you and I, in this beautiful world..
green grass blue skies..
you and i in this beautiful world..
winding lanes as streams go by....
u and i in this beautiful world
Wednesday, October 10, 2007
You and I in this beautiful world:
you and I, in this beautiful world..
green grass blue skies..
you and i in this beautiful world..
winding lanes as streams go by....
u and i in this beautiful world
Thursday, July 26, 2007
IITs or Call Centres : What India needs more.
Let me start this blog with a very short true incident that happened with one of my friends during the software recession period of 2001 - 2002. This friend of mine was interviewed for a company and he did exceedingly well in the interview. There was'nt a question that he did not answer correctly and after the interview was over he was quite confident about making the cut.
After a week the company HR mailed him saying he does not qualify for a position. The mail said "The hiring committee carefully reviewed your experience and qualifications and determined that there is not a strong match for our position at this time. We hope that in the future if a position arises that will be a better fit, we'll keep you in mind as we grow and hope you might consider us again sometime down the road. Thanks again for considering us we wish you well in your future endeavors."
The crux of the above mail was that he did not get the job. This guy had another friend in the same company whom he called to find out the exact reasons of he not making it. His friend told him that as he had done exceedingly well in the interviews the company feels that he is gonna leave the company as soon as the market stabilizes.
Was the company right in doing so?
This is a question that came to my mind a lot of time after this incident and almost everytime I felt it was not fair, and I still feel ethically that was not the right thing to do. But thinking practically I realize that the company was right in not hiring him becuase he would have certainly left the day he had a better opportunity.
After a week the company HR mailed him saying he does not qualify for a position. The mail said "The hiring committee carefully reviewed your experience and qualifications and determined that there is not a strong match for our position at this time. We hope that in the future if a position arises that will be a better fit, we'll keep you in mind as we grow and hope you might consider us again sometime down the road. Thanks again for considering us we wish you well in your future endeavors."
The crux of the above mail was that he did not get the job. This guy had another friend in the same company whom he called to find out the exact reasons of he not making it. His friend told him that as he had done exceedingly well in the interviews the company feels that he is gonna leave the company as soon as the market stabilizes.
Was the company right in doing so?
This is a question that came to my mind a lot of time after this incident and almost everytime I felt it was not fair, and I still feel ethically that was not the right thing to do. But thinking practically I realize that the company was right in not hiring him becuase he would have certainly left the day he had a better opportunity.
Wednesday, July 25, 2007
Khwaish
khwaish teri ab to ek ibaadat ho chali hai,
khwabon ko palko pe pighalne ki ab to aadat ho chali hai.
har shaam youn kshitij ko takti, bas ek hi intezaar mein dhali hai,
ki mit kar mil jaane ki tujhme ab to aadat ho chali hai.
tapti hui zameen par masoomiyat meri kuchh is kadar jali hai,
ki khud ban kar mit jaana ab meri fitrat ho chali hai.
yun hi nehi is kyun mein yeh umar ek muddat se jali hai,
shunya mein hi, par kehin, tu mujhe tanha mili hai.
by Chomsky AKA Amar Singh Chauhan
khwabon ko palko pe pighalne ki ab to aadat ho chali hai.
har shaam youn kshitij ko takti, bas ek hi intezaar mein dhali hai,
ki mit kar mil jaane ki tujhme ab to aadat ho chali hai.
tapti hui zameen par masoomiyat meri kuchh is kadar jali hai,
ki khud ban kar mit jaana ab meri fitrat ho chali hai.
yun hi nehi is kyun mein yeh umar ek muddat se jali hai,
shunya mein hi, par kehin, tu mujhe tanha mili hai.
by Chomsky AKA Amar Singh Chauhan
Zindagi
shaam aayi to bekali layee, seher aayi to beqaraar aayi.
kuchh chand uljhe huye se afsaane, bas zindagi aur kuchh nehi layi.
chashme purnab hai, bahi, bahi na bahi
zindagi hai kal rehi, rehi na rehi.
Tum to kehdo jo tumko kehna tha,
mera kya hai, kehi,kehi na kehi
kuchh chand uljhe huye se afsaane, bas zindagi aur kuchh nehi layi.
chashme purnab hai, bahi, bahi na bahi
zindagi hai kal rehi, rehi na rehi.
Tum to kehdo jo tumko kehna tha,
mera kya hai, kehi,kehi na kehi
Tuesday, May 29, 2007
About me, I collect moments.
I collect moments. I think it is just a few moments that make my life, totally insignificant to someone else but invaluable to me.
the time when my Papa bought me a hockey stick,
picking fused tubelights from the bin and blowing them with my younger bro,
fooling people while exchanging stamps and coins (the feeling was mutual so no guilt),
bunking classes with friends for a morning show,
the coffee on the beach after everyday class,
sitting on the road to plan for the next match with seniors (and losing that too),
the goa trip (and ditching all girls for this, we love your company but sometimes its too much of a baggage),
the mass walkout from the class in front of HOD,
spending nights planning for ...well it turns out to be nothing, and a lots more.
About me, I collect moments.
the time when my Papa bought me a hockey stick,
picking fused tubelights from the bin and blowing them with my younger bro,
fooling people while exchanging stamps and coins (the feeling was mutual so no guilt),
bunking classes with friends for a morning show,
the coffee on the beach after everyday class,
sitting on the road to plan for the next match with seniors (and losing that too),
the goa trip (and ditching all girls for this, we love your company but sometimes its too much of a baggage),
the mass walkout from the class in front of HOD,
spending nights planning for ...well it turns out to be nothing, and a lots more.
About me, I collect moments.
Thursday, March 29, 2007
A view from far
I know this from my personal life,
if there is something I want to do,
I convince myself its right and just,
and put away evidence that shows its not true.
I want to see myself from a distance,
to stop deception from myself,
with my thoughts free of perception,
with my thoughts free from self.
if there is something I want to do,
I convince myself its right and just,
and put away evidence that shows its not true.
I want to see myself from a distance,
to stop deception from myself,
with my thoughts free of perception,
with my thoughts free from self.
Saturday, March 17, 2007
Religion a mind virus (a very interesting study of religion)
Richard Dawkins' essay "viruses of the mind".
Basically, he postulates that you can consider any cultural idea to be something analagous to genes called 'memes'. A meme can be anything, a catchy phrase, a way of dressing, etc. In this passage, he is describing the following things to look for to determine if someone is 'infected' with a viral meme, or a meme that spreads itself similair to a virus, and once infected, takes steps to keep itself there.
1) The patient typically finds himself impelled by some deep, inner conviction that something is true, or right, or virtuous: a conviction that doesn't seem to owe anything to evidence or reason, but which, nevertheless, he feels as totally compelling and convincing. We doctors refer to such a belief as 'faith'.
2) Patients typically make a positive virtue of faith's being strong and unshakeable, in spite of not being based on evidence. Indeed, they may feel that the less evidence there is, the more virtuous the belief (see below). This paradoxical idea that lack of evidence is a positive virtue where faith is concerned has something of the quality of a program that is self-sustaining, because it is self-referential. Once the preposition is believed, it automatically undermines opposition to itself. The "lack of evidence is a virtue' idea would be an admireable sidekick, ganging up with faith itself in a clique of mutually supportive viral programs.
3) A related symptom, which a faith-sufferer may also present, is the conviction that 'mystery', per se, is a good thing. It is not a virtue to solve mysteries. Rather we should enjoy them, even revel in their insolubility.
4). The sufferer may find himself behaving intolerantly towards vectors of rival faiths, in extreme cases even killing them or advocating their deaths. He may be similarly violent in his disposition towards apostates (people who once held the faith but have renounced it); or towards heretics (people who espouse a different --- often, perhaps significantly, only very slightly different --- version of the faith). He may also feel hostile towards other modes of thought that are potentially inimical to his faith, such as the method of scientific reason which may function rather like a piece of anti-viral software.
5). The patient may notice that the particular convictions that he holds, while having nothing to do with evidence, do seem to owe a great deal to epidemiology. Why, he may wonder, do I hold this set of convictions rather than that set? Is it because I surveyed all the world's faiths and chose the one whose claims seemed most convincing? Almost certainly not. If you have a faith, it is statistically overwhelmingly likely that it is the same faith as your parents and grandparents had. No doubt soaring cathedrals, stirring music, moving stories and parables, help a bit. But by far the most important variable determining your religion is the accident of birth. The convictions that you so passionately believe would have been a completely different, and largely contradictory, set of convictions, if only you had happened to be born in a different place.
6). If the patient is one of the rare exceptions who follows a different religion from his parents, the explanation may still be epidemiological. To be sure, it is possible that he dispassionately surveyed the world's faiths and chose the most convincing one. But it is statistically more probable that he has been exposed to a particularly potent infective agent --- a John Wesley, a Jim Jones or a St. Paul. Here we are talking about horizontal transmission, as in measles. Before, the epidemiology was that of vertical transmission, as in Huntington's Chorea.
7). The internal sensations of the patient may be startlingly reminiscent of those more ordinarily associated with sexual love. This is an extremely potent force in the brain, and it is not surprising that some viruses have evolved to exploit it. St. Teresa of Avila's famously orgasmic vision is too notorious to need quoting again. More seriously, and on a less crudely sensual plane, the philosopher Anthony Kenny provides moving testimony to the pure delight that awaits those that manage to believe in the mystery of transubstantiation. After describing his ordination as a Roman Catholic priest, empowered by laying on of hands to celebrate Mass, he goes on that he vividly recalls the exaltation of the first months during which I had the power to say Mass. Normally a slow and sluggish riser, I would leap early out of bed, fully awake and full of excitement at the thought of the momentous act I was privileged to perform. I rarely said the public Community Mass: most days I celebrated alone at a side altar with a junior member of the College to serve as acolyte and congregation. But that made no difference to the solemnity of the sacrifice or the validity of the consecration.It was touching the body of Christ, the closeness of the priest to Jesus, which most enthralled me. I would gaze on the Host after the words of consecration, soft-eyed like a lover looking into the eyes of his beloved... Those early days as a priest remain in my memory as days of fulfilment and tremulous happiness; something precious, and yet too fragile to last, like a romantic love-affair brought up short by the reality of an ill-assorted marriage. Dr. Kenny is affectingly believable that it felt to him, as a young priest, as though he was in love with the consecrated host. What a brilliantly successful virus! On the same page, incidentally, Kenny also shows us that the virus is transmitted contagiously --- if not literally then at least in some sense --- from the palm of the infecting bishop's hand through the top of the new priest's head:
Basically, he postulates that you can consider any cultural idea to be something analagous to genes called 'memes'. A meme can be anything, a catchy phrase, a way of dressing, etc. In this passage, he is describing the following things to look for to determine if someone is 'infected' with a viral meme, or a meme that spreads itself similair to a virus, and once infected, takes steps to keep itself there.
1) The patient typically finds himself impelled by some deep, inner conviction that something is true, or right, or virtuous: a conviction that doesn't seem to owe anything to evidence or reason, but which, nevertheless, he feels as totally compelling and convincing. We doctors refer to such a belief as 'faith'.
2) Patients typically make a positive virtue of faith's being strong and unshakeable, in spite of not being based on evidence. Indeed, they may feel that the less evidence there is, the more virtuous the belief (see below). This paradoxical idea that lack of evidence is a positive virtue where faith is concerned has something of the quality of a program that is self-sustaining, because it is self-referential. Once the preposition is believed, it automatically undermines opposition to itself. The "lack of evidence is a virtue' idea would be an admireable sidekick, ganging up with faith itself in a clique of mutually supportive viral programs.
3) A related symptom, which a faith-sufferer may also present, is the conviction that 'mystery', per se, is a good thing. It is not a virtue to solve mysteries. Rather we should enjoy them, even revel in their insolubility.
4). The sufferer may find himself behaving intolerantly towards vectors of rival faiths, in extreme cases even killing them or advocating their deaths. He may be similarly violent in his disposition towards apostates (people who once held the faith but have renounced it); or towards heretics (people who espouse a different --- often, perhaps significantly, only very slightly different --- version of the faith). He may also feel hostile towards other modes of thought that are potentially inimical to his faith, such as the method of scientific reason which may function rather like a piece of anti-viral software.
5). The patient may notice that the particular convictions that he holds, while having nothing to do with evidence, do seem to owe a great deal to epidemiology. Why, he may wonder, do I hold this set of convictions rather than that set? Is it because I surveyed all the world's faiths and chose the one whose claims seemed most convincing? Almost certainly not. If you have a faith, it is statistically overwhelmingly likely that it is the same faith as your parents and grandparents had. No doubt soaring cathedrals, stirring music, moving stories and parables, help a bit. But by far the most important variable determining your religion is the accident of birth. The convictions that you so passionately believe would have been a completely different, and largely contradictory, set of convictions, if only you had happened to be born in a different place.
6). If the patient is one of the rare exceptions who follows a different religion from his parents, the explanation may still be epidemiological. To be sure, it is possible that he dispassionately surveyed the world's faiths and chose the most convincing one. But it is statistically more probable that he has been exposed to a particularly potent infective agent --- a John Wesley, a Jim Jones or a St. Paul. Here we are talking about horizontal transmission, as in measles. Before, the epidemiology was that of vertical transmission, as in Huntington's Chorea.
7). The internal sensations of the patient may be startlingly reminiscent of those more ordinarily associated with sexual love. This is an extremely potent force in the brain, and it is not surprising that some viruses have evolved to exploit it. St. Teresa of Avila's famously orgasmic vision is too notorious to need quoting again. More seriously, and on a less crudely sensual plane, the philosopher Anthony Kenny provides moving testimony to the pure delight that awaits those that manage to believe in the mystery of transubstantiation. After describing his ordination as a Roman Catholic priest, empowered by laying on of hands to celebrate Mass, he goes on that he vividly recalls the exaltation of the first months during which I had the power to say Mass. Normally a slow and sluggish riser, I would leap early out of bed, fully awake and full of excitement at the thought of the momentous act I was privileged to perform. I rarely said the public Community Mass: most days I celebrated alone at a side altar with a junior member of the College to serve as acolyte and congregation. But that made no difference to the solemnity of the sacrifice or the validity of the consecration.It was touching the body of Christ, the closeness of the priest to Jesus, which most enthralled me. I would gaze on the Host after the words of consecration, soft-eyed like a lover looking into the eyes of his beloved... Those early days as a priest remain in my memory as days of fulfilment and tremulous happiness; something precious, and yet too fragile to last, like a romantic love-affair brought up short by the reality of an ill-assorted marriage. Dr. Kenny is affectingly believable that it felt to him, as a young priest, as though he was in love with the consecrated host. What a brilliantly successful virus! On the same page, incidentally, Kenny also shows us that the virus is transmitted contagiously --- if not literally then at least in some sense --- from the palm of the infecting bishop's hand through the top of the new priest's head:
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)