Skip to main content

The future of mankind

In a society where people have equal rights; right to vote, right to education, right to health, right to security, right to a good job; everybody who would work hard could do well. Everybody would thus be free to pursue happiness. This society would be more evolved than one where such equality of rights is not present.

In any case for equality of rights to exist at a societal level, equality of rights would have to be a value accepted by society.

In such a society however people could still view a relationship among individuals as being based on an [economic] transactional model where the value of a relationship is proportional to its benefit to the individuals. If however, society were to evolve to a higher value where a relationship among individuals were not viewed as a means [to success] but as a goal [of success] i.e. the milestones in the relationship become the milestones of success [in the journey to self-actualization], individuals would have to keep the “wellbeing of the other” close behind “the pursuit of one’s own happiness”.

Such a society would probably take upon itself the responsibility of ensuring the wellbeing of each of its members. It would require it to accommodate each subgroup even every member of the society. For such an accommodation to take place the society would have to create solutions to various problems. If such solutions were to become necessary for society then it would have to innovate and perhaps invent its way to these solutions. A society that took care of itself in this way would inevitably become a role model for other societies.

A society is however a group of individuals. Groups exist in many other forms such as a nuclear family, an extended family, a community, a nation, a religion and finally the whole of humanity. To reach equilibrium in a larger group is harder because of greater diversity. However the results of such equilibrium have to be proportionally significant. I think this partly explains why the Quran says [I have misplaced the exact reference – will put it here soon]: “Your creation and resurrection should be like the creation and resurrection of a single soul”.

For the whole of humanity to become a single soul; for every individual on the planet to be accommodated, humankind would have to answer many tough questions. When we have these answers we will achieve happiness in a way we have never experienced before.

The other side of this argument is however a little disturbing. This is the argument: for a group of any size, if the group were to not accommodate some of its members, the members that are left unsatisfied would emerge as a minority that would perhaps demand their rights [as a collective i.e. all the members of the minority] from the majority. Perhaps this is why the Muslims of India wanted a separate state. Perhaps this is why sects are born.

People inevitably rise when they feel they are being wronged. This continues until the larger group gives enough concessions to the smaller group leading to a state of equilibrium. Equilibrium is thus inevitable for any two conflicting groups. While the two groups may not agree with each other they tolerate each other’s existence. Unfortunately the process of adjustment to reach this equilibrium can be quite painful. [This is most evident in the case of the Middle East crisis.] Since equilibrium is inevitable it is in the interest of groups to readjust themselves in the least painful manner possible.

Equilibrium thus requires tolerance. If the whole of humanity were to tolerate its own diversity [and not fight proxy wars among itself] it would come closer to becoming a single soul.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Explanation of the movie 'Revolver'

I saw the movie for the umpteenth time last night and I finally got it.

This is what the movie says:

1) In every game and con there is always a victim and there is always an opponent. It's good to know when you are the former so you can become the latter.

2) But the question is how do you prepare yourself for this game?

3) You only get smater by playing a smarter opponent.

4) The smarter the game the smarter the opponent

5) Checkers is an example of such a game. Chess is a better game. Debate is an even better opportunity to learn and so on.

6) But the question is where does the game stop? or one can ask what is the smartest game one can play?

7) The answer according to the movie is: "The game of con you play with yourself".

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The text below has been added on 3 Dec 2008 and is based on a comment posted on October 30, 2008, at time 4:12 PM. I have only recently understood what this person meant and it is …

What the journey means to me

My journey so far has been about discovering the meta rules of how the self works. The essence of what I have learnt is that the self can change and in fact does change every time it undergoes an experience. Where any experience is significant because of the meaning it carries for us. It means something to us by the fact: it changes our feelings from state (state a) to another state (state b). Where this movement between states is a process we can call witnessing.  The exercise of witnessing can be powerful and enriching.  In fact if we could communicate what we have witnessed through poetry or through prose, perhaps with the aid of metaphors, we could share these experiences with our family, friends and with the larger community. 
Thus to go in retrospect and search for meaning in the experiences we have had can help us grow mature, become stronger and make us more aware.

My Criteria for my marriage partner

1) She should be a home maker. 10 on a scale of 10
2) I should be able to fall in love with her and her with me … 7 on a scale of 10.

First criteria:

10 on a scale of 1-10 for this criteria because I consider my family my second self. The better my partner will be at making my family the best the better off my second self will be. Who doesn’t want to aim for the best? In accordance with this she should have the best of the characteristics that every home maker should have:

1) Intelligent
2) Practical
3) Ability to take stress and bounce back – agility of mind
4) High level of commitment
5) Principled
6) Caring
7) Want her children to be the best
8) Want to learn how to make her children the best

Of course there is an ideal woman out there who would rank very high in all these areas. But then I have to be practical too. I would want to marry the most ideal woman who is compatible with me. Compatibility is covered in the second criteria.


Second Criteria:

Description of scale:

5: passes the basic crite…