SCANDALS!

“Scandals are useful because they focus our attention on problems in ways that no speaker or reformer ever could”.

The topic is somewhat related to the idiom “crying over spilled milk”. Nothing can be done once the scandal has already occurred. The loss that it was intended to do i.e. physical, financial, and emotional, etc. is already done. Hence, I do not agree that scandals are ‘useful’ however; they do take attention to the crime or misconduct. But, never the less, it is mostly associated with corruption and forgery, they are already well known problems.

Scandal according to its dictionary meaning is a ‘disgraceful event’. It is quite obvious that a disgraceful event cannot be ‘useful’ in any why. On the contrary it represents the voids in society. It also gives a picture of the flaws that our society is facing and highlights’ the domains in which the awareness is lacking.

Many scandals say 2G scam, CWG, and other minor act of corruption that occur every day around us. The only way to deal with them is by proper education and knowledge of one’s rights and duties. And these i.e. knowledge of rights and duty are the thing that comes with learning. We cannot just rely on scandals to occur, to teach and enlighten us with problems.

Let us take the example of teenage pregnancy. A scandal in such case probably is not “useful”, merely to bring into notice that “we need to educate teens about sex education”. It should be well known fact and well aware problem and must be consider before any example of so called scandal occurs. A prior education can save the teenage parents from the unrequired problems and child from poor standard of bringing up.

There are many better ways of creating awareness such as proper knowledge of law, duties and rights of the people via proper communication media such as TV and Radio. Documentaries and films should be related to the problems to create awareness. As the field of mass communication and media is growing, the awareness must be spread in order to stop the scandals, instead of waiting for the scandals to occur and focus attention on them.

So it’s not scandals that brings attention to a problem but the knowledge and awareness that, scandals should not happen. 

Lastly “precautions are always better then cure”.

ORIGINALITY

“Originality does not mean thinking something that was never thought before; it means putting old ideas together in new ways”.

Originality is not something that was never thought before. Old ideas contain something that is useful and can be brought up along with new innovation.

Originality is related to creativity in writing, art, innovation and design. However originality does not mean thinking something that was never thought before.  Human civilization existed for many centuries before, it has passed three main phases i.e. hunter gathering, agricultural and technological era. This combination has showed a variety of ideas some contradicting and other overlapping.  Most of the new inventions and innovation are stimulated from the older ideas. Thus old idea acts as foundation of the new invention.

In reference to the latter half of the issue to be dissected, i.e. originality means putting old ideas together in new ways. Questioning of existed ideas has lead to many new inventions. It requires a radical and interrogative thinking process for improvement of the pre existing norms and belief. Someone has said it right; millions said the apple fell but Newton was the one to ask why.

One of the quintessential of foreseeing the future discoveries was the science fiction writers Author C.clarke, Isaac Asimov and Robert A. Heinlei.  The doyen writer C. Clarke was a great visionary and a brilliant writer. He foresaw communication satellite, a nationwide network of computer and predicted that man will be on moon by 1970. The ideas he mentioned in his work of fiction were the prediction on the future in technological era.

The idea of flying machine was thought long back. Man was always fascinated to see birds flying. Wright brothers are known for inventing the airplanes, but the idea was not something never thought before. Leonardo da Vinci in 14^th century designed a human powered Ornithopter (i.e. a wings flapping device intend to fly). It is not known whether he tried to build it. Leonardo considered gliders and parachute also in this lifetime.  Thus it is evident from the history that the idea was thought before. Even today the aeronautical technology is still growing and the older inventions act as the foundation for the new innovation.

Conclusion; every invention starts with an idea that might be new or old but this does not make the invention less original. It only takes a bit of radical thinking to make it work.

ART vs SCIENCE

"The function of science is to reassure; the purpose of art is to upset. Therein lays the value of each."

In the above issue, it is not clearly defined what is to be reassured and what is to be upset by science and art respectively. There are various domains. Say previous belief, lifestyle etc, that could be considered.

We cannot generalize the role of these two disciplines. We cannot even assure the reverse of the statement is true. As per the evident from history both play important roles in the development of humanity and society. Both have a unique purpose, which modifies with time in both fields.

On contemplating the function of science, it is well known fact that science always challenges the previous belief and presents a new and better way of perception.  Hence science certainly does not reassure the previous beliefs. A few of the great works in this field such as "the origin of the species” by Charles Darwin did attack one of the profound belief and on contrary did not reassure anything. The contemporary work by Mr. Stephen Hawking defies the much popular theory of relativity in some cases and likewise did not reassure the already existing notion.

The purpose of science, if is to reassure anything it is certainly a better way of living. With the development of science and technology, there has been enhancement in the standard of living. The world now has a better way of communication such as telephone, satellite communication and internet etc, fastest means to travel via magnetic trains and airplanes etc , easy lifestyle by usage of machine in jobs which required a great deal of manual work, computers have eased the monotonous and programmable jobs. With the medical technology the science have reassure health concern of human being.

Although science has a negative side as well, that has upset our living standards. The most threatening nuclear power is a production of science and has the power to destroy the planet. The byproducts of industries and automobile have polluted the environment to the extent of global warming and hole in ozone layer.

On the other hand, art have a different function or purpose and that purely is to relax the mind and take a break from the fast lifestyle of monotonous rush in the rat race. However the art too like science cannot be generalized and it depends on the artist’s state of mind, what he or she creates. Listening to music and visiting art gallery always leaves a different impression on mind it may reassure or upset (with profound suffering that it portrays), but is always appreciated.

The beginning of art is not known but Paleolithic caves are evident that it existed many centuries before.  The scriptures in the caves, old famous paintings such as Mona Lisa, beautiful architecture like pyramids.  Certainly do not upset but creates a sense of mysteries and admiration.

Conclusion; the function of science is to progress and purpose of art is to flatter!

ACADEMIC DISCIPLINE

"The study of an academic discipline alters the way we perceive the world. After studying the discipline, we see the same world as before, but with different eyes."

Academics or education is the process of acquiring knowledge and broadening the horizon of one’s perception. The difference in the way a child perceive the world and an educated adult perceive the same can be easily seen in the people around us. The mature thought process in an adult individual is due to the knowledge and experience he or she has acquired in the course of academic discipline that he or she pursue. Thus the statement, (The study of an academic discipline alters the way we perceive the world. After studying the discipline, we see the same world as before, but with different eyes.) Has significance.

The people in older times are quintessential of the above issue, for them the basic natural phenomenon was not less than a miracle. Disease was taken as the act of evil and eclipse was the sign of God’s wrath. Some of these processes, say rainbow and stars are still not less than a fascinating miracle for an uneducated baby. Uneducated people in rural areas do not have the knowledge about the disease caring agents that proliferates due to unhygienic lifestyle; this in turn narrows their willingness to keep cleanness in their surroundings. Majority of people in US who does not have the proper knowledge about the heavenly bodies, think moon in made up of cheese. There are various such superstitions that only pedagogy can correct.

 In general the perception of children is same. It varies with the change in surroundings and different experience in academic life. During the formative years of one’s academic life a simple outline of basic knowledge is provided. Later the scope diverges into various academic disciplines, and the knowledge becomes more of complex details. For illustration an engineer has a better knowledge about the machine and programs that he or she has to deal with, a person studying medicine has knowledge about human body and metabolism, a detective has better knowledge of the patterns of the crime, etc. in nutshell the purpose of education is to provide a better and profound understanding of the surroundings.

Conclusion; the difference in different individual is the way they perceive the same world; the difference itself has originated through the academic discipline that one has completed. The excellence in the inherit triads that are developed during the course of academic discipline.

LAW

"It is possible to pass laws that control or place limits on people's behavior, but legislation cannot reform human nature. Laws cannot change what is in people's hearts and minds.

Law is defined as the set of rules enforced by the countries governing body. Law may restrict people inappropriate behavior to a high extent, but thoughts do not have any limits and cannot be barred by law. One’s thoughts may wander without any guiding force. Law does not possess any device or instrument to check on to the thoughts. Law may impose certain restriction in the ways one should behave but cannot control one’s imagination. Thus the above issue is justified.

The inappropriate behavior that does not go with the law is implied with breaking the law and rules, which law bodies have set up. This further is nothing else but committing a crime. Law may have had setup certain punishment for certain crime, but this does not assure that the crime will not be repeated. The criminal may most probably repeat the crime if the punishment is not convincing enough for him to stop. For instance the local muggers and thieves generally are not the one with clear criminal records and are professionals.

It’s a fact that before any crime takes place it has already taken place in the mind of the criminal. (P.S I don’t imply to the acts of crime that occur due to accidents, self defense and movement of madness, etc...)  The criminal behavior is mostly deliberate and well planned and law does not impose any hindrance in the planning.

The right manner to teach how to behave is to discipline and to teach one how to think appropriately is to provide strong morals in the formative years of one’s life. Both the factors i.e. morals and discipline are retrained via education hence to ensure better living standards the governing body should put more emphasis on the education. Better educated individual are more civilized and knowledgeable about the law, discipline and morals.

Conclusion; law may control or place limits on people's behavior, but legislation cannot reform human nature. Laws cannot change what is in people's hearts and minds but education can.

INNOVATION !

“It is always an individual who is the impetus for innovation; the details may be worked out by a team, but true innovation results from the enterprise and unique perception of an individual."

It is a well known fact that, every individual has a unique thought process. Hence every individual looks into any opportunity from any of the various dimensions available. The same is true for the enterprise that comes up with innovations. Thus the statement (“It is always an individual who is the impetus for innovation; the details may be worked out by a team, but true innovation results from the enterprise and unique perception of an individual.") is somewhat convincing. It is only after the basic initial idea is stimulated by an individual the enterprise asks for the associated team to work on details with the team effort. Hence the innovation endeavor is completed by enterprise.

The research and development in the field of science and technology is often substantiated by an individual, who provide the necessary impetus to the project that he or she has stimulated. The project is then worked upon by him along with a team assisting him till the final form of the innovation. Although sometimes there are other members involved, who provide the required incentive and motivation to the team. Thus the credit for the innovation does not always go to an individual every time.

However there are various examples of innovation ideas that have been brought up with the team effort of various scientists through “brain storming” sessions. One contemporary example of such attempt is LHC.

Thus to conclude; the impetus to an innovation in form of an idea by an individual and the formalization of innovation are two different aspect of the whole issue and hence are varied by the stages of the formation of final innovation form. Hence should be considered differently. Although one has to be broadminded and open to the idea of an individual who provide the impetus but should not ignore the tram efforts employed.

Conclusion; the enterprise and unique perception of one or more individuals provide the necessary impetus to any innovation.

CULTURAL HERITAGE

"Many of the world's lesser-known languages are being lost as few people speak them. The government of such countries should act to prevent such languages from becoming extinct"

About five to six thousand languages are spoken across the globe! No exact count of the languages spoken is available, as there is just a thin line for classifying the languages/dialects. Language differs on a locational basis of a few kilometers. According to a survey some of these languages may extinct in the near future, and will be considered as dead language.

As far as it is about preserving the cultural heritage it has to be done to some extend. And it can be done by the community or by people of particular region by giving proper knowledge of there ancestral language to there progeny. The descents of the culture may not use the language in there everyday life in a globalized world, but this certainly can be preserved by the family and relatives and pass it on to the successive generations.

This task will be somewhat problematic for government as the number and diversity is so high and could lead to secular approach of small towns with different lingual basis. Above all, it could turn into a “good for nothing” political issue and may harm the unity of the nation.

The basic purpose of any language is to communicate, exchange thoughts and knowledge. As long as this purpose is served and we are commuting with each other in the planet its good enough. English is considered as a global language as it is highly spoken throughout the word.

I may just waffle about this topic as I don’t think the government of these nations can or should take it as a political issue. Attacking on heritage especially on the language to be used in any particular state or country may not be a suitable option.

A contemporary and apt example of one such attempt was sited in Indian state of  Maharashtra. Where people from some politicized background, let me be specific Mr. Raj Thackery, a man of monarch mindset have made it a rule (illegal rule) that the state should use their heritage language ie Marathi. And I should not miss to mention that he is the same lad who organized a Michael Jackson concert for the first time in India at the Andheri Sports Complex in Mumbai. The man who does not mind westernization, but creates fuss over youngsters celebrating Valentine's Day. Well I guess he is just being another hypocrite Indian playing political games on the name of saving the culture. This certainly is not any of his attempts to save the cultural heritage but just another chore of playing dirty politics in India.

DIVERSITY IN MORALS

"Many problems of modern society cannot be solved by laws and the legal system because moral behavior cannot be legislated."

System In the present time the world is moving towards modernization and globalization in which a lot of different communities with different cultural and traditional backgrounds are coming together. This era of time has brought together the whole lot of different backgrounds with different moral values to come together. These different morals are often found contradicting each other rising to some major conflicts.

In the present time morality can not be well defined. Indeed it is more of a relative term. Morals are the code of conduct and the beliefs that are accepted out of any individual in any particular society and culture. Legalizing morals in a specific well defined way is not the option as moral behavior varies from person to person and basically depends on the upbringing and acculturation. Most of the problems in today’s society are dealing with the different perception of morals.

Let us take a few examples of the problems that the society is facing today.                               

·        Abortion. For some it is an immoral act to kill a life as in a few religions it is considered sinful to do so. Others think that keeping the baby and not being able to give him or her proper lifestyle and facility as an act of immorality. So the both options that is in favor of or against abortion are extreme points in the line of conduct. Both are justified according to the respective morals.

·        Homosexuality. Is one of the serious issue in today’s time most of the people find that same gender relationship is absolutely against the law of nature and is somewhat like going against the god himself and is an absolutely immoral. On the other hand people who advocate this behavior think that love don’t have any boundaries nor even gender or social stigma and find nothing harmful or hate able in it, love in any form is love and god can never be against it. And this justify how they are not being immoral

 I somewhat agree to the above issue. Most of the problems of the recent times in society are dealing with the undefined lines of morality. And law and legal cannot define morality.

Outrageous Truth

"Important truths begin as outrageous, or at least uncomfortable, attacks upon the accepted wisdom of the time."

First of all I would like to point out what’s " wisdom of the time"is, it basically has to do with the mind set of the people of today, at what level they think, how broader is there mentality and how easily they are ready to take the changing time towards future. The wisdom of time is where the word is today at this part of time is. We can look back in time and see how it had changed in last few decades.

The issue drove me back to the time of Galileo. Galileo Galilei one of the greatest scientific thinker of the time and the founder of astronomy. He questioned the prevailing idea of that time. He focused people eyes on what’s happening in the sky and gave his one of the major work in the form of ''The Starry Messenger” this work described the universe as heliocentric (sun is the at the center and earth revolves around) rather then the earth is the center of universe which at that time was advocated by the church. This work landed him into trouble as the church opposed it forcefully. This even lead him to spend last four years of his life under house arrest. This Copernican against the Ptolemaic system is one of the most appropriate examples of the issue above.

Also we can take examples from law of “natural selection”. There was a serious scientific objection to the theory of evolution by Mr. Charles Darwin. That indeed was the most successful theory of the nineteenth century. To which the religion and the people at that time opposed strongly. Criticism of Darwin’s theory of natural selection was outrageous then and eventuality it was accepted by the world. His theory purposes, a direct challenge to the already existing religious and moral grounds of that time.

One of the most recent truth of time is homosexuality its have been accepted at some parts of world but is still hideous in most of the places. Sooner or latter it will be accepted

So I think the issue stands true for most of the cases. History justify that the truth at first is outrageous and latter accepted at that part when it becomes the need of time.