Friday, August 17, 2012

POINT OF VIEW




In any situation, progress requires discussion among people who have contrasting points of view.

How would the world be, if there would be no discussion amongst the people with contrasting view? Imagine a world of no harmony, trust and mutual understanding. If we do not share our views the world would not make any progress. It is because of mutual discussion that we are living in a cultural and technically advanced society. Thus discussion amongst people with contrasting points of view is highly essential.
One of the problems faced by the physicist of late 1900 was discord in the two most popular theories of physics, quantum mechanics and gravitational physics. Physicist supported one or the other of the two theories. However, the two could not go hand in hand with one another. It was only considering the two contrasting works the contemporary physics came up with string theory.
Yet another example is the nature of light. Initially light was considered as wave. However, when further examined it was empirically seen that light was behaving as particle. Science experts held one view or the other claiming that opponent's opinion about nature of light is arcane. It was only after mutually considering both sides the scientist came up with the dual nature of light. 
In politics, all the members of any nations' political system discuss issue in hand with diligence and come up with an ideal solution. The overall capacity of a group is certainly more than that of an individual. People with different outlook can anticipate the various aspect of issue in hand. Contrasting opinion presents various pros and cons of the situation. Only discussion is a way to optimize conclusion by brainstorming of everyone’s opinion.
In judiciary many times the lack of harmony between opponents’ hamper with their capacity of mutually discussing their postulates. Such cases turn more intricate due to lack of discussion. More than offer these complicated cases takes a lot of time to untangle. However, cases where the opponents find mutual settlements by discussion cannot be solved very effectively and easily.

To conclude I believe that “progress require discussion amongst people who have contrasting point of view". It is evident from the field of law, research and government that situations, which are considered with mutual discussion amongst the people with different viewpoints, are always fruit full.

No comments: