Ideas We Believe

Before it was named science, this branch of rational debates on natural phenomena was a part of philosophical discourses. However, the biggest differentiator was the approach. Scientific truths were to remain objective and under scrutiny forever when one phenomenon that contradicts a hypothesis is enough to bury it. This explains that scepticism is the central facet of scientific thinking. Today, the nature and physics of systems have gone too complex for the truth to be objectively identified. We gamble on the empirical formulation of reality and quantify its error. Also, specialisation has made science disciplines wander so far off that a singular authority is hard to conceive. This has ushered into an era where unscientific theories conspire to challenge established truths. This problem is pressing since it seeks to undermine centuries of human intelligence. Today, when information is abundant, the means of verification are limited and sources of authority in multitude, what could b

The world today is 281 trillion in debt to itself. There is no science more mysterious than that of money. What drives my enthusiasm for finance is its underlying devotion to mathematics, just like most of the pure sciences. This pride in being extremely logical and putting rationality before empirical bias is what makes it worthy of a Nobel (though not the original one). But its influence on daily life is enormous, a genuinely distinct feat in pure sciences. So let's delve into the unapparent philosophical side of the currency. 281 trillion is a significant amount. If everyone called on their cards, we would have a lost game of poker. In fact, we have such a bluff on the table that we can't risk calling it. It is horrifying that this accounting deficit makes no difference to the world. Has there ever been a scam this benign? Or do we need a piece of the puzzle? The latter seems rational. The reason for this debt is simple, sovereigns have printed more and more money over the y

There are obvious downsides to democracy. When we look at the distribution of opinion on a particular issue, it generally follows a normal distribution. This implies that to achieve the majority, it's theoretically advised to stick to the centre. And this love for mediocrity makes democracy allergic to politically solid decisions.  Along with it, democracies tend to be the rooster for sweet talkers. And that is an outcome rather than a voluntary trait. Primarily because most voters need to be equipped to deal with the complexities of the field. For example, it could be more practical for an electrical engineer to comprehend medical patterns and the pandemic's effect on production. Thus, democratic institutions need people managers who have two keywords to watch out for - sweet talking and status quo. However, democracies have been hugely popular. And people have reported being happier. Whether this is induced, indoctrinated or influenced is another question. But history has cho

  “Death is a certainty for all of us, both you and me.” Does this offend you??? how about this “you b***** mo***, I CAN’T WAIT TO SEE YOU DEAD.” This does hurt. So, Is right to offend an indispensable part of the freedom of expression and speech ? I would gladly say NO. Let’s start with the major stakeholders, the offender and the offended. It’s not natural for us to step out of our comfort zone and hurt someone else. Then why do we do so? The answer is psychological … Its the repressed emotions of anger, jealousy and pride that seek expression inform of hate-speech, misinformation and condescending remarks . Thus every example of offence is a sign of spreading emotional malice in the society. If you have ever been on the side of the offended,(given the rates of cyber-bullying, you are under threat), our body initiates a defence mechanism every time we are offended. That could be resistance or denial. Resistance is when we reciprocate offence with another offence and needless to say

One way to put a banner on the course of human civilization is to call it an escape from uncertainty ( most of which would have led us to death). Why do we live in societies? To save ourselves from the uncertainty of getting attacked... Why do we build houses? To mitigate the uncertainty of getting our food washed away in the rain... Why do we rear children? So that we don't fast ourselves to death in old age. So in all these cases, the sheer uncertainty in the future has made us make expensive investments in the present. And those who didn't give in to these fears took a risk.  The pay-off of that risk is, however, independent of the past. In some cases, the risk turned out to be a golden gamble. Just like a flood washing away houses of people...the ones who hadn't built their houses were a little less sad. Risk can give an unexpected reward, but the higher the risk, the greater the return.  But at times, the risk is otherwise. Instead of choice for the individual, it beco

Superhero movies have been the talk of Hollywood town over the last decade. The resurgence of Marvel Movies is testimony to what extent the millennials have popularised the superhero concept. The franchise, struggling to keep up with its bread-winners like Spiderman and Hulk, has become a cult. Big theatre release, a massive ensemble of characters and whooping budgets that promise to win back the investment. It would be untrue to claim that superheroes have disappeared from the movie scene, but the extent to which they have captured the Hollywood market makes it a compelling case. So why not look deep into the invincible suits... There is a theory to makes a hero. The first part is the discovery, where you introduce your star as an average person struggling with mundane jobs, mostly away from attention. The journey unfolds his realisation of power and subsequent claim to fame. For a lot of the superhero movies, directors had kept their these lives distinct. In many films, the heroes ha

Welcome to an unknown psychiatric syndrome, which  cripples a lot of teenagers as soon as they move away from home.  If you still doubt my claims, I shall recommend you to peek into any ordinary college bitching about professors, courses or tests. The level of obscenity in all these are far beyond the actual intentions of the teenagers or so to say young adults (this sounds like an oxymoron). Often, my friends would say, their address to mother or sister is only  to trigger a sense of disgust in the listener because they are pretty immune to the other (non-obscene) ones.  Well, it could be the case, but we must look into this psychological behavior of this specific age group with some more caution. One of the first causes of these could be a severe restriction prevalent in the society when someone intends to talk about sex. This leads to two bad outcomes namely the first that the  teenagers get to know about stuff from highly unauthenticated and filthy atmosphere , which in turn ma

There is intricate relation between philosophy and religion. Something we have lost over time, probably because its tough for common people to comprehend and apply in lives. Here enters the main character : PREACHERS. What Preachers do is that  they interpret the religion for you, set out rituals and put in guidelines for everyday life. All this sounds non-harming and calm, but not always.  Because, some preachers do take hard stands. Why?? Because of personal experiences. That’s true with everyone.  Most of our logic, decisions and even prejudices are built on our experiences, something we can’t erase however hard we may try. What does that leave us with… A bias.  But in case of religious teachers, this bias is worrisome. Most people around the world are in search of hope, religion gives it to them. But also a bias of the preacher…. As these bias accumulates, the religion tends to become conservative and radical. This is what breeds the next level of terror;  people whom “religi

Corruption as in itself carries a lot of philosophical matter, but the one we see in everyday life is quite simple to explain. Or is it ? I had a discussion with an elderly couple who were on their way to their children in Bangalore. As the discussion turned to they voiced their concern on corruption becoming a hindrance to nations growth and why we need to uproot it. And his idea was.... "Lets stop the inheritance of property across generations. " Seemed a wonderful idea at first. It solves a lot of issues on the go. It would work as an  heavy blow to the rich lads who aim to survive on their dads bank account . Bringing in accountability into the system. It would also kill the attempts to pool all money for a better life of the children. It would simply  kill the desire to pool money  (if it is not for you …) Then when things were such rosy, I thought then why not. The answer was subtle and linked much to the organisation of our society. If you look deep,  its