SOME RANDOM THOUGHTS

-

Is Pain Necessary to grow?

Yesterday, When I was at the Gym, one of the guys there, a junior to me, He is in 8th standard asked for my earphones for a while to listen to music while his set is going on. I gave it to him, but then he said something like, "You are not annoyed or angry because of this, right?" and I said, of course not. Why do you think so? But he did not listen and was in zone now. 

That got me thinking, at this age, he must have experienced many passive aggressive and many times openly aggressive people, to take such a light matter into consideration. He literally thought I would be angry at him for asking for earphones. You know a part of me thinks, no one in this world should ever experience cruelty and nobody deserves anger, toxicity, and violence. But again, I feel, how will they grow if they do not experience such hardships. 

The relationship between negative experiences and resilience and growth is well-established. But We casually say, we grow through negative circumstances. Ever thought that this might be the biggest coping mechanism employed by all of mankind. We grow through pain. How did we associate being numb to pain as growth? Why don't we see Numbness to pain as insensitivity? These are some questions which provide an alternative perspective towards progressiveness. 

What would have progressiveness meant? If there were no systemic and emotional hardships in people's lives? Too utopian I know, but still, I would like to engage you in a thought experiment. Suppose no human ever misbehaved with any other human. Suppose no system ever exploited man's labor. Then what would have been our definition of progressiveness. 

It would be softer skills, like, who knows singing? Who can play cricket? Who is kinder of us? Who understands complex emotions better? A world where fighting evil and negative experiences is not considered a special skill would be a place where arts would have thrived a lot. There, Science would have been like Arts only. 

I don't know. But I sometimes think. Is pain necessary to define progressiveness or growth? I leave you with this question. 

Is Hope a good thing? 

I mean, honestly, I do not know. Hope forms part of life instinct. But, I wonder, what the lowest margins of our society hope for? Do they hope at all? How do they live? Do their wishes limit to the next bread or the next work or the next ounce of alcohol? 

I see what rich people and people of middle classes hope. They have enough conditions to hope. I think Life instinct occurs in people who have a life. Hope can only occur in people who are living. marginalized people live like lifeless beings. They do not hope, they do not despair. 

I used to think Despair must be the saddest thing on Earth. But, Unfortunately, the saddest thing on earth is not been able to live such that the concept of hope and despair comes in your mind. 

A nice conversation

Yesterday, I met someone online. And talked about a variety of topics from Lacan to Psychoanalysis to Philosophy to many other things. Her name was Riddhima. She was a Political Science Graduate from University of Delhi. I never had witnessed someone with such a varied field of interest as me. She was into philosophy, political science and psychoanalysis as me. 

A really good conversation. Hope, I can talk to her more often. But I do not want her to think I am some creep. I just like our conversations. It is not very often that you meet a girl who is so well-versed in thoughts and ideas. 




Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

THANK YOU!

-
Image
Journalling will be continued and so will Foucault reading. But I just wanted to share something very personal with you.  You know, Once upon a time, there was a kid who came to a small town in Patratu, leaving his parents behind because their parents were struggling with their own lives and relationships, to a Bijli Board given D-type quarter (House), of two of his Grandparents, Dadaji and Dadima. For a whole year, he was confused where he has come since, he did not know Hindi, only English and Tamil, may be a little Kannada.  He entered a school which was super-Hindi school. For a lot of time, He was a confused kid who did not understand what is going on.  It took at least one year for him to learn basic Hindi to be able to comprehend what was going on? Of course, he was never a brilliant student. Forget brilliant, He was not even mediocre when he used to study in LKG in Bangalore.  Now, cut to, when I see me, this little kid, who has no idea whatsoever, to me, mem...
Read more

EVERYWHERE, EVERYTHING ALL AT ONCE

-
I wrote it after a sweet experience of is-ness after a Bhajan. Life, as it is, seems quite incomprehensible to us. Too much of everything. Too much of things, too much of people, too much of emotions and too much of reason. The best description of life, as it is, should be Everywhere, everything, all at once. Things exist, and from those things arise man which can comprehend itself and its is-ness.  Is-ness is a quality of the man. The capability to be able to acknowledge how existing feels like, it is a unique feature of the man. Stones cannot describe is-ness. From is-ness, a need for meaning arises. A dire need to formulate why we are able to comprehend so much.  From meanings, arise a need of articulation and from that arises language. Language worships meanings through words. Words create, in turn, their own symbolic or otherwise meanings. These meanings have a world of their own. One meaning that arose due to is-ness, another meaning which was the cause of language and t...
Read more

LET'S READ FOUCAULT: CHAPTER 1 (CHOMSKY-FOUCAULT DEBATE

-
Image
Michael Foucault, in my opinion, is the most influential thinker of 20th Century. No cap. I think the extent to which he has inspired literary theory, Philosophy, Sociology and Contemporary thought in general, it is immeasurable. I mean, everyone thinks he is not Foucauldian until I tell them what actually Foucauldian is, and then they realize that most of their actions in their lives is Post-modern and hence Foucauldian.  Here, in a couple of chapters, we will try to understand Foucault and his thoughts. In no way, it is meant to create an analysis of his work or trying to interpret his work. It is just an informative blog., the way I understand him, I would like to present so as to consolidate my knowledge. Next in the series might be Marx, Zizek, Lacan, whatever.  My beginning to understand him began when I watched this debate happened on a Dutch Television show, where these two Great thinkers, Noam Chomsky and Michael Foucault, appeared. At that time, and it was some 4-5 y...
Read more