Changing US and Pakistani "Elites"

On June 30th, Ayesha Siddiqa's column, "What is Pakistan's elites" appeared in The Express Tribune. It didn't move me as there wasn't anything new for me. Then, almost two weeks later, on July 12th, David Brooks's Column "Why Our Elites Stinks" appeared in New York Times and to my surprise, the arguments and conclusions were so identical to that of Ayesha's column, that I couldn't resist but read them twice to make sure, that I am not misreading their arguments. Wow, I said to myself, although, there is no match between the elites of both countries, but the Process of social mobility and the complaints are very close, if not similar. That was very surprising to me. So let's compare, the David and Ayesha's arguments and conclusions,

........."the elite are not just a group, but also the name of a process that facilitates a constant cycle of change in a society. In case of a powerful, yet easily manipulated state like Pakistan, the process of elite formation is directly linked with the ability of a group to manipulate the state, its power and resources. This means that what may be the middle class or lower middle class of yesterday can be the elite of today. For instance, who could imagine a few decades ago that one day, people belonging to lower middle or middle class backgrounds, like Altaf Hussain, Qaim Ali Shah, Malik Riaz, Humayun Akhtar, Ijazul Haq, or Arsalan Iftikhar will be powerful millionaires and part of the elite? Not to forget the fact that today religious leaders like Maulana Fazlur Rehman or jihadi leaders such as Hafiz Saeed, Fazlur Rehman Khalil, Malik Ishaq and others are also part of the power elite.".............

As, I have highlighted in the above excerpt, Ayesha recognizes "a process" and defines the process as "the ability of a group to manipulate the state, its power and resources". In the previous paragraph, she identifies the able group as "civil and military bureaucrats" but she doesn't mention about "the process" which form the bureaucrats,

....... "Popularly, the term ‘elite’ invokes the image of the landed-feudal group, which was originally part of the ruling elite in 1947. However, over the years this began to change with the state’s civil and military bureaucracy getting integrated into the elite and also using state resources to create other elite groups such as business and industry." ...........

Like Ayesha, David starts his column by pointing to the shifts in the elites of US, 

......"Through most of the 19th and 20th centuries, the Protestant Establishment sat atop the American power structure. A relatively small network of white Protestant men dominated the universities, the world of finance, the local country clubs and even high government service.

Over the past half–century, a more diverse and meritocratic elite has replaced the Protestant Establishment. People are more likely to rise on the basis of grades, test scores, effort and performance.".........

But unlike Ayesha, David mentions the process  as meritocracy and later he elaborates the process, 

.............." I’d say today’s meritocratic elites achieve and preserve their status not mainly by being corrupt but mainly by being ambitious and disciplined. They raise their kids in organized families. They spend enormous amounts of money and time on enrichment. They work much longer hours than people down the income scale, driving their kids to piano lessons and then taking part in conference calls from the waiting room.".............


It would be fair to acknowledge that, Ayesha didn't mention the process because she wrote her column to highlight the negation of the "elites" as being elites and David wrote to defend the "meritocratic elites" but having said that, surprisingly both columnists points to the same trends among current elites and that is their negation and escapism from taking responsibility,



........Chris Hays, the man, whose thoughts were the main theme of the David Brooks' column......

  David; "Everybody thinks they are countercultural rebels, insurgents against the true establishment, which is always somewhere else. This attitude prevails in the Ivy League, in the corporate boardrooms and even at television studios where hosts from Harvard, Stanford and Brown rail against the establishment.

As a result, today’s elite lacks the self-conscious leadership ethos that the racist, sexist and anti-Semitic old boys’ network did possess. If you went to Groton a century ago, you knew you were privileged. You were taught how morally precarious privilege was and how much responsibility it entailed. You were housed in a spartan 6-foot-by-9-foot cubicle to prepare you for the rigors of leadership."............

Ayesha; "The fact is that the term and concept, ‘elite’, is misrepresented and misunderstood in this country. Intriguingly, those who are part of the elite themselves carry out most of the anti-elite commentary. In fact, castigating the elite at popular forums is a way to gain legitimacy that could lead to acquisition of greater power. For instance, the MQMcondemns its opponents as elite, while being a part of the power circle itself. Similarly, the PTI leadership, which comes from an elite background, sells a middle class narrative to gain access to greater power and control of government. Even the judges challenge the elite when they are historically part of the power establishment of the country."......................

I may not be in position to analyse the changing elites of US and Pakistan however, I know, why there is a denial on the parts of elites. To make the  picture clearer, let me bring a historical excerpt from meeting and conversation of Ibn Khaldun (the "greatest Arab historian") and Tamerlane (The last of great Mongol conquerors). Why I have chosen Ibn Khaldun and Tamerlane? I chose Ibn Khaldun because he is the ideal representative of the 13th century hybrid elite (Aristocracy +Meritocracy). His family was part of upper class Arab Spain and after fall of Spain, they still managed to maintain their status in Tunisia.  He was involved in Politics and was Qadi of Maliki sect of Islam in Egypt. On other hand, Tamerlane was the Khan of an empire (Mongolian Khans had brought a world order that had unified Far East, Central Asia, South Asia and Middle East and had created an Eastern globalization based on Silk Road) that was superpower of his time. When Tamerlane and his army camped outside of  Damascus walls, Ibn Khaldun sneaked Damascus to meet Tamerlane and this resulted in a historical conversation between the two historical figures (It should be noted that no Persian historian of the time had recorded this conversation and we know about this conversation only through Ibn Khandun's autobiography and Arab sources) ....

Most of their conversation is about history and geography of Maghreb (Northwest Africa; Currently, Tunis, Algeria, Morocco, Libya) and Heroes of history as per subject interest areas of the Tamerlane but what is relevant here to our topic is the efforts of Ibn Khaldun to please Tamerlane by exalting him,

After mentioning of the predictions by Astrologers and Sufis about the coming of the great power (Tamerlane), Ibn Khaldun says that, "May Allah aid you- today it is 30 or 40 years that I have longed to meet you," The interpreter, 'Abd al-Jabbar, asks him, "And what is the reason for this?"

He replies, "Two things; The first is that you are the Sultan of the Universe and the ruler of the world, and I do not believe that there has appeared among men from Adam until this epoch a ruler like you. I am not one of those who speak about matters by conjecture, for I am a scholar and I will explain this........"; Ibn Khaldun and Tamerlane and their historical meeting at Damascus... 

So, here is the greatest historian of Arab/Muslim world (Sometimes when I see Muslim religious scholars challenge each others' beliefs and refer to such scholars' books, I can think of nothing but saying, "for sure, there is no limit to stupidity") and first sociologist who knows, how to manipulate the power of his time. What is the difference between elites of the 13th century Muslims and those of today's. In Medieval ages, the source of the legitimacy was the bloodline of kings so Tamerlane was linking himself to Genghis Khan for legitimacy (Tamerlane's most conquered areas were in Khanate regions and he wanted to legitimize his dynasty by linking himself to great Khan) and elites like Ibn Khaldun could maintain their status by serving and glorifying Khans. In our time, the source of legitimacy is people so the elites want to be conceived as part of people even if practically they are not...

In conclusion, elites are attached to power and as Einstein was noticed, "The attempt to combine wisdom and power has only rarely been successful and then only for a short while." The elites will change as circumstances change  and likewise the nature of complains.............. 

Game Changer?

“If knowledge can create problems, it is not through ignorance that we can solve them.”….. Isaac Asimov (1920 - 1992)

Although, I am not fan of fictions, particularly Science fictions but I couldn’t resist reading Isaac Asimov’s a few works sporadically, both out of curiosity and also because it was introduced to me by my uncle who was always an inspiration for me. In an interview (1988), Isaac Asimov had predicted that, internet will change levels of learning; Public education was a change from personal tutors for those who could afford to class based lectures, in which the students were expected to learn with an equal pace. The internet will not only allow each individual to learn with his/her own pace and timing but more importantly, it makes learning, a lifelong process. Asimov was not alone in speculating, how internet will change things as these speculations are still continued. After a decade of “worldwide” internet availability, we must be able to see some of the most evident changes and test some of the speculations. Here, I would like to link the fate of the three most popular, internet based movements.

 If eusociality have allowed humans to conquer the earth, it has also been a source of debates, conflicts and perpetual struggle between individuals and society, each side trying to increase the spheres of their influences.  By introduction of internet, this relationship disturbed as never before, as it has empowered both governments and individuals. Iranian green movement, Arab Spring, London riots and 99% movements came as a test of the levels of empowerments and to redefine relationships. Although, all these movements had the same characteristics like, absence of central leadership, no ideological basis and no clear lists of demands but the results were very different. While Iranian green movement, London riots and 99% movements could not survive, the Arab Spring evolved with mixed results. The Iranian, British, American governments were proved to have evolved with technology and were organized enough to easily deal with their respective popular movements so nothing happened. Arab governments that had not reorganized themselves collapsed in the face of popular uprising.

Aside from higher intelligence, higher culture and language, what makes humans unique from the rest of social organisms is that; all normal individuals can reproduce, make and shift alliances across all social levels and this flexibility is one of the main reasons for increasing sophistication of human individuals, society, culture and intelligence as a whole. Using imaginations to use past experiences and creating future scenarios to evaluate the consequences of their decisions is uniquely human and main cause of human’s deep interests in others and in socializations. This is why, Asimov could predict that by invention and spread of internet (socialization of computers; a human technology), individuals’ will gain a control over their learning; to learn at their own pace and timing and topic of choice.

After a decade of entering into this new level of socialization, at least one thing has become even clearer; in relationships of individuals with society and within groups, adaptability and organization are still the yin and yang of triumphs. The perceptions that internet has changed the old game of central leadership and ideologue have proved to be wrong as still, it is the central leadership and a common ideology that organize people. 

Although, I am myself, doesn't like central leadership and ideology as they both retard people in following them but, it is a fact that, the bigger and more efficient an organization is, the easier, it controls over individuals and smaller groups and organizations. For this we even don't need to think much as Empires of the past, powers and multi-national companies of our times are all standing evidences. It may not be wrong to say that, although, human societies are unique in flexibility of social mobility but the function of society as a whole is no more different than the colonies of other eusocial organisms. 

Al-Qaeda Service Pack 2

Sometimes I question, why there are imaginary heroes like Superman, Spiderman, Batman and so on in our times? Why we can’t have real life heroes in our time? Answers immediately follow without much thinking. It is because modern men do not have set of values that they could identify themselves with and those who stand for them become their heroes. One group’s heroes are other groups’ demons. It is not that there is total lack of values but instead because the values have reduced into tools of power struggle. In modern language, it is called, “Soft Power”. Now, power is not something promising for everybody but instead, the control of few over others. Let me dare to say, it is pleasing to convince ourselves as men of conscious and conscience standing for humanistic values but the fact is that, we are mere docile laborers of Soft Power.

Anybody who has watched “Troy” that is based on the Homer’s Iliad, can’t forget the contrasting characters; Hector and Achilles who were symbols of honor and bravery versus characters of France and Agamemnon, the first one is representing lust of beauty and pleasure and second one representing lust of power, with both having a common selfish feature of putting their personal drives above everything else resulting in a lengthy war that had cost countless deaths and total destruction of the               Troy.  Horace writes it,

“All because Paris loved another’s wife,

Greeks and barbarians clashed in baneful strife”

Archaeological layers in the ruins of Troy

Here, I do not intend to tell, why Homer’s Iliad is appealing to people of all ages and still fascinates  people of modern age as it is common knowledge that human nature has not changed despite of advances that humans made. Like all times, Agamemnons still sacrifice Achilleses and Hectors for their personal drives. I remembered Troy and its characters because these days, almost every day, the news of Syrian civil war is making headlines. It is amusing to see the Cold War Scenario is back and the rivalry is played around the character of President Assad. To a layman like me, President Assad is presented as France who is destroying the Troy (Syria) for his personal drive. If it was ancient Greek times, where the only narrative available was those of victorious Greeks, spiced up with legends of dramatic events, people would celebrate Agamemnons as Heroes. However, in the age of information technology, the roles of the Saudi and Qatari Sheikhs are like Agamemnons that  do not have any values whatsoever and their only drives are their personal lusts; lusts for power and pleasure at the costs of lives and freedoms of the whole Middle Eastern people. It is just their luck that they have found niche for their lusts due to global rivalries. I don’t know, how global players expect people would get fooled, that it is just a single person’s arrogance and lust that is limiting people’s freedom. I don’t know what kind of freedoms Saudi, Qatari and Al-Qaida Sheikhs are standing for that fit perfectly with UN charters and Western countries’ values? Back in the 1980’s, the West and Arab Sheikhs made an alliance against Soviet Union that gave birth to Taliban, Al-Qaida and affiliated groups that not only attacked West but are proudly killing innocent people in South Asia, Central Asia, Middle East and North Africa.

I am just sacred and feel sorry for coming generation as the new alliance of West and Arab Sheikhs to hijack Arab Spring for creating a Cold War scenario to contain Russian and Chinese economic power (While US and Europe’s economies are in trouble) are grooming an upgraded version of Al-Qaida and Taliban that will be more lethal as they are getting equipped with much sophisticated technologies and strategies (not to forget the basket full of experiences that were gained from three decade long terrorist operations). The naïve citizen are still believing that they are standing for democracies and Human Rights in the Middle East and North Africa while ignoring the ideologies and motivations of those people who are fighting on the ground and their backers. How short are the memory of modern men that have forgotten the 9/11 attack and “war on terror” that are still taking victims on daily basis.

There is a Persian saying, “Victims of snake bites fear black and white ropes”. I don’t care if Assad stays in power or not but I do care about the militants who fought in Libya, fighting in Syria, Iraq, Yemen and are preparing the ground in Egypt. Arab Spring was promising at the beginning when youths stood for democracy but now it seems that the season has changed and the Arab Summer has started. I fear that, sand storms of the Arab Summer cross Atlantic and Indian Oceans. From what is happening, I feel that, just like our generation, the coming generation will enjoy (more) the Taliban and Al-Qaida’s upgraded version. I can just tell them, Have Fun; You will never get bored as all their shows are thrilling J

Internet Shock

Before my first visit to USA, I was introduced (First Time) to term, “Cultural Shock” and then last summer when I went back home, I heard another term, “Reverse Cultural Shock”. I guess, before both of these shocks, I had experienced another shock and I had no term to describe it. Although, I was feeling the need for a term to be able to communicate the experience but at the same time, I was thinking that, Samuel Huntington’s “Clash of Civilizations” is explaining the phenomenon. People like Huntington had long sensed that a “Global Village” in “Post Ideological Divide” will resurface the historical divides and the basis of so called, “Cultural Fault lines” would be historical boundaries of the cultural landscapes.

Parallel to physical world, now we have a digital world and today’s World Wide Web is no more, just a place to find information, publish information or exchange information. It has evolved into a socializing space and people have started calling it “Second Life”. With current growth rate, Facebook is expected to become the largest country of the world. If there are physical cultural fault lines then it is natural to expect that those fault lines will also find space in the digital space. Unlike the physical cultural landscape that has its own costs for the cultural activities that go beyond the means of lots of people; internet provides most of the services free of cost. If walking across cultural landscapes gives initial cultural shocks and retuning back gives initial reversal cultural shocks then it is logical to expect having both of these phenomena on internet.

Current estimate; Facebook population is 900 million people (Though, it is an old illustration but I like it because of the multi-level comparisons)

 Seeing the exchanges of debates on social networks and on comment sections of blogs and sites, on daily basis, I am realizing that, the divide is not just on “Cultural fault lines” but it is much deeper.  Subcultures, subgroups and even groups that do not fall into any category, encounter each other with the zeal of Orcs. Sometimes, these encounters are temporary on occasional events that are just good for a no purpose chatter (The street chatters are now on the pages of social networks).

In short, it is not just cultural fault lines or sub-cultural variations or even within small groups’ differences of opinions that keep the buzz of fuss going on but it is part of human nature to buzz around things necessarily or un-necessarily. So, if the “Cultural Shock” means to experience big cultural differences then it exist and show up with much details on internet and this might legitimize the term, “Internet Shock” as parallel to “Cultural Shock”.  

Edward O Wilson (Some consider him as Darwin of 20^th Century) in a recent article, “Evolution and our Inner Conflicts” argues that conflicts are pre-determined by multi-level selection. Although, I may not agree with it as a whole however, two of his paragraphs are interesting and relevant to our topic…

……….“A second diagnostic hereditary peculiarity of human behavior is the overpowering instinctual urge to belong to groups in the first place. To be kept in solitude is to be kept in pain, and put on the road to madness. A person’s membership in his group — his tribe — is a large part of his identity. It also confers upon him to some degree or other a sense of superiority. When psychologists selected teams at random from a population of volunteers to compete in simple games, members of each team soon came to think of members of other teams as less able and trustworthy, even when the participants knew they had been selected at random.”…….

What I take from this paragraph is that, if you come across a post, a comment, article and video that call you or what you recognize yourself with, as “Stupid” , it might shock you or even anger you but as it is part of human nature to see others inferior to relative to themselves so there is no escape from it. Better to accept it and learn to live with it. It is what Wilson is also recommending in its final paragraph,

…….”The eternal conflict is not God’s test of humanity. It is not a machination of Satan. It is just the way things worked out. It might be the only way in the entire universe that human-level intelligence and social organization can evolve. We will find a way eventually to live with our inborn turmoil, and perhaps find pleasure in viewing it as a primary source of our creativity.”………..

If there is a partial truth in those two paragraphs of Wilson then internet shock is a real phenomenon and it will remain no matter even if global village shrink to global home. 

I tried to keep it short but it just expanded (redundancy is another internet phenomenon :) 

Indiana Jones: The True Story PART 1/5

Horace, Men of Faith and Gates

By turn of century, war on terror began and then reduced to drone attacks, green revolution sprout in the streets of Tehran and then shrank to pages of BBC Farsi, Wikileaks sprang out of nowhere to shake the capitals of world and reduced to few interviews, Arab Spring came to change the face of Middle East and ended up changing the faces of a few old men who were already needed rest for medical reasons. Although, most of the expected BIG events proved to be ephemeral but unlike the rest of world, Pakistan is unique in that, she doesn’t rest at all. Here, a Big event is forced into dormancy just by another Bigger event. Take the examples of Gates series; Just like Bill Gates Windows series, there are upgrades of gates in matter of weeks to months, memogate, family-gate and now media-gate. Are there more gates in the pipeline? Who knows?

Like every other Pakistani, I grew up hearing time and again about the Iqbal’s “Man of the Faith” in books, in newspapers, in TV talks and songs. To see, men of faith in actual was like expecting to see the spiderman in subways. May be, as some conceive, Iqbal’s words were so dense that the very men of the faith for whom they were written, weren’t able to decipher them.  People say that, “Great men think alike” so I turn to another great lyricist like Iqbal, Horace just to not offend those who take Iqabl’s words as sacred poems. As the media report, Malik Riaz had distributed Villas to remove his anxieties. Horace says,

“Reason and sense remove anxiety,

Not villas that look out upon the sea”

And

“Try to bend things to them, not them to things.”

But, these bookish advices are of no use to hardheaded elites of Pakistan as they know well that, there are two parallel lines of logic in the world, reasoning and money. There is no one who doesn’t understand the logic of money while, there are  few people who are convinced by reasoning. So, if they had read the Horace by any chance, they must have read these lines,

“Let him show mastery over a fighting foe,

And clemency when he has brought him low”

And

“When riches fail, I praise

The safe and simple life, content with humble ways;

But then, when better, richer fortune smiles on me,
I say that only they live well and sensibly

Whose wealth in country manors glistens brilliantly”

But, wait a minute, Iqbal’s Man of faith was supposed to be like Eagle or in Horace words,

“Wise, and master of himself,

Fearing not death, or chains, or lack of wealth,

Disdaining honors, firm against desire,

Within himself well-rounded and entire,

Beyond the reach of all external pain,

Against whom even fortune strikes in vain?”

Perhaps, Iqbal had realized that his men of faith are much sharper than Eagles and are more practical than bookish wise men and that was why, he said, “Why should I ask wise men; whence is my beginning? I am busy with the thought; where will be my end?”

Still, each one of the more than 180 million citizen of the country are busy worrying, Where will be their end?

The Real Middle Earth

It is natural for men to think of themselves at the center of everything. It appears arrogant but it is, how men make their perceptions and sense of the world around them. It is evident from religious expression of "God has created men on His image" to philosophical expression of "I think, therefore I am". Reading news and analyses in different languages, I feel like the centrality of the world shifts depending  on which newspapers, I am reading. The works of fantasy is no exception.

I feel like, there is a pattern in different works, divided wide both in terms of time and nationalities, ranging from Plato's "Republic" to Firdosi's "Shahnama" and Tolkien's "Lord of the Rings". Plato was living in a time, when the great ancient Greek city of Athens was in decline due to wars and greed of the Aristocrats. Firdosi was living in a time, when Persia was in decline and was losing territory and authority to Turks of Central Asia and Tolkien was living in previous century, the most deadliest century of all times so far. He participated in WWI and witnessed the rise of the Germany, WWII, decline of British Empire and rise of Soviet and American Empires. Republic, Shahnama and Lord of the Rings are works of fantasies but are so rich in imaginations that are more lively than real world. These masterpieces were intended to inspire, people of their times to stand upright in the face of declines caused by weaknesses of ruling men.

If you have watched or read the first of the Lord of the Ring series; "The Fellowship of the Ring", you might have noticed it all over the story but particularly in the dialogue between Boromir (The Captain of the White Tower; from Gandor) and Aragorn;

Aragorn; Take Some Rest. These borders are well
               protected.

Boromir; I will find no rest here. I heard her voice
               (Lady of Light) inside my head. She spoke of my father and "fall of Gandor". She said to me; "Even now, there is hope left". But I cannot see it. It is long since we had hope. My father is a noble man but his rule is failing..... and our people lose faith. He looks to me to make things right, and I would do it.
"I would see the glory of Gandor restored".
Have you seen it, Aragorn? The white tower of Ecthelion, glimmering like a spike of pearl and silver. Its banners caught high in the morning breeze. Have you ever been called home....by the clear ringing of silver trumpets?

Aragorn; I have seen the white city long ago....

Boromir; One day, our paths will lead us there. And the tower guard shall take up the call; "The Lords of
               Gandor have returned"

Reading these lines of the Tolkien, I was feeling that he is speaking about fall of British Empire and is expressing hope for a come back of her glorious times. The reason is just the historical perspective behind this novel. Although there is an alliance of different races and creatures (Just like WWII scenario) against Sauron  (a common threat) but each one is concerned with the glory of their own cities. 

Cultural ‘Capital’ and Language of Empires

How it is that, modernization is almost synonymous with westernization and English has emerged as the representative language of globalization? What about rise of Persian with persianization, rise of Islam with Arabization?  rise of Turks with Turkization? What about Spanish speaking people in Latin America and French speaking class in North Africa? In fact, transnational languages are footprints of the past empires. Middle East and Central Asia are considered as graveyard of empires and although there are no more empires but the lingual divides and the continuing competition of languages over populations are still reminding us of the legacies of those majestic empires.  Pakistan is an interesting case study is this regard.

The national language of Pakistan is Urdu and Urdu speaking community is called Muhajir (Immigrants) because they emigrated from North India during partition of India-Pakistan. In fact, Urdu is a legacy of Mughal Empire and is very recent to be added to the family of languages and people of North India adapted it (created it during Mughal Empire). Likewise, English is the official language of Pakistan and it is the legacy of English Empire. Just as English Empire had replaced Mughal Empire, similarly, the English language had first replaced Persian as an official language and then slowly distorting/enriching Urdu by replacing Persian and Arabic words and expressions in it.

I think, the best explanation can be Pierre Bourdieu’s theory of “Cultural Capital”. He has borrowed the concept from Marx Capital and hence represents any cultural aspect (education, intellect, style of speech, dress, and even physical appearance, et cetera) that helps social mobility. Language stands at the core of cultural capital and it really explains why, with the rise of each empire, the language of empire was adapted by other people. It really explains why founders of Pakistan adapted Urdu as a national language and English as official language. Urdu was the heritage of Muslim (Mughal) empire (glorious past) but English was the coinage of current empire. 

It is interesting to note that, despite of very obvious influence of cultural capital on every segments of modern societies, Marxist movements  of last century and even recent 99% movement were largely based on economic class divide. And that is because cultural capital are the products of economic and social capitals. By increasing digitalization of the social institutions, the influence of the cultural capital are deepening. Seeing the people of previous generation, even those who weren't able to read and write properly are struggling to catch up with basic technologies are an indication of a social urgency and the role that cultural capital  is playing in it. 

First as Tragedy, Then as Farce

"There is no such thing as a 'self-made' man. We are made up of thousands of others." George Matthew Adams ... Perhaps, that is the core concept behind the sense of social responsibility. Naturally, we tend to give back, what we have received from others. But what if someone tells us that, we need to rethink the ways that we give back as they are not doing the "good" that we intended to? Very few people invest thoughts in their actions, especially in actions that are appreciated by dominate culture. Aside from a bunch of flakes, who question the norms, people usually follow the norms and it makes the saying of Louis Althusser appear true, "Ideology has very little to do with 'consciousness' - it is profoundly unconscious."...

In his talk, "First as Tragedy, Then as Farce", Zizek criticizes the capitalist philanthropic practices based on the assumptions, that they are just addressing the symptoms, not causes. I agree with him on this, but I have a question here... 

Let's assume that, you go to Starbucks to buy your coffee and the ads says, part of the price goes to an extremist madrassah, what would be your reaction? What, if the ads explains that, your money is spent for a good cause of "educating" poor children in some remote place? Well, I assume, that doesn't require much thinking as by now, it is a common knowledge, that these madrassahs have become part of problem instead of solution. They produce people who lack skills to get them jobs (to become a useful part of society) and instead, they have the mindsets to  make them as readily available recruits of militants.

Even if for a while, we assume that the "education" in those madrassahs are harmless and are just for moral training and literacy, again read this description of the "education" in those schools to learn, how they produce just waste, "In this part of the world, writing as a category has not been recognized for centuries although the word used for Muslim school is Maktab which literally means the place where you write. But in Maktabs there has been no writing done at least after 12th century. These are, in the words of Dr Sarfaraz, ‘oral societies’ in that the method of teaching in their religious schools is mostly oral — individual to individual with no use of conventional teaching aids, such as the black boards, chalks, and markers."

Although it is plausible to question, the way capitalist philanthropists invest but I wonder, why after more than a decade of "war on terror" no one has questioned the donations of those Shaikhs who support these madrassah and still do business in billions with countries that have prioritized the war on terror as the prime objective of their foreign policy? Why they have remained immune of the smart sanctions? (May be, it is just asking a  wrong question as those Shaikhs are frenemies. Next joke please!!!)

If we just limit ourselves to questions of the intellectuals again, I understand that, it has a popular demand to question element of popular culture that everybody is familiar with. Skipping serious questions that have less public appeal is the characteristic of "cultural capitalism". The Socialist revolutionaries have reduced to public entertainers. I don't know, what to call it, "reverse revolution" or "reverse evolution"? whatever, it is really amusing in itself. 

Culture is a Stronger Force than Religion

Seemingly, it might look a very strong statement but as a matter of fact, by each new evidence, I am becoming  more convinced that culture is much stronger force than religion and historical-global-process, such as modernity. I have stopped looking to people of regions based on their religious affiliations and modernization movements but instead got interested to look, how religion and modernization have reshaped by respective cultures.

In previous century, people might had high hopes for new movements both in secular and religious hemispheres. Communism's equality, Capitalism's liberty and Islamic movement's Justice had great promises  that appealed to  masses that a large chunk of people thought them, worth dying for, but in the age of internet, it is becoming evident, that humans are far from balanced by nature. The recorded brutalities, available on you tube is sufficient evidence (at least for me) that humans think, talk and like to appear as humane and civilized, but are too weak to their nature, when they have the power to make choices between evil and good.

Usually, we see the rationalizations of savage acts, either by name of social engineering or an act of religious devotion (a religious obligation) but what about the practices that have only an element of pleasure with them? How can we justify them other than human nature?

Middle East is thought as the birthplace of civilizations, graveyard of empires and the birthplace of Abrahamic Religions but watching the following video report, I felt as no empire, civilization and religion has touched this place. Dubai is seen as the symbol of modernization in the Middle East and yet the child slavery is an evidence that culture is much a strong force than religion and historical processes.  

So, Afghanistan was supposed to be on the ancient Silk road, cross-road of civilizations, the cultivating ground for Jihadists, the launching pad of communism and now melting pot of westernization and modernization. But apparently, none of these processes have been able to influence the cultures there. The culture of "dancing boys" have defied all these processes just to reassert, that culture is much a strong force than religion and global processes.

 

Just recently, four women and two men were sentenced to death in Kohistan area of Pakistan and reportedly, the four women were killed because the women had sung songs and men had danced in front of them (Kohistan video scandal: 4 women killed ). Even if the culture is beyond the common sense, against religion and Human Rights, again it is the culture that is going to reshape all those forces. 

To me, it is no more surprise why the violent sides of religions, sports and entertainment attract more certain regions and segment of societies, while the same are disgusted by others? It is quite understandable that cultures that promote and appreciate violent aspects of human nature have the tendency to look, appreciate and enjoy violent aspects of religion, sports and entertainments. 

The video that was used in sentencing to death, the four women and two men that appeared in it.

John Cleese on Creativity

Pessimism is learnt by suggestions

Some folklore stick to heart as they are sweet embodiment of hard-learned lessons, that people want to pass on. I guess, the following Hazaragi folklore was everybody's favorite, when they were young and weren't getting why teachers are so annoying,

There was a Mullah in the village, who was teaching Quran to students but he was really hard, when it came to misspellings. He was punishing students by beating them with sticks and students were looking for a way to get rid of him. One of the students comes with a solution. Next morning, when they go to mosque, the Mullah asks as usual the students to come forward one by one and read aloud, their lessons. As the first student arrives, he asks Mullah, why  he looks so pale today? Does he feel fine? Mullah gets angry and beat him with stick and replies, I am perfectly fine. But all the students repeat the same questions on their turns. Mullah becomes curious that he might be looking pale as everyone is not only noticing it but inquiring about it. When the students leave, he looks himself in the mirror and finds to his amazement, that he really looks tired and pale. In coming days, the students repeat the same practice and each day that Mullah looks himself in the mirror, he finds that the paleness is becoming more evident. Moreover, by each passing day, he feels really tired and exhausted. So, he starts looking for a remedy. After a week or so of persistent suggestions, the Mullah really gets sick enough to not be able to come to mosque and students get rid of him. It was just a suggestive disease.

Well, it might appear only a folklore but by reading Jane Brody's article, "A Richer Life by Seeing Half Glass Full", it reminded me of this story that was my favorite, when I was young but didn't have the courage to practice it. In fact, we do it often to others, mostly without knowing it, by discouraging them with our "suggestive rationales". 

I understand that, genes play a role in optimism and pessimism but it is also now known, that most of them are learnt. So, if there are prevalent pessimism, no doubt, it will affect most of people so in an age, when people are tightly connected and messages pass very quickly, there is a need for a more responsible and more careful behavior in suggesting things. 

Inspired by Facebook?

Two modern side effects of rapid technological developments and related modern life styles have emerged as increasing number of obese people and addiction to social networking sites, especially Facebook. Recently, the role of the brain reward system in food addiction and social network addiction have become popular to explain a lot of whys in this regard. Although, researchers are trying to find the genetic basis for obesity but there are evidences for links between brain reward system and obesity. 

In "Your Brain on Facebook", David Rock discusses the link between our brain reward system and popularity of Facebook. Our brains are evolved to be social and don't miss a chance in thinking about others even if it gets a chance of few seconds to be not engaged. Facebook uses two aspects of our brain, thinking about others (connecting with others and what they do) and our brains reward system by its "Like" button. 

Although the reports like those of two previous paragraphs are amusing to learn about but my interest is in something else. If brain reward system is so manipulative of our behaviors that it can hurt our health, education and even social lives, then can the brain reward system be used for something more positive? In fact, the answer is Yes. It is not just food or the social networking that are addictive but also "things that we like to do" or make us feel good doing that are linked with brain's reward system. Just if we make them habit, then they become our real strength and even lead us to fulfill our dreams. In fact, brain is an amazing organ in the sense that it usually change the reality. The mental reality is usually not the same as the external reality and it is not the virtual reality that is mostly products of mental realities are so different and addictive. 

Just as Facebook uses two aspect of our brains, linking with others and brains reward system, if we design what we "like to do" to link with others then, it would definitely ending up  boosting our performances and sharpening of our skills.

The reason that, I am saying that we can use, the phenomenon of Facebook addiction, as a model to reinvent our behaviors, and use it in our advantage is because, Facebook has emerged as a parallel mental ecology to those of earlier ones like culture. By parallel, I mean, culture is still dominant force in shaping our behaviors however, the cross-cultural and self-reflective environment of Facebook is introducing new behaviors that are at times go beyond social norms.

This means, if we create a parallel environments that are more productive then consumptive environment like that of culture and Facebook, we can use it to our advantage. The brain's attention is a limited resource and if it is not managed well, it will be wasted mostly.

There are 200,000,000 neurons in the mouse brain and only very small fraction of them - about 10,000- are dopamine neurons. Despite of making a very small fraction of neuron, they are proved to be very powerful in shaping behaviors of the mouses.

A comment on neutrality

I really like to be neutral but I do feel that option is not available. In fact, neutrality is a self-deception, if it is not an intentional lie (Silence is not neutrality). The only thing that can be neutral is nature. Humans is not neutral even if they claim so... As it is a short comment on neutrality, so I try to exclude my wordings and include as much as I can of others words (It might not be a good practice to compliment my opinion with theirs but somehow, I thought it suits here) 

"There is no such thing as problem. It is situation"... I heard it is a Jamaican proverb (I am not sure as the wordings do not match?)..So, what if the situation that we are in, is much bigger than us, tied to millions of people, as are in political situations? What should be our response, as it is not the situations but our responses to them that define us? At least, neutrality is not an option. One of my favorite Pakistani drama artist, Sania Saeed - She has a well rounded, graceful personality and acts naturally- says, "Cars don't run on neutral gears (unless, you push or pull them - that is definitely not a good option-).. every acts are political even if one chooses to be neutral" ...

So what if the situation is bigger than a single person's capabilities? So far, I have seen two suggestions that I have liked; It is an opportunity to change ones' situation - "When we are no longer able to change a situation - we are challenged to change ourselves"....Viktor E. Frankl - ....(We normally do not go for very bold and basic changes unless we do not run out of all others options)... Do not react hastily (From my personal experience, I can say that reactionary acts mostly backfire) ...

Well, as we do not have any scale for timing of response that distinguishes sanity from insanity, I like an alternative suggestion by Omar Khayam's (Famous Persian Poet) teacher to him, "For a boy to become man, he has to do three things, see things, write well and do not tell lie"... Seeing things help only for partial understanding of situations and to get more clearly, one needs to think and I don't see any better way for an organized thinking than writing...

And last do not worry (Just to calm down nerves)... The world is not going to end (Even, if it is ending for someone, others still have ways to make it a good one..  A charming example is "Internet users shower dying man with letters"  )..... George Soros says, "The worse a situation becomes the less it takes to turn it around, the bigger the upside."... I agree with that..

Just one thing more, the situations that we are in are mostly caused by us and even if the nature has a role in it, it stays neutral. So it is upon us to not be neutral... "The universe seems neither benign nor hostile, merely indifferent.".... Karl Sagan

So, in short, I think, situations are not natural and we can't be neutral, reactions are bad options are we have not to act alone and just for ourselves as we are tied together either we like it or not...

Saadat Hassan Manto’s Oxygen for Pakistan

What commonly known about him is that he was 35 years older than Pakistan, wrote neutrally about India-Pakistan partition and had freaked out the “nobles” with his “filthy” works like کھول دو    ;Open it - and       ٹھنڈا گوشت   ;Cold Meat – and died at age of 42 suffering from Cirrhosis and poverty. His often quoted reply to his critic, “If you cannot bear these stories then the society is unbearable. Who am I to remove the clothes of this society, which itself is naked. I don't even try to cover it, because it is not my job, that's the job of dressmakers.”…

Frankly, I am not in a position to write about Saadat Hassan Manto because I am not familiar with all of his works. As a coincidence, I read some of the Manto’s stories when I was reading Khalil Gibran’s works and I found them very close to each other in the sense  that both were detached from their birthplaces, lived in poverty, somewhat tried to demystify the human characters but were very slow in their descriptions of their experiences (at least in stories that I read… and it is just my personal judgments and my judgments might be very partial ) and all these things cumulatively made me not to follow their works anymore. I feel that the main reason for my decision was that at those times, I was feeling a big gap in human achievements regarding human mind and other sciences. To me, mankind had failed to understand themselves in systematic manners as they have understood and organized their knowledge of Physics, Chemistry, Biology, Economics, History and Social Sciences. The absence of a systematic understanding of human’s behaviors in general and human mind specifically have kept the doors of mystery still open. The patchy insights scattered through works of writers with good observations were leaving me with a choice to go after writers with more direct, simple but condensed observations. I didn’t have the patience to skim through thick piles of works to get some insights. So I was skipping writers with prolific use of words but with less condensed insights. Hassan Manto and Khalil Gibran were falling in this category for me…

OK, if I had not developed an interest in reading Manot then why am I describing him now?

People are rediscovering Manto

Two weeks ago, I was with my other classmates in the microscopy room to observe live anaerobic bacteria that we had cultured over almost in a month in the tubes with headspace of nitrogen to avoid oxygen exposures. Oxygen is poisonous to anaerobes. After placing a drop of culture on slide, we were observing the anaerobic bacteria freaking out by exposure to oxygen and were running randomly here and there. Observing this on the large screen, it was first time I was feeling sorry for those bacteria and meanwhile revisiting my perspective about the discoverer of Penicillin (weapon of mass destruction for bacteria)…

Pakistan soon after independence intentionally moved towards making the Pakistani society anaerobic (conservative) and writers like Saadat Hassan Manto, whose stories were making holes in this bubble were freaking out those who were considering oxygen (a direct and demystified observations) toxic for society in general. Now, that society have totally run out of oxygen and people are suffocating… there are some strong desires to make some oxygen available. But oxygen is already so scarce.

Saadat Hassan Manto died on spring of 1955 just when Pakistan was only 8 years old. This year (2012), Hassan Manto has become 100 years old and Pakistan has become 65 years old. It is no surprise that, why Pakistan has failed to produce another Hassan Manto in more than half a century after his death? The answer is simple. In a society that “self-deception” is more than welcomed and contradictions are rationalized under name of honor and loyalty, one can’t expect the blossom of healthy and courageous minds. Manto was able to observe and write in the earlier days, when Pakistani society still had the spirit and openness of British India but that unfortunately didn’t last long.

I see mushrooming of articles, audio and video reports in English newspapers and on BBC Urdu and I understand the strong desire for come back of Manto but the chances look bleak unless the present bubble of “self-deception” bursts and people once again breathe in an open atmosphere…  

                

                                      BBC Urdu celebrates Manto's 100 birthDay 

Changing Face of Radicalism

May be one of the reasons that I have developed a fondness for little events with some sort of conclusions and interpretation came from the “moral lessons” of school textbooks as well as little story books for children? When I look back, I find that textbook designers were wanted to achieve two objectives simultaneously, teaching the language and morality. The reason that I brought up those moral stories is, in a way they have implanted in me from an earlier age that learning from wise men is a wise act. Frankly, I am growing increasingly doubtful about this. Wherever, I see more stress on the words of the wise men, I see more aggression and inhuman behaviors.

If I dilute things out and do not go for Marxists, Jihadist and Libertarians' gig names and choose the most respected one like Plato, again I find the same issue. In the Book VII of the “Republic” after telling (through Socrates) how a “Just City” should form and look like, he then goes for how to implement it in an existing city. He proposes to kill or banish everyone over ten years old and raise the children in the manner he has outlined………. Now, if someone with a strong will gets inspired from Plato and tries to make such a just city, the result will be a humanitarian catastrophe. In fact, it has already happened many times but in different versions and under different titles. Take all major revolutions; there were deliberate killings or cleansing for creating “Just societies”. From French, Americans, Russian, Germans, Chinese, Turks, Indian/Pakistanis, Iranian, Arabs, Latin Americans all have tasted and practiced it in one or another form. Although these countries have seen brief humanitarian crises during their revolutions/independence however, afterwards they have moved to be better societies. In fact, these countries celebrate those times as their most romantic times.

Contradicting myself, I also consider them romantic times as those were times when people were standing for what they were thinking as justice and the REASON that I consider them romantic times is due to shrinking stands for justice and increasing stands on identities in our times. If people in first and second decades of last century were standing for economic and social justice…. today, a century later when the whole globe turned into a “village” and “all nations” have signed on “Human Rights” bill, it is no more justice or just societies that people stand for but the identities.

Honor asks to ban/kill

Freedom asks to ban/arrest

Frankly, Seeing “Burqa” has become a hot political issue is a Yuk moment for me. I should say, it is a yuk time in the history. It is such downgrading even in radicalism that it is no more society but it is the very personal issues, like head covering, beard, trousers and hair styles that have become most important issues. It appears to me Tribal values have overtaken both religious and secular values and have successfully dragged contemporary people around the world from societal issues into personal issues.  

Romantic Rebellion

Today, Yahoo posted an article on its home page about Daniel Suelo who runs a Blog by name of Zero Currency. It is not his Blog but his rebellious life style that reminded of several events. First time, that I read Leo Tolstoy's short story, "How Much Land Does a Man Needs?", it deeply impressed me and I got fond of reading other Russian writers of that time. This short story was a beautiful illustration of what happens when subconscious mind is in driving seat. Well, Although we experience on daily basis the contradictions between different parts of our brains but usually, it is the culture, the ecology of billions of brains around us that help us to come out with sound judgments with not much difficulties and feel as a single person (- a rational person- of course).

Leo Tolstoy; A tragedy hunter

What I find common between the life style of Suelo and writings of the late 19th century Russian writers are Romantic rebellions. Romantic in the sense that they have emerged from their commitments to their concepts of  morality. When one is committed to morality and wants to live with it, he finds himself in contradictions with the world one lives in and it usually creates tragedies. If one sees the world through moral point of view then his radars are quick to detect such tragedies with magnified details. Romantic (from sense of Morality) writers are usually "realist" and try to present the naked pictures (The contradictions) of society - The parts that people usually like to cover-

Although, we all know that we all are exposed only to limited information and we are ignorant to a large part but it doesn't make much problem as we live and interact with others but when we intentionally seal ourselves from information -conditioned- then we get a picture of world, that is dark and tragic. Love and Morality are two most romantic ideas that we all love to see but the world around us see them as parts not as whole or end goals. Devotion to these ideas are what I call, "romantic rebellion"...

In a field trip, there were some Kuchis (Afghan nomads) tents. While we were passing them by, our teacher said, "Look, they are also living. Human needs are small but human desires have no ends". That was a moralistic commentary on life but I knew, that it is against human nature. Unconscious Mind is the thickest layer of mind and drive us to break the limits instead of limiting ourselves to the minimal survival. If  one is interested that why majority of us do not have the gut to go for romantic rebellion, I refer a short and quick  reading, "The brain… it makes you think. Doesn't it?" in which two neuroscientists give their perspectives on who really govern us? 

While, it is evident that our unconscious minds are the biggest drive even in our seemingly conscious decisions but it is not just a mind or brain that decides all but it is the interactions of brains that influence most of our behaviors and decisions. I don't need any Neuroscientists/Psychologist/Philosopher tells me, how much the interactions with other brains or minds can shape our behaviors. I already know that a group of men that are conditioned can see the world in so a "nightmare like" perspective that they can deny all realities and not even can go to deny the very existence of others but also the large part of the very texts that they have devoted themselves... 

Today's infants are

Tomorrows leaders

The unmatched brutal murders and suicide attacks that students of "Madrassahs ; Religious Schools" have committed for last decade in Af-Pak region is enough evidence for how conditioning of minds can make unconscious mind grow strong enough to overtake the conscious minds and do acts that do not make sense to rest of world but make perfect sense to conditioned minds... Taliban didn't came out of no where but it is the conditioning of hundreds of thousands of minds for last four decades in thousands of Madrassahs that have produced a generation who see the short cut path to paradise by killing non-believers/infidels. 


Abraham Lincoln famously said, "The Philosophy of the schoolroom in one generation will be the Philosophy of government in the next".... 


If Kuchis can live on minimal things, it is because they have grown up conditioned to that life style. It is not the result of free choice as "romantic rebels" like Sadhus   or those who rebel against modern life styles based on their senses of moralities or conscience.. 

While we see occasionally some are having  the guts strong enough to challenge their unconscious minds and society altogether by power of their "moral judgments" and quite naturally we also encounter individuals who have totally given up to their unconscious minds and apparently have subjugated their conscience by their "rationales"... Sometime we see amusing reasoning for it..

The wife of the watchman gets sick and he runs out of money in taking care of her so he goes to owner of the building and asks for a loan amounted  10,000 rupees. The owner replies, "I am more needy than you are. There are thousands of people able to help you with 10,000 rupees but I need tens of millions of rupees to complete 2nd floor of my building. Tell me, how many people are out there who can afford to help me out with tens of millions of rupees?"... 

If there are people who rebel to denounce the normal lives altogether is not because normal lives are evil but because they observe the tragedies all around them... that are mostly the results of rationales in favor of instinctual and subconscious drives. While the rest of us have occasional "Yuk moments" to these drives, their strong moral senses make most of the normal looking things appear as Yuks... I see one more aspect to this and that is "romantic rebels" are mostly concerned with personal well beings than to social usefulness.

While "romantic rebels" are amusing and illustrate the subconscious drives, the "conditioned rebels" illustrate what happens when the minds are sealed off of most information and exposed to particulars... 

Do we need to measure ourselves?

I am confident that every culture has come up with ways to ease out the emotions that result from comparisons.  I was hearing it a lot from my father, “Our elders were saying that, if it happens in life that you feel proud because of your achievements and started looking down to others, visit a graveyard. By looking to epitaphs or tombstones you will realize that much better people are lying there that preceded you and if it happens sometime in you life that you feel down then visit a marketplace or Bazar and you will see people of different kinds that you are much better off than a lot of them”… While, the advice is practical but the question is, do we really need to measure ourselves at first place?

We can’t think to live modestly without measurements. All businesses, sciences and most of the social interactions are based on measurements.  In fact, our sense of fairness and security in our interactions with others dominantly come from our relying on these measurements. If we are relying so heavily on measurements in our daily lives then isn’t it counterintuitive that when it comes to our personal lives, the frequent advice is to not measure ourselves with others??? (Except in the cases of emotional very high or very down; first paragraph). The reason for not measuring/comparing oneself with others is said to be “Differential abilities/talents” and “Differential beginnings” so the comparisons do not makes sense but even more important reason is its cost on the overall wellbeing of the individual. By comparison with others one either becomes illusionary flattered or becomes delusionary depressed.

 While we are advised not compare with others but we are evolved to appreciate refined things. In fact, choices that we make and prices that we willingly pay are dominantly based on the refinements. We know men with most refined works in their respective fields as great men. It is repetition but just to illustrate look at following list,

Shakespeare; most refined drama writer, Einstein; most refined Physicist, Charles Darwin; most refined biologist, Michael Angelo; most refined artist, Alexander the great; most refined general, Socrates; most refined Philosopher, Siddhartha; most refined psychologist, Edison;  most refined inventor, Gandhi;  most refined politician, Muhammad Ali; most refined boxer, Nusrat Fateh Ali Khan; most refined singer and so on…

If from one side we are advised to not compare with ourselves with others but from other side we are advised to takes these big names as role models and push against our limits. It seems that we actually got standards for our measurements and we do measure however, these measurements are NOT to find our worth but instead to make ourselves worthwhile.

But it does also have another aspect; looking to this very small sample out of pool of great names, one might wonder, these were the individuals who invested their lives for their respective goals. Does the goal in life is the same as “meaning in life?” or a life worthy of living despite all suffering it asks for? Majority of people are living a mediocre or below mediocre lives. What about their lives? Are their lives are devoid of meaning? Of course, no one agree with this extreme point of view except radical reductionists. But while having said that, if you look back to the list, you find that all of these great names are coming only from one dominant perspective and that is the utilitarian perspective of life; how much useful one is to society? Although it eases out everyone as no doubt everyone finds their niches of usefulness in their respective societies however, again it ignores the very person/individual in question.

For the individual, there is another perspective and that is psychological perspective. I don’t know any other person than Siddhartha who came with best explanation for this aspect of the question. Do not compare yourself at all. Making comparisons and expectations are wrong approaches. Life is not all about racing with others. It is much bigger than that. So, it is no wonder to see the popularity of yoga increases in places where races are more intensive. Although it is ironic but at least it is good that it is working. I didn’t want to suggest anything instead I just wanted to clarify that when it comes to our lives, we usually mix psychological perspective with social usefulness perspective.

I read a lot of complains that Philosophy has a depleting impacts on the meaning of life. It questions everything so brutally that leaves nothing under shades. To me, that is a mistake. Personally, I do not look to Philosophy as a specialized knowledge to provide specific answers. It is a practice of critical thinking in areas or to questions one cares or has interest in and it is not necessary that our areas of interests match. In short, if one wants to get a utilitarian perspective like level of usefulness to society, one might come with good answers. It might actually enrich the life but of course with due sufferings they ask for. But on other hand, if one is not concerned with society but just for wellbeing or with personal life then I am afraid that Philosophy is not a good place. For that, ancient Psychologists provide a template for practice and an explanation that rationalize well to live a content life. I always refer to Siddhartha (Buddha) as he had a secular and practical approach to personal wellbeing. My personal approach so far has been a combination of both. While I try my best to push against my limits to be more usefulness, I do not expect in return or at least try to minimize my expectations to the lowest levels.