I dare do all that may become a man;
Who dares do more is none
--Macbeth, William Shakespeare
Thursday, October 18, 2007
In defiance of economics
Law of Diminishing Marginal Utility.
Its a law of economics which attempts to explain the utility derived from consuming a product. This law states that for every additional unit of product consumed, the utility derived from the act of consuming it keeps reducing. Ultimately, if the consumption continues, it will lead to negative utility i.e. dis-utility.
Simple example, a person is dying of thirst. The first glass of water that he drinks will provide him with the highest amount of satisfaction or utility. The second glass, while still important, will be of lesser signifance as compared to the first and will bring him lesser satisfaction. If he continues to keep drinking water, ultimately he will puke which is what I meant by dis-utility.
This is what everybody knows, reads and has been propogated as conventional wisdom. This is how it looks from outside in.
Now, lets look at this from inside out.
An inherent assumption in this law is, there is always some satisfaction to be derived from performing an act and this satisfaction reduces with every additional performance. If an act does not provide any satisfaction, why would someone perform that act.
Except, a person has multiple needs which needs to be satisfied. What if performing an act satisfies one need but blatantly ignores another need ?? For example, a man wants to work in order to make money and he wants to enjoy his work. He finds two jobs, one which pays extremely well but the work absolutely sucks and the other which pays peanuts but the work is absolutely amazing.
What happens now ?? People, depending on individual preference, will take up one of the two jobs. This is not the best of examples for the discussion at hand, but still I'll try and explain as best as I can. The problem with this example is, the guy who picks the job which pays better is serving a recurring need. The need for money is completely and absolutely inelastic. No matter what else changes, there will always be a need for money which will absolutely need to be satisfied.
So he hates his job, but does it anyway because he needs the money. Doing something inspite of not liking it is not a great feeling. The dissatisfaction from this compulsion keeps mounting with every passing day and ultimately one fine day it will surpass the satisfaction that is derived from the money he is making. There is some truth in the "Law of Diminishing Marginal Utility". After all, it is empirically proven.
When that day comes, what do you think will happen ? One of three things, I say. One, he quits and moves to another job which he likes better but pays a lot lower. Two, he puts up with the frustration, takes is out on his family & friends and continues with the job. Three, he finds another job which he doesnt hate as much, but at the same time doesnt pay that much lower. One of his needs is either ignored or both his needs are compromised.
This is a simple example with just two needs. Extrapolate to a real life situation which has a zillion needs cropping up from every nook and corner. How can anyone possibly handle this situation ? There will always be some amount of dissatisfaction. There will always be some amount of depression. There will always be some amount of hate.
Pareto's law applies. 80% of happiness comes from 20% of activities.
Of course, every rule has exceptions. There will be people who only do what they love and with no compromise.
We all live in the hope of becoming part of that exception.
An exception where 100% of satisfaction comes from 100% of activities.
Its a law of economics which attempts to explain the utility derived from consuming a product. This law states that for every additional unit of product consumed, the utility derived from the act of consuming it keeps reducing. Ultimately, if the consumption continues, it will lead to negative utility i.e. dis-utility.
Simple example, a person is dying of thirst. The first glass of water that he drinks will provide him with the highest amount of satisfaction or utility. The second glass, while still important, will be of lesser signifance as compared to the first and will bring him lesser satisfaction. If he continues to keep drinking water, ultimately he will puke which is what I meant by dis-utility.
This is what everybody knows, reads and has been propogated as conventional wisdom. This is how it looks from outside in.
Now, lets look at this from inside out.
An inherent assumption in this law is, there is always some satisfaction to be derived from performing an act and this satisfaction reduces with every additional performance. If an act does not provide any satisfaction, why would someone perform that act.
Except, a person has multiple needs which needs to be satisfied. What if performing an act satisfies one need but blatantly ignores another need ?? For example, a man wants to work in order to make money and he wants to enjoy his work. He finds two jobs, one which pays extremely well but the work absolutely sucks and the other which pays peanuts but the work is absolutely amazing.
What happens now ?? People, depending on individual preference, will take up one of the two jobs. This is not the best of examples for the discussion at hand, but still I'll try and explain as best as I can. The problem with this example is, the guy who picks the job which pays better is serving a recurring need. The need for money is completely and absolutely inelastic. No matter what else changes, there will always be a need for money which will absolutely need to be satisfied.
So he hates his job, but does it anyway because he needs the money. Doing something inspite of not liking it is not a great feeling. The dissatisfaction from this compulsion keeps mounting with every passing day and ultimately one fine day it will surpass the satisfaction that is derived from the money he is making. There is some truth in the "Law of Diminishing Marginal Utility". After all, it is empirically proven.
When that day comes, what do you think will happen ? One of three things, I say. One, he quits and moves to another job which he likes better but pays a lot lower. Two, he puts up with the frustration, takes is out on his family & friends and continues with the job. Three, he finds another job which he doesnt hate as much, but at the same time doesnt pay that much lower. One of his needs is either ignored or both his needs are compromised.
This is a simple example with just two needs. Extrapolate to a real life situation which has a zillion needs cropping up from every nook and corner. How can anyone possibly handle this situation ? There will always be some amount of dissatisfaction. There will always be some amount of depression. There will always be some amount of hate.
Pareto's law applies. 80% of happiness comes from 20% of activities.
Of course, every rule has exceptions. There will be people who only do what they love and with no compromise.
We all live in the hope of becoming part of that exception.
An exception where 100% of satisfaction comes from 100% of activities.
Monday, October 15, 2007
Speech written for V by Wachowski Brothers
"This visage, no mere veneer of vanity, is it vestige of the vox populi, now vacant, vanished, as the once vital voice of the verisimilitude now venerates what they once vilified. However, this valorous visitation of a by-gone vexation, stands vivified, and has vowed to vangquish these venal and virulent vermin vanguarding vice and vouchsafing the violently vicious and voracious violation of volition.
The only verdict is vengeance; a vendetta, held as a votive, not in vain, for the value and veracity of such shall one day vindicate the vigilant and the virtuous. Verily, this vichyssoise of verbiage veers most verbose vis-a-vis an introduction, and so it is my very good honor to meet you and you may call me V."
The only verdict is vengeance; a vendetta, held as a votive, not in vain, for the value and veracity of such shall one day vindicate the vigilant and the virtuous. Verily, this vichyssoise of verbiage veers most verbose vis-a-vis an introduction, and so it is my very good honor to meet you and you may call me V."
Saturday, October 13, 2007
Some of my favourites, not in any order of preference
"Veni, Vidi, Vici" - Julius Ceasar. More popularly known as "I came, I saw, I conquered"
"It is better to keep your mouth closed and let people think you are fool than to open it and remove all doubt" - Mark Twain
"Always forgive your enemies, nothing annoys them as much" - Oscar Wilde
"Consistency is the last refuge of the unimaginative" - Oscar Wilde
"I am not young enough to know everything" - Oscar Wilde
"Patriotism is the virtue of the vicious" - Oscar Wilde
"Only the shallow know themselves" - Oscar Wilde. Got a soft corner for this one.
"The only way to get rid of a temptation is to yield to it" - Oscar Wilde
"Illusion is the first of all pleasures" - Oscar Wilde
"Never interrupt your enemy when he is making a mistake" - Napolean Bonaparte
"The price of greatness is responsibility" - Sir Winston Churchill
"It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it" - Aristotle. Also this one.
"Not everything that can be counted counts, and not everything that counts can be counted" - Albert Einstein
"It is better to keep your mouth closed and let people think you are fool than to open it and remove all doubt" - Mark Twain
"Always forgive your enemies, nothing annoys them as much" - Oscar Wilde
"Consistency is the last refuge of the unimaginative" - Oscar Wilde
"I am not young enough to know everything" - Oscar Wilde
"Patriotism is the virtue of the vicious" - Oscar Wilde
"Only the shallow know themselves" - Oscar Wilde. Got a soft corner for this one.
"The only way to get rid of a temptation is to yield to it" - Oscar Wilde
"Illusion is the first of all pleasures" - Oscar Wilde
"Never interrupt your enemy when he is making a mistake" - Napolean Bonaparte
"There is only step from the sublime to the ridiculous" - Napolean Bonaparte
"The price of greatness is responsibility" - Sir Winston Churchill
"It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it" - Aristotle. Also this one.
"Not everything that can be counted counts, and not everything that counts can be counted" - Albert Einstein
"Reality is merely an illusion, albeit a very persistent one" - Albert Einstein
Wonder what he really meant
"Only the dead have seen the end of war" - Plato
Not many would be really familiar with this quote, including me. Not until the release of Ridley Scott's Black Hawk Down in 2001. Interestingly there is no documented proof that this quote appears in any one of Plato's dialogues. Anyway, I'm not interested in verifying the authenticity of this attribution.
Irrespective of who might have originally come up with this quote, it is most certainly an interesting one.
There is always something to fight about. There is always a conflict of interest.
After all, "The purpose of all war is peace" - St. Augustine. Cant help but accept the innate truth in that quote.
Friday, October 5, 2007
I found the connection
Ockham's Razor
The most cited version of the Razor as found in Ockham's work is Plurality ought never be posed without necessity.
This is a principle attributed to the 14th century English logician and Franciscan friar, William of Ockham.
Paraphrasing, the razor sounds something like, "All things being equal, the simplest solution tends to be the right one". To be a little more practical, when there are multiple theories competing to explain a phenomenon the theory which contains the least number of assumptions should be chosen.
As I have mentioned in one of my previous posts (Yes or No, Right or Wrong), This is the Simplicity of True Genius at work. I didn't know what it was called then. I do now.
Try this if you want to know more.
The most cited version of the Razor as found in Ockham's work is Plurality ought never be posed without necessity.
This is a principle attributed to the 14th century English logician and Franciscan friar, William of Ockham.
Paraphrasing, the razor sounds something like, "All things being equal, the simplest solution tends to be the right one". To be a little more practical, when there are multiple theories competing to explain a phenomenon the theory which contains the least number of assumptions should be chosen.
As I have mentioned in one of my previous posts (Yes or No, Right or Wrong), This is the Simplicity of True Genius at work. I didn't know what it was called then. I do now.
Try this if you want to know more.
Tuesday, October 2, 2007
God is who I think he is
Before you read on, none of the below mentioned is an effect of me reading or watching "The DaVinci Code". I dont want Dan Brown to get ahead of himself. I personally feel that book is one of the most over rated pieces of fiction ever written.
The 14th century church divides sin into two types:
Seven deadly sins. To make it sound more melodramatic, Capital Vices or Cardinal Sins.
The 14th century church divides sin into two types:
- Venial - forgiven through the sacrament of Confession.
- Capital - meriting damnation.
Seven deadly sins. To make it sound more melodramatic, Capital Vices or Cardinal Sins.
- Lust (Latin, luxiria) - Depraved thought, unwholesome morality, desire for excitement, or need to be accepted or recognized by others
- Gluttony (Latin, gula) - Thoughtless waste of everything, overindulgence, misplaced sensuality, uncleanliness, and maliciously depriving others. Marked by refusal to share and unreasonable consumption of more than is necessary, especially in the case of food or water
- Greed (Latin, avaritia) - A strong desire to gain, especially in money or power. Disloyalty, deliberate betrayal, or treason, especially for personal gain or when compensated. Scavenging and hoarding of materials or objects.
- Sloth (Latin, acedia) - Apathy, idleness, and wastefulness of time. Laziness is particularly condemned because others must work harder to make up for it. Cowardice or irresponsibility. Abandomment.
- Wrath (Latin, ira) - Inappropriate [unrighteous] feelings of hatred and anger. Denial of the truth to others or self. Impatience with the law, or seeking revenge outside of justice. Unnecessary vigilanteism.
- Envy (Latin, invidia) - Grieving spite and resentment of material objects, accomplishments, or character traits of others, or wishing others to fail or come to harm.
- Pride (Latin, superbia) - Pride is known as the father of all sins. Pride is a desire to be more important or attractive to others, failing to give credit due to others, or excessive love of self.
Since i took the trouble of digging up the seven sins, i thought i might as well go the distance and dig up the seven virtues as well.
The Seven Virtues were derived from the Psychomachia ('Contest of the Soul'), an epic poem written by Aurelius Clemens Prudentius (c. 410) entailing the battle of good virtues and evil vices. The intense popularity of this work in the Middle Ages helped to spread the concept of Holy Virtue throughout Europe. Practicing these virtues is alleged to protect one against temptation from the Seven Deadly Sins, with each one having its counterpart.
The virtues ranked in ascending order of sanctity:
- Chastity (Latin, virtus) - opposes lust. Courage and boldness. Embracing of moral wholesomeness and achieving purity of thought through education and betterment.
- Abstinence (Latin, frenum) - opposes gluttony. Constant mindfulness of others and one's surroundings; practicing self-control, abstention, and moderation.
- Diligence (Latin, industria) - opposes sloth. A zealous and careful nature in one's actions and work. Decisive work ethic.
- Liberalty (Latin, liberalitas) - opposes greed. Generosity. Willingness to give. A nobility of thought or actions.
- Patience (Latin, patientia) - opposes wrath. Forebearance and endurance through moderation. Resolving conflicts peacefully, as opposed to resorting to violence.
- Kindness (Latin, humanitas) - opposes envy. Charity, compassion, friendship, and sympathy without prejudice.
- Humility (Latin, humilitas) - opposes pride. Modest behavior, selflessness, and the giving of respect.
Restraint is the keystone of the seven holy virtues. The other holy virtues are created through selfless pursuits:
Valour — Pursuit of Courage and Knowledge
Generosity — Pursuit of Will
Diligence — Pursuit of Ethics
Patience — Pursuit of Peace
Kindness — Pursuit of Charity
Humility — Pursuit of Modesty
Several of these virtues interlink, and various attempts at causal hierarchy have been made. For example, restraint is implied in patience, as well as humility and most of the others. Each sin is a particular way of applying heroic attributes.
Prudentius probably wrote about seven virtues only because St. Gregory came up with the seven sins. This is very much in keeping with the concept of duality.
Its amazing. The complex nature of the schema that was developed in cross referencing each of these attributes.
Why did i type all that ?? 'Cos i got curious. Where does the concept of God fit into any of the above mentioned ??
I believe God is a notion. God is the quintessential human being that our forefathers made out to be. God is an icon that we should aspire to be. Faith is a social norm. The constant propagation of faith has made it conventional wisdom. With time, the true purpose of its creation has been forgotten and has been replaced with malicious undertones.
One should not blindly have faith. One should understand and then believe.
I've decided .....
You try to keep in touch with friends. You mail every once in a while. You call once in a while. You message once in a while and what not. The friend replies every once in a while, but only replies. Meaning your friend always only reacts.
It can mean one of two things. One, you are an idiot wasting your precious time on people who dont deserve it. Two, your friend thinks he/she is morally superior and is immune from the responsibility that goes into maintaining a friendship. Quite possibly even both of these things.
Of course, everyone has priorities. In an environment which has more than one participant, like a friendship, it is important that the priorities of the parties involved be reasonably similar. A time lag is perfectly understandable. A lack of initiative is inexcusable.
You have to decide for yourself how to handle this. I have decided.
It can mean one of two things. One, you are an idiot wasting your precious time on people who dont deserve it. Two, your friend thinks he/she is morally superior and is immune from the responsibility that goes into maintaining a friendship. Quite possibly even both of these things.
Of course, everyone has priorities. In an environment which has more than one participant, like a friendship, it is important that the priorities of the parties involved be reasonably similar. A time lag is perfectly understandable. A lack of initiative is inexcusable.
You have to decide for yourself how to handle this. I have decided.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)