The writing is triggered by many incidences in your life . Though my life has been going on its monotone pace, sometimes frustrations are deep down building up and a little catalytic event and here is the outcome.
What would be more offensive - Taking an issue/subject as a subject or as an object? Or both or none? Being objective, people are thinking in a way they think think. Its like looking at a stone and trying to understand. Objectivity helps in understanding things or phenomena or whatever on the face of earth beyond ones emotional, ethical, virtuous(according to many - irrational!!???) part of brain. There are so many people I have met who say, " Well, you behaving the way you behave because you mind is trained in this way in your childhood; "Oh yeah! Right. Thanks for the enlightenment. I was groping in dark, and your viewpoint has suddenly bridged the gap with its twilight".
Sarcasm apart: What is the idealistic way of looking at society or as a matter of fact "I". The existence of every little object in your room has its own importance and its timely shift from object to subject is based on ones situational need; applies very much to every human on the face of earth. Each of us are object and subject to different people based on ones perception, acquaintances, emotional bondage and of course ones virtues. I am not here to argue - which is better. Because, I ain't certain myself and for sure can never be.
But a little couplet from an urdu poet would add a dash to food for thought:
Hun said kabhi aur kabhi aur sayyad hun mein
Kuch bhi nahin baazeecha-e-izdaad hun main
Mukhtar magar apni haddon mein mehdood
Haan wusat-e-zanjeer tak azaad hun mein
(said=predator, sayyad=prey, baazeecha-e-izdaad = bundle of arguments/contradictions)
To put it in a non-literal analogy the rubai is questioning the very existence of objectivity. The very concept of 'objectivity' is based on the fact that it is devoid of subjectivity - that it itself is relative. Once you take this as your base, the whole concept is tinted with perception of the experienced.
Well, my friend argued " You are hell bend on your ideologies - resistant to change. For a change look at things from objective point of view. May be it would give you a better understanding of things around."
It all started with 'Don't ask, don't tell' policy discussion. I neither intend to ask nor tell, because its is against the adab of Islam (or rather a crime) to expose someone to someone else. I try my best to confirm to this principle. And, I really get out of situations that I think are out of my control. I don't want to be a part of the game where I am just a silent watcher. To tell the truth, I have been just that most the time and I hate my self for it. I have always been labeled as easily offended, too serious, just cant takes jokes, you think too much, etc from my school days. Because everything affects me - if it is related to me or not. Its nothing wrong on others. I am not offended by it but I feel guilty being a part of it. That's the way I am. People are different and thank God they are.
But is it really that if I adapt the objective point of view that the whole issue becomes indifferent - Indeed that is all we do all the time. Dont we?
The recent reports of series of pre-school shootings in china by mad people with amunition is ridiculous. The objective reason according to the news reporters is that there is too much unemployment around and hence people are suffering from depression and paranoia. Really? There are many similar diseases on my list: gambling, being shy is social phobia, PMS. I am sure times are near where every misbehavior would be approved by some psychological disorder to make things look ok. Excuse me for my blatant characteristics but the present chaos in our society is because of our objective approach.
The western world is still trying to recuperate the repercussions of teenage pregnancies. And the recent supreme court green flag to pre marital sex is an added blow. Oh my God! How naive am I. Putting my foot in the so called progress of Indian society. But answer me how are we going to defend teen age pregnancies? Oh sorry, pre marital sex is only for above 18 people and don't we have anti contraceptive measures. Ah! I see. As, I said: I am naive.
In a country where more than 40 percent of population living below poverty lines, there a huge 50 % margin between the supply and demand of water on negative side, people are hungry, more than 30 % population is unemployed, where every year 27 million babies are born, where women are raped, eve teasing is rampant?
Are we really solving the problems or aggravating it? Oh common, what has it got to do with me? I am just being an imprudent brute orthodox. He also argued that it happens all the time, legalizing is just helping it to remove the social stigma. How can I even argue to such a statement. I just kept my mouth shut.
Homicide is a criminal offense- still we find people killing each other. So shall we legalize killing. Its ok to kill if you are above 18. You are mature to decide for yourself.
Yet, the cool aired attitude towards adaptation of thinking that things should be looked up as new concepts in ones life sometimes irks me. Anything out of box is cool. People should read psychology a little bit to understand why the newer concepts are presented with that air.
Not surprising enough, there are two types of people: people who spell out their opinion and people who don't. But keeping quiet usually is taken as a trademark of agreement/ignorance. Well, I have been a culprit of this misconception sometimes. There could be two reasons to it : either the person really agrees on the opinion or the very base of perception on which the argument is based is not in alignment with the him/her and he or she has decided not to go to the arduous task of explaining because their objectivity has taken over their subjectivity. Did it make sense? Anyways, to cut the long story short: I mean to say that everything on the face of earth and earth itself is relative to something else and hence the whole concept of objectivity is a little hyped and let me end it by a famous scientist quote:
"A human being is part of the whole called by us universe, a part limited in time and space. We experience ourselves, our thoughts and feelings as something separate from the rest. A kind of optical delusion of consciousness. This delusion is a kind of prison for us, restricting us to our personal desires and to affection for a few persons nearest to us. Our task must be to free ourselves from the prison by widening our circle of compassion to embrace all living creatures and the whole of nature in its beauty." ~ Albert Einstein
What would be more offensive - Taking an issue/subject as a subject or as an object? Or both or none? Being objective, people are thinking in a way they think think. Its like looking at a stone and trying to understand. Objectivity helps in understanding things or phenomena or whatever on the face of earth beyond ones emotional, ethical, virtuous(according to many - irrational!!???) part of brain. There are so many people I have met who say, " Well, you behaving the way you behave because you mind is trained in this way in your childhood; "Oh yeah! Right. Thanks for the enlightenment. I was groping in dark, and your viewpoint has suddenly bridged the gap with its twilight".
Sarcasm apart: What is the idealistic way of looking at society or as a matter of fact "I". The existence of every little object in your room has its own importance and its timely shift from object to subject is based on ones situational need; applies very much to every human on the face of earth. Each of us are object and subject to different people based on ones perception, acquaintances, emotional bondage and of course ones virtues. I am not here to argue - which is better. Because, I ain't certain myself and for sure can never be.
But a little couplet from an urdu poet would add a dash to food for thought:
Hun said kabhi aur kabhi aur sayyad hun mein
Kuch bhi nahin baazeecha-e-izdaad hun main
Mukhtar magar apni haddon mein mehdood
Haan wusat-e-zanjeer tak azaad hun mein
(said=predator, sayyad=prey, baazeecha-e-izdaad = bundle of arguments/contradictions)
To put it in a non-literal analogy the rubai is questioning the very existence of objectivity. The very concept of 'objectivity' is based on the fact that it is devoid of subjectivity - that it itself is relative. Once you take this as your base, the whole concept is tinted with perception of the experienced.
Well, my friend argued " You are hell bend on your ideologies - resistant to change. For a change look at things from objective point of view. May be it would give you a better understanding of things around."
It all started with 'Don't ask, don't tell' policy discussion. I neither intend to ask nor tell, because its is against the adab of Islam (or rather a crime) to expose someone to someone else. I try my best to confirm to this principle. And, I really get out of situations that I think are out of my control. I don't want to be a part of the game where I am just a silent watcher. To tell the truth, I have been just that most the time and I hate my self for it. I have always been labeled as easily offended, too serious, just cant takes jokes, you think too much, etc from my school days. Because everything affects me - if it is related to me or not. Its nothing wrong on others. I am not offended by it but I feel guilty being a part of it. That's the way I am. People are different and thank God they are.
But is it really that if I adapt the objective point of view that the whole issue becomes indifferent - Indeed that is all we do all the time. Dont we?
The recent reports of series of pre-school shootings in china by mad people with amunition is ridiculous. The objective reason according to the news reporters is that there is too much unemployment around and hence people are suffering from depression and paranoia. Really? There are many similar diseases on my list: gambling, being shy is social phobia, PMS. I am sure times are near where every misbehavior would be approved by some psychological disorder to make things look ok. Excuse me for my blatant characteristics but the present chaos in our society is because of our objective approach.
The western world is still trying to recuperate the repercussions of teenage pregnancies. And the recent supreme court green flag to pre marital sex is an added blow. Oh my God! How naive am I. Putting my foot in the so called progress of Indian society. But answer me how are we going to defend teen age pregnancies? Oh sorry, pre marital sex is only for above 18 people and don't we have anti contraceptive measures. Ah! I see. As, I said: I am naive.
In a country where more than 40 percent of population living below poverty lines, there a huge 50 % margin between the supply and demand of water on negative side, people are hungry, more than 30 % population is unemployed, where every year 27 million babies are born, where women are raped, eve teasing is rampant?
Are we really solving the problems or aggravating it? Oh common, what has it got to do with me? I am just being an imprudent brute orthodox. He also argued that it happens all the time, legalizing is just helping it to remove the social stigma. How can I even argue to such a statement. I just kept my mouth shut.
Homicide is a criminal offense- still we find people killing each other. So shall we legalize killing. Its ok to kill if you are above 18. You are mature to decide for yourself.
Yet, the cool aired attitude towards adaptation of thinking that things should be looked up as new concepts in ones life sometimes irks me. Anything out of box is cool. People should read psychology a little bit to understand why the newer concepts are presented with that air.
Not surprising enough, there are two types of people: people who spell out their opinion and people who don't. But keeping quiet usually is taken as a trademark of agreement/ignorance. Well, I have been a culprit of this misconception sometimes. There could be two reasons to it : either the person really agrees on the opinion or the very base of perception on which the argument is based is not in alignment with the him/her and he or she has decided not to go to the arduous task of explaining because their objectivity has taken over their subjectivity. Did it make sense? Anyways, to cut the long story short: I mean to say that everything on the face of earth and earth itself is relative to something else and hence the whole concept of objectivity is a little hyped and let me end it by a famous scientist quote:
"A human being is part of the whole called by us universe, a part limited in time and space. We experience ourselves, our thoughts and feelings as something separate from the rest. A kind of optical delusion of consciousness. This delusion is a kind of prison for us, restricting us to our personal desires and to affection for a few persons nearest to us. Our task must be to free ourselves from the prison by widening our circle of compassion to embrace all living creatures and the whole of nature in its beauty." ~ Albert Einstein
