A recent talk with a friend left me pondering about something that I always thought was obvious- who decides how I use my intellect (assuming that I have some!!!)? If I have the capability to think and imagine, what use should it be put to?
The discussion led to two strikingly different views- one that said that the decision is completely personal and the other that said that seemingly personal decision is also bound by some social ties.
Let’s assume that I am a thinker and like researching on some topic that happens to be of minimal importance to the society. I have the ability to sit and ponder over such an abstract and complex issue. This means that I definitely have the ability to think about the more worldly issues.
Knowing that the society I live in is still in need of the solutions to its day-to-day problems, that a number of people around me are more in need of the basic primary education, that there are numerous problems about poverty, education and health in our society, I should rather use my energies in trying to figure out a solution to some of these problems, rather than getting into the mysteries of nature, which to a great probability I would never solve. I am bound by a duty to work for those people around me who were not fortunate enough to reach the level where I am and are right now struggling hard to get their next meal. Is it justified that rather than thinking about them, I worry about the black holes up there in the sky??? Had Gandhi continued working as a barrister, we would have not been independent; he would have not been a Mahatma.
And then there is another view.
If designing a telescope for looking at that far off star interests me more than designing an education system for my society, why shouldn’t I do it? It is true that the education system would do more good to the society than the telescope, but does it mean that I am bound to do that. Shakespeare wrote great plays, proving that he had a high emotional quotient. Would he have rather been a social worker than a writer? NO. If forced to do so, he probably would have not been any good; he would have probably reached a mental block and would have been just another man doing something he didn’t want to and not doing what he desperately wanted to. His decision of pursuing what he liked the most and not what the society wanted the most made him a legend and resulted in the beautiful creations that we even after so many years cannot help praising. So why not let everyone do what he or she wants to and allow the collective effect of all these acts move the society.
Two arguments- equally strong- but one has to be wrong. Which one???
4 comments:
it is like a parent saying my child should care for me in my old age because i nurtured him/her. should the child be forced to comply? i dont think so.
i do feel dutiful to the society, but each to one's own.
As Aristotle said
"Only real obligation man has is to convert his potentiality to actuality."
In the example of Shakespeare, you answer for yourself.
Let me give example of Maria Montessori(Do check her wikipedia profile). She chose medical profession in an era where women were not supposed to. She took Psychiatry. She studied into techniques as to how mentally retarted children can be made educated(considered uneducable in Rome). Then she applied these techniques to normal kindergarden children.
Her lifetime of work in pedagogy is reflected in widely popular and effective, Montessori system of education. Irony being, initially she never wanted to be teacher.
Had she accepted societal norms and become a teacher, could she devise these techniques. Chances are remote.
So follow your heart, and society will eventually follow...
- Rohin
tis true that both the arguments are equally strong but i quite don't quite agree one has to win. however, one should,in all respect make a choice.
Like when the Greek kings died they didn't write an epitaph, all they asked was "did he have passion?" - passion that made them a good king,compassion that made him a great king.. so decide what you want !! all the best :)
--- "the friend"
Hey Smriti, nice blog.. :)
Both the arguments are thought provoking and to think of it… both are right (I am wearing a white hat today ;)). I strongly believe in Einstein’s theory of relativity :), right or wrong is a relative term... What seems to be right for one could be wrong for others.. Society has its own faces.. You may prosecute a person for killing somebody who did harm to him but on the other hand you will honor a person for killing somebody he doesn’t even know; for the country during war... Same crime; different context different implications.. How many of us can actually think of anything beyond social norms? There are a few and we know who they are... as they say there is no element of genius without some form of madness... I believe we should follow our heart rather than what others think of it and follow it to the hilt... Honestly speaking, we may fool ourselves by saying we are doing some thing good for the society but I think we do it for our own SELFISH self... We get happiness out of seeing others happy :) and WTH how many of us even realize in our day today lives that who did what; for whom so ever... We live once and we should live it to the fullest... if you have a dream …follow it!!!!
Post a Comment