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.

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.

hi

read the scientific method blogs, bottom up.

from part 1, 2 .... , final.

thanks for reading

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.

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.

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.