In the end.. I am all alone.

When people don't agree on my viewpoint, I get irritated. But little did I realize that mine is also a disagreement with the other person and is bound to evoke the same feelings as mine in him/her.

I feel people live in a imaginary world. What I hate to understand is that people's preference change. And I have seen reasonably unreasonable people's view being changed to accommodate a not so preferred person. This happens so drastically that it hurts a person who was preferred. Is this a mistake of the person who changed or the person who caused the changed is no one's guess. But the point I am trying to drive now is, everyone is inherently volatile.

The idea of 'introvert' and 'extrovert' is grossly mis-understood. A person who derives energy from within is an introvert and an extrovert is otherwise. So it logically follows that a person dependent on others' company is definitely an extrovert. Its funny to recall that there are people who are not so sure if they are introverted or extroverted. By saying introverted, a person may get the advantage of being stand-alone, having his opinions based on his own beliefs. But if such a person is not really individualistic, it becomes a real problem. Mainly because such a person will not have best regard for others, but is still seeking others' company.

Why do we accept a person, who is normally rebellious, when he rebels? Being rebellious is sadly sought out as a trait following critical thinking. But a person, who is normally docile, is being rebuked when revolted. Who has the (I normally don't use slangs) rights to rebuke another person? In my opinion, a person who is rebelling is frustrated. At this juncture, I would like to point out an irony. People, as they grow, tend to become matured, losing out on the fun part. So it is commonly said that people should also try to emulate child-like characteristics. But the irony is, the child-like characteristics are killed over a period of time. Killed by maturity. It looks like maturity and childishness cant co-exist. Take for example, when you go to a company and try to learn without concern for ratings (child-like characteristics), you are over-whelmed by the feeling of shame over a period of time that you start to lose on the characteristics. The problem is, everyone is not objective. Some are competent. Some are not. The not-so-competent simply magnify their contributions. The competent, who actually enjoys work falls in line only. And over a period of time, competency loses out. This is a plague in itself. Because, over a period of time, the majority (incompetent) will be blabbering out to be heard and the competent, unable to bear this would switch tracks. It is exactly at this point, that a person becomes rebellious. This rebellion is either competent and is crying for attention for his new-found out-of-the-box idea, or is yet another immatured incompetent person. Leaving the latter, who would over a period of time join the plagued league, what is left is silent child-like souls crying for attention because of the belief in individual excellence.

People listen to people who talk stable. No one listens to an emotional speech as an idea. It is at this point where the helpless competent people lose out. Now where is the logic of 'survival of the fittest'? To continue on, what happens over a period of time is this set of people would definitely tide over this and form a shift in attitude. And this leads to a tough person, who is intelligent enough, atleast to be trusted.

To give sense to all these divergent thoughts, my idea here is, people who are unduly unreasonable and people who play the game as mentioned above, are the ones who rule. When a docile person retaliates, its of no use. When he doesn't retaliate, its of no use. When this set of people learn to jump to the first category, let them try to change the world. Else we will continue to lose out on our individuality.

In the end.. I am all alone. You can guess the category in which I fit into.

Objectivity in a corrupt world

It’s a fallacy that being objective is rightful and subjective application should be dishonoured. I myself am a sheer propagandist of objectivism but there is a misnomer in place here. Being subjective actually works wonders and so does dictatorship. Why democracy is advocated is because it doesn’t encourage subjective opinions that are manipulative in nature to creep in. Hence I myself believe in democracy. But then the choice of the belief is not out of option but by choice.
It can’t be denied that people would want to manipulate a system to get the maximum possible off it. From a capitalist point of view this seems correct, putting to test the system itself. And so the system shall evolve to plug in all the holes to further move on to becoming objective and just. This is under the assumption that the system or at-least the user of the system is a universally good person. One must agree that there is something called universal justice. Else judicial systems would not have evolved only. And considering the best judicial system in Pakistan and the poor execution capacity, one can definitely and safely assume that both the subject and the object shall abide by universal laws of goodness. One shall now agree that the world is not made of good people only. That’s when we start thinking of objectivity. Let there be one ruling. Only objective and no subjective decisions shall be made. Say a majority of the people say that a particular person should be in power, a subjective thinker may might as well think that the majority is foolish and would consider a single voice that is logical. If all logic is in place, it goes to prove that a good dictator is way far better than advocating democracy. Democracy is meritocracy provided an alternate involves only good people. An alternate to democracy is dictatorship. So the point driven down here is that when we don’t have a good dictator, we shall go for democracy.
But now, by good people I mean very good people. People with good intentions, who would not want to steal the show and who are objective. But sadly, people with good intentions believe in equal opportunity. And so dictatorship cannot be under a good person.
Now I equate objectivism with democracy and subjectivism with dictatorship. Simply put, dictatorship formed under a good ruler is sane; else democracy makes a lot sense.
Now I am trying to apply this to informal situations. A small group of friends is lead by a ‘group thinker’. This is fine as long as the person’s intentions are good. It’s not so always. Worse still the members don’t even know it’s a group think. Subjective decisions made by a person who is illogical, let alone with bad intentions, leads the group to dogs. Worse still when two different roles played by the person are deliberately mixed.
That’s exactly why we make it democratic. Say, the simple task of choosing which place to hang-out. The group leader decides. If any member feels that his/her intentions are not fine then discontent creeps in. Then what’s the use of dictatorship or subjectivism. Objectivity works wonders. Subjectivism is only for ideal cases. Rules and frameworks are to be adhered to. But objectivism is costly. A single unintentional violation of a rule breaks your bones. You are asked to compensate for the violation in an unfair manner. That’s when subjectivism would look a lot better. But had you been subjective, such a situation would be hell. There again objectivity is the best way out.

Re-opens..

I consider my re-opening this blog as a shameful act.. Not keeping to one's words is pathetic. But its ok. I realise that I am what I am. I simply cant do away with my so-called rationality.

I am confused. And this is just an attempt to vent my odd feelings. One thing I found (I should not say recently.. Niether it is so very early) was that one has to learn to live for himself (Don't take hints..).

I read a novel.. Not for the sheer pleasure of reading. But for the sake of a friendly chat with my best friend about the book.

I think of technical innovations. Not for the sheer pleasure of discovering. But for the recognition from the able-minded.

I talk with a person worried about what impression I create.

The pathetic thing is that, that perception is never under our control. And its always over-stated or under-stated. The sheer pain of finding that your efforts to create that impression leads to a same result as that of a person who seems to have used a little subtle instrument is heart-breaking. Maybe life is all about management. Use resources to produce output. Here output could be either monetary (physical), social or physiological. All hell breaks loose when the social output gets monitored. why on earth do we worry what others think of us. Why on earth dont we understand that one cant satisfy all at a time. By all I literally mean all.

Is human mind so complex. Or am I perceiving. This is possibly the second time I am writing such a weird article. Well.. But then, judging others is difficult. Why is it so is no one's guess. I guess one should be a loner if he feels that being egregious doesn't suit him. But then loneliness will grip him, I am sure. But then, the fine balance of impassionate passionate talk helps.. Maybe. Care a damn about others is it? Well not all are brought up like that. I have some lessons to learn... Learnt it thought not as hard a way as my really loved people have.. If such a small learning is hurting so much, I respect and admire aghast the learnings of the... Thats when I feel such helplessness is a formation of a maturity.

Well.. I started this post to vent out.. But I should admit. I havent. I shall think more on this and write some other shit. For someone who has read all this: 'I am not this way actually.. I am writing this because you would read..'. What a weird thing to say to end.

The End

We talk of rationality only when we are not confronted with sad events.. Only when we all have our five fingers...

I conclude this blog.

There is nothing called rationality in this world. Humans are complex. Humans have the ability to generate happiness. Humans can create things out of the blue.

I conclude this blog.

Emotions are essential in life. Thinking logically helps, but not in life.

I conclude this blog.

Just to conlcude,

A quote that I ran through incidentally...

The worst way to miss someone is to be sitting right beside knowing you can’t have…

There is no point over-simplyfying... Complex emotions that are incomprehensible exist..

The law of conservation of happiness!

I have been quite complex in my writing during my recent posts. I will make this simple.

Assumptions:

1. Life is a game.
2. We are not the sole players. Assume even nature is playing.
3. Just as in a game, One wins and other loses. And the probability of choosing a strategy stabilises over time.
4. All the explanation about taking both success and failure in the same spirit is set aside for some time.

The theory:

I call it The law of conservation of happiness.
"Happiness can neither be created nor destroyed. It can be transformed from one entity to another."

Justifications:

1. We win and nature loses (Mining)

2. Nature wins and we lose (Death of a person)

3. I win a contract someone loses.

4. Let’s take a slightly complex example.
Say I am a part of a group of 6 members. And say we are researching into something. When someone finds something, another person becomes happy but is forced to discover something better. Here now, two things can happen. One, the second person discovers and this happiness gets multiplied (for this he has to be competent). But an onlooker will become sad seeing this. Or two, the second person can become discontent and hence the theory.
Of the above two, the second scenario happens most of the time as there is a lack of competency most of the time. And so that’s why I guess you find at least 50% of the people discontent with work. And hence the theory.

5. But some can say that happiness gets multiplied when shared. I will dispute this. Say I share a happy news with someone. Now both of us are happy. But the choice of selection of that person comes out of preferences. You can’t like everyone or share with everyone (at least). And so the multiplication effect of the happiness is nullified by the multiplication effect of the sorrow of the out-of-preference people. This may sound silly though.

6. Now say you meet a sad person. Then what follows is the reverse flow of happiness. The sad person gets the attention and the onlooker gets a little sad seeing him. And having got the attention, the sad person becomes better.

I am not trying to over-simplify. This may be true.

Digging in for the nature of complexity

The following is meant to offend a few whom I didn't mean to find reading this.
Yet another serene mood.
This is a mere collection of different thoughts not meant to mean anything. So please stop here if you would like to carry on with what you were doing earlier.
I wanted to fight the enneagram, the moment I saw it. I fought and will keep fighting. Somehow I feel the enneagram undermines my individuality. The moment I saw the diagram, something struck me. It’s awfully right. Then with all the things happening around me I could realise the process.
I was in a college. Don’t know. I love it but with scant respect. Why, it has alienated me from a world that’s the reality. Am I becoming incompetent? Or is the reduction of the population of the world pressing me? But that’s not a concern.
I was walking back after my tea. All alone. Being alone I like. Or liked. Or like. Or liked. Whatever, at that point in time, I liked. I realise, being possessive is of no use. But my conscious memory doesn’t allow me to point at what I am so possessed with. Drive is so nice in life. There weren’t many days when I had felt hopeless or at least restless about what I am doing. I felt it one day. I felt it the whole day. But then I was driven back again the next day. Am I being controlled, is no one’s guess. But, can’t I be motivated by anything else? What drives me one day doesn’t drive me on another day. But one thing drives me always. But my conscious memory doesn’t allow me to point that. The shame in accepting it is the loss of individuality. Yes, it is. But that is not a concern.
I was termed as a reformer by that enneagram test. But I am constrained. That made me down to an artist. I beg to my God to not make me like being an artist at all. And so I reverted back to a reformer. But I am constrained.
So I removed the constraint. But that is a concern.
I was writing this blog. I am immobilised on the realisation that I am possessive. But then, I had been possessive earlier given a even larger world. Why is this possession controlling me? From now I will be swinging back and forth in time. An unexplained journey in time. I am sitting in front of my computer. I can’t digest the fact that he will come and inquire. I was brought up to be very sensitive to three very beautiful things, honesty, modesty & respect. It was my midterm in my corporate life. I respected him. He belittled me. I respected him, he belittled me. When I belittled him, he turned hostile. I can’t become hostile, for that was not for what I am. I turned back to my damn beautiful character (which is so safely overlooked by some decent gentlemen). It paid me nothing. Nor will hostility. The Mumbai streets were very long one day and short the other. And so were the roads to my room. A friend. So simple. But I did not like him. Now I love him. But I don’t like him. Maybe I ll love him in future. A strong integrity in a human being. The character put to test. What an awful experiment. I rebounded, but my three values put me down. I was not able to stand up again. But that’s a different world. Being egoistic is different. Individualistic is way different. I am not sure what I am. No one has called me the former. But the two people I am talking of touched a single point that broke me down. I won’t break sure. Because of my three values and add together the fourth, the joy of solitude. But I don’t like it. But I have a poor alternative. The reason is I am not an artist. People want me to be. But I am resisting. But that is a concern.
The very fact that I am resisting it all is a concern. I have known people’s intentions. The lack of understanding of altruism and the lack of refraining to be held in the trap of a few. So obsessed, monomaniac. Why is that I am comfortable with some and not with others. The problem is not the person I would say. It’s the circumstances. I have a neat friend. I would just like to remind that I am still drawing two parallel lines. What one line says is about one and the next about another. Demands by a few are unreasonable. The failure to satisfy is a reckoning. The success of such a move is a source of drive. How do we become humorous? By nature? I am sure it’s by choice. The lack of drive pushes. But it doesn’t push me. Ok. It pushes. But I resist easily. But the resistance is overlooked. Why do some choose to not look at the modest ones. Or why is humour so captivating? I was rated average. I won’t regret. I hope the appraiser wont. But the failure to view someone who is working silently is a shame in our development of humanity and social relationship. And that is happening. This and a few others are a motivation for me to bring in a different sort of enterprise. And that is a solution to concern.
Intelligence should come without any malignity. I hope this forms the next species on earth. And that’s a concern.
I have requested just two of my friends to read this. The dilemma to publish this is taxing. But after all, I am not going to inform anyone that I have updated my blog. And time cures many things. And that’s a concern.

PS: The publishing of this blog was not intentioned to coincide on new year's day.

Mood swings and the equanimity.

All is fine and serene. The serenity is surpassing. A serenity in totality. Internal and external. You consecrate all the things you have done and your own self.

We tend to have a cycle of emotions. And a prime emotion that is a seed to a purpose in life is the drive, what we so stoically term as motivation. The drive changes and occurs as a pattern, as a cycle. We will agree that we have high days and low days.

And a high day is when you are all pumped and ready for any challenges. To put it a little pessimistically, I would say, you are naughty. A low day is when you don’t find a purpose for things that you had pursued like hell.

And what particularly interests me is the blend of these, an equilibrium, the serenity which prompted me to write this.

I chose to write this on such a day of serenity (By serenity I am not talking about environment or anything physiological). My language, if you had noticed is quite flat in tone, like a documentary running. I did not smile much. Or rather I am more to myself. I contemplate many things in life and all my positives get highlighted with a neat emphasis on a future perseverance of even better goals. I don’t get astonished. It’s a 'what else can happen in life now' attitude.

It’s not dejection, but a sense of completion. A sense of gratification and an even matured outlook that all such completion is a beginning and the road ahead doesn’t fear you. These times are like pausing a play and contemplating on what and all happened till now. And coincidentally, you also get the same feelings as in play. You might know how would all these end and don’t fear the same.

I just am very monomaniac and don't differentiate anything. Rain is same as a mundane bus trip. A friend and a foe the same. and so on. Something to do with maturity? Ok let’s now think about this.

How do such states of mind get triggered? Is it potentially useful?

For me, it triggered by a movie. It was about terrorism. And a complex character trying to blow up a terrorist action. He talks about faith. And any intellectual stimulation could be a pre-cursor. Maybe.
Or.
Many of us have complex feelings. How often have we thought that we have a unique feeling about a person? That feel could have arisen out of a mixture of both rational reasoning and unavoidable negative emotions like envy, pride etc. Such unique feelings when found to be common with someone, the sheer joy of having that commonality and the relieving of guilt is huge. That can give you all the happiness you need.
In effect,
When one has an overdose of psychological attention or if one is confronted with a situation that warrants the circumvention of such a need, then this serenity sets in.

And now about the usefulness.

A shocking study revealed that you think clearly, when you are sad. Such a reasoning would never be accepted consciously. But try to think of some new idea when you are sad. Or in a way when you are serene.

Bright ideas come in the restroom or bathroom or en-route you usual commute. And things that are mundane and those that you are putting up with no option leads to this serenity or sadness to varying degrees. And bright ideas pop up then. Or you may take it as a relief of all responsibilities and an effort to rehabilitate yourself seeking better responsibilities either challenging or otherwise that brings about this serenity. Or you may also take it as loneliness. But loneliness leads to sadness. Absolving responsibilities is definitely a sad thing and so is a serene mood.

You may consider this reading as a waste of time. But I have made many important decisions when I was serene.

Or have I simply spoken about being equanimous?

No idea. I don’t take the moral responsibility to please the reader, because I am in a serene mood.