Is It A Good Life?

The Four Purposes Of Human Life

Almost all of us have heard of the question - "What is the meaning of life?" - We are supposed to contemplate this when we are 'starting to live consciously' and have a good stretch of life to look forward to.
Another closely related question is the same in essence but one which we would typically ask at the end of our life or when someone's life has ended - "Was it a good fulfilling life?" or "Was This Life Worth It?"

According to a philosophy, there are the following four areas in which we are each supposed to define our specific goals or aspirations. Achieving an acceptable measure of success in each of the four areas supposedly leads one to feel 'It was worth it!' at the end of life.

1) Justice/Doing The Right Thing: This has to do with a built-in knowledge that almost all are born with - a sense of fairness, knowing right from wrong and respecting other's rights.

2) Material wealth: Earning enough to provide for ourselves, our loved ones and even others materially - food, shelter, clothing and even comforts.

3) Love, Desire, Affection: A deep attachment or attraction to others, a need to express love towards others and achieve an acknowledgement, acceptance or love in return.

4) Liberation, Detachment and thought of the afterlife: A realisation of the fleeting nature of material wealth, relationships in human bodies and thoughts of a bigger picture beyond one's own lifetime in this body.

Here are the four areas, explained a little more in detail.

1) Historically, "Doing the Right Thing" meant not stealing, being honest and sincere, adhering to the truth, sometimes even fudging the truth, to achieve a greater common good in the face of evil. It was considered one of the supreme acts worthy of praise. That is why, old Royals - Kings and Rulers were called the ones chosen to ensure that Justice was done. They supposedly upheld this 'divine law'. They were supposed to be respected for that, not for assuming 'Divine Rights'. The law was supposed to be supreme. In some places, the term for 'doing the right thing' was mis-translated to mean 'perform acts of charity'. However, that is not the intention in this context. There was a simple but incredibly deep, powerful definition of how to know what is 'Doing The Right Thing' or being Just and fair ?. It was this one simple sentence - "Do not disturb others" - as the ultimate expression of this principle. The word 'disturb' covers just about every human crime and violence from the mildest annoyance to the most foul and horrible harm or 'crime against humanity'.

2) Earning material wealth was considered a worthy and necessary pursuit for all, to provide for themselves or their families or even for others. It is essential for surivival and everyone has an obligation to contribute. As long as the methods adopted to earn material wealth and essentials were honest, and one achieved wealth by 'doing the right thing', it was fair and good and for the benefit of all. This was not looked down upon. It was understood that various people would achieve different levels of material possessions and wealth by their varying efforts, contributions and chance of fate.

3) Desire, love, lust, affection, pleasure and attachment to others were also legitimate goals to pursue in life, as part of our pursuit of happiness (the words of the constitution of the USA rings the same note). Here again, the only requirement was to 'Do The Right Thing'. As long as it is done fairly, justly and without trampling on anyone else's rights and peace, it was fine.

4) The thought of liberation or even a cursory thought about the afterlife - even if one decides that none exists, is fine. But it is built-in, into almost everyone of us to sometime ask this question for ourselves. A certain knowledge of somethings about afterlife often helps us lead better lives while we are alive. There is no need to believe anything that is not rational, logical, truthful. Here, there is a small reminder of an indisputable fact, from which we each can draw our own conclusions - Change is the only constant and everlasting truth in the universe. 
Change implies creation of new forms even as old ones are destroyed. Each form also appears to last for a little while (whether a few nanoseconds, microseconds, hundreds or billions of years). So, we can have an idea about ourselves about life and afterlife from this basic fact. Often it leads to a more gracious acceptance of the inevitable and end of our lives in this human form. 

 Each of the three aspects - creation, destruction and fleeting nature of existence is a basic, everlasting, ultimate truth and principle. They are worthy of remembering, respect, understanding, and even reverence. Sometimes these are called the 'trinity'. Some have made up characters, even with human or animal forms out of these basic concepts. This is an area that we are supposed to work out for ourselves, even if we take input from others. We are not supposed to blindly follow or believe what anyone says. Liberation or salvation is a highly personal concept in this context and philosophy.

The philosophy suggests that we are all inherently created with a definite and certain levels of inherent aspirations in all these four areas. If we do well in achieving satisfaction in each of these areas, we feel our life is fulfilled and 'it was worth it' and we can leave this human body gracefully without too many regrets. Achievements in these four areas are measures by which we (should) supposedly judge the life of someone else. 

We can see that having achievements in one area and not the other can leave us feeling unfulfilled. We can also observe that as a society, the greatest respect and admiration goes to those who achieve the most in the first area of doing the right thing - it affects all of us. We recognise that everyone has a right to a private life of desire and pleasure. We expect everyone that can, to support themselves and others in society by being productive and contributing. 

The two questions that led us to this philosophy can be answered for each of us by addressing our goals in these four areas and achieving them to have a good, fulfilled life.


Copyright  (c) Kannan Narayanamurthy 2015
All rights reserved 

Grandfatherly Feelings

He sat reminiscing, reclining on the couch. It would the first birth anniversary of the little ones. There would be a huge party, friends and family would come, bring a lot of presents and shower them with love. They would be at the stage when they would appreciate things with colour, movement, sounds, enjoy playing with things, smiles, being carried up on the shoulder and make delighted sounds. They would be toddling around. They would compete over toys, one had to get two of anything and still they would want what the other had. They would throw up unexpected delights, memories and funny antics with seemingly limitless energy that only little children can come up with and delight the hearts of grown-ups who can watch them for hours and hours on end without loss of interest or excitement. Pictures and videos were always taken and shared aplenty in these days of easy photography.  Awake or asleep, they would steal the hearts, mind and interest of some special people – grandparents, even more than the parents who had to attend to so many other chores. Grandparents, while helping out when they can, had more time for fun. They can enjoy the grandkids in a way they could not even with their own children.

He remembered the little dolls, from the first days of their birth, when they were tiny, a little premature and exhibiting such natural charm and beauty while being blissfully unaware of it. He had watched their progress over the next months as they grew, weathering tough challenges and only increasing in cuteness, energy and interest in the world around every time he saw them. He remembered their energetic kicking of legs against his belly as he held them on his lap sitting on the couch. They would be strong kicks sometimes, and if not held right, would feel like they might push themselves out of his arms. It had been many years since he had held his own children like that and they brought wonderful memories flooding back. The way they fit snugly when he held them, their new baby smell, their angelic beauty when they slept, their demanding company, grasping his finger with their tiny, soft hands with surprisingly strong grip and sometimes sucking on them – memories came by and passed like a train arriving and leaving a platform.

They were not his biological grandchildren, but it never seemed to matter. They were the children of the child of the woman he was seeing then. He had a vision and dream of them as one family. Once he held the children in his arms, looked into their eyes and faces, heard their cries and seen their smiles it was not even an issue, nor was there a second thought. He had met them, seen them, held them or played with them only a few times and on certain occasions, less than he might have liked, but it was always with the feeling that they would be there in his life for the future. He now missed them. For a few moments, the feeling was intense. He had to let it flow and ebb. The mind slowly convinced the heart to let go. It had been many months since he had last seen them. He realised that he had not seen them for as long as the period that he had seen them since they were born.

Once you give your heart to a child, you can never take it back. It is all over in a flash and indeed love at first sight. He had dreams of their growing up, taking them for walks and treats and calling him ‘Naana’ (maternal grandfather). He was still in his early 50s, reasonably fit and people often mistook him to be in his 40s, he did not look a grandfather most of the time, except for his grey hair. It was the feeling of love and connection with the little ones that made him realise what it felt like to be a grandfather, not what he had heard or read. In some ways, it was like the feeling of being parent – he had never truly understood it until he actually felt the love for a child, at an earlier stage of life.

He had his own kids who were younger. It seemed like he was rewarded with grandchildren a bit ahead of when he had expected. He could not have been happier. With this feeling, he had started to think on the lines of making his relationship with the woman he was seeing into a permanent one – from a partner to a life-partner. He started making plans to propose and take the next steps forward.

Alas, as they say, there is many a slip between the cup and lip. Fate and human affairs of grownups are a lot more complex and unpredictable. As fate would have it, his relationship ended. Relationships between middle-aged adults, beyond their first marriages, can sometimes be over as quick as they begin. It was probably for the best in the long run.

The sadness came from the fact that he was now cut-off completely from  the little ones as with the rest of the family. While their adult parents took their stand and understandably supported the grandmother, the ‘not-quite-official-grandfather-yet’ had no place in their thoughts. No one cared to consider his feelings for the little ones. He sought no legal rights. Only he wished that people were thoughtful enough and gracious enough to let him still have a connection to the little ones who had stolen his heart. Adults often, in their own pain, forget the pain or implications for others. Such is the world and life.

He occasionally thought about the little ones and had to move on with a heavy heart. It seemed strange that the human heart seems heavier when there is some emptiness in it!

While it was not an ache that was easy to bear, there was however, a saving grace and blessing of fate that he was thankful for – the little ones were too young to remember him particularly. They would never even be aware that he was missing from their life. They would never suffer even a pang of missing him. He was grateful for that.

Copyright  (c) Kannan Narayanamurthy 2015
All rights reserved 

Cheating, Lying, Cunning and 'Being Clever/Smart' - Small Scale or Large Scale?

Disclaimer: This will probably be one of my most politically incorrect posts ever, if one goes by  the number and range of people who might be offended by or take offense at it. Please keep in  mind that even if one takes this seriously, it should be taken as just one person's purported  opinion. I am just taking my own personal, statistical observations and opinions and stretching  them a bit too. I can claim some fair degree of exposure to both economically underdeveloped and developed cultures and societies, having lived in both for a long time (about even). I am doing this to put something out there, that people normally do not speak about publicly, but think and act on  privately, as I have observed. 

So, you have been forewarned. Please don't flame/blame me for this. I KNOW and accept that not  everyone fits any stereotype and each person has to be treated individually as they are. Any  persons we refer to in this post is a conceptualised, statistical average person, who is fictional. We all might find something common that we share with this 'model' person and it is for us to judge ourselves as individuals, not for others to do so. This is just to get the reader  thinking about the issues and to respond with their views and opinions. Hope you all have some  fun even while looking at serious issues.


Every culture, society or country has, as an integral part of it, elements of cheating, being cunning, lying and trying to 'Be Clever/Smart'. These are things that are taught to its members, even children growing up. Almost individuals from anywhere, have a bit of these in them. Some these traits are purely from within and some are taught or encouraged by their society around them. Those that are  society's contributions are those that are actually applauded and encouraged in a subtle way -  often by using other words or descriptions to make them sound better or positive. Sometimes old  words that had negative connontations are changed over time to make them appear positive.

I will give you some examples along the way and make a summary of conclusions at the end.

Growing up, as a child in India, when my age was still in the single digits, I used to hear from  adults and grown-ups about what was right and wrong, examples how someone did well in life and  were admired. We would be encouraged to emulate them. Most examples were about people who were honest, struggled hard against poverty and adversity and still kept their personal integrity while working their way up. Anyone who did well materially, but through cheating, cunning or lying was looked down upon and condemned. The  generation of my parents grew up with even tougher challenges and poverty, from around the time of World War II and Indian independence. They were conditioned to unfairness built into the  system whether one was of a certain race or religion or caste during Imperial rule and during the  transition to a supposedly Independent nation, yet they were quite strict and rigid in their disapproval of cheating, lying or being cunning to exploit others.

Gradually, around my teens, as I traveled around the country into more developed parts, I  observed that there was a trend where parents would openly complain about 'others' getting ahead  by cheating, cunning, and lying. Some went to the point of asserting that their own children, or  those that they wished to 'succeed' in life, should also become 'Clever/Smart'. This was their  way of rephrasing some degree of Cheating, Lying or being Cunning. From tacit acceptance, if their child learned these on its own, it slowly evolved to active encouragement for those children who still persisted in being innocent and lagging behind. I often heard remarks like the following.

"That's what it takes these days!"

"Everyone is doing it, so to compete fairly, one has to do so."

"If you are not smart enough, you cannot succeed in life."


Once people got over a certain level of achievement or financial security, then they often went to  make amends 'spiritually' by donating to causes or their religious institutions. It became such a  common trend that by the time I was in my late 20s, corruption, lying, bribing, being devious to  succeed (particularly in business) was a 'virtual necessity' for most. It was very rare to find anyone who did not give bribes. The more 'honest' ones just gave but never took bribes.

It starts from something as simple as NOT crossing the road at the intersection or zebra  crossing but randomly anywhere they wish, then it goes on into cutting into lines, to cheating on exams, cutting corners in getting a driving license or water supply, or a train ticket or applying to get a job, a contract, getting elected. The scale and prevalence just grew phenomenally. As long as they 'succeeded' in getting what they want or getting rich, many looked at them with more envy than resentment.


The net result was that the quality of everything that was even reasonably good in life - from  the roads, air, water, electricity, education, medical care - went downhill. All became dirty, corrupt and earned an international disrepute. I heard or realised that India was not the only country going through  this phenomenon. From my exposure to people from other poor, underdeveloped or developing  nations, I saw that they were all going through similar stages.

The people that indulged in being cunning were usually satisfied once they reached a certain  level of comfort or status. Then they would turn their attention to cultivating an air of  goodness, spirituality or even holiness. Many would often be enraptured with the honesty of civil life in more developed countries that they visited or heard about. They would complain about the rottenness of their own country and its systems, often justifying their own dishonest actions as something they were forced to do for survival.

Now, coming to life in more economically developed countries, I see the situation is different. For a long time, their populations had grown used to a system of rule of law, a fair amount of personal honesty and integrity in all the common things in life - whether crossing the road at the right place, standing in line, passing exams in schools and universities, applying for a job, access to air, water, electricity, or a train ticket or even applying for a job. Often some of the very same people who would break the rules back home in their less developed countries, will follow the rules well when they are in a more advanced country, but not all of them. Many will still try to, by sheer conditioning, unless checked aggressively try to get an unfair edge in applying for jobs or work around rules rather easily, as a second nature. The natives of developed countries, on the average are savvy and know that being corrupt or cheating in petty day-to-day affairs will completely destroy their quality of life that they hold dear. This also the reason many flock to these countries. It is inbuilt in humans to seek an honest, everyday life.

The citizens of more economically developed countries are really usually conscientious about following rules in what one would term petty, personal, narrow areas of personal gain that are clearly visible. But it is another matter on issue that are significant  or large scale. On the average, they still accept institutionalised, 'legal' discrimination, segregation, cheating, lying and cunning on a grand scale, so long as it benefits their 'entire society as a whole' as opposed to benefitting just an individual on such matters as jobs, contracts or big 'deals'. 

They want people to feel good about themselves, as living and contributing to an honest, civil society in most everyday things (that without prejudice I term small scale) but also feel good about being dishonest on a large scale, by admiring their 'chutzpah' or 'enterprising' nature!

They are taught in a subtle way, in what areas it is OK, nay even admirable, to cheat, lie or be cunning and in what areas it is not. The media play a great part in it. That is why the people in more developed nations today rationalize big, large scale cheating, lying, cunning or dishonesty upon which their entire society may be founded or based. They tend to commit or support terrible human rights violations in some far away place so long as it benefits their entire society clearly. It is seen as a 'normal rational' way of thinking.
There is a saying  in the developed countries - if you want to dream, dream BIG!


Conclusions:

So, even now I think that overall, on the average, people from less developed countries or  developing countries tend to readily cheat, lie, be cunning or try to be clever over things that  are petty, narrow, selfish personal gain. 

The rule in developed countries seems to be this - so long as your cheating, lying, being cunning or devious benefits a lot of people, the company or government or the entire country or society, it is considered 'Clever/Smart'. 


So, what do YOU  think? What have YOU observed?

Note: Try to refrain from personal attacks in your responses. Keep in mind, these are broad brush strokes over an AVERAGE and that too, in ONE person's opinion (mine). I may well be wrong according to others and I might not even reflect the average opinion of people with my background.



Copyright  (c) Kannan Narayanamurthy 2015
All rights reserved 

Snatching Defeat From The Jaws Of Victory

It is well known around the world that a lot of bright, talented, hardworking and enterprising people flock to the developed, western countries from the developing countries. They may start out chasing opportunities, but then often decide to settle down and put roots in their new home. There is a sound legal process to admit and indeed welcome many of them for the mutual benefit of the migrants and their new homeland. While this phenomenon is due to many factors, part of the reasons for this migration is simply this - They do somethings right in the West. It is certainly a victory of many features of civil life in the developed Western countries. While not perfect, the following are mostly true selling points of life in the West - rule of law, honesty in civil transactions, opportunities for personal and economic growth and a certain sense of personal freedom in private lives. Of course, one can see now a growing trend of Westerners seeking opportunities in developing countries these days and it will likely grow. 

In the West, there are other features such as easier, reasonable basic access to cleaner air, water, food and affordable stuff and gadgets. While clean air and water are not freely available in all developing countries, many westerners still will seek opportunities for the short term, or even long term if the opportunities are sufficiently lucrative. If someone makes a lot of money, they can get personal access to these to some degree with bottled water, air-conditioners etc at some considerable expense.

Like most migrants in history, many will assimilate and become part of the native population and identify themselves as locals. By the second and third generation, their connections to the new homeland will tend to be stronger than to the lands of their parents or grandparents. This is the natural, normal course for most. Of course, there needs to be a feeling of mutual acceptance to make this happen. Mostly it does. This is a victory of sorts for the local culture, that does not have to be at the expense of the homeland left behind. 

In Australia, I have met many migrants from the UK, who have lived here more than 40-50 years and still identify themselves as NOT Australians. They have worked here, contributed to society, made a living, made fortunes, visit their homeland only rarely now. They have all kinds of differing opinion about the local and global politics, history or philosophy. Many are even citizens, but consider themselves British first and Aussies second. There is a certain mutual and often good natured, friendly banter, teasing and faked resentment between these 'Pommies' and 'True Blue Aussies'. Occasionally, there is not the good nature or friendliness. The Poms put down Australia, its culture (or lack of it) and compare it regularly to how things are/were back in the home country. Most Australians stand up for their country, give back a bit if pushed too far, but move on with confidence, knowing that Poms remain because overall the positives overcome the negatives.

The children and grandchildren of these Pommies that were born or brought up here mostly tend to identify themselves as Australians. But there is never a question or issue of whether the 'Poms' belong here in Australia or not. They are absolutely accepted as part of the Australian landscape. This is a victory for the Australian culture.

In my experience and opinion, people whose personal experiences are positive overall, tend to become more and more loyal and avid supporters of their new homeland. It is a bit like religion, the new converts tend to be more earnest and passionate in their convictions or beliefs. They tend to be blind to the failings or less critical of it - sometimes to the point where they do not seek it better it, but just appear 'properly thankful and grateful'.

However some migrants or their next generation, encounter intolerance, racial abuse or vilification - more than what they can bear or more than the positive, accepting people who reflect the best of the local culture. Some of them can become pessimistic, over critical and perhaps 'radicalized' as the say in the media. Some children of immigrants, by stroke of chance, encounter petty, bigoted, narrow-minded individuals in their daily life (social online forums are now increasingly part of someone's daily life) who are more resentful of the new comers, feed their ego or try to let out their jealousy or resentment by persistent expressions of hate, threats and intimidation. They are constantly threatened, or told to leave the country if they do not parrot views or opinions of the people who hate their presence in the first place. It becomes a struggle against those that try to keep them down psychologically. People that do not know how to deal with these - those who are struggling themselves to make a living in a new society or culture, but who themselves have a sense of pride, fairness or ego themselves often cannot simply digest the racial abuse can give up trying and develop a sense of deep resentment. 

This is very difficult to detect or eliminate in a relatively free society where the long term citizens (even if they were immigrants themselves a little while ago) are accepted with a wide range of views, opinions and even disagreeable views. Government, businesses and most reasonably civil, sensible people are all usually positive, helpful, kind and help newcomers fit in and make a permanent home. They will usually accept a migrant of different race with same differing political views or opinions as a 'native' with equal grace or tolerance. This is critical in helping new comers develop a true, deep sense of belonging and acceptance in a new land. Once they develop this it is hard to shake off. 

It is a small number of numbskulls, who undo all the good done by good policies of immigration and the good work of a majority in any society. All it takes is to respect and treat fairly a person with a different view point, but for some their own private satisfaction in stoking their ego is apparently more important.They will not tolerate the same opinions in a person of a different race or religion, that they will happily tolerate in someone of European origin. Sometimes they are not even really serious, but just 'joking' or 'having fun'!! But their targets may not see it or feel it that way. It is these unthinking people who often snatch defeat from the jaws of victory, in deeply antagonizing someone unfairly. Just a change in their attitude can make so much of a difference in the life of someone and their own country.

Do you see this phenomenon in your own country too?

Now, recently, Australia has a minister in charge of issues relating to immigrants, their assimilation and sometimes their radicalization or of their children from mainstream society. Even though it is not stated explicitly, a lot is made in the media about the 'different' culture or religions of the new migrants towards whom these measures are targeted. This is a sad commentary and a defeat of sorts for the best of Australian values that it has reached this state. However, this can be turned into a positive in the long run.

One hopes that the government and law enforcement will take this opportunity to work sensibly to address the real issues here. In doing so, they will have to deal with and counter those with extreme views in all forums and in society. This will need to become the norm - just as there is vigilance against terrorism, extreme or violent view points from outside the country, there will be a need to counter them from within as well. This will make Australia more secure and stronger from within. It will help develop loyal, happy and accepting people as citizens, even if they are from different cultures, races or religions.



Copyright  (c) Kannan Narayanamurthy 2015
All rights reserved 

The Four Steps Approach To Disagreements

Uniquely, in human affairs, when a difference of opinion, that we cannot live with, arises, it can lead to disagreement,conflict, clashes and even perhaps war. There is a philosophy that recommends the following four Steps be considered and adopted in such situations, starting from the earliest sign of disagreement over an issue. 

Step 0. The first question to ask and deeply explore is - Can one live with our differences without affecting each other? Sometimes this is possible. In which case one should try to simply go ahead without disturbing anyone or affecting anyone else's legitimate interests. But if we see that it is not possible to do so, then the following steps are recommended in the strict order presented. The four steps in order are Reasoning, Yielding, Discriminating and Fighting.

Step 1. Reasoning: 
Attempt to convince the other party of one's point of view using logical reasoning. Of course, when we go to convince others, we want them to listen to us, accept logic, reason, facts and accept the conclusions that they lead to, for the greater good, not of narrow selfish interests. To be fair, when we do this, we need to go with an open mind and be willing to be convinced by the other person's reasoning and logic and concede our position if that is the best thing to do. This requires both parties to keep in mind that it is not a personal win or loss. It should be a triumph of logic, reasoning and overall welfare. Resolution of the issue at this step, requires both parties to have a common agreement and values of what is really the greater good over and above illegitimate or narrow self-interest.

Note: Being insincere in reasoning, trying to be too clever, cunning, playing with words, specious reasoning, taking advantage of the other's ignorance or weaknesses in the argument does not count as 'reasoning' under this step. Only that which is undertaken with honest, sincere intentions counts. Principles of fairness and equal respect are critical, important and need to be accepted by both parties.


Step 2: Yield in goodwill, Compromise:
If a sincere attempt to reason fails, then try to yield some ground, try to compromise as much as you can to demonstrate goodwill towards the other party. One should not confuse yielding out of goodwill to yielding to superior logic or reasoning. If the other party yields similarly, acknowledge and appreciate the goodwill. Often it will be possible to come to an agreement if both parties yield a little. Sometimes it might just take just one party to yield some ground. Resolution of an issue at this second step indicates that both parties do not agree upon what constitutes the larger good, but have enough goodwill to accommodate each other and work things out. It is a less than perfect solution, but good enough to move on. This cannot be repeated too often with just one party yielding or compromising all the time. That will ultimately generate resentment and illwill.

When the situation is resolved by any of the two above steps, both can walk away feeling good about themselves and/or the other. These are the most positive and desirable ways to achieve resolution of a conflict of view points (not conflicts of self interests being presented as conflicts of view points).  The two above are the 'Nice' approaches, between two 'Nice, intelligent and wise parties'. When an issue cannot be resolved within the two steps described above it is evident that there is something 'Not Nice' with atleast one party. If the 'Not Niceness' is NOT from our side, we then step into the next two steps which are less desirable, but sometimes unavoidable for the greater good. They are as follows.

Step 3: Discriminate, separate:
Take apart the other party's support system, think carefully, discriminate between their good and bad points. Divide them and render them weaker. This is the equivalent of a cold war. This has the possibility of rendering the 'Not So Nice' opposition weak enough to either accept reason or a compromise. This step brings out all the cleverness, cunning and devious nature in humans. It need not all be evil. It is not only the evil side that has the exclusive right to such tactics. It is better that the good side also have an understanding of all the tactics used in step 3.

Step 4: Fight!!
When all else (the three steps described above) fails, one may be left with no other option but to fight. Then whoever prevails has their way. Might is right! One has to accept that and move on. Animals (other than humans) accept this with grace everyday. Sometimes the weaker but morally right side is defeated, they perish or go extinct. This is also the case with some human societies and cultures. History is replete with examples of these.

We are all mostly taught the first two steps. We are taught to be 'Nice' mostly. It is indeed the preferable way. But looking at the human realities, we need to understand all the steps.

Some observations and notes on the Four Steps:

The prescribed order of adopting the Four Steps is critical and as important as understanding the steps themselves.

Consider for example, why is it that 'Reasoning' is the first recommended step and not 'Yielding in Goodwill'?

That is because, reasoning is done with someone who one respects as an equal, with one who believes has the values and intellectual capacity to do so. One goes to reason with a willingness to yield to the superior reasoning from the other side. If the issue is sorted in this stage, there is no one who is belittled or made to feel taken advantage of. It is the best relationship one can have with other humans when we have a different, conflicting point of view to start with.

Yielding in goodwill indicates an allowance for someone one cannot reason with, as with a loveable child or someone who is immature. It is good for a little while, but not as a constant pattern. It still indicates the presence of a positive feeling of goodwill or love towards the other. It has to be valued and appreciated and reciprocated. Exploiting someone's yielding nature will ultimately lead to illwill and resentment. It also makes one party feel superior or inferior in accepting a compromise on fairness.

The true nature of an individual or a party to a disgreement can be usually judged in which approach or step they take as a default starting point. If they start with Step 1, they are treating you as an equal, with respect and fairness in mind. If they start at Step 2, they have goodwill towards you, but perhaps do not consider you very reasonable or mature. But both Steps 1 and 2, form the 'Good' and 'Nice' approaches.

Those that start from Step 3 or Step 4, are clearly 'Not Nice', but rather 'Nasty'.  It is not to say that nice and good people cannot become nasty. They can and do, but it is important to see where their starting point lies and what is their preferred, default approach.

Those that use Steps 3 and 4 as their preferred approach indicate an aversion to listen to reason, truth, goodwill or compromise. They are usually the known arrogant, aggressive, controlling types or those that are blindly aggressive, sometimes even to their own detriment.

One can judge not just individuals, but the times we live in, the society or culture by looking around and seeing which approach dominates as a starting point in resolving differences. 

There is an ancient philosophy that describes these four steps and suggests that mankind goes through phases where the dominant approach in the society itself, is one of the four steps described above. The best, golden period is when Step 1 dominates. Gradually, human societies decay into stages when Steps 3 and 4 dominate. This leads to large scale conflicts, destruction and devastation like world wars and then there is a reset to one of the other stages.

Looking over human history I have found this wisdom to be timeless! What do you think?


Copyright  (c) Kannan Narayanamurthy 2015
All rights reserved 

Why kids of Indian origin tend to do well in English spelling bees

It is indeed an ironic phenomenon we see - kids of Indian origin doing well in English spelling bees.
The strange thing about Indian language and scripts is that one could not have a spelling bee in any of them. They are truly phonetic and words are written exactly one way, and it is dictated by how it is pronounced. The moment someone pronounces a word, it can be written down in a unique way by the sounds. Most Indian languages and scripts are derived from the basic principles of Sanskrit. These are truly logical, brilliantly designed languages with features one would incorporate even if we sat down today to design the best universal language for all. It is impossible to have a spelling bee in Indian languages - once one knows the basic symbols and phonemes (which are a small set that one can learn in the earliest years of school) all words can be spelled perfectly right. For some few rare sounds that are not common to Indian languages, that are found in some foreign languages, there are very close approximations and they are very evident, since the meaning of the word itself indicates its foreign origin. For words in Indian languages themselves, the set of symbols is sufficient.

Perhaps, because English involves so much violation of common sense, logic and rules of phonetics, and it is so different from the common sense and logic found in Indian languages, the mind conditioned to Indian languages and logical thinking remembers these violations from early on, makes note of these countless exceptions, carefully remembers the non-intuitive spelling of English words. They also have to practice these violations of rules or exceptions from early on. The work ethic of learning in India also helps people memorise a virtual dictionary of English language, which was forced upon them as a national language. Indians have made the best of the situation thrust on them.

It is time for Indians and Chinese to view their own variations of English as their own native intellectual property and consider themselves the authority of their own versions of English! More power to them!

Perhaps it would be good idea to teach children in English speaking countries a more logical phonetic language early on so that their mind too can learn to understand the difference in spelling for English. Their English learning might improve by helping them see the contrast and difference between English and other languages. Such exposure in the early years will help them remember all the differences in English spelling much better.
The rules of true phonetic spelling in Indian languages was designed. The uniform consistent and predictable application of word termination syllables and their true phonetic representation (without scores of exceptions) in Indian languages was designed in the structure of the languages.  This makes learning easy and predictable. It also adds richness and elegance to poetry and true rhymes with perfect rhyming of words with the exact meaning when used in context. English is not designed at all in this sense. It is awkward in poetry and literature and basic learning and it shows.



Copyright  (c) Kannan Narayanamurthy 2015
All rights reserved