Skip to main content

Why political science matters?

The meaning of political science is often restricted to the state, government, and everyday politics. However, it goes beyond that. We as humans share various relationships. What do we do when conflicts arise in these relationships? How do we resolve them? The Socratic dialectical method or Habermas’ idea of deliberation provides a solution. It says conflicts are better resolved through dialogue rather than domination. Hence, it tells us how to talk in a dialectical manner. It is the process of reasoning together. For instance, when your father asks you to aim for a government job, but you want to become a content creator, you do not totally oppose each other. Instead, you engage rationally: Why is a government job important? Maybe because it provides security and financial stability. But being a content creator might give you creative freedom. So you decide to take a government job but also start your creator journey simultaneously — maybe by vlogging your day as a government employee...
Post a Comment

An essay on ego and arrogance


We often lose track of ourselves in the hustle and bustle of our daily lives, becoming so engrossed in our thoughts that we fail to stop and observe ourselves. Ego and arrogance are the results of our restricted perspective flowing from ignorance. When we block our mind knowingly or unknowingly and limit our understanding to ourselves only we are in the clutches of ego and arrogance. While philosophical interpretations of the two concepts are varied, in general terms ego can be defined as an attitude(towards ourselves) or feeling related to self-importance and limited to the self only in a way that individuals try to portray themselves as superior. Arrogance is related to others and is visible when expressed with reference to them either through words or actions. Ego is a human trait visible in itself. For example, a person full of ego would never accept their mistake even if they are wrong but the arrogant person would not only not accept the mistake but might also say that even if I am wrong I do not care or start talking rudely and on and on. We can say that arrogance is the manifestation of ego. Both ego and arrogance are the results of taking excessive pride in oneself or the things one has achieved or anything that the individual possesses. Excessive pride in anything for example in one's religion, race, caste, gender, knowledge, body, property, or even people is a reflection of ego. It can be either gained by merit or privilege one has got because of their identity as an individual.

The formation of ego will help us understand the reflection of arrogance. The formation of ego starts with the word 'I'. This ‘I’ can be achieved or earned. People who take excessive pride in themselves because of their identity (in which they did not have any role to play) are the ones living in the name of others and their act of taking excessive pride in it can be denounced on the very fact that they did not have any role to play in it. Since they did not do anything to get it then they don't have any right to take pride in it. It becomes difficult to counter those who have earned something on their own through their hard work and sacrifices. The question here is whether they achieved all that on their own. Can they honestly say that their efforts have been the sole cause of all that they have accomplished? Did the state, society, family, friends, any random individual, or any external situation not have any role to play in it? For example, if I become a very good writer, is it only because of the hard work and intellect of my own? I am here because I was taught by good teachers and have always been in a setup where I was supported and helped by others. Even a small help has contributed to what I am today. My parents paid for my fees, my friends helped me when I needed mental and emotional support, and I could write because that day I had water to drink or a pen to write. So everyone has their functional value and contributed in their own way. Because of all this, I am where I am. Hence, it is not only because of the hard work that I am here but also because these efforts, small or big, have been made by different people for my growth. To illustrate it differently a chess player was going for a match in her car. On the way, the tyre of her car got punctured. She took the lift and reached the venue on time and ended up winning the match. Now is it only the player who is responsible for her achievement? Or the person who gave her a lift has also contributed to her success? The obvious answer would be that she won the match because she was able to get there on time and that became possible because she was given a lift by someone. Therefore, when we focus too much on the self and take excessive pride in ourselves what we do is we disregard other people's contributions. This is true with ideas or knowledge also. How do our ideas take birth? Ideas are born either out of the existing ideas which provide them with the foundational base or from experiences. When they come from experiences then thousands of other factors contribute to the germination of those ideas. No idea is born in a vacuum. Hence no individual can honestly say that they have propounded this idea or that thought took birth in their mind only. Meaning to say that pride in knowing something or propounding some new thought or idea is also a mistake an individual makes. 

Thus there is almost nothing which we can do on our own and take the name of ‘I’ with so much pride. We can not know everything as postmodernism and syadvada in Jainism tells us that there are end number of perspectives to look at things. So we must be humble to others because without the support of others be it the individual or the circumstances we can not achieve anything and also the fact that we can not know everything. What then is there to take pride in? The ‘I’ must be smashed to pay gratitude to the others. Ego and arrogance also bring friction and continuous conflicts in our life. Gratitude makes our life beautiful, frictionless, and devoid of conflicts. 


Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Escape

The word escape doesn’t seem to have a very negative origin. It originally meant to set oneself free. It should not be seen as an act of cowardice. The qualitative aspect of escape should inform our judgment. In moments of mental crisis, someone’s escape might be spirituality; for someone else, it could be alcohol. These patterns of escape slowly become habits. With repeated events, our body naturally starts craving the same escape in moments of discomfort. For instance, if someone has chosen isolation as an escape, then whenever a crisis occurs, the body automatically starts demanding isolation. This is why such patterns are difficult to break–because escape sets one free. It provides an alternative way out. The body doesn’t perceive escape as an end in itself; it sees it merely as a means to get away from the current situation. I believe this is the reason behind large-scale alcohol addiction in Indian villages. Based on my limited understanding of Indian villages–especially those in...
Post a Comment
Read more

Exclusion

  The very foundation of some of the major problems that persist in our society is built on the bedrock of exclusion - be it biases, stereotypes, discrimination, or any other practice that degrades others. This makes it important for us to question: why do people exclude in the first place? The idea of exclusion often germinates from the desire to stand out or appear unique. We crave being seen as distinct, not just like any other person. For instance, when we go shopping for clothes, we consciously avoid those that are widely sold. We often say, “everyone wears that.” Maybe we’re comfortable with the broader pattern but not the exact color or design - because we want to stand apart. Hence, we exclude certain colors or styles to create our own distinct identity. While this kind of exclusion in fashion may seem harmless, it reveals a deeper psychological pattern that, when applied to social groups, becomes dangerous. Over time, we begin to associate certain styles with people we don...
Post a Comment
Read more

Might is right

  Might Is Right “Justice is the interest of the stronger” replies Thrasymachus, answering the question asked by Plato, what is justice? The same goes with might is right. The meaning of this proverb is that the powerful are always right. Although might is right its reverse isn’t correct which is right is might. So might is always right but right is always not might. Which means the weak can also be right. Might is right not because it is right but because of their power and position, no one can object to that. So whatever the mighty says is considered right. We will try to discuss it further by starting from the individual level and ending at the international level.  At the individual level, some people are stronger and mighty. For example, there are two people one who is very powerful both connection-wise and physically. If you indulge in a fight with him/her, not even a fight if s/he is doing something wrong you can’t do anything. And our not objection to that particular a...
Post a Comment
Read more