STILL BELIEVING IN PARROTS!

A few weeks ago on television I heard this quote by Bill Moyers "Creativity is piercing the mundane to find the marvellous." I almost forgot the quote but the word "mundane" somehow kept appearing repeatedly in my mind. Once in a while a catchy tune or some wording from a song seems to get stuck in the head and we keep repeating it. This phenomenon has been explained as a "cognitive itch". You are compelled to scratch it by repeating it. Like any other itch, instead of amelioration, the scratching actually enhances the desire to scratch. One way of getting rid of it is to find out the whole song or the whole experience associated with that fragment.
What has the sound of "mundane" has got to do with my subconscious memory? Suddenly after a few days I remembered that this word is phonetically very similar to "Mandan" and of course I have heard the story of Mandan Mishra many a times when I was growing up in India.
Here is a short version of the story.
In 8^th century CE, in Mithila area of India there lived a very learned Hindu scholar called Mandan Mishra. He lived with his wife Bharti. He was an ardent believer in ritualistic religion.
    Shankar (who was later known as Adi Shankaracharya) was a young rising scholar of Hindu religion and philosophy who believed in the superiority of spiritual wisdom over rituals of religion. He had debated and defeated many contemporary scholars. In the same vain he came to debate with Mandan Mishra. When he reached the outskirts of his village he came across some women who were washing clothes there. He asked them about the location of Mishra`s home. They said "just go straight, when you see a house where the parrots are reciting the sacred Sanskrit Shlokas, you would have reached your destination."
With that tip Shankar found the house easily. After some persuasion Mandan Mishra agreed for a debate. Then came the matter of choosing a judge. Mandan Mishra was certain that he would easily defeat the young scholar but he thought that if he nominated a judge, people might say that he won because of partiality of the judge. So he insisted that Shankar nominated the judge. Shankar was also sure of the superiority of his logic but he thought that if he chose a judge of his acquaintance, people might accuse him of favouritism. So he chose Bharti, Mandan Mishra's wife to be the judge. The debate lasted for many days covering almost all aspects of Hindu religion and philosophy but ultimately Bharti declared that Shankar had won the debate. According to the custom prevalent at that time Mandan Mishra started preparations to give up his way of thinking and become Shankaracharya`s disciple.

But at that moment Bharti stopped further proceedings and said " as husband & wife make a single unit, Shankar had defeated only one half". Before declaring a complete win he would have to do a debate with her. Logically she was right. Bharti started debating on the very intimate matrix that existed between a husband and a wife. She was justified to open this subject as Hindu religion and philosophy governed all aspect of life. Shankaracharya soon pleaded his ignorance of these matters explaining that as a bachelor he did not have a chance to study that facet of life. Mandan Mishra was the judge in this debate. Instead of declaring the defeat of Shankar he halted the debate and allowed the young scholar to go and get the required experience and come back to debate the matter in six month's time. Shankar came back after having the experience of a married life and then defeated Bharti fair and square.
This episode gives a glimpse of the civilised life that existed at that time. People sorted out religious differences by polite verbal debate rather than rudeness, cheating or violence.
It also describes the strength of character of an ideal judge or arbitrator as one who gives verdict based on evidence rising above any self interest. Dr. Radhakrishnan quoted this story in his inaugural speech at the centenary celebrations of Allahabad high court in 1966. Describing Bharti as an ideal judge he said "pure objectivity and fidelity to truth: these were the only things which weighed with her as she gave the judgment in favor of Shankaracharya"
Of course when we first heard the story, the only thing that fascinated us was the fact that Mandan Mishra`s parrots were reciting Sanskrit scriptures. And we were very proud of those parrots. As children we did not know that parrots were just mimicking the sounds.
Sadly many adults still believe in these parrots : the so called gurus of various religions who just repeat the scriptures without really analyzing them with objectivity and fidelity to truth.
More worryingly many parents and educators are again advocating to teach children by rote or diktat. It will be very hard for these children to pierce the mundane to find the marvellous.

WHY RELIGION HAS TO BE SO POMPOUS?

Almost all the religions sing the praise of a simple and unostentatious life. They all advise the faithful to develop a longing for spiritual upliftment rather than hankering after material wealth. Jesus said "Again I tell you, it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of God."
Buddha said, "The extinction of desire is Nirvana." This is the ultimate goal in Buddhism.
In Hinduism this world is described as Mithya (false) and Tyaag (giving up) of all things worldly is advised for attaining Devatwa (Godhood).
Islam guides its followers to live a humble and simple life. Material wealth is said to be a trial.
All the prophets lead simple lives. It is also true for many revered rishis, monks and fakirs from past who are quoted repeatedly by today's religious leaders of all faiths.
Given this background I really wonder why then almost all the religious institutions are so pompous. Just look at the unbelievably rich temples, cathedrals, synagogues and mosques! Do they really believe in the teachings of their religions?
Inside these institutions you can see the glittering chandeliers, shining marble floors and sparkling gold and silver paraphernalia. Even the dresses of the officials reek of silk and muslin. When millions of human beings are poor, uneducated and sick, why our religious leaders waste this much wealth in a way which is obviously counter to their core teachings?
In poor and developing world it really hurts me to see a grand temple, church or mosque amidst sprawling sea of poverty, illiteracy and sufferings. The situation is not that different in the developed countries either where governments are struggling to maintain a good standard in the schools and hospitals.
Why the religions have to be so pompous? Do we really believe that God prefers luxury?

MY DIGITAL CAMERA WARRANTY: CATEGORICAL V/S HYPOTHETICAL IMPERATIVE

    

I bought a digital camera in a supermarket near my home. It is made by a well known multinational company. It worked fine for 3 months. Then the screen went blank. I took the camera to the supermarket customer service desk. After a long queue I came face to face with a young man. I explained the problem to him. He looked at my receipt and said that as it was bought within one year it was still under warranty and will be repaired free of cost. I asked him when can I come and collect it back. He laughed and said that I was going too fast. He explained the supermarket has nothing to do with the repair as the warranty was with the manufacturer. I will have to ring a premium telephone number to the warranty provider for the manufacturer who will then advise me as to what was covered by the warranty and where the camera should be sent to be looked at. The supermarket who took my money does not take any responsibility.

I came home. After being on the phone and listening to lo-fi music for almost one hour I managed to get an address where the camera was to be sent. The whole episode left a very bitter after taste in my mouth and caused a serious dent in my trust in both the supermarket and the manufacturer.

The main reason of this unhappiness is  dichotomy of action and responsibility. The person (company) who is doing the action is delegating the responsibility to another person or company. The bigger the company higher is the number of intermediary agencies. There is a tendency to increase the distance between action and responsibility in both time and space.

When you really come to think of it, you can not blame the companies. It has become the norm in our society to dissociate action from consequences. A surgeon removes wrong kidney. The patient does not get to talk to the surgeon or even the hospital but to some other agency in a different city altogether involving General Medical Council and Medical Defence companies etc.

But why blame them. I and you are also doing the same as without doing so we can not live in a modern society. The travel insurance, car insurance, home insurance, all are in a way, a device to delegate the responsibility. And the insurance company has also taken insurance from another insurance agency and that agency has bought bulk insurance from another company in another country and so on. The distance between action and consequence is increasing at an alarming rate.

As this distance increases, action and consequence do not see eye to eye, proportionality is completely lost. I may not even get my camera repaired or I might get a brand new camera. The patient might get millions of dollars or nothing at all. The surgeon might go to jail or just continue as nothing has happened.

I think this is happening because taking ownership of one's action and accepting responsibility for it has lost its intrinsic moral value. Before taking responsibility of our actions we think of our necks first. As the great moral philosopher Immanuel Kant would have put it taking responsibility has become a hypothetical imperative instead of a categorical imperative.

BIRTH OF A GRANDCHILD: CONTINUUM OF LIFE

Ellora was born on last Friday. She is the first child of our eldest daughter. Her husband is also the eldest sibling. Imagine the happiness of four inexperienced, eager, and anxious grandparents on her arrival. A granddaughter indeed!
Children join only two persons: grandchildren link six. No wonder we like them so much. As the generations go forward the number of people connected together increases geometrically. Of course go back in past for long enough and we all are connected to each other through the First Couple.

The granddaughter makes you aware of your mortality and also simultaneously provides the antidote to it. Your frailty suddenly vanishes when her innocence and vulnerability induces an overwhelming urge to protect her.
You can dream to see the future through her eyes and simultaneously relive your past. She tells you of her aspirations and you tell her the tales of time gone by. Future and past meet at the platform called present to catch the train known as time and the eternal journey continues.
You teach her and you learn from her. The boundary between who teaches and who learns becomes not just blurred but completely obliterated.
Life becomes a continuum instead of unconnected dots.

STEPHEN HAWKING AND ASHTAVAKRA: NEED TO INVOKE GOD

08/10/2010

Recently Stephen Hawking was in news with the publication of his new book "Grand Design". The most provocative bit in the book is its assertion that Creation can happen spontaneously without the need for a Creator. "Spontaneous creation is the reason, there is something rather than nothing, why the universe exists, why we exist,----It is not necessary to invoke God to light the blue touch paper and set the universe going."

I saw him on the TV talking about his book and his work. Seeing this genius professor in his wheelchair, all crumpled and distorted, explaining the origin of universe with extreme clarity and logic, I was reminded of Ashtavakra, a sage and philosopher from ancient India. As many of you already know he was called Ashtavakra because his body was distorted by being bent in eight places (in Sanskrit ashta means eight and vakra means bent). He is renowned for being one of the most cerebral of the Indian sages. I was aware of the story of his birth and also how he came to be noticed by the then great king Janak. But I knew nothing about his philosophical and religious views. I looked on the internet and found that his most important work is "Ashtavakra Geeta". Like the more famous Bhagwat Geeta, Astavakra Geeta also has the format of a dialogue between a sage and a disciple. Ashtavakra explains his views to Janak on the fundamental questions "who am I?" and "how can one attain happiness?"

According to Ashtavakra, "Me" or "I" is pure consciousness, the external world including the mind and the body is just the creation of this consciousness. It only exists because I create it in my consciousness. He does not distinguish between God and I. according to him I am everything or nothing at the same time.

I read the English translation by John Richards http://www.realization.org/page/doc0/doc0004.htm. Here are some excerpts:

--You do not consist of any of the elements; earth, water, fire, air, or even ether. To be liberated, know yourself as consisting of consciousness, the witness of these. 1.3

  

-- The stupid does not attain Godhead because he wants it, while the wise man enjoys the Supreme Godhead without even wanting it. 18.37

-- Some think that something exists and others that nothing does. Rare is the man who does not think either, and is thereby free from distraction. 18.42

-- It is the feeling that there is something that needs to be achieved which is Samsara. The wise who are of the form of emptiness, formless, unchanging, and spotless see nothing of the sort. 18.57

-- Neither happy nor unhappy, neither detached nor attached, neither seeking liberation nor liberated, man is neither something nor nothing. 18.96

--For me who am forever pure there is no illusion, no Samsara, no attachment or detachment, no living organism, and no God. 20.11

Ashtavakra like Hawking does not need to invoke God.

This I think may also be the reason why Ashtavakra's Geeta was suppressed by the people whose livelihood depended on invoking God.

DISAPPEARING UMBRELLAS: LOSS OF AN ERA

Lately it has been raining quite incessantly here in Manchester. The temperature has plummeted down... Autumn has arrived. Well rain or no rain I had to go to my local library to return the now due books and get some new ones. From the car park to the library is about 300 meters. The rain was continuing so I had to open my umbrella. There were a number of people, men, women and children walking around me. I felt a bit uneasy but could not think of any reason. After the library I walked to the local market and again the feeling of uneasiness returned. I looked around and suddenly the reason for this awkward feeling became clear. I was the only person with an umbrella, every one else was just walking as if there was no rain. Some, who did take notice of the rain, just increased their pace but still no umbrellas. I was the odd one out and that was making me uneasy. It is evolutionary behaviour. In any herd environment it is the odd one out that is most likely to be pursued by the predator. Though in my situation there was no evidence of any predator around but one can not completely unlearn millions of years of evolutionary traits on which the survival of the species once depended. Anyway once the reason was apparent I felt at ease.

Once almost everyone in UK who could afford carried an umbrella almost every day but now even on a rainy day most of the people do not. What has happened in the last twenty or so years to cause this change in the behaviour? I could think of a few reasons:

1. Increased density of population leading to shrinkage of personal space in public areas such as roads etc.

2. Decreased time spent walking , increased use of personal vehicles e.g. cars.

3. Areas of work, shopping, exercise and entertainment have increasingly become covered. Many of these used be under open sky in past.

4. Lack of tolerance in society in general, you will end in a brawl if your brolly pokes into someone's face or even touches him or her.

5. Availability of cheap waterproof hooded jackets, anoraks and Macs, thanks to china!6. Increased, almost universal use of mobile phones. Texting and snapping photos you need both hands, so you can not carry an umbrella simultaneously.

7. Identification of umbrella as a middle class symbol and hence a taboo for the middle class! Or it may just be that umbrellas simply have gone out of fashion, end of an era! 

What do you think?

ALTERNATIVE MEDICINE: PREYING ON THE ILL AND THE ILL INFORMED

6/09/2010

When it comes to building a bridge over a river no one use methods employed, proposed or described thousand years ago but somehow when it comes to medicine even seemingly intelligent people feel happy or even prefer to advocate use of drugs and techniques which were described hundreds or even thousands of years ago without taking any account of vast discoveries made in biological sciences in the interim. Antiquity of such medical systems is actually offered as a great merit!
The goal of medicine is restoring and preserving health. To practice best medicine the practitioner cannot ignore the existing scientific knowledge. But now adays increasingly some people are exactly doing that but instead of medicine they call it alternative medicine.
Many of the alternative medicines are traditional systems which originated a few hundreds or in some cases a few thousands of years ago. For example Ayurveda is said to have started 3 to 5 thousand years ago. The Sushrut Sanghita and Charak Sanghita were written around 500 BC. The Greek and Roman medicine also developed around same time. In India and china the traditional medical systems continued where as in West much was lost after the fall of Roman Empire. Muslim scholars translated many of original Greek, Roman and Indian medical texts and also added a great amount of their own knowledge and developed what is called Unani medicine or traditional Islamic medicine. This was at its zenith around 700 AD. Homeopathy, flower therapy and reflexology originated in recent past mostly in 17th and 18th century.
One of the cornerstones of the systems developed in antiquity was their relation with religion. The reason being is that religion was the main way of explaining the world and worldly phenomena at that time period. The knowledge that agreed with the religion was accepted and the rest discarded or even maligned. The people who taught and practiced the ancient medicines kept up to date with the knowledge which was available to them at that time. In that way they were honest and were practicing good medicine. Alas! same cannot be told about the practitioners of ancient medicine today whose main argument is "it must be good because it was invented by our ancestors many thousand years ago".

Modern medicine is being continuously shaped by the rapid advances taking place in our understanding of human anatomy and physiology in general and cellular and molecular biology in particular. Science demands more rigorous proofs. Quoting a religious or an ancient text is not accepted as a proof. But some of our great advocates of Ayurvedic, Islamic and Chinese medicine are doing exactly that. In developed and relatively rich countries there is no justification to use alternative medicine without the same level of scientific scrutiny used for modern medicine. And then it should become a part of main stream medical education and the practitioners should be governed by the same rigours rules and regulations which are necessary for public safety.

In poor and underdeveloped countries one of the reasons given for the use of alternative medicine is that it is cheaper. But really this is a fallacy. If there is no proof that it works then it is a waste of the country`s meagre resources. A Rich person can indulge in a folly but a poor person can ill afford to lose all his life savings on snake oil.

Quite a significant number of people advocate alternative medicine out of strong loyalty to their culture and religion and though admirable it is; it does not constitute evidence. Many people turn to alternative medicine when their doctors tell them that there is no certain cure for their illness. For an alternative medical practitioner there is no such limitation. He/she has got a potion for every illness. I wonder whether these practitioners know that they are making false claims or they are so brainwashed by the Alternative Medicine Gurus that they unknowingly make them.
What do you think?

ALWAYS IN THE SLOW LANE: DESTINY OR JUST A COGNITIVE BIAS

I was in the supermarket yesterday. Before getting in the queue to pay I surveyed the different queues. There were long queues at most of the isles. Everyone had decided to do there shopping at the same time as me. One isle had only four persons. I ran and stood behind them. Three people in the front finished quite quickly and I thought I will certainly be able to go to the library and get some books before it closes in half an hour's time. How wrong was I?

The lady in front of me was thirty something, good looking and smartly dressed: a professional type. I would have never imagined she would do that. Before paying she took out a wad of vouchers from her designer purse and gave them to the till girl. She checked them, one by one and said to the lady that none of them were related to the items she had bought. The lady said that she bought the face cream and the butter only because of the vouchers and asked the till girl to return them. The girl was apparently new and did not know how to do that and raised her hand to get the supervisor. He was helping at the other till. He came after about ten minutes and started showing the girl how to do this. The other longer queues were going much faster. Finally the girl managed to return the cream and butter and the lady put her card in the pin machine to pay. I was holding by breath. Luckily the card was accepted and the till started printing her receipt. I pushed my things nearer the till in anticipation that my waiting was finally over. How wrong was I? Printing machine stopped, paper had finished. The girl raised her hand for the supervisor and whole scenario was replayed again, in slow motion. At least it felt like that to me.
I have noticed that it is the same at airports. When I stand in the queue for check in, when I wait for my luggage to come and when I go through the customs and immigration, the adjacent lines always seem to be moving faster. When there is a partial traffic jam on the multilane highways my lane always moves slower. When I change the lane to move in a faster lane, soon it becomes the slowest lane.
Is the universe always contriving to inconvenience me?
That's it. When one starts blaming the universe, fate or destiny, it is time to look rationally for an explanation. Where does one look for it? The internet, of course. Where else?
I soon found it is not only me but most of the human population have or had the same experience. But if every one thinks they are always in a slow moving line then who are in the fast moving ones? Looking for an answer in the word wide web is just that. The critical word is world wide. Like searching for a needle in hay stack. But I kept at it and finally got an explanation. Eureka!
The lines move slower or faster randomly. A chance of being in a slow or fast lane or ones chosen lane becoming slower or faster is totally random. If one queues often enough, his chances of being in a slow or fast lane are ultimately equal. He only becomes aware of the other line moving faster when he is in a slow lane. One tends not to notice or there is no reason to notice when one is moving faster.
That is why you do not remember or recall the incidences when you were moving faster. Also that when you are in a slow line, you are staying at the scene of occurrence longer than when you are in a faster lane, be it supermarket, airport or the motorway. So the slow lane incident gets a longer memory exposure.
This is an example of a cognitive bias mainly due to recall bias and/or selection bias. Bias or not, it is certainly true that even if you are in a slower or a faster lane for equal number of times, overall you spend more time in a slower lane.
Now I know the theory. I just have to learn to live with it.

 

Preventing Spread of An Idea And Preserving Culture: A Futile Struggle

25/07/2010


When I was in London recently my daughter gave me this book “Things Fall Apart” written by Chinua Achebe, saying that it was one of the best books she has read in a long time. Last week I read it. I could not put it down till I finished it. It is certainly a great book. Written in a story telling style, it is easy to read and at the same time has got a profound intellectual depth. The book describes the life and culture of a tribal village in the backwoods of Africa and vividly portrays the cataclysmic effect of the arrival of the missionary and colonial personnel without any incrimination or lamentation. The reader feels sad at the demise of a simple but elegant culture but also sees the inevitability of the change that the modernity brings.

Though first published in 1958 the book still feels fresh. The struggle to preserve the local culture from the external influences which constantly keep trying to insinuate is still happening all over the world. The futility of this struggle is also evident but only in hindsight. In India some people want to stop the satellite television and multinational companies to prevent dilution or outright destruction of their “culture”. In Afghanistan some people are prepared to die and kill to preserve the way of life which they had since middle ages. It is not happening only in the poor and developing nations but in every nation. In China the government is struggling hard to prevent the “subversive influences of internet “and in France the government is banning the veil. In Britain the BNP the ultra nationalist party is opposing any proposal to build a temple and Switzerland does not want any more mosques. Americans are worried about Hispanic influence and Venezuelans are banning all things American.

As evident in this book by Achebe one can not prevent the changes. It is exactly the same all over the world. One can never prevent the spread of ideas from one culture to another, from one country to another. It is inevitable.

I wish we could all rise above our pettiness and not waste our precious resources in obstructing the free flow of ideas all over the world.

THINKING IN PLANETARY TERMS

4/07/2010
Global warming has become the issue of 21^st century. Most if not all our scientific, economic and cultural resources are being and will be employed towards finding a solution to this problem. Why is it so difficult to solve this problem? The answer lies in the name it self. Global warming; global is the key word. Up till now problem solving has been an individual effort, may it be an individual person or individual institute or an individual country and the reward of problem solving has also mostly gone to that individual in one way or another. Global warming is different. The effort of solving it has to be global and rewards of finding a solution will benefit every one on this planet. Failure to do so will harm everyone.
This universality of solving the problem and reaping the outcome is a total paradigm shift from what the human modus operandi has been up till now. Our way of thinking and working has evolved over millennia; individual or tribal survival being the prime moving force. Our civilization has broadened this to the extent that now we think in terms of countries or group of countries. We may pretend but still evolutionally we are way behind thinking in planetary terms. At present we do not act as though every human being is equally important and has equal rights (compare between the responses to Bhopal ie UNION CARBIDE and Mexican gulf ie BRITISH PETROLEUM disasters). 1000 people dying in a third world country makes a smaller news impact than 10 people in a G8 country. From this state of affairs to visualize that not every one on this earth but every thing on this earth is equally important seems an unfathomable leap. And that is what thinking in planetary terms means.

At present in many regions of the world the governments still make decisions which help them personally or tribally. Whether it will be of any benefit to their country is not taken into consideration. Many a times these decisions blatantly harm their country. We rightly call them corrupt and denounce them. But when governments take decisions which are beneficial to their countries but harmful to the planet as a whole (increased carbon emission, pollution of air, water and soil, increased consumerism and natural source depletion) we do not apply the same moral criterion. In planetary term they are almost equally guilty. And this applies to every country in the world!


If we are going to survive this millennium we have to start thinking in planetary terms. Before taking any decision we must check that it would not harm the planet. And this should be incorporated into our inherent moral code. Can it be achieved? I am certain that it can be. But it needs a seismic change in our psyche not just in our industries.

BUTTERFLY FLAPS ITS WINGS

DECISIONS & OUTCOMES: THE BUTTERFLY EFFECT

Last weekend we went to London to meet a family friend whom we have not seen for about 15 years. It felt quite strange when flashes of shared memories kept on dancing in front of us. We talked about our jobs, mutual friends and yes, about our children.
We are settled in UK and my friend is settled in USA. We came from very similar backgrounds and did go through similar experiences in our early careers. How did we end up in so different places?
When we both were working in Middle East about 20 or so years ago there were two good primary schools there, one British and another American. They decided to send there children there and we sent our children to British school. Was this decision taken after a lot of deliberation about the future consequences or the minute differences in the two schooling systems? No. The truth was that the decision was taken on the basis of what our other friends were doing at the time and whether a good transport was available from where we were living to the school.

Did that decision taken about twenty five years ago resulted in modifying our paths so profoundly? Many seemingly minor decisions turn out to be life changing as the future unfolds. It reminds me of the Butterfly Effect first elaborated by Edward Lorenz in 1972 in his presentation "Does the flap of a butterfly's wings in Brazil set off a tornado in Texas".

The butterfly effect can be simply described thus "small variations in the initial conditions of a dynamic system can produce very large variations in the outcome over time". The key factors here are that the system is dynamic and the changes happen over time. It explained why accurate long term prediction of weather is impossible.

Life is a dynamic system and future unfolds over time. Does the Butterfly Effect make it imperative on us to weigh each and every decision, however small very carefully and minutely if we wish to get a certain outcome in future? Of course not.
The life will become unbearable if you take every decision after full deliberation, as we take hundreds of decisions every day. When to get up? What to eat for breakfast? What to wear? What to cook for dinner? You got the gist.

In fact the butterfly effect and the related chaos theory convey the exactly opposite massage. Any minor event can cause profound variation and millions of minor events happen every day. You cannot really make allowance for every event and thus can not accurately predict the future outcome. It actually dispels the determinism inherent in the Newtonian and Laplacian view of the universe.
The past or the present does not determine the future; it is how we and zillion other particles continuously interact in the universe that builds the future.
It may seem that I am advocating fatalism and advising not to take our every day decisions seriously. What I really wish to convey is not to attach so much importance on the future outcome in all our decisions that our present becomes a suffering.
What do you think?

NEWCOMB PARADOX, VOLCANIC ASH AND US

16/05/2010

When we got stranded in Japan following the cancellation of our return flight to Manchester due to volcanic ash ,we were given two options by the airline officials.
Option 1. Confirmed flight to Manchester via Paris after 8 days on 25/4/10
Option 2. Confirmed flight to Rome or Madrid next day on 18/4/10 and then make your own way to Manchester by land and sea.
If fumes from Iceland volcano would clear and flights resumed by 25/4/10, then option 1 was better. But if the fumes continued for weeks or months option 2 had a lot to be preferred.
Thinking rationally option 2 seemed more attractive as no one can predict how long the volcano problem would continue and also one can travel to Manchester from Rome by modes other than air flight. We could be stuck in Tokyo for a long time as there is no other reasonable alternative to air flight to reach Manchester from here.
We took the irrational option and stayed in Japan for an extra 8 days came to Manchester on 25/4/10. It turned out to be the best option as people who chose to go to Rome got stuck there because all the trains and ferries were overbooked and when they did manage to come they had to pay quite a bit more for their transport.
Was our decision irrational or was it predetermined? Did we really had a choice to decide or the decision and the outcome both were already set.
This dilemma reminded me of the Newcomb paradox. This was put forward by William Newcomb who was a physicist in California USA. It has been discussed and dissected by not only philosophers and theologians but also by mathematicians and computer scientists.
It goes like this:

A super intelligent, super genius being who says he can see the future puts two boxes on a table. Box A is transparent and one can see $1000 in side it. Box B is opaque. Both boxes are sealed. He calls a person (say Frank) from the audience and asks him to take either box B alone or both Boxes A and B. The being says to frank"if you choose only box B you will find that it has $1000000. But if you choose to take both boxes then the box B will not have any money in it." The being also said that in past he has never been wrong in prediction.

What should Frank do? Rationally he thinks: the boxes are sealed so whether Box B contains one million dollar or nothing is already there. So if he takes both boxes he will be $1000 better off. If box B contains a million dollar he would have this and the $1000 from the Box A. if there is no money in Box B, at least he would have $1000 from Box A.

Then he thinks that the super being had never been wrong in past in his predictions, on that basis he should only take Box B because otherwise he would certainly lose $999000.

People ask how the Being can change the amount of money in the box B as it had been sealed before Frank made the decision. The answer is that being has already predicted which option Frank would take and has put the money accordingly in Box B. If Frank believes that the Being has seen the future and saw him taking one or the other option, then he should take only Box B.

But as Box B is already sealed then what Frank would do is already determined before Frank makes the decision. If he believes the being then really frank does not need to agonise over decision making as he has no choice.
It is very easy to see the Being as God and the theologians have discussed Newcomb paradox in that context to debate the age old problem of predeterminism v/s free will.
There is no right or wrong, better or worse option per se. We were just lucky that we chose to stay in Tokyo. Or was it already chosen for us?
References:
http://www.leaderu.com/offices/billcraig/docs/newcomb.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Newcomb's_paradox

NIRVANA THROUGH NOSTRIL

       In Todaiji temple in Nara, Japan there is a wooden pillar with a hole at the base. the size of the hole is said to be the same as the nostril of the Budha's statue in the temple. people believe that if one can pass through this hole they can achieve enlightenment.

Trip to Japan, Volcanic Ash and a wish granted

1^st of May 2010

 

I and Bibha went to Japan for a 2 weeks holiday. We ended up spending another extra week there due to flight cancellations caused by volcanic ash from Iceland. While planning for the holiday I was moaning that two weeks were not enough for seeing Japan. God was listening! I wish He would have chosen some simpler and less stressful method.

Our itinerary was very hectic. We went to Tokyo, Mount Fuji, Kyoto, Nara, Hiroshima and Miyajima Island. We were so busy with travelling and immersing ourselves in Japanese experience of Hanami( cherry blossom festivities) that we only came to know about the volcanic eruption and closure of Europe's air space when we arrived at the airport for check in on 17^th of April.

What a shock it was to be told by the Air France staff that flight was cancelled and they were not sure when the flights would resume. The way the news was coming on CNN and BBC, it seemed that it could be days , weeks or even months before we could get back. By the evening Air France offered a provisional booking on 25^th of April with caution that flights may not be running by then. I have travelled a lot but never faced such an uncertainty.All the hotels around Narita Airport Tokyo were full and we ended up staying at the airport for 24 hrs. I managed to get a hotel from the following day and I booked it for a week. Flights resumed and we did come back on 25^th.

I think if you have to get stuck , Japan is a good place, probably the best. People are very courteous and empathic. The officials take pride in their job and feel responsible for the people they are dealing with. Even with a huge language barrier they tried to help us and to make our enforced stay more bearable, enjoyable even. UNICEF ladies organization in Narita arranged for home visits and cultural evenings. The city council made the local buses free on showing the passport. In fact we saw a more personal side of Japan which is not usually seen on busy sightseeing tours.

In retrospect I think that the extra week spent in Japan without the pressure of compulsory sightseeings was very rewarding and really complimented our trip. God does work in mysterious ways!

STATING THE OBVIOUS WITH CONVICTION

17/3/2010
Mahatma Gandhi said "you should not lie", Jesus said "love your neighbour", Buddha said "you should not kill". So and so said "we should always strive for peace" or "you should not steal"

 These are obvious moral codes and you will not find any sane human being who will not agree with these. It irritates me when people qualify these statements with the name of an important person or religion. No religion says "do not help poor" "do not speak the truth" "make war not peace" but I so often hear people saying "my religion says "help the poor" "or my religion is peaceful". You will not start lying or stealing or killing someone whether Mahatma Gandhi or the Great Buddha said to the contrary or not.

 A fellow traveller said to me that his religion promoted well being of every human being. I said "can you tell me which religion does not claim to do that?" he got angry and further conversation stopped because we both wanted to reach our destination safely.

 Why does one feel the need to qualify an obvious statement?

 

I think people do this mostly to disown the exact opposite deeds in which they or members of their own creed are involved. The CEO of a big arms manufacturing company said that he was a disciple of Mahatma Gandhi who believed in non violence.

A child was caught stealing in the school. The headmaster phoned the mother to discus this. When he explained to her what happened, the mother haughtily said that it could not be true. The headmaster was taken a back and asked why the mother was so convinced. The mother said because her great-great grand father (who happened to be a well known leader in the last century) had said that stealing was a sin.

 It may also be that people do this to convince themselves that their religion, or their role model or their religious leader is some how better than others or simply to empower themselves with some false superiority which really does not exist.
Let me know what you think.

NO WIN-NO FEE CULTURE VULTURE

4/03/2010

I have been getting a lot of unsolicited telephone calls from "Mr/Ms unavailable no." They all seem to be interested in my good health and want to get some money for me. Nice people. They not only enquire about my good health but also about my family members, my friends and my neighbours. Here is a short conversation.

Telephone rings……. ……. ………

Me "hello"

The Nice Person On the Unavailable No.( NPU) " hello, Mr. Kumar , we have just come to know that you had an accident recently."

Me "not recently."

NUP "so you did have an accident, a few months ago. "

Me "no, not a few months ago"

NPU "aha! I know it was last year"

Me "no. It was not me last year"

NPU "oh, it was your good wife. We can get you 110% compensation. We won't charge you a single penny"

I am interested at the thought of getting some money. Now that I am on a small pension and it is a terrible winter.

But I am a bit suspicious. Who is this benevolent person taking so much trouble for my family?

But, I do not ask this. Instead I ask "who will be giving me the money, you?

NPU "no, no. The money will come from your neighbour or your doctor or the shop keeper who is responsible for the accident."

Me "but none of them was . My wife just fell down in our garden. She only had a little bruise. And that was ten years ago "

NPU "oh, in that case we will get it from the council. You don't worry about these little things, sir. Leave it to us. We will prove beyond doubt
that any or all of them, at one time or another were certainly responsible for your wife's physical and mental trauma."

Me "my wife's mental condition is very robust. She did not have any mental trauma. "

NPU "do not you worry, our company expert will turn her into a complete mental wreck. "

As I am getting older (euphemism for deaf), I am having this conversation with the speaker on. My wife just heard the last sentence as she came in the study. She cut the telephone off. "so, now I am a mental wreck!"

I had to do a lot of explaining and a bunch of flowers before the dinner was finally served that night.

HIRSUTIC & HIEURISTIC: TOOLS TO SOLVE A PROBLEM

 19/02/2002

I was writing an article about hair. How from a normal evolutionary appendage it has become a burden?. I wanted to describe a face full of too much hair and I wrote hirsutic, Microsoft word immediately put a red line under it. I thought the spelling was wrong and corrected it by typing hirsuetic. This was not red lined and I carried on with my article.

 I now know there is no such word as hirsutic or hirsuetic, the correct adjective to use is just hirsute. Microsoft word did not red-lined the latter word because I had mistyped it as heuristic. I got intrigued: what does this word mean?

To find this I used the common sense approach. First use the easiest available method in the word programme it self, by right clicking on it and look for a synonym. But there was none. Then I went to internet and Googled it. Walla! a lot of articles, 4,670,000 in 0.3 seconds. What an interesting word! It means exactly what I was doing: trying to solve a problem. It is derived from a Greek word heur; meaning to find out. Heuristic broadly means common sense or "a set of rule of thumbs" to solve a problem. It is used in almost every discipline of learning from philosophy to mathematics, from soft cognitive psychology to hard core engineering. Most lucid was its use in solving mathematical problems.

   I came across a book " How to Solve It" by G. Polaya who was a Hungarian mathematician settled in USA. In this book Polya describes 4 steps to solve any mathematical problem. Reading through it one quickly realises that these steps can actually be utilised to solve any problem in any walk of life. I will give a brief layman's summery here and you be the judge. Polya's 4 steps to solve a problem

1. 
   
   Understand the problem
   What is unknown? What is the data? What are the conditions?
   Draw a figure.
   Separate the problem in to simpler parts.
2. 
   
   Devise a plan
   Find the connection between data and what is unknown.
   Past experience of a similar or related problem or part of a problem If you can not solve the given problem, try to solve some related                     problem or part of the problem.
   Are you asking the right questions?
   
    
3. 
   
   Carry out the plan
       Check at each step.
   
4. 
   
   Look back
       Examine the result.
       Can the problem be solved in a different way?
       Can you use the method to solve other problem?
   

What do you think?

 Reference : G. Polya, "How to Solve It", 2nd ed., Princeton University Press, 1957, ISBN 0-691-08097-6.

CHINESE CIRCUS TO CHANGING REALITY

Friday, 05 February 2010

Last week I went to see a performance by Chinese state circus. It was more of a theatre presentation than a proper circus but nonetheless it was a circus with jokers, jugglers, unicycles and lots of pretty faces. The performers were amazing, doing almost impossible feats. Young children seemed very appreciative but among the teenagers and adults it was not so.

In the era of computer generated cinematography nothing seems impossible and we kind of get desensitized to real human achievements. We have become so used to the acrobatics in the Crouching Tiger and Hidden Dragon and House of Flying Daggers that anything less does not satisfy us. We have started to expect the same from reality which we get from imagination. The boundary between media generated virtual reality and our day to day physical reality seems to be getting blurred.

I was in India in November last year. I attended a marriage ceremony in a small provincial town. I was astonished to see how closely it resembled a Bollywood film set. The rituals which have never been a part of that community were adopted effortlessly because they have been shown in the recent films so often.

The films, theatres and arts did have an effect on our behaviour before but because we had only limited exposure to them, it did not overshadow the raw reality of our physical surroundings. Now a days the time for real interaction with people and objects around us has been heavily encroached by the films, television, and computers.

Because we are getting our information more from virtual than real, our reality is changing. The reality is not truly real anyway; it is only what we perceive to be real through our limited sensory input and with a profound modulation by the brain based on our past experiences. And if our experiences are mainly virtual, so will become our reality. A frightening thought !

My snow giant and the Turner prize

12/01/2010

As you must be aware by now that UK is going through a mini ice age. It started snowing a few days before Christmas and has continued almost on an alternate day basis since then. Initially it was a great fun to play in the snow and just to be a bit different from the ubiquitous snow man; we made a snow giant in our back garden.

By its size and shape, it represented the awesome force of nature and at the same time the smiling face showed benevolence rather than ferocity. I can go on for ever praising it but really it was made like that because it was easier to make this rather than a proper snow man/woman. I could do this all with the shovel without taking my hands out of the woollen gloves. The eyes were made with two solar powered garden lights which happened to be in the garden for the last few years.

When I visit the modern art galleries, I wonder whether that piece of wood with a smooth cut going through the middle is really worthy of the description that is given in the hand book. A canvas with a green squire and a red triangle is described as a reflexion of contemporary post modern dilemma. Did the artist really thought that before making this? Or he/she just made something easy and then thought how can I explain this so that it fetches a few thousand dollars. And the art critics rarely denounce a piece of work by a well known artist.

I am thinking of submitting my snow giant for the consideration of Turner prize!

Being homebound for almost ten days due to the icy roads is having its affect on my intellect. Definitely.