There were four schools (Hairesis) of Philosophy in ancient Greco-Roman civilization, The Academy of Plato, Lyceum of Aristotle, The Garden of Epicurus and Stoa (Porch) of Zeno (Zeno of Citium). These schools were originated in same Hellenistic civilization but from different Philosophers. Those of us who are not so young know that the Communists and Capitalists were battling, competing and refuting each other very viciously though these both politico-economic ideologies were born mostly in Britain (Though Karl Marx was educated in Germany –University of Bonn and University of Berlin- but he spent from 1843 till his death -1883- in London and used British museum as resource to develop and support his “theories of surplus value”…. Similarly, although Capitalism has not very known origins but father of Capitalism, Adam Smith (known for his famous book, “An Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations” was a Scottish Political economist and Philosopher who was educated in University of Glasgow and University of London… so we can say that both Capitalism and Communism were largely born in Britain). If you do know that how communists and capitalists were battling each other very bitterly then you have to just extend the same level of bitterness to the two schools of Philosophy in ancient Greco-Roman Civilization, Stoicism and Epicureanism. In fact all four schools of Philosophy were battling each other but these two have well recorded rivalries. Coming back to our modern time people who reads academic papers sometimes wonder, why academicians battle to refute each other so viciously? Or for those who do not read academic papers but watch news may think, why Sunnis and Shiites are battling so bitterly and murderously despite both claim to be Muslim and in principles have no differences? Or even closer, sometimes people wonder, why siblings compete so bitterly with each other (Though not all ;)…
The first reason that might come in our mind may be commonality. Because those Philosophical schools, ideologies, religious sects, siblings, colleagues are so much in common that they have very small things or very little things to fight over and it would only make sense if they fight very aggressively, very viciously or murderously to make those battles look important.
Well, Dan Ariely (who is famous for his bestselling book, “Predictably irrational” …This website allows to download it for free, if you are interesting to read it, http://search-ebooks.eu/p/predictably-irrational-pdf... ) has an interesting explanation for it (though he is not talking directly on the same topic),
He says that people who are very similar with each other affect drastically the image or position of each other by influencing on others’ judgments and decisions. This is really interesting and somewhat counterintuitive. For example, if two persons or things have all in similar then a small difference though negligible but highlighted, will influences the decisions drastically. In other words, people who are very different try to project their commonalities while people who are similar try to project their differences. Following is Ariely TED talk. If you watch it till end, I am sure you will be amused…
Tuesday, December 27, 2011
Sunday, December 25, 2011
Having a second culture
It would be interesting to compare the Project of Hellenization (as a culture of logic) to globalization as secondary culture (which has pushed logic in culture become mostly counterintuitive)… To me here is, how this comparison goes,
Aristotle is known as the father of logic and it is not uncommon that commonly the name of Aristotle comes immediately in talks when one talks about the logic. Aristotle was the pupil of Plato whose biggest idea was that of “Philosopher King”. Aristotle became Philosopher but not King however he tutored a King, Alexander the great. So logically he was a big influence on this King who wanted to Hellenize the ancient world. In a way he wanted to open up the world for Philosopher kings through Hellenization. Though Greeks were worshiping many Gods and Goddesses but Greek societies were structured in a way in which Philosophy had the biggest influence, of course indirectly. We can compare the influence of Philosophy in ancient Greece to that of corporations in our time on cultures. If today we look back we see only relics of Hellenization in conquered areas of Alexander. At least people of conquered areas could have preserved Hellenic culture as their second-culture.
Why Hellenization was not adapted as second culture? Was it because Ruling period of Alexander was short or was it because the communication means were very primitive that the project of Hellenization was not so successful? I think all these things matter however the main cause of failure was that, the project itself was against natural law of diversification. Nature tends to bounce back and stabilize. As we know there were Silk Road in place and that was the main source of connections and communications between ancient civilizations and cultures. The same road was used to spread Buddhism and Christianity.
Now we live in a very different time. It is different because it is no more Tribal elders, religious authorities and Philosophers who are producing and leading cultures but the corporate businesses and Medias. As multinational companies are transnational and transcontinental so they are providing people with an additional culture, the second-culture. It is common to have second language or third language and so on beside the native language same is becoming true about the culture. The cultures that corporate world are producing are becoming the second-culture and it is global in nature. It is how globalization is making sense. As most of the corporate businesses are originated and grown out of West so it is also taken as Westernization.
My general thinking is that unlike Hellenization project of Alexander, this corporate culture will sustain and becomes deep over time. There are two main reasons for it, firstly corporate businesses have become integrated into societies and have emerged as a class in society that is going to grow. Secondly, it is not taken as something foreign but as outcome of technological advances and that is also going to deepen over time. While the second-culture is growing at much faster rate than native cultures, there are already concerns of overtaking of native cultures by secondary culture. My understanding is, while there are conflicts between the two however it is also galvanizing the native cultures as people are becoming aware of their identities and trying to preserve them. So in a way the secondary culture is modernizing the native culture and native cultures, whose people are conscious of the process, will benefit a lot out it.
An interesting question would be, does second culture or corporate culture make people more logical (as Hellenization were supposed to do) by increasing the choices? Well, I doubt that and I doubt that because corporate cultures are mostly short lived and are intended to increase the consumerism. And of course consumerism have turned the survival adaptations that human have evolved for millions of years (?) into weaknesses. One interesting example is that of “Survival of the Fattest”. Fat genes have been selected as a survival mode in famine but the consumerism culture has turned the same survival mode into danger mode. In the same way, collecting stuffs were a survival mode in ancient times when products were scarce however consumerisms have turned this survival strategy into something disastrous both financially and in terms of time management. You can just think on the same line of thinking to find more of how, what were logical are becoming illogical. I mean consumerism has pushed logic as something counterintuitive. And that is really interesting.
Aristotle is known as the father of logic and it is not uncommon that commonly the name of Aristotle comes immediately in talks when one talks about the logic. Aristotle was the pupil of Plato whose biggest idea was that of “Philosopher King”. Aristotle became Philosopher but not King however he tutored a King, Alexander the great. So logically he was a big influence on this King who wanted to Hellenize the ancient world. In a way he wanted to open up the world for Philosopher kings through Hellenization. Though Greeks were worshiping many Gods and Goddesses but Greek societies were structured in a way in which Philosophy had the biggest influence, of course indirectly. We can compare the influence of Philosophy in ancient Greece to that of corporations in our time on cultures. If today we look back we see only relics of Hellenization in conquered areas of Alexander. At least people of conquered areas could have preserved Hellenic culture as their second-culture.
Why Hellenization was not adapted as second culture? Was it because Ruling period of Alexander was short or was it because the communication means were very primitive that the project of Hellenization was not so successful? I think all these things matter however the main cause of failure was that, the project itself was against natural law of diversification. Nature tends to bounce back and stabilize. As we know there were Silk Road in place and that was the main source of connections and communications between ancient civilizations and cultures. The same road was used to spread Buddhism and Christianity.
Now we live in a very different time. It is different because it is no more Tribal elders, religious authorities and Philosophers who are producing and leading cultures but the corporate businesses and Medias. As multinational companies are transnational and transcontinental so they are providing people with an additional culture, the second-culture. It is common to have second language or third language and so on beside the native language same is becoming true about the culture. The cultures that corporate world are producing are becoming the second-culture and it is global in nature. It is how globalization is making sense. As most of the corporate businesses are originated and grown out of West so it is also taken as Westernization.
My general thinking is that unlike Hellenization project of Alexander, this corporate culture will sustain and becomes deep over time. There are two main reasons for it, firstly corporate businesses have become integrated into societies and have emerged as a class in society that is going to grow. Secondly, it is not taken as something foreign but as outcome of technological advances and that is also going to deepen over time. While the second-culture is growing at much faster rate than native cultures, there are already concerns of overtaking of native cultures by secondary culture. My understanding is, while there are conflicts between the two however it is also galvanizing the native cultures as people are becoming aware of their identities and trying to preserve them. So in a way the secondary culture is modernizing the native culture and native cultures, whose people are conscious of the process, will benefit a lot out it.
An interesting question would be, does second culture or corporate culture make people more logical (as Hellenization were supposed to do) by increasing the choices? Well, I doubt that and I doubt that because corporate cultures are mostly short lived and are intended to increase the consumerism. And of course consumerism have turned the survival adaptations that human have evolved for millions of years (?) into weaknesses. One interesting example is that of “Survival of the Fattest”. Fat genes have been selected as a survival mode in famine but the consumerism culture has turned the same survival mode into danger mode. In the same way, collecting stuffs were a survival mode in ancient times when products were scarce however consumerisms have turned this survival strategy into something disastrous both financially and in terms of time management. You can just think on the same line of thinking to find more of how, what were logical are becoming illogical. I mean consumerism has pushed logic as something counterintuitive. And that is really interesting.
Saturday, December 24, 2011
Strong VS Weak
All is one
Playing strong though looks desirable but is wrong. Playing weak on other hand is utterly wrong. No, I do not want to prove wrong everything. These two extremes are wrong because they depict imaginations and conceptions that we have created and like to play rather than depicting reality. Playing strong is wrong because, the moment you start looking at you as strong, you will start feeling your position in danger from others. You will start worrying about keeping your strong position in place and will see every progressive move by others as a threat to your strength. It makes you to focus on countering others rather than focusing on yourself, on your real needs, on your real issues and your potentials. Keeping an eye on others’ backyards while neglecting yours is by no measure could be counted as right. On other hand, playing weak is utterly wrong because it is the denial of reality. The reality is that strong lose its meaning without weak. It is the weak which makes strong to believe in their strength. The fact is, when one submits or accepts defeat then the other one gets a triumphant feeling, gets a sense of winning. Of course, you can lose a game, a battle or a deal or a series of them but these losses do not disqualify you to not play again or to not challenge again.
Simply we have the choice to play strong and feel threaten or accept defeat and provide the chance to others to feel that way. Besides these two choices, there is also a third option and that is accepting support and help from others irrespective of their strengths or weaknesses and to be ready to support and help others again irrespective of their strengths and weaknesses. In short, instead of playing strong or weak we have the option to play as helpful and open to receive help and support from all. The third option is the acceptance of reality and becoming an agent of peace and at same time, be blessed by it. It might look to be more ideal but it is the new reality that we are moving towards. By bursting off of cultural, economic, social and political boundaries, everybody got a role to play and with the same coin, we all became more interdependent. If all have a role to play and have an impact and we are becoming more dependent on each other, then the third option is what closer to reality than other two options.
Cultural identities are the basic units of global culture but unfortunately we see that, there are cultural conflicts in every part of world and it is really unfortunate that, in some parts of world, there are violence, Human Rights abuses and discriminations based on the cultural identities. The roots of these conflicts are again the roles that these cultural identities play. Majority or groups of cultural identities that are in power feel that their positions are threatened and try to maintain their power by discriminating against others and on other hand minorities seeing themselves in existential struggles, try to isolate themselves to protect their identities. This situation puts one cultural identity against others or cultural identities against each other.
Naturally they feel in competition with each other. What comes out of these competitions? Of course, no one get anything out it as it only helps to increase fear and feeling of insecurity and keep occupying the minds with negative thoughts and negative activities and result in great loss of very needed potentials that these cultural identities need to pace in their contemporary world with dignity.
The third option is wise as it makes us to accept each other’s’ rights and support and help each other in achieving our rights. While globally cultures tend to assimilate into a “global culture”, competing with each other locally does not make any sense.
If globalization is the fate of humankind as the current trends are showing and earth is our home then we are one. And not any individual can call it healthy or stand as one when its organs are competing against each other. Unfortunately, humanity was born sick (its organs competing against each other) and has progressed a lot but still is sick. The worst thing is that there is no indication that humankind has realized the sickness and thinking seriously to cure itself. Our heroes are those who divide us and kill us under names of cultural identities. Patriotism and nationalism should become a mean of curing by becoming helpful and open to others’ help and support rather than playing Strong or Playing Weak….
There is nothing more effective force to make relations strong than helping/supporting others and getting help/support from others………….
Playing strong though looks desirable but is wrong. Playing weak on other hand is utterly wrong. No, I do not want to prove wrong everything. These two extremes are wrong because they depict imaginations and conceptions that we have created and like to play rather than depicting reality. Playing strong is wrong because, the moment you start looking at you as strong, you will start feeling your position in danger from others. You will start worrying about keeping your strong position in place and will see every progressive move by others as a threat to your strength. It makes you to focus on countering others rather than focusing on yourself, on your real needs, on your real issues and your potentials. Keeping an eye on others’ backyards while neglecting yours is by no measure could be counted as right. On other hand, playing weak is utterly wrong because it is the denial of reality. The reality is that strong lose its meaning without weak. It is the weak which makes strong to believe in their strength. The fact is, when one submits or accepts defeat then the other one gets a triumphant feeling, gets a sense of winning. Of course, you can lose a game, a battle or a deal or a series of them but these losses do not disqualify you to not play again or to not challenge again.
Simply we have the choice to play strong and feel threaten or accept defeat and provide the chance to others to feel that way. Besides these two choices, there is also a third option and that is accepting support and help from others irrespective of their strengths or weaknesses and to be ready to support and help others again irrespective of their strengths and weaknesses. In short, instead of playing strong or weak we have the option to play as helpful and open to receive help and support from all. The third option is the acceptance of reality and becoming an agent of peace and at same time, be blessed by it. It might look to be more ideal but it is the new reality that we are moving towards. By bursting off of cultural, economic, social and political boundaries, everybody got a role to play and with the same coin, we all became more interdependent. If all have a role to play and have an impact and we are becoming more dependent on each other, then the third option is what closer to reality than other two options.
Cultural identities are the basic units of global culture but unfortunately we see that, there are cultural conflicts in every part of world and it is really unfortunate that, in some parts of world, there are violence, Human Rights abuses and discriminations based on the cultural identities. The roots of these conflicts are again the roles that these cultural identities play. Majority or groups of cultural identities that are in power feel that their positions are threatened and try to maintain their power by discriminating against others and on other hand minorities seeing themselves in existential struggles, try to isolate themselves to protect their identities. This situation puts one cultural identity against others or cultural identities against each other.
Naturally they feel in competition with each other. What comes out of these competitions? Of course, no one get anything out it as it only helps to increase fear and feeling of insecurity and keep occupying the minds with negative thoughts and negative activities and result in great loss of very needed potentials that these cultural identities need to pace in their contemporary world with dignity.
The third option is wise as it makes us to accept each other’s’ rights and support and help each other in achieving our rights. While globally cultures tend to assimilate into a “global culture”, competing with each other locally does not make any sense.
If globalization is the fate of humankind as the current trends are showing and earth is our home then we are one. And not any individual can call it healthy or stand as one when its organs are competing against each other. Unfortunately, humanity was born sick (its organs competing against each other) and has progressed a lot but still is sick. The worst thing is that there is no indication that humankind has realized the sickness and thinking seriously to cure itself. Our heroes are those who divide us and kill us under names of cultural identities. Patriotism and nationalism should become a mean of curing by becoming helpful and open to others’ help and support rather than playing Strong or Playing Weak….
There is nothing more effective force to make relations strong than helping/supporting others and getting help/support from others………….
Friday, December 23, 2011
Capitalism without capital; What's the alternative?
Gold and silver are the metals that have been used since ancient times as standard trading metals. In the period that we are living in, inflation has become a common reality and has been accepted as a form of indirect taxation. On the other hand, the prices of these two precious metals are generally rising and people who fear losing money in inflation (dropping value of unit currencies) tend to buy gold and silver.
On the other hand, the internet is emerging as a new marketplace where it is not possible to do business with traditional precious metals. Banks and other financial institutions are the backbone of online businesses. Technology is changing rapidly our habits, expectations, and perceptions about things. It is not just money, bullion gold, and silver that appear as digital numbers, but personal libraries and intellectual properties are also nothing more than digital texts, figures, graphics, and so on.
While the digital form of currency gives Governments and financial institutions the enormous capability to track and control the finances of people or manipulate markets, the gigantic size of the transactions and the ease of printing money can also create bubbles that can ruin economies and the lives of people. Look at the decreasing distance between the economic bubbles in modern times;
- Tulip Mania ( (1634-1637)
- Dot-com bubble (1995-2000)
-U.S. housing bubble (2000-2007)
- Bitcoin bubble (2017-2018)
By adding to this list, the collapses of the banks in 2023, I am just wondering if the banks and financial institutions so easily turn into bubbles, and keep bursting at decreasing distance of time, then what are the alternatives?
Wednesday, December 21, 2011
Effect of Moharram on Pakistani Economy
I am not an economist but "recession" is scary for me as it means a collective hard time, a time when one sees worrying faces become the dominant species and people with smiley faces go to the verge of extinction. It is Christmas season and also the biggest shopping season in Western world where usually sales go higher from 30 to 40% than other months of year. The end of shopping season is the beginning of new year so economists look to sale season as a determinant of a "good" or "bad" year for economy. Big sales will stimulate the economy in a new year and small sale will slow down economy in new year. So it is why Christmas became almost a corporate Christmas... Whether it is ethical or not, is another issue but Christmas is the biggest turnover in economy, that is a fact....
Muharram is the first month in Islamic calender and also the beginning of Ashora festivals that lasts almost 48 days but the peak days of festivals are from 1st to 10th Muharram. There is no study in overall impact of Muharram on economy of Muslim world but Geo TV made an interesting report on impact of Muharram on Pakistan's economy that was almost unbelievable for me at first glance..... According to this report Muharram festivals stimulate the economy with 125 billion Rupees that is almost equals 1/4th (22.1%) of country's annual budget (Pakistan federal budget for 2011-2012 is " 2767 billion" rupees. That seems the biggest turnover in the country's economy and works like that of Christmas season in the Western world...
According to Wikipedia, there are 30 million Shia Muslims which is 16.1% of total population (180 million). The size of economic turnover indicates a large participation of Sunni Muslims in Ashora festivals and that is a positive indicator of religious harmony between these two big sects of Islam at grass roots level which needs to be tighten in order to prevent country from sectarian chaos.
Of course some people do not like (It may be even offensive for some) to look at it economically and also there might be some people who think more individualistically to this large expenditure as somewhat waste of money (Perhaps they are thinking of other social aspects like education, health and so on). I am not discarding their points of views but by thinking in a bigger picture, the overall economy of country matters to all and affects everything from per person income to employment to social developments. If the economy of a country goes to recession then budget cuts, downsizing, flight of capital/investments and general tendency of people to limit their expenditure will shrink the size of smiley faces irrespective of their faith or ideologies...
Muharram is the first month in Islamic calender and also the beginning of Ashora festivals that lasts almost 48 days but the peak days of festivals are from 1st to 10th Muharram. There is no study in overall impact of Muharram on economy of Muslim world but Geo TV made an interesting report on impact of Muharram on Pakistan's economy that was almost unbelievable for me at first glance..... According to this report Muharram festivals stimulate the economy with 125 billion Rupees that is almost equals 1/4th (22.1%) of country's annual budget (Pakistan federal budget for 2011-2012 is " 2767 billion" rupees. That seems the biggest turnover in the country's economy and works like that of Christmas season in the Western world...
According to Wikipedia, there are 30 million Shia Muslims which is 16.1% of total population (180 million). The size of economic turnover indicates a large participation of Sunni Muslims in Ashora festivals and that is a positive indicator of religious harmony between these two big sects of Islam at grass roots level which needs to be tighten in order to prevent country from sectarian chaos.
Of course some people do not like (It may be even offensive for some) to look at it economically and also there might be some people who think more individualistically to this large expenditure as somewhat waste of money (Perhaps they are thinking of other social aspects like education, health and so on). I am not discarding their points of views but by thinking in a bigger picture, the overall economy of country matters to all and affects everything from per person income to employment to social developments. If the economy of a country goes to recession then budget cuts, downsizing, flight of capital/investments and general tendency of people to limit their expenditure will shrink the size of smiley faces irrespective of their faith or ideologies...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)