Can we extend our experiences beyond the limitations of our senses?
A picture is worth thousand words, they say. You try to explain something to your friends and they get confused then you show them the photo/ video of the same thing and the need to explain things disappears. Visual media is literally ruling over all other types of media. This also highlights our dominant way of consuming information, any information. Hence, we can definitely say that vision is the most important of all the senses we use to interact with our surroundings. Important thing to understand is that we can perceive only certain range of light obviously known as the visible spectrum. What if we could extend this sense of vision?
Extending human vision
There are already good attempts for us to see in ultraviolet and infrared region which lie on the both sides of visible spectrum. Special optical filters and thermal sensors can create visuals in ultraviolet and infrared which normal human vision cannot see. In a way, we have achieved UV, IR vision which can increase our understanding about surrounding. This story goes good for people with normal vision. But how does a blind person can understand this highly visual world? Many of us would have experienced and will agree that the lack of a sense for a long time elevates the other senses in such differently-abled persons which helps them to perceive same object with different attributes of senses. We will see one such interesting story of a person who is not completely blind but the way in which he solved the problems in his vision have created a totally different understanding about our ideas on vision and our senses.
Neil Harbisson – the cyborg with antenna
Neil Harbisson has a condition called ‘Achromatopsia’ also known as ‘Total Color Blindness’ where he cannot perceive the color of objects. The whole world is like black and white television for him. There are some types of spectacles available in market for partially color-blind people which effectively help them to distinguish different colors but there is no such solution for people with total color blindness. Neil solved this problem in a different way.
Neil Harbisson World’s First Cyborg
The problem of perception of different colors of objects was solved by converting the light into the sound. This simply means that certain sound frequency is assigned to certain color. When a digital camera scans such color, it will create auditory feedback which can be heard by the ears of the person. Now it becomes a learning for the color-blind person to differentiate between different sounds to understand the respective color. With the help of Adam Montadon, a computer scientist, Neil developed an antenna which is physically connected to his head – the rear part of skull – occipital bone. This antenna was further upgraded by Peter Kese and Matias Lizana. The early model of this eyeborg developed for Neil was like a headset with camera and later on it evolved to an antenna, reduced computer weight to computer integrated to a chip. Now, Neil has one tentacle-like antenna over his head.
The “eyeborg” and its feedback
Not only the design and evolution of eyeborg is fascinating but the feedback it provides is very interesting. As we know already that the different frequencies of color are converted to different sound frequencies. Whenever the camera in the antenna is pointed to any object, it gives sound feedback to Neil which enables him to distinguish and experience the color in a different way.
In the early version of eyeborg the sound was fed to Neil through the headphones to his ears. This blocked the ambient sounds for Neil making him unaware of the surroundings. It was like he sacrificed the ambient sound to understand the colors of surrounding objects. The smart update Neil did was to integrate the auditory feedback of eyeborg directly through his skull bones. This eliminated the over the ear feedback of eyeborg thereby freeing his ears for ambient sound. Now Neil hears ambient sound through his ears and the sound for color feedback is heard through bone conduction! Everyone can understand the difference between bone conducted sound and the ambient sound actually. When you hear your voice through a recording you always hate it (maybe this doesn’t happen with good singers!) because it sounds so weird and creepy. This happens because you have always heard your voice through bone conduction and others hear your voice as an ambient sound.
This doesn’t stop here. Neil was unable to understand the saturation in the color in the early versions so he assigned loudness of the frequency to the saturation of the color. The antenna containing camera serves as a Bluetooth/ Internet connection so that he can receive and transfer data to other devices.
Hearing music from a painting
Neuroplasticity of our brain has allowed Neil to understand the world in a different manner. The sonochromatic scale developed to understand the colors through the sound has elevated Neil’s understanding about colors to next level. First obvious thing is that his brain perceives the surrounding colors in terms of different sounds; this allows his brain to associate certain sound to certain objects. For normal humans when we say bus, we generally picture a red bus, when one says an airplane, we generally picture a white airplane, when someone says an ocean, we generally picture a blue ocean. Interestingly, Neil’s brain has developed itself to associate the objects to certain sounds which creates different synaptic feedback in his mind. His perception for general objects is totally different than all the people who can experience color.
We should understand how deeply colors are rooted into our fundamental understanding of nature. And when this understanding is changed to feedback of different sense which is a sound in Neil’s case the experiences are totally different and otherworldly. Even his dreams are filled of sounds for different colors, this is how deeply the ‘hybrid sense’ has been developed in Neil.
NASA released some images from James Webb Space Telescope where they assigned certain sounds to certain colors and tones to stars in the image. When tracked in a pattern you can experience the image in terms of sound which is on crude way of understanding the image through sound (crude way as in it is nowhere closer to the actual sound of the location, it is just conversion of image data to sound date with one to one replacement)
Sound from an image Source:JWST, NASA
The colors from a song
Turns out, that the reverse of feedback from the eyeborg is equally interesting. The process of association of sound to a color has gifted Neil to understand the sounds in different way. Though the initial purpose was to comprehend the color through different sensorial feedback, it has given Neil a different type of intellect. Now, when he listens to a song, sound or music he can picture some series of colors. In simple words, he can create a visual and colorful output of an audio array. Though we visualize the sounds or music through complicated waveform, they were never associated to colors to the scale that Neil has experienced before. According to Neil’s experiences now he has a color scheme for certain music pieces, world famous speeches, musical symphonies.
Neil’s Eyeborg and Synesthesia
Actually, there is one human condition which is much closer to the experiences of Neil. There is one condition where a person associates the feedback of a sense to a totally different sensorial experience. The feedback from a sense stimulates some different type of experience. For example, for people with a synesthesia, they may associate certain color to certain number, some people associate the sound to certain color. This stimulation of totally different cognitive pathway by the experience of a cognitive pathway is called as synesthesia. Synesthesia is a natural and rare condition. Neil has artificially developed this condition in him to heighten his awareness of the colors. There are different types of synesthesia based on the association of cognitive stimuli.
In Grapheme–color synesthesia person associated a color for a letter as in A will stimulate the color red in his mind, in Spatial sequence synesthesia people associate events to certain stimuli so that they have exact memory of events as in with exact date and time, in Auditory–tactile synesthesia people experience touch or sensation in certain body parts when they hear certain sounds, in Ordinal linguistic personification synesthesia the person associates some objects, sequences like number sequences, calendar months to certain people or genders, in Misophonia synesthesia the person invokes certain emotions like anger, happiness, fear when certain sounds are heard, in Mirror-touch synesthesia the person are said to have heightened empathy so heightened that they experience the touches to the person in front of them as if someone has touched them actually, in Lexical–gustatory synesthesia the person experiences certain taste upon hearing certain words.
Chromesthesia is the synesthesia which deserves separate explanation for our discussion. In Chromesthesia, the person assigns a color to the sound they hear. Which exactly what is happening in the case of Neil but artificially. According to art historians the famous artist Vincent Van Gogh has Chromesthesia which made his paintings so vibrant. According to one such comment Vincent tried to learn Piano but left it midway because the notes of piano invoked different colors in his mind thereby overwhelming him.
Van Gogh’s The Starry Night
Jack Coulter – one of the artists of our generation has Chromesthesia. He is known for his abstract art pieces which reflect the way he interprets the sounds and music. In simple words, he paints the songs. Jack’s paintings of are such an experience. You can find his paintings on some famous songs on his official Instagram page which includes ‘Love of My Life’ by Harry Styles, ‘The Best Day’ by Taylor Swift, ‘Running Up That Hill’ by Kate Bush, ‘Don’t Tell Me’ by Avril Lavigne, ‘Take me Home Country Roads’ by John Denver, ‘As It Was’ by Harry Styles. He even has created an art piece for the world famous ‘Cornfield Chase’ soundtrack from Christopher Nolan’s Interstellar.
Jack Coulter’s ‘Mr. Bad Guy’ painting based on Freddie Mercury’s song of same name
A mix-tape of senses and the hidden reality – philosophical implications
This crisscross of our senses and the stimulus actually questions the nature of our reality. If we question the nature of evolution by question like why can only eyes see color and why can only ears hear the sound which are very fundamental philosophical questions (so fundamental that the person who poses them may be called a mental person), then we will understand that it is the nature of light to impart the color to the object, it is the nature of sound to impart the vibration of the object which developed such organs in a way.
But if we dig deeper and question the limitations of our perception of sound and light then we will realize that what we perceive or feel through our senses is just a sample or small piece of all the experiences presented by the reality. For simple example, though sound (mechanical) and light (electromagnetic) are all but vibrations, the extent of their experience or the ranges in which they exist or the things they are made up of cause them to collapse into two distinct sensorial experiences.
And when we are trying to resolve such questions about the senses, the conditions like Synesthesia or the cyborg movement created by people like Neil try to modify our understanding of the reality that we live in. If these people can interpret the colors into sounds and sounds into colors, are our senses limiting us from a different type of awareness? Are we missing some extra information from reality due the limitation of our senses? In simple words, even though there are many colors around us we cannot see in dark but most of the animals have awareness of infra-red spectrum or night vision which gives them extra information of the same surrounding where we all coexist. Bees, butterflies, insects can detect ultraviolet light to understand the pollen part of the flowers which we cannot see by or normal vision. This questions the reality and our experiences from it
For a no person with complete awareness of his/her senses, the cognitive stimulus and feedback is almost hardwired. This stimulus and feedback are what create reality for us. We cannot experience even a common thing without experiencing the interactions of our senses with the surrounding. And when we realize that there are other ways to experience the same reality by connecting it to totally different sense and stimulus, this opens a new chapter in our understanding of the nature. It’s like being aware of the ultrasonic sounds as same as owls experience it. This opens a totally different universe for all of us – the hidden one which was already there. Maybe this is the sixth sense many people talk about. Actually, our lives and the experiences that we have, are always being dictated by the five senses that we experience.
Bertrand Russel had made some attempts to crack such question in his world-famous book called ‘The Problems of Philosophy’. In the very first chapter called “Appearance and Reality” of this book Russel concludes that this can be a question which may remain unsolved forever. He uses a concept called ‘sense-data’ as in the information which we immediately know from our senses as in smell, color, sound. Russel clarifies based on a structured thought process that what we perceive as a reality is mere the what it appears to us based on the senses we experience (also known as sense-data). If our sense-data gets limited our understanding of reality will be limited. As the reality we experienced through our limited senses will be a reality for us, it will not be the complete reality as in “the reality” – “the ultimate/absolute reality”. (I know this gets confusing from hereon) And if the reality through our senses is not complete reality that how could we transcend to the realization of “the ultimate/absolute reality” by extending our senses? Or is it a completely different pathway? Russel leaves that idea to the power, need and importance of philosophy.
There is definitely much more information that we are missing only because of the limitation of our senses. So, the reality is not we experience through our senses only, it is more than that which maybe is impossible for us to grasp for now. Maybe in near or distant future we will be able to understand reality in different way like Neil, Jack and many people like them.
P.S. – Most of the artists have mastered this transcendence of senses in their own ways, which is what makes art so special for humanity. Maybe it is the only way we have right now to extend our senses.
References:
“A picture is worth a thousand words” – image by ElizabethHudy from flickr
Bell’s Inequality and The Completeness of Quantum Mechanics
“The Nobel Prize in Physics for 2022 to Alain Aspect, John F. Clauser, Anton Zeilinger is important in the sense of how we understand the nature. The works of these three Nobel Laureates have confirmed that the fundamental things which make up the whole Universe follow the rules which are not consistent with the reality we experience”
“If you think you understand quantum mechanics, you don’t understand quantum mechanics.”
Richard Feynman
Ever since that damn apple fell off frw3om the tree on Newton’s head the world of science has exploded and expanded faster than maybe the Universe in which we are continuously questioning the nature of our existence, the nature of reality. Although if one really tries to understand how Newton worked out his ideas on the laws of motion, law of gravity, the calculus, they will know that it surely wasn’t the apple that did all the trick. (Given that “apples” have already contributed to change the course of the humanity in different ways)
Classical Mechanics
Sir Isaac Newton The discovery of Gravity was not a coincidence
What made Newton’s work great is the predictability, structured-ness of the theories he developed. Newton described gravity as the force of attraction between each and every object in the universe. Higher the masses, closer the objects stronger will be the gravity. These theories make predictions which can be tested and then checked to be right or wrong. And for a long time, they were true. Then there came a time – the time. The time of Albert Einstein, where some people say that he proved Newton wrong. I will say Einstein found more generalized form for Newton’s theory of gravity. The ideas of Newton’s theory of gravity are a chunk of the bigger picture of Einstein’s theory of relativity. The theory of relativity considers the gravity not a force but rather curvature of the fabric of space-time. The mass of the object causes the space-time to curve around it hence causing the nearby objects to fall towards it. It’s like a trampoline where a heavy object is curving the elastic sheet around it wherein if other smaller objects are brought in this elastic sheet, they will be eventually pushed into the heavier objects. Newton thought of gravity as an attraction- a pull, whereas Einstein’s gravity pushes. Like Newton, the Einstein’s theory of general relativity makes predictions which can be tested by doing experiments and are proved to be right. Newton’s gravity could not predict the motion of planet Mercury around the Sun due to its limitations. Einstein’s theory of relativity predicted it accurately. Thereby proving it’s superiority.
Albert Einstein Gravity is the bending of the fabric of Space-Time
The most important thing about Einstein’s theory of relativity is that it created the awareness of the fourth dimension and made it accessible to humanity in some indirect ways. Although, multiple dimensions are possible in abstract mathematics, but they were never accessible to humanity before the establishment of the theory of relativity. Einstein’s theory of relativity is still standing strong and predicting some of the wonders only universe can manifest.
But you know what, Einstein’s theory of relativity is not the generalized theory of our understanding of the universe. Einstein’s theory of relativity though fits for heavenly bodies, even to the grain of sand but it cannot explain the behavior of the subatomic particles making the atoms of the same grain of the sand. There are still some missing pieces in our understanding of the universe. Meaning that Einstein’s theory of relativity is applicable some special case of the reality we exist.
Rise of Quantum Mechanics and the EPR Paper
Einstein’s attempt to formulate the theory of everything sets the Quantum mechanics in motion. The basic idea is that Newton’s and Einstein’s approaches were top-down approaches to understand the nature whereas the approaches of quantum mechanics are bottom up where the discussion starts from the subatomic particles and the fields responsible for the generation of the fundamental forces (Electromagnetic force, Strong force, Weak force) in nature. One must understand that gravity is still not explained by quantum mechanics. Which is what in a way was the point of concern for Einstein. The theory of relativity breaks at subatomic levels.
This is the part where the EPR paradox comes in picture.
In order to understand the comments in the EPR Paper, one needs to understand some basic ideas in quantum mechanics.
The model of an atom has evolved greatly over time which also showcases how we improved our understanding of the universe.
John Dalton thought that matter on many divisions will end up in its smallest indivisible part called atom. Which established different elements will have their own characteristic atoms. This idea helped to establish the weight of an atom of each element. Combination of elements would give weight of the molecule made from that specific combination of atoms. With this idea one can exactly tell the molecular weight of product formed by the chemical reaction of two reactants.
J J Thomson in his experiments on Cathode Ray tube (exactly similar technology used in our old heavy box TVs) found out that if a high voltage is applied between two metal electrodes in a vacuum there is formation of a ray which gets attracted to the positively charged terminal thereby showing the negatively charged particles in this ray “The Cathode Ray”. Stronger the magnetic field stronger the cathode ray will deflect. And based on the relationship between the strength of magnetic field and the extent of deflection ray, Thomson found out that the weight of the particles in the Cathode Ray is very small compared to the weight the atoms. In this way the Dalton’s atomic model was revised to Plum Pudding. Where the electrons are scattered throughout the positively charged environment (Literally like the plum pieces randomly scattered in the pudding)
On further experimentation, Rutherford found out that there is vastly bigger space between the positively charged nucleus and the negatively charged electrons. This was a sort of weird plum pudding. The atom’s plum pudding has all the dough at center which positively charged and is the heaviest part of the atom. The plum pieces i.e., electrons are actually floating around this nucleus which are negatively charged. This devised the planetary model of an atom.
From here on now the real fun begins,
If the electrons are floating around the nucleus, how do they always remain in contact with their own nucleus. What makes them remain “attached” to their nucleus? If they are remaining attached to their own nucleus and are floating around it, after some time the tired light weight negative electron should get attracted towards the strong and dense positive nucleus, thereby becoming unstable. And this doesn’t happen in reality, otherwise nothing would exist from such atom as it will not hold itself longer. Technically, an accelerated electrically charged particle emits electromagnetic energy thereby losing its energy – getting “tired” and eventually falling into the nucleus.
The Quantum Leap
Niels Bohr further sophisticated the model of Rutherford by assigning circular highways to the electrons around the nucleus. Each highway/freeway (autobahn!) has its speed limit which here in atomic model is the energy level. The difference between energy level of each highway is “quantized”. Meaning that there is no middle lane between each highway, no lane cutting/ lane crossing and no overtaking. The energy gap between each highway i.e., “orbit” is fixed. The change in highway is only possible when the electron gains or losses this fixed “quantized energy”. This jump of electron from on orbit to other coined the term the “Quantum Leap”.
Bohr’s idea was usable for simple atoms like hydrogen but it could not explain the behavior of heavier atoms and hence there was still something missing in the model of atom.
The Wave Particle Duality
Erwin Schrödinger formulated that the electrons don’t actually have discrete highways around the nucleus. Electrons are the particles that behave like a wave around the nucleus. This idea was inspired from the Louis de Broglie’s hypothesis that the subatomic particles like electron actually are the waves around the nucleus. Meaning that you cannot pinpoint the electron around the nucleus. The electron will be anywhere in the space around the nucleus, but it follows certain schedule/ timetable which is the famous Schrödinger Wave Equation.
The schedule of electron is always tightly packed. Electron is not that person who confirms his arrival to a party by immediately saying Yes or No. An electron is that friend in your group who will always has his plans and will ditch you at the last moment. To meet such type of an “electronic friend” i.e., the electron itself you have to study its behavior, its routine which is its waveform. The waveform will give you an idea where your electron hangs out the most. Such hangout places where you have largest chance of finding your electron are the “clouds of high probability” called the orbitals.
This is where the real problems start to happen. You thought you knew everything about your dear “electronic friend”. The whole foundations of quantum mechanics are based on wave particle duality of subatomic particles.
Spin of an electron
Spin of an electron is actually term used to signify the angular momentum of an electron. Please note that spin of electron does establish that an electron is exactly a ball or a top which is spinning around the nucleus. Rather, spin only represents that there is some measurable angular momentum for an electron.
Quantum measurements are never “Gentle”
The first and most important idea in quantum mechanics is that on subatomic levels the measurements disturb the state they are trying to measure.
The Heisenberg’s Uncertainty principle tells that if you go for the measurement of the spin of an electron the interaction between your measuring equipment and the electron will change its location. Same thing will happen when you go for the measurement of the position of an electron. The interaction between the equipment measuring the position will change the angular momentum of the electron.
Means, the effects we are trying to measure at such subatomic levels are so interaction sensitive that mere the interaction of measurement will disturb the state of the subatomic particle. Thus, you can either measure the momentum of an electron or position of an electron at a time.
The famous American physicist Leonard Susskind’s own words say,
“You can learn nothing about a quantum system without changing something else”
The quantum measurements are so interaction sensitive that they will change the state of the subatomic particle by merely interacting with the measuring equipment.
It’s like the measuring rotations of a ball in the air where you are physically flying with the ball with tachometer in hand in contact with the ball’s surface. The frictional interaction between tachometer and ball will either change the position or the rotation. Hence, you will only know about either the spin of ball or the position of the ball correctly at once. (I agree that it is one exhausting way to perform such measurements, but it serves the purpose here!)
Interaction during quantum measurements will change the state of the quantum particles
Einstein’s problem with the probabilistic nature of quantum mechanics
The wave nature of electron, the so called “fault” to measure the exact conditions of the subatomic particles all at once, the probabilistic nature of the quantum mechanics puzzled Einstein. Please note that the ideas discussed in quantum mechanics are not just some wild thoughts, these are legitimate mathematical proofs which are conceptually established in place. Einstein despised the idea of entanglement, which was not consistent with the reality he had already developed.
The entanglement- the bizarre child of an innocent mother
One bizarre concept born from an innocent concept is entanglement. As far as nature’s fundamental laws go- for creation of anything, something has to be invested in first place. This is called “conservation”. Law of conservation of energy says that the net energy of a system remains same, remains conserved always, it will change its forms but will always remain same in total. Conservation of mass says that one mass can change to other mass with totally different properties but the net mass of the system will always remain the same. Law of conservation of momentum says that if two objects of different momentum come in contact – collide, the total momentum before collision will be equal to the total momentum after collision.
In the same sense, angular momentum is also conserved in the natural phenomena.
So, now consider that two particles are generated from a particle with certain spin. In order to conserve the angular momentum of the system, the two particles will have exactly opposite spin of each other. This nullifying spin with the spin of the object they are created from will give the net constant spin to the system, thereby conserving the angular momentum of the system.
For any system the momentum is conserved
This type of connection between the new two particles from a system is called as the entanglement in quantum mechanics. (This may be, is the exact cinematic love that transcends all the barriers, all the dimensions in your favorite SCI-FI movies and fantasy movies!)
God does not play dice
In quantum mechanics, when one tries to measure the state of a subatomic particle, the act of measurement gives a state of that particle, but this act of measurement for getting the information about that particle also fixes the state of another particle entangled with it.
Meaning that if you separate the two entangled particles at a distance and measure the spin of one particle then spin of another particle gets fixed at the moment of measurement. The question is that, how does the other particle get the information of the first particle being measured and its state? Einstein called this idea as “spooky action at a distance”.
The EPR Paper
Einstein was so sure that there is something lacking in the theory of quantum mechanics that he published his idea about the incompleteness of quantum mechanics today famously known as the EPR Paper. Albert Einstein with Boris Podolsky and Nathan Rosen published the paper to explain why theory of quantum mechanics was still incomplete.
The abstract of this paper itself is intriguing:
“The EPR Paper”
Einstein debates that the reality is bound with all variables perfectly known. Hence, for a theory to be complete and to perfectly explain the reality there has to be one variable for each behavior. Hence, according to Einstein, as the quantum theory is completely based on wave function thereby becoming probabilistic (because wave function only gives the probability of measuring the information of the electron and does not pinpoint it) it is not giving the certain, definite, sure answers to the questions thrown at it. In simple words, if you ask a quantum physicist to pinpoint the electron around a nucleus, she/he won’t pinpoint the electron, instead they will tell that in this area there are high chances that you will find electron. As if, the quantum physicists have not studied the system completely, there is some unknown behavior that they haven’t identified yet which will complete the whole theory. Knowing this unknown variable will remove the tolerances in the theory, will remove the probabilistic nature of the theory.
Hence, Einstein puts the argument in two pieces:
First one attacks the lack of awareness of the all the variables in the quantum theory
The second one attacks on the reality, reality implying that the condition of having a definite state.
In short, either we don’t know completely about what is happening in quantum world or the quantum world does not have a real state.
Where the determinism and theory of relativity breaks
You have to understand the implications of the ideas put forth by Einstein and his colleagues in this paper. Einstein debated that the entangled particles when getting entangled secretly decide the state they are going to be. Hence, when one measures the information of the entangled particles, they seem to have been decided already. As if they have conspired about their states and our quantum theory is lacking to explain this conspiracy. The idea of fixing this state already established the concept of determinism. That every behavior in nature is already decided, it is only our lack of knowledge about nature which actually surprised us about the outcomes we experienced. If we have complete model of nature’s behavior we will not be surprised by the outcome, rather we will predict the outcome in advance. This was the heart of Einstein’s debate.
One more reason for Einstein’s debate on incompleteness of quantum mechanics was his own theory of relativity. According to Einstein’s theory of relativity, nothing in the universe can travel faster than the speed of light. The clever trick quantum mechanics holds it that even after being separated at larger distance where the light will take significant time to travel from one particle to its entangled counterpart the information of the first particle being measured is instantaneously transferred to the another entangled one. If this is happening instantaneously, then the information of one particle being measured has to travel faster than light to the another entangled one. This was also one point of concern for Einstein.
The concept of locality becomes important here. According to the principle of locality, only the immediate surrounding can affect the state of an object thereby limiting the speed information lesser than the speed of light. But, in quantum mechanics the information transfer is instantaneous irrespective of the distance, meaning that the state of one object even after not being in immediate surrounding is affecting the state of its entangled counterpart. (Park this idea of “locality” for one interesting concept called Quantum Cryptography). This meant that quantum effects if are true then they are non-local. Which established the concept of “non-locality” – challenging and exposing the limits of Einstein’s theory of Relativity. That is why Einstein always argued about the incompleteness of Quantum Mechanics. There were some practical explanations to believe so.
The understanding of Einstein about the incompleteness of quantum mechanics was not just a random philosophical pursuit or some complicated thinking done in the air which was incomprehensible for comparatively dumb people of the times. His idea of reality was influenced by the famous mathematician of his time called Jon von Neumann who was obsessed with structuredness of the fundamental theories. Rather he was the one who defined the standards of a good fundamental theory.
Einstein was unsettled with the idea of the probabilistic nature of the quantum mechanics.
This is the only reason which got Einstein into formulating “The Theory of Everything”. A theory which will combine the gravity from his theory of relativity to the theory of generation of fundamental forces of nature from quantum mechanics (if proven right in his time). Even in his last moments of his life, Einstein was working on “The Theory of Everything”. Today String theory and Loop Quantum Gravity are two strongest contenders for theory of everything. Humanity’s most brilliant minds are working on these theories. The problem is that these theories are completely abstract, conceptual to date and still in incubation mode to design a measurable experiment to check and validate the predictions.
The Nobel Prize in Physics for year 2022 is actually awarded to the contributions made for the real- life experimentation done to prove the completeness of the Quantum Mechanics and its implementation in real world.
The Nobel Pursuit- Bell’s Inequality
The EPR paper went in hibernation for years but, this actually became a reality in near future. The paper attracted the attention of one of the physicists at CERN called John Stewart Bell. Bell formulated a mathematical argument to explain the idea of hidden local variable in system. If this mathematical argument is proved to be right then this would also prove that Einstein was right all the time.
The Bell’s Paper where he established the inequality due to hidden variable
The beauty of Bell’s inequality is that that it gathers the intangible ideas and inspirations from EPR paper and probabilistic nature of quantum mechanics, wave function into a one definite, measurable and quantifiable equation. The equation given by Bell was testable in real world so that some concrete conclusions could be drawn about the completeness of quantum mechanics.
Bell developed a mathematical expression which was based on the assumption that the quantum mechanics has to be “Locally Real”. Where, Local means that the phenomena in quantum mechanics are not faster than the speed of light as explained and proven by theory of relativity; Real means that quantum mechanics is actually deterministic meaning that every measurement done in quantum mechanical system will give an exact answer, a definite value, a surety, it is only our lack of understanding of some hidden variables which cause the quantum mechanics to not be real.
Once the hidden variable/s in the quantum mechanics are identified, then theory will become consistent with the Classical Mechanics.
Smart thing about Bell’s equation is that it used the ideas of probability to show that quantum mechanics is not probabilistic.
Here is simplification of the idea explained by Bell:
We will set up an experiment where we will measure the spin of two entangled particles. You have to understand that in quantum mechanics the act of measurement itself changes the state of the quantum particle. So, when you are measuring the spin of a particle in say Z-direction, after measurement it spin value will no longer be the same as the measured value.
Now what we will do is that we will measure Z-direction component of the spin of one particle in Lab 1 and X-directional component of the spin of the another one which is entangled with the previous particle in Lab 2. Please note that the distance can be as large as possible on the condition that both labs receive undisturbed, un-interacted entangled quantum particles. The measurements will be exactly simultaneous.
So, the possible measurements we will get from the experiments where we only measure two variables are as follows:
The set of measurements when there are only two variables will be:
Here, M1, M2, M3, M4 are the measurements taken. Thus, for set of all measurements:
Now, the real game begins. According to EPR paper, if there are additional hidden variable/s in the model of quantum mechanics which we are not considering, the number of possible outcomes from the same experiment will increase. Say, if there is one hidden variable which we had not considered before while devising the Quantum theory called Q1, and now we are measuring this additional variable in the experiment then the number of possible states of entangled particles increase as follows:
When a new hidden variable is present in the system and if we measure that additional measurement as Q the number of possible combinations of measurement will increase. See below:
The set of measurements will be:
So, what will be the probability, the chance of getting Z directional spin positive and X-directional spin positive? i.e., What will be P (Z+, X+)?
Now, if there is one hidden variable and we are measuring that hidden variable then for the person who measures Z and Q the value of P (Z+,Q+) will be:
Similarly, for the person measuring X with hidden variable Q the value of P (X+,Q+) will be:
Now pay attention,
If we combine these three equations to establish the relation between them, the equation will be as follows:
Which is the Bell’s Inequality.
And is true, if we put the exact values,
In simple words, more variables driving the system, more will be the combinations of the measurements and thereby more complex the equation need to be to completely explain the system.
If there is hidden variable in the system, the number of possible combinations of measurements will be more than the system with lesser variables considered in the study. Which in turn will affect the balance of the possibilities of the events.
Now understand where does the quantum mechanics starts playing its tricks.
When we start to put the one-to-one values in this equation, we will realize what probabilistic nature can do. Due to the probabilistic nature of the quantum system, the measurements will not have a discrete value which lies on a straight line, rather it follows a sine wave, and if we substitute the values of the measurements from the sine wave function the inequality actually breaks.
The wave function in quantum mechanics actually tell what value it will have for measurement at certain angle. Which is indicated by the blue line in the graph below. The wave function only tells that what will the possibility that the spin will be +1 or the possibility that the spin will be – 1. The red line indicates that the measurements will be discrete (either up spin (+1) or down spin (-1)).
Wave function does not give discrete values
For our example, if one makes a measurement of so-called hidden variable between Z- component and X-component i.e., along Q axis lying between 45 degrees from both Z and X axes the outcome will break the equality as follows:
The values for the Bell’s Inequality for quantum mechanical measurements is given by using the sine wave given in the graph above:
Hence, from the Wave Function in Quantum Mechanics:
Hence, for Bell’s Theorem in Quantum Mechanical System the inequality breaks as follows:
Which is not possible, indicating that Bell’s inequality does not hold true for quantum mechanics. Proving mathematically that there is no hidden variable in Quantum Mechanics. Quantum measurements are not discrete and give definite values, rather the measurements can take any value until we are measuring them, we can only give the probability of how the measurement will be.
This was a shock for those who considered reality as a very sophisticated and definite. The wave function of quantum mechanics does not follow the Bell’s Inequality. There was a strong need for devising an experiment to check and confirm what actually is true. But you must appreciate the power of mathematics and the intellectual level of human mind which can give such deep insight about the nature of reality.
John Stewart Bell You can see that he has written the outcomes by classical way as 2 and by quantum way as 2 multiplied by square root of 2
The CHSH inequality
The first person with Nobel Prize in Physics of 2022 called Jon Clauser devised an actual experiment to check the Bell’s Theorem and to confirm whether there is any hidden variable in quantum mechanics. Jon Clauser, Michael Horne, Abner Shimony, and Richard Holt created the experiment and the CHSH inequality for the experiment from the Bell’s inequality.
The setup for experiment is as follows:
Two experimenter Alice and Bob (two important people in quantum cryptography. We will discuss about them in upcoming part) will receive a quantum particle simultaneously. The particles are entangled. Meaning that if Alice measures the Z-directional spin of her particle the spin will change in that direction so Bob again measuring the Z-directional spin of his particle which is entangled with Alice’s particle will give new and changed spin value in Z-direction thereby making the measurement meaningless.
Bell’s Test
So, what Bob will do is that he will measure the X – directional spin of his particle exactly when Alice measures the Z-directional spin of her particle. As the two particles are entangled with each other, we will know two states of the entangled quantum particles simultaneously (which seems like some type of cheating but is a pure possibility). The CHSH inequality for the system becomes as follows:
For any number of measurements, when spin of Alice’s particle in Z-direction indicates +1 then the Bob’s entangled one will have spin -1 in X-direction and vice versa. So, according the spin measurements, the maximum possible outcome of the equation is 2. When the experiment is repeated multiple times to converge to a fixed value, we get the statistical average of the measurements (remember that the wave function is probabilistic in nature, hence only statistical average of the measurements will yield a definite value for the equation)
Thus, for hidden variable in quantum mechanics,
Where the angular brackets indicate the statistical average of the measurements known as Dirac’s bracket notation.
But, from actual experiments done by John Clauser the CHSH inequality breaks. And the result is:
This proved that quantum mechanics does not follow the local realism as conventional classical mechanics do. Quantum mechanics does not have any hidden variable which are causing its probabilistic nature. Rather the reality is probabilistic instead of deterministic, predefined.
In the experiment done by John Clauser and his colleagues, they measured the polarization of entangled photons in two directions.
There was one loophole in the experiment of John Clauser. The angles of polarizers were preset or fixed before the entangled particles were sent out to observers from the source. This adds additional determinism in the experiment thereby making “Locally Real” to some extent, therefore the observations were to some extent discrete. I simple words, the experiment done by John Clauser and his colleagues proved a special case of for inconsistency of Bell’s inequality in Quantum Mechanics.
What Alain Prospect the second Nobel Laureate for Physics in 2022 did, that he closed this “loophole of locality”. Alain Prospect and his colleagues devised an experiment where it was possible to switch the detector settings after the entangled particles are released from the source. In simple words, Alain Aspect’s experiment increased the randomness of the combinations and the removed deterministic, predefined nature of measurement.
Quantum Teleportation and Quantum Cryptography
So, now know that the quantum entanglement is real phenomena and not only mathematics but the experiments also follow the principles, it demands the value addition to the society. The third Nobel Laureate for Physics in 2022 – Anton Zeilinger used these principles for transfer of encrypted information.
It is now established that if one particle’s state is measured in a setup at that exact moment the state of the particle entangled with it gets fixed irrespective of the distance. It shows that the information of the first particle being measured is transferred with the speed faster than the speed of the light.
But there is one more catch,
If we have to check the state of the second entangled particle to understand how the first particle behaved, we need to understand in what orientation of the equipment the first particle was measured. This information of the orientation of the equipment cannot be shared to the other end beyond the speed of light. But there is still use of this information. If only the people at both the ends measuring the entangled particles know the settings, orientation of measuring equipment, then only they can understand what the states of particle are.
If the entangled particles interact with some other particles or are intercepted by some enemy, there states will no longer remain the same. The information of the orientation of the equipment will show that.
Hence, the orientation of the equipment for measuring the state of entangled particles becomes a secret key for two observers- one of them is sender and another one is the receiver.
And this is exactly called as Quantum Cryptography. Quantum Teleportation refers to the transfer of information irrespective of the distances as the entanglement is instantaneous.
This implementation of quantum teleportation was done Anton Zeilinger and his colleagues using photons.
Alice will decide the equipment orientation while measuring the state
Bob will use the information of Alice’s equipment orientation for decryption
The one where someone tried to intercept
The name Alice and Bob- The “Power-couple of Quantum Cryptography” first appeared in a paper. The Alice and Bob characters were invented by Ron Rivest, Adi Shamir, and Leonard Adleman in their 1978 paper “A Method for Obtaining Digital Signatures and Public-key Cryptosystems”. Instead of using some boring name Machine A and Machine B they used Alice and Bob. (Some say that the secret message is Valentine’s Day Poem). The names became popular in no time and for any experiment in quantum mechanics you need to involve Alice and Bob. (Given that the love they have for each other!)
Philosophical implications of Bell’s inequality
The breaking of Bell’s Inequality shows that the quantum mechanical system has no hidden variables. Please note that the quantum mechanical systems are the most fundamental systems to date for the whole humanity’s understanding of the universe. This implies that even though the fundamental nature our reality is consistently changing, there are ways to completely understand. One can know the complete system without understanding it’s hidden variables.
The breaking of this inequality both theoretically and experimentally proves that the reality is not definite, predefined. This shows that nature is not deterministic. The idea that reality is mere superposition of infinite possibilities and the one of them becomes apparent only when you interact with them measure is really enlightening. The approach of your measuring equipment, the way you approach the things in nature is like the perspective you hold. The things will define their states their nature according to your perspective is such a humbling idea and learning from all these efforts of humanities greatest minds.
The EPR Paper – Can Quantum-Mechanical Description of Physical Reality Be Considered Complete? A. Einstein, B. Podolsky, and N. Rosen Phys. Rev. 47, 777 – Published 15 May 1935
We live in a competitive and fast-moving world where everything’s success depends on the outcomes and their value delivery. Take any example, if any movie release fails to entertain the major audiences, consider it flopped; if any project is not delivering the expected profits to the company consider it stopped; if any equipment is not working properly for the performance it promised, consider it a market failure; if any start-up is not built upon the actual market requirements, consider it a flop business; an employee fails to reach his targets, consider no promotion or even a pink slip. Whenever you are working on achieving anything and if your actions and thought process behind them are not directing you to the Goal, people will suggest you to change your strategy. In nutshell, everything you do, every thought you have is expected to have a fruitful outcome, value creation, profit, gain, benefit thereby there must be some utility. We now call these things, these thoughts “practical”. General thought process always suggests to have the practical way of life in order to succeed in a way.
I am of the same opinion, that doing certain things, acts, thinking (actually overthinking) about everything you stumble upon is expected to deliver some “practical” benefit in my life. If you studied enough and can’t get the job of specific salary then what good is your education? There must always be some definite value delivery from our actions otherwise we are just wasting time and getting nothing.
The situation worsens when you implement the same logic to the ways you think about anything and everything you stumble upon. It is like day dreaming as you are only thinking about some random things, are engrossed completely in the world of your own and there is no real-life benefit from it. Then, it becomes imperative to “Get Real” in life, sort your things and be practical and use your common sense.
Now, here comes a short story-
In a fight, the flight attendant finds an elder person going through severe chest pain, she immediately asks for the expert help. Flight Attendant- Attention all, we have an emergency. Is there any Doctor onboard? (One person raises his hands) The person- Yes, I am a doctor. Flight Attendant- We need medical help. The person- But, I am a doctor of Philosophy. Flight Attendant- He is going to die The person- Aren’t we all anyways?
One can only imagine the awkwardness and impractical response of philosopher to the situation in the flight.
I used to think that the philosophy and it’s ideas yet interesting and intriguing cannot handle the reality of life and solve practical problems.
And, (as usual) I was wrong.
Here it goes…
The question is-
Will thinking about every possible thing you are exposed to (and even about the things you may never get exposed to) and asking “unnecessary questions” about it add value to our life? Will thinking about things irrelevant to your job is going to increase your performance at your workplace? Is thinking about any random thing is going to put food on your table?
In short, what is the worth of the philosophical ideas, questions if they are not going to solve our practical problems? What is the practicality of philosophy?
This was the question I was stuck at; even though philosophical ideas have always intrigued me.
Then I found my answer in Bertrand Russel’s book called “The Problems of Philosophy” with the last essay called “the Value of Philosophy”. The ideas explained by Bertrand Russel in this writings answer the very basic question about the utility of philosophy.
Ends of life
Russel explains the idea of ends of life by distinguishing between the nature of Physical Sciences and the philosophy. The idea is that all the physical sciences that we as a human have established have contributed to the society in some ways. The developments in physics led to inventions of uncountable things like lasers, semiconductors, telescopes, machines and what not hence landing mankind into the modern world. The developments in virology, bio-technology, modern medicines helped us to come out of the global pandemic. The developments in geography helped us to explore the globe, share our trades, cultures, profits, save us from natural calamities. The psychology helped in maintaining the mental well-being, the social well being of the society there by controlling the sanity in the people. The economics helped to efficiently utilize and manage our resources in order strive as a species on a space floating rock. These physical sciences have mastered various ends of life and are continuously contributing ahead
What about philosophy? If we are going to discuss how certain philosophy has solved the world hunger or how a philosophy has cured the incurable diseases in history or how a philosophy has saved people from famine or how a philosophy landed us on another celestial body, then the answer is surely no. There are no practical ends of life which philosophy helps us to achieve.
Uncertainty of philosophy
Bertrand Russel has very beautifully established the difference between the nature of Physical Sciences and philosophy. The Physical Sciences have postulates, theories, formulae, a definite structure which builds the all knowledge they represent. There is a systematic path to be followed in order to answer the posed question. If you ask a physicist why the sky is blue? he will approach the problem from the branch of optics then thereby refraction and scattering and the spectrum of light. If you ask how the eclipses occur? to an astronomer, he will take you through solar system, to planets, their satellites and their rotations, orbits. It can go on and on.
In short, in all the physical sciences the truths established are definitive. There are definite answers to the questions posed. Such is not the case with philosophy. If you pose a philosophical question as in “What is the purpose of life?” every philosopher will have his own versions and there is no surety of definite answer. If you ask questions like, why was the world created? Why was the universe created? Are we really body with a soul or a soul with a body?
See the pattern we can observe from the philosophical questions is that the truths they are giving are not certain. On contrary, the truths revealed in physical sciences are definite, their truth value is certain based on the truths they are derived from due to structured-ness. Bertrand Russel establishes that all the physical sciences are originated from philosophy. When the definitive-ness, certainties of truth extraction system, knowledge building system of these philosophies became strong, they separated from the philosophy and get independence.
Thus, the only thing certain in philosophy is that there are no certain answers to the questions posed. If the answers are getting definitive, certain then a new physical science gets established thereby separating from philosophy. Philosophy of mind became psychology; philosophy of heavenly bodies became astronomy.
What I found interesting in this idea of “genesis of physical sciences from philosophy” is that though upon certainty of truth/ knowledge physical sciences become free from philosophy, the next unanswered questions in physical sciences immediately start to redirect themselves to philosophy again until the certainty of answers are obtained thereby proving the presence of philosophical inheritance. Our quest for understanding “the nature of reality” in the world of modern physics is one such strong example.
Richard Feynman in one of his famous lectures discussed about questioning the nature of reality as we understand:
“it’s a very strong tendency of people to say against some idea, if someone comes up with an idea, and says let’s suppose the world is this way.
And you say to him, well, what would you get for the answer for such and such a problem? And he says, I haven’t developed it far enough. And you say, well, we have already developed it much further. We can get the answers very accurately. So, it is a problem, as to whether or not to worry about philosophies behind ideas.”
Richard Feynman
Meaning is it not always compulsory to have structured-ness and definitive nature to any idea. There may be always some indefinitve-ness to the answers in philosophy.
Truth of the answers to the questions of philosophy
Now that it is clear that the answers to the questions in the philosophy are not definite, not certain; it is also important to understand that the answers don’t lose their value due to their indefinite or uncertain nature. Rather they bring us closer to the unrealizable, un-experienceable truth.
According to Russel, the confinement of knowledge is the major point which poses the question on “the practicality” of philosophy in our life.
I think what Russel is trying to say here is that as soon as the nature of the truth of knowledge starts following a pattern/ a trend, it gets confined in the structured-ness of certainty thereby getting its independence, self-reliance. The philosophy hence will always remain as a field (even the word “field” is so confined) rather expanse of uncertainty where there will always be some room for speculation.
In order to ask for value of philosophy, one has to confine it to some ideas and then compare these ideas to other ideas. But the game philosophy plays here is that the you lose the identity of philosophy once you confine it to some set of ideas in knowledge/ physical sciences. Thus, remains incomparable.
Funny thing is that the solution of such problem will start with – What is comparison? How to measure the worth of anything? (Which themselves are good philosophical questions!)
Philosophic Contemplation: the idea of Self and not-Self
Russel suggests that the value of philosophy will be only realized when the ends of the life are not limited to ‘Self’. I think what Russel is trying to convey is that the realization of something greater above ourselves itself is humbling. Understanding that the knowledge will still exist irrespective of our existence is one important part of we becoming free from our own identity.
When there will be search for knowledge for Self, the answers gained will be confined, they will always reflect the nature of the self or the seeker.
But, once one understands that the knowledge, philosophy is above himself i.e., once a person starts seeking questions to the answers not for the betterment of himself only but for the knowledge itself then the knowledge reveals itself. This knowledge will not be definitive, certain. This knowledge will not have concepts of good or bad, pure or impure, left or right, profit or loss, worthy or unworthy. It will be only the knowledge itself where truth is still uncertain, indefinite an innocent. Russel calls the philosophy as the union of Self with not-Self. That is in order to understand something greater than ourselves, we have to lose the idea of ourselves, our being.
The curse on humanity
The question of finding the worth of philosophy itself has its own limitations. The concept of being worthy brings in the ideas of comparison, tradable value, what one gets in return, replacement value, a sense of transaction, gap due to absence, appreciation due to presence. This transactional, tradable, replacement value itself is a very small part of materialistic ideology of our human life.
See, our existence, thereby we being alive is dependent on so many materialistic things/ resources which are inherently important for our existence. You will not find a beggar asking for the explanation of the ideas in stoicism or nihilism. Most of the times he will only think about the ways to get the next meal. (Although, a beggar can also question about nature of him being a beggar
instead of a king if he wants)
In short, what I am trying to establish here is that for us as a human being, we need materialistic objects and our interactions with them through our senses to become aware of our consciousness. To become sure that the materialistic world and the sensations from them are not the only bounds of the life that we live in. The curse to human life here, I would say is that the first step in awareness of “knowledge greater than Self” starts with the awareness of our materialistic nature. Our first dose of true knowledge is only possible from the establishment of truths from the material world and our interactions with them. The material worlds being born from higher level of “uncertain things” reveal these uncertainties, thereby making us question their fundamental nature. This leads us to understand that there are things greater that what we are experiencing but there is no surety of completely true, certain answer.
Lifting the curse
I have a thought that, there is also benediction for this curse, rather anti-curse which is “the Curiosity”. Curiosity itself is the definition of philosophy. The whole purpose of philosophy is not to find the definitive answers, truths to the questions rather it is asking the questions and keep asking the questions.
Satisfaction of the curiosity is I think the boundary of the truths. The extent of satisfaction of the curiosity will be dependent upon how real or practical you want to get (What is the extent of real and practical also needs definition thereby). Here, there is no place for value, worthiness rather it is about satisfying the purpose and truly implementing philosophy to solve some real problems.
Bruce Lee has one famous quote on the same front:
“…here is the natural instincts and here is control. You are to combine the two in harmony. If you have one to the extreme, you will be very unscientific. If you are another to the extreme, you become, all of a sudden ‘a mechanical man’- no longer a human being. So, it is a successful combination of both, so therefore it’s not pure naturalness, or unnaturalness. The ideal is unnatural naturalness or natural unnaturalness.”
Bruce Lee
It is about the union of Self and not-Self to find the knowledge as Russel explains. You need not to infuse your boundaries, your prejudices to the questions of philosophy while on the quest of knowledge. You have to again lose your identity to find the real knowledge.
Again, Bruce Lee’s philosophy about being water reflects similar ideas about the nature of true knowledge from philosophy.
“Empty your mind, be formless, shapeless, like water. Now you put water in cup, it becomes the cup. You put water in bottle, it becomes the bottle. You put it in a teapot, it becomes the teapot. Now water can flow, or it can crash. Be water my friend”
Bruce Lee
Be water my friend!
– Bruce Lee
This also explains the innocent nature of knowledge. It takes shape of anything that it is in.
(That is the exact reason why we were forced to write the essay in our school on “Science: Curse or Boon”! OK, Jokes apart)
Having answers to the questions ends the quest thereby giving the boundary to the idea; asking the questions creates the possibilities. And creation of possibilities however uncertain they may be is the purpose thereby the worth of philosophy.
So, philosophy is not about finding definitive answers, it is about keeping on asking questions.
“I would rather have questions that can’t be answered than answers that can’t be questioned.”
– Richard Feynman
“Through the greatness of the universe which philosophy contemplates, the mind is also rendered great, and becomes capable of the union with the universe which constitutes its highest good”
– Bertrand Russel, The value of Philosophy from “The Problems of Philosophy”
The whole premise of the story Zima Blue is greatly aligned with finding the purpose of life, finding the meaning of life which are greatly the interests of the Existentialism. Almost all of the great personalities in the human history are the people who did one thing in a great way as they found their purpose, their meaning of life in that one thing. The purpose they found in that thing made them to endure anything in their life and this might the way in which we can find our meaning, our purpose in this chaos.
Love, Death and Robots is undoubtedly the most valuable gems of Netflix. This is an anthology series which consists of short animated stories and is intended as “animation series for adults”. Netflix proves its purpose of existence by supporting creation of series like Love, Death and Robots because such freedom of expression has yielded some unforgettable creations in the history of storytelling. There are many great and thought-provoking ideas expressed in Love, Death and Robots which will surely tingle your mind, one of them is called as Zima Blue and my #1 favorite. I will be discussing Zima Blue in detail so spoilers ahead.
The story of Zima Blue
Zima Blue is a story of an artist on the quest of creating the ultimate masterpiece of his life. He has invited a reporter – Claire to explain what his next demonstration will be. Through the narration of reporter, we understand that Zima was an ordinary portrait artist who in the search of greater meaning moved from portrait painting to large murals. The murals were filled with some great depictions of the universe and as the murals went on developing, they gradually had a geometric center piece of blue shaded shape which went on getting bigger and bigger with each iteration and finally occupied the whole canvas of the art. This blue was later identified as Zima blue by the people. Further on, the Zima Blue crossed the bounds of canvas to cover the whole sky; after that the Zima Blue creation became so big that it cast its blue shadow on the planet. The whole “planet painted blue” became Zima’s biggest creation which influenced even the people who were not interested in the art.
In order find the real meaning of life and to create such extraordinary masterpieces Claire tells us that Zima went through extreme physical transformations as in “cybernetic transformations”. Zima modified his eyes to see in any known spectrum, he got the polymeric skin to physically experience any worst environment in the universe, now he no longer needed oxygen to breath. Now that people were eager to see Zima’s next creation, he had invited Claire as a medium to the people for explaining what Zima did and the backstory of his ultimate masterpiece.
For the final reveal, Zima Jumps into a swimming pool and gradually disintegrates every part of his body finally revealing to the audience that he was nothing but just a ceramic tile cleaning robot designed by a lady. And audience are in awe. What they were thinking as a human responsible for creation of such thought-provoking arts pieces was actually a self-aware robot evolved from a “ceramic tile-cleaning robot for a swimming pool”.
Origin of Zima as a tile cleaning robot (From Zima Blue – Love, Death and Robots/ Netflix)
Before demonstrating this ultimate masterpiece, Zima explains his life journey to Claire. Zima was actually a robot created for simple tile cleaning job in a swimming pool by a smart robot loving lady. After being unsatisfied by its performance, the lady upgraded this robot with the color vision and a brain to define the cleaning strategies for the swimming pool. After the death of lady and being handed over to different owners and thereby its up-gradation, the robot became self-aware and more human-like so that it became impossible for even him to differentiate between him as a robot or human. His evolution in his awareness finally directed him in the search of the meaning of life thereby leading to the creation of such masterpieces.
The “Zima blue” what people had famously identified as his characteristic shade was the first color the robot had sensed which was simply the name given to that shade of ceramic tile in the swimming pool by its manufacturer. When we are looking at the disintegration of Zima into its most fundamental and primitive robotic form, we hear his final words:
“I will immerse myself. And as I do, I will slowly shut down my higher brain functions… unmaking myself… leaving just enough to appreciate my surroundings… to extract some simple pleasure from the execution of a task well done. My search for truth is finished at last. I am going home.”
The unfolding of Zima Blue story explained above is important as a personal experience for everyone. Somethings in Zima Blue cannot be experienced in the words. It is what makes the Zima Blue and its writer Alastair Reynolds so great.
Zima Blue points out the most important fact of any conscious being and that is- they are aware of their experiences. Even though nature has some of the physically strongest, fierce creatures already available, we humans are the most powerful beings in the world only because of our consciousness. We humans have relatively the largest footprint of our activities on the world only because we have become aware of what we do and experience and act accordingly.
But what Zima Blue story shows us is that, once the machines or any non-human entity will gain the consciousness, self-awareness, the awareness of the experiences it is having- it will eventually have the urge to search for the reason behind the actions it is doing.
Many people call it as “finding the purpose of life?” as in finding “why we are doing anything?”. We can also categorize similar questions as follows in the same group:
“Is there any greater outcome from what we are doing right now?”
“Why am I doing this?”
“Am I going to get out of this?” or “When will this end?” (Especially, when the outcomes are not in our favor)
The very nature of we as a human being is that, we are never satisfied with what we have and hence are in constant search for what will bring more pleasure into our life. This search for pleasure has no end hence we remain unsatisfied every time.
Existentialism and Absurdism
The above discussion can be perfectly fitted into the idea of Existentialism. What Zima Blue does excellently is to close the gap between humans and robots through building a bridge of consciousness of existence. Anything that is aware of what it can do, feel and experience is going to think rather question about the ultimate purpose, meaning and value of the acts it is performing.
This question to find the meaning initially generates the confusion, anxiety, restlessness leading to conclude that maybe life is meaningless- that it has no meaning also known as “the existential angst”. There is one interesting concept in existentialism called “Absurdism” highlighting that the life is meaningless and it will get the meaning by the way we define what is the meaning of our life. It’s like saying that “we will be fulfilled with our existence only when we find or define what fulfills us and act on it?” (This may sound confusing as the definition of absurdism is made of paradox itself)
Absurdism says that life is “unfair” anyways (bad things may happen with good people too, rather there is no such thing as good happening or bad happening- whatever will happen will happen) and you just have to find what unfairness you are going to handle throughout your life which can be found out by what you really want to achieve in your life. This goal of achieving something will give you the purpose to go through that unfairness in your life.
There is also one interesting concept in Existentialism called “Authenticity” and a concept called “Existence precedes essence” which somewhat go hand in hand. In existentialism, authenticity is the extent to which a person’s actions align with his ideas, values then whatever may be his surroundings – adverse or supportive. The acts performed by the man define him thereby giving him the essence (defining his nature, explaining why he is so). “How he exists gives the meaning to his existence, how he acts defines who he is” can be the loose explanation of “Existence precedes essence”.
Existence precedes essence
There is a moment in Kung Fu Panda 2 where Po is defeated by Lord Shen and is completely in confusion, fear and anxiety that it was Lord Shen who killed Po’s parents thus he is more powerful than anyone in the world. Po as a Panda cannot defeat Lord Shen as Lord Shen has wiped entire population of Pandas ruthlessly in history. He, at this moment is far away from getting the inner peace.
And in contrast it is the same moment when Po finds inner peace as he learns that it is not the labels assigned to him already that define him so that he can’t defeat Lord Shen rather it is the course of actions he is going to take ahead which will define him. The essence of his being is in the actions he is going to take ahead indicating his ways of existence. He defines himself as fulfilled when he is in the present moment.
The moment Panda finds inner peace- Kung Fu Panda 2
“Your story may not have such a happy beginning, but that doesn’t make you who you are. It is the rest of your story. Who you chose to be!”
Soothsayer to Kung Fu Panda
This moment in Kung Fu Panda really gives meaning to the statement “Existence precedes essence” which is the core of existentialism.
In the infinitely infinite expanse of the universe where there are so many things to be done one may get overwhelmed and find themselves useless hence, leading to that restlessness of not achieving something. But, once you find that one thing to live for, once you find that one thing to achieve however small, absurd, funny or useless it may seem to others- you can fulfill your purpose in the life. Probably, this thing will not be that much great for others but your actions to achieve that thing will give it greatness it deserves.
Hence, you will finally find the Zima dismantling into the only thing it was at its start- a simple blue ceramic tile cleaning robot in a swimming pool.
“I will immerse myself. And as I do, I will slowly shut down my higher brain functions… unmaking myself… leaving just enough to appreciate my surroundings… to extract some simple pleasure from the execution of a task well done. My search for truth is finished at last. I am going home.”
Zima in Zima Blue from Love, Death and Robots (Netflix)
Søren Kierkegaard a Danish theologian, philosopher, poet, social critic, and religious author is considered as the first existentialist philosopher, has following beautiful quote which also aligns with why Zima decides to go to its original form while entering into his ultimate moments of his life.
“Life can only be understood backwards; but it must be lived forwards.”
Søren Kierkegaard
There is a good TED talk by Shaolin Kung Fu Master Shi Heng Yi, who despite of having many great academic and personal achievements chose the way of life of a Shaolin Monk. This talk mostly focuses on how to achieve the purpose of your life and highlights the uniqueness of everyone’s purpose in the expanse of universe.
“All of our lifetimes all of our lives are too unique to copy the path from someone else. To bring meaning to your life, to bring value into your life, you need to learn and master yourself and don’t let the hindrances stop you.”
Master Shi Heng Yi
Another good TED talk to explore is “How to know your life purpose in 5 minutes?” by Adam Leipzig. In short it is asking yourself these five questions:
5 Question to Ask Yourself:
Who are you?
What do you love to do?
Who do you do it for?
What do those people want or need?
How do they change as a result?
He says a good thing in his talk:
“If you make other people happy, life teaches us we will be taken care of, too.”
Adam Leipzig
The whole premise of the story Zima Blue is greatly aligned with finding the purpose of life, finding the meaning of life which are greatly the interests of the Existentialism. Existentialism also explains why many great people in the history of the humanity are not associated with greatness as an executioner of bunch of great things; Rather almost all of the great personalities in the human history are the people who did one thing in a great way as they found their purpose, their meaning of life in that one thing. The purpose they found in that thing made them to endure anything in their life and this might the way in which we can find our meaning, our purpose in this chaos.
Zima as and in his ultimate masterpiece – (From Zima Blue – Love, Death and Robots/ Netflix)
Further links and references:
Pictures of Zima Blue from Love Death + Robots episode (season 1, episode 14)
“Men imagine that thought can be kept secret, but it cannot; it rapidly crystallizes into habit, and habit solidifies into circumstance.“
“A man cannot directly choose his circumstances, but he can choose his thoughts, and so indirectly, yet surely shape his circumstances.“
– James Allen, As A Man Thinketh
The best thing about books is the value they provide compared to their cost. Books are the materialistic vessels which contain streams of the incomparable, unbound and unfathomable ocean of knowledge. I will discuss one such small- yet very impactful book by James Allen called “As A Man Thinketh”
The book is the epitome of common saying “good things come in small packages”. This book is mere collection of seven essay-like chapters which emphasizes on the importance of our thoughts /thinking and their impact on our life, circumstances, success/ failure, body. This small self-help book is the perfect distillate of the ideas in philosophy related to our thoughts – our thinking. Nobody should miss this book.
The author James Allen intended this book to remain concise, compact. James Allen was a British philosopher, poet and is called the pioneer of self-help movement. Buddha and his teachings – one of the influences on James Allen seem to reflect themselves in this book. He also calls this book “little volume (the result of meditation and experience)”. The book is also said to inspire one of the bestsellers called ‘The Secret’ which focuses on the Law of attraction.
Let us dive into the seven short yet insightful ideas explained in the book ‘As A Man Thinketh’.
1. Thought and character
Act is the blossom of thought, and joy and suffering are its fruit.
James develops this idea from the logic of Cause and Effect. Anything we do will have a favorable or unfavorable outcome which decides whether it will make us happy or sad. If sweet or sour fruits are the effect then their cause is the action taken.
But what is the cause to the effect of taking an action?
James expresses ‘the thought’ as the cause for actions. We are what we think. Our every minuscule, insignificant seeming yet impactful thoughts and their collection make us who we are which thereby enables us to act in a specific way. Some may consider this as a behavior, the attitude of a person. James wants to make readers aware of the control they can have on their life by having control on their thoughts, thereby the actions they will take and the outcomes of these actions
Man is always the master even in his weaker and most abandoned state; but in is weakness and degradation he is the foolish master who misgoverns his “household”
2. Effect of thought on circumstances
The soul attracts that which it secretly harbours; that which it loves, and also that which it fears; it reaches the height of its cherished aspirations; it falls to the level of its unchastened desires, – and circumstances are the means by which the soul receives its own.
Here, in the second part James expands the idea of cause and effect of our thoughts causing our “attitude” which causes our actions in a specific way giving us “our character”. This idea is also somewhat similar with the thought expressed by Carl Jung- Swiss psychiatrist and psychoanalyst as follows:
“You are what you do, not what you say you’ll do.”
– Carl Jung
This reinforces that the thoughts are responsible for every action we take. No matter how spontaneous they may seem but they are the outcomes of our deep, hidden thoughts and they may remain unconscious for us. That is why James says “soul attracts that which it secretly harbours”. These conscious, unconscious thoughts inspire actions in a specific manner and the outcomes are revealed as the mannerisms of the actions taken. Hence, our thoughts give birth to the circumstances around us.
Justice
The idea of reaping what we sow is central here. James calls it ‘the exact justice’. Rather than circumstances shaping the person, James highlights that the person is the cause of his circumstances which are linked to his/her attitude which is ultimately linked to the thoughts.
Ignorance
James expands the idea of circumstances to the desires, wishes of every person. In almost every case a person has the solution for the problem right in front of her/him, but they chose to ignore because it will cost them to change themselves and the anxiety associated with changing themselves.
If one eliminates this ignorance of the obvious yet anxious seeming change/ improvement, then she/he will become free. This means that one has to sacrifice her/his current attitude, current thought to improve personally thereby to improve the circumstances.
Good and Evil
James clears the idea of being good or being bad. In simple words, they are considered as a superficial tag or quick judgemental opinion of every person.
There are many examples in everyone of our lives when we feel that the dishonest man got the success and honest man failed greatly.
According to James’s idea of “Exact Justice”, the person having complete and absolute knowledge would have gone beyond good and bad, success and failure. She/he would consider them as a part of their evolution, part of their ongoing experiences.
Blessedness and Wretchedness
James discusses here the idea of suffering which seems to be influenced highly by the teachings of Buddha. Desires are the root of suffering. James calls the suffering as the effect of wrong thought. When one loses the harmony with her/his thoughts then only she/he suffers.
Blessedness hence is originated from the right thought, however materialistically poor a person may be and wretchedness is originated from the wrong thought, however materialistically a rich may be. Right thoughts meaning the harmony of a person with his doings and ultimately the thoughts responsible for them.
Introspection
Again, based on the law of justice of the universe, James establishes that, once a man accepts that his thoughts are responsible for the conditions around him, he starts tuning his thought in a way to change the conditions, people and their behavior towards him. This is possible only by the power of Self analysis and introspection, James says.
This seems like the core inspiring idea behind the development of the book called “The Secret” which calls for the Law of attraction.
Good and bad Habits
The collection of continuous thoughts in certain way creates a channel of certain continuous actions thereby creation of routines leading to the formation of habits. Our thoughts even may seem untouchable, non-physical but they manifest themselves into our actions in a specific way thereby swiftly developing our habits. These then create the circumstance of certain outcome.
James calls it as the “crystallization” of thoughts into habits and further “solidification” of these habits into the circumstances.
3. Effect of thought on Health and The Body
The body is delicate and plastic instrument, which responds readily to the thoughts by which it is impressed, and habits of thoughts will produce their own effects, good or bad, upon it.
James considers the body as a servant of the mind. In simple words, the body is the materialistic extension of our untouchable, non-physical thoughts. Hence, thoughts drive the body and the health. That is why a healthy mind will always crave for healthy food, healthy and hygienic habits. The neat and healthy living is the effect of the neat and healthy thinking.
With those who have lived righteously, age is calm, peaceful, and softly mellowed, like the setting sun.
In one sentence – “Age is just a number”. It is all in the thought of ours which determines how young we are.
4. Thought and Purpose
Even if he (a man) fails again and again to accomplish his purpose (as he necessarily must until weakness is overcome), the strength of character will be the measure of his true success, and this will form a new starting point for future power and triumph
James wants to establish the concept of failures as a part of life and their contribution in the ultimate success. Overcoming the failures is only possible when a person has found the purpose. This purpose then makes him to accept the failure, strengthen himself to face the failure again and to finally become strong to overcome it.
In simple way- when a person accepts the fact that, in order to become successful, one will go through multiple failures, the first step towards success is taken. In the process of overcoming these failures he will become strong; he will gain the strength to ultimately achieve the true success.
Purpose will guide the person through the failures.
5. The Thought-Factor in achievement
Intellectual achievements are the result of thought consecrated to the search for knowledge, or for the beautiful and true in life and nature.
Here, James follows the idea of strengthening oneself to overcome the failures. This will need sacrifice. The sacrifice intended here is of the selfishness. Because selfishness indicates attachment, attachment induces desires and failure to get these desires makes the person to lose the said harmony of thoughts and actions. The true achievement James establishes here is the freedom – what some may call as “Mukti” as mentioned in Hinduism. This needs upliftment of thoughts which is only possible by letting go of materialistic desires and acceptance of true knowledge, true purpose.
6. Visions and Ideals
Dreams are the seedlings of realities
James Allen calls the dreamers as the saviors of the world. The idea is that visions are one structured way of inspiring thoughts which go on accumulating to cause an action in a constructive way thereby manifesting a good habit. This good habit will be responsible for the harmonious circumstances which is the ultimate purpose of the life. James clarifies that the idle wish is not the Vision.
In all human affairs there are efforts, and there are results, and the strength of the effort is the measure of the result. Chance is not.
James denies the existence of chance, luck through the idea. It is therefore is established here that there are only thoughts conscious or unconscious they may be which are ultimately responsible for who we are and what is happening with us and how we accept and react to it.
Gifts, powers, material, intellectual, and spiritual possessions are the fruits of effort; They are thoughts completed, objects accomplished, visions realized.
This idea again focuses on actions thereby the thoughts responsible for these actions which are the key parts of human evolution in physical and non-physical ways. The vision brings thoughts into the reality of action, drives it or gives it a purpose.
7. Serenity
Yes, humanity surges with uncontrolled passion, is tumultuous with ungoverned grief, is blown about by anxiety and doubt only the wise man, only he whose thoughts are controlled and purified, makes the winds and the storms of the soul obey him.
Serenity in the end is intended to calm ourselves our of all the thoughts we have. This demands to establish control on our thoughts thereby controlling the actions and circumstances.
These are the seven core ideas of James Allen’s intellectual and philosophical masterpiece. ‘As A Man Thinketh’ itself builds a bridge between eastern and western philosophies in an effective way. The ideas also bring religious thought processes from Christianity, Buddhism and Hinduism. The book being so small yet expressing such vast and exhaustive ideas definitely highlights the power of few pages bearing, single dollar costing book with such a strong thoughts and ideas. Definitely a must read.
“There is in every one of us, even those who seem to be most moderate, a type of desire that is terrible, wild, and lawless.” – Plato, The Republic
KGF Chapter 2 was one of the most anticipated movies by Indian audience. The movie is filled with some great moments, a good performance from the whole cast especially the superstar Yash and most importantly the story line and characters have created significant impact.
Obviously, the wow factor of the movie is the character development of Rocky. From being an orphan to being kid doing boot polish to a gang leader to killing the most vicious person on record to becoming world’s richest man and most powerful man thereby the whole journey is mesmerizing.
I had only one fear about the story development while watching the Chapter Two which can be expressed as follows:
The whole ambition of becoming world’s richest man was a personal ambition of Rocky. His only goal was first of all very personal, it did not specifically involve doing good for the people. In the later stages, while planning on to kill Garuda, Rocky is exposed to the unfitting environment of gold mines and the unjust, cruel system forced on the oppressed people. Rocky works under the hood to reach to Garuda killing him in an absolutely dramatic environment and in front of the same crowd which was very scared, terrified by mere presence of Garuda.
Given that Rocky was more of a criminal and somewhat similar to Garuda in terms of terror, cruelty. I had a fear for the story that what if Rocky just replaces Garuda and becomes the same tyrant as Garuda was. Even though he frees the crowd from the terror of Garuda, his intentions are also not pure already as he wishes the same thing as Garuda and all that he wanted was the Gold of KGF and power that comes with it. It is just that KGF gets another Tyrant with some more emotions and personal attachment.
And the story actually developed to this stage, Rocky’s father like figure Khasim makes his thought clear to Rocky that the way in which he is enforcing to dig more gold makes him more of a same person as Garuda was.
But the story writers have done their job perfectly here. Actually, there is more similarity in the character of Garuda and Rocky than there are differences. Garuda is as ambitious as Rocky is, both are physically and mentally strong, both have intimidating presence, both create strong influence on the surrounding people, both want to become the richest and the most powerful people in the whole world.
What differentiates Rocky is that his ambitions are more attached to his mother and the suffering she went through. Hence, when people ask Rocky the reason behind so much greed, he points his finger to the tomb of his mother. Whatever decisions he is taking no matter how cruel and unjust they may seem they are justifiable just because he wants to fulfill his mother’s wish.
My fear was that Rocky becomes as tyrant as the previous tyrants of KGF were nonetheless he becomes the same person as his predecessors were.
The whole ensemble and development thereby degradation of ‘our antihero’ into a tyrant reminds me about the regime explained by Plato in his book called Republic. The ideologies of Plato’s five types/regimes of Government. These regimes are namely Aristocracy, Timocracy, Oligarchy, Democracy and Tyranny. According to Plato starting from the Aristocracy, the government degenerates into worse condition finally collapsing into tyranny. The whole story line and characters shown in the movie KGF can very effectively explain these five regimes of government.
Regime 1 – Aristocracy and early years of discovery of KGF
Aristocracy literally means ‘Ruled by the best’. Here, Plato expects the best as in the best in wisdom, education and ethics. Today the meaning of aristocracy is somewhat different and misleading. In aristocracy, wisdom and intellect are valued more hence power is in the hands of those who have the merits also called as meritocracy.
The biggest disadvantage of Aristocracy is ‘Nepotism’. Plato categorizes aristocracy as the government where people are ruled by few educated, just and moral people. But Plato never specified how many people are to be called ‘those’ few. Hence over the time meritocracy’s meaning went on obscuring. This leads to single person Aristocracy also known as ‘Monarchy’. Monarchy leads to hereditary rule which empowers Nepotism. Today’s aristocracy in the world is mostly hereditary. Which is far away from Plato’s intended Aristocracy.
We see the same Nepotism based aristocracy.
The early leader ‘Suryavardhan’ as explained in KGF Chapter 1 is smart and has sufficient wisdom and is clever, cunning to control a group of powerful people who are serving him and the people of KGF mines. Then he realizes that his time in this world is short, which creates a wave. When it comes to choosing a successor, he chooses his son Garuda over his brother Adheera. Even if he had chosen Adheera, the power would have stayed within family thus maintaining nepotism influenced monarchy.
Regime 2 – Timocracy – Vanaram, Adheera and their army
Timocracy is the degeneration of aristocracy. When the Aristocratic rulers no more remain ethical, justice loving they only care for the power and the influence it brings on the surrounding. The power corrupts them, that is why they always want to establish control on the masses and resources which drive their lives. Plato categorizes oligarchy as government where people are ruled by single person.
In timocracy, the rulers are more power hungry, less philosophical and focus more on development of military to maintain the grip. Weapons are prioritized over books, basic necessities.
Though Suryavardhan has his own army to control the people of KGF which is led by Vanaram, it is the army of Adheera which stands out throughout the narration. Adheera is more ‘timocratic’. He wants to create the influence through army and cares less about people.
Regime 3 – Oligarchy – Shetty, Inayat Khalil, Leaders of KGF and their gold racket
Oligarchy is all about materialism, the greed and the pleasure that comes with it. It is degeneration of Timocracy. Leaders have the sense of power and the supply of resources that can be controlled through this power. In oligarchy leaders focus more on becoming more and more rich, more and more resourceful. Their lifestyles are lavish, high profile. More focus on the becoming rich caused to pass the rules and regulation that give al the power to riches. Here, the valley between rich and poor is deeper. The military is weak due to more focus on enjoyments and ignorance of leaders. Money gives more merits in oligarchy.
Almost every character is greedy for gold in KGF. Shetty is a good example as an oligarch but his ambitions are far smaller. Though he wants to have control over Bombay he never misses to enjoy the pleasures of this power and this has already corrupted him. He has no rule, character, foundation to drive the tasks (mostly bad tasks). Leaders of KGF also restrict the resources to people of KGF showing greater sign of oligarchy.
Oligarchy brings about that unhappiness in the crowd, causing them to revolt against the leaders.
Regime 4 – Democracy – People of KGF, Rocky and Ramika Sen
In Democracy, it is the rule of leaders chosen by the people who are fed up with the inequality in the society and concentrated power in the hands of leaders. Democracy is the aftereffect of revolt of masses – ‘the mob’ against Oligarchy. In democracy, people do whatever they want. That is why Plato hated democracy. His master, the great philosopher Socrates was the victim of it – Socrates’s death sentence was decided by the masses who were never understood and accepted his teachings. Plato thought that when the mob is given the power to control the government the minorities are pressed down. Wrong activities are justified hen supported by mob. The mob generally does not have that wisdom and can be driven to any direction if properly influenced which is also possible for a sole leader but the influenced mob is more powerful. There is no control and systematic structure, hierarchy to handle issues of the masses.
Today’s democracy is far more evolved from the democracy of Plato. This democracy is liberal democracy somewhat hybrid democracy where there is a proper constitution, strong and independent judicial system, protection of minorities, hierarchy to prioritize the concerns of people and solving them.
We see two different faces of democracy in KGF
One is the democracy in the KGF after the killing of Garuda. People choose Rocky as their leader and are ready to die for him. This democracy is somewhat closer to the democracy explained by Plato in ‘The Republic’. The mob revolts and chooses a face for them. Now the only question is for the chosen face that whether he will fulfill the expectations of his people.
Second democracy is the democracy of India as in Liberal Democracy. Ramika Sen is the face of this democracy along with the constitution, parliament, judiciary, investigation wing. They portray the hierarchy within the democracy to solve the problems like Rocky for the nation. The twist of the story is that Ramika Sen is portrayed as a dictator in a democratic government which makes the fight between Rocky and Ramika interesting.
Ramika’s democracy is more of a totalitarian governance meaning she wants and does hold all the power to uproot Rocky. She wants control over everything.
Rocky’s democracy is more of a new born democracy where there are more chances of dissolving it into the chaos or maybe leading to tyranny if the people’s face loses his conscience. Same happens in the end; Rocky loses his mind over the death of his loved one and crosses the boundary.
Rocky also forces people of KGF to dig more and more gold. At a point in the story, we are given a moment to differentiate the tyrannical nature between Garuda and Rocky. But the forcefulness of Rocky is justified with the promise he made to his mother.
Regime 5 – Tyranny – Almost every ruler of KGF and Rocky to some extent
When democracy gives more power into the hand of a person and if this person has the only personal motivation, only expects personal well being then the democracy degenerates into tyranny. Tyranny is outcome of ideal democracy. When there is no hierarchy paranoia develops among the people and the chosen person amongst the people becomes tyrant. A tyrant does whatever he pleases leading to murder and terror. Tyranny is rule of only one and there is no rule or justification for any decision. The only justification is getting benefited on personal level only. Using the power for personal gains only.
Tyranny is the heart of the story of KGF. The race to own the gold mines always tries to replace one new ruling face. This position and the resistance to sustain this position, this ownership makes every person a tyrant, even Rocky is not exception to it. The only justification for Rocky’s tyranny is again his backstory with his mother.
KGF sole as a movie is a great entertainer and at the same time is a good refresher course on Plato’s Five regimes of government explained in his book ‘The Republic’. You see all these distinct characteristics and the downfall of each system into finally tyranny which highlights the good and bad aspects of each type of governance.
According to Aristotle- the law means “a sort of order, and good law is good order” and “reason unaffected by desire”, and “the mean”. Many of us are unaware of how a law making system established itself, its inner workings and its vast expanse. “The Principles of Natural Justice” may help us to understand some of the workings, importance and purpose of the law and judicial system in Human Civilization.
“You can’t escape from long arms of the law”- is one of the most famous dialogues from the classic detective/ investigative/ crime-based movies. These movie plots have somewhat same structure under them; our villain has tried all the ways to destroy the evidences from the location of crime and the witnesses. Eventually, the smart protagonist who was unable to prove the innocence to the court due to the trickery of antagonist finds a clue, a loophole which leads to the final victory in the court. There are many real-life examples of these cases. Here, the court serves as a middle man or the independent decision maker to decide what is right or wrong. (Even though ‘we’ as an audience know that the hero of the movie is right, the director takes whole movie to prove the thing to the judge!) A system to decide ‘what is fair and what is not’ as a Judicial system is one of the most important parts of being a stable human civilization. This is what separates us from animals in some ways- we have a system to resolve the conflicts without too much of a blood shed. A strong judicial system is one of the pillars of democracy for the reason. This means that there are certain laws for deciding what actions have to promoted and what actions are to be penalized. But the law has its limitations too. You cannot go on making law for everything in the world to be correct (and may be that is why you can still put pineapple on the pizza). Human conflicts are so much diverse in nature that you cannot frame all of them or categorize them in certain sets and furthermore establish a law system to all of them. That is the point maybe beyond the reach of the law. There are many moments in real life where time calls for the clarity of what is wrong and right in situations at your workplace or you might the one who will be responsible for deciding the fate of people you are leading. How will you make the fair decisions there? What if, there is no written law to decide what has been right and what has to be called wrong? How to be fair and just in such situations? You know what- you can’t escape the long arms of the law! There is a fantastic concept of Principles of Natural Justice which is used to decide the fairness of any judgement. Actually, the scope of Principles of Natural Justice is highly focused on and intended for the Administrative Laws where there might be instances for which specific laws are not established. There are two important statements which are stated in the Principles of Natural Justice from Latin maxims-
Nemo judex in causa sua
no-one is judge in his own cause
Audi alteram partem
listen to the other side
Nemo judex in causa sua- The intention of this maxim is to make the decisions without any prejudices. Being judge in owns case already establishes the polarity of decisions while doing justice. The decision will always be in the favor of party the judge personally prefers which will lead to unfair decision. The unfairness in decision will actually diminish the trust of people in the judiciary system thereby the foundations of a good civilization. Hence, the independence of judge/ decision makers becomes of high importance while performing justice. The maxim tries to remove one of the biggest flaws of being a human which is the flaw of being biased. The biases are the favored truths, prejudices of people which for them are the bendable truths. The biases will make the decisions subjective hence it will be difficult to create a good example out of any situation. Biases are like tinted goggles which filter certain ideas and makes the decision maker unclear of what the facts really are. There are many biases found in human behavior which are always creating the illusion of truth until someone comes and proves them wrong for us. The Natural Justice highlights on some of the following biases: Personal biases- It is the favor made while making decisions which will affect us and our relatives, friendships in a bad way. Thus, there must not be any personal interest or relation between the parties and the judge. Pecuniary bias- It is the favor of decisions made to achieve financial advantages. The decision-making authority/Judge must not have any financial interest between the parties demanding justice and the judge. Subject matter bias- A person who has supported a subject or has following for the subject on which the proceeding is going on will not give the hearing for the case. Otherwise again the favor of judgement will occur. Departmental bias- A bias which is highly observed in administrative cases. As the name indicates the judge must not be of the same departments to which the justice demanding parties belong. Preconceived notion bias- There must not be any presumptions in the mind of the judge which will affect the unfairness of the case. This bias is the most difficult bias to challenge. We as person are developed for the choice of what is wrong and what is right based on some truths and their comparison with the situations. These are our personal truths which actually develop the tendency to give justice while making decisions and we must accept that some of them may not be actually true.
The cultural differences, the upbringing of a person, the financial and family background of person, the environment around the person, the life altering events in that person’s life, the impact of other peoples’ decisions on the person’s life and so on, there are many factors which make a person- not only person but we all as a human to have our version of truths. Even Friedrich Nietzsche also quotes the following:
All things are subject to interpretation. Whichever interpretation prevails at a given time is a function of power and not truth.
Friedrich Nietzsche
Meaning that out of all the truths everyone has, some of them feel true only because of the conditions in which they were presented. When we say that “Only victors write the history”- it leaves that space to think whether the victors were good or bad. If they were really bad then we have been presented the dark parts of history with needless glorification which is the real injustice with the truth. Here, the role of science becomes of highest importance which looks for the proofs of the facts. Anyways, biases are that one integral flaw in our nature as human beings which will always challenge the fairness of decisions we make while solving the conflicts. The ‘Nemo judex in causa sua’ helps to build the trust in the intentions of person giving the judgements. Otherwise, what is the point of an order which will not be enforced by the people for the well-being of the system created for the people themselves.
Audi alteram partem- The purpose of this maxim is to gather all the information to make the judgement as fair as possible. It provides the chance for both the parties to put forth their version of truth. This is also known as ‘the right to notice’. Unless the party is aware of the facts presented in or against their favor one cannot truly defend themselves. This also brings the inherent image of fairness, a just decision-making procedure in the judicial system. Listening to only one side already violates the first maxim related to bias. It highlights that judge her/himself are favoring to one side only. Hence, listening to the other side creates that common ground for people with different version of their truths in front of the judge. It not only important for a judicial system to offer justice to the people the act of offering a fair, just decision must also be observed by the people. ‘There must always be someone watching the justice being granted’- is the essence of the second maxim. This also strengthens the belief of people in judicial systems. Listening to other side is not just about giving opportunity to other side- it is also one way to collect more supporting information for decision making.
Reasoned Decisions There is also a third part of the Principles of Natural Justice which highlights the importance of reason in the justice offered. Their must be some provable logic/ reasoning to strengthen the justice offered otherwise it will be further challenged and the loop will go on. The people who will be affected by the decision must know why they will be affected. This importance of logic and reason in any hearing must be a speaking order which brings the seriousness and responsibility in the people and eliminates randomness of decisions. Any randomly passed decision will create loophole in the system thereby leading to many bad decisions in future which are sufficient enough to bring the entire system down.
If any ideology proves that the Principle of Natural Justice were not followed during the judicial process, the order becomes void or null. It becomes of no value. There are some exceptions where the principle of natural justice natural justice will not be followed. This can be decided by the apparent nature and intentions of the actions while giving justice. Some of the events are related to the importance of emergency (exclusion in terms of emergency), maintenance of secrecy (exclusion in terms of confidentiality), tedious nature of addressing everyone when a group of people is representing one side (exclusion in case of impracticality), exclusion in case of routine matters- where the routine evaluations are being made for deciding fairness, exclusion in case of interim decisions – where the final decision has not been given and the suspension order is in effect, exclusion in case of legislative action- where the actions are taken base on the law already established (otherwise the law would be challenging itself which will create paradox) and the cases where no human rights were violated.
In the essence of the Principles of Natural Justice, it is one integral yet independent part of any judicial system in the world. These principles have actually defined the image of we as humanity and the system which runs it. Actually, the Principles of Natural Justice digs deeper into the nature of subjective thinking of human beings for the mere purpose of survival. The principles being ancient also highlight the fact that though many years have passed since the existence of human beings, we still think in the same way, we still create our own versions of truths, we still make decisions in the same way our ancestors used to do. Though the path followed is same, the primitive brain used is the same- survival instincts used are the same, it’s the addition of new truths to the previous set of truths in the process which are making humans to adapt to new definitions of being human- what it means to be a human.
A truth that has merely been learnt adheres to us only as an artificial limb, a false tooth, a wax nose does, or at most like a transplanted skin; but a truth won by thinking for ourself is like a natural limb: it alone really belongs to us. This is what determines the difference between a thinker and a mere scholar
Arthur Schopenhauer
New year represents new beginnings, a fresh start. Though recent years were filled with great challenges, we have adjusted ourselves to the new conditions, many things have changed. One of the things that are not changed are ‘the new year resolutions’. New year resolutions are one inseparable part from the new year celebrations. Whether one declares it publicly or keep it to themselves, everybody has thought of doing something new (consistently!) for upcoming year. Developing the habit of reading or reading ‘these’ many books is one of the famous new year resolutions (please note that joining the gym is still ranks the number one).
Being a bookworm, being bookish person (with spectacles for extra effects) has always been an indicator of studious, genius, mastermind, scholar personalities in popular culture. Having read lots of book is status symbol in the scholastic circles for years. But here is one thought – What if you are given all the resources, time, superpowers to read all the books in the world, will you be the wisest person in the world? Everybody knows the answer- the answer is ‘No’.
I came across this essay by the great German philosopher (and the most underrated one) called ‘Arthur Schopenhauer’. The title is ‘On Thinking for Oneself’. The essay is made up of mere 75-100 sentences but it has all the juice that will last forever if you really think over it. And this man has more essays like this.
‘On Thinking for Oneself’
Schopenhauer starts the essay with an example of two libraries- first where it has lots of books and you have read them all and second one has far lesser number of books, you have read them and have thought thoroughly over them. The second case will be of far more value- Schopenhauer says. The answer lies in the process of rearrangement of your experiences, their alignment with the truths/beliefs you have established, questioning your current beliefs, changing them if they are proven wrong after reading. That is how you not just gain the knowledge but this is how you acquire authority-mastery over it.
In simple words, reading a book is just feeding your brain with some words and collecting such sets of word again and again to call yourself a scholar. This is more of an artificial approach of gaining knowledge and will not last forever. Like, do you even remember what you read for that exam in the school where you scored the highest marks? In Schopenhauer’s words ‘It is like forcing a spring under continuous pressure so that it loses its elasticity’. I think this is what’s wrong with the current education system. Development of a train of thought for everything you read, is more organic. One can force people to read as much as possible but one cannot force anyone to think about them or anything forcefully. The thinking needs to be originated from inside only and once it starts flowing it will go on building itself. This is possible only when one has innate ‘Will’ to understand/ question what she/he has read. The act of reading must start with a purpose born from inside. Read whatever you wish not what others recommend.
Schopenhauer explains this ‘plain’ reading with the analogy of mouth and digestion/assimilation necessary for functioning of body. According to him reading is like chewing the food, splitting it into the pieces. But the real transfer of the nutrients from the food to the organs is only possible through the digestion and assimilation which is of far more importance. Thinking is like digestion and assimilation. People value mouth and eating more for remaining healthy, we consider reading in the same way; Staying healthy is also about digestion and metabolism.
Schopenhauer wants to focus on the importance of thinking over the things rather than just registering them, recalling them whenever demanded. He writes-
“Reading is merely a surrogate for thinking for yourself; It means letting someone else direct your thoughts”
Means it is very important to understand the intentions, background of the writer. When you are reading any book, your boat of imagination, thought is sailing by the winds of writer’s intentions. These intentions can be subjective, personal hence are of immense value to the writer but same might not be the case for the reader. There are many examples human history can provide, where people have stuck to the sayings, declarations, predictions from the books without even questioning, debating over them, accepting them as the ultimate truths and later they lead to disasters.
So, does that mean that you should stop reading?
Schopenhauer has explanation for this too.
“You should read only when your own thought dry up, which will of course happen frequently enough even to the best heads; But to banish your own thoughts so as to take up a book is a sin against the Holy Ghost; it is like deserting untrammelled nature to look at herbarium or engravings of landscapes”
Books are very important when your thoughts are stuck in a place, when you are completely directionless. Even starting with wrong directions which the case most of the times can at least make you aware of where you are (provided that you are thinking on your own).
The roots of this all ‘thought process’ lies deep down into the Schopenhauer’s philosophy of Will. Schopenhauer’s famous book called ‘The World as Will and Representation’ elaborates this idea in far more detail (this deserves one separate discussion).
It is not just about reading lots of books. It is about developing the habit of thinking over what you have read; it may be a small paragraph or even a quote. Questioning, debating, challenging and erasing the old beliefs thereby establishing newer ones and most importantly aligning them with your ‘personal’ experiences is what is of the highest value- that what being the smartest species on the earth means. I think this is what ‘critical thinking’ is and the gift of being a human.
In simple words, a ‘book smart’ person is the one who has gained the knowledge just by agreeing to the writings of the books, it may be in his/her imagination. On the other hand, a ‘street smart’ person is the person who has gained the knowledge by dealing with the things in real life, real experiences, by developing muscle memory. You will be a lethal combination of ‘book smart’ and ‘street smart’ if you could really connect your real-life experiences and the thoughts developed after questioning the readings from the books. But for all this, you really have to start think on your own without any external influence. Because, it is always easy to make people think based on the external influences. That is what advertisements do, one commercial and ‘poof’ you have already bought that unnecessary thing.
How can we start to really think over anything we have read? How can we make reading more effective? How can we extract value from reading a paragraph or mere sentence?
Actually, we already question many things, readings in daily activities- but these questions are not pronounced to the noticeable scale and get faded with the time. So, whenever you come across some readings and that makes you think over them, try to write it down and revisit it someday, you will get a new perspective to that thought. Maybe you will think for yourself and that will be the most natural, organic way of thinking- nobody has forced you to do it. So, I would say read once and small but think over it twice and big, maybe think again later (Overthinkers know that better :D) Whenever you are reading anything, just keep this small thought in the back of your mind. I know you have read all this to the last line, it will be great if you have thought over this for yourself too.
Remember the last time you pulled a prank on someone and imagine explaining it to your friends. You go on building the events and so the excitement level goes up and up. For the last sentence, all the purpose of events is resolved into a comic relief. You will notice the expressions of people listening to your story keep changing as the event unfolds. They are building the picture of the event in their mind as you are delivering the sentences.
There are some moments in life when you do not have words to explain how you feel. Like first underwater diving experience, that joy and feeling of achievement of climbing up to one of the difficult summits, the thrill of skydiving. You could explain them to others, but still feel that the one must experience it to know it, understand it.
The thought underlying below the ideas explained above state three important things-
The connection between what you said and what happened
What the listener understood by listening to your story, his interpretation
The explanation of the experiences that cannot be explained(!?)
The answer to these mysteries lies in the theory of language and how we handle it.
Ludwig Wittgenstein
Ludwig Wittgenstein, known as one of the most influential philosopher of 20th century has done some work on what is famously known as ‘the picture theory of language’. According to Wittgenstein, the language and the world we live in has a structure. In simple words,the world is made up of objects which are related by names; language is made up of names. These names combine in a structure to form elementary propositions. The elementary propositions combine to form states of affairs. States of the affairs are the closest or equal to a fact.
Means we use different sets of words and propositions to establish relationship between them. This creates a base fact, and the combination of these base facts create picture of what could have happened in the event. For example, when somebody says we had fun last night at birthday party! – this makes us to picture birthday boy blowing the candles, a cake cutting event, everybody singing the song, eating and drinking, making jokes, playing fun games. We are picturing many objects and their different interactions to create an event which was fun. We created pictures of a cake being cut by a knife, colorful candles being blown, the tune of birthday song being sung to create the whole meaning.
There is one catch in the above explanation-
Not everyone will see same cake in their minds- some will see vanilla cake, some will see black forest, some will see lemon cake. Some people will have simple single-color candles, some will have colorful candles, some will cut the cake by plastic knife, some will cut the cake by a metal knife. The birthday songs may be in different language if your friend circle is multicultural (!) (Though the tune might remain the same!) This applies to every thing you say while communicating.
People can have very different pictures attached to the words and expressions. It is the superposition of the multiple propositions which creates a fact. The more precise, specific, and detailed your word choice will be the more will be the similarity between what you experienced, what you explained and what the person in front of you visualized.
Wittgenstein’s Picture theory of language was inspired by a Paris Traffic Accident case where the whole scene was enacted using objects to indicate how things happened. According to Wittgenstein, the reality is made up of various events or states of affairs which may or may not be true. The propositions are made up of elementary propositions (which are born from names, objects) and logical operators like ‘and’, ‘or’. The truth of events depends on the truth of the elementary propositions ultimately responsible for the formation of propositions thereby events.
The Picture theory of language helps us to understand the meaning of empathy in a deeper sense. The dictionary meaning of empathy is ‘the ability to understand and share the feelings of another’. In simple words- ‘the ability to put yourself into the shoes of other person’. The experiences of every person are very personal (!) this makes the association of many feelings and the objects unique in everyone’s mind. Ask fear to the Batman and he will see Bats, ask fear to the Superman and he will see Kryptonite. We have different pictures associated to every word and feeling. The things are simple when we are explaining an object, but it is not easy when we are explaining our feelings.
Hence, the empathy demands more focus on the listening abilities and trying to understand what others are saying instead of having prejudices and conclusions in advance. The more and more we create comfortable spaces for others to say- the clearer the picture we can build of how they really feel. The clearer the picture, the clearer and more personal will be our understanding. This will make us able to help people in a greater way, this will make the relationships more personal and more trust building.
” What can be said at all can be said clearly; and whereof one cannot speak thereof one must remain silent”
Ludwig Wittgenstein, Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus
Parts Per Billion 