Yet another first
18 years ago
Thursday, January 20, 2011
Sunday, January 17, 2010
Strategy - The Biggest GLOBE
What is strategy?
This is the opening line of a world famous and most quoted paper by Michael Porter and is the opening line of plethora of books on strategy by different authors, all claiming to be authorities on a topic which cannot be mastered by their own admission. The first page of any text book on strategy claims that it is not easily defined and is very subjective and open to interpretation. Yet isn’t it funny that they are writing a book of 1000 pages about something which they admit cannot be actually taught in a classroom? After reading all the 1000 pages, neither the author is clear about what is he talking about, neither the teacher who “facilitated “ this course nor the hundred odd students who were actually supposed to learn it.
To pile on the misery, we have the siblings or descendants ( I, being so weak on strategy could not figure out how the taxonomy works) of Strategy by really wicked names like Corporate Strategy, Business Strategy, Marketing strategy. HR Strategy, Transnational strategy and blah blah blah. To make the matters worse, we have derivatives on strategy like strategic intent, strategic positioning etc and etc. If defining the indefinable was not enough, people have added qualifiers just like they are adding prefixes to normal English words.
OK, now you may ask what is my opinion/ definition/view on strategy. To set the record right, I do not believe that there is anything called strategy. However, just to avoid loss of face to the questioner, I would say that strategy is simple common sense. All the gyan that are captured in fancy looking frameworks are just nothing but embellishments over some trivial idea which I am sure anyone can think of. But then we have a great obsession with all neat looking diagrams containing words which no one understands in beautiful shapes of triangles, diamonds and pentagrams.
Even if we assume that strategy is more than plain common sense, it raises a fundamental question what purpose does strategy serve in a business. It does not help us get more sales, does not help with financing or understanding the costs nor it deals with motivating the people. It does not help me wit my production as well. Then, do we actually need so many courses in strategy as part of the curriculum in an MBA program? Wont we be better off with a reduced load? Or if some people feel it’s a cardinal sin to have free time for yourself in a b-school, we can have one or two courses which encourage you to study some industry in great detail thereby helping you in making a career choice.
The only reason why strategy is taught in a b-school is because it keeps a specific breed of academicians relevant in the overall scheme of things and they continue to pile up garbage in the name of academic research. They come out with fancy ideas with fancier names which devoid of all embellishments is basically something that’s what everyone is supposed to do in business. These academicians come out with new and new theories which help them to make the text books thicker and thicker. The corporate then hire these academicians for consulting projects with the hope that their company name gets published as a pioneering practitioner of the latest crazy idea that a crazy professor has come up.
Isn’t it funny that all great strategies are known only in hindsight when the company has successfully executed its plans? For all the pedigree of the academic researchers, why can’t they predict if a particular strategy would be successful or not? They can always do a good post mortem but would be horrible if they have to stick out their neck out and say it would work. The greatest joke is when a particular strategy fails they take refuge in the fact that it was not poor strategy formulation but poor implementation that led to the downfall. If implementation is what actually matters, then why so much noise about strategy formulation in the first place?
If Wal-Mart is successful, its not because it has a low cost strategy but because its managers are good at finding ways to achieve lowest costs and are capable of doing it successfully. All the competitors of Wal-Mart are trying the same strategy but are unable to do so. If strategy actually mattered, then all of them should have been successful. The bottom line is its Execution that matters and not strategy in business. If the b-schools want to churn out entrepreneurs in large numbers, they should stop all the strategy courses and replace them with courses consisting of field work and execution challenges
This is the opening line of a world famous and most quoted paper by Michael Porter and is the opening line of plethora of books on strategy by different authors, all claiming to be authorities on a topic which cannot be mastered by their own admission. The first page of any text book on strategy claims that it is not easily defined and is very subjective and open to interpretation. Yet isn’t it funny that they are writing a book of 1000 pages about something which they admit cannot be actually taught in a classroom? After reading all the 1000 pages, neither the author is clear about what is he talking about, neither the teacher who “facilitated “ this course nor the hundred odd students who were actually supposed to learn it.
To pile on the misery, we have the siblings or descendants ( I, being so weak on strategy could not figure out how the taxonomy works) of Strategy by really wicked names like Corporate Strategy, Business Strategy, Marketing strategy. HR Strategy, Transnational strategy and blah blah blah. To make the matters worse, we have derivatives on strategy like strategic intent, strategic positioning etc and etc. If defining the indefinable was not enough, people have added qualifiers just like they are adding prefixes to normal English words.
OK, now you may ask what is my opinion/ definition/view on strategy. To set the record right, I do not believe that there is anything called strategy. However, just to avoid loss of face to the questioner, I would say that strategy is simple common sense. All the gyan that are captured in fancy looking frameworks are just nothing but embellishments over some trivial idea which I am sure anyone can think of. But then we have a great obsession with all neat looking diagrams containing words which no one understands in beautiful shapes of triangles, diamonds and pentagrams.
Even if we assume that strategy is more than plain common sense, it raises a fundamental question what purpose does strategy serve in a business. It does not help us get more sales, does not help with financing or understanding the costs nor it deals with motivating the people. It does not help me wit my production as well. Then, do we actually need so many courses in strategy as part of the curriculum in an MBA program? Wont we be better off with a reduced load? Or if some people feel it’s a cardinal sin to have free time for yourself in a b-school, we can have one or two courses which encourage you to study some industry in great detail thereby helping you in making a career choice.
The only reason why strategy is taught in a b-school is because it keeps a specific breed of academicians relevant in the overall scheme of things and they continue to pile up garbage in the name of academic research. They come out with fancy ideas with fancier names which devoid of all embellishments is basically something that’s what everyone is supposed to do in business. These academicians come out with new and new theories which help them to make the text books thicker and thicker. The corporate then hire these academicians for consulting projects with the hope that their company name gets published as a pioneering practitioner of the latest crazy idea that a crazy professor has come up.
Isn’t it funny that all great strategies are known only in hindsight when the company has successfully executed its plans? For all the pedigree of the academic researchers, why can’t they predict if a particular strategy would be successful or not? They can always do a good post mortem but would be horrible if they have to stick out their neck out and say it would work. The greatest joke is when a particular strategy fails they take refuge in the fact that it was not poor strategy formulation but poor implementation that led to the downfall. If implementation is what actually matters, then why so much noise about strategy formulation in the first place?
If Wal-Mart is successful, its not because it has a low cost strategy but because its managers are good at finding ways to achieve lowest costs and are capable of doing it successfully. All the competitors of Wal-Mart are trying the same strategy but are unable to do so. If strategy actually mattered, then all of them should have been successful. The bottom line is its Execution that matters and not strategy in business. If the b-schools want to churn out entrepreneurs in large numbers, they should stop all the strategy courses and replace them with courses consisting of field work and execution challenges
Saturday, January 2, 2010
happy new year 2010
Happy New Year 2010
I wish all of you a very happy new year day. I hope everyone gets what he/she wants this year. This wish is even more pertinent to a class of species who are going to graduate out of a bschool and are wondering if the economy has recovered enough for them to get a job. With an average liability of 8Lac on each of the student, people are praying that they have a salary decent enough for them to pay off the EMI. He he, just kidding guys. The economy has recovered and everyone would have multiple offers.
Year 2010 started off in a very unusual way as I was caught in a traffic jam at 00:00 hrs on Jan 1. I had gone for dinner with my closest bunch of buddies to Mint and had a nice dinner( It was nicer as it was sponsored by a friend). We all wanted to be in campus on time for the new year as this would be the last new year that I can celebrate in my beloved Hel(L). But then as they say, man proposes and God disposes and we were all wishing new year to each other in a taxi. Few of my friends tried to do a "LEAD INDIA" by playing the role of traffic constable and clear the traffic jam. However, they forgot that its Lucknow and to expect people to have road sense is like asking a bit too much. Anyways, I used this opportunity to lay down full stretch in the ambassador taxi and had a power nap for 30 minutes.
We finally reached the campus at 00:30 and then wished everyone we met and it was such a happy moment. I generally don't give much of a significance to any particular date be it Jan 1 or Feb 14 or Apr 21 ( to the uninitiated, I was born on this day. I know you would have guessed it as you are a smart ass but then even smart asses like a pat on their back ). However, it was nice to see so many smiling happy faces around you, all of them forgetting their own tension, sorrows for a fleeting second and just celebrating the arrival of a new year as if it is the arrival of a new epoch.
I hope 2010 would be really lucky for all of us. I am praying for few things this year which I have not done so in earlier years. I am pretty excited about this year as I have lots to look forward to. Au revoir 2009 and welcome 2010
I wish all of you a very happy new year day. I hope everyone gets what he/she wants this year. This wish is even more pertinent to a class of species who are going to graduate out of a bschool and are wondering if the economy has recovered enough for them to get a job. With an average liability of 8Lac on each of the student, people are praying that they have a salary decent enough for them to pay off the EMI. He he, just kidding guys. The economy has recovered and everyone would have multiple offers.
Year 2010 started off in a very unusual way as I was caught in a traffic jam at 00:00 hrs on Jan 1. I had gone for dinner with my closest bunch of buddies to Mint and had a nice dinner( It was nicer as it was sponsored by a friend). We all wanted to be in campus on time for the new year as this would be the last new year that I can celebrate in my beloved Hel(L). But then as they say, man proposes and God disposes and we were all wishing new year to each other in a taxi. Few of my friends tried to do a "LEAD INDIA" by playing the role of traffic constable and clear the traffic jam. However, they forgot that its Lucknow and to expect people to have road sense is like asking a bit too much. Anyways, I used this opportunity to lay down full stretch in the ambassador taxi and had a power nap for 30 minutes.
We finally reached the campus at 00:30 and then wished everyone we met and it was such a happy moment. I generally don't give much of a significance to any particular date be it Jan 1 or Feb 14 or Apr 21 ( to the uninitiated, I was born on this day. I know you would have guessed it as you are a smart ass but then even smart asses like a pat on their back ). However, it was nice to see so many smiling happy faces around you, all of them forgetting their own tension, sorrows for a fleeting second and just celebrating the arrival of a new year as if it is the arrival of a new epoch.
I hope 2010 would be really lucky for all of us. I am praying for few things this year which I have not done so in earlier years. I am pretty excited about this year as I have lots to look forward to. Au revoir 2009 and welcome 2010
Friday, December 18, 2009
Back to blogging
Its been almost 18 months since I Blogged. I think with the eurotrip, and few intellectual discussions, I have enough content to talk about.
I think time has come to fill up the pensieve again.
I think time has come to fill up the pensieve again.
Friday, June 13, 2008
My Expectations
I am into the last week of one month notice period in the office. I am itching to get into IIM Lucknow and begin the most important phase of my life. I feel like a batsman padded up and waiting for the play to start.
If I look back at last few years of my life, I feel the four years of engineering in NSIT was a big let down. I could have learned a lot more but squandered the opportunity. Why did it happen? One reason as I see now is that I was not clear of my objectives. Mine was a journey without a destination and a clear sense of purpose. No wonder, I covered great distance but displacement was paltry.
Wise men never repeat the mistakes. So I have decided to put in writing what I expect from this course. It would serve as a template, a reference which would guide the route I choose in this momentous journey. Let this be the light that leads my way…
My expectations are:
1. Good understanding of all functional areas of management.
2. A structured thinking process. The ability to define a problem out of thin air.
3. To further refine my thought process
4. To discover new facets of my personality
5. A network of great individuals to march with in the professional life.
6. Buddies for life. NSIT introduced me to some people whom I respect a lot. I hope IIML gives me a larger number.
7. The confidence to do anything.
8. Time management
9. To prepare me for battles in corporate life. I should never quit because of inability.
If I look back at last few years of my life, I feel the four years of engineering in NSIT was a big let down. I could have learned a lot more but squandered the opportunity. Why did it happen? One reason as I see now is that I was not clear of my objectives. Mine was a journey without a destination and a clear sense of purpose. No wonder, I covered great distance but displacement was paltry.
Wise men never repeat the mistakes. So I have decided to put in writing what I expect from this course. It would serve as a template, a reference which would guide the route I choose in this momentous journey. Let this be the light that leads my way…
My expectations are:
1. Good understanding of all functional areas of management.
2. A structured thinking process. The ability to define a problem out of thin air.
3. To further refine my thought process
4. To discover new facets of my personality
5. A network of great individuals to march with in the professional life.
6. Buddies for life. NSIT introduced me to some people whom I respect a lot. I hope IIML gives me a larger number.
7. The confidence to do anything.
8. Time management
9. To prepare me for battles in corporate life. I should never quit because of inability.
Delhi, My Love....
I am leaving Delhi for IIM Lucknow in just about eight days i.e. on 20th June. Just four more days of office for me. Though I was born in a village called Kallidaikurichi in Tirunelveli in southern Tamil Nadu, I have spent all my life here. My schooling and my engineering were in this historic city. For my job, I wanted to move out of the city so that I can meet up new people and learn new language and culture, but as luck would have it, I got the job in Greater Noida itself.
So, I wanted to move out for the last two years but now that I am actually moving, I feel a bit uneasy. Leaving this city is emotionally more difficult that what I imagined it would be. I would be missing my family, friends and above all my daily dosage of “Gol Guppa and other chats”. Traveling in DTC buses seems pleasurable and this sweltering heat bearable.
Though I am just going to a near by city that I can reach in six hours and one which is similar to mine in terms of climate and culture, I still feel the pain. I am thinking about the people who have to leave their motherland and go to some strange place permanently. How difficult it would be for them.
Now I understand why NRIs are more attached to this country than the average resident Indian. Now I understand why they say “Janani Janmabhoomischa Swargat api gariyasi”. I always supported Nasser Hussain when he complained about British supporting Asian cricket teams in England. Now I am a bit skeptical. You just can’t cut away the roots.
If planned emigration by choice is tough, what about the forceful displacement of millions of people in war torn areas. These people are forced to cut their roots and move to a strange place on account of the ego of a single man, an emperor or a political leader. What emotional turmoil do they go through? When I talked to a Kashmiri pundit, I see a glint in his eyes as he talks about his ancestral home. Now I understand the affection for Pakistan amongst the elder Punjabis. Imagine the plight of Hindus and Muslims at the time of partition as they moved to a strange land. Imagine the dwellers of the “City of Peace” (Jerusalem) during those chaotic years of late 1940s. Imagine the situation of people of Africa who have civil wars as the only constant thing in their life.
These thoughts further enhance my love for ahimsa. Why can’t the world be a happy place where there is no conflict, hunger or poverty? My Lord! When will you answer my prayers of “Loka Samasta sukhino bhavantu, Sarve janaha sukhino bhavantu”?
PS: This should qualify as my most random post. I started with something and I ended up this way.
So, I wanted to move out for the last two years but now that I am actually moving, I feel a bit uneasy. Leaving this city is emotionally more difficult that what I imagined it would be. I would be missing my family, friends and above all my daily dosage of “Gol Guppa and other chats”. Traveling in DTC buses seems pleasurable and this sweltering heat bearable.
Though I am just going to a near by city that I can reach in six hours and one which is similar to mine in terms of climate and culture, I still feel the pain. I am thinking about the people who have to leave their motherland and go to some strange place permanently. How difficult it would be for them.
Now I understand why NRIs are more attached to this country than the average resident Indian. Now I understand why they say “Janani Janmabhoomischa Swargat api gariyasi”. I always supported Nasser Hussain when he complained about British supporting Asian cricket teams in England. Now I am a bit skeptical. You just can’t cut away the roots.
If planned emigration by choice is tough, what about the forceful displacement of millions of people in war torn areas. These people are forced to cut their roots and move to a strange place on account of the ego of a single man, an emperor or a political leader. What emotional turmoil do they go through? When I talked to a Kashmiri pundit, I see a glint in his eyes as he talks about his ancestral home. Now I understand the affection for Pakistan amongst the elder Punjabis. Imagine the plight of Hindus and Muslims at the time of partition as they moved to a strange land. Imagine the dwellers of the “City of Peace” (Jerusalem) during those chaotic years of late 1940s. Imagine the situation of people of Africa who have civil wars as the only constant thing in their life.
These thoughts further enhance my love for ahimsa. Why can’t the world be a happy place where there is no conflict, hunger or poverty? My Lord! When will you answer my prayers of “Loka Samasta sukhino bhavantu, Sarve janaha sukhino bhavantu”?
PS: This should qualify as my most random post. I started with something and I ended up this way.
Tuesday, June 10, 2008
Twin Rules on ethics
I was having a discussion with one of my college friends. She just mentioned that I am an ethical person. I have received this compliment from others as well but did not think much about it. I am wondering what they mean when they say I am ethical. I think what they mean is I am a man of principles and values. (It’s a nice compliment and I enjoy writing this blog). I can’t say if I am a man of principles but I can assume that I am perceived to be one. Also the fact I got this compliment from many people spread over a period of a year will help me in assuming that I am indeed one.
Ethics and morality come into picture when you have to take a decision or to make a choice. Your decisions and the choices determine what sort of person you are. I can safely assume that I have been consistently making those choices that people expect a principled man to make. More interesting question is how I do it. Do I follow a rule consciously to help me make a decision or is it just natural? If its natural, am I doing it subconsciously and the process is so innate that I fail to perceive it? To find answers, I thought of situation where in I was faced with a difficult decision. After replaying many incidents, I think I have discovered the twin rules that help me decide on the choices.
Rule 1
Whenever you have a choice to exercise, evaluate each of the option carefully. Think over the options in great detail understanding what each of them means for you. All these years, you must have a developed a system of values for yourself, certain ideals that you cherish. Just ensure that the choice you make does not contradict those. Because, when you look back at these decisions, you should be proud about it irrespective of their monetary or social benefits. At the end of the day, when you see your image in the mirror, it’s always better to see a guiltless face and proud shoulders than a guilty face and drooped down shoulders.
This rule works for 80% of cases. You generally have two or at most 3 options and this rule helps. For the remaining minor cases you can use rule two.
Rule 2
Identify a set of people you admire and whose views you respect. It would generally be your family members and some friends you respect a lot. The set should consist of people who understand you well, should be your well wishers and you reciprocate their feelings as well. Now evaluate each of the options and see if they approve of it. Does your action increase or reduce your reputation and respect in their frame of reference. Will they be happy and proud of the choice you exercised? These questions go a long way in helping you make the choice.
Ethics and morality come into picture when you have to take a decision or to make a choice. Your decisions and the choices determine what sort of person you are. I can safely assume that I have been consistently making those choices that people expect a principled man to make. More interesting question is how I do it. Do I follow a rule consciously to help me make a decision or is it just natural? If its natural, am I doing it subconsciously and the process is so innate that I fail to perceive it? To find answers, I thought of situation where in I was faced with a difficult decision. After replaying many incidents, I think I have discovered the twin rules that help me decide on the choices.
Rule 1
Whenever you have a choice to exercise, evaluate each of the option carefully. Think over the options in great detail understanding what each of them means for you. All these years, you must have a developed a system of values for yourself, certain ideals that you cherish. Just ensure that the choice you make does not contradict those. Because, when you look back at these decisions, you should be proud about it irrespective of their monetary or social benefits. At the end of the day, when you see your image in the mirror, it’s always better to see a guiltless face and proud shoulders than a guilty face and drooped down shoulders.
This rule works for 80% of cases. You generally have two or at most 3 options and this rule helps. For the remaining minor cases you can use rule two.
Rule 2
Identify a set of people you admire and whose views you respect. It would generally be your family members and some friends you respect a lot. The set should consist of people who understand you well, should be your well wishers and you reciprocate their feelings as well. Now evaluate each of the options and see if they approve of it. Does your action increase or reduce your reputation and respect in their frame of reference. Will they be happy and proud of the choice you exercised? These questions go a long way in helping you make the choice.
Monday, May 19, 2008
Countdown begins...
Finally, the wait is over. I have formally resigned today from the job and need to serve the notice period of 1 month. I expect to be relieved on 18 June. Even though I had intimated my decision to my manager and team members 3 weeks ago, I held on the job so long so as to complete one year of service. I am unable to express my feelings now. I am neither sad nor elated. The feeling is very similar to the day I got this job on campus.
Looking back at this one year, I made some good friends, learned a lot both professionally and personally and on the whole am more mature than what I was a year ago. Company, though not a good pay master ,offers a good quality of life. Lot of perks and encouragement to do things that you want to do makes it one of the better places to work for. The disappointment of leaving the company is masked by the fact that I am going to IIM L. It’s a new inning and hope that I start on the front foot right from the first ball.
1 down, 29 more to go.
I plan to write a series of blogs to share my experiences of the journey to Hel(L). Watch out this space.
Looking back at this one year, I made some good friends, learned a lot both professionally and personally and on the whole am more mature than what I was a year ago. Company, though not a good pay master ,offers a good quality of life. Lot of perks and encouragement to do things that you want to do makes it one of the better places to work for. The disappointment of leaving the company is masked by the fact that I am going to IIM L. It’s a new inning and hope that I start on the front foot right from the first ball.
1 down, 29 more to go.
I plan to write a series of blogs to share my experiences of the journey to Hel(L). Watch out this space.
Monday, March 24, 2008
BudgetBlog - Social Sector
FM Chidambaram has called education and health care the twin pillars of the social sector. The increased outlay for both education and healthcare is a step in the right direction. However, the allocation falls way short of the target of 6% and 3% of GDP as mentioned in the CMP. The countries that have achieved high growth over a prolonged period have done so because of their strong emphasis on education and health. Education can make the difference between half a billion mouths to feed and a billion hands to earn. Health care goes a long way in ensuring battle ready soldiers in the fight against poverty.
Mid-day meal scheme, a concept pioneered by the late Congress leader Kamaraj ( former CM of TamilNadu) way back in 1960s is being now introduced all over the country. Well, better late than never! Establishment of 6000 model schools, opening of more Nehru Yuva Kendra, 3 new IITs and other excellent institutes of higher learning are laudable steps. Not only this, the govt. should expend all its energies in improving the quality of all institutes of higher learning in this country. Today we have few institutes of excellence like oases in deserts. It is the right of every Indian to see a forest of excellent institutes.
INSPIRE, if properly implemented can go a long way in ensuring an army of technologists and scientists that the country would need in days to come. To sustain a position of economic pre-eminence in this century, the role of science and technology can not be over emphasized. To tackle the problem of jobless growth, the FM has proposed the up gradation of ITIs and the launch of a world class skill development programme. He should have also considered the demands of IT and BPO industry for setting up of finishing schools for the graduates.
All the well intentioned policies of the govt. would come to nought if we do not focus on its effective implementation. A system of controls should be established so that projects are completed without cost or time over runs. Our record when it comes to implementation has been very poor and it’s an historic opportunity to set the record straight. Let’s march towards our rightful place at the top of the world order. CHAK DE INDIA.
Mid-day meal scheme, a concept pioneered by the late Congress leader Kamaraj ( former CM of TamilNadu) way back in 1960s is being now introduced all over the country. Well, better late than never! Establishment of 6000 model schools, opening of more Nehru Yuva Kendra, 3 new IITs and other excellent institutes of higher learning are laudable steps. Not only this, the govt. should expend all its energies in improving the quality of all institutes of higher learning in this country. Today we have few institutes of excellence like oases in deserts. It is the right of every Indian to see a forest of excellent institutes.
INSPIRE, if properly implemented can go a long way in ensuring an army of technologists and scientists that the country would need in days to come. To sustain a position of economic pre-eminence in this century, the role of science and technology can not be over emphasized. To tackle the problem of jobless growth, the FM has proposed the up gradation of ITIs and the launch of a world class skill development programme. He should have also considered the demands of IT and BPO industry for setting up of finishing schools for the graduates.
All the well intentioned policies of the govt. would come to nought if we do not focus on its effective implementation. A system of controls should be established so that projects are completed without cost or time over runs. Our record when it comes to implementation has been very poor and it’s an historic opportunity to set the record straight. Let’s march towards our rightful place at the top of the world order. CHAK DE INDIA.
Sustainable Development
CSR has come a long way from a being a dangerous fad to one of the functions of business. I feel time is not far when CSR wont be taken up just as an act of charity but for strong economic and business reasons. CSR is just one aspect of the broader idea of Sustainable Development. I believe Sustainable Development practices will be taken up by more and more companies as they see its advantages particularly in the long run. What exactly is Sustainable Development (SD)?
SD, as I understand, has three aspects to it- environmental, social and political. When the business practices are socially sustainable, politically sustainable and environmentally sustainable we have a business model that’s economically sustainable for perpetuity. Environmental sustainability deals with practices that do not harm the environment irrevocably. The companies need to be concerned about the natural resources that they consume and if possible, replenish them so as to remain resource neutral. Political sustainability deals with respecting the regulations of the countries in which we operate not only in letter but also in spirit. It calls for highest standards of corporate governance and business ethics. This is the only way we can forge a long term meaningful relationship with our customers, employees and the suppliers.
Social sustainability relates to the idea of inclusive growth. Our business divides the members of the society in two parts- one who are benefited by us and the others who are not benefited by us. It should be our endeavour to continually increase the count in the former group and reduce in the latter group. The logic for such a step can be easily seen from the fact that most of the countries today are democracies and it’s the numerically stronger group that decides the policies (at least on paper!). So, inclusive growth is no charity but a strategic move to cover up for the potential catastrophic losses in the future. It’s like buying insurance or going for hedging.
The time has come for all of us to embrace SD for our own benefits and long term survival.
SD, as I understand, has three aspects to it- environmental, social and political. When the business practices are socially sustainable, politically sustainable and environmentally sustainable we have a business model that’s economically sustainable for perpetuity. Environmental sustainability deals with practices that do not harm the environment irrevocably. The companies need to be concerned about the natural resources that they consume and if possible, replenish them so as to remain resource neutral. Political sustainability deals with respecting the regulations of the countries in which we operate not only in letter but also in spirit. It calls for highest standards of corporate governance and business ethics. This is the only way we can forge a long term meaningful relationship with our customers, employees and the suppliers.
Social sustainability relates to the idea of inclusive growth. Our business divides the members of the society in two parts- one who are benefited by us and the others who are not benefited by us. It should be our endeavour to continually increase the count in the former group and reduce in the latter group. The logic for such a step can be easily seen from the fact that most of the countries today are democracies and it’s the numerically stronger group that decides the policies (at least on paper!). So, inclusive growth is no charity but a strategic move to cover up for the potential catastrophic losses in the future. It’s like buying insurance or going for hedging.
The time has come for all of us to embrace SD for our own benefits and long term survival.
Saturday, November 3, 2007
Scientific Method - Final Part
SHANKARA WROTE:
Hi Kislay,
You have mentioned about the "process of drawing a map" and have equated it to the mathematical method of representing it in terms of symbols and formulae.i believe your analogy is incorrect.
The natural phenomenon is the territory. The process of enquiry is the conceps of drawing a map. Sceintific model of enquiry is just one of the ways of drawing a map. The problem with your argument is that you are equating one of the instances of the class with the class itself. This
probably comes from the belief that it is the only instance possible. It is precisely this dogma that I am uncomfortable with. Just as scientific enquiry, we can possibly have some other kinds of enquiry, which though may not be as popular as scientifc one, yet may have the potential to explain natural phenomena.
The reason for such a belief stems from the fact that scientific inquiry has advanced quite a lot and is now capable of explaining many concepts. But this alone does not give us the justification to claim that it IS THE ONLY MODE OF ENQUIRY POSSIBLE. I think, what we require is a multi disciplanary approach. We need to draw lessons from metaphysics, easterm mysticism and others schools of thought. Or in fact, a systematic study of Vedas should also help us understand many natural phenomena. Its not without reason that Dayanand Saraswati asked us to go back to the vedas.
Scientific Method- Part 6
KISLAY WROTE:
Hi,
ALL RIGHT, it took me one night to see why your second arguments about the map And the map maker sounds so plausible even though I know it is crap. But I think I finally got it. So here goes.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
1.You believe maps are not independent of territory. Perfectly agree, 100%. But you also seem to suugest that territory is not independent of maps. It is this backward mapping from concepts to reality that I object to.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
You misunderstood me about the two way mapping. What I meant was that if I Understood a map, I could picture the territory by using it. Also if I was actually Standing in that territory, I would be able to visualize what part of THAT PARTICULAR MAP it is. The territory is definitely completely independent of the map. It Would exist independent of the existence of any map.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
2. you believe maps are true representation of territory. I contest this. Maps are just a perspective of the map-maker about the territory. If map maker changes, so does the map.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Now this is what was bugging me. What you are saying is true. But here you are being inconsistent with your own initial problem statement, viz, the ability of science to help explain phenomena.If the map maker changes, so does the map. Correct. But it still remains a map. Situation being analogous to multiple scientific theories to explain a single phenomenon, One or more of which may be fully or partioally correct.
What you ORIGINALLY said that is there a way of doing this without maps at all. You wanted something which would put you yourself IN the territory, instead of you having to infer the territory from the map.
Change the map maker as many times as you will, you still need a map.
Maps are representations their makers perspective on the teriitory??? As both you and I agree, The territory is a fact. It does not brook any perspective on it. All you can do is choose HOW to represent this fact. The map maker has to present his Key to the map in advance. He may be Somewhat incorrect. Some road may be longer or shorter than what it appears to be in the map.Then the maker has to make the effort of corrcting his map as soon as such a flaw is found.
What I mean to say is:
You may find faults with a map or a map maker, but you can not fault the CONCEPT OF DRAWING MAPS To represet territory. The only way for you to actually BE IN THE TERRITORY to use your mind to Understand a map.
What you are saying about locality maps is bullshit. I don't need a map of my locality Because I already have it in my head. And the map in my head has much more detail than Would be found in a usual map, but it's a map a map nonetheless. Everytime I take a left from the paan waala to reach the playground I am referring that map subconsciously.
But I will need that locality map if you want to know what is the cumulative length of all the roads in my colony. It is requied for quantitative measure.
Similarly, what suport tools do you want to do away with? Since you are very comfortable with English can you do away with the grammar or punctuation??? If you are very worried about Delta T Then allow me to remind you that as far as understanding the territory of natural phenomena goes You don't need that abstraction. It comes into the map only when you try to obtain a quantitative measure of phenomena. It is like scale of the map, not required if you want only a general layout Of the territory but required if you want to measure it.
I hope THAT has killed your little unscientific rebellion.
Hi,
ALL RIGHT, it took me one night to see why your second arguments about the map And the map maker sounds so plausible even though I know it is crap. But I think I finally got it. So here goes.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
1.You believe maps are not independent of territory. Perfectly agree, 100%. But you also seem to suugest that territory is not independent of maps. It is this backward mapping from concepts to reality that I object to.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
You misunderstood me about the two way mapping. What I meant was that if I Understood a map, I could picture the territory by using it. Also if I was actually Standing in that territory, I would be able to visualize what part of THAT PARTICULAR MAP it is. The territory is definitely completely independent of the map. It Would exist independent of the existence of any map.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
2. you believe maps are true representation of territory. I contest this. Maps are just a perspective of the map-maker about the territory. If map maker changes, so does the map.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Now this is what was bugging me. What you are saying is true. But here you are being inconsistent with your own initial problem statement, viz, the ability of science to help explain phenomena.If the map maker changes, so does the map. Correct. But it still remains a map. Situation being analogous to multiple scientific theories to explain a single phenomenon, One or more of which may be fully or partioally correct.
What you ORIGINALLY said that is there a way of doing this without maps at all. You wanted something which would put you yourself IN the territory, instead of you having to infer the territory from the map.
Change the map maker as many times as you will, you still need a map.
Maps are representations their makers perspective on the teriitory??? As both you and I agree, The territory is a fact. It does not brook any perspective on it. All you can do is choose HOW to represent this fact. The map maker has to present his Key to the map in advance. He may be Somewhat incorrect. Some road may be longer or shorter than what it appears to be in the map.Then the maker has to make the effort of corrcting his map as soon as such a flaw is found.
What I mean to say is:
You may find faults with a map or a map maker, but you can not fault the CONCEPT OF DRAWING MAPS To represet territory. The only way for you to actually BE IN THE TERRITORY to use your mind to Understand a map.
What you are saying about locality maps is bullshit. I don't need a map of my locality Because I already have it in my head. And the map in my head has much more detail than Would be found in a usual map, but it's a map a map nonetheless. Everytime I take a left from the paan waala to reach the playground I am referring that map subconsciously.
But I will need that locality map if you want to know what is the cumulative length of all the roads in my colony. It is requied for quantitative measure.
Similarly, what suport tools do you want to do away with? Since you are very comfortable with English can you do away with the grammar or punctuation??? If you are very worried about Delta T Then allow me to remind you that as far as understanding the territory of natural phenomena goes You don't need that abstraction. It comes into the map only when you try to obtain a quantitative measure of phenomena. It is like scale of the map, not required if you want only a general layout Of the territory but required if you want to measure it.
I hope THAT has killed your little unscientific rebellion.
Scientific Method- Part 5
SHANKARA WROTE:
<<<<<<<
In what terms will I know it? In what terms will I describe it? Other than probably Saying "I'm moving damn fast!!!!!" which doesn't mean anything.That's what I mean when I say that understanding presupposes a mode of expression.
>>>>>>>>.
Well, nobody is doubting the fact that we need symbols to convey the ideas. The question that I am posing is, are these symbols adequate( or rather necessary) to describe the phenomenon. Just because of the fact that we make use of mathematical symbols does not mean that mathematical symbols alone can describe it. It just proves that we are used to mathematics so much that, we find it difficult to understand anything without symbols.
Also u need mathematical symbols only if u want to express your motion in terms of mathematical symbols. Say, you are running, can you not compare your running speed at different points in time? Can you not know when you are jogging and when sprinting? Do you need mathematical symbols to realize that there is some change in velocity? You may argue that, u may not be able to specify the speed at a particular point in time. But is not "speed at a particular instant" itself a construct of mathematics? Suppose man has not invented mathematics. U are not aware that there is something called speed, vector velocity etc. Can you not intuitively tell that a state of rest is different from a state of motion or for that matter, a state of higher velocity ( sprinting ) is different from a state of low velocity?
Just to prove my point, why does a deer run very fast when it sights a predator?. When it is sure that it is relatively safer, it slows down. You may argue that it does not need to communicate like humans do. We make this statement because it does not communicate like the way we do. Its quite possible that it is aware of its "speed" and uses a system of symbols and signs that is quite different from us and also tells this to its "friends".
So to experience motion or to understand motion, I believe, mathematical symbols are no neccessity. But if we want to describe motion so as to fit it into the mathematical framework that we have built up, I think we need mathematics.
Also your statement that I am moving damn fast makes a lot of sense if you can convince yourself that there are alternate ways of describing it other than X km/hr. I am moving damn fast says that
1. I am moving
2. I am sprinting, probably running at my maximum speed. ( I know my maximum speed intuitively but I don't know what is it in km/hr. depending upon your point of interest, you can consider it as half full or half empty).
Now talking of Capra's "map for territory"
I am perfectly with you on the fact that mathematical symbols are like the maps. It seems, u have not correctly understood my objection. My objection is not against symbols as representation of the phenomenon. My
objections are
1.You believe maps are not independent of territory. Perfectly agree, 100%.But you also seem to suugest that territory is not independent of maps. It is this backward mapping from concepts to reality that I object to.
2. you believe maps are true representation of territory. I contest this. Maps are just a perspective of the map-maker about the territory. If map maker changes, so does the map.
Now coming to the need for maps.
I believe maps are not essential. You can still understand without the maps. Just to prove my point, Do u need a map of your colony? Don't u feel u know more than what the map actually tells u? So should we not do a similar
thing in science as well. When we have understood certain phenomena, should we not
try to do away with the support tools just like we are doing away with the locality maps? This has been the crux of my argument so far. I believe if one can explain a phenomenon or for that matter, a concept when he can
define it without any jargon.
<<<<<<<
In what terms will I know it? In what terms will I describe it? Other than probably Saying "I'm moving damn fast!!!!!" which doesn't mean anything.That's what I mean when I say that understanding presupposes a mode of expression.
>>>>>>>>.
Well, nobody is doubting the fact that we need symbols to convey the ideas. The question that I am posing is, are these symbols adequate( or rather necessary) to describe the phenomenon. Just because of the fact that we make use of mathematical symbols does not mean that mathematical symbols alone can describe it. It just proves that we are used to mathematics so much that, we find it difficult to understand anything without symbols.
Also u need mathematical symbols only if u want to express your motion in terms of mathematical symbols. Say, you are running, can you not compare your running speed at different points in time? Can you not know when you are jogging and when sprinting? Do you need mathematical symbols to realize that there is some change in velocity? You may argue that, u may not be able to specify the speed at a particular point in time. But is not "speed at a particular instant" itself a construct of mathematics? Suppose man has not invented mathematics. U are not aware that there is something called speed, vector velocity etc. Can you not intuitively tell that a state of rest is different from a state of motion or for that matter, a state of higher velocity ( sprinting ) is different from a state of low velocity?
Just to prove my point, why does a deer run very fast when it sights a predator?. When it is sure that it is relatively safer, it slows down. You may argue that it does not need to communicate like humans do. We make this statement because it does not communicate like the way we do. Its quite possible that it is aware of its "speed" and uses a system of symbols and signs that is quite different from us and also tells this to its "friends".
So to experience motion or to understand motion, I believe, mathematical symbols are no neccessity. But if we want to describe motion so as to fit it into the mathematical framework that we have built up, I think we need mathematics.
Also your statement that I am moving damn fast makes a lot of sense if you can convince yourself that there are alternate ways of describing it other than X km/hr. I am moving damn fast says that
1. I am moving
2. I am sprinting, probably running at my maximum speed. ( I know my maximum speed intuitively but I don't know what is it in km/hr. depending upon your point of interest, you can consider it as half full or half empty).
Now talking of Capra's "map for territory"
I am perfectly with you on the fact that mathematical symbols are like the maps. It seems, u have not correctly understood my objection. My objection is not against symbols as representation of the phenomenon. My
objections are
1.You believe maps are not independent of territory. Perfectly agree, 100%.But you also seem to suugest that territory is not independent of maps. It is this backward mapping from concepts to reality that I object to.
2. you believe maps are true representation of territory. I contest this. Maps are just a perspective of the map-maker about the territory. If map maker changes, so does the map.
Now coming to the need for maps.
I believe maps are not essential. You can still understand without the maps. Just to prove my point, Do u need a map of your colony? Don't u feel u know more than what the map actually tells u? So should we not do a similar
thing in science as well. When we have understood certain phenomena, should we not
try to do away with the support tools just like we are doing away with the locality maps? This has been the crux of my argument so far. I believe if one can explain a phenomenon or for that matter, a concept when he can
define it without any jargon.
Scientific Method- Part 4
KISLAY WROTE:
Writing this after reading both your mails.
>>>>>>>>>>
Can you not describe your motion at every single instant of time?
>>>>>>>>>>>>
In what terms will I know it? In what terms will I describe it? Other than probably Saying "I'm moving damn fast!!!!!" which doesn't mean anything.That's what I mean when I say that understanding presupposes a
mode of expression.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
what do I do if I want to know its motion both in space domain and time domain simultaneously?
>>>>>>>>>>>>
Suppose you want to tell what an elephant looks like from front and behind.Can you say it using a single language construct? You will have to say it in 2 different statements.
Man you can know it but HOW WILL YOU SAY/EXPRESS IT? All external symbols and formulae are means to conveying that to-fro motion of the pendulum. You are falling into Capra's "map for territory".
Trap - thinking that symbols mean something independently of the phenomena they are attached to. They do not. They are a map using which you have to visualise the territory.
>>>>>>>>>>>
Another point with the usage of mathematics for this approximation. Science in its attempt to make a discrete event as continuous as possible, introduces the concept of "dt" or 'delta t'. Science has not given a
scientific, mathematical definition of 'delta t'. The definition is of intuitive nature and to make it mathematical, have introduced the idea of limits. (tending to zero but not equal to zero. Is it not a proof enough of the inadequacy of science to explain phenomena?
>>>>>>>>>>>
"Delta t" is a way of saying that however small a change is, maths can track it. Observe that the Final deliverables of maths, i.e., equations, don't have deltas in them.
V = u + at ---------- 1
may be derived using delta but as an 'end-user', you are free to enter any random time instant/interval in this equation. Delta T is way of modelling an arbitrary precision time interval.
>>>>>>>>>>>
Can you not describe your motion at every single instant of time? When you are doing a scientific analysis, are you not taking snapshots at discrete intervals and then trying to construct a continuous picture out of it?
>>>>>>>>>>>
Yes I am. And I can tell you that I am successful because now you can enter any value of t in Equation 1 and the answer would be correct. I would consider that damning evidence in favour of the scientific method!!!
>>>>>>>>>>>
We both know that y(t)= A sin(w*t) is different from y(t) = A'cos(w'*t). When I say understanding it,I mean I should be able to able to identify that there is some difference between these two, without constructing their
equations.
>>>>>>>>>>>
Without showing me the equation, what will you say? How would you convey to me the difference between the two?
>>>>>>>>>>>
Can we define acceleration as something more than dv/dt?
>>>>>>>>>>>
Well we definitely can!!!! All bike/car enthusiasts define it as 0 to 100 kmph in x seconds. Even here you see that all these guys need this figure to express how fast a bike is, and looking at this figure( the analog for physics equations), a bike enthusiast will know how slow or fast a bike is.
Writing this after reading both your mails.
>>>>>>>>>>
Can you not describe your motion at every single instant of time?
>>>>>>>>>>>>
In what terms will I know it? In what terms will I describe it? Other than probably Saying "I'm moving damn fast!!!!!" which doesn't mean anything.That's what I mean when I say that understanding presupposes a
mode of expression.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
what do I do if I want to know its motion both in space domain and time domain simultaneously?
>>>>>>>>>>>>
Suppose you want to tell what an elephant looks like from front and behind.Can you say it using a single language construct? You will have to say it in 2 different statements.
Man you can know it but HOW WILL YOU SAY/EXPRESS IT? All external symbols and formulae are means to conveying that to-fro motion of the pendulum. You are falling into Capra's "map for territory".
Trap - thinking that symbols mean something independently of the phenomena they are attached to. They do not. They are a map using which you have to visualise the territory.
>>>>>>>>>>>
Another point with the usage of mathematics for this approximation. Science in its attempt to make a discrete event as continuous as possible, introduces the concept of "dt" or 'delta t'. Science has not given a
scientific, mathematical definition of 'delta t'. The definition is of intuitive nature and to make it mathematical, have introduced the idea of limits. (tending to zero but not equal to zero. Is it not a proof enough of the inadequacy of science to explain phenomena?
>>>>>>>>>>>
"Delta t" is a way of saying that however small a change is, maths can track it. Observe that the Final deliverables of maths, i.e., equations, don't have deltas in them.
V = u + at ---------- 1
may be derived using delta but as an 'end-user', you are free to enter any random time instant/interval in this equation. Delta T is way of modelling an arbitrary precision time interval.
>>>>>>>>>>>
Can you not describe your motion at every single instant of time? When you are doing a scientific analysis, are you not taking snapshots at discrete intervals and then trying to construct a continuous picture out of it?
>>>>>>>>>>>
Yes I am. And I can tell you that I am successful because now you can enter any value of t in Equation 1 and the answer would be correct. I would consider that damning evidence in favour of the scientific method!!!
>>>>>>>>>>>
We both know that y(t)= A sin(w*t) is different from y(t) = A'cos(w'*t). When I say understanding it,I mean I should be able to able to identify that there is some difference between these two, without constructing their
equations.
>>>>>>>>>>>
Without showing me the equation, what will you say? How would you convey to me the difference between the two?
>>>>>>>>>>>
Can we define acceleration as something more than dv/dt?
>>>>>>>>>>>
Well we definitely can!!!! All bike/car enthusiasts define it as 0 to 100 kmph in x seconds. Even here you see that all these guys need this figure to express how fast a bike is, and looking at this figure( the analog for physics equations), a bike enthusiast will know how slow or fast a bike is.
Scientific Method- Part 3
SHANKARA WROTE:
<Doyou want to know its location 3 seconds from now?>>
Contrast this approach with the approach that I am talking about.Instead of analysing the motion of particle, u somehow transfer yourself into the particle. Its like u have got into the particle and moving along with
it.Would not your understanding of the motion of particle now would be better than what it was with the external analysis by scientific method? Can you not describe your motion at every single instant of time? When you are doing a scientific analysis, are you not taking snapshots at discrete intervals and then trying to construct a continuous picture out of it? At the first time, the difference is huge because the intervals are large. You refine the process by decreasing the inter-frame interval and come closer to a continuous motion at every attempt. However hard you may try u will never get a really continuous motion as you there is a fundamental conflict between the two objects (one is discrete and other continuous . To get a truly continuous frame, you need to have the inter-frame interval zero, which is not possible in scientific analysis.
Another point with the usage of mathematics for this approximation. Science in its attempt to make a discrete event as continuous as possible, introduces the concept of "dt" or 'delta t'. Science has not given a
scientific, mathematical definition of 'delta t'. The definition is of intuitive nature and to make it mathematical, have introduced the idea of limits. (tending to zero but not equal to zero.) Is it not a proof enough of the inadequacy of science to explain phenomena?
To give you a even better idea of what I am talking about, say Kislay is in motion. I capture all his movements for about one hour and apply scientific analysis on it. I have a wealth of information about Kislay's movement.
I know what was your velocity at a particular time period ( I still doubt, if science can provide me the information at a particular instant) and you will not be aware. Yet, I believe you can understand your motion in a much
better sense that I can I ever hope to do. You can, if you want, describe your motion at a particular instant of time while I cant.
Now coming to the SHM problem, what do I do if I want to know its motion both in space domain and time domain simultaneously? Can science answer it ? When I say I want to understand the phenomenon, I mean I should be able to visualize it without any need for external symbols or formulae. What I mean by understanding SHM, is I should be able to imagine myself as the pendulum and feel its to- fro motion as if I am the pendulum.
We both know that y(t)= A sin(w*t) is different from y(t) = A'cos(w'*t). When I say understanding it,I mean I should be able to able to identify that there is some difference between these two, without constructing their
equations.
Don't u think, we should have a website, that explains these physics concepts in an intuitive way. Can we define acceleration as something more than dv/dt?
<
Contrast this approach with the approach that I am talking about.Instead of analysing the motion of particle, u somehow transfer yourself into the particle. Its like u have got into the particle and moving along with
it.Would not your understanding of the motion of particle now would be better than what it was with the external analysis by scientific method? Can you not describe your motion at every single instant of time? When you are doing a scientific analysis, are you not taking snapshots at discrete intervals and then trying to construct a continuous picture out of it? At the first time, the difference is huge because the intervals are large. You refine the process by decreasing the inter-frame interval and come closer to a continuous motion at every attempt. However hard you may try u will never get a really continuous motion as you there is a fundamental conflict between the two objects (one is discrete and other continuous . To get a truly continuous frame, you need to have the inter-frame interval zero, which is not possible in scientific analysis.
Another point with the usage of mathematics for this approximation. Science in its attempt to make a discrete event as continuous as possible, introduces the concept of "dt" or 'delta t'. Science has not given a
scientific, mathematical definition of 'delta t'. The definition is of intuitive nature and to make it mathematical, have introduced the idea of limits. (tending to zero but not equal to zero.) Is it not a proof enough of the inadequacy of science to explain phenomena?
To give you a even better idea of what I am talking about, say Kislay is in motion. I capture all his movements for about one hour and apply scientific analysis on it. I have a wealth of information about Kislay's movement.
I know what was your velocity at a particular time period ( I still doubt, if science can provide me the information at a particular instant) and you will not be aware. Yet, I believe you can understand your motion in a much
better sense that I can I ever hope to do. You can, if you want, describe your motion at a particular instant of time while I cant.
Now coming to the SHM problem, what do I do if I want to know its motion both in space domain and time domain simultaneously? Can science answer it ? When I say I want to understand the phenomenon, I mean I should be able to visualize it without any need for external symbols or formulae. What I mean by understanding SHM, is I should be able to imagine myself as the pendulum and feel its to- fro motion as if I am the pendulum.
We both know that y(t)= A sin(w*t) is different from y(t) = A'cos(w'*t). When I say understanding it,I mean I should be able to able to identify that there is some difference between these two, without constructing their
equations.
Don't u think, we should have a website, that explains these physics concepts in an intuitive way. Can we define acceleration as something more than dv/dt?
Scientific Method - Part 2
KISLAY WROTE:
"The essence of the phenomenon" and "I mean can u feel its motion?" make your mail sound very Hegelian.
Hegel was a philosopher who said that it is futile to analyse. If you analyse the motion of billiards balls striking each other on the billiards table, then you are incorrect in doing so as you are only analysing your
own concepts (like force, momentum etc.) and not "the essence of the phenomenon", as you have put it. The Analysis doesn't help you know the events reality, to feel it.
So much for Hegel. You might like to read him.
I feel that you are not asking your questions properly. What, precisely
do
you mean when you say "understand" the motion of a particle in space? Do
you
want to know with what it will move in the next split second? Do you
want to
know its location 3 seconds from now? There is no pooint saying I want
to
understand the particle. It has nothing to understand. Scientific
enquiry
will answer the questions you pose to it. Different questions asked of
the
same phenomenon will yield different answers, but that is not because
the
phnomenon has changed or science is wrong, but only because a different
question.
BTW you might want to ask yourself-what it is that you mean by the
essence
of the phenomenon?
Consider a wave on a string. What is the nature of this phenomenon? If
you
observe the wave in time domain, it appears as a disturbance flowing
from
one point in space to another. If you observe it in space domain (i.e.
observe any point on the string), it appears as plain SHM. So this is
not a
fallacy of science. You ask different questions, you get different
asnwers.
It must be said here that the concept of understanding presupposes a
mode of
expressing that understanding. All the equations and formulae are that
mode
in science. The real problem, when you ask questions like this "essesnce
of
phenomenon", is that you haven't grasped the mapping from equation to
phenomenon. Think of this like ED- "a cube is lying on ite edge with one
of
the face at 45 degrees to VP....". To solve this we need to visualize
this.
THAT is the essence of the phenomenon that is this cube. Analogy can be
exztended to physics. You can be said to understand only when you know
the
mapping both ways and go from one expressions to the other easily.
This, incidentally, is the great problem of how to teach Physics in a
better
way in our schools and coolleges. So many people I have met know all the
equations for light cones but can not map it to an intuitive concept.
Hope this doesn't sound gibberish.
"The essence of the phenomenon" and "I mean can u feel its motion?" make your mail sound very Hegelian.
Hegel was a philosopher who said that it is futile to analyse. If you analyse the motion of billiards balls striking each other on the billiards table, then you are incorrect in doing so as you are only analysing your
own concepts (like force, momentum etc.) and not "the essence of the phenomenon", as you have put it. The Analysis doesn't help you know the events reality, to feel it.
So much for Hegel. You might like to read him.
I feel that you are not asking your questions properly. What, precisely
do
you mean when you say "understand" the motion of a particle in space? Do
you
want to know with what it will move in the next split second? Do you
want to
know its location 3 seconds from now? There is no pooint saying I want
to
understand the particle. It has nothing to understand. Scientific
enquiry
will answer the questions you pose to it. Different questions asked of
the
same phenomenon will yield different answers, but that is not because
the
phnomenon has changed or science is wrong, but only because a different
question.
BTW you might want to ask yourself-what it is that you mean by the
essence
of the phenomenon?
Consider a wave on a string. What is the nature of this phenomenon? If
you
observe the wave in time domain, it appears as a disturbance flowing
from
one point in space to another. If you observe it in space domain (i.e.
observe any point on the string), it appears as plain SHM. So this is
not a
fallacy of science. You ask different questions, you get different
asnwers.
It must be said here that the concept of understanding presupposes a
mode of
expressing that understanding. All the equations and formulae are that
mode
in science. The real problem, when you ask questions like this "essesnce
of
phenomenon", is that you haven't grasped the mapping from equation to
phenomenon. Think of this like ED- "a cube is lying on ite edge with one
of
the face at 45 degrees to VP....". To solve this we need to visualize
this.
THAT is the essence of the phenomenon that is this cube. Analogy can be
exztended to physics. You can be said to understand only when you know
the
mapping both ways and go from one expressions to the other easily.
This, incidentally, is the great problem of how to teach Physics in a
better
way in our schools and coolleges. So many people I have met know all the
equations for light cones but can not map it to an intuitive concept.
Hope this doesn't sound gibberish.
Scientifc Method - Part 1.
This series of blogs is the outcome of discussions that i had with my friend Kislay Verma. It isin the form of emails exchanged thru and forth.
First mail is mine. Then we reply alternately.
Shankara wrote:
Let me pose this question to the objectivist.
Do u think, scientific analysis can help us understand an object?
Or you believe, scientific analysis is far from perfect?
KISLAY WROTE:
In my opinion, both your statements are correct.
Vis-s-vis the second statement, I would like emphasise that I don't mean
that the process of scientific enquiry is wrong.
By the process I mean the hypothesise-test-conclude-rehypothesise(if
wrong) process. What I mean is that we may not at all times know what
questions to ask and how to ask them. This might introduce problems in
the scientific process.
Am I clear or do I need to write one of my trademark massive mails?
SHANKARA WROTE:
I do not mind your trademark massive mails.
But do you think, certain formulae and certain equations can capture the
essence of the phenomenon?
Say for example, u want to understand the motion of a particle in space?
What do u think will be the best way to "understand it". By
understanding
it, I mean can u feel its motion?
First mail is mine. Then we reply alternately.
Shankara wrote:
Let me pose this question to the objectivist.
Do u think, scientific analysis can help us understand an object?
Or you believe, scientific analysis is far from perfect?
KISLAY WROTE:
In my opinion, both your statements are correct.
Vis-s-vis the second statement, I would like emphasise that I don't mean
that the process of scientific enquiry is wrong.
By the process I mean the hypothesise-test-conclude-rehypothesise(if
wrong) process. What I mean is that we may not at all times know what
questions to ask and how to ask them. This might introduce problems in
the scientific process.
Am I clear or do I need to write one of my trademark massive mails?
SHANKARA WROTE:
I do not mind your trademark massive mails.
But do you think, certain formulae and certain equations can capture the
essence of the phenomenon?
Say for example, u want to understand the motion of a particle in space?
What do u think will be the best way to "understand it". By
understanding
it, I mean can u feel its motion?
Sunday, October 14, 2007
Aggressive Cricket
The off-field antics of both
What is aggression? What is aggressive cricket? Is
Dictionary defines aggression as behavior that is intended to cause harm or pain OR having or showing determination and energetic pursuit of your ends. I believe the second definition is more relevant to the context of the article.
Aggression as a strategy in sports in quite common and is there since time immemorial. It is prevalent, though in different extent, in all major sports or games. Even a game like chess which doesn’t call for much physical exertion has aggressive players ( ok we call them attacking players but they are very similar). Some like to attack right from the word go, while some prefer setting up a game, fortifying the defenses and then going for the onslaught. In football, we have different playing styles ranging from the defensive English or Italians to the free flowing, attacking football of
Now coming to the important question of what is aggressive cricket, I feel your game is either attacking or defensive on the basis of your response to setbacks. When a team is already going hammer and tongs and you continue doing so is no aggression for me. When your chips are down (when u are 30/4), how you respond to the situation shows
So the most aggressive team, according to me, is the
Is
What we do is mouthing abuses just like them. Dude, they are not BP patients who can’t handle shocks, they are battle hardened veterans. U need to instill fear by your deeds and not by words. If the bowler showers expletives on you, don’t rattle off BCs or MCs. Just hit a full blooded shot at his face. He will take an evasive action, then u go and tell him to shut up or next time the ball wont miss his head.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
