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 ...

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...

Most people search for hope, for belonging, for purpose. Religion can offer all of that, but if it ever sidelines your freedom to choose, to think, to wonder—something precious is lost. So, what’s the answer? Not confrontation, but honest, unguarded questions. Questions that aren’t meant to provoke or undermine, but to genuinely understand and maybe even reshape how we see the world, each other, and ourselves. See, preachers—like everyone else—filter their teachings through layers of personal experience. Some are gentle guides, others take a hard line, but most fall somewhere in the middle. That’s not surprising. We all lean on what we know: our stories, our histories, our mistakes. It’s just that, for religious teachers, this bias carries extra weight. Sometimes their perspective anchors a community, offering stability and belonging. Other times, accumulated bias can make a religion feel rigid or exclusionary—raising walls instead of building bridges. There’s an intricate relationshi...