violence is coming from a religion where peace is the base of it and also from political parties who we as public are supposed to choose in order to lead our country into the future.
The article alludes to a lot of issues in the society of India and across the world. One would be obviously being the involvement of uneducated and emotionally run fanatics in our government. Emotion as a base to make decisions is ultimately harmful. Anger of the Hindus is what led to this crime. Anger is also what led to the formation of the Al Qaida and thus the 9/11 attacks, 2006 Bombay blasts and the 26/11 attacks. The logic that science follows lacks in the action by the fanatics who follow more emotions as they are upset at the facts that the poor were converting their faith. What they do not see is the fact that their own faith has not done anything for the poor. At least the church funds go into the school and activities for the members. The money that the poor offer to the temples goes straight into the pockets of the pandits. History has many proof s of the frauds played by Hindu pandits who exploit the faith of the followers. How is any of this ethical? And to top it off committing a violent movement as this in which women are injured and proper facilities that the future of India needs to develop an educated mind is damaged, can hardly be called justified even on religious terms.
The bias of the article is that they have really made the entire Hindu community look bad which is not true. The people who committed the action do have a justified reason because the church is using money as a bribing factor for the poor to change their religion. Yet the fact is that the way they executed their action was unethical especially the fact that they were disrespecting someone else’s religious beliefs. Anger was what guided them and thus their actions lacked reason. A rational mind would have tried to use money to improve the facilities offered to Hindu worshippers which at the moment is hampered by the system of casts and status.
The circumstances of this situation are grave and based on religious differences. The fear that must have been instilled in the minds of those watching children may eventually lead to a desire for revenge. Religion is a clouding factor for reason, something that religious leaders use continuously as seen during the crusades of the middle ages and right now by the Taliban leaders. The movie Khudha Ke Liye is a perfect example in which one can see a mind being brain washed by beliefs. One should care as this is damaging to the unity with which one should live in this world. After the horrors of the first (1914) and the second (1945) world war, is it right to get trapped in another deadly universal war over God! Hence this is why people should care and give this a second thought because they should realize the fact that religion can make one do drastic things where reason has evaporated into nothingness.
Sunday, April 19, 2009
RATIONALISATIONS
REFLECTION
Wednesday 15th April’08
As human beings we usually tend to reason out unintentionally with our emotions. Sometimes what we see, hear, smell around us may play on our primary emotions of happiness, sadness, fear, surprise, disgust and anger. These experiences contribute in overpowering our reason and thus swaying our judgements so as to satisfy the emotion that was felt. For example when a child has an ice-cream for the first time, the tactile pleasure that he will get shall instigate the emotion of happiness and he would want to feel this emotion again and again. He would generalize that an ice-cream is equal to happiness. On the other hand if one sees a drunken man, physically abuse his wife by slapping her repeatedly and openly, it would instigate anger within us. If one sees a similar incident again after a week or so, this anger would be directed towards trying to help such women and one would generalize that all drunken men beat their wives.
These generalisations when negative become prejudices. From then on we do not reason in a holistic manner with evidences from science, literature, math, art and ethics but we look at only evidence that supports our bias and we form a belief with a conformation bias that is illusionary as one has not looked at the counter arguments. A vicious circle will be formed and this uncertain belief would end up becoming stronger.
Sometimes this can be a source of motivation like in the example of the drunken man and the helpless woman. The people may ending up taking strong action against this social issue and thus help the society. But if the prejudice is more against a race or a particular group of people then this cycle could make them a fanatic as history has proven to us with examples like Hitler and the Al Qaida. Such a thing also happened in America during the 1950’s and 60’s civil rights movement where racism against the black people lacked all logic. In the 1950 some whites really feared that the wave of civil rights for the black Americans that was spreading was a threat to their own way of life because they would have to compromise on their sophisticated culture. There was also a sense of disgust at this thought cause of the skin colour of the blacks compared to the ‘pure’ one of the whites’. This formed a biased perception and backed by influenced newspaper reports (many of them fake to instigate anger against the blacks as the newspapers themselves were owned by the Whites) and one ignored all the good things about the Black Americans like their contributions in the first and the second world wars. This fallacious reasoning leads to emotive language that is filled with anger and hatred against the Blacks. And thus leads to even more powerful emotions against them. In America this cycle led to the formation of the Ku Klux Clan and many secret killings of the Black people. There was abuse, physical and emotional, beatings and unfair segregation.
This is rationalisation and many times the effects are horrifying as the example signifies.
Wednesday 15th April’08
As human beings we usually tend to reason out unintentionally with our emotions. Sometimes what we see, hear, smell around us may play on our primary emotions of happiness, sadness, fear, surprise, disgust and anger. These experiences contribute in overpowering our reason and thus swaying our judgements so as to satisfy the emotion that was felt. For example when a child has an ice-cream for the first time, the tactile pleasure that he will get shall instigate the emotion of happiness and he would want to feel this emotion again and again. He would generalize that an ice-cream is equal to happiness. On the other hand if one sees a drunken man, physically abuse his wife by slapping her repeatedly and openly, it would instigate anger within us. If one sees a similar incident again after a week or so, this anger would be directed towards trying to help such women and one would generalize that all drunken men beat their wives.
These generalisations when negative become prejudices. From then on we do not reason in a holistic manner with evidences from science, literature, math, art and ethics but we look at only evidence that supports our bias and we form a belief with a conformation bias that is illusionary as one has not looked at the counter arguments. A vicious circle will be formed and this uncertain belief would end up becoming stronger.
Sometimes this can be a source of motivation like in the example of the drunken man and the helpless woman. The people may ending up taking strong action against this social issue and thus help the society. But if the prejudice is more against a race or a particular group of people then this cycle could make them a fanatic as history has proven to us with examples like Hitler and the Al Qaida. Such a thing also happened in America during the 1950’s and 60’s civil rights movement where racism against the black people lacked all logic. In the 1950 some whites really feared that the wave of civil rights for the black Americans that was spreading was a threat to their own way of life because they would have to compromise on their sophisticated culture. There was also a sense of disgust at this thought cause of the skin colour of the blacks compared to the ‘pure’ one of the whites’. This formed a biased perception and backed by influenced newspaper reports (many of them fake to instigate anger against the blacks as the newspapers themselves were owned by the Whites) and one ignored all the good things about the Black Americans like their contributions in the first and the second world wars. This fallacious reasoning leads to emotive language that is filled with anger and hatred against the Blacks. And thus leads to even more powerful emotions against them. In America this cycle led to the formation of the Ku Klux Clan and many secret killings of the Black people. There was abuse, physical and emotional, beatings and unfair segregation.
This is rationalisation and many times the effects are horrifying as the example signifies.
Tuesday, April 7, 2009
The War between Reason and Emotion…
REFLECTION
Monday 6th April
Both Emotion and Reason act as forces in our minds…that act in opposite ways thus leading to internal conflicts and sometimes tendencies to dominate. But only when they are balanced will the decisions that one makes are right and morally justified. Thus these tendencies to dominate are what cause the weak moments of our lives. At times humans become the ‘materialistic rational scientific city man’ as the poems of TS Eliot highlight clearly. In his poetry emotions have more or less vanished from earth…Humans are just ‘hollow men’ with nothing but money to guide them. They are robots…this happens when reason overtakes everything. When emotion leaves us not even the devastation of the war and the cruelty of death affects us. Our decisions become for our selfish needs.
Domination of emotions too causes nothing but wrong decisions. Dictators and politicians are expert at playing with emotions so as to blind reason. Even if there is a conscience, a cluster of emotions can lead it to become clouded. And thus irrational decisions are formulated and implemented. This not only ruins the life of the person who is thinking emotionally but also the people around him. Examples of emotionally swayed individuals in the 21st century would obviously have to be the terrorists. Even politicians try and use it by trying to instigate hate into his listeners against the other party.
It is not wrong to think emotionally or extra reasonably. Unconsciously we just perform what feels right at that point. However for justified and absolutely true decisions a balance combination of reason and emotions is true. I mean if our prime-minister Mr. Manmohan Singh ran the country without properly thinking about it in the diplomatic ways but yet making his decision so as to not go against his own sentiments, we would either be in a state of war with our neighbours or a puppet country up for show, not the IT centre and the largest democracy of the world!
Monday 6th April
Both Emotion and Reason act as forces in our minds…that act in opposite ways thus leading to internal conflicts and sometimes tendencies to dominate. But only when they are balanced will the decisions that one makes are right and morally justified. Thus these tendencies to dominate are what cause the weak moments of our lives. At times humans become the ‘materialistic rational scientific city man’ as the poems of TS Eliot highlight clearly. In his poetry emotions have more or less vanished from earth…Humans are just ‘hollow men’ with nothing but money to guide them. They are robots…this happens when reason overtakes everything. When emotion leaves us not even the devastation of the war and the cruelty of death affects us. Our decisions become for our selfish needs.
Domination of emotions too causes nothing but wrong decisions. Dictators and politicians are expert at playing with emotions so as to blind reason. Even if there is a conscience, a cluster of emotions can lead it to become clouded. And thus irrational decisions are formulated and implemented. This not only ruins the life of the person who is thinking emotionally but also the people around him. Examples of emotionally swayed individuals in the 21st century would obviously have to be the terrorists. Even politicians try and use it by trying to instigate hate into his listeners against the other party.
It is not wrong to think emotionally or extra reasonably. Unconsciously we just perform what feels right at that point. However for justified and absolutely true decisions a balance combination of reason and emotions is true. I mean if our prime-minister Mr. Manmohan Singh ran the country without properly thinking about it in the diplomatic ways but yet making his decision so as to not go against his own sentiments, we would either be in a state of war with our neighbours or a puppet country up for show, not the IT centre and the largest democracy of the world!
Sunday, March 29, 2009
THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN LOGICAL AND RATIONAL THINKING
REFLECTION
“You are not thinking. You are merely being logical” is a quote said by Niels Bohr to Albert Einstein. He is very much right. Science and Mathematics are subjects where no room to question has been left. What we do when solving a question is basically a general fact, a rule that everyone has to follow. Being good at math may make one into a logical thinker but not a rational one.
I originally thought that rational and logical thinking was the same thing or divided by a really fine line. However that is not the case. The word rationality and logic have entirely different meanings. The dictionary gives these as their meanings.
Rational-‘having its source in or being guided by the intellect (distinguished from experience or emotion) (Example: "A rational analysis")’or ‘consistent with or based on or using reason (Example: "Rational behaviour")’.
Logical- capable of or reflecting the capability for correct and valid reasoning (Example: "A logical mind")
or based on known statements or events or conditions (Example: "Rain was a logical expectation, given the time of year")
Rationality is related to more to the idea of reason in the sense if one is rational one is able to infer or extrapolate in an ordered matter. Yet rationality is not certain i.e. it is based on probability and expectation. However logic is based more on facts that can be proved. It is very precise and cannot be argued with. Working out a maths sum is the perfect example of logical thinking because there is no other way of going about the sum. There is no reason involved in the sense that one is not going to think twice before writing 2+2=4, in our brain it is a fact.
Science is a mixture of logical and rational thinking. Proofs for formulas would be more logical however explanations and understanding is based on rational thinking. One would perceive as science being 100% right but because the explanations are rational, they are more hypothetical. For example science works around the phenomena of an ideal gas where the gas particles do not exert any force on each other however in reality no such phenomena exists unless induced by humans and even there it is not completely proper. Also many things have been taken for granted where science is concerned for example there is actually no proof that the direction of magnetic field lines is from the north to the south. It has just been taken for convenience’s sake. These hypothesises is science are rational but not logical as there are no facts.
Thus in conclusion rational behaviour is where one is uses there own personal experiences, perception and thus knowledge to infer something. Thus it is entirely based on reason. Here one questions to reach a hypothesis, an expected claim. However logic is something that is a part of rational thinking if the logic used is valid, certain or rather factual. Rational thinking is however ‘uncertain but sensible’.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
