Anonymous Notes

The terms civilization and culture together bring out the need for approval of individual actions from a group of peers. This when left to develop enough leads to a moral code. Which in essence is the opposite of barbarianism/animalistic tendencies.

So here we are with a moral codes which extend from ethics to conscience and consequentialism to guilt. This gives us a egotistical high ground from which to look down upon the rest of the universe. Once we finds ourselves on this imaginary pedestal there is nowhere to go but down. Let me elaborate.

In work life or in personal matters we take the moral code to be universally applicable but this will conflict with sel-interest and desirable outcomes. At this point we are left with an option to loosen the moral code (bend so to say) or forgo personal gain. As can be noted from the quote

Let he/she who is without any flaws or sins ‘cast the first stone

All of us have made these compromises at various points in time. But this code is usually so much a part of our existence that life without appears to be an impossible commodity. But then again moral codes are flexible (after all they can be bent ) but it’s like segments of a rubber band. If you pull on one side the other will tighten and resist more. Or as Newton put it once. For every action there is an equal and opposite reaction, Well in this case opposite but not really equal. I do not mean to say that we always have a looser moral code as we progress through life. But it allows modification within limits. Of course socio-economic conditions play a major role but, Individuals do have a level of control over it.

For those of you who read this far hoping I’d get to the point. Well there isn’t any just an observation, at best astute , at worst a foregone conclusion.

Festival season is hunting ground for 20 something singles (not a necessarily criteria) around the world. I was out and about with a mixed group of friends in the wilderness previously known to us all as ‘Durga Pooja’ when I heard the phrase.

Whatever happened to all the good looking warm men?

Obviously recounted by a female peer of mine. It got me to thinking about desired traits in human matchmaking. Most Indians have at some time or the other glanced at a matrimonial classified (same goes for matchmaking services/websites elsewhere) and the ridiculous pursuit of various ‘virtues’. The way I see it people are always looking at grass on the other side that’s not really there at all. In other words there is no such thing as a perfect match. I concede that the good parts may outweigh the bad in many cases, but the dark underbelly of a relationship is never for the public eye to see.

Getting back to the point in contention where did they all go?

• They got married (that would still not explain disappearance)
• They aged horribly into their late 20s and hence fail on the first count
• They lost vitality and enthusiasm as they aged and hence fail on the second count

Beauty is a commodity distributed evenly enough so I’ll wash over that part. I’d like to think that the second adjective in discussion is due to changing/changed perspectives.

When I was in school there was never a dearth of people to meet and most had been on the same beaten path as me for most of their lives. This would include similarities in interest and sensibilities of acceptable human behaviour. As I moved into my mid 20s I saw that there are many other kind of people who do not match the traditional definition of ‘warm’ that I grew up with but each and every single one has a set of moral and egotistical peculiarities. At the end of the day every human requires justification to self for actions taken. A select few do wallow in self-pity and playing the underdog for most of their lives, but as for the rest of us, we have it ingrained to behave in a certain way. This makes people wary of going outside the inner circle of people since outsiders do not play by the same rules.

Polygamy(either sex) is not unheard of but unacceptable in a prospective match by my moral make-up. Similarly there would be other things (can’t think of one right now) that I may consider perfectly normal and may not be acceptable by others. The most important thing here is an understanding that the other person is different but not necessarily immoral by their rules. I notice people making their circles smaller and smaller in the absence of this understanding.  For example: If a person got a make-over(lifestyle wise) that does not make them a bad person. On the contrary it makes them proactive in expanding their circle. But a lifestyle change also means a new set of friends and new interests. Old acquaintances often view this as betrayal and make their circles unnecessarily smaller.

Where are the Good looking warm men(and women)? They are as present as they always were. It’s the way you look at the world that makes them visible.

Intellect is defined as the capacity to learn. yet what we see most in our daily lives is the hedonism to our own ego’s.

When talking to another person our first reaction is to prove our intellectual superiority. Daily conversations are driven by random political, economic and scientific talk about which the spokesmen have little or no clue about. Their depth of knowledge on the issue can only be measured by the height of the Marinas Trench. See there we go again. Exhibitionism to the extent where its deplorable. The rules of society horde the ones with similar kind of preset notions and ideas together and hence increase the ignorance of each of these pools.

The only way in which both parties in a pseudo intellectual conversation can find closure is if they are equal and opposite in their ignorance of the subject matter Or if they have not found any common ground on which both have equally small bits of information. In the first case all is well each takes the other to be a ‘worthy adversary and the 2 might further their social acquaintence with further displays of pseudo intellectual conversations. In the other case they may both go their separate ways and have more pseudo intellectual conversation with other people on how the first conversant was completely ignorant on the subject.

But more likely than the above is that the 2 people in question will arrive at a point where 1 person will shiningly display their ignorance and convince the person in front of them that they are ignoramus. This serves nothing at all but to shatter ego’s and self confidence of people. And to boost the ego temporarily of those who see the battle as won. But a ego built on such ruins is but a building with a weak foundation.

enough blabber for now. I’d better get back to work

A very good gal friend of mine asked me an open ended frank question about an acquaintance of hers. The question was around how the male psyche works. So, when a guy stares blankly into a girls eyes in the middle of some important conversation (and hence misses the point). What is the guy staring at? Especially when from the perspective of the lady in question the mutual relationship is at a completely platonic level.

I looked back and dug deep and came up with the lame answer that the guy has just watched too many modern day romantic comedies where a meaningful stare at the right moment is all that is needed to turn the situation around in favor of cupid. My friend would not take the explanation. Which in turn gave me a great insight that both the male and female of the species would rather believe what they want to than what the facts may present.

Let me explain. The girl knows it is a platonic relationship and thus passes off the guy’s stares as idiosyncrasies that are inexplicable. The guy knows it’s a platonic relationship but harbors glorified ideas that never bear fruit.

The battle of the sexes has never been a strong hold of mine but it seems that it definitely isn’t any one else’s either.

I have made previous blog entries about happiness on this blog but had not posted it here but it was on my older blog here.

Anyway I saw 2 groups of people at a local mall the other day and the point in discussion was if you were to choose a person from 2 groups
1. pseudo rich and pretentious
2. rich and pretentious
who would you rather pick to pursue as a romantic interest. My personal experience has been that neither group would do you any good but that it”s easier to open a window to the former rather than the latter. This brought me to the realisation that pretention is something which is in fact ingrained in most member of our society and thus we are all equipped at some level to handle it in our own different way. The trick is to not realize that in fact you are what you”d rather be.