dam!

Probably because it was on my mind, or probably because it genuinely fits, but this post today from one of my favourite websites http://www.xkcd.com/ to mind works best to illustrate the point I was trying to make on yesterdays blog.

After posting yesterdays blog I was not so comfortable with it. Something inside of me kept rankling. What was it about that post? Is my postulate wrong? Was I in error? Are there too many outliers to this that I have missed out? The more I thought the more I seem convinced that balanced and erudite minds often tend to be open about their conclusions. Of course you have the instances of scientists going mad because no body listened to them and they kept repeating their thesis to disbelieving audiences. Probably that’s a caricature we have from the media creations we see. Most smart guys I know are secure about their knowledge and are keen to hear relevant arguments on their findings or knowledge.
It took some soul searching to figure that the reason I was uncomfortable is that I was pissed at the world for this. This was the stupid thing. How can I preach equanimity if I get angry at the world for not being balanced and for being one sided? Relax. People need not follow all your values, no matter how right they seem to you. Getting agitated is one thing; the fact that it affects itself is an issue. Will have to learn to let go. I will have to learn to keep quite. I can change knowledge, add to it, debate it but it’s probably too much of a task to change attitude. Will have to learn to pick fights.

One random stupid joke comes to mind.
While swimming, two fish hit a wall. The first fish told the other “Dam!”

shaped by attitude? nopes... shaped by knowledge

It’s impossible to deal with arrogance especially if it is coupled with ignorance. I hate getting into arguments. I would live not to. Over a period of time I have learnt that arguments are largely useless and there is no one side to reality or knowledge. There is always another side. Also if you listen to people about their experiences and knowledge you would always tend to gain from them. The problem starts when an opinion hits the conversation. This opinion is strong and driven by attitude as opposed to knowledge. The stronger the opinion the greater chance that it is driven by attitude and not knowledge. Knowledge driven opinion tends to be circumspect in its view, while attitude driven opinions will be accompanied by a large amount of table thumping and rhetoric.
I have seen truly intelligent men be very quiet and understated. They realise the duality of thought process. They are ready to listen to people, the other side of view and realise that every opinion can be countered. Many times there is much to learn from your opponent if only you don’t see them as such. Also the really smart ones are the one that choose not to comment on almost all things. They reserve their judgement on issues they knew little about, they are secure in their knowledge and ready to admit their ignorance.
I sometimes fail to see why so many people have such strong opinions with so little knowledge. I guess five years ago my knowledge was limited as well but my opinion was vast and vehement. Over the last five years the reverse has happened. I think our education might have something to do with it. In school ion a debate you have to take a string opposing stance on anything. You can’t take an opposing stand that says that the first team is not taking a moderate stance. Your stance has to be at the exact opposite. You can’t take centre line.
A centre balanced line that is unable to see black or white is what I have typically seen as the truth. People jump to criticize issues or stands but are unable to see the reason why it has come to fore. People like me who say, relax, see the reason why the act has been done without judging it are complete bores at beast and completely impractical or preachy at worst. We have been taught to take a stand, be the judge and take decisions as if all actions are being played before a court of law that is expected to pass verdict. No dude. Don’t pass verdict. It’s ok. The action happened. That’s all. The moment we pass a verdict too soon we don’t realise the silly errors we are making and are blindsided by the information we don’t have.
Take the recent example of a hotshot tennis star marrying a Pakistani cricket captain. It was alleged that the cricketer was already married to a lady in Hyderabad. One friend of mine explained that bullshit he married her. Look at her she is so fat and ugly. Haha. You have taken your decision not on the facts of the case. You have taken your decision purely on one instance. The lady in question is fat. I asked this lady friend of mine –if it was a hot chick who starred in b grade movies and has a slutty reputation then you would have not believed her at all, if it was a slim pretty girl from a simple family, you would have and you are suspicious of a fat girl. The facts of the case remain the same, yet you believe a case basis some really random peg.
It is so silly. She could have been really slim and then put on weight. Which media report you read said that she was fat from the start. Why is that he could have not fallen for a fat girl and then realised that he could do much better. You have no information but you have an opinion based on your attitude.
Another issue is the feminists that believe that they have it tough and the men have it easy. How can you so say? I truly genuinely believe that women have it tough. The ones who work manage home and office. They do very well. But that does mean I have addressed the issue of tough‘er’. I find the whole argument so brittle. Sure its bad but both sides face issues all the time.
It’s like someone once asked me if I dominate the relationship with me and my wife. Stupid ass question. Just because I seem more outgoing and vocal of the two. I left it to my wife to answer, who at first chuckled. I don’t think anyone can completely dominate anyone in a healthy relationship. It is so difficult so say that. Yesterday someone asked while talking about egos, that don’t men have stronger egos than women. Hah! Ego is not about men or women it’s about power and the situation you use it in. Everyone is equally prone and susceptible to ego, not men more than women. I could only think of one example to counter it. The mother in law and daughter in law fights. They are largely driven by ego and they are prevalent almost everywhere. Does that mean that women tend to have more egos? We take the biggest example in front of us and generalise the rule. So unfair, so driven by attitude as opposed to knowledge.
The criticism of my stand is that is that I have no stand and I will not be able to take a side. Uhhh. Ok. So? It doesn’t stop my decision making. I take my decision basis what I know best at the time simple. At least I am aware and actively receptive to the counter. It will help in changing stand as well. At the time of decision my stand is clear. Till then I don’t need to have a stand. Especially on so many issues that have little bearing on my life. Having mental paradigms stops us from seeing the whole picture and we are unable to see the game unfold. In the current cricket saga, I am not holding anyone guilty, hence I think I am better placed to see the game unfold and the moves being made. This is making the show much more entertaining or enriching. Sit behind, grab a mocha gande and sip it slowly. The world passing by is pretty interesting only if we care to see it unfold.
It is not easy and by all means its not that I can maintain this stand of equanimity at all times. But I try and I keep my senses open. I actively seek fault in my argument and thinking. This helps me learn and improve. Its helps me conquer ego and arrogance. It’s a slow burn. It will take time. Those who know me from before will not believe this blog of mine. I was a twerp, an arrogant one at that. Working with my God Dharen Chadha for about a year has changed me in many ways. His unrivalled knowledge with his willingness to learn more and listen to noises around him while withholding opinion on things outside his knowledge has changed me as a person. My wife many times asks why I don’t call him and keep in touch with him. I don’t know. You keep in touch with God by talking to him. He need not talk back to you. His picture is always burned in my memory. I just can’t get myself to talk to him. I feel so low and insignificant. How can I talk to him? I just can’t.
Thanks to him I started reading, started listening started to understand the value of being moderate. I am not a patch on him, but I am trying as best as I can. So far it has changed me in many ways possible. I hope it is for the better. I sure hope it lasts.

open up

While doing some general researching I came across this interesting study

A new kind of economic indicator
By Richard Florida
In 2007 Charlotta Mellander and I examined how various regional factors shape housing prices. We found that two factors combine to shape them. The first is pretty obvious: income. The wealthier the residents, the pricier the housing. The second and much larger factor is reflected by our Bohemian–Gay Index, which combines the concentration of artists, musicians, and designers with the concentration of gays and lesbians in a region. Regardless of which variables we applied, what version of the model we used, or which regions we looked at, the concentration of bohemians and gays consistently had a staggering impact on housing values.
We found that the presence of these populations had direct effects on housing values as well as other locational variables (like income and human capital), making these places more attractive to other populations and demographics. In other words, the presence of these groups not only made housing values rise, it made incomes rise as well.
Why would this be? Our theory is that bohemian and gay populations capitalize on two distinct factors of high-value housing. The first is an aesthetic–amenity premium. Artists and bohemians not only produce amenities but are attracted to places that have them. As selective buyers with eyes for amenity, authenticity, and aesthetics, they tend to concentrate in places where these things abound. The second is a tolerance or open-culture premium. Regions with large bohemian and gay populations possess low cultural barriers to entry, allowing them to attract talent and human capital across racial, ethnic, and other lines. Artistic and gay populations also cluster in communities that value open-mindedness and self-expression.
And their status as historically marginalized groups means that artistic and gay populations tend to be highly self-reliant and receptive to newcomers. They’ve had to build networks from scratch, mobilize resources independently, and create their own organizations and companies.
For all of these reasons, regions where artists and gays have migrated and settled are more likely than others to place high premiums on innovation, entrepreneurship, and new-company formation. It’s not that gays and bohemians drive up housing simply by paying more; their effect on housing prices is far less direct. Bohemian and gay residents drive up housing value because they make areas that were already ripe for growth even more desirable, and to a greater number of people.

This sidebar is excerpted from Florida’s recent book Who’s Your City? How the Creative Economy Is Making Where You Live the Most Important Decision of Your Life.
Source http://whatmatters.mckinseydigital.com/innovation/a-new-kind-of-economic-indicator

-------
They are right. Open cultures and communities would always do better than closed ones. This would reflect in all sorts of economic indicators. It seems to be empirical proof of the point I have been trying to make. Openness is a must in our mindsets. Even for selfish reasons: Regions with large bohemian and gay populations possess low cultural barriers to entry, allowing them to attract talent and human capital across racial, ethnic, and other lines.
The US was built by a steady stream of enterprising immigrants who fueled its bio-diverse populace and allowed to attract some of the best brains in the business. For rock solid proof we might do well to research the Manhattan Project or even see the mix in the Silicon Valley. Openness begets openness. What you want in life? To be surrounded by narrow minded backward looking bigots that seek to protect the gene pool as if it were nectar or be surrounded by open forward looking people who are able to break conventions, ask why not and challenge not only themselves but those around them. Do you get better by gazing at your navel or by looking and learning from those around you? Open up. Be ready to accept new ideas, cultures, habits, technology and quirks. I am amazed by the response of the world and those around me at times. Why would they so want to hold on to status quo? I think they might be pressured into giving a response and that’s why they might be using the safe route and stonewalling anything new. I normally use the words ‘I don’t know; guess it works for some’. Not all new is good, the same way not all new is bad. It’s better to buy time, research, understand consequences and then have an opinion. Till then it’s better to admit ignorance.
Now that’s ironic. A lot of blog posts of mine are highly opinionated. Take the one before last. I had an opinion on a life décor, of all things a bloody lift! How does that really matter?
The disclaimer is thus. I really don’t have as strong an opinion as might be reflected in the blog. But a exaggerated pot shot at something odd does make for good copy. Forgive me.