Adultery

Why do we have adultery? That question has been in my mind ever since I watched the movie 'silsilay'. In some ways, I feel it was a biased movie with a feminist basis as all the men in it were shown to be callous and irresponsible. However, in society both men and women turn to adultery very often. Is it a product of the arranged marriage process in some cases or does it depend on the nature of the individual? Is it there in human nature to want multiple partners or is monogamy also a standard thought process and instinct? I feel that after all the time and emotional effort that is invested in nurturing a relationship, turning away from it is leaving a tree which has been brought to fruit, to die. Every new relationship is like planting a new tree--it takes time to bear fruit. But again, it also depends on the wants of the individual--do people who go for several partners serch for something they cannot find or is it just a whim? Does commitment to one partner have to be an enforced process? That may be one of the reasons for the ritual of marriage--otherwise the world might have been filles with polygamous people, maybe!

Autumn at Natchez Trace

Small things can be so beautiful--this place is barely a 20-minute drive from where I live but look at it in the fall!

Development and the vicious cycle

I attended a talk for neuroscience today and I realized something--development is a process that can stop very easily if we get caught in the vicious cycle of routine and the so called ''necessary jobs". For instance, in several countries including my own, India, academics is given great significance and children are encouraged to devote themselves to it since their early years. Diversion in the form of other activities is not well looked upon because 'how can drawing help you to get a high rank in your entrance exams?' The result is a population of youth who have excelled in the academic system but have never had a chance to explore themselves or understand what they like or want. However, if you go by the Indian way of life, what chance is there to discover yourself? At the end of it all is it important to be well-rounded, to seek knowledge and to engage in a constant process of development? If people try to follow this then what about the necessities--because the fact stands that the mind can explore in peace only when the basic needs have been fulfilled. There are also people who do not let the system affect their own development (some scientists and artists)--how does their preoccupation transcend basic needs or does it? So ultimately it appears that the choice is to be made by the individual but what seems appealing is to be able to do both--fulfill the needs and still be in a progressive state. That's a matter of time management, perhaps.
The education system in other countries is also not amenable to development--you have to be in the system and tweak it to a reasonable degree to come out with a sense of true achievement. The American system, for instance, has a great deal to offer in the way of liberty, choice and opportunities. But when you combine it with politics, collaboration issues and subjugation from superiors, you wonder if this is really the liberal education system that you were looking forward to? It has a lot to offer just like the British-based system yet the advantages are shrouded in a veil of superficiality that the learner has to remove bit by bit.
There may be no perfect answer or exact solution to designing these cycles to achieve what can only be called idealistic aims but it is possible to be in the system and explore the opportunities within. Change can only be brought about by the people within and that too, by enough people within. Revolution has to be accompanied by volume in addition to concept. The point of trying to explore this situation, interestingly enough, comes back to the seminar. I was initially going there for the free food! I had planned to leave it early but I could not. It was fascinating and I realized how good it felt to be just learning after a long time just to learn, not to take exams or get grades, but just to know. Why are we not educated mostly like that? Would such a system work where students were actually encouraged to learn and not to channelize their education totally towards material aims? I am not saying that material aims should be abolished , I just feel that the stress should be towards a more broader goal which leads to a lasting development.

UNRELATED NOTES:
Key points of the seminar:
Multiple sclerosis
Infection c.pneumoniae
disease combination of demyelination and infection
Can infection cause demyelination?
Early cases of MS in Faroe islands after British troops left

To know me

A very good friend has told me:
"You are very good at analyzing other people but somehow analyzing yourself makes you disturbed"
It is true. Whenever I try to think of myself I feel as if there are tangled webs in my mind and that I'll get frustrated trying to untangle them. Why is self-analysis so hard for some people? On the other hand, if we go by philosophy, especially Eastern philosophy, then if we were to know ourselves completely we would have achieved complete self-realization which is the echelon of the knowledge pyramid. Why is it so? How are you supposed to go on in this world if you don't know most of the things about yourself? Why should there be any mystique involved?
Coming back to self-analysis, I want to find out my strengths and weaknesses, especially the latter. One of my greatest weaknesses, I know is the lack of self-conviction. How do I overcome that? How can you get over such a fundamental thing? I do not know the answers to these but I want to find out. I want to seek all available sources as I believe that in this regard, I do not have suffcient background to start with. So the process begins--books, people......in time I hope to get somewhere, at least a position where I can be comfortable with myself.