Saturday, December 19, 2009

Is there a thing that doesn't exist?

"Is there a thing that doesn't exist?" was the question my son Krishna asked me last night. It has been his habit to listen to my ramblings before he goes to sleep. His point is - my voice gives him good sleep. And I see the reason on why I didn't become a teacher. Coming back to his question - it made me happy, for he asked a difficult question. It made me happier as I can answer this one to my satisfaction. So, I started.

"The answer in a single word is No. But let me explain. We perceive everything through our minds. Thousands of inputs from the sensory organs and a memory help our mind make sense out of what the eyes see, ears hear etc. So, to perceive something, the mind must be present. That is the basic premise.

To answer your question, we must first define what that "thing" is (that doesn't exist). You can define that thing as something not in your memory. For example, a creature with three legs, four arms, eight eyes and three ears is definitely that's not there in your mind until we defined. As we defined it, it started existing in your mind.

As per our basic premise, we perceive only those things that exist in our mind. After the above example, the strange creature started existing." He nodded and tapped his head and said - "here".

I was happy that he understood such an abstract piece of information at his age. I narrated this to my wife and asked, "Isn't he brilliant?"

For her part, she narrated an event that happened three hours before.

"I had just returned from the market, buying vegetables to last for 10 days. They were all unpacked and I was about to stock them up in the fridge, when you called. I was preparing dinner, was on a call with my aunt and there was someone at the door. So, I asked Krishna to take your call. He spoke to you and turned to me and asked - "Father asked if he needs to get vegetables or greens." There was 200 rupees worth vegetables and greens right in front of him at the table where he was sitting and still he didn't correlate it to your question. Now, tell me - is he brilliant or what?"

All I could say was - "He's like me!"

Monday, May 18, 2009

In response to Science & Religion

This blog is in response to Ram's blog on Science and Religion, a debate.

I see both science and religion as two tools that try to set aside the subjective experience with a more objective observation.

I choose to place my views with examples.  I like examples.

If a religion preaches that attending a worship session is good for you, (medical) science preaches that aspirin is good for your heart.  Both tend to apply an observed phenomenon on a small sample to the masses.  Just as aspirin may be good for your heart, attending a sunday mass could be good for your emotions.  In both the cases, there are side effects.  Not attending a mass can induce guilty conciousness; aspirin is known to have side effects.  Note that I'm not referring to the act of attending the mass or taking aspirin, but am just referring to the preaching's impact.

Rarely do we see priests paying true attention to the individual.  Doctors are slightly better.  But considering the healthcare in most populous countries, I doubt whether doctors take individuals seriously.  Instead they try to interpret the situation with what they have learnt, in a scripture or a book.

Science gets an approval from the rationalists because it clearly has its fine prints and disclaimers.   Unfortunately, the religions I know of do not have such caveats.  Instead they warn of terrible consequences if you don't follow.  

Religion during Galileo's period disapproved of science that wasn't in line with the scriptures.  In a way, we see the same tendency within the scientific community of today, towards religion and spirituality.

Is there a serious study on religion or spirituality and its impact in the human well being?  If there were any, I doubt whether those researchers are respected within the research community. 

Saturday, March 28, 2009

How do you feel?

When I was about 19-20, on the day of Vinayaka Chaturthi, my father was performing the pooja. My brother and I wanted to go to our uncle's place - some 15 kilometers from where we were, to watch a cricket match on TV.  We didn't have TV at that time.  We were rushing our father to finish the pooja fast so that we don't miss even a minute of the game.  My mom was quite upset that we preferred a game over God.  I asked my father - "What would you do when you were my age and got a chance to play/watch cricket?".  Sounded like a good question at that time.  My father didn't say anything, but finished the pooja quickly and we went off to watch the game.

Apart from this, I've asked my mom and other elders on a number of occasions on why should we do this or that - to justify my actions and inactions.  The responses can be broadly classified as follows:
  • Some science  (often supported by statistics) that no one understood were behind  the rituals.  An example would be scientific backing of (Hatha) Yoga.
  • Intangible benefits - like punya, better concentration etc.  Example: Benefits of meditation as told by practitioners.
  • Elders said so - I don't know and wouldn't question that.
But, never once I got that answer like - "Try it - you might feel good."   It is as if, no one wanted to talk about the subjective feeling, but always try to reason it.  The reasons, over a period of time, were misunderstood and had become foolish rituals.  

I'd attribute this is to a couple of things.
  • People didn't have any authentic experience in support of these theories.  Even if they had had, they don't value it and use as a supporting fact.
  • The Western mind and the education system insists too much on the objectives to a level that a subjective experience is distrusted and seen as a lie.
The rituals are not restricted to the religious practices.   There are jokes like processes designed for certifications like ISO, CMM and modern research on physiology and psychology that rely heavily on statistics.

In effect, we don't even trust how we feel fever, instead need a thermometer to prove that there is fever.

Let me see if I can play the "feel" factor with my developers - expect them to produce good quality software that they would be feel proud of.  There are a lot of steps involved, but I think it would definitely be a step forward in their quality of work.

A few years down the line, I foresee the situation narrated in the beginning happen again.  That time, I would find myself playing a different role - that of a father.  When that happens, I might tell my son, "Try staying in the pooja - you might feel good."  I'd still try to finish the pooja fast and would make my son feel happy - just as my father did!

Sunday, March 22, 2009

Nano, People, Economics and Tata's Vision

Yesterday Prakash blogged about sentiments on Nano. On the points that Prakash had mentioned:

1. Bridge the status for many people
Are we looking at a more or less equal status of people because all of them can have a car? Is this the end of all differences and do we start treating people equally? Nano is just a product that would attempt to cash in on the small segment of city people that can afford a bike but can't afford a Maruti 800 or such a car.  

Status differences are there and will be there. There will always be a comparison.

2. Allow people to convert their dreams in reality
The one who managed to buy a Nano would want to sell it the next year and move up to a bigger better car. So, if someone can dream of a Nano, the next dream would be an i10 or Getz or Maruti 800.

3. Ensure safe travel
Agreed. A car is safer than a bike just because you can't drive a bigger vehicle as crazily as you would drive a bike. But sir, what about the safety of the poor souls that happen to walk and cycle on the same road. Yesterday, I stopped for letting a pedestrian cross the road. She was shocked that someone could do that and stood like a moose in front of the headlights. In the meantime, I was honked and yelled for stopping!

BTW, I use my car as rarely as possible - maintaining a balance between social responsibility and need for luxury.

4. How a good segment of population will take a cautious approach before buying? They will wait and watch till the official verdict is on.
1 lakh (or advertised as Rs 99,999 + taxes) is just a marketing figure. I wonder what would be the cost of driving it that includes fuel, maintenance and insurance. Tata cars aren't known for their ease of maintenance and roads aren't designed for a maintenance free driving either. At this state of economy when the money flow is not guaranteed, people would obviously think a hundred times before committing on an ongoing spend.

My concern is, as the number of cars keep increasing, we have limited road-space in all the cities. We just can't afford to have more cars without causing major problems in environment, physical and mental health and lastly economy. In these conditions, it would be foolish to expect an expensive product to make life better for the masses.

Here are the specific comments about the timing of Nano.

Was it a good idea of Mohammed bin Thuglaq to shift the capital city? Was it a good idea to mint leather currency? Definitely yes! But every decision for a country or organization must be backed up by time.
  • To me, Tata's Nano and their acquiring of Jaguar, Land Rover or Corus lack the vision Tatas are known for.
  • If building a car from ground-up is an achievement, they have done it with Indica. 
  • Instead of improving its quality and being cost effective in the production, Tata chose the 1-lakh car. Though the idea sounds good, it seems to be driven by ego - that we can do it. 
  • That has an adverse impact in making fair judgment of the present conditions. I feel the opposition at Nandigram should have been seen as a bad omen for the 1-lakh car. We usually do not see resistance as a warning and Tatas are no exception.

Earlier Posts