Getting What You Want

If you are not getting something that you "want", the reason why you're not getting it could be a strange truth: you don't actually want it.

It seems a bit difficult to understand, but recent observation reveals to me that in many situations, men stop "wanting" something when they realise that it is difficult to get. They may crib about it, but the truth is that they don't want it.

The simple solution, whenever you find yourself not getting what you want, is to clearly say to yourself, "I want (to) _______ ". Mean it.

Trust me: if you do this, more often than not, you get what you want. Or you may realise that you don't want that thing. In any case, you'll be at peace.

Another Original Quote

Truth is great fiction

When To Say 'Thank You'

One should only thank someone when that person expects to be thanked. But in many cases, one can only guess what the person expects and in these situations, the following rule will do a lot of good:

I would suggest that the words 'thank you' should only be used when you want to express your gratitude to someone for either going out of the way to help you or helping you on your request or helping you when you did not expect it.

In all other cases, 'thank you' has a counter-productive effect.

The Importance of Being Frank

We've all been in situations where we try to be too nice and pretend to agree with someone when actually we don't.

Some believe that such behaviour is self-demeaning and is therefore wrong. Others defend it by saying that within its limits, such behaviour is an occasional compromise for the sake of better cooperation.

I strongly believe that it is wrong to do so - and it has nothing to do with self-respect.

When we pretend to agree with someone, the person whom we are dealing with generally ends up believing that we actually share his opinion. So he behaves with us accordingly, only to realise on a later day that we don't actually agree with him.

The result of this long story is that, while trying to be nice, we actually cheat the person whom we were dealing with. The intention of trying to be nice doesn't justify it : cheating is cheating.

Winning Quote

There's many versions of this quote by Bobby Knight, so I'm going to paste the one that I read first.

"Everybody has a will to win. What's far more important is having the will to prepare to win."

Another Good Quote

This is what a judge told a contestant on a regional talent hunt:

"There are two kinds of people in this world: some tidy their house just before a guest arrives, whereas others are normally in the habit of keeping their house in order. You seem to be the latter kind."

Pretty deep !

A General Theory of How We Think and Act

"Watch your thoughts. They become words. Watch your words. They become deeds. Watch your deeds. They become habits. Watch your habits. They become character. Character is everything."

- Ralph Waldo Emerson

In one of my latest posts, I talked about how a change in thinking does not directly change concrete situations. Today, I want to draw my readers' attention towards a larger picture, a picture which explains the relation between action, thinking, perception and consciousness. It seems to me that these four things are connected with each other in a feedback loop.

I am leaving "habits" and "character" out of the discussion, because they are mere niceties which can be explained on the basis of what I'm about to say.*

Some preliminary explanations:

By actions, I mean physical processes which we execute, voluntarily or involuntarily and consciously or subconsciously.

By thinking, I mean the mental processes by which we analyse what we perceive, form opinions, make decisions, etc. These too can be voluntary or involuntary and conscious or subconscious.

By perception, I mean the mental process by which our minds receive information from the various senses. This information is often filtered. Further, information from the various senses is integrated to form one percept. To put it very simply, perception means how we see things.

By consciousness, I mean the way in which our mind is "plugged in" or the state of our mind. The might mind be "plugged in" in any way, but if it is not plugged in, nothing whatsoever would work. (I am not using this the word "consciousness" in the sense of "conscious and unconscious". To me, as long as a person is alive, he has a consciousness, because his mind is "plugged in" in some way or another.)

When I say "subconscious process", I mean a process that we are not consciously aware of. Even a "subconscious process" can only occur if there is consciousness, i.e, the mind is "plugged in".

Now, Emerson begins by telling us to watch our thoughts. However, our thoughts don't come from nowhere. The data which they analyse in order to form opinions (becoming words, in Emerson's terms) and make decisions (becoming deeds, if carried forward to the action stage) comes from perception. If we perceived differently, we would think differently.

This is where a problem arises: how can one change his own process of perception ? If one cannot see something, or one can see it only in a particular way, how can one change that ? Learning to see things can only help in specific cases. For example, if I can't see a tiger hidden behind a bush, I might see it when someone points it out to me. But that might not allow me to see another tiger hidden behind another bush ! Perhaps, after being shown several tigers behind several bushes, I might even learn how to spot tigers behind bushes. But that would not affect my inability to spot, say, a particular rythme in a Wallace Stevens poem. So basically, perception cannot be taught.

Further, the process of perception is value neutral because it is completely or atleast substantially subconscious. Thus, there is no "correct" way to perceive. Yet, perception leads to thought which leads to action. And there is definitely a "correct" way to act, atleast for the sake of achieving a particular object.

Then I realised that there is a way to change how we perceive. There is one and only one way: a change in consciousness. If the way in which one's mind is "plugged in" is changed, he would perceive very differently. For example, think about how any drug, be it coffee, tea, tobacco, alcohol, or LSD (and God knows what else) changes the state of our mind. Alcohol typically puts us in a state of mind in which we underestimate risks. Coffee and tea, it seems to me, make us more attentive and thereby, we perceive several finer points which otherwise evade us. Though I can't speak for LSD, Aldous Huxley, in The Doors of Perception, has superbly demonstrated how everything seems so different on mescaline.

So, how does one effect a change in consciousness ? Obviously, taking drugs is one way. Meditation, I am told, does the same thing in a healthier way. Perhaps exposing oneself to some strong sensation might do the same thing. (Exposure to bright light, excrutiating pain, etc.) What is common to all these things is that they are actions which change our environment, internal or external. I strongly believe, therefore, that actions which change our environment, internal or external, can bring about a change in our consciousness.

Actually, even a change in our environment which is independent of our actions, can change our consciousness. But I am more concerned with voluntary changes.

So we have the following loop:

The loop moves only in one direction. This is model is slightly incomplete, because I've not properly dealt with how thought and actions can be laterally affected by other thoughts and actions. The same applies to consciousness and perception, though I have briefly talked about how perception can be modified laterally.

The moral of this story, like the moral of that earlier post, is this: The easiest way to change yourself is by doing something, not "thinking differently."

I personally believe that certain types of consciousness are preferable. In other words, one can compare and objectively evaluate states of mind. For example, a state of mind which is energetic would obviously be preferable to a mind which is always exhausted. And there are specific things that one can do to have a desirable type of consciousness which is sustainable. Tobacco might make somebody feel like working, but it has its flipside. That is hardly the case with Yoga.

Sometime later, I'll add a list of such actions to this post. Phew !

*I think that "character" is akin to what I call "consciousness" in this post. Habit, however, is a more complicated thing.

Troubleshooting 101

When dealing with difficult situations, we often try to "think differently".

Well, "thinking differently" might allow us to see the situation in a new light, thereby directing us to the manner in which the situation can be changed.

But really, the situation can only be changed by doing something. Until one actually does something, thinking differently can only alter the character of the situation in our mind. It cannot alter the situation itself.

A change in perception or thinking does not directly change situations, but a change in what we do does.

"Why" is not important

A typical question that many of us face in an interview is "why ?". "Why do you want to do this ?" , "Why did you choose this profession ?", "Why do you like this subject ?", "Why do you want to be (x) ? " ; etc.

The answers are not always very easy to find.

But look at it this way: think of some of man's greatest feats: the ascent of Everest, man's journey to the moon, Michaelangelo's sculpture, Shakespeare's tragedies.. can any of these people answer why they did it ? I doubt it.

Such questions don't make much sense. One must answer them accordingly.

Self-esteem (Definition)

Self-esteem, in a social setting, means our estimate of what others think of us.

I will talk about whether or not self-esteem is important in a later post.

A very small observation

Exact opposites are one and the same thing.
One must understand this.

Religions, Philosophies and "What Should I Do?"

I began by wondering about the question of knowledge. Is it important to know ? Well, tentatively, yes. Well then, why know everything ? It's curiosity. If you don't know something, you generally feel like knowing it.

So then I came to think of The Enlightened, who is supposed to know everything. Wouldn't that be boring ? Because curiosity won't have a place in his mind. And the death of curiosity might not be harmless, so we should adopt the precautionary principle and not kill it.

And even if The Enlightened knows everything there is to know, one question persists : so, I know everything, what do I do now ?

And that was what gave me the break : The Enlightened One always knows what to do. If he knows that all the time, he need not know everything.

If you come to think of it, all religions and most philosophies attempt to answer this very question. What should we do ? With our lives, with ourselves, in times of need, in times of trouble, to solve an algebra equation, etc. In fact the quality of a doctrine can be judged upon how well it answers this question.

There is no correct answer. But if that answer conclusively satisfies the listener, that's good enough. The question no longer remains for that listener, and he has found his doctrine.

Now let's try to see the manner in which this question can be answered. Please note that according to me, the answers cannot be objectively evaluated:

1. Evading the question itself : It is possible to put a man in a life where the question does not arise. A busy life, I suppose. I'm sure that millions have lived without ever being haunted by the question of what to do. Either the answer was obvious and unquestioned (go to work, come home, sleep, etc) or the question never even occurred. And I'm sure they rest in peace.

2. Giving a proper answer : By this I mean answering the question in real terms. This is where I would place most religions. "Help others", "Say your prayers", etc. In fact some religions have detailed guidelines on what to do. Some Hindu texts give a detailed description of what each caste must do, right upto when they should have a bath, when they should get up in the morning, etc. The caste is pre-determined by birth. Or the Church answers the question of whether or not to abort definitively : no.
In these cases, the question is properly answered. The only problem is that we do not know if the answer satisfies the individual. And this is where it can get ugly. The answerer tries to prove that his answer is better than any other possible answer. Voila, the roots of religious strife and intolerance.

3. Giving an open ended answer: This answer is generally on these lines : go figure it out yourself. It doesn't seem like a good answer until I give you this hint : Use your imagination ! (I think it is implicit in this type of answer that there is no proper answer.)

The problem with many of us is that we take the third answer but we don't take the hint. So we sit and we read and we try to see what others have done, we partly agree and take bits and pieces from other philosophies, etc. We remain immersed in trying to 'find' the answers this way. In this case, if the first or second answers would have fit us, we would have gladly fallen for them. It's just sad that we're on our own.

So, if you fall in this category, let me repeat myself : use your imagination ! I will write about the imagination at a later time. I must confess that I find this answer the most amusing of them all. It's sad that I don't fit into the first category.

Emotion and Passion

When one says that one likes something, it is always an expression of emotion. It doesn't matter if you say you like a girl or if you say that you like driving. The act of liking is always an emotional act. It has no rational basis.

When you like something very strongly, we say that you have a passion for it. Thus, passionate people are deeply emotional when it comes to their passion.

More importantly however, only those who are capable of being very emotional can be passionate about something.

You can't be passionate without being emotional.

I will consider whether it is important to be passionate in a later post.