Getting things done
Getting things done, based on schedules, at our workplace requires as a prerequisite a huge amount of selfishness.
September 2005 Archives
« August 2005 |
Main
| October 2005 »
Getting things done, based on schedules, at our workplace requires as a prerequisite a huge amount of selfishness.
Is getting up in the early morning good, or getting up when we feel convenient?
Abnormalities lead us to less frequently traversed paths, which sometimes have ditches, and sometimes have hidden treasures.
I think the world of consciousness is like the mathematical world -- the mathematical world is so detached from the material world -- (2+2=4) -- is true whether this world exists or not. (p->q && q->r => p->r) would have been true, even if the big bang wouldnt have taken place. I mean to say that, these are "mathematical properties" which have an existence independent of things/matter.
Likewise, I think consciousness is a property -- it is not limited by the life of the biological organism/material body in which it exists. Its a property and properties dont have lifetimes, but instances/manifestations of the property do.
And consciousness has this primary characteristic of "awareness". And I think "awareness" in itself is also somehow a universal, abstract, forever-existing-and-true property.
And consciousness has this amazing characteristic of "seeking meaning" (primarily for itself, but thence also results into seeking meaning for things)
Now, "meaning" is also a universal property, related to "causality", "reason" and "purpose", which are all universal properties.
So....consciousness seeking self-meaning despite the temporary existence of it's instance....is acceptable?
I think the real destination comes nearer when we are able to hop from one viewpoint to another viewpoint, feeling home at each (understanding it and supporting it), and then when all have been done, coming to rest at a state where we feel comfortable and nice -- still not being rigidly attached to it.
An edited copy of a mail I recently sent -- sorry for bias for India -- it was counter to the anti-Indian and pro-Western bias of the receipient.
-------------------------------------
--- xyz@gmail.com wrote:
> i repeat: some (all) indians still lack the *conscious* ability of
> self-critique, self-improvement by negative feedback, intellectual thought
> etc they are always bathing in the drug-like effects of positive feedback
> and self-aggrandizing and surrouinding oneself with praising people, which
> would have been ok, if not for the animal like existence it entails with
> total lack of improvement over the long term, maybe deterioration
> too.stillit is king mentality i am great. like an old film star who
> still thinks
> he/she is a star but actually is ignored.
> some uniconscious intelligence (though negligible in long term) is there in
> small amouts so they move to foreign countries, realizing futility of stay
> in india be it with their suffering parents who call them back who are
> ignored to be left to die "alone" in India or come to US.
You should immediately remove the term "intellectual thought" from your first sentence. For example, how were we able to develop into the leading country in all intellectual domains until the western enlightenment in the 17th century?
You should read this:
http://www-groups.dcs.st-and.ac.uk/~history/Mathematicians/Panini.html
http://www-groups.dcs.st-and.ac.uk/~history/HistTopics/Indian_mathematics.html
http://www-groups.dcs.st-and.ac.uk/~history/HistTopics/Indian_sulbasutras.html
http://www-groups.dcs.st-and.ac.uk/~history/Mathematicians/Bhaskara_II.html
http://arxiv.org/abs/physics/0301078
http://arxiv.org/abs/physics/0310001
http://www.ece.lsu.edu/kak/hist.html
Basically, we have always been centuries ahead of the west in maths, astronomy, spirituality, psychology, and possibly most of the intellectual domains; until the 17th century, of course.
If the culture is severely flawed and cannot even self-critique (which is the basic attribute of intelligence), how could it have developed all this so early, _centuries_ and _millenia_ before anybody else?
You are only looking at the current Indian culture, which has flaws, due to what I feel are the effects of population, and other geographical factors, and the flawed merge between the West and the Indian cultures.
And also, you are not looking at the best of Indian culture -- you are looking at problems, you are missing the merits: your western psychological training has trained you to look at the mind as a machination, with a tendency to get flawed. But because of this, you are unable to see the positive sides of the mind. You get egoistic pleasure in believing and telling that most people are essentially flawed. Once egoistic pleasure comes in the middle, you cannot think straight. (Same applies to me).
The Western psychologists have only recently started to look at positive psychology. The American Psych Assoc (APA)'s president Seligman realized around 2000 that something very significant was amiss in western psychology, and started a conference/field of positive psychology, where they try to understand and promote human happiness instead of the traditional way to reduce unhappiness.
A must-read:
http://www.apa.org/apags/profdev/pospsyc.html
Now I believe that the Western Psychology will understand happiness and positive emotions better; and they will come up with something similar to spirituality -- present in the Indian religion/culture/philosophy since millenia.
My subjective feeling that: Put India on an isolated island, and you will see they would emerge with true happiness (not that they will be remain in happy state completely, but they will reach a sustaining cultural state, which would support fulfillment of the conscious mind's ultimate desires of meaning and belonging).
I went to an Indian Hip Hop Dance class today; and my absent-mindedness did not allow me to fully immerse in it. But I am sure that I will be able to inculcate into me the required presence of mind (at least in temporary bursts) by the end of class, to actually dance.
I noticed that dancing (particularly Indian Hip Hop) gives you a high sense of self-confidence, which feels nice. It also instills a high dose of present-mindedness, which also feels nice.
Since these feelings are departure from my regular self, I started wondering whether they are good or bad...
I think that Self Confidence is good for acheiving things, focussing yourself towards the positive, getting things done, feeling nice about yourself.
But that it "may" take you away from being humble, mixing, the so attractive innocent feeling of "needing others" with the resulting compassion and empathy.
Present mindedness is good for many things which everybody knows, and will help in many things.
However, it does tend to make you less reflective.
Overall though, these are very nice things to have, esepcially if you are aware of the above caveats at the same time.
I will surely continue the dance class in the vein it was meant to be followed.
Alas, how strongly do I feel the need to lead life without harming anybody's sentiments. Is it possible? Is it recommended?
Why did more-or-less all religions of the past teach us "detachment"?
When I practise detachment, I find myself in trouble these days?
Is it true that the detachment that they preached was only applicable to their times, and not ours?
The Rediff Interview/ Dr Subhash Kak
Subhash Kak is a well known authority on Ancient Indian History, as seen by his histroy page.
Change is something we need to learn to accept.
The culture that we come to acquire by way of being a son or daughter of somebody, a cousin of somebody, and/or a citizen of a city/race/culture/region has much belonging to the "past". It arose in the past, where things were not the same as today.
The sense of grief that usually accompanies change is not necessarily the best and the only valid approach.
We must learn to accept change and adapt to whatever is around us; though with some caution and care: we must ensure that the change does not stifle our smile in the long run.