‘The Black Swan’ is an interesting book written by Nassim Taleb. If you wade through the pages of somewhat pompous writing, you would find several good insights. One of them goes like this---In our normal life we only see white swans and you may be tempted to assume that all swans are white. However, this may not be the case. A black swan may exist and be seen by some ornithologist someday. So, the word ‘certainty’ can be applied only to indicate the presence of black swan, if one is seen. One can not be certain that no such swans exist if only white swans are seen.
There is an asymmetry here that applies to many situations.
Take, for example, the question of the existence of God. For many of us, we have not seen evidence that would indicate his existence*. So, we conclude that he does not exist. However, if the above logic is used, the absence of evidence implies only that he may not exist, not that he does not exist. The only time we could be certain is when the opposite happens---an irrefutable proof is found.
So, by this argument, we can not be atheist and claim to be rational at the same time. The only rational position is that of an agnostic.
I am troubled by this. In our daily lives we, the doubters, are given more leeway.
Take for example the court of law. You are innocent until proven guilty. So, the absence of an irrefutable proof that you murdered someone is taken to indicate that you are innocent, not that you may be innocent. The onus is on the other side to prove your guilt.
Why can’t the same logic apply while discussing the existence of God?
----------------------------------
* The purpose of this post is not to question the faithful who are able to see the evidence of God in many events and things around us. It starts with the position held by many of us who do not see the evidence and argues for the validity of atheism as a rational position.
Monday, January 17, 2011
Wednesday, December 1, 2010
Personal Branding
Branding is an important element for a product. When you establish brand of a product, say a car, you determine which ones of its many attributes are worth highlighting-- those that will differentiate your product from competition. So, for example, Volvo has branded what it builds as a ‘safe’ car and so those obsessed with safety will consider it when shopping for cars.
We also use branding to differentiate ourselves from the others. This personal branding is a natural thing to do unless and until we have gotten rid of our egos. We select one or more of our attributes and try to highlight them. This is done through how we project ourselves, what we do, what we say, and how we interact with people. The arguments we make, the subjects we select to discuss, and things we purchase are often meant to support the brand image we are trying to create and sustain.
The problem comes when people’s image of us does not agree with the one we are trying to portray. Again, thinking of cars, GM’s Pontiac was branded by its tag line ‘Pontiac brings excitement’. Well, the customers did not accept that branding. The car failed to differentiate itself from the ‘non-exciting’ brands and the whole division was shut down. (To be fair, perhaps it brought excitement in the 50s but not in the new century, so it was more of a problem of sustaining its brand.)
So it is with personal brand. We might want to brand ourselves as the rugged outdoors type by driving around in a Jeep. However, our other attributes and actions may leave the people we interact with not thoroughly convinced.
Thus, personal branding has at least two dimensions: (1) what we want people to think about us and (2) what people really think about us.
Another dimension is --- what really is the truth. We may not really be rich but want people to believe that we are. Even more interesting is the fourth dimension----even though we really are not rich by any measure, we think and truly believe that we are. This is the scary stuff, and often thought of as delusional.
I think of all this because soon I am off to India for my 40th reunion. I will meet people who I have not met for four decades. Most of us will see this as an opportunity to re-brand ourselves. The snotty kid of the past would re-brand himself as the savvy globetrotter. Efforts will be made to provide supporting evidence, leading to his brand becoming credible. Or, it would be seen as delusional diatribe by all but the most gullible.
In the end, it would not really matter. But, it will nevertheless be interesting to see how it all plays out.
We also use branding to differentiate ourselves from the others. This personal branding is a natural thing to do unless and until we have gotten rid of our egos. We select one or more of our attributes and try to highlight them. This is done through how we project ourselves, what we do, what we say, and how we interact with people. The arguments we make, the subjects we select to discuss, and things we purchase are often meant to support the brand image we are trying to create and sustain.
The problem comes when people’s image of us does not agree with the one we are trying to portray. Again, thinking of cars, GM’s Pontiac was branded by its tag line ‘Pontiac brings excitement’. Well, the customers did not accept that branding. The car failed to differentiate itself from the ‘non-exciting’ brands and the whole division was shut down. (To be fair, perhaps it brought excitement in the 50s but not in the new century, so it was more of a problem of sustaining its brand.)
So it is with personal brand. We might want to brand ourselves as the rugged outdoors type by driving around in a Jeep. However, our other attributes and actions may leave the people we interact with not thoroughly convinced.
Thus, personal branding has at least two dimensions: (1) what we want people to think about us and (2) what people really think about us.
Another dimension is --- what really is the truth. We may not really be rich but want people to believe that we are. Even more interesting is the fourth dimension----even though we really are not rich by any measure, we think and truly believe that we are. This is the scary stuff, and often thought of as delusional.
I think of all this because soon I am off to India for my 40th reunion. I will meet people who I have not met for four decades. Most of us will see this as an opportunity to re-brand ourselves. The snotty kid of the past would re-brand himself as the savvy globetrotter. Efforts will be made to provide supporting evidence, leading to his brand becoming credible. Or, it would be seen as delusional diatribe by all but the most gullible.
In the end, it would not really matter. But, it will nevertheless be interesting to see how it all plays out.
Monday, November 1, 2010
The last hike
October is a great month to be in Boston. The days are bright, cool and crisp. The leaves are in their full autumn glory and the city has a vibrant feeling.
However, for us, fond of hiking, October is also the time when we start coming to the realization that winter is almost upon us and our hiking season is coming to an end. The mountains will soon be snow covered and the weather will turn quite challenging. Before that happens, we will do the last hike of the season and then wait for snow to melt in April before starting again.
This is a tolerable situation because it is a temporary hiatus before we begin again.
However, considering that we are all aging, someday we will go on a really last hike----not last for the season but last forever. That is inevitable. What is not clear is how exactly this will play out.
There are two scenarios. One in which we will know beforehand that this would be the last hike, and the other in which we will not.
Which one is more likely?
I bet that it will be the second scenario that plays out. Under that scenario, every time we go on a hike we will keep thinking that there will be additional opportunities. We will not decide before hand that this would be it. We will not celebrate a last hike and accept the fact that in the future we will enjoy a hike by reminiscing about it. We will only be able to look back and say---although we did not know at that time--- that was our last hike.
However, for us, fond of hiking, October is also the time when we start coming to the realization that winter is almost upon us and our hiking season is coming to an end. The mountains will soon be snow covered and the weather will turn quite challenging. Before that happens, we will do the last hike of the season and then wait for snow to melt in April before starting again.
This is a tolerable situation because it is a temporary hiatus before we begin again.
However, considering that we are all aging, someday we will go on a really last hike----not last for the season but last forever. That is inevitable. What is not clear is how exactly this will play out.
There are two scenarios. One in which we will know beforehand that this would be the last hike, and the other in which we will not.
Which one is more likely?
I bet that it will be the second scenario that plays out. Under that scenario, every time we go on a hike we will keep thinking that there will be additional opportunities. We will not decide before hand that this would be it. We will not celebrate a last hike and accept the fact that in the future we will enjoy a hike by reminiscing about it. We will only be able to look back and say---although we did not know at that time--- that was our last hike.
Friday, October 1, 2010
Bottled water
Whenever we go to Europe for a vacation, the issue of bottled water comes up. When one asks for water in a restaurant, the invariable question the waiter asks is, “with gas or without?” There is no mention of tap water in his query.
Invariably, we divide ourselves in two groups. One group thinks that it is OK to order one of the two types of bottled waters. The other, its members sticking to their rights as customers, and having previously learned what tap water is called in the local language, makes a go for the option not offered. Argument usually ensues between these two groups about the merits of the two approaches.
The tap water group argues that it is better for the ecology---and that is a perfectly valid reason. The other reason, although not stated clearly, is that the bottled water costs money, the tap water is generally free. One can not argue with that either.
The arguments against ordering tap water are fuzzier but equally compelling, at least to me.
The first is that it is the custom of the country and we should obey. People in these countries do not consider it safe or civil to drink tap water, as we do in the US. As an examlpe, when the Western visitors go to India, they are expected to follow the local customs, however indignant they may be about them. For example, they would be expected to remove their shoes in a temple, no matter how filthy the floor is. The same logic applies here.
The second reason is closely associated---and that has to do with pride. I am an American and perfectly comfortable with the western ways. While I am proud of my Indian heritage, I believe that there are better ways of displaying it than sticking like a sore thumb in a restaurant. I do not want to give the waiter an opportunity to make faces at me, saying to himself, “Here comes another cheap Indian.” It is a matter of pride for me.
Needless to say, I usually end up losing the argument when the group consists entirely of Indians. How can one argue against ecology and saving money? And what is this “custom of the country” and “pride” bit?
May be I think differently. May be there are others like me who think of ecology and money not as sacred cows that can not be touched, but as elements of tradeoffs one makes in the overall context of the situation. It is OK to spend a bit more than necessary, and purchasing a bottle of water (generally of recyclable glass not plastic) on occasions is not going to destroy the eco system.
Invariably, we divide ourselves in two groups. One group thinks that it is OK to order one of the two types of bottled waters. The other, its members sticking to their rights as customers, and having previously learned what tap water is called in the local language, makes a go for the option not offered. Argument usually ensues between these two groups about the merits of the two approaches.
The tap water group argues that it is better for the ecology---and that is a perfectly valid reason. The other reason, although not stated clearly, is that the bottled water costs money, the tap water is generally free. One can not argue with that either.
The arguments against ordering tap water are fuzzier but equally compelling, at least to me.
The first is that it is the custom of the country and we should obey. People in these countries do not consider it safe or civil to drink tap water, as we do in the US. As an examlpe, when the Western visitors go to India, they are expected to follow the local customs, however indignant they may be about them. For example, they would be expected to remove their shoes in a temple, no matter how filthy the floor is. The same logic applies here.
The second reason is closely associated---and that has to do with pride. I am an American and perfectly comfortable with the western ways. While I am proud of my Indian heritage, I believe that there are better ways of displaying it than sticking like a sore thumb in a restaurant. I do not want to give the waiter an opportunity to make faces at me, saying to himself, “Here comes another cheap Indian.” It is a matter of pride for me.
Needless to say, I usually end up losing the argument when the group consists entirely of Indians. How can one argue against ecology and saving money? And what is this “custom of the country” and “pride” bit?
May be I think differently. May be there are others like me who think of ecology and money not as sacred cows that can not be touched, but as elements of tradeoffs one makes in the overall context of the situation. It is OK to spend a bit more than necessary, and purchasing a bottle of water (generally of recyclable glass not plastic) on occasions is not going to destroy the eco system.
Wednesday, September 15, 2010
Forty years and counting
I arrived in the US in the August of 1970. That means I have been here now for forty years---a personal landmark for me to look back and reflect.
This was not the way it was meant to be.
I had come to MIT for graduate studies. After finishing my doctorate, I had started applying for jobs in India. By the time the last summer of my stay came rolling by, I already had three offers in hand. I could have become a lecturer at IIT Bombay, an assistant professor at BITS in Pilani, or a scientist at the Indian Space Research Organization in Trivendrum, at a princely salary of about Rs.1000 per month.
Then came a fateful meeting with a friend of one of my cousins. I met this gentleman, a senior executive of an Indian firm that represented Digital Equipment in India, at the Howard Johnson motel in Concord. In about an hour he managed to convince me that I should at least get some work experience in US (and earn some money) before heading home.
That one and half year work experience under a “Practical Training” program led me to apply for Green Card, along with a promise to myself that this stay in this foreign country will last only for a few years…ten at the most.
Then came marriage and children. Ten became twenty. The idea of going back faded, as did the notion of what is “back”---back where? This was home now.
In doing this, I became one of the statistics---that representing brain drain from poorer countries. Instead of paying back to my country of birth and the fine education it had provided, I was helping a rich country become richer and in the process becoming prosperous myself. I did not get to spend much time with my family in India, and started drifting away from a network of friends I had left behind.
Forty years. Much lost….but much gained. Probably gained more than lost.
I can rattle off the usual benefits of living in the West----good living, material prosperity, few hassles, and raising children in a land of opportunity. However, to me an equally important aspect, if not more, is the opportunity for personal development this has provided. Living in a country like US gives you an opportunity to gain a global outlook, widen the scope of experiences you can have, and vastly increase the potential to learn. Being neither an Indian nor an American in the strict sense allows you to become both or, if you wish, a global citizen, equally at home in any part of the world.
Come to think of it, that is not a bad trade-off.
This was not the way it was meant to be.
I had come to MIT for graduate studies. After finishing my doctorate, I had started applying for jobs in India. By the time the last summer of my stay came rolling by, I already had three offers in hand. I could have become a lecturer at IIT Bombay, an assistant professor at BITS in Pilani, or a scientist at the Indian Space Research Organization in Trivendrum, at a princely salary of about Rs.1000 per month.
Then came a fateful meeting with a friend of one of my cousins. I met this gentleman, a senior executive of an Indian firm that represented Digital Equipment in India, at the Howard Johnson motel in Concord. In about an hour he managed to convince me that I should at least get some work experience in US (and earn some money) before heading home.
That one and half year work experience under a “Practical Training” program led me to apply for Green Card, along with a promise to myself that this stay in this foreign country will last only for a few years…ten at the most.
Then came marriage and children. Ten became twenty. The idea of going back faded, as did the notion of what is “back”---back where? This was home now.
In doing this, I became one of the statistics---that representing brain drain from poorer countries. Instead of paying back to my country of birth and the fine education it had provided, I was helping a rich country become richer and in the process becoming prosperous myself. I did not get to spend much time with my family in India, and started drifting away from a network of friends I had left behind.
Forty years. Much lost….but much gained. Probably gained more than lost.
I can rattle off the usual benefits of living in the West----good living, material prosperity, few hassles, and raising children in a land of opportunity. However, to me an equally important aspect, if not more, is the opportunity for personal development this has provided. Living in a country like US gives you an opportunity to gain a global outlook, widen the scope of experiences you can have, and vastly increase the potential to learn. Being neither an Indian nor an American in the strict sense allows you to become both or, if you wish, a global citizen, equally at home in any part of the world.
Come to think of it, that is not a bad trade-off.
Sunday, August 1, 2010
Overcommunicating
Aren’t these great times?
Facebook now allows me to connect on a daily basis with previously long lost friends and relatives. Blogs provide me with a soap box over which I can stand and provide my point of view on any topic I feel like. With my cell phone, and sensible pricing schemes, calling anyone in the world from anywhere has become a synch. Typing in a few words of SMS is now an impulsive and instantaneous activity. Broadcast emails with extensive mailing lists allow me to reach out to lots of people with my thoughts, opinions, and ideas.
For someone like me who gets kicks out of carrying out meaningful conversations with a diverse set of people, these are indeed wonderful developments.
However, I now realize that there are other types of people around in the world---those who are not much into communicating. These are the people who never respond to a broadcast email. They are your friends on Facebook, but they remain invisible. They are the ones who do not pick up the phone on the other hand---the caller ID having revealed that it is you who is calling.
To some extent, I see their point. In most cases it is us who have imposed ourselves on their quiet nook. We can not expect them to behave the same way as us or have the same needs. They have enough things going on in their lives that these overcommunicating activities play a secondary role. Or they just prefer to be left alone, either because of inherent shyness or fear that their communicating skills are not good.
They do not rejoice the availability of these multiple channels. They have no need share what they feel at any moment, their views on Sarah Palin, or what they did over the weekend. They probably think we are too pushy, self absorbed, and opinionated.
We need to respect their wishes. We need to stop being annoyed if they do not respond to our broadcast emails or do not participate in a hot discussion.
However, I feel that the behavior adjustment has to take place on both sides. The undercommunicators need to observe some level of courtesy in their dealings with people like us. A direct email (not a broadcast one) needs to be responded, the phone needs to be picked up. There are ways of expressing your desire that you don’t want to be bothered without being so obvious.
If these adjustments are not made, I am afraid that some relationships are going to end up being weakened, or even wrecked, as a result of these tools instead of getting strengthened.
Facebook now allows me to connect on a daily basis with previously long lost friends and relatives. Blogs provide me with a soap box over which I can stand and provide my point of view on any topic I feel like. With my cell phone, and sensible pricing schemes, calling anyone in the world from anywhere has become a synch. Typing in a few words of SMS is now an impulsive and instantaneous activity. Broadcast emails with extensive mailing lists allow me to reach out to lots of people with my thoughts, opinions, and ideas.
For someone like me who gets kicks out of carrying out meaningful conversations with a diverse set of people, these are indeed wonderful developments.
However, I now realize that there are other types of people around in the world---those who are not much into communicating. These are the people who never respond to a broadcast email. They are your friends on Facebook, but they remain invisible. They are the ones who do not pick up the phone on the other hand---the caller ID having revealed that it is you who is calling.
To some extent, I see their point. In most cases it is us who have imposed ourselves on their quiet nook. We can not expect them to behave the same way as us or have the same needs. They have enough things going on in their lives that these overcommunicating activities play a secondary role. Or they just prefer to be left alone, either because of inherent shyness or fear that their communicating skills are not good.
They do not rejoice the availability of these multiple channels. They have no need share what they feel at any moment, their views on Sarah Palin, or what they did over the weekend. They probably think we are too pushy, self absorbed, and opinionated.
We need to respect their wishes. We need to stop being annoyed if they do not respond to our broadcast emails or do not participate in a hot discussion.
However, I feel that the behavior adjustment has to take place on both sides. The undercommunicators need to observe some level of courtesy in their dealings with people like us. A direct email (not a broadcast one) needs to be responded, the phone needs to be picked up. There are ways of expressing your desire that you don’t want to be bothered without being so obvious.
If these adjustments are not made, I am afraid that some relationships are going to end up being weakened, or even wrecked, as a result of these tools instead of getting strengthened.
Thursday, July 1, 2010
Karma and emails
In the beginning there were Nigerians. They perfected the art form of sending spam emails to millions of people enticing them to untold rewards, if only they would give out their bank accounts and deposit instructions. The emails generally are like this: “I am Mr. Obutu. I met your relative who gave me your name. Well, he died and I need to give his $10,000,000 to you...” Believe it or not, there were people who fell for the scam, and some Nigerians became quite rich.
I don’t get such emails any more. I guess my name has now been removed from most of the Nigerian mailing lists.
However, I do get lots of emails originating in India. The latest one told me that on June 21st I would see two suns in the sky, because a star called Aderoid (yes, that is the name) will be so close to earth that it would be as bright as the sun. I suppose the person who sent it believed in it and thought of alerting me to this amazing event lest I miss out.
This is just one example of many such emails I receive. Most are a collection of photographs, with elevator music playing in the background. The photographs are quite beautiful, actually, but they are the same ones repackaged countless times. The messages that accompany the pictures have to deal with pithy advice such as being nice to cats and other living things, because God loves you. Some others are threats---telling me that bad things will happen to me if I do not find 20 suckers to forward this email describing the power of God such and such (remember India has thousands of them).
Unlike the Nigerians, the Indians have developed a very sophisticated production and distribution system. Volunteer distributors, ‘nodes’ for those familiar with network jargon, are created and the message spreads virally. These emails come to me from people I trust----my friends and family members, not Mr. Obutu. So I open them, at least most of the time. The originator packages an email (where does he find the raw material?) and sends it out to a handful of initial fire starters. Then it goes in the Internet Ocean of volunteers who are keen to educate and entertain the world.
So, how do people become volunteer ‘nodes’? I receive my daily quota from several volunteers, and if you meet anyone of them, you would not suspect him/her to be a part of such an elaborate network. Nice, ordinary people. So, were they approached by someone in the middle of the night and asked to become a node or did they get an epiphany that this is what they should be doing? Also, how do they get their quota of messages of the day? Do they get them from anonymous sources every morning--like packets of information arriving at an Internet node--- ready to be forwarded to the next destination?
Of course, the big question is why such messages are created and spread around? Unlike the Nigerians, no one is getting rich. Yes, some of them spread the word of God, and so could be construed as a modern channel created by some religious zealots, but why would anyone send an email about two suns?
These are the mysteries of India and the answer perhaps lies in the belief that you need to do what is in your Karma. The email distributors have determined that this is their Karma. The Indian philosophy further states that you should not expect fruits for your labor. So now everything makes sense. It also leads me to believe that such an email factory and distribution system will continue to exist only in India. The Nigerians will have nothing to do with it.
I don’t get such emails any more. I guess my name has now been removed from most of the Nigerian mailing lists.
However, I do get lots of emails originating in India. The latest one told me that on June 21st I would see two suns in the sky, because a star called Aderoid (yes, that is the name) will be so close to earth that it would be as bright as the sun. I suppose the person who sent it believed in it and thought of alerting me to this amazing event lest I miss out.
This is just one example of many such emails I receive. Most are a collection of photographs, with elevator music playing in the background. The photographs are quite beautiful, actually, but they are the same ones repackaged countless times. The messages that accompany the pictures have to deal with pithy advice such as being nice to cats and other living things, because God loves you. Some others are threats---telling me that bad things will happen to me if I do not find 20 suckers to forward this email describing the power of God such and such (remember India has thousands of them).
Unlike the Nigerians, the Indians have developed a very sophisticated production and distribution system. Volunteer distributors, ‘nodes’ for those familiar with network jargon, are created and the message spreads virally. These emails come to me from people I trust----my friends and family members, not Mr. Obutu. So I open them, at least most of the time. The originator packages an email (where does he find the raw material?) and sends it out to a handful of initial fire starters. Then it goes in the Internet Ocean of volunteers who are keen to educate and entertain the world.
So, how do people become volunteer ‘nodes’? I receive my daily quota from several volunteers, and if you meet anyone of them, you would not suspect him/her to be a part of such an elaborate network. Nice, ordinary people. So, were they approached by someone in the middle of the night and asked to become a node or did they get an epiphany that this is what they should be doing? Also, how do they get their quota of messages of the day? Do they get them from anonymous sources every morning--like packets of information arriving at an Internet node--- ready to be forwarded to the next destination?
Of course, the big question is why such messages are created and spread around? Unlike the Nigerians, no one is getting rich. Yes, some of them spread the word of God, and so could be construed as a modern channel created by some religious zealots, but why would anyone send an email about two suns?
These are the mysteries of India and the answer perhaps lies in the belief that you need to do what is in your Karma. The email distributors have determined that this is their Karma. The Indian philosophy further states that you should not expect fruits for your labor. So now everything makes sense. It also leads me to believe that such an email factory and distribution system will continue to exist only in India. The Nigerians will have nothing to do with it.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
