Can Money Buy Everything?

My friend on Facebook posted..
Those who keep saying “Money Can’t Buy Everything” don’t have enough money.

And I argued:

“It’s very easy to disprove. Can a billionaire buy you with money? Yes or No? Can he buy to be the most empathetic person, can he buy to be the best scientist? I can go on and on what he can not buy. But it’s true that he can buy lots of things that most people can’t. But even if, what is it that most people want.. big house, big salary, luxary cars, jewelery, ability to travel, power and influence. I can give you hundreds of examples of enthusiastic people who are not rich, who are doing these way better than Donald Trump or some other boring billionaires. Just watch Instagram and YouTube mindfully, how beautifully people can live with less. Money can’t buy creativity, peace in mind; it can just help towards that path. It’s just a vehicle for comfort and survival but it itself is not the comfort and happiness. But look.. this kind of mentality that money is everything.. imprison the free mind and make your mind and then life a living hell. Do u really not think you can just leave every fucking luxary and go to a jungle and live peacefully eating fruits? I am telling you I can totally see myself doing that if that’s whats gonna give me happiness and peace. I’m not a prisoner of the society and the world where money is required. LoL. Money is just a peace of paper. It’s the idea and perception of living that’s important. Peace!! Haha. ;)”

What do you think and say? I would like to hear.

Advertisements

Purpose

Sometimes I forget what I myself wrote.. And then when I read and realize again, I feel to slap myself for not remembering everything I told to myself. And I wake up.
“You don’t find purpose, because there is no purpose pre-ordained. You make your own purpose of your life. There is no ultimate purpose. I know, that feels like a huge slap on the face like most truths. Every morning you wake up, you will have to reinvigorate your purpose. You are free to change your purpose, you are free to not have any purpose. You are responsible for every thing your brain produces even though you have no control over most of them. You are mostly responsible for every action you make with your conscious, unconscious or subconscious mind. Yes.. Life is scary. But it’s better not to live delusionally but to face it. You were not alive on this mother earth for billions of years.. you won’t be alive on this universe filled with joy and distress for more than trillions of years.. So, the less than 100 years you got, don’t waste.. enjoy and live.. if you can have a purpose and propagate that in human culture, that’s a plus.. Even though there’s only one earth physically, but actually the number of perceived earth and the number of human brains are equal. If the purpose you think about is dictated by someone else, you are doomed. So.. You need to open your heart and reach other people who have purpose in their lives to learn and live and probably get a reference. And then.. you probably make your very own purpose. And be happy that you are alive. Pinch yourself to verify. You can either feel scared how little and insignificant you are amidst of the billions of exploding stars or you can think that you yourself are a stardust meaning you are part of everything. Every urge you have to eat, sleep, fuck are evolutionarily designed into you. Learn how to deal with it with good examples from others who lived meaningfully.. But eventually you will have to live on your own. Miserably if you choose wrong, meaningfully if you can make a purpose of your own and strive to be happy and productive. Existentialism at its core, but not ridiculing nihilists too. Hail to Sartre and Nietzsche. And blue is the warmest color.”
My other quora posts:

Software is eating the world

It’s past midnight. And I just realized how I depend on softwares literally my every awakening moment. And I googled how many people feel the same way. And here it is.. “Software is eating the world.” You see how this sentence scares our feelings. If I would use the word “improving/enhancing” instead of “eating/devouring”, you would have imagined things differently. Words can misconstrue and mislead. And here it gets more spooky on artmusicdance if you have time to read —
My Speculations About Reality- Really Speculative!
I think freedom of choice is the most important thing over anything else. So, if everything we do is to live the way we want and if we are always trying to seek for something better for our lives towards the goal of perfection, and if on a positive note, we continue building software for the betterment of our lives and society, we will be software driven. May be in a more radical sense, we can say that we ourselves are gonna be part of softwares, though I guess everybody hates these type of ideas, connotations because of the scifi transformer type movies, where anything mechanical is non-spiritual and thus non-humane, thus undesirable. We have these feeling of separation from things that’s logical, that’s mechanical from things which are spiritual, illogical, irrational – even though our whole consciousness basically rely on both at the same time. But anyway, our ideas are ever evolving I guess about what kind of world we want to live in. It’s not that we know everything or we can know everything, but we try. And as far as I can see, there will be softwares everywhere, inside and outside, more and more. Like money is turning into software based, software generated, virtual. The friction we have about whether it should be accepted or not can link towards very much psychological, philosophical questions like what’s the value of your memories? In far far future, will you pay for a software which can help you regain some memory that you lost but you want to regain? What if we come up with technologies with which it’s possible to store our brain and thus choose different physical bodies, will we call ourselves software, will we coin some new term? When the general artificial intelligence will be capable of giving birth to seemingly sentient robots which can have human like conversation with you, with whom you can form better bond or friendship than with your neighbour, will you call psychologically matured, software driven, human-like robots your friend? The world we, the human species if we exist, are gonna live years from now is not going to be the same world as it is now, like it was not the same, rather was quite different 500 years ago in terms of standards and morality. But I do believe that some basic ideas of life and morality and culture probably won’t change, but how we express and exhibit may change very much along with every other changes that I can not fathom right now. Now why is that relevant to you? That’s a good question to ponder on. Only if you want to!! Haha.
 
So I will quote legendary Investor Andressen:
“””More than 10 years after the peak of the 1990s dot-com bubble, a dozen or so new Internet companies like Facebook and Twitter are sparking controversy in Silicon Valley, due to their rapidly growing private market valuations, and even the occasional successful IPO. With scars from the heyday of Webvan and Pets.com still fresh in the investor psyche, people are asking, “Isn’t this just a dangerous new bubble?”
 
I, along with others, have been arguing the other side of the case. (I am co-founder and general partner of venture capital firm Andreessen-Horowitz, which has invested in Facebook, Groupon, Skype, Twitter, Zynga, and Foursquare, among others. I am also personally an investor in LinkedIn.) We believe that many of the prominent new Internet companies are building real, high-growth, high-margin, highly defensible businesses.
 
Today’s stock market actually hates technology, as shown by all-time low price/earnings ratios for major public technology companies. Apple, for example, has a P/E ratio of around 15.2 — about the same as the broader stock market, despite Apple’s immense profitability and dominant market position (Apple in the last couple weeks became the biggest company in America, judged by market capitalization, surpassing Exxon Mobil). And, perhaps most telling, you can’t have a bubble when people are constantly screaming “Bubble!”
 
But too much of the debate is still around financial valuation, as opposed to the underlying intrinsic value of the best of Silicon Valley’s new companies. My own theory is that we are in the middle of a dramatic and broad technological and economic shift in which software companies are poised to take over large swathes of the economy. “””
 
Nvidia CEO: Software Is Eating the World, but AI Is Going to Eat Software

Then you never stop feeling..

Last weekend I was bored. I was super bored, up to a level that I was literally trying to escape from everything. This weekend I am feeling really good. It’s really nice weather outside here. I am in the new Starbucks coffeeshop near our campus. I love the new atmosphere in this coffee shop. The old one was really small and congested, the new one is wide and feels having more room. It’s interesting how space makes us feel. The feeling of wideness and narrowness I mean! And I am thinking about ups and downs of life. May be I have some obsession with playing with my feelings ;). The ups and downs are so common, but still every time you are in the down side, you hate being there. On the other hand, the ups are the ones you want to sustain. How to really get used to with your failures? Some failures are just hard to accept as you firmly believe that you could have done better. It’s that your laziness and lack of conscious thoughts in the moment just ruined it for you. But then no physical event should really define your potential, but it’s just hard to reconcile. My friend Adil gave me a book. It’s “The Prophet” by Kahlil Gibran. Reading Gibran is such a delight. I am reading page 29 on Joy and Sorrow. The chapter starts with

Then a woman said, Speak to us of Joy and Sorrow. And he answered: Your joy is your sorrow unmasked.

There really is no hard line between joy and sorrow. But as human being, we know we feel; We feel joy and we feel sorrow. And we don’t want sorrow for ourselves, we only want joy. Because it just feels good being joyous. But the natural world, the unconscious everything doesn’t have the least concern about how we feel, what we want. Should we call the nature ruthless then because it doesn’t care us at all? So, it’s on us how we can feel, what we can feel. But feeling the power within yourself is not that easy. Well, that doesn’t mean it’s impossible.

The deeper that sorrow carves into your being, the more joy you can contain.

Frankly I have a feeling that I understand this sentence, but do I really? I am doubtful, may be because you can never appropriately measure the depth of your sorrow or your joy. When you are in misery, like when you lose your closest one, or you fail in something you deeply desired for, the sorrow just feels endless, when you are in the joyous state, like making love with your sweetest one, like sitting beside your mother and listen how you used to be when you were young with some disbelief, the joy you feel is just unimaginable. Every time it’s new, because it’s a new moment.

Is not the cup that holds your wine the vey cup that was burned in the potter’s oven?And is not the lute that soothes your spirit, the very wood that was hollowed with knives?

When you are joyous, look deep into your heart and you shall find it is only that which has given you sorrow that is giving you joy. When you are sorrowful look again in your heart, and you shall see that in truth you are weeping for that which has been your delight.

Gibran talks about how inseparable joy and sorrow is. He denies the superiority of one over the other. He brings some metaphor like a cup or a lute and how they stand with both of the sides- the harsh and the mild. He asks us to be introspective, to see our heart like a dual being observing its other self standing nearby.

We are always thinking. And if I look at my own thoughts, they are so sporadic. It takes some effort to linearize my thoughts. It requires concentration to steadily and critically think about a single topic. It may be a very important neuro – scientific question why and how we evolved to be like this. A broad answer may be that millions of our early evolutionary past, all we thought and cared about is our survival in the wild. But were we not more focussed than what we are now? What I mean is – when you are running away from a danger or chasing down an animal or heavy lifting or climbing, those normally require intense focus. It can easily be said that when we didn’t know how to read or write, those were our primary activities. Did we then used to live in the present more than how we live our life now? In our modern lives (last few centuries) through urbanization, through industrial, scientific, academic revolution, we brought more stability in managing our resources, properties. We live more in our mind now that we live outside I guess. But this is a big claim? Isn’t it? And probably it’s just not very easy to prove it. Our modern activities have changed, moved from high physical labor to low physical labor tasks, require more mental activities, because we learnt through imagination we can touch the infinite. It’s a huge dilemma, isn’t it? If I understand the mechanism of joy and sorrow, I know that these emotion are deeply attached with your connection with your presence in the world. But then we know that only through imagination, prediction of future and inference of the past, we can enjoy the unknowns. Both are true and so is the struggle in the mind. I will just end with the last sentence in the chapter by Gibran.

When the treasure-keeper lifts you to weigh his gold and his silver, needs must your joy or your sorrow rise or fall.

And I am now watching this to add more spice to my burning mind-oven.

Hegelian View

Quick Summary of Hegelian Views:

  1. Important part of ourselves can be found in parts of history. Ancient Greece for example.
  2. Learn from ideas you dislike. Learn the alien points of views. What is hiding there? What underlying good idea is there? To identify ..
  3. Progress is messy. Overcompensating the previous mistake is tough.
  4. The German philosopher Hegel believed that strange and alien bits of history have much to teach us. He believed story and civilization do not move in a straight line, so important ideas and attitudes get left behind.
  5. Art has a purpose. Art is the sensuous presentation of idea. Take good, already known ideas and stick them into our mind creatively.

Never stop

We are human being. We are gullible, we are breakable. I was feeling afraid.  I woke up early today, started the day confidently , with determination and will of getting things done. But then after an hour, I got distracted. I remembered a very old memory which made me sad. But then I felt okay. Every time a past memory blows me, now I tell that I need to make a good present memory to fight against. May be that’s the only optimistic way to deal with and be productive in life. But sometimes it’s tremendously hard to accept the loss, to deny the desire of getting something back that was so dear to yourself. But then impossible is a word that should be, arguably !!,  found in the dictionary of the fools, right?  The sudden emergence or intervention of some thoughts is something that I am very fearful about. There are certain experiences that I never want to have again. There are pains that I never want to experience again. That means there is weakness in me, there are holes in my mind where if I fall, I tend to feel unable to get out of. Now can knowing your own weakness be your strength? I think it should be the case. Because as I said, we are all vulnerable, we all have weaknesses. I was thinking about a lot of things. I can see around how people manipulate other people, I can read stories of selfishness and selflessness, it hurts to see how some take advantage of others. We are all linked, aren’t we? If no students would go to the university, what would all the professors, staff do? If no one would want to drink, with whom would all the bars and clubs be filled with? If everyone would like to cook, then how would all these restaurants run themselves? If all would like to walk or bike, would somebody get killed in fatal road accident? If everyone was not interested to see televisions, movies, then who would be the consumer of all those entertainments and advertisements.  If everyone would only focus on his own life, who would worship the celebrities?  There’s so many ifs- I am probably asking questions like a baby who is trying to understand why are all these happening around us. It seems this whole society and all societal acts are based on a service based system. Someone needs something, so someone else needs to help them out. Someone has knowledge about something, that other can use. We are all depending on each other in some way or another. It doesn’t matter whether you talk with anyone or not, you need to eat, you need to work, so you need someone for something implicitly or explicitly. I was thinking about mistakes. Now, it’s easy to see that all these dependencies can not always go without errors. We are all error prone. We will make mistake, then we will hurt other people. So, disaster is inevitable. So, failure is also inevitable. Being cautious is necessary. You just should never stop.

Geneaology of morals

I was reading “On the Genealogy of morals” by Friedrich Nietzsche. It is a very dense book to absorb and I felt like I need to read it again and again and also read some explanations by others. I found a good review on goodreads that I am feeling to post here just to keep track. Thanks to Rowland Bismark’s Reviews.

On The Genealogy of Morals is made up of three essays, all of which question and critique the value of our moral judgments based on a genealogical method whereby Nietzsche examines the origins and meanings of our different moral concepts.

 

The first essay, “‘Good and Evil,’ ‘Good and Bad‘” contrasts what Nietzsche calls “master morality” and “slave morality.” Master morality was developed by the strong, healthy, and free, who saw their own happiness as good and named it thus. By contrast, they saw those who were weak, unhealthy, and enslaved as “bad,” since their weakness was undesirable. By contrast, the slaves, feeling oppressed by these wealthy and happy masters, called the masters “evil,” and called themselves “good” by contrast.

 

The second essay, “‘Guilt,’ ‘Bad Conscience,’ and the like” deals with (surprise, surprise) guilt, bad conscience, and the like. Nietzsche traces the origins of concepts such as guilt and punishment, showing that originally they were not based on any sense of moral transgression. Rather, guilt simply meant that a debt was owed and punishment was simply a form of securing repayment. Only with the rise of slave morality did these moral concepts gain their present meanings. Nietzsche identifies bad conscience as our tendency to see ourselves as sinners and locates its origins in the need that came with the development of society to inhibit our animal instincts for aggression and cruelty and to turn them inward upon ourselves.

 

The third essay, “What is the meaning of ascetic ideals?” confronts asceticism, the powerful and paradoxical force that dominates contemporary life. Nietzsche sees it as the expression of a weak, sick will. Unable to cope with its struggle against itself, the sick will sees its animal instincts, its earthly nature, as vile, sinful, and horrible. Unable to free itself from these instincts, it attempts to subdue and tame itself as much as possible. Nietzsche concludes that “man would rather will nothingness than not will.”

 

Nietzsche is difficult to read because he demands that we overturn or suspend many of the assumptions that our very reasoning relies upon. He is one of the Western tradition’s deepest thinkers precisely because he calls so much into question. If we can come to understand Nietzsche’s genealogical method, his doctrine of the will to power, and his perspectivism as all linked, his arguments will become much easier to follow.

 

In Nietzsche’s distinction between a thing and its meaning, we find the initial doubt with which Nietzsche unravels so many of our assumptions. We are generally tempted to see things as having inherent meanings. For instance, punishment is at once the act of punishing and the reason behind the punishment. However, Nietzsche argues, these things have had different meanings at different times. For instance, the act of punishment has been at times a celebration of one’s power, at times an act of cruelty, at times a simple tit-for-tat. We cannot understand a thing, and we certainly cannot understand its origin, if we assume that it has always held the same meaning.

 

Central to Nietzsche’s critique, then, is an attempt at genealogy that will show the winding and undirected route our different moral concepts have taken to arrive in their present shape. Morality is generally treated as sacred because we assume that there is some transcendental ground for our morals, be it God, reason, tradition, or something else. Yet contrary to our assumption that “good,” “bad,” or “evil” have always had the same meanings, Nietzsche’s genealogical method shows how these terms have evolved, shattering any illusion as to the continuity or absolute truth of our present moral concepts.

 

Because they can have different, even contradictory, meanings over the course of their long life spans, Nietzsche does not believe that concepts or things are the fundamental stuff that makes up reality. Instead, he looks beneath these things to see what drives the different meanings that they adopt over time. Hiding beneath he finds force and will. All of existence, Nietzsche asserts, is a struggle between different wills for the feeling of power. This “will to power” is most evident on a human level, where we see people constantly competing with one another, often for no other purpose than to feel superior to those that they overcome.

That a thing has a meaning at all means that there is some will dominating it, bending it toward a certain interpretation. That a thing may have different meanings over time suggests that different wills have come to dominate it. For instance, the concept of “good” was once dominated by the will of healthy, strong barbarians, and had the opposite meaning that it does now that it is dominated by the will of weak, “sick” ascetics.

 

According to Nietzsche, then, a belief in an absolute truth or an absolute anything is to give in to one particular meaning, one particular interpretation of a thing. It is essentially to allow oneself to be dominated by a particular will. A will that wishes to remain free will shun absolutes of all kinds and try to look at a matter from as many different perspectives as possible in order to gain its own. This doctrine that has deeply influenced postmodern thought is called “perspectivism.”

Nietzsche’s inquiries are thus conducted in a very irreverent spirit. Nothing is sacred, nothing is absolute, nothing, we might even say, is true. Our morality is not a set of duties passed down from God but an arbitrary code that has evolved as randomly as the human species itself. The only constant is that we, and everything else, are constantly striving for more power, and the only constant virtue is a will that is powerful, and free from bad conscience, hatred, and ressentiment.

 

Nietzsche’s main project in the Genealogy is to question the value of our morality. Ultimately, he argues that our present morality is born out of a resentment and hatred that was felt toward anything that was powerful, strong, or healthy. As such, he sees our present morality as harmful to the future health and prosperity of our species. While the “blonde beasts” and barbarians of primitive master morality are animalistic brutes, at least they are strong and healthy. On the other hand, our present ascetic morality has “deepened” us by turning our aggressive instincts inward and seeing ourselves as a new wilderness to struggle against. Nietzsche’s ideal is to maintain this depth and yet not be ashamed of our animal instincts or of the life that glows within us.

There you go

There you go again, again the quest for searching places you can merge.

You can’t stop climbing the walls because you want to see the other side

All the dreams you are unsure of and all the reflections you want to absorb.

No wander why you can’t avoid the surge of your desires.

Not that all you can understand in this short span of life,

But don’t quit trying to make sense of everything that interests you.

When the rainbow and it’s color are all over in that cloudy sky,

You want to walk, you want to walk endlessly, incessantly.

Realizing The Illusion

It’s not that difficult to see how illusory everything is. If self itself is an illusion, then everything created by that self is also an illusion. Ego! It’s an identity created by all the neural connectivity the brain experiences over time with the physical body participating in all the real events it had in its scope in its lifetime. If the physical self wouldn’t experience certain things, wouldn’t have participated in specific life events, the experiences of the brain would be different and so is the ego and so is the self. So, I, as a whole, is just one of the billions of others I could have become. But I am too attached to my own identity. Everyone is. And one can argue that for the style of life in a communal society, you don’t have much choice. If everyday when you wake up, you could start a new you wanting to erase all the past you, you wouldn’t be accepted. Not that you need to care! But.. again.. If you wear costume and change your outlook every morning so that no one can identify you, then you don’t exist in the eyes of others. But you do exist. But the problem is you start questioning your own existence. Because you are confused with multiple identities in yourself and so the others around you give you the perspective about what you mostly are. At least in general sense. I am not saying that it’s not possible to identify yourself without other human minds and their opinions. You may not need another human being, but you need this world, the air, the sky where you are contained to feel your existence. That means you understand yourself from an external towards an internal process, not an internal towards an external process. I will argue the later is almost impossible. Let me elucidate – When you are sleeping at night, if you are not dreaming or at least if you don’t recall dreaming, you are breathing, everything outside you is still going on, somebody is drinking, somebody is writing song or poetry, somebody is fucking hard or moaning or screaming, somebody is crying, somebody is laughing his ass off, somebody is just looking at the night sky, but you are not experiencing those, you are just not a part of those stories, so those don’t add anything to yourself, for you those are unreal, so your reality is only constructed when you are conscious about what’s going on. That’s why you can not feel your existence when you are unaware. That means all these going on surrounding you give you the perspective of your own existence. Anyway, I digress. Realizing that everything is relative can help us not to attach too much to certain things. Pain, dissatisfaction can be very hard to deal with. It’s because we feel extreme attachment with those memories. We feel like our selves have been wounded, damaged by those experiences, by those failures. Joy, satisfaction are also similar. One can argue that if you don’t have such attachment, then you will feel neither joy nor sadness. And that’s entirely true. You need some attachment to feel. I never said that the illusion is not important. The illusion is important for you to feel, for you to be a human being. But you don’t need to disagree with the fact that it’s an illusion. You, again, just sometimes need to realize that these are illusion. At least it helps when you are crippled with something inside your mind and sometimes when your own self, your own ego hurts you. And may be when you are against your self. You may question – then what’s the point? Where is the value of yourself? What’s the purpose? I don’t know the most philosophically accepted answer. But for me, you need those for you to continue, for you to be a productive member of your community. You just need to keep going till you expire. So, you can come up with your own answers. You can take answers from those who pondered a lot on those. Or you can be totally oblivious about all these questions and keep on living, eating, shitting and fucking and if you are smart, making some contribution so that others can keep on doing those a little bit longer than they would if you wouldn’t give a shit. Well, is this a pessimistic view about life? May be it is! I could do some euphemism and could come up with some optimistic one. That I often do. Optimism sometimes helps, pessimism sometimes helps. Hey! You need both calmness and anger. All you need just to go on. May be some options are better because they are less chaotic. But this time, let it be this way. If your surrounding, whatever achievements, whatsoever human connections, your religion, your ideology  can answer your questions, help you to keep walking and persevering, then have them. But some are false, some are half false, some are true and you should not burden with your realization on someone else. And importantly again, realize that it’s all illusion and keep on acting.

Some crappy, some not but one needs it all

Permanent happiness is for sure an illusion. By little introspection, one can easily find out that one can not be permanently happy. Because one’s experience itself is pretty dynamic constantly influenced by the natural world outside, the emotional world inside and the superabundant interactions between these two. If the ultimate goal of one is to achieve an optimal state of happiness in the most possible conscious moments of one’s life, then from the very start of that continuous journey, one needs to prepare oneself for the rocky unhappy moments. But there are always some surprising unhappy moments one can not be prepared for and in fact, a life where everything is predictable is probably a very boring life to lead with few diversities and excitements at all. Then it follows that one’s experience of unhappiness, distress and melancholy is inevitable for one’s own happiness. One may argue that happiness and unhappiness are two sides of a coin being flipped randomly and incessantly. One, as an experiencer, is just a part of the coin flip reality with one’s desperate desire to achieve the happy side every time but evidently no prior ability to force the coin. Does then being a vigilant who prepares for future shock tend to achieve more happiness than a carefree? In general, our education claims to teach to prepare us so that we can be better equipped to deal with the uncertainties brought to us each day. Desire to get a good job, desire to acquire a good mate, desire to have stability in one’s inner mind and the desire for peace in society – all are to bring more happiness around. But one can never avoid being unhappy is what my personal realization at this moment.