Hot Seat

Right now i was in a place where i get most of the ideas. Yeah, the Hot seat, The Philosophical Chambers, The toilet seat as some people know it. I donot know why, but most of the times ideas hit me like eureka, and i perfectly understand that how archemedes must have shouted "eureka" after he came out. Sad, i can't do the same.

Today three ideas came to me.

1. I can be an author after all. All i have to do is complete 100 or 150 or maybe 200 posts on the blog and then get them published. I donot think that whatever i write over here is bullshit. Many a times it has happened, that i have independently come to a conclusion, and later on read that some great man has written them centuries ago. So the chances are good that whatever i think can be quoted later on. Because one forgets what's said in a book like "five point someone", but the stuff i write on, can be there for many years.
2. The second thought that came was that people essentially want to sin, and they want people to convince them that sinning is not bad. They are looking for logical explainations and proper reasons to convince them that whatever they are doing bad is actually okay. Nietzsche, Freud, Darwin, Osho, Newton, Copernicus, Voltaire and Marx are some of the people who either came out with theories that suggested that sinning is okay, or that God is absent.
   
3. You have the right to be proud of yourself. The reason is simple. You have certain things, and you donot have certain things. So either you can be ashamed of what you donot have or be proud of what you have. Half(or is it all??) the religions in the world say that "pride comes before fall". But you have a choice there, in case you missed the point. So you can be as proud as you want, just if you believe the sentence and/or are ready to take the risk.

Coming back to point 2. wasn't it Marx who said that "religion is the opium of the masses"?? Wasn't Voltaire the person who said that " If there were no God, it would be necessary to invent one"???? Hasn't Osho been popular because he said that " When you reach the culmination in sex, then for that one fraction of a second, for one moment, you are impervious to anything, you are in ecstacy, the same ecstacy that you attain whn you are in samadhi"??

May be that is one of the reasons why Marx was so popular. He abolished religion. The benefit was that now you just have to follow law, and forget God altogether. So conscience doesn't figure in. Because according to the same law, you are "innocent until proven guilty". So you could go on and sin as much as you want and not feel guilty about it, because you haven't been caught. There was no eye from heaven watching you.
The down side came to be that along with the eye, there was no heaven either. So what about the poor and the down trodden who could some how live their life believing that they will at least have a good life when they die? And who is the big brother who will help the weak, and everone at some point of life, does feel weak, and needs support. Now all of us aren't rational human beings who would just say that "Okay, there is no God, and i have my own responsibility, and whatever happens to me is because we caused it(internal locus of control)"

The element of romanticism was lacking. God used to be a popular tool before Marx. Simple, because if you succeded, that was because of your own effort, and if you failed, that was because of God moving in mysterious ways. In absense of God, the whole cause and effect cycle went haywire. Half the things were explained by Science. But what about things where science failed? Who was causing those things?

And would you find it easier to explain "The Big Bang theory" or "The String theory" to a peasant, or just our "Mysterious God"?? Because to explain these reasons for creation of universe, or its inner workings, you have to have the peasant educated, if you have him educated, he will not just understand these theories, but many other theories which you wouldn't want him to understand. Plus after he is educated, he can no more be a peasant....can he??? OOF... what a vicious circle......Just bring back the God...damn it!!!

But the day is not far away when it will become easier to explain these theories to peasants. Then as science works, either universe was created either by Big Bang or by God as both cannot be logically possible. And God has said in "He that is not with me is against me; and he that gathereth not with me scattereth abroad."(Matthew 12:30) So both cannot definitely co-exist. Or was it that God created the Big Bang?? Then what about Genesis and the seven days of creation?

So when that day comes when all of us think, or even a reasonable majority thinks that universe was created by Big Bang(and even as you read this, some scientist in some corner of the world must be working to seal the gaps in the theory, or come out with a better theory still) theory of God will be in a confused state. To believe or not to believe, that will be the question. The irony is that the Big Bang theory was given by a Belgian Priest called Georges Lemaître!!!!!!!

Well if you find Big Bang too easy to understand for your level of intellect, or you are the type that exists on modernism, there is another theory doing rounds called the "Ekpyrotic theory" or the "Brane storm" theory, with 5-dimensions, lot of maths, and of course your favourate, the Big Bang.

I love the way i wander off, i mean you must have noticed that i started off from a toilet seat and right now am discussing God and Ekpyrotic theories and all. Is't it?

So bingo, coming back to what i was saying. God is about to vanish. When i say God, I mean the concept of God.Donot think that it won't just because it hasn't happened in a gazillion years. Capitalism is working hard towards it. Now wait a minute. Did i say Capitalism?? Wasn't it Communism who was working hard towards it? Well, as i always say, some ideas just have their time. Hadn't Newton come out with the discovery(yeah, it was a discovery) some one else would have. Its just like a movie. Once the hero has killed or defeated the villain, the movie has to end. In the same way, when enought theories have been put forward for another invention or discovery, that is bound to happen. In the same way, the time to abolish the theory of God has coem, and actually has been long overdue.
Scientists have been working hard over the centuries to give all the answers to questions where we needed the concept God to do the explaining. now you can no more be burnt on stake just because you say that you worship satan(actually accepting the presence of satan or for that matter God is equal to believing that there is God). So your life is safe even if you deny God, because your life is being protected by law. Law is supporting you as well as them. Gone are the days when Heretics used to be burnt on the cross. What a big leap.

Because doesn't jurisprudence according to Jeremy Bentham follow the rule of "utility". Or that law is good or bad depending upon whether or not it increased general happiness of the population. And so if a law is still there, and not being planned to change, that doesn't kill people who disbelieve in God or punish them in any way must be bringing "increased general happiness of the population".

Altruism cannot be achieved because of the "theory of commons" which illustrates that in a situation where resources are common and people are selfish, the fortune will always favor the person who is selfish and works against the principle of "common good". In such a society, only such a person will be able to benefit, who believs in selfishness or atleast a principle of "tit for tat". This is well illustrated in the game theory's "The classical prisoner's dilemma", where when two people who have been caught and seperated by police for questioning have the following options

Prisoner A Stays Silent	Prisoner A Betrays

Prisoner B Stays Silent	Both serve six months	Prisoner B serves ten years; Prisoner A goes free
Prisoner B Betrays	Prisoner A serves ten years; Prisoner B goes free	Both serve two years

both the prisoners will always betray each other and like to get a sentence of two years rather than cooperate and get a simple sentence of 6 months because one will simply work towards his own self interest( remember adam smit's theory of the invisible hand ??) and choose not to trust the other.

So meanwhile, remain confused, because i am too. And i will come on later and add to the blog. Because i have written too much and spent too much time here. So Adios.

Godspeed