Since I have been talking so much about God, the next obvious increment would be religion. There are two things that happened in the last couple of weeks that got me thinking in a all together different directions about religion. One was obviously the discussion about my previous blog with Tanno where he said that he was a Muslim and his view of the world is based on the Quran. The second one was a shrine that Rahul created in the conference room at the ECM office.
I guess I have hinted on my position on religion in previous posts. I was born into a religion but i don't practice it. So far I don't believe religion has helped me with anything whatsoever, neither spiritually, emotionally nor socially. It has been used to discriminate against me right from the time i needed to go to school. I am not especially proud of being a Hindu. You can argue that I really don't know much about Hinduism or what it represents and you won't be wrong, I don't know much. Probably I am not happy with the way it is represented today and the I am not happy with the people who claim to be the leaders of the religion.
I am tired of the fundamentalism and the intolerance that all religion has come to represent in the so called modern world. It has become a tool to acquire power and status. Bombay has become Mumbai and Madras has become Chennai but the legacy of divide and rule doesn't seem to be going away anywhere soon. People can be divided along a lot of lines but religion seems to be the most potent. As I have discovered religion can be a very touchy subject and I am slowly discovering the meaning of "Die Religion ... ist das Opium des Volkes", though definitely not in a communist way.
I am not opposed to the idea of religion per se but I definitely have deep reservations of the way it is being practiced and I have become so cynical about the concept that there is this tremendous inertia to learn about it. I think that religion should be a personal affair and I really don't think it should be overtly advertised. Most people, I have come to realize, don't even have the slightest notion of the religion they practice and I really have no qualms in saying that this is true even in my house. I have asked many a times for the significance of particular ritual or a verse and I have never got a straight answer for any question. It all seems to be second hand knowledge and religion seems to be practiced without understanding or questioning.
I have started reading the Quaran and even though it is a very difficult to read I am still sticking to it. As I read I am learning more and I am quite intrigued by the idea of religion in general and why it came about. I hope to read the rigveda and the Bible next. The idea definitely is to find out with an open mind when and how these religious texts came into being, why they are revered so much and why people follow it blindly, millennia after they have been written.
As it stands today though, I don't believe that I need religion to provide me with an identity in society. I would rather not be part of or be associated with a religious group or sect. I don't want to announce to the world or to the government my religious preferences. I would rather be nonreligious, if that is at all possible.
That said I cannot ignore the deeply communal society we live in. The majority of the people around me are attached and are more often than not proud of their religious identities. Their sensibilities are hurt and sometimes deeply wounded by the tiniest of pin drops. Everyday morning when I walk to my room in the office, I pass the shrine in the conference room and I have to ask myself in a land where even Ayappa and Venkateshwara have not learnt to coexist, is this not an invitation to trouble? Why give the company a religious identity? What purpose does it serve? Is this not talking a side? Is this not communalizing the fabric of the work place with such an "in your face" location for the shrine? Doesn't the location amplify the message unreasonably? The question really is should we as a business establishment be making such a statement when it can so easily be perceived as intolerant? I would think not!
Tuesday, February 19, 2008
Friday, February 15, 2008
At Peace!
I started reading a book on neurobiology recently and the author has written a few lines in the introduction which summarizes very nicely my view of the discussion on the previous post I made. I quote:
"I am skeptical of science's presumption of objectivity and definitiveness. I have a difficult time seeing scientific results, especially in neurobiology, as anything but provisional approximations, to be enjoyed for a while and discarded as soon as better accounts become available. But skepticism about the current reach of science, especially as it concerns the mind, does not imply diminished enthusiasm for the attempt to improve the provisional approximations.
Perhaps the complexity of the human mind is such that the solution to the problem can never be known because of our inherent limitations. Perhaps we should not even talk about a problem, at all, and speak instead of a mystery, drawing on a distinction between questions that can be approached suitably by science and questions that are likely to elude science forever. But much as I have sympathy for those who cannot imagine how we might unravel the mystery (they have been dubbed "mysterians"), and those who think it is knowable but would be disappointed if the explanation were to rely on something already known, I do believe more often than not, that we will come to know."
What he says about the human mind can be equated to nature which is far more complex than the human mind it created. I don't believe that any literary work today can even come close to defining what nature is and how it works, let alone being a definitive guide. I have been here only for 28 measly years, I cannot be at peace with anything. The day i say that, I have closed my mind to new "approximations". I don't want to be at peace and hope to be this way for the entire time I am here. I want to learn and I want to explore. There is just so much out there that I need to know before I can say a piece of knowledge is useless.
"I am skeptical of science's presumption of objectivity and definitiveness. I have a difficult time seeing scientific results, especially in neurobiology, as anything but provisional approximations, to be enjoyed for a while and discarded as soon as better accounts become available. But skepticism about the current reach of science, especially as it concerns the mind, does not imply diminished enthusiasm for the attempt to improve the provisional approximations.
Perhaps the complexity of the human mind is such that the solution to the problem can never be known because of our inherent limitations. Perhaps we should not even talk about a problem, at all, and speak instead of a mystery, drawing on a distinction between questions that can be approached suitably by science and questions that are likely to elude science forever. But much as I have sympathy for those who cannot imagine how we might unravel the mystery (they have been dubbed "mysterians"), and those who think it is knowable but would be disappointed if the explanation were to rely on something already known, I do believe more often than not, that we will come to know."
What he says about the human mind can be equated to nature which is far more complex than the human mind it created. I don't believe that any literary work today can even come close to defining what nature is and how it works, let alone being a definitive guide. I have been here only for 28 measly years, I cannot be at peace with anything. The day i say that, I have closed my mind to new "approximations". I don't want to be at peace and hope to be this way for the entire time I am here. I want to learn and I want to explore. There is just so much out there that I need to know before I can say a piece of knowledge is useless.
Sunday, February 10, 2008
Heaven holds a place for those who pray?
So say Simon and Garfunkel. I love the song but then I don't necessarily agree with them. As we grow up, we give up St. Nick, the tooth fairy and the closet monster but why is it so difficult to give up the concept of heaven and hell? Aren't they all in the same league? Aren't they all fairy tales, we were taught as children?
I have not come to terms with the concept of praying as well. I find temples awkward places to be at. I have never been able to understand most of the rituals there, they seem frivolous to me and i somehow can't get myself to do them. The base problem though is that the concept of God in general, does not appeal to me. I think that God was created by early man to attribute things that he did not understand and the concept has just stuck around for too long.
Think about it originally man did not know about the sun and the moon so they became Gods. Then the planets, then earth, fire, wind and water. As our understanding progresses we don't hold these things in awe and how many people today really think of the sun as a God. In a way, as human knowledge increases, it kills a little part of God. Even today, we attribute things which are beyond our control or things we don't understand to God. Take creation of the universe as an example. We have conflicting theories, the big bang being the most popular but no real consensus. The simplest explanation that remains is that God created the universe.
People pray for and do penance for things that they expect or want in the future. Our lives are complex and modeling our lives is probably impossible. The sheer number of variables controlling our lives and situations that make out lives are so many that it is impossible to predict an outcome for the situations or our lives. But the other side is that if you get your way it is easy to attribute it to something or anything because it is difficult to prove what had and what did not have a tilting influence on some outcome. So it could be God who put in his 2c to get you what you want or it could be the planets exerting their influence.
That said I personally would like to believe that it is my effort that most influenced the outcome of any situation. I don't like sharing my glory with God or the planets. Why should I? I have worked hard for what i earned. Similarly if something doesn't go my way then it is probably because I left some stone unturned or I made a mistake or I was being plain stupid. I think I am strong enough to accept that and deal with that. I don't need a safety net in terms of God or the planets to blame. I really cannot get myself to believe that asking a stone idol or an unknown "creator" for help in changing the future or influencing outcomes of situations is a worthwhile effort.
I don't buy the argument that I was created by an intelligent creator. To me there is no watchmaker, blind or otherwise. The basis of the watchmaker analogy is that all complex things like a watch are created by intelligent design and cannot occur randomly or by chance. Another argument is that of purposeful design, that is the designer makes things to solve a certain purpose. For example the hands of a clock require to be moved so there is a spring to hold power, similarly humans have eyes to take in the environment around them or limbs to move around. I do own a copy of the Origin of the Species and even though it is a seriously boring book, I have read through most of it. I think Darwin wins hands down and he convincingly disproves all these arguments.
Mutation and natural selection explain biological creation and why we are as we are with our eyes and limbs. Similarly it also provides a plausible explanation of how complex things and life itself can evolve and need not be created by an intelligent designer. There is empirical evidence to back this up all around us and the evidence and the argument just gets stronger everyday. For me the creation vs. evolution debate has a clear and unambiguous winner. Moreover, if an intelligent designer created me then he must be more complex than I, who created him? Is it not a circular problem?
I don't have a problem with people believing in the presence of a creator, everybody is entitled to their own view. Moreover the concept of God has a multi-billion dollar industry around it. The Tirupathi temple has a budget running into a few hundred crores. The industry does provide employment to millions and does have its philanthropic benefits. The problem I have is that this industry is based on fear and fear can be used to exploit people. How many times have you heard people say if they don't shell out cash, God will make bad things happen to them. The second problem is ignorance and blind faith. How many people you know who argue about the existence of God have actually any idea about the concept of evolution or have a open mind to even read about it. This is what troubles me the most.
In essence what i would like to do is chip away at God and eliminate the unknowns rather than pray. That should get a place in the books which is better than a place in heaven. I am happy being an atheist but for the non-believers, God bless you and Mrs. Robinson.
I have not come to terms with the concept of praying as well. I find temples awkward places to be at. I have never been able to understand most of the rituals there, they seem frivolous to me and i somehow can't get myself to do them. The base problem though is that the concept of God in general, does not appeal to me. I think that God was created by early man to attribute things that he did not understand and the concept has just stuck around for too long.
Think about it originally man did not know about the sun and the moon so they became Gods. Then the planets, then earth, fire, wind and water. As our understanding progresses we don't hold these things in awe and how many people today really think of the sun as a God. In a way, as human knowledge increases, it kills a little part of God. Even today, we attribute things which are beyond our control or things we don't understand to God. Take creation of the universe as an example. We have conflicting theories, the big bang being the most popular but no real consensus. The simplest explanation that remains is that God created the universe.
People pray for and do penance for things that they expect or want in the future. Our lives are complex and modeling our lives is probably impossible. The sheer number of variables controlling our lives and situations that make out lives are so many that it is impossible to predict an outcome for the situations or our lives. But the other side is that if you get your way it is easy to attribute it to something or anything because it is difficult to prove what had and what did not have a tilting influence on some outcome. So it could be God who put in his 2c to get you what you want or it could be the planets exerting their influence.
That said I personally would like to believe that it is my effort that most influenced the outcome of any situation. I don't like sharing my glory with God or the planets. Why should I? I have worked hard for what i earned. Similarly if something doesn't go my way then it is probably because I left some stone unturned or I made a mistake or I was being plain stupid. I think I am strong enough to accept that and deal with that. I don't need a safety net in terms of God or the planets to blame. I really cannot get myself to believe that asking a stone idol or an unknown "creator" for help in changing the future or influencing outcomes of situations is a worthwhile effort.
I don't buy the argument that I was created by an intelligent creator. To me there is no watchmaker, blind or otherwise. The basis of the watchmaker analogy is that all complex things like a watch are created by intelligent design and cannot occur randomly or by chance. Another argument is that of purposeful design, that is the designer makes things to solve a certain purpose. For example the hands of a clock require to be moved so there is a spring to hold power, similarly humans have eyes to take in the environment around them or limbs to move around. I do own a copy of the Origin of the Species and even though it is a seriously boring book, I have read through most of it. I think Darwin wins hands down and he convincingly disproves all these arguments.
Mutation and natural selection explain biological creation and why we are as we are with our eyes and limbs. Similarly it also provides a plausible explanation of how complex things and life itself can evolve and need not be created by an intelligent designer. There is empirical evidence to back this up all around us and the evidence and the argument just gets stronger everyday. For me the creation vs. evolution debate has a clear and unambiguous winner. Moreover, if an intelligent designer created me then he must be more complex than I, who created him? Is it not a circular problem?
I don't have a problem with people believing in the presence of a creator, everybody is entitled to their own view. Moreover the concept of God has a multi-billion dollar industry around it. The Tirupathi temple has a budget running into a few hundred crores. The industry does provide employment to millions and does have its philanthropic benefits. The problem I have is that this industry is based on fear and fear can be used to exploit people. How many times have you heard people say if they don't shell out cash, God will make bad things happen to them. The second problem is ignorance and blind faith. How many people you know who argue about the existence of God have actually any idea about the concept of evolution or have a open mind to even read about it. This is what troubles me the most.
In essence what i would like to do is chip away at God and eliminate the unknowns rather than pray. That should get a place in the books which is better than a place in heaven. I am happy being an atheist but for the non-believers, God bless you and Mrs. Robinson.
Sunday, February 3, 2008
Growing up!
With so many of my friends on the cusp of becoming parents, I cannot help but reflect on how difficult parenting actually is. A child is a living, breathing thing a complex entity. Complex entities have a tendency to be chaotic and unpredictable. How do you deal with this chaos and how do you react and handle difficult situations and how do you work when so much emotion is clouding every small morsel of judgment you might have? It all sounds very daunting.
I believe the key like with any other relationship is communication. Without communication, I have seen parents and children drift so apart that they almost look like strangers who just live together. Communication is a two-way street and both parties have to be equally involved to make things work, but i believe very strongly that the onus of setting up the environment for conducive and productive communications lies squarely with the parents. Thats because this has to be done early in the child's life.
Most of the time this becomes impossible because parents tend to think of their children as things they own and control completely. "My son will do what i ask him without questioning", seems to be a statement which makes most parents overzealous with pride. You have to wonder if that is a seriously degrading comment on your child's intelligence or your assertion of total control over your children. This kind of almost dictatorial control can be achieved only through fear. Instilling fear in your children when they are young I assume is not very difficult. A good spanking or some serious emotional blackmailing will put the fear of God into any child. But fear brings with it one major drawback, it severs all channels of communication. There are only two things the child can do, either he is going to be this timid docile creature and treat every word you say as a command of God or he is simply going to rebel and do everything behind your back. What he chooses totally depends on the environment presented to him outside the house. Either which way if you set up a precedent of fear for your children, and your child even for a moment thinks he is scared of you, then the game is most definitely over. At that instance when he thought that, you have lost your children forever and they are not coming back.
You may not be a tyrannical parent but you could still decide that you would not talk to your children about specific so called taboo topics and just assume that your children have some how magically figured out the right thing to do. The most classic example of this is booze. Ask a parent, "does your son drink" and i will bet that most of the time you will hear "Absolutely not!". Complete and total denial. I am sure all of us have wondered at some time or another on such a comment, are our parents really so naive? I mean they ought to know at some point or another you did get pressured, bullied or plain tempted to pick up that glass of vodka and gulp it down.
I know that booze is there in the world and it can be bought easily. Sweeping it under the carpet is the most irresponsible thing ever. Booze can get my children into trouble. I would rather know where and when they are drinking rather than they drinking on the sly and debating whether or not they should call me if they end up in trouble. Denial does not seem to be the right answer, not at all. The answer definitely lies in education and communication, in an environment where there is not a blanket ban on alcohol but rather an advisory on its ill effects and how to manage it correctly. Don't get me wrong, I am not saying drinking should be encouraged in any way but a logical and clear discussion on alcohol with your children is not going to make them an alcoholic on the contrary, I believe that a rebellious child drinking behind your back is more likely to become one.
I enjoy my glass of wine and I have never had to make an excuse for it at home. I have a collection of spirits from all over the world and I am actually proud of it and it sits in a closet in my room. I can order a Mojito for myself, a glass of wine for my sister and a beer for my dad at a restaurant on a Sunday afternoon and not worry too much about it. I do think that this is a far better place to be in than sneaking out with friends and drinking irrationally with the fear of getting caught always hanging on your head. There is a mutual trust that has built up where my dad is confident of my ability to drink responsibly and I make sure that I don't shake that confidence in any way. I know that if I break it I will be the bigger loser, that itself is deterrent enough to make me say no after my third drink. Isn't this a far healthier relationship where things are in the open and people are generally sleeping better than a one based on lies and denial? Cheers dad!
Fear and denial are age old problems that parents seem to dealing with all the time but then the environment in which children live changes with every passing generation. What do you do with problems whose consequences are not known. The most glaring of these problems at least for our generation and the coming one seems to be with mobile phones and the Internet. Every teenager today is bought a mobile phone. In general, looking at a very global picture mobile phones make personal communication easy and effortless. But if you observe how your 16 year old cousin uses her phone even you will be surprised, let alone her parents. Try explaining to your mother how you can effectively fight with your girlfriend from the middle of crowded wedding reception with 160-byte snippets. The conversation will probably end when you say girlfriend but you get the idea of what i am trying to say. Or better still try explaining to your aunt the perils of putting a computer with a broadband connection in the same cousins bedroom. Both are seriously uphill tasks!
These are just genuine mistakes or simply unknowns which can end up causing a lot of issues at some point or another. So, what do you do as a parent? Do you not buy your children mobile phones or do you not get them an internet connections? For all its worth, these things expose your child to whole new world, a whole new sub-culture. Do you curtail this exposure or do you start spying on your children and start reading their mails and putting up key loggers on the PC? I don't think that either of them is a good option. I think the only solution is to be on your toes and make informed decisions and learn to deal with, understand and accept situations as they evolve. By accept, I mean that if your kid needs to use steganography to send out messages then there is something terribly wrong already even before the computer came in. I am sure the word invest i used in my last post is suddenly starting to make sense! It is a lot of difficult, hard work.
But i think, all this aside the most difficult aspect of parenting is learning to let go of your children. As your children grow and acquire knowledge and intelligence for themselves, your influence and control on their thinking reduces or at least it should reduce. Most parents find this concept very daunting and they would like their children to be in their sphere of influence for eternity. The idea seems to be that they can somehow protect their children from all pitfalls for time immemorial, which practically is not achievable. In my opinion, parents who accept this idea gracefully are the ones who make the difference and make life easier and productive for themselves and their children. Somewhere down the line you have to learn to stop saying "I know what is best for my child" and say "He knows what is best for himself" instead. That later statement is obviously difficult to make and it requires a lot of trust and respect both ways, though I am sure it is said with immense pride because for reasons more than one, it is vindication of your "work" as a good parent.
As, I look around me, I actually feel lucky to be where I am. I have had an exceptional childhood. I have never been denied anything, I have not been subjected to an environment of fear, I have had my independence and privacy, I have been able to do and achieve what I have aimed and wished for, not what was expected of me, my opinions are sought for and are respected and I don't have very many complaints. I am not saying that it has all been perfect and my parents have made no mistakes but overall considering how complex this whole game is and how difficult children can be, if I reach some point which is even half way to where my parents are today, I would consider it a job well done!
I believe the key like with any other relationship is communication. Without communication, I have seen parents and children drift so apart that they almost look like strangers who just live together. Communication is a two-way street and both parties have to be equally involved to make things work, but i believe very strongly that the onus of setting up the environment for conducive and productive communications lies squarely with the parents. Thats because this has to be done early in the child's life.
Most of the time this becomes impossible because parents tend to think of their children as things they own and control completely. "My son will do what i ask him without questioning", seems to be a statement which makes most parents overzealous with pride. You have to wonder if that is a seriously degrading comment on your child's intelligence or your assertion of total control over your children. This kind of almost dictatorial control can be achieved only through fear. Instilling fear in your children when they are young I assume is not very difficult. A good spanking or some serious emotional blackmailing will put the fear of God into any child. But fear brings with it one major drawback, it severs all channels of communication. There are only two things the child can do, either he is going to be this timid docile creature and treat every word you say as a command of God or he is simply going to rebel and do everything behind your back. What he chooses totally depends on the environment presented to him outside the house. Either which way if you set up a precedent of fear for your children, and your child even for a moment thinks he is scared of you, then the game is most definitely over. At that instance when he thought that, you have lost your children forever and they are not coming back.
You may not be a tyrannical parent but you could still decide that you would not talk to your children about specific so called taboo topics and just assume that your children have some how magically figured out the right thing to do. The most classic example of this is booze. Ask a parent, "does your son drink" and i will bet that most of the time you will hear "Absolutely not!". Complete and total denial. I am sure all of us have wondered at some time or another on such a comment, are our parents really so naive? I mean they ought to know at some point or another you did get pressured, bullied or plain tempted to pick up that glass of vodka and gulp it down.
I know that booze is there in the world and it can be bought easily. Sweeping it under the carpet is the most irresponsible thing ever. Booze can get my children into trouble. I would rather know where and when they are drinking rather than they drinking on the sly and debating whether or not they should call me if they end up in trouble. Denial does not seem to be the right answer, not at all. The answer definitely lies in education and communication, in an environment where there is not a blanket ban on alcohol but rather an advisory on its ill effects and how to manage it correctly. Don't get me wrong, I am not saying drinking should be encouraged in any way but a logical and clear discussion on alcohol with your children is not going to make them an alcoholic on the contrary, I believe that a rebellious child drinking behind your back is more likely to become one.
I enjoy my glass of wine and I have never had to make an excuse for it at home. I have a collection of spirits from all over the world and I am actually proud of it and it sits in a closet in my room. I can order a Mojito for myself, a glass of wine for my sister and a beer for my dad at a restaurant on a Sunday afternoon and not worry too much about it. I do think that this is a far better place to be in than sneaking out with friends and drinking irrationally with the fear of getting caught always hanging on your head. There is a mutual trust that has built up where my dad is confident of my ability to drink responsibly and I make sure that I don't shake that confidence in any way. I know that if I break it I will be the bigger loser, that itself is deterrent enough to make me say no after my third drink. Isn't this a far healthier relationship where things are in the open and people are generally sleeping better than a one based on lies and denial? Cheers dad!
Fear and denial are age old problems that parents seem to dealing with all the time but then the environment in which children live changes with every passing generation. What do you do with problems whose consequences are not known. The most glaring of these problems at least for our generation and the coming one seems to be with mobile phones and the Internet. Every teenager today is bought a mobile phone. In general, looking at a very global picture mobile phones make personal communication easy and effortless. But if you observe how your 16 year old cousin uses her phone even you will be surprised, let alone her parents. Try explaining to your mother how you can effectively fight with your girlfriend from the middle of crowded wedding reception with 160-byte snippets. The conversation will probably end when you say girlfriend but you get the idea of what i am trying to say. Or better still try explaining to your aunt the perils of putting a computer with a broadband connection in the same cousins bedroom. Both are seriously uphill tasks!
These are just genuine mistakes or simply unknowns which can end up causing a lot of issues at some point or another. So, what do you do as a parent? Do you not buy your children mobile phones or do you not get them an internet connections? For all its worth, these things expose your child to whole new world, a whole new sub-culture. Do you curtail this exposure or do you start spying on your children and start reading their mails and putting up key loggers on the PC? I don't think that either of them is a good option. I think the only solution is to be on your toes and make informed decisions and learn to deal with, understand and accept situations as they evolve. By accept, I mean that if your kid needs to use steganography to send out messages then there is something terribly wrong already even before the computer came in. I am sure the word invest i used in my last post is suddenly starting to make sense! It is a lot of difficult, hard work.
But i think, all this aside the most difficult aspect of parenting is learning to let go of your children. As your children grow and acquire knowledge and intelligence for themselves, your influence and control on their thinking reduces or at least it should reduce. Most parents find this concept very daunting and they would like their children to be in their sphere of influence for eternity. The idea seems to be that they can somehow protect their children from all pitfalls for time immemorial, which practically is not achievable. In my opinion, parents who accept this idea gracefully are the ones who make the difference and make life easier and productive for themselves and their children. Somewhere down the line you have to learn to stop saying "I know what is best for my child" and say "He knows what is best for himself" instead. That later statement is obviously difficult to make and it requires a lot of trust and respect both ways, though I am sure it is said with immense pride because for reasons more than one, it is vindication of your "work" as a good parent.
As, I look around me, I actually feel lucky to be where I am. I have had an exceptional childhood. I have never been denied anything, I have not been subjected to an environment of fear, I have had my independence and privacy, I have been able to do and achieve what I have aimed and wished for, not what was expected of me, my opinions are sought for and are respected and I don't have very many complaints. I am not saying that it has all been perfect and my parents have made no mistakes but overall considering how complex this whole game is and how difficult children can be, if I reach some point which is even half way to where my parents are today, I would consider it a job well done!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)