To The Best Of My Knowledge

Dear, All, Good Day!

29th June 2023

     I am just jotting down whatever I logically (my logical ability?) right and definitely questionable. The Snap of a Lighthouse by Tim Foster I used is not actually regarding my sea life, but I like to throw light into some areas, which may be helpful to some. Man-woman rivalry is supposed to be the most prominent of mankind. Saying "mankind" itself is good enough to start the fire! Reading, maybe carelessly " The One" by Richard Bach I fell into the deep pit of married life. Then I reread that book and I realized what mistake I have made, but anyway, his method can not be applied where I live. Anyway, after a lot of struggle, we managed to be one whenever needed and remain as individuals mostly. Not being bonded, but still being associated gives us a little bit of freedom also.

                                                                        Now, first thing, first as the world over, mostly patriarchy is on and if matriarchy is on men should be fighting for liberation. As the balance of anything humankind could not manage so far. And always very good at tipping the balance and even Goddess Justitia could not survive. How a blindfolded was not made to survive. If she can, then she definitely shouldn't be blindfolded. Asking for equality, women are actually degrading themselves, I feel. But then equality is not a thing that is practical and an idealistic term that can never be achieved, and only an approximation. But then we the great humans thrive on approximations and tramples on everything on earth, above and under. One day we may drill a tunnel from the North Pole to the South Pole to make the shortest road and shout aloud, Hurray, for whom to hear, I do not know. I feel that inherently, humans have that attitude that "you scratch my back and I will scratch yours" as we can't manage that part ourselves, and our happiness is always based on that.

                                       And, also I feel that the rivalry is between good and bad, and good is not really good, and bad is not really bad, but anything in-between needs a proper analysis as mostly they will be bad. I can tell a story which is normally put as a puzzle. at Y fork of a road on either branch, one person stands and one road leads to hell and the other to heaven. One of them tells only lies and the other tells only the facts (Sorry, I don't want to use the term truth here). Now you have to ask only one question and that too to only one of them and get the way to heaven or hell, wherever you want to go! But the person who raised this puzzle did not say that they know each other about their characteristics and each of them knows what is a lie and what is a fact. Incidentally, I knew this puzzle already and compared it as a product a negative and a positive number will always be negative. So the answer is if you ask anyone what will be the answer if I ask the other one which is the right way. Here the person who lies is not a bad guy but with innate knowledge and integrity. So is piracy at sea or software, they are doing a favour, but I think it went too far and got curtailed. All these activities are always monitored and controlled by people themselves at higher strata. So it is not a man-woman rivalry in the first place. If it was so, so many homes should have been broken down, by this time. I could not read World As I See It by Albert Einstein, but the flipping through a concise version I got, I found that when he was visiting the US there was opposition from the women's liberation team there.

                                        I do not know whether Ayn Rand was into women's liberation, but I liked her logical ability and storytelling. But anyway, human logic is always associated with absurdities and I too will not be spared. About her novel Fountainhead, I should say that Angelique was stupid to leave Haoard Roark just because he didn't achieve his dream and became a loser. Angelique's logic was that Roark lost and if she marries Roark, she will still be a gainer, but she too wanted to be a loser to the core. But I say, from my point of view, the profession is nothing but, for a family, to make both ends meet. And try to keep your and your family's girth as minimum as possible. As long as win and lose; I repeat win and lose, is all about sports and to be viewed with a sportsman(woman!) spirit.

                                                     Now, I may introduce the term "generalizing" which may turn out to be quite vicious, when dealing with humans, whereas it may be okay to use in mathematics or other physical sciences. In this case, I should also say that there is only science is there for humans, and when it achieves its highest peak and goes out of the hands of people in charge of that science stream, it may attain the status of religion. Everything in this is unique and you may notice the mathematical method used to prove that two fingerprints match precisely. How can you assume that; so many people are living here now and forget the ones who died or are yet to be born. It is a risk in assuming such a thing. It is a theory based on probability and permutations and combinations and works in a way like statistical quality control in the production process. So I may say that there are no two things that are exactly the same, and the whole numerical system shall collapse. But we are on a plane of approximation and approximation should be acceptable to a limit, even in scientific fields. Even human languages are just approximations; we may set the name of a fruit 'mango' and from then onwards, that fruit is considered as mango. For material things are okay with it. But in the case of qualities like love and other emotions, the approximations may work at a low level or even do the inverse. In one country what you do in love, like punishing your kid, may be an offence somewhere. I can tell the story I read where two people, speaking different languages, are fighting saying that mango is something else, and a knowledgeable person comes and sorts out the issue, convincing them they both are right. But I wonder, how two people of different languages can fight over a linguistic issue! The same goes for Sri. adiShankaracharya's Advaita Vedanta. If 'one' is not there, how can you consider two? More on this later. So generalizing is something which I am totally against and I have said somewhere I said divided I stand. I am against all sorts of unions. I take memberships only if I am forced to and stay detached in normal circumstances. I may even say against Yoga, which means union, the aim of which is to become one with the universe. But I myself am inherently enforced to be one with the universe and I can feel it too. But if you are not able to perceive it, then I don't think yoga should help you, but you may need some other therapy. This is like SadhGuru saying he is not a person, but others are, but I feel if SadhGuru is not a person and he feels it and others are also not persons and the only thing is that they are not aware of it. He talks about the persona part also many times. From Angels to all union makers succeed in bringing people together who are illiterate and being misused by bad elements in society (maybe they have some valid reasons). So making a union was found to be a strong method and it always grew stronger than the people against whom it was formed. Now let me come to the point that Carl Lewis can run faster than Florence Griffith Joyner doesn't mean that I can run faster than Florence. Even when some women talk about freedom there are a lot of men who have much less freedom than what many women enjoy. Restrictions were enforced on women in the earlier world for their own safety and revoking or rather getting them revoked was always in the pipeline. So as far as physical labour is concerned men are made to work a hard way, mentally and physically and if I can believe what was told to me, around 60 years back it was almost impossible for a woman to work in the engine room of a cargo ship even though internal combustion engines were present. The intricate issue is that almost all of the physical reproductive system is installed in the female and forget the hardship involved, but a force de majure situation can really devastate a female if she is carrying.

                                                           But the inventions and further developments have made it possible for women to work in ships' engine rooms and maybe the pregnancy effect working onboard is still there in force. Also, chastity-based morality is predominant in India and thereby men getting deprived of sex, which can cause fights and other issues in the society. 

                                                           Life for human beings was always tough; tougher than other living beings, as they are never, naturally provided with protective equipment others are given to deal with the climatic conditions present on earth and their ability to get food also was a tough task. Or maybe they are built for vegetarian food only! Also, maybe,  initially, wild animals were not really wild and against humans but after they started hunting animals, they went against humans. As it is once an animal is afraid of someone, they definitely attack that one. I feel this is quite universal law! So wearing clothes and weapons was a naturally acquired way. Otherwise, the first sin in Genesis caused all these and the shame part, but I may consider it as the earlier one and works against nature as an armour and the shame part crept on naturally. The shame part also, if invented, should be of the higher invention, or may be evolved out of the chastity issue and later lead to so many industries vis, textiles, fashion, pornography and you just name it! And many times men misbehave with women from stalking to violent ones due to chastity stuff and sexual starvation. Most of the men are like starved lions on the street as far as sex is concerned. There is so much to write about in this issue. Based on this issue women are not given the freedom to move around later compared to the wilderness in the olden days which they were not designed to cope with. 

                                                                By the way, mechanization and automation inventions were not invented by men or women but by humankind and that definitely made freedom possible to a greater extent for women but still, the sexual harassment issue can only be dealt with by cultural development and education does nothing in this regard and only moralistic approach, say by heaven and hell concept and others by religion wins the race hands-down. Talking about the breadwinner was always man and education also helped them keep it till un even work hours and hard physical labor involved. In the olden days, I feel, in Bharat education was to learn and become liberated and I still do not know what is liberation and, from what, to get liberated. Born as a physical conscience you can not get away from physical existence and what happens; whether I come back and live again, and all that stuff is not at all conceivable; forget to know, with this physical consciousness. So mechanisation and automation had crept into homes also and whatever freedom already achieved and yet to be achieved liberation levels of women are definitely a work of humankind and not by man or woman; they are just warmongers. So women's freedom or easiness in life was always at par with man's as far as humankind was concerned. But still, as long as chastity and other moral issues stay among us the woman to do all the things a man is allowed to do in society may not be possible for women. If that equality reaches gradually a lot of industries may collapse. Also amongst other living things, a male section is provided with sexually attractive fitments but humans have the other way around, I feel.

                                                    Comparison amongst anything may be possible, but when two things are complementary, it should be only up to a limited way. Like either side of a coin, man, and woman are only the elements that make the (wo)mankind. Here I may tell in a short way why I started searching for God. God again is not a properly defined word and the moment you hear God, attention is immediately diverted to religions, which many people think unscientific. But to me, the term God can only be formed by a scientific initiation, and started off at the aboriginal level and got carried over till now with a lot of accumulated knowledge and database. Maybe the religions are using the term, God in the wrong sense, nowadays. That is because religions are there and they have their own Gods. This situation is reached a grave level because of invasions and trans-migrations caused thereby. So 99.9% of living beings and all others in this world are so perfect (except the born disabled ones mostly amongst humans; the reason which I am still not sure about and so is the secret exactly behind reproduction. If science knew then the cases of infertility cases might have come down drastically). Reproduction is a wrong term to be used amongst humans as some similarity is there physically for the offspring, and mentally it is all haywire, which actually is what matters more! Among other living things, it is not really noticeable, but. So coming back to God, the first argument is Christian God created Christians and Hindu God created Hindus and so on. No, but only one God is possible if you understand what I mean by the word God. Everyone can have his own definition, and if you think a single one can not take care of creation and upkeeping(?if actually free will is there, regarding subsistence is concerned) then some may go for so many Gods which may or may not be under one single God. Some may even find a Human, Godly, and adore him/ her like God itself. Anyway most of us have something or place to represent the presence of God.  Even though it was a tough task, I stuck with Monotheism, along with polytheism. Duality of that sort was the toughest or maybe the easiest!

                                                              Looking at myself and other things in this world, I just could not believe that the formation of this whole thing can not happen out of an accidental occurrence and I just do not have enough time or energy to spend on disproving any kind of evolution theory. I do agree that evolution is always there but only from a valid starting point and I wouldn't like to give any divine aura to the creator and he may be just another human, who got evolved into one capable of it. The most treacherous part of seeking the creator is who created the creator and it will become an infinite series and most cases discourage you from making the search. But then, all the journeys are never completed instantaneously, and many times you go to one place even though, Google Maps may say that you have reached your "destination" but you may be knowing better! All religions give you the idea free of cost, otherwise, you may take a lifetime to consider that word. Material science(which was always there in different forms) worked as the strengthening material for your search like in a physical training class. Either actually seeks the same but apparently goes in opposite directions! I am talking about both being available to laymen like me and top people of both may be knowing better...

Inventions for home improvement mostly by men

The physical labor involved in all professions due to mechanization

The first woman to climb a mango tree!

Man-woman physical differences

workers unite Angels

generalizing continue

healthy competition- my language- drug abuse

Carl and Florence

leader-follower

Earning member.

provider, co-provider,

04th(US independence day?) July 2023  1145 Hrs IST Updated to continue...

 Good day, all!

                          This one is a different case as the case I try to give a different meaning to English words. The word meaning is okay, but I find the understanding and usage are a bit different in a way. First of all, I am not a nationalist(?). It had done enough harm to my country, as I did only menial work for my country, but it worked well for me. As I work on a ship that goes to various countries, all of them allowed me to embark on their land and had full freedom there. The only exception was Karachi in Pakistan which was a hostile place politically, particularly it was during the stand-off period after Kargil War. And it was quite acceptable from my point of view, as the arrangement was more for my own safety. So I belonged to the world than the country I am from, for all practical purposes.

                                  In my view, nationalism is supposed to work for the purpose of nation-building and should be contained within the nation itself. Once you are out of the country, I feel, it is better I leave my nationalism behind, for the good of all. This, these days are more prominent in the case of international events related to arts, sports, etc. where competitions amongst national representatives are held. Actually, I wanted and already posted another title called Arts and Sports to go in depth. But sportiveness is killed by the professionalism and these days anyone shows some sports spirit all media make it something viral. The same is the case when somebody returns a wallet or something precious. These are good deeds, just because bad deeds are plenty. These are just sane and humane things. Nothing great. If I remember right, olden days wherever people gather for any reason, there used to be a lost and found counter used to run alongside.

                                            But I still do not understand the border issues as far as India is concerned. How people belonging to enemy countries can work together peacefully, on a ship or some other part of the world. That means these wars are not citizen-based, but politically (I mean the shady version)motivated. 

                                   In these times, for any country, will it be humane to be proud? Or to be symbiotic is only for other beings and humans are exempted? Maybe I had already mentioned before somewhere, we are arrogantly after three non-existing values or value-less things, vis, Independence, freedom, and pride. Independence is not possible at a micro or macroscopic level. I got a hunch that Sanatana Dharma means justice will always be there, and if so laws also be there, and definitely no Utopia possible (and crimes also will be there). Apparently Sanathana Dharma in a says that injustice will be there at large until Dharma manages to destroy it or keep it under check. Sorry that I haven't gone into Vedas and Yugas of Hindu Mythology. All just plausibility from my vantage point. Any story can not be complete without an antagonist and the same about our life too) As long as laws are there your freedom is controlled, whether you follow your own laws or others'. Pride is very easy, what is there in this world for a human being to be proud of?

                 By the way, what I said above may be easily misunderstood, and actually, I may be an Indian to the core, than the nationalists I see around or passed away. I can never be proud, if I have a fair idea about India and it in a fanciful way, I feel that India was the epicenter of continental drift. Maybe the big bang occurred on earth, between the polytheists and the monotheists. Apparently, monotheists had won and I am not sure about Africa, but. I can tell you a story about when I purchased,  many years back from Amazon.in, a national flag aluminum sticker, and what I received noted that the orange and green colors were inverted and I can't stick it upside down as in the lower part it was embossed "INDIA". So I had some sticker sheets for automobiles and cut green and orange ones to size and stuck on the previous ones so that the issue is sorted out. Definitely, it cost me Rs 5 extra! Looked into the reviews of this item and so many Indians cried sedition and were even ready to sue Amazon. India pride is something like mushrooms, which pop up during Independence Day and like, and when some Indian origin person achieves something Internationally. And it breaks down, the moment someone, may be of ignorance, a flag is tied upside down. 

                                                                                        At this juncture, I should take the word self-esteem. After hearing SadhGuru I am quite confused about this word, as he says that this is a negative term. But I think this website clarifies it; https://www.differencebetween.com 

                 We basically lack self-esteem I feel and we look out to the world to accept us and definitely an indication of an inferiority complex. There are definitely valid and good reasons for this situation and as an Indian, I can not blame any of us or the world for it explanation has to be done on a higher strata, but from a layman's point of view, I should say due to leadership issue including reformers. Please understand that with the knowledge I have acquired, saying somebody was wrong doesn't mean that he was bad, but an intention and action mismatch. Definitely, those things were supposed to be happened, even though, you may call me superstitious.

29th June 2023.

To continue...

Dear All, Good Day!

                                   This is another contraption, like my experiments with English words. charity is derived from the word love and anything out of love can not be considered as a favour. Also when someone provides food, shelter, clothes and education which all humans deserve and it is their right to have them. First of all, someone in society is deprived of them as we try to follow the science of economics, it is definitely against being symbiotic and a failure of society. In nature, the so-called supreme entity, humans are supposed to be the worst in building a society. which inherently should be most symbiotic. I used to argue with many foundations that they are not doing charity but a responsibility on behalf of lot many unheeding ones, or we ourselves without our awareness created a deficiency of such sort. Anyway, the science 'Humanity' have to look into this issue seriously. I do help a lot of people whom I find deserving or not, and I never consider it as a charity, on the other hand, I feel very happy that I somehow managed to do something for a fellow human being and that sense itself pays for the effort I have done. But at the same time, I may not help someone get the job, as he or she should get it by herself, which should make them elated with joy, than with my help they may feel obliged to me all along. Maybe all along I am Interpreting the word charity, but anyway that is the way people treat that word these days. Maybe reading Ayn Rand's Selfishness, the Greatest Virtue, may help.

To continue..

 Good Day, all!

                          That doesn't mean they were bad. Maybe they were trapped by hard-core instigators. Let me start with Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi, our own father of the nation. I know history can not be trusted,  but I am left with no option and anywhere I go wrong please do correct me. I am mostly following Wikipedia in this regard. From my point of view, he was quite fallible to investigators. We walked the street in front of my home when my father was less than 10 years, definitely led by instigators galore!

                                                             In the late 1920s, Muhammad Ali Jinnah asked for a separate land or place for Muslims where they can pray and feel safe also, but he was ignored by the top guns. But let me ask why they did that when a fellow Indian is feeling insecure in India,  they should forget about English and Kings and all and should have started working for removing that sense of insecurity in the large mass of Indians. Later on, when Gandhi proposed a non-violence form of attack, Jinnah walked out stating that it will cause political anarchy. I still do not know what sort of logical ability he had at that age, to foresee, what India is facing now. As I had mentioned somewhere before that, you will kill yourself to your enemy, which should make him very happy, as his arms are not going to get stained. This will work only between people having empathetic relationships and not with the opposition. This is the only logic I could reach and not really very much valid, but Jinnah said something really substantial is happening around me and going to continue, and reins are being put now, I feel. Any way India never got freedom, got partitioned into two and later into three. 

His proposition to dissolve Indian National Congress after independence too never worked. In my view, all parties in democracy should be dissolved after every election and already members are there to deal with the ruling? (Governing) and authority should be there for the majority to execute the decisions, nothing should be taken to the streets which definitely considers with what Jinnah said! Presently if I say India is the root of all terrorist activities, can anyone object. Separatism, sycophancy, favouritism and many other manures are needed all here. No religion is also present in the forefront. Religions are the most important aspect in the bringing up of a moralistic society I can't see any religion here as secularism had killed them!

                              India was never an unsecular country and that is why in comparison it had to spell it out. Stupid cover-up, but! I am talking about present India after the so-called Independence. Or rather we were more unsecular before independence. 

                            About the story of Gandhi being pushed out of the train in Soth Africa, there are a few mismatches as to how he managed to get a first-class ticket if against law/ practice there. Even when he was pushed out he could look at only the skin colour, not the look at their eyes and see what is making them do such an inhuman act. Anyway organizing seemingly troubled people can end in a mishap like the Marx-Angels combination and many other people have tried. To me, Gandhi was more of a war-monger and I know I am being blasphemous to the core. And no US now to seek asylum for me!

                          The worst thing was that pre-independence all went to Britain for studies, particularly law and they all had exposure to other countries. After August 15th doors were closed and India was no more a part of the world; they said it will help us to become more independent! I found it a stupid argument. By the way, studying in the UK and coming back here and working against them was a treacherous thing to do. I studied in two colleges set up primarily by the Kings of Kerala, and in their site earlier it was written that the idea was to learn English and beat the English in it. It looked like taking a knife from someone and the facilities and then using it to nab him. Only English can teach you English and you may beat another English man but theoretically, you can never beat your language tutor. In sports particularly, cricket we are doing it well and I agree much. 

               Maybe it is my imagination running wild, but the whole Drama of Indian Independence was for the English to leave this extremely hostile land with respect and whatever they did was to bring out the worst of India together fast and some good people may be able to do the necessary corrective action. As I said before, Moses and Abraham Lincoln may have to turn over in their graves. I still prefer to be here even though I have estranged many in my profession, here in India. That I too am a reformist and onboard I work for the owner as I had been trained. Anyway without the owner all other entities collapse. May the owner can be a government but still owner is there. You may notice that no ship can trade following the rules laid down by stupid entities like flag state and port state and the great abominable IMO all the time. And with a Chief Engineer and Master onboard, how can a surveyor, with more or less the same qualifications, board and find out non-conformities. It is imperative that these faults were hidden by them or they should be dismissed from their duties for incompetence. Mostly flag state and port state officials are previous sailors and while sailing they hide things for the owner and the moment role changes they go against the ship and owner vehemently. Anyway, I got diverted and let me pen something more. Many seafarers think that safety is life-saving equipment. But to me, the utmost safety is the ship as a whole except for the lifesaving and firefighting equipment. I am talking about normal cargo ships and not special-purpose vessels. My basic concern is to prevent the occurrence of contingencies and take calculated risks when total safety can not be ensured. This is the reason why I don't care for the seatbelt, airbags and Anti-Blockier systeme as if I am in total control and vigilant while driving the above-said items are mostly for sleep drivers or incompetent and absent-minded sort. Also, note that Murphy's laws are applicable to these and can put you in a more dangerous situation than it actually is. Similarly, I will have to take chances if one of my standby machinery failed and is beyond repair with available resources onboard. Logistics issues may cause the repair to complete quite late and in that case, I will have to take an assessed risk and keep the ship running. As it is I do go to Sea as I don't care to die, but avoid dying as much as possible. During my training, I was told that there is a priority matrix to be followed for taking decisions in critical situations, comprising of Engine, Life, Cargo and Hull. Later on, Environment was also added. The correct sequence is Life, Environment, Cargon, Hull, and Engine. So Engine is the last one and it is not fully a commercial solution, even though it apparently looks like and very much logical sequence. In my life, I had to use it once and avoided a collision at Hodaida in Yemen and I feel very happy about it.   And More on this later and other social reformers. As I put in one of my posts lot of reform needs to be done on me than other but reform the word itself have so many meaning depending on the path you have chosen... 

Another PS. 1. By the way I haven't read or rather read only few pages of Gandhi's My Experiments with the truth and stopped as his understanding of the word truth is entirely different from my definition. 

2. I never tried to See Richard Attenborough's movie as I never had the patience and as it may confuse me more. 

To continue...

Good day, All!

Dear All, Good day! 

 Dear All, good day!

                                   I sincerely doubt whether I will know when I reach or have arrived; this way or that way! And no guiding maps are available in this case! This may be considered a continuation of my last post, even though the title looks a little bit absurd. I think I have put myself in a precarious position by writing this much so far, with so much needing to be written to complete most of the topics. The title I have chosen now makes things even worse. I do not know how to start or end this and how to follow a legible sequence all the way. Anyway, let me have a try. Please keep in mind that the title of this blog remains valid for all I write, as everything is based on the knowledge I have acquired. I haven't read all that is written and available, never heard all that is said, and so on.

                                                       As I can remember, every time I use Google Maps and reach where I was heading, it says ' you have reached your destination". But to me, it was just a place I wanted to reach. My destination in life for quite some time is death, and I am not in a hurry to reach that. Or it really doesn't matter and nothing is pessimistic about this thought. I know it may cause a lot of physical pain and discomfort, which I disdain. Particularly being a sailor, who doesn't know swimming too, death by drowning and/or hypothermia may be the worst. Frankly speaking, I am not afraid of death, but I take utmost care not to get physically hurt, which should evade death. I smoke, just because I am damn sure that it is not going to cause anything malignant to me, and I can tell a bit more about this at some other time. Driving rashly was another thing that could have made me reach my destination earlier, but then I take best to nothing untoward happen. I used to drink earlier, but it used to make me soberer, and if you consider the drunks here, it was just a waste of money for me! Whatever the case, the most daunting question is whether I will know I am dead, or is it be a total obliteration! Anyway, I am still trying to get hold of a story about a land where deaths are never mourned (Even here in other south Indian states, they frolic, literally during a funeral ceremony, but I can not say that is a truthful one). I believe it is from Stories Of Five Decades by Herman Hesse, and the only thing in that place people do is place flowers on the ground after burial. The story is about a death, which occurred when there were no flowers available in the whole state.

        Now, the most crucial part is death; earlier I started the title about death being a myth. Yes, it is a myth. I haven't heard anyone coming back after death and saying what it is. When someone dies we lose him and we consider that he also loses his presence in this world, which is quite true, definitely from our point of view. Now let us consider the case of sleep. When we sleep(don't consider the stages of sleep etc as they are only for the researchers) our conscious self becomes unaware of this world and the sub(!)conscious self remains and keeps the body ready for the conscious self to wake up, either normally, or under any disturbances. Forget about the dreams. In the case of death, the conscious self and the subconscious self vanishes and the body itself will disintegrate, or we may have to cremate it. Present-day science and many people including me like to see death as an eternal sleep. Now the exception is the religions with heaven and hell or the three worlds or twice seven, fourteen worlds as Hinduism says. By the way, all these are assumptions or conclusions reached with the logical ability each had. None can be proved right now as far as I know. The religious ones can not be proven may be because necessary scriptures and people of ability are no more, apparently. Setting up death as my destination is just that, I find this life as a walk(no, not a race) and all so-called goal turns out to be temporary and you still have to keep on going. I just hope that death will put an end to this. No,  I am not sick of life, or rather I enjoy it well, even though the downs were too deep than the ups. Or I just like to maintain the status quo. Without seeking money, power, or fame, I look more like an aimless guy. Am I a truth seeker? I think I should utilize the next paragraph for the terms science and knowledge!

                                                     I do not know, maybe I am wrong in redefining the words in English. I have earlier said that ignorance is not a lack of knowledge but ignoring things, situations, people, etc which eventually leads to a lack of knowledge, and that way and only that way it will become a crime. Also, I feel that independence, freedom, and pride, which are the favorites in this part of the world, are either invalid or bad traits. Nothing in this world can be independent, only the nature of dependence may vary. Freedom is a no, no, thing as some sort of law is applicable to all, even a criminal. Maybe the Sanathana Dharma in Hinduism also specifies this. As far as I know, Dharma is justice, which is rooted in the laws, and the phrase may mean that the laws will remain forever for humans. I don't know. And pride, I still haven't found anything humans had ever done to feel proud of. Even if something makes you proud, it definitely will be short-lived. Now coming to the point, we humans are generally a proud lot. We do a lot of things that no other living doing, forget the non-living. We say we think! And we think nobody/nothing else thinks or thinks as much as we think. Forget the silly conquests by Emperors, but we think to conquer the earth and the whole universe and apparently, we almost reached there! And science is our weapon. And I think it is quite potent now and I just don't know its true potential, but as far as I can see all its capabilities are revealed to the public and now it is more like wartime; good versus evil maybe. Science, the word derived from 'sci' the root word of knowledge, and knowledge is basically derived from the thought process. The Hindu derivative of the word human means the one who thinks/can think. Let me continue with this in the next paragraph as this one seems to be already too long.

                                                        I may note down a few things which I adhere to all along, as below, even though I was not really conscious of them at an early age.

1. The term relativity: Of all the people I have heard of or come across, I think Albert Einstein is the most prominent one. I agree that I am not having a clear picture of his life or his contribution to today's science, but I was attracted by the title of the book, "The World as I see it" and the theory of relativity. I managed to procure a concise version of the book, which I could only flip through and it never went deeply into the mathematical formulae of the theory of relativity. But what I am trying to do, with this blog is to give a picture of what I see. Nothing concrete and only possibilities and it is like showing some light on some aspects, which may be helpful to some.

fear of death, 

let there be zero

helpful materialistic science

the goal justifies the path 

word relativity

To know is humans and animals are equally inferior and humans are worse maybe!

science redefined, everything is science

logical thinkers against religion

                                                         Let me refer to my earlier post named "Archimedes Principle", where I mentioned the lyrics of a song by Alan Parson's Project based on Edgar Alan Poe's poem, which said about some fancies, which are born when bodily and mental health are at their perfection.

To complete this skeleton!

Good day, All!

 Good Day, All!