As we look out at the universe, we are looking back in time, because light had to leave distant objects a long time ago, to reach us at the present time.
This means that the events we observe actually lie in our past.
I guess this doesn't sound too radical when we are gazing upon the stars.
But the moment we start looking at our daily lives in this context, This is pretty confounding, we look ahead and walk looking ahead but what we perceive is what took place, in time a few units ago.
It is like looking ahead but perceiving what lies behind.
In our daily lives this does not matter as this is pretty much the manner in which all us human live I mean can we do something about it and change the way we see, I guess we have no option here, we will continue to perceive a future by perceiving the past.
Sunday, October 28, 2007
Saturday, October 27, 2007
SWF
Visiting China in late August, German Chancellor Angela Merkel wrung an assurance from her hosts that [China SWF]China Investment Corporation (CIC) would not try to buy strategic stakes in big Western corporations.
SWF have become increasingly popular as the spending power of a sovereign/country. SWF or sovereign wealth funds are typically created when governments have budgetary surpluses and have little or no international debt. Of the top 7 SWF - 6 of them are Asian with the exception of Norway. ADIA (Abu Dhabi Investment Authority) is at the top slot with USD 1.3 trillion capitalization; if ADIA liquidated its investment/shareholding in companies, it would fetch them this amount. For the sake of comparison the US GDP stands at about 13.13 trillion in effect ADIA’s capitalization is to the extent of 10% of the US economy.
More than the capitalization SWF have created, the SWF does have sizeable control on the management of a company and this means European or American Companies are owned and managed by SWF of another country. eg: QIA (Qatar Investment Authority - Qatar SWF) is looking at buying a sizeable stake in J Sainsbury, UK's leading grocery chain.
It is this concern of one nation's soverign & strategic interests when owned and operated by another nations SWF, that brings to light German Chancellor Angela Merkel comment on the CIC. Given the scope and capability of an SWF, they can gobble up huge corporations in a blink of an eye. If we combine the SWF of Singapore, Saudi, China and Kuwait, these four could together gobble up another 10% of the US economy.
As on date, India is contemplating an SWF given its swelling foreign exchange reserves.
Which brings to light a popular Bob Dylan song "Times they are a changin'".
SWF have become increasingly popular as the spending power of a sovereign/country. SWF or sovereign wealth funds are typically created when governments have budgetary surpluses and have little or no international debt. Of the top 7 SWF - 6 of them are Asian with the exception of Norway. ADIA (Abu Dhabi Investment Authority) is at the top slot with USD 1.3 trillion capitalization; if ADIA liquidated its investment/shareholding in companies, it would fetch them this amount. For the sake of comparison the US GDP stands at about 13.13 trillion in effect ADIA’s capitalization is to the extent of 10% of the US economy.
More than the capitalization SWF have created, the SWF does have sizeable control on the management of a company and this means European or American Companies are owned and managed by SWF of another country. eg: QIA (Qatar Investment Authority - Qatar SWF) is looking at buying a sizeable stake in J Sainsbury, UK's leading grocery chain.
It is this concern of one nation's soverign & strategic interests when owned and operated by another nations SWF, that brings to light German Chancellor Angela Merkel comment on the CIC. Given the scope and capability of an SWF, they can gobble up huge corporations in a blink of an eye. If we combine the SWF of Singapore, Saudi, China and Kuwait, these four could together gobble up another 10% of the US economy.
As on date, India is contemplating an SWF given its swelling foreign exchange reserves.
Which brings to light a popular Bob Dylan song "Times they are a changin'".
Tuesday, October 23, 2007
Our neighbour...
Most countries have a General however in the case of Pakistan the General has a country. To add to this, I would reckon that Pakistan also would be a country that has the highest casualty of Generals. One is deposed in macabre ways to make way for another.
In the present era, one ex-PM was rudely shunted on arrival to Saudi. He was impetuously told that he could not be in Pakistan. Another ex-PM on her return to Pakistan was greeted with much aplomb and 2 bombs. Well, the former was disparagingly treated but I think he is safe. The other was victoriously greeted but she is unsafe. Between the both of them I think they get the message.
All this has not mattered to the world and probably would not have — if Pakistan had not been a nuclear-armed country. To add to its nuclear capability, its chief scientist A Q Khan had leaked technological inputs and designs for the N Bomb to N Korea, and he has gone incognito. Much like Dawood who resides in Pakistan but Pakistani officials have short term memory loss in such matters. A Q Khan armed a non-nuclear state with nuclear capability, makes one wonder what cards the North Koreans had to barter this deal, but that is another take. Add to this a deposed democratic elected representative, a potential democratic elected representative, the recent deposed then reinstated Chief Justice and the endemic jehadi.
To a jehadi – you are either for them or against them, which means to say, if you disagree with them you are against them. The trouble is that there are enough committed dolts to hold this view and murder for his convenience. Pakistan has become a world problem.
So the party is at our next door neighbor’s place, there is definitely something brewing, let’s hope it is not a nuclear bomb. What could be worse; A jehadi with a nuclear bomb!
"Hence we may learn the lesson that on seizing a state, the usurper should make haste to inflict what injuries he must, at a stroke, that he may not have to renew them daily, but be enabled by their discontinuance to reassure men’s minds, and afterwards win them over by benefits." - The Prince - Niccolo Machiavelli.
In the present era, one ex-PM was rudely shunted on arrival to Saudi. He was impetuously told that he could not be in Pakistan. Another ex-PM on her return to Pakistan was greeted with much aplomb and 2 bombs. Well, the former was disparagingly treated but I think he is safe. The other was victoriously greeted but she is unsafe. Between the both of them I think they get the message.
All this has not mattered to the world and probably would not have — if Pakistan had not been a nuclear-armed country. To add to its nuclear capability, its chief scientist A Q Khan had leaked technological inputs and designs for the N Bomb to N Korea, and he has gone incognito. Much like Dawood who resides in Pakistan but Pakistani officials have short term memory loss in such matters. A Q Khan armed a non-nuclear state with nuclear capability, makes one wonder what cards the North Koreans had to barter this deal, but that is another take. Add to this a deposed democratic elected representative, a potential democratic elected representative, the recent deposed then reinstated Chief Justice and the endemic jehadi.
To a jehadi – you are either for them or against them, which means to say, if you disagree with them you are against them. The trouble is that there are enough committed dolts to hold this view and murder for his convenience. Pakistan has become a world problem.
So the party is at our next door neighbor’s place, there is definitely something brewing, let’s hope it is not a nuclear bomb. What could be worse; A jehadi with a nuclear bomb!
"Hence we may learn the lesson that on seizing a state, the usurper should make haste to inflict what injuries he must, at a stroke, that he may not have to renew them daily, but be enabled by their discontinuance to reassure men’s minds, and afterwards win them over by benefits." - The Prince - Niccolo Machiavelli.
stocks and the impossible trinity.
Asset prices especially of our stock markets seem to be at an all time high and there are no signs of it ebbing. The Sensex has now made a run from 14000 to 19000 in a matter of 2 months, a rise of 35%. Usually monetary policy is directed towards balancing an expansionary or contractionary markets ergo if markets are growing too fast monetary policy is directed to limit its growth to a manageable level, if markets are lack luster monetary policy is directed towards expansionary or growth policies. Thus monetary policy is balancing these 2 forces in an economic market.
In our case however the stock asset prices have increased on account of foreign inflows. These inflows are justified on the phenomenal growth of corporate earnings in India and expected growth and opportunity in Indian markets at least that is what we are led to believe. Inadvertently however, the foreign inflows have been appreciating the rupee (12% appreciation in the past quarter) which is affecting exports. Exports are getting expensive on account of lower dollar realization, a revision upwards of exports prices is netting fewer buyers in the world market and we see that exports in this quarter have slumped.
Generally a rapid and high growth market is soothed by increasing interest rates. Increased interest rates would encumber new investments, limiting growth and maybe in turn lowering assets prices. However when foreign inflows are increasing stock asset prices, an increased interest rate in the market further propels inflows into the country. So we are in a situation where we can’t affect interest rates, so foreign inflows will continue and the rupee will continue to appreciate v/s the dollar. Most economists call the dilemma the Impossible Trinity viz exchange rates, capital movement and interest rates. Economists believe you can choose only 2 out of 3.
What may be of importance to note is that SEBI, the stock exchange regulatory authority had issued a clarification or comment on foreign inflows using participatory notes. The day of comment evoked a 1700 point slide on the sensex. Mr. Damodaran, SEBI Chairman promptly retracted his statement, and dutifully the sense reverted by 1500 points that very same day. Maybe Mr. Damodaran doesn’t want to be the man behind a stock market crash only time will tell. Let’s wait & see.
In our case however the stock asset prices have increased on account of foreign inflows. These inflows are justified on the phenomenal growth of corporate earnings in India and expected growth and opportunity in Indian markets at least that is what we are led to believe. Inadvertently however, the foreign inflows have been appreciating the rupee (12% appreciation in the past quarter) which is affecting exports. Exports are getting expensive on account of lower dollar realization, a revision upwards of exports prices is netting fewer buyers in the world market and we see that exports in this quarter have slumped.
Generally a rapid and high growth market is soothed by increasing interest rates. Increased interest rates would encumber new investments, limiting growth and maybe in turn lowering assets prices. However when foreign inflows are increasing stock asset prices, an increased interest rate in the market further propels inflows into the country. So we are in a situation where we can’t affect interest rates, so foreign inflows will continue and the rupee will continue to appreciate v/s the dollar. Most economists call the dilemma the Impossible Trinity viz exchange rates, capital movement and interest rates. Economists believe you can choose only 2 out of 3.
What may be of importance to note is that SEBI, the stock exchange regulatory authority had issued a clarification or comment on foreign inflows using participatory notes. The day of comment evoked a 1700 point slide on the sensex. Mr. Damodaran, SEBI Chairman promptly retracted his statement, and dutifully the sense reverted by 1500 points that very same day. Maybe Mr. Damodaran doesn’t want to be the man behind a stock market crash only time will tell. Let’s wait & see.
Monday, October 22, 2007
Scotch Fir
The exposition is provided by a naturalist and may be of some significance especially when we put our hand up and ‘sigh’.
“In an estate of a relation, where I had ample means of investigation, there was a large and extremely barren heath, which had never been touched by the hand of man; but several hundred acres of exactly the same nature had been enclosed twenty-five years previously and planted with Scotch fir. The change in the native vegetation of the planted part of the heath was most remarkable, more than is generally seen in passing from one quite different soil to another: not only the proportional numbers of the heath-plants were wholly changed, but twelve species of plants (not counting grasses and carices) flourished in the plantations, which could not be found on the heath. The effect on the insects must have been still greater, for six insectivorous birds were very common in the plantations, which were not to be seen on the heath; and the heath was frequented by two or three distinct insectivorous birds. Here we see how potent has been the effect of the introduction of a single tree, nothing whatever else having been done, with the exception of the land having been enclosed, so that cattle could not enter.”
Maybe we need to find out our ‘Scotch Fir’ that one thing that can change the status quo of our predicament.
“In an estate of a relation, where I had ample means of investigation, there was a large and extremely barren heath, which had never been touched by the hand of man; but several hundred acres of exactly the same nature had been enclosed twenty-five years previously and planted with Scotch fir. The change in the native vegetation of the planted part of the heath was most remarkable, more than is generally seen in passing from one quite different soil to another: not only the proportional numbers of the heath-plants were wholly changed, but twelve species of plants (not counting grasses and carices) flourished in the plantations, which could not be found on the heath. The effect on the insects must have been still greater, for six insectivorous birds were very common in the plantations, which were not to be seen on the heath; and the heath was frequented by two or three distinct insectivorous birds. Here we see how potent has been the effect of the introduction of a single tree, nothing whatever else having been done, with the exception of the land having been enclosed, so that cattle could not enter.”
Maybe we need to find out our ‘Scotch Fir’ that one thing that can change the status quo of our predicament.
isolation to specialisation while chaos to variation..
Although isolation is of great importance in the birth of new species, on the whole the largeness of area is still more important, especially for the production of species which shall prove capable of enduring for a long period, and of spreading widely. Throughout a great and open area, not only will there be a better chance of favorable variations, arising from the large number of individuals of the same species there supported, but the conditions of life are much more complex from the large number of already existing species; and if some of these many species become modified and improved, others will have to be improved in a corresponding degree, or they will be exterminated. Each new form, also, as soon as it has been much improved, will be able to spread over the open and continuous area, and will thus come into competition with many other forms. They will thus play a more important part in the changing history of the organic world. - C R Darwin
It maybe worthwhile to draw a parallel between nature and economic markets or even life. An environment in flux allows a greater probable chance to develop favorable variations to withstand imperils or unforeseen circumstances than that can be garnered from a cloistered or stable environment.
It maybe worthwhile to draw a parallel between nature and economic markets or even life. An environment in flux allows a greater probable chance to develop favorable variations to withstand imperils or unforeseen circumstances than that can be garnered from a cloistered or stable environment.
Sunday, October 21, 2007
complex relations..
There comes many a times when things we initiate don’t commence or inadvertently fail to go the way we intend. In such times we would often be tempted to attribute the failed initiation or outcome to matters of chance.
When a forest is cut down the new growth of vegetation that springs up could sometimes differ from its surroundings whereas in contrast places of old ruins which must have been formerly cleared of trees, the ruins display diversity akin to the surrounding forest. The vegetation whether akin or different must be the outcome of a struggle between the several kind of trees/plants each annually scattering its seeds by the thousand; the war between insect and insects, birds and beasts of prey — all striving, all feeding on each other, or on the trees their seeds and seedlings, or on other plants which first clothed the ground. The growth of vegetation would be a result of these various interactions.
Humblebees alone visit red clover flower, as other insects cannot reach the nectar and the bee alone seems to have sufficient weight to depress the petals of the clover. Hence we may infer if the whole genus of humble-bees became extinct, the red clover would become very rare, or wholly disappear. The number of humblebees in any place depends in a great measure upon the number of field mice, which destroy their combs and nests. The number of mice is largely dependent on the number of cats or predatory birds. Hence it is quite credible that the presence of a feline animal in large numbers in a place might determine, through the intervention first of mice and then of bees, the frequency of certain flowers in that place.
Perhaps, there is an entire series of interactions, interrelations and interconnections that coalesce to produce an outcome.
When a forest is cut down the new growth of vegetation that springs up could sometimes differ from its surroundings whereas in contrast places of old ruins which must have been formerly cleared of trees, the ruins display diversity akin to the surrounding forest. The vegetation whether akin or different must be the outcome of a struggle between the several kind of trees/plants each annually scattering its seeds by the thousand; the war between insect and insects, birds and beasts of prey — all striving, all feeding on each other, or on the trees their seeds and seedlings, or on other plants which first clothed the ground. The growth of vegetation would be a result of these various interactions.
Humblebees alone visit red clover flower, as other insects cannot reach the nectar and the bee alone seems to have sufficient weight to depress the petals of the clover. Hence we may infer if the whole genus of humble-bees became extinct, the red clover would become very rare, or wholly disappear. The number of humblebees in any place depends in a great measure upon the number of field mice, which destroy their combs and nests. The number of mice is largely dependent on the number of cats or predatory birds. Hence it is quite credible that the presence of a feline animal in large numbers in a place might determine, through the intervention first of mice and then of bees, the frequency of certain flowers in that place.
Perhaps, there is an entire series of interactions, interrelations and interconnections that coalesce to produce an outcome.
Wednesday, October 10, 2007
the last word
"Sometimes a great deal is made in public domain of the opinions expressed by our friends...but this should not alarm you."
- Sonia Gandhi, UPA Chairperson.
On the Left's Opposition to the Nuclear Deal.
Intersting to note:
1. The Left had countered the present Govt. on its Nuclear Programme.
If the Govt. did formalise a meeting with IAEA, this would have resulted in the Left withdrawing support to the Govt inadvertently destablising its 5 year term.
The 'counter' was more of a challenge to the present Govt asking them to take a chance and call in the wager.
Modus Operandi: The Govt. arranged a series of meetings. The actual objective of the meetings were just to keep the Left occupied in the meetings.
In total, 4 meetings were arranged in a span of 3 weeks.
None of them resulted to any conclusion to the Nuclear Programme.
I mean it is common knowledge that if we put a bunch of comrades together and ask them to decide on a subject, they would have endless discussions on which subject to start, but seldom initiate a subject.
Moral: Don't challenge in Politics, just keep the politicians occupied.
Meetings are the best way to keep the politicians occupied while the statesman can continue to run the affairs of the country.
2. If the UPA Govt had called in the wager of the Left.
The incrimination would have been on the UPA to have lost the Nuclear Deal and its ruling position. Maybe the vote banks would not have supported the UPA for a fresh term if re-elections were called.
Modus Operandi: The UPA did not call in the wager, neither did they issue any official statements countering the Left's wager. This would have aggravated the situation than placated it. The UPA was concered with taking the Nuclear Deal ahead.
And this is what todays evening NEWS scrolled.
The PMO(Prime Ministers Office) had 'informal' talks with International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) chief Mohamed El Baradei.
The talks may have been stated as 'informal', but I think the UPA played the cards astutely against the Left demands of 'no formal' talks.
I think Politics is all about nuances and subtlities and more so about 'playing power' than 'power play'.
Moral: I think a clear thinker is concerned with what the communication is achieving and not who said the last word. 'Power play' is what everybody does, we all have some power to do something, but 'playing power' is what a statesman does.
I think the UPA handled this situation deftly.
The Left as usual have the last word but 'no say'.
And the more they shoot their gobs, the bleaker their situation gets.
I find it unable to credit them for anything but the endemic holler. "Inquilab"
If it isn't the holler, then it is a 'strike' or a 'bandh'
Personally, I think we are often been inclined to have the last word, rebuttal, riposte, or refutal much like the Leftists.
It is not the appropriate thing to do, the right thing to do is just walk away or peacable diagree.
And in intense personal situations just 'agree'. Maybe I don't have to battle every whit out there, some agree some don't. Life and people are just like that.
I think UPA dis-agreed with the Left and still had it their way, while the Left just had their say.
Maybe I need more practice on 'playing power' than 'power play'.
- Sonia Gandhi, UPA Chairperson.
On the Left's Opposition to the Nuclear Deal.
Intersting to note:
1. The Left had countered the present Govt. on its Nuclear Programme.
If the Govt. did formalise a meeting with IAEA, this would have resulted in the Left withdrawing support to the Govt inadvertently destablising its 5 year term.
The 'counter' was more of a challenge to the present Govt asking them to take a chance and call in the wager.
Modus Operandi: The Govt. arranged a series of meetings. The actual objective of the meetings were just to keep the Left occupied in the meetings.
In total, 4 meetings were arranged in a span of 3 weeks.
None of them resulted to any conclusion to the Nuclear Programme.
I mean it is common knowledge that if we put a bunch of comrades together and ask them to decide on a subject, they would have endless discussions on which subject to start, but seldom initiate a subject.
Moral: Don't challenge in Politics, just keep the politicians occupied.
Meetings are the best way to keep the politicians occupied while the statesman can continue to run the affairs of the country.
2. If the UPA Govt had called in the wager of the Left.
The incrimination would have been on the UPA to have lost the Nuclear Deal and its ruling position. Maybe the vote banks would not have supported the UPA for a fresh term if re-elections were called.
Modus Operandi: The UPA did not call in the wager, neither did they issue any official statements countering the Left's wager. This would have aggravated the situation than placated it. The UPA was concered with taking the Nuclear Deal ahead.
And this is what todays evening NEWS scrolled.
The PMO(Prime Ministers Office) had 'informal' talks with International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) chief Mohamed El Baradei.
The talks may have been stated as 'informal', but I think the UPA played the cards astutely against the Left demands of 'no formal' talks.
I think Politics is all about nuances and subtlities and more so about 'playing power' than 'power play'.
Moral: I think a clear thinker is concerned with what the communication is achieving and not who said the last word. 'Power play' is what everybody does, we all have some power to do something, but 'playing power' is what a statesman does.
I think the UPA handled this situation deftly.
The Left as usual have the last word but 'no say'.
And the more they shoot their gobs, the bleaker their situation gets.
I find it unable to credit them for anything but the endemic holler. "Inquilab"
If it isn't the holler, then it is a 'strike' or a 'bandh'
Personally, I think we are often been inclined to have the last word, rebuttal, riposte, or refutal much like the Leftists.
It is not the appropriate thing to do, the right thing to do is just walk away or peacable diagree.
And in intense personal situations just 'agree'. Maybe I don't have to battle every whit out there, some agree some don't. Life and people are just like that.
I think UPA dis-agreed with the Left and still had it their way, while the Left just had their say.
Maybe I need more practice on 'playing power' than 'power play'.
political soilicitations
A leader of the present opposition party quizzed by a reporter.
Reporter: Sir, are you quitting your party?
Politician: I have no comments.
Reporter: Sir, are you not quitting the party?
Politician: I did not say anything.
Reporter: Sir, we have reports that you are quitting the party.
Politican: As far as these reports are concerned, these reports are not true as on today.
{Implicitly, what the politician means is the reports can be true after today.}
Politician: Today, I am a member of this party.
(Implicity, he is saying, tomorrow I don't intend to continue to be a member of this party.)
I don't know how smart this politician is, but he has just sent a solicitation for an invitation to the present ruling party. I don't know if the present ruling party will oblige, but if they do they have on their hands an obvious mistake.
Reporter: Sir, are you quitting your party?
Politician: I have no comments.
Reporter: Sir, are you not quitting the party?
Politician: I did not say anything.
Reporter: Sir, we have reports that you are quitting the party.
Politican: As far as these reports are concerned, these reports are not true as on today.
{Implicitly, what the politician means is the reports can be true after today.}
Politician: Today, I am a member of this party.
(Implicity, he is saying, tomorrow I don't intend to continue to be a member of this party.)
I don't know how smart this politician is, but he has just sent a solicitation for an invitation to the present ruling party. I don't know if the present ruling party will oblige, but if they do they have on their hands an obvious mistake.
Monday, October 8, 2007
in lighter vein
Indian from a small town comes to one of the bigger cities falls in luv with a nurse...After much thinking, he finally writes a love letter to her:
"I luv u sister."
*****************************
Son, while filling up a form: Dad, what should I write for Mother tongue?
Dad: Very long!
"I luv u sister."
*****************************
Son, while filling up a form: Dad, what should I write for Mother tongue?
Dad: Very long!
Darwinism
#1 “We see indefinite variability in the endless slight peculiarities which distinguish the individuals of the same species, and which cannot be accounted for by inheritance from either parent or from some more remote ancestor. Even strongly marked differences occasionally appear in the young of the same litter and/or in seedlings from the same seed-capsule.”
#2 “The principle of reversion states that there could arise characteristics in domestic varieties such that that our domestic varieties, if not interbred with other stock to invariably revert in character to their wild aboriginal stock."
Animal Planet happened to be showcasing a program on adaptability: An animal’s endemic hide that concels its presence in an environment is on the contrary divulging it presence. The subject was a particular yellow colored crocodile which was distinct from the cornucopia of black crocodiles in the waterhole. The distinctness in its yellow color could not be traced to its immediate parent and is referred to as indefinite variability. The endemic crocs had a black pachyderm which camouflages its presence in the murky waters of the waterhole. The black hide aids the crocs by cloaking it in the muddy waters allowing it to prey on herbivores that quench their thirst at the waterhole. But since this particular subject crocodile was yellow (#1) it becomes apparent despite the murky waters. The ‘indefinite’ variability is on account of the variability being uncommon in the ambient brood of crocodiles.
Most black crocodiles would paddle up close to the prey but as it nears the prey its eyes and snout are the only visible distinguishing features above the water and when in striking distance it lunges onto the prey. The advantage the black crocs have is that they can sneak up real close to the prey on account of their pachyderm.
The yellow crocodile when following a similar routine in catching its prey is not successful. (#2 – hunting like the rest of the crocs) It has to adapt its hunting skills. It adapts by immersing itself completely into the water and heads to the prey underwater. It lunges itself onto the prey from beneath the water. This was unlike the prevalent hunting behavior, the black crocs lunged from the surface while the yellow croc lunged from beneath the water with no cues from any other crocodile as it is the only one of a yellow color.
Now if we mutatis-mutandis the principles that is if it was reversion that made the croc to revert to a yellow hide (we can’t be sure as there were any other yellow crocs in the brood) then it had to adapt its skill to an indefinite variability from the remaining brood of black crocodiles.
Both these principles were observation of Darwin which he penned in ‘The Origin of Species’, he precludes both principles to a parental linkage. This discussion however does not limit itself to the preclusions that Darwin made so as to broaden the scope of the discussion and bear on the following:
1. It would be interesting to note how we humans bring indefinite variability in reversions or how reversions create indefinite variability.
2. What may be critical to note is a reversion in one trait is not accompanied by a reversion in another which in Darwinism would be to de-evolve rather than evolve.
3. Further to #2, Darwin had expounded on a ‘law of correlation’ commenting that for a change in trait there would be a corresponding change in characteristic too.
4. The above points could imply that human characteristics are correlated and if so, then a change in one should follow with a change in another. The encumbrance to do so could ferret our abilities in turn our very own growth.
Sometimes if we can recognize our reversion we can nurture an indefinite variability.
#2 “The principle of reversion states that there could arise characteristics in domestic varieties such that that our domestic varieties, if not interbred with other stock to invariably revert in character to their wild aboriginal stock."
Animal Planet happened to be showcasing a program on adaptability: An animal’s endemic hide that concels its presence in an environment is on the contrary divulging it presence. The subject was a particular yellow colored crocodile which was distinct from the cornucopia of black crocodiles in the waterhole. The distinctness in its yellow color could not be traced to its immediate parent and is referred to as indefinite variability. The endemic crocs had a black pachyderm which camouflages its presence in the murky waters of the waterhole. The black hide aids the crocs by cloaking it in the muddy waters allowing it to prey on herbivores that quench their thirst at the waterhole. But since this particular subject crocodile was yellow (#1) it becomes apparent despite the murky waters. The ‘indefinite’ variability is on account of the variability being uncommon in the ambient brood of crocodiles.
Most black crocodiles would paddle up close to the prey but as it nears the prey its eyes and snout are the only visible distinguishing features above the water and when in striking distance it lunges onto the prey. The advantage the black crocs have is that they can sneak up real close to the prey on account of their pachyderm.
The yellow crocodile when following a similar routine in catching its prey is not successful. (#2 – hunting like the rest of the crocs) It has to adapt its hunting skills. It adapts by immersing itself completely into the water and heads to the prey underwater. It lunges itself onto the prey from beneath the water. This was unlike the prevalent hunting behavior, the black crocs lunged from the surface while the yellow croc lunged from beneath the water with no cues from any other crocodile as it is the only one of a yellow color.
Now if we mutatis-mutandis the principles that is if it was reversion that made the croc to revert to a yellow hide (we can’t be sure as there were any other yellow crocs in the brood) then it had to adapt its skill to an indefinite variability from the remaining brood of black crocodiles.
Both these principles were observation of Darwin which he penned in ‘The Origin of Species’, he precludes both principles to a parental linkage. This discussion however does not limit itself to the preclusions that Darwin made so as to broaden the scope of the discussion and bear on the following:
1. It would be interesting to note how we humans bring indefinite variability in reversions or how reversions create indefinite variability.
2. What may be critical to note is a reversion in one trait is not accompanied by a reversion in another which in Darwinism would be to de-evolve rather than evolve.
3. Further to #2, Darwin had expounded on a ‘law of correlation’ commenting that for a change in trait there would be a corresponding change in characteristic too.
4. The above points could imply that human characteristics are correlated and if so, then a change in one should follow with a change in another. The encumbrance to do so could ferret our abilities in turn our very own growth.
Sometimes if we can recognize our reversion we can nurture an indefinite variability.
What comes first? the chicken or the egg?
The question that has perplexed westerners since ages.
What comes first - the chicken or the egg?
And the answer was found in a local dhabha in Jalandhar.
What comes first - the chicken or the egg?
Oye yaar, jiska order pehle dogay, vo ayega!!!
What comes first - the chicken or the egg?
And the answer was found in a local dhabha in Jalandhar.
What comes first - the chicken or the egg?
Oye yaar, jiska order pehle dogay, vo ayega!!!
Saturday, October 6, 2007
Religion and Politics
Religion and Politics each in their utopian state is an appeal to the conscience of man/woman. And the corruption of both is wealth. Their genesis and ministration is a result of an appeal to the conscience of men/women. Both draw wealth and people and the appetite for wealth grows with what it feeds upon which in-effect means greater number of people contribute to greater wealth.
Maybe we need to be a little more discerning concerning them. It is not about loyalties and stairway to heaven but who has the greater appetite.
The appetite for wealth grows with what it feeds upon.
Maybe we need to be a little more discerning concerning them. It is not about loyalties and stairway to heaven but who has the greater appetite.
The appetite for wealth grows with what it feeds upon.
Thursday, October 4, 2007
solving a problem
The peculiarity (in theory) of solving a problem:
There is a sudden burst of inspiration – eureka – and the solution evokes from our minds.
or
The other is a thought process of steps towards the solution of a problem.
PJL
There is a sudden burst of inspiration – eureka – and the solution evokes from our minds.
or
The other is a thought process of steps towards the solution of a problem.
PJL
Tuesday, October 2, 2007
to lie or not to....
Some data by a leading researcher (Paul Ekman) on why the general population finds it difficult to discern lies.
Reason #1.Our environment, to a large extent the environment we grow up in viz; genetically and physical environment. The former invloves the line of thought that our brains are not developed in the area of being deceivers. In a community, more often people want to live peaceably amongst each other so the chances that people in a community would lie are rare. This implies that in a community since people find it difficult to get away with a lie thus most people will not lie. The research points out that in the early communities people did not have their own space, rooms with walls for privacy, in such a case lying and cheating would be difficult, so we come from an environment that didn’t purportlie and cheat. What the researcher is implying is that our brains are not developed to a level where we are congenital liars and thus we find it difficult to identify a lie.
This could mean that if a liar is in an environment that fails to catch him/her, he/she is more likely to lie. So it may be important to know the past environment to evaluate the probability that one is a liar.
Reason #2. Society by itself makes it difficult for a liar to get away with a lie. I mean the law. The law is attuned to catch the outlaw. So there is a discouragement in a community to lie.
I don’t know how far this is true, look at our politicians they talk through their hat most of the time. Our problem is we don’t know when they are lying and when they are telling the truth, but it could be fair to generalize that politicians talk through their hats most of the time.
But the society does not encourage to lie but people who can get away with a lie will.
3. The target (of deceit) would prefer to believe the lie than otherwise as the target would have a vested interest to maintain the status quo than find out otherwise.
Corny Example:- A wife asks her husband, “Was there any other woman at the party whom you thought was more attractive than me?”. The husband would most probably lie by claiming she was the most attractive even if she was not. He does not want to make her jealous or he does not want her having ill feelings, and she herself may want to believe she was the most attractive.
Self-Thought Question #1: Is that a trick question?
Self-Thought Question #2: Why would a woman ask a question like that?
Implicit Conclusion: Maybe the husband loves his wife so he lies. Maybe he is a real nut-case and he prefers to lie.
The afore questions and conclusion are not relevant to the discussion, some rhetoricals are better not raised or concluded.
4. We are generally polite or at least we want to be polite even when we don’t want to be. I couldn’t believe this one, till the researcher exemplified.
Example 1: We generally avert our gaze if someone picks his/her nose. At that juncture we wouldn’t interrupt the digger while he/she is on such a meaningful activity in life and break his/her concentration and query him/her on why he/she did what he/she did exactly at that juncture.
Example 2: A secretary who feels miserable about a fight with her husband the previous night answers, “Just fine,” when her boss asks, “How are you this morning?”. The boss just wants to know if she is up to work, so she politely replies she is fine.
5. People don’t let tell us they are lying, if they did infomr us immediately after telling a lie, then we have a better chance of analyzing the facial expressions, demeanor, gaze, etc. Since we do not receive such information people tend to be dubious about all statement or they are gullible to the information provided by a liar.
In the normal course of our lives, we generally don’t have situations like this where we know that the subject is trying to mislead us. Neither do we know if the subject will mislead us – for all we know at that instant he/she may say a truth.
Now to the crux. We do know that the moot reason an individual lies is in self interest but there are professions that look at a lie with no self interest rather not one which purports themselves.
Professions like forensic experts, detectives, police, counter intelligence, etc need to discern a from the truth, this is common knowledge and quite elementary .
But, in addition we have 2 legitimate professions who should know how to lie.
Nurses and doctors should know how to conceal negative emotions, maybe this keeps the patient and family positive about a possible recovery which could actually aid the patient’s recovery. It also gives patients and thier immediate relatives a chance of hope in such cases.
Reason #1.Our environment, to a large extent the environment we grow up in viz; genetically and physical environment. The former invloves the line of thought that our brains are not developed in the area of being deceivers. In a community, more often people want to live peaceably amongst each other so the chances that people in a community would lie are rare. This implies that in a community since people find it difficult to get away with a lie thus most people will not lie. The research points out that in the early communities people did not have their own space, rooms with walls for privacy, in such a case lying and cheating would be difficult, so we come from an environment that didn’t purportlie and cheat. What the researcher is implying is that our brains are not developed to a level where we are congenital liars and thus we find it difficult to identify a lie.
This could mean that if a liar is in an environment that fails to catch him/her, he/she is more likely to lie. So it may be important to know the past environment to evaluate the probability that one is a liar.
Reason #2. Society by itself makes it difficult for a liar to get away with a lie. I mean the law. The law is attuned to catch the outlaw. So there is a discouragement in a community to lie.
I don’t know how far this is true, look at our politicians they talk through their hat most of the time. Our problem is we don’t know when they are lying and when they are telling the truth, but it could be fair to generalize that politicians talk through their hats most of the time.
But the society does not encourage to lie but people who can get away with a lie will.
3. The target (of deceit) would prefer to believe the lie than otherwise as the target would have a vested interest to maintain the status quo than find out otherwise.
Corny Example:- A wife asks her husband, “Was there any other woman at the party whom you thought was more attractive than me?”. The husband would most probably lie by claiming she was the most attractive even if she was not. He does not want to make her jealous or he does not want her having ill feelings, and she herself may want to believe she was the most attractive.
Self-Thought Question #1: Is that a trick question?
Self-Thought Question #2: Why would a woman ask a question like that?
Implicit Conclusion: Maybe the husband loves his wife so he lies. Maybe he is a real nut-case and he prefers to lie.
The afore questions and conclusion are not relevant to the discussion, some rhetoricals are better not raised or concluded.
4. We are generally polite or at least we want to be polite even when we don’t want to be. I couldn’t believe this one, till the researcher exemplified.
Example 1: We generally avert our gaze if someone picks his/her nose. At that juncture we wouldn’t interrupt the digger while he/she is on such a meaningful activity in life and break his/her concentration and query him/her on why he/she did what he/she did exactly at that juncture.
Example 2: A secretary who feels miserable about a fight with her husband the previous night answers, “Just fine,” when her boss asks, “How are you this morning?”. The boss just wants to know if she is up to work, so she politely replies she is fine.
5. People don’t let tell us they are lying, if they did infomr us immediately after telling a lie, then we have a better chance of analyzing the facial expressions, demeanor, gaze, etc. Since we do not receive such information people tend to be dubious about all statement or they are gullible to the information provided by a liar.
In the normal course of our lives, we generally don’t have situations like this where we know that the subject is trying to mislead us. Neither do we know if the subject will mislead us – for all we know at that instant he/she may say a truth.
Now to the crux. We do know that the moot reason an individual lies is in self interest but there are professions that look at a lie with no self interest rather not one which purports themselves.
Professions like forensic experts, detectives, police, counter intelligence, etc need to discern a from the truth, this is common knowledge and quite elementary .
But, in addition we have 2 legitimate professions who should know how to lie.
Nurses and doctors should know how to conceal negative emotions, maybe this keeps the patient and family positive about a possible recovery which could actually aid the patient’s recovery. It also gives patients and thier immediate relatives a chance of hope in such cases.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
