I thought of continuing Me and My Experiments with Human Understanding series but have finally decided not to use that title again because Experiment is a strong word and in the past people have confronted with me for it. Also, experimenting with humans is banned until you have proper permissions. This thought leads me to the current topic of discussion (yes, keep looking for this on the Facebook page). How much perceptions and opinions matter?
The line between right and wrong fades away when we bring the words, perception and opinion in the fray. It becomes one man's opinion against other man's opinion. We formulate our opinions on the basis of our perception of a particular situation or a thing. Now how we perceive is totally dependent on our brains. Brain makes a perception on the basis of experience and knowledge. So effectively, our ability to make right or wrong opinions totally depends on our brains. But sometimes, when what we think are right opinions lead to decisions, they may be catastrophically wrong for some. Consider Pearl Harbor and Hiroshima and Nagasaki bombings, both parties took right decisions according to them, which corresponded to some opinions, but in the end what happened was very wrong. I will put out some questions here, do right or wrong even exist? If they do, who has the ultimate authority to decide what is right and what is wrong?
I think I have the answer for the second question but not the first. Reading Freud, Jung, Marx, Plato etc., I came to know that I am not the first one to think about this and obviously I am not. The concepts of Law and Government was created only to decide on this fact that was is right or wrong. And thus somethings which were considered right in some traditions like Sati, Child Marriage, Corruption etc were deemed as wrong. While making excess money was considered right. But, what wrong is corruption for a poor sweeper whose only aim is to earn only as much so that he can feed his family? Rules and Laws were created to drive something called collective perception. So, according to this, if we collectively believe in something, it makes it right. While some believe that something which goes against human suffering should be considered right while others considered that to achieve something right we must go through suffering.
Another question is how much can we get away with this argument of opinion and perception? And the truth is, all the arguments with others can be won on this basis, or at least they can be deflected. "It is my opinion and I don't care about what you say!". This is very much acceptable but how about an inner conflict, what side to take? If we can't decide if right or wrong exists, how can we take sides to anything?
My ultimate aim of writing this is to find a way to escape this argument. How can we eliminate right and wrong and opinions and perceptions from our discussions? Can we still find solutions to problems without our opinions? Will not having these affect the quality of our decisions? I will be creating polls and discussions for this. Do provide your comments.
Facebook page link: https://www.facebook.com/pages/Incremental-Observations/104787302906058
The line between right and wrong fades away when we bring the words, perception and opinion in the fray. It becomes one man's opinion against other man's opinion. We formulate our opinions on the basis of our perception of a particular situation or a thing. Now how we perceive is totally dependent on our brains. Brain makes a perception on the basis of experience and knowledge. So effectively, our ability to make right or wrong opinions totally depends on our brains. But sometimes, when what we think are right opinions lead to decisions, they may be catastrophically wrong for some. Consider Pearl Harbor and Hiroshima and Nagasaki bombings, both parties took right decisions according to them, which corresponded to some opinions, but in the end what happened was very wrong. I will put out some questions here, do right or wrong even exist? If they do, who has the ultimate authority to decide what is right and what is wrong?
I think I have the answer for the second question but not the first. Reading Freud, Jung, Marx, Plato etc., I came to know that I am not the first one to think about this and obviously I am not. The concepts of Law and Government was created only to decide on this fact that was is right or wrong. And thus somethings which were considered right in some traditions like Sati, Child Marriage, Corruption etc were deemed as wrong. While making excess money was considered right. But, what wrong is corruption for a poor sweeper whose only aim is to earn only as much so that he can feed his family? Rules and Laws were created to drive something called collective perception. So, according to this, if we collectively believe in something, it makes it right. While some believe that something which goes against human suffering should be considered right while others considered that to achieve something right we must go through suffering.
Another question is how much can we get away with this argument of opinion and perception? And the truth is, all the arguments with others can be won on this basis, or at least they can be deflected. "It is my opinion and I don't care about what you say!". This is very much acceptable but how about an inner conflict, what side to take? If we can't decide if right or wrong exists, how can we take sides to anything?
My ultimate aim of writing this is to find a way to escape this argument. How can we eliminate right and wrong and opinions and perceptions from our discussions? Can we still find solutions to problems without our opinions? Will not having these affect the quality of our decisions? I will be creating polls and discussions for this. Do provide your comments.
Facebook page link: https://www.facebook.com/pages/Incremental-Observations/104787302906058
