Professional Documents
Culture Documents
RANDOM
OPUS
- Random Guy
1
RANDOM OPUS
2
RANDOM OPUS
Introduction
You could say that this is a philosophical work pretending
to be a short story - but it makes no such claim. This
format merely seems useful to illuminate the processes
that led to some of my beliefs. Further, the process of
searching for answers is often more valuable than any
concrete conclusions in such matters, primarily because
going through the process enables us to examine and thus
change our mindset as we desire, whereas just being
handed conclusions means that we look at those
conclusions along the same lines of thought that we are
otherwise used to. Thus, those conclusions are not so
valuable by themselves.
3
RANDOM OPUS
This, along with the fact that coming up with this coherent
worldview involved coming up with certain non-trivial ideas
and perspectives that may not be familiar to most people,
leads me to believe that I should share these views and
the processes behind these with others. Merely talking to
people or posting on various boards gives a fragmented
view of these views, and makes it hard to explain how they
were arrived at and how they all fit together. Hence, I found
it worthwhile to try and express my views on these subjects
and the process behind arriving at them all together, where
they can be examined in their totality.
6
RANDOM OPUS
Table of Contents
i Introduction 3
ii Table of Contents 7
1 Prologue 11
2 The Living World 15
3 Ideas of Mathematics 22
4 Essentials 26
5 Laws of Nature 35
6 Judge Thyself 37
7 What the Body Wants 41
8 Compassion 43
9 Selfishness 45
10 Emotions snd Identity 47
11 Ego 50
12 Cessation 55
13 Peaks and Plateaus 58
14 Kins and Katas 64
15 Will 71
16 Metaphor 74
7
RANDOM OPUS
17 True Fanatic 78
18 Mystics 83
19 Fraudmen 86
20 God 88
21 Opposites 91
22 Logic 94
23 Magic 96
24 Technology 101
25 Negative Statements 104
26 Categorical Imperative 109
27 Means and Ends 115
28 Trust 122
29 Courage 123
30 Competition 127
31 Sacred 128
32 Desert 130
33 Greatness 137
34 Heart of Sword 140
35 Plan Management 143
36 Tribalism 150
37 Pacifism 152
8
RANDOM OPUS
38 Non-Violence 154
39 War 157
40 Likeness 160
41 Assumptions 166
42 Immortality 169
43 Growing Up 171
44 Division of Labor 175
45 Politics of Panacea 179
46 Government 181
47 Equality 183
48 Leniency and Uniformity 190
49 Globalization 194
50 Future Generations 197
51 Epilogue 201
52 Appendix: Witticism 203
9
RANDOM OPUS
10
RANDOM OPUS
Prologue
It is said that when a man dies, his past life flashes before
his eyes. But what if he is also the last of his kind? Is it not
fitting that the past life of his culture appear to him?
the very ships that had attacked them and forced the
navigators to lead them back to the Marahis. Abos had
neither expected nor prepared for this, and while he tried
very hard to put up some resistance it was a swift loss - not
only did the enemy have the benefit of surprise, they had
lived in a state of continual war for millennia which had led
to far superior firepower on their side.
who had been used to the luxuries of palace life could not
survive long when hunted like a dog. What's more, his
craven display of cowardliness meant that his beloved
former subjects now despised him, and joined the
Rabranias in hunting him down. When they finally found
him and turned him over to the authorities, he was
regarded as no more than a common criminal. Of course,
this did not redeem the Marahis in the eyes of their
captors. Only a few hundred of them were spared, and
they were all imprisoned along with Abos as proof of what
happened to those who resisted the Rabranias.
14
RANDOM OPUS
His first dream, like most that would follow, involved two
friends walking down the streets in a lost city of another
world. They looked otherwise happy but bored, and were
curing their boredom by indulging in petty arguments:
"I see."
destroyed."
"Yes - and like this, as people kept finding out more and
more weird properties of consciousness as opposed to the
material world, they found the material world only too
willing to step up and match said weirdness. Thus, in the
end, they were forced to conclude that the conscious
world, far from being a compatriot of the material world,
was merely another aspect of it - just as waves and
particles were aspects of it. This notion of one thing having
many aspects was earlier supposed to be restricted to
mathematics before the real world jumped on the
bandwagon - but then, this has always been the case. The
revelation of the living world, and later on the revelation of
one thing with many aspects not being an aspect merely of
mathematics or of physics, but of all realms of human
thought, later on led to the birth of mercenaries whose
prime purpose was to find the aspect of any given scenario
that was most beneficial for their employers - but that is
another story."
21
RANDOM OPUS
Ideas of Mathematics
"I guess I do agree with you there. However, it's a fact that
even if we lived in a world that had no mathematical
structure, or the structure was of a form that was wholly
incomprehensible to us, we would still try to impose on it
structures similar to the ones we employ in this world. If we
did not do that, it would not be us human beings that you
would be talking about here. In other words, the nature of
mathematical ideas we have - about our world and
otherwise, are fundamentally part of our selves. They
make us what we are. So as long as we are talking about
us, no matter what kind of world we lived in we would have
had such ideas, mathematical or otherwise. In other words,
the fact that we have those ideas in no way implies that
those ideas are inherent in the world, only that they are
inherent in our own minds."
"You could say that, but is it not also true that in the world
we actually do inhabit, these ideas have driven
technological progress? That those societies who have
investigated and have worked on these ideas have had a
clear advantage over those who have not done so - both in
warfare and in everyday peaceful life? Does this not
contradict your notion of mathematical ideas merely
existing in our own head?"
25
RANDOM OPUS
Essentials
"Don't you think that far too many people use words in a
confusing manner? Wouldn't we all be better off with rules
and regulations regarding the correct usage and meaning
of words? I am not talking here of legal rules, but it should
be easy to make programs to dictate what the correct
meanings of words and phrases are. With us being able to
pin down the precise meaning of language, it should be
easy to encourage people to say what they mean and
mean what they say."
" Stop right there. I know what way this is going, and have
very strong views on this and on related subjects. So from
now onwards, let me speak - I will speak and you listen:
life to fight with words rather than with guns, and even
crooked words offer some understanding of the speaker
and perhaps even the subject to a discerning listener),
rather that we need to consider words critically,
understanding that proficient use of words may merely
denote a lot of lies and politics to sift through, rather than a
lot of understanding to make use of."
For instance, we say that there is one sun for the earth.
But if we say that a sun is 'something the earth revolves
around', or even that 'it is a self-luminous ball of largely
hydrogen in space around which the earth revolves', we
could say that the earth has not just one, but many suns.
This can be done like this: take the sun as we know it, and
divide it into smaller sub-balls. This will leave some
residue, but that will be as inconsequential to us as is the
fact that according to our current objects, the earth is
pulled by the gravity of not just the sun, but of myriad other
heavenly bodies too. Alternately, we could keep
subdividing them into a practically infinite number of mini-
suns. According to that we would say that we revolve
around many suns. You could object that only one of them
would hold the center of gravity that the earth revolves
around, but by that logic even in binary star systems, only
30
RANDOM OPUS
chairs, for instance, than the fact that they seem different
to us. However, this same logic has been used in the past
to deny the consciousness of other races, and even later
on to deny the consciousness of animals and plants. We
have outgrown all that, so maybe in due course of time we
will also outgrow the notion that certain entities like tables
and chairs have not even the seeds of consciousness. In
due course of time, we will no doubt come to see that all
things have consciousness, albeit to varying degrees.
Once we see that consciousness flows through all, we can
also see that the division of this consciousness into a
number of different conscious entities is purely arbitrary.
For instance, just as we can talk of a living human being,
we can also talk of the living cells, the living organs - even
the living liver - of that human being. Further, just as living
humans beings can be seen as being constituted of living
cells, we can also see human beings as the living cells of
larger living entities like nations, sects and corporations.
They too behave like we would expect living organisms to
behave, except that just as it is hard for us too see living
cells as living because the scale of consciousness is so
different, this difference in scale also prevents us from
properly seeing nations etc. as living entities. However, it
does make sense to see them as living entities.
34
RANDOM OPUS
Laws of Nature
"I have said earlier that I don't think there is much evidence
for commonly-held notions of God, and in general it is
meaningless to even try to phrase questions about God,
including existence and number. However, similar
arguments can be made regarding the presence of
physical laws. Whichever laws we come up with seem to
have their own limitations, and it is possible that it is
beyond us to find a concise, coherent set of physical laws
that fully explains all physical phenomena. Also, while the
fact that we can and do try to use the experimental method
to try to disprove a theory may be taken as some sort of
justification for holding on to a particular theory (rather than
others) until it is disproved, it cannot be a justification for
belief in the notion that 'physical laws exist'. This
proposition is something that does not lend itself to
refutation by experiment. Experiments can only refute
specific laws that lay claim to being genuine physical laws.
However, refuting any number of theories that claim to give
us genuine physical laws does not automatically refute the
notion that 'physical laws exist'. Thus, belief in specific
physical laws may be a result of the state of scientific
progress - that in turn is arrived at by using the
experimental method. But the belief that such laws exist in
the first place, rather than the universe being essentially an
arbitrary place that only coincidentally appears to have
causality and laws regulating it built in - this belief in an
35
RANDOM OPUS
36
RANDOM OPUS
Judge Thyself
"In general, yes. But not to the extent that we are not able
to live up to our positive self-image and get even more
devastated when it breaks down. Or when it is built on
patent absurdities, merely to hide deep-rooted insecurities.
Of course, this seems to be reason for such positive
judgment most of the time. However, while genuinely
judging ourselves positively may make more sense than
judging ourselves negatively, the fact is that I don't even
agree with the premise that we should judge ourselves. It
is one thing to know ourselves, that is: to know our relative
strengths and weakness, to know our abilities and their
limitations, to understand how people see us and
otherwise how we relate to those with whom we happen to
be interacting at a given point of time. But to judge
ourselves would mean to have an overall positive or
negative impression of ourselves, like we have for other
people. With other people, it can make sense to judge
them according to our impression of whether are allies or
foes, and otherwise how they view us and what they can
38
RANDOM OPUS
do about it. But how can one judge oneself? One's self is
the very criterion by which he judges others (i.e. by what
they mean to him, and otherwise by how they compare to
him). So there is little sense in trying to judge oneself, for
what does one mean to oneself?"
"The way you are putting it, it looks impossible for people
to judge themselves. But in actual fact, people do judge
themselves - what kind of job they do of it is another
matter."
40
RANDOM OPUS
"A body does not die because of what you will, but
because of what it wills. Normally, a body will die because
it no longer wishes to live on. A body that is not given
enough food will eventually become unhappy with its
owner that is not giving it enough food. A body that is
made to eat too much will eventually grow resentful of the
owner who demands that it digest too much. A body that is
denied rest will eventually grow resentful towards the mind
in it. Just as we have discussed how all things can be said
to have some form of consciousness, a body too can be
said to have a sort of consciousness that can be
distinguished from that of the mind residing in it. When it
feels mistreated, or it gets bored of existing as it is, it can
decide to die. So someone who wishes to live by pure will
while torturing the body, is like a tyrant who tries to bully
41
RANDOM OPUS
"In such cases, you could say that the body after some
effort gives up on life, and lets the blade pass through it.
While it may not be a case of seeking for death, it is
nevertheless different from your interpretation of the body
only being able to act in certain ways as a lifeless entity: I
am sure that someone with good relations with his body
can ask it to pose resistance even to swords and bullets"
42
RANDOM OPUS
Compassion
44
RANDOM OPUS
Selfishness
46
RANDOM OPUS
"You could say that. But I would still have to say that in
general, the emotions we classify as 'negative', tend to be
the ones it is easier to identify ourselves with and harder to
get rid of - while generally the 'positive' emotions, for most
people, are precisely those that we can have without
readily identifying ourselves with them, or becoming unable
to be rid of them."
"In general, that may well be true. But while this is a good
guideline, it is not always true for any given person that he
will be more likely to get attached to and identify with a
'negative' emotion rather than a 'positive' one - it can also
sometimes be the other way round. When this happens, I
feel it would be better for us to realize that the source of
suffering lies not in particular emotions themselves, but in
how we get attached to and identify with them - and
therefore that identification with, 'positive' emotions can
cause as much suffering as with 'negative' emotions. Also,
for this same reason, giving up emotions while becoming
attached to the concept of ourselves as emotionless
persons can hardly be considered a better plan than
having emotions without becoming attached to them."
49
RANDOM OPUS
Ego
"I hate Raj: He spends so much time into making his body
healthy and well-maintained. Does he not realize that his
excessive zeal for health only exposes his vanity? Much
better to let my body go to dust and make my mind and
soul beautiful!"
"No."
"No?"
"See?"
"I have never said that both paths lead to vanity. I have
merely said that both attitudes can possibly lead to it, or
rather that both can be symptoms of vanity that already
exists previously. As such, vanity is orthogonal to striving
for good health."
who identifies their self with the body can be said to have
an ego. This can be reflected by excessive striving for
health, but it can also manifest itself as running away from
good health. Why is this? If X who feels identification or
ownership towards Y, then that can show itself as
excessive yearning for Y. But on the other hand, it also
shows itself in X feeling the right to abuse Y. When
someone does not feel attachment, identification or
ownership towards something..."
"Right."
"Yes, that way we will only leave regrets in our life. I agree
that we are better off facing the realities of life head-on.
When we have achieved all we have to do, it makes sense
to be truly indifferent to all: not before that."
54
RANDOM OPUS
Cessation
"Is that so? Many people mistakenly believe that, but have
you ever tried actually spending a few months without any
deep thought or any attempt to fulfill your responsibilities?"
"I have not, but that is only because I have yet to find such
an opportunity. I am truly unfortunate in that sense..."
"If you try it, you will feel a sense of dissatisfaction. You
could put it down to boredom - but it seems meaningless to
call it boredom and hate it, when you yourself sought after
it. On the other hand, one could try to pretend that with the
cessation of thought and activity, you have achieved
enlightenment, although your experience of dissatisfaction
would seem to argue against such a claim."
"Problem?"
"But why not then just stop doing stuff? Can't we just will
it? Will that really work? Also, I have seen people lose all
hope due to despair and they don't seem to be too
happy..."
the process where old ones are fulfilled and new ones do
not arise because the underlying causes relating to their
arising are taken care of. On the other hand, 'suppression
of desire' refers to a state where even existing desires are
not taken care of, leave alone the underlying issues that
make them arise. So these two are entirely different things.
Further, this is an issue relating to the emotions (cessation
of their underlying causes) not just ideas, and is therefore
something to be done practically. Thus mere thinking about
it, though possibly helpful, is not a substitute for actually
getting your hands dirty. Just like obtaining dexterity in a
sport, it is more about reaching a particular frame of mind
and obtaining practical skills to deal with the underlying
causes of dissatisfaction, rather than about processing
more data from one's current state of mind, or merely
speculating intellectually about concepts which one has
been exposed to only from a theoretical point of view
rather than having a first-hand familiarity with them."
57
RANDOM OPUS
"Huh?"
"Okay, whatever"
way, you can live a far more robust and fault-tolerant, and
thus happier life"
63
RANDOM OPUS
64
RANDOM OPUS
"Of course. But this does not negate the fact that you were
earlier giving a diplomatic answer, and are now trying to
evade the issue altogether."
"I will, if you will just let me... now, it is true that for
someone who thinks of himself as being basically,
essentially and inherently happy and blissful - and then
goes ahead to see physical stimuli as something external
to himself - these stimuli are merely a nuisance that disturb
his inner peace and are thus to be avoided. Now, most
people may not find most stimuli to be disruptive. But it is
also true that almost everyone does feel disrupted in this
sense by ugly sights, by ugly sounds, and by ugly smells -
not to mention other forms of ugly stimuli. Almost
universally, we feel such ugliness to be a disruption to our
relatively peaceful everyday life. In this, we are almost all
in agreement with the Katastematic view. So really, what
differentiates 'Katas' from other people is mainly the fact
that many experiences that we find to be pleasant are also
regarded as disruptive by them. This is because in
pleasant experiences which occur to us as a spike, often
65
RANDOM OPUS
"But you kept saying: 'I agree with this part', and 'I agree
with that part'! Is this not the same as saying that you are a
Kata?"
70
RANDOM OPUS
Will
73
RANDOM OPUS
Metaphor
"I don't know why people keep using lies and metaphors,
but I am also terrified of the boredom I would feel if
everyone was straightforward in what they said - instead of
resorting to such cheap linguistic tricks."
77
RANDOM OPUS
True Fanatic
"I am so pissed off at the people who think that only their
point of view are right, and that others who don't share
their views need to be all killed."
"Oh really?"
"Why not?"
"Say there is someone who wants to kill you and all that
you value. Or if we do not go to that extent, just think of
78
RANDOM OPUS
"But all this still seems not tolerant enough. I was talking to
this guy yesterday and he told me that all religions and
philosophies say the same thing, so it is useless to
distinguish among them."
"While I agree that saying that you alone are right and
everyone else is wrong and needs to be eliminated - is
something of a fanatical idea, the same cannot be said for
merely momentarily ensuring the continuity of the stream
of ideas you came across and examined and found to be
useful: comparing the latter to the former is like comparing
someone who loves his own family to one who wants to kill
everyone not in his immediate family: one shows the will
cooperating with itself, the other shows it fighting against
itself. Also, while it may be fanatical to believe that only
your views are valuable (and the experiences of others can
be thrown away), it is far more fanatical to say that all
religions and philosophies say the same thing. It is clear
there are differences between them, for example some
believe in a God, some don't. Some believe in tribal
80
RANDOM OPUS
82
RANDOM OPUS
Mystics
"In other words, you are a mystic. Does it ever occur to you
that the habit of mystification that goes with this may be the
reason why writing such a book may be beyond you?
Perhaps you are just too esoteric for popular appeal."
83
RANDOM OPUS
"So you are saying that your gate alone is not selective in
terms of power, intelligence, etc. and yet gets few
entrants?:"
85
RANDOM OPUS
Fraudmen
87
RANDOM OPUS
God
"But the stuff you said about being able to make negative
statements if not positive ones about God - is that not also
a strong argument for Monotheism?"
"Why?"
88
RANDOM OPUS
"How is that?"
90
RANDOM OPUS
Opposites
"Of course"
"But why stop there? Like this, I could take something that
is not even a sensory stimulus. Then you would find THAT
to be the real opposite. Again, if I find something common
between light and its so-called opposite, I could find
something that does not share this characteristic. Then you
would find that to be the opposite. I can carry through this
process at least till I claim that 'nothing' is the true opposite
to anything, because anything is 'something', while
'nothing' is not something."
"But that would make no sense. How can all the myriad
things have 'nothing' as their opposite? This is pointless"
93
RANDOM OPUS
Logic
"Other things."
95
RANDOM OPUS
Magic
"???"
"Consider the machines you use now. Are not their sizes
regularly reducing? Are not you progressing in a way
where the way you interface with your machines becomes
more and more intuitive?"
"Interface?"
"Yes, I guess all of that is true. But you know, we still deal
with them physically. We don't just mumble at them"
"No, no... you can't just match voices like that. That is not
science, that in itself is magic. So all you have been saying
is that your ancestors too were magicians..."
"No: even though they had the 'talent', they would never be
trained by us: you can be sure of that"
"Sorry, no can do. Not only can we not see them, we have
no idea of how they work. We do know how to work them
with our spells, but none of our books give us a spell to
make those nanobots self-destruct...."
"..."
100
RANDOM OPUS
Technology
103
RANDOM OPUS
Negative Statements
"I have known you for a long time now - and whenever I
ask you about anything really important, you answer with
something that is not an answer at all."
"But don't you think that through all this, you have merely
been bluffing me all this time? Out of all these situations, in
none have you given me a straightforward, objectively
meaningful answer. You have always twisted and turned
the words in my question to make a new question, and
then answered that. Does this not mean that you are in fact
unable to answer my original question? Aren't you merely
using involved wordplay to avoid admitting to that, and
pushing your own agenda without any intention to deal with
the questions I posed? I get it now, you are so full of
yourself that no matter what anyone else wants to talk to
you about, you just manipulate the conversation according
to your own agenda - while forgetting the initial point the
other guy wanted to discuss about. Why does it have to be
like this? Why is it always about you, you, you? What
105
RANDOM OPUS
"Look, you are getting carried away here. While it's true
that I do have my own set of beliefs, my own
understanding of the world according to which I act, it does
not mean that I am always trying to push it, regardless of
what the other person wants to talk about. It is true that I
don't like talking about stuff that does not interest me, like
gossip about celebrities. But when I find someone going on
about something like that, I don't try to cunningly steer the
conversation to subjects that interest me. You know me
well enough to know that I simply refuse to discuss things
that are of no interest to me - I don't try to prevent others
from talking about them either. So when you start a
discussion about something and I join in it - whether it is
about nature and number of God or about morality - it is
because I am interested in the topic in the first place. It is
true that sometimes, I try to rephrase some questions that
you raise before looking for a solution to them, but I have
never rephrased the question in such a way as to deviate
from its initial topic. Rather, I do this to question hidden
assumptions in the original question."
108
RANDOM OPUS
Categorical Imperative
114
RANDOM OPUS
"No, wait. That is fucked up. Do you really think that most
people want to read those things? Don't you think that
most of them would be perfectly able to buy them if they
needed to, and would in fact be pissed off rather than
happy at being spammed each month by the latest issue of
Nex Comics?"
spam."
"You would have liked to see those images when you were
5-6 years old? I doubt it."
"True, but this means that you don't just get 'whatever you
want': you give up certain kinds of desires for the sake of
others. Don't you think that other people also deserve this
kind of consideration?"
"... while you seem to have got the point about giving
priority to ends in themselves, when we interact with others
it is not only a question of what you consider an end in
themselves, but also what they consider as an end in itself.
For a starving child, food is an end in itself because when
taking food, they don't have any purpose in mind for the
sake of which they are eating. On the other hand, there are
probably many things they do as a means to getting at
food. When you give Nex Comics to starving children, it
lets them achieve what you consider to be an end in itself.
However, in general it does not help them get at what they
118
RANDOM OPUS
"But how does all this gel in with your notion about all of us
being indistinguishable from each other? Since we are the
same as each other, would it even make any difference
whether I treat them according to their wishes or my own
wishes?"
"I guess because of this it may make more sense to see all
people, and similarly all organs etc., interconnected like
brothers, instead of dwelling on the fact that in some
sense, they could all be considered one."
"Right."
121
RANDOM OPUS
Trust
122
RANDOM OPUS
Courage
society."
"A great man once said, 'to know what is right, and to not
do it, is cowardice' - and I agree.
"You have a point, but although I agree with what you have
said till now as being necessary for something to be called
courage, I think you are missing out on something. If I
know what is right - and I do it - but that is something with
no repercussions either psychologically or socially, am I
doing something courageous? I don't think so. So it should
be more like, 'knowing what is right and overcoming all
124
RANDOM OPUS
But this is patently false. Someone may feel more fear and
guilt because of putting in more effort, but also because of
lack of forethought in the way they put in their effort, or
simply because they let life happen to them instead of
happening back to life in turn. Someone who fights his fear
before minimizing it does not become more courageous as
a result. It is true that in the absence of other purposes, we
often just go along the flow by doing whatever is easiest for
us socially and psychologically. Because of this, the
easiest way to know that we are being courageous - by
knowing that we are not merely going along with the flow -
is by sensing how much resistance we are getting: if we
feel more resistance, that probably means that we are
being more purposeful and hence more courageous.
125
RANDOM OPUS
126
RANDOM OPUS
Competition
127
RANDOM OPUS
Sacred
"I think the point is not about things being true, but about
them being sacred, sacrosanct and unchallengeable. A lot
of people keep following ideas that restrict their and others'
behavior, but they don't even bother to question and judge
those ideas before becoming slaves to them. Without
treating ideas as such sacred cows, we permit ourselves
everything - and so are able to question ideas to determine
their worth. Even when we find an idea to be worthy, we
follow it not because of being compelled to do so, but out
of our own wish. We permit ourselves everything, and
then, without any artificial restriction on our choices, do
what seems reasonable according to our wishes. Now
contrast this with the opposite, 'tolerant' idea.
128
RANDOM OPUS
129
RANDOM OPUS
Desert
"Don't you think that people who let others steal from them
should be killed?"
"I don't know what you are talking about: they are already
fined an amount that is equal to the money stolen from
them. Don't you think that this is punishment enough?"
"I know all that. I too went to school just like you, and was
indoctrinated with the same bullshit."
"Not only that, you did quite well in it - and that fact has
helped you do well in life so far! So then how can you now
turn traitor to the very system to which you owe
everything? Have you no shame?"
130
RANDOM OPUS
"Unlike you, I believe that although the state can have its
own subjective laws of ruler and ruled - of winner and loser
- nature too has its own objective laws that don't
distinguish between people, just as they don't distinguish
between specks of sand. A person may perish if he goes
against a state, but a state too will perish if it goes against
nature. As patriotic members of our state, our fundamental
duty towards it is to ensure its continued survival. This
supersedes the duties the state imposes on us by force,
because if we don't follow the former, we cannot follow the
latter towards a state in the absence or ruin of the state
itself. In this way, objective laws of nature have always
been the true calling of people like myself, who have
worked hard to realign themselves and their states towards
these laws and have thus strengthened both in the long
run. The fact that the laws of the state must be brought into
accord with the laws of nature is precisely the reason why
131
RANDOM OPUS
"I too have heard all that when those notions were parroted
to us as little children, the difference between us lying in
precisely this: that I have overcome those childish notions.
First of all, there can be no such thing as a 'bias towards
objectivity', because objectivity by definition is a default
state on which you can superimpose your personal biases
(since nature has no personal biases, it is impartial -
objective). Secondly, the notion of subjectivity being a
friend of human rights is a myth. In case you did not notice,
laws that claim to help the needy and oppressed that are
not phrased objectively (as tends to be the case) -
generally end up persecuting groups hated by the framers
of the law. Similarly, the beneficiaries almost always end
up being the friends, relatives and voters of those who are
in power - even when, in fact especially when, they are not
really oppressed in any way. Examples of such laws
include the ones that have been made so that members of
one group can bring the whole apparatus of the state to
132
RANDOM OPUS
off their ass, by holding them responsible for the acts they
let happen. There is no point in punishing the strong for the
weaknesses of the weak, because that way we will only
reduce our own strength as a society."
"It existed right here on the land we are standing on, laws
134
RANDOM OPUS
"My point, which you seem to have been missing all along,
is precisely this: the just deserts of people are not
determined just by them. It also depends on the paradigm
under which you decide to see their actions. For the
successful paradigm you follow, the responsibility to
prevent robbery rests on the owner of said property. But for
the historical, even more successful paradigm followed by
our late ancestors, robbery can and should be tackled by
dealing with the robbers - they are the ones being blamed
for the robbery. So there is nothing inherently criminal
about the robbee: only the attitude of the society makes it
so."
136
RANDOM OPUS
Greatness
"Yes."
"So if you get to know more and more about how he lived
his life, will you try to emulate as much of it as you can?"
"Yes, of course."
"Unfortunately, the more you did that, the less you would
be like him. Why is this? Simply because he himself is an
original, not a carbon copy - and it is largely this that
makes him what he is. Did he spend his whole life trying to
emulate someone, or did he beat his own path? He found
his own path. If you, instead of finding your own path,
merely try to emulate him, then at best you can be like him
only superficially. You will thus be unable to emulate the
very characteristic which made him great - his originality. If
you want to emulate his greatness, then instead of finding
superficial similarities you are probably better off just being
original and true to yourself, like him."
137
RANDOM OPUS
"Yes, good point. But then how do you explain the fact that
in many cases, great people turn out to have known other
great men, sometimes closely, in their youth and
childhood?"
"It is still good. I will have lived life my way, fighting for
what I want instead of gaining fake accomplishments by
superficially emulating others. Even if it does not work out,
it is good enough to have lived life working towards
genuinely getting what I want."
139
RANDOM OPUS
Heart of Sword
"A heart of sword? What's that? Is that the thing you have
after someone stabs you in the heart? Although I guess
that would be more like a heart pierced by a sword, no?"
"There are people who waste time in clubs. There are also
people who keep hammering away at things. So you have
something there. But basically, you got to realize that the
art of war reached a new level when people graduated
from using blunt weapons like clubs and hammers to sharp
stuff like swords. Why? Because sharp objects can focus
much more force to a point than blunt objects, at least if
similar power is applied on both of them. Also, the kind of
point damage inflicted by swords is harder to deal with
than the kind of area damage inflicted by blunt objects"
"It's not about killing your emotions. It's about realizing that
many of our emotions are merely the result of social
conditioning and so don't count for shit. So we become
lazy in acting on them, and soon only thoughts and actions
that lead to our purposes are of any consequence
whatsoever. Also, fanatics become fanatical precisely
because they are led by their conditioned emotions, rather
than by reason. So a person with a heart of sword is
actually the least fanatical of people, although in some
cases he may look like that to others"
can keep using its blade, it's useless if say at any time you
mistakenly use its thin dimension for hitting anyone"
142
RANDOM OPUS
Plan Management
"Is that so? Aren't you the same guy who was talking with
me yesterday about how you want to live life
spontaneously, in the moment - without having to worry
about what tomorrow will bring?"
"Yes, maybe that was so. But then, you yourself convinced
me about the futility of that line of thinking, and made me
realize the power of having a 'heart of sword', as you call it.
Figuring out the escape from anxiety and doubt, and also
the strength it promises, I have decided to live my life in
that way only: My life will have one purpose only, and I will
use every aspect of my life as a mere tool to achieve that
purpose. With everything geared towards a single purpose,
I will cut through difficulties like a knife -"
"Or a sword..."
"Very well, but have you even thought of what this single
purpose of your life is going to be; or are you just going to
go with the first arbitrary idea that comes into your head?"
"Well..."
149
RANDOM OPUS
Tribalism
151
RANDOM OPUS
Pacifism
" This point of view does not seem to have much merit, in
spite of the fact that violence too is not worthy as an end in
itself. Without tribes being willing to defend themselves
form other tribes, the tribes who don't defend themselves
will be eliminated by those who are willing to use force - a
good example being the genocide of neanderthals by
modern humans in the colonization of Europe. But even
within a tribe, if individuals are unwilling to use force to
fight for the rights and freedoms they want, they will find
themselves being subjugated and enslaved by those who
are more unscrupulous than them. Further, this is not an
'honorable act of self-sacrifice' - allowing others to have
their way through the unscrupulous use of force
encourages them to stick to those methods and thus acts
as a disincentive to seek other, more just solutions. Thus,
those who are pacifist for the heck of it also share some
responsibility for the spread of unscrupulous violence in
their society. If we want to live in a society where certain
kinds of ways of solving problems (eg. through considering
the wishes of all) are preferred over others (like beating up
those who are weaker than you), then we need to act in a
way that encourages the means we prefer over the ones
152
RANDOM OPUS
we don't.
153
RANDOM OPUS
Non-Violence
156
RANDOM OPUS
War
"You know, I often think that we should just take the path
of least resistance, just going our own ways without being
bothered with what others do. In this way, there could be
true peace in the world Perhaps we wil eventually be done
with war too."
"Ahh, just let things slide... the true joy of peace, true
peace and bliss - right?"
"Except for the small detail that with some people willing to
kill for their whims and others not even willing to fight for
their rights, you know very well which group will die out. In
the past, the ability of people to increase their chances of
survival has depended on various factors, including
chance. For the sake of simplicity, we could say that at
least two of these factors would be: 1) How martial you
are: being willing to kill your competitors and thus reduce
competition for resources would increase your 'fitness'. 2)
Technical and and physical prowess. In short, in the first
way it is the size of the fight in the dog that counts, while in
the second it is the size of the man in the fight - or out of it.
But what happens when you become entirely pacifist in
your approach? Since the whole species has not converted
over to non-violence - and even if it did, other species
157
RANDOM OPUS
"I see your point, but isn't the promotion of violence even in
retaliation only going to result in a net increase in violence
among all? For all people do not always agree on what is
proper retaliation. Also, an eye for an eye will only make
the world go blind."
158
RANDOM OPUS
"First of all, the notion that an eye for an eye will make the
whole world go blind is absurd. Two eyes for an eye will
make the world go blind, as will most ways of taking 1.1
eyes for an eye. On the other hand, an eye for an eye will
only cause those who intentionally cause blindness in
others to go blind. While I have sympathy even for such
people, this way will in the end cause less harm than
'nothing for an eye', where even one man if he wants can
make all the rest of the world blind. This is why I am a
believer in retaliation. I do agree that not everyone agrees
on what is acceptable retaliation. But while it is always
good to be moderate in using violence, some kind of
retaliation - even if mild - is needed to deter others from
being too violent, although I do agree that violence is best
used sparingly and only after other options have been
exhausted."
159
RANDOM OPUS
Likeness
"I see."
165
RANDOM OPUS
Assumptions
"Yes, of course"
"Then this is not how I would do it. Consider this: all over
the world, people make a big deal of the scientific method.
no doubt you do too. But what is it? Is it not merely the
understanding that no matter how sure you are about a
conclusion when you first think of it, you could be wrong
and it is generally a good idea to seek to disprove ideas
rather than make sacred beliefs out of them? Tell me, isn't
this what lies at the heart of the scientific method?"
"True..."
"Yes, indeed."
168
RANDOM OPUS
Immortality
170
RANDOM OPUS
Growing Up
"Not unless you are a child. Listen, resources are not free.
Resources are never free. Someone always has to pay
something for them. If you don't pay by giving stuff in
exchange, you pay by taking care of the resources or of
other resources that generate these resources. There is no
such thing as a free lunch, at least not for long. People
who don't take care of themselves - who don't make good
decisions in life - eventually die out. If they avoid dying
because their culture subsidizes them, then the culture will
eventually have to support more and more such guys
(having supported them earlier) and will eventually die out.
If the wider society decides to bail out such a society, then
for the same reasons it too will die out. Similarly, if you
make a global effort to encourage such societies, the
species could die out - and beyond that whom do you look
to for help? At each of these levels, the capacity to hide
bad choices increases - but so does the certainty of ruin
when they are no longer able to be hidden. So in practice,
if you want to live, then in exchange for something you
have to give something else. If someone helps you, you
too have to help them. If you depend on a species for
survival, you have to protect it from other species and
171
RANDOM OPUS
But it is insane to think that society should not help out its
weaker sections. Do you really think that abandoning those
in need is truly the way to survival?"
173
RANDOM OPUS
itself.
"I would say that they may be adults in body and mind, but
not in spirit. Everyone cannot be a net consumer.
Someone has to produce, or at least take care of the
goods that others consume. If you have not yet become
prepared to take on this role, you are little more than a
child. If you refuse to take the initiative, to work for what is
wanted by not just you - but also others who are dear to
you - then you still have a lot of growing up to do."
174
RANDOM OPUS
Division of Labor
isolated from the rest of the people who are not really
interested in them anyway."
178
RANDOM OPUS
Politics of Panacea
180
RANDOM OPUS
Government
181
RANDOM OPUS
182
RANDOM OPUS
Equality
fight and die for their relatives, etc. - however, I believe the
point has already been made strongly enough, and has
little need of being further reinforced. This is thus a clear
example of a group wanting further privileges without any
moral scruples parading as a group who merely seek
'equality', thus conveniently using the fact that when you
talk of equality for fundamentally different entities, you can
pick and choose your notion of equality to make it anything
but equitable.
186
RANDOM OPUS
189
RANDOM OPUS
"Oh, but do you wish for the same thing to happen to you
when you do so?"
"Why bother, they make those laws but are the most
corrupt of people. Even if I wanted, there is very little to
make him follow the laws he himself created."
"So you take out your anger on other people just like you?"
"I understand your feelings, but you are only one of many
people who feel helpless in making hotshots follow the law
and yet keep trying hard to enforce them for others. This
kind of helpless vigilante-ism makes the elites of the
society have more and more power (by being able to make
any sort of laws and knowing that people would fall over
themselves enforcing them) with no responsibility (by
knowing that no matter what laws they make, they
themselves would not be subjected to it). It would be better
to work towards the uniform applicability of laws by
showing your vigilante acts towards lawmakers, instead of
towards random mistake-makers."
"So you are saying that this guy who broke the rules
deserves to not be punished for that?"
hand in hand."
"I see."
193
RANDOM OPUS
Globalization
"Sure, why not? Maybe they would not all be exactly the
same, but they would become far more homogeneous than
they are now."
194
RANDOM OPUS
196
RANDOM OPUS
Future Generations
"It is not envy, but pity that I feel towards them. Consider
the fact that the nature of needs change with times, and
what you have left for them may not suffice when you are
no longer alive. Also, consider that even if you have done
enough to let your children glide through life, they will not
be able to do the same for their children without learning
any abilities. Also, a life without abilities necessarily
becomes a life without purpose. For all but a few men,
such a life may seem pleasant - but only when you are not
197
RANDOM OPUS
199
RANDOM OPUS
200
RANDOM OPUS
Epilogue
You may think that these dreams would affect him, inspire
him in some way to keep on living and revive the Marahi
empire. But as I have already mentioned, he was out of
food and water. So after seeing those dreams, Abos did
not wake up. Rather, he saw other dreams. Then he died.
201
RANDOM OPUS
202
RANDOM OPUS
Appendix: Witticism
"Well it's really simple, little one. If the stars had material
existence, what would stop them from falling to the
ground?"
"The more important question is: how could all this dark
get generated? It is a well-known fact that all things are
naturally luminescent - this is a prime aspect of our
theology. So for there to be such darkness, there has to be
something keeping it out, something shutting in the world."
"But if these are holes, then why does their position keep
on changing?"
"Yes, but haven't you read the very first line of our holy
book, the Tractatus Religio Philosophicus? This line, our
testament of faith, very clearly says: The world is all that is
in the case. And you better believe it too: The world is all
that is in the case."
205
RANDOM OPUS
206