Che and Thoughts on Government...

I just finished watching "The Motorcycle Diaries" and would highly recommend it.

I was mesmerized by the stunning locations, the purity of Che's idealism and the spirit of adventure that saw Ernesto and Alberto cover a stunning 10000 km in 5 months with nothing but an old motorcycle (La Poderosa II) and some sparse belongings...

Che had charisma, no fear and through him I saw life pouring out of every little cell.... He epitomizes the immortality of youth that I wish I could feel forever....

The movie made me think about the role of government in society. For starters, why does civilized society need governing? I think we need governance because we are too short-sighted and selfish to ever see the "greater good" - which is what government eventually seeks to provide! And how can government do this? By creating a level playing field and by striving to ensure that everyone has the opportunity to pursue life, liberty and happiness! Mr. Thomas Jefferson was a true visionary *bows*...

So why then does this not happen? Why then does Utopia not exist? Because as always, beautiful ideas make beautiful assumptions!

Assumption 1:
People in power can see and work for the greater good.
This will never happen unless truly exceptional or truly rich and bored people come to power. A person is selfish by default and it takes a lot to give up the lust for power and money...


Assumption 2:
There exists "greater good" and people believe it exists!!
Greater good... hmm... does that mean that the total number of happy people is more than the total number of sad people? Or does it mean that nobody is sad? Or what? Difficult to describe, no?

Assumption 3:
People who vote can see the big picture.
Again, the belief that the vote of a person is cast whilst keeping in mind the larger picture is flawed. People will vote for greatest personal gain and this doesn't necessarily lead to greater good.

But what is the alternative? No government? That aint ever going to work, because laws are necessary for a civilization to survive and for laws to survive authority is necessary, hence government.

If that didn't make sense to some of you then I apologize because I haven't been able to construct an argument--because I didn't really have a point, just some rambling thoughts!

The Symonds issue and crowds in India

I love cricket and play and follow it passionately. I am also a big fan of Andrew Symonds and am angry at the Indian crowds for their pathetic attempts at intimidating him with monkey chants of all things.

What Indian crowds need to learn is r-e-s-p-e-c-t for players. They are already hugely partisan and show no grace in applauding good play by the opposition. While I can understand this, there is absolutely no excuse for abusing and heckling opposition players. It just ain't right.

Cricket has always been a beautiful game played in a good spirit. Crowds need to uphold this spirit too.

For once I am going to say a big "Boo" to Indian cricket crowds.

Songs that move me - I

This is the first in a series which will probably go on forever!

Some songs transport me to a different emotional level. Being an engineer I am wont to rationalize and stay away from overt displays of emotion. I will go so far as to say I don't even "feel" as much as I should. But some songs...

The first in this series:



The haunting voice of Lata, the passion of Meena Kumari, Raj Kumar's attempt to be unaffected but his failure to do so and most of all the beautiful words.

For those of you who don't understand Hindi: the heroine beseeches the night to stop (some things lose their flavor in translation) and asks the moon to never set so she can enjoy the time together with her lover.

What is it about songs of longing? Every one of them tugs at my heart.

Tribute

I attended a modern dance performance recently where I saw a composition titled "Pieces of Me". The choreographer Michael Somersel had tried to capture/express his growth in four years of his undergraduate life. There was a piece called "In Cooley's Looking Glass", where he expressed a very interesting idea: Our perception of ourselves is (largely)based on the reflection of us that we see in others. The world is our mirror and there is nowhere to hide!

Our identity is formed by the people we meet, the experiences we have and what not. But what is it that makes us unique, gives us our individualism(ity?!)? Is there anything that is truly original about anyone? Where are the inventors, the creators? Why am I not a creator?!

Anu Malik had said once .."Show me an original song"! I say "Show me an original person" !! Honestly, with the profusion of information bombarded at us these days I don't think there is a way to escape convention and conventional thought! How then will we make progress? Only through rebels? Only through those who reject conventional wisdom? And if it is genuinely wisdom then why does it need to evolve?!

Answers when I have them :D

PS: The tribute is to all those people who have contributed to shaping my thoughts! I don't know whether I should thank them or destiny for letting me meet them!

Big Red!

The semester is about to end. My life as a student is about to end. I have enjoyed it so much I don't want it to stop.

I've wanted to go to school, I've wanted to work in lab. Cornell did that for me. Never felt like "bunking"! I owe something to this University and the people here. Thank you.

For those who are considering coming to Cornell, just do it! There is no doubt in my mind that I would do it again :) Maybe I'll come back for a PhD!

"Far above Cayuga's waters....." Go Big Red :-)

Some progress, nothing concrete!

I found a few sites that analyze love from a philosophical perspective:

Kenny Pearce's blog
Stanford Encyclopedia of philosophy

The first of these sets out to prove the statement: Love is a deeply internalized belief in the intrinsic value of the beloved.

The second is more like a textbook chapter that lists the various "forms" of love: philia, eros, agape.

A confession: I have not read either of those two through. I thought they might help me answer my question, but then I realized that the answer to my question should not be based on what philosophers surmise! I ought to think on my own and come up with something for myself!

I believe emotions quite often do not subscribe to laws of logic and "rationality" (this word in quotes because I am unable to define it), hence a logical analysis of love seems contradictory.

I am going to end the post here partly in order to explain the title, but really because everything that I tried to write after this either did not make sense or was not right for this post!

The first set of questions

Reading "The Zahir" by Paulo Coelho has left me with some unanswered questions. Some questions are by-products of more menial tasks, while some have been with me for a while!

What is love?
What is freedom?
What are Jacobian matrices? How do I use them to solve the problem that I am trying to solve?
Where will I find bliss? Is it "worth it" looking for bliss? Why don't I just enjoy the journey instead!
Why do some emotions inspire(unleash?) creativity? Despair, longing, jealousy, anger, happiness....

Too many question marks in this post... I will try and remedy that in the next one.

And I think I'm going to enjoy blogging :-)

Thanks goods ;-)