World as I Think

People who know me for sometime would acknowledge that i could pick an argument about anything and everything; I would definitely vouch for it. Not that i am a fighter cock, i like discussing about things and my way is of the questioning type. I happily rely on logic for my arguments.

I recently picked up an argument with my fellow colleague. He was leaving our company and seeking another career. Out of genuine interest, I asked him as to what he wanted to become in life and as to why he chose this new career and the particular domain. He told me that he was interested in management and didn't want to do a content type of role. I asked him as to how he knew that he was good in management. He said that he wanted to be in the decision-making arena rather than truck on the operational issues.

It was getting interesting, I wanted to provoke him with what i learned in MBA and with good intent, I told management needs a lot of interpersonal skills and asked him whether he was comfortable with it. He replied that he was comfortable with people. I wanted to dig deeper, I asked him as to what he was good at, for example being analytical, creative, leadership or intutive. He out rightly replied without any reflection "I would excel in whatever i do and it should not be problem".

I said that its fine that you can do everything but there must that something which comes to you naturally. He was still stubborn on defensiveness and replied that there is nothing that i am so good or bad but i can do what i am given. He started coming personally at me and asked why don't you tell me what my dreams were in life and what comes to me naturally. I apprised him about my dreams and what comes to me naturally. He gave a very brunt reply "I really can't accept what you are saying". Oops, I didn't know what to say when somebody was trying to negate my views without giving any reason to it. I am not feeling bad about somebody opposing my views; i was rather disappointed that they had not cited reasons for it.

I knew if the argument continued, it would unnecessarily end up in a personal tussle rather than contesting on the content, which we were discussing. I stopped and observed his body language and found that he had his hands pocketed.

As he was a good friend of me, after sometime i told him that it is not necessary that two people need to have the same point of view. I just asked him why don't you reflect on what i say instead of out rightly rejecting. I also told him that even his body language suggested that he was very defensive and that’s why i didn't want to continue. He dared to give a damn about it and quipped I don't believe in body language and it is not true. Boy, oh Boy, how do we deal with people who don't want to accept a point of view without even quoting a reason for it. As i know him, he was very logical in his work and somehow got illogical in this one-off situation.

It happens everywhere, the stock markets crash not because the companies performed badly, its merely because that greed propelled by irrationality overwhelms logic. We follow humpty number of procedures and superstitions with full confidence on our ancestors. Most of them could be really being built on the context and could have perfectly fit that situation. We need not totally discard them, we need to just understand what we are trying to do and that comes through reasoning.

Logic has its own limitations as well, that’s what Immanuel Kant tries to say in his book "critique of pure reason”. Everything cannot be logically explained, as they may not be comphrendable by the limited dimension of our thinking. That doesn't give the liberty to waive off logic; it can be applied to the extent where it can be and most of the times reasoning ends at the apriori which need to be taken in good faith.

Now to the all-important question how do you combat non-rationality with rationality? Simple, its either we need to impart rationality, the basic premise is that we can discuss something only when everybody understands the subject of contention in the same way and have substantiation for it. If we can't, it’s better not to argue because we cannot understand what the other has to say. Now what if we have to co-exit, its better to accept as they are and wait till each of them reach a capability to understand each other

This thought unraveled here is not an outcome of weird explorations; it’s a sincere step to confront the maze of logic and ethics, which has provoked more anguish than its intended purpose. It is out of genuine madness to give us a better world. The past drove us to this convincible answer to all our problems.

It had to survive the darkness of tumultuous eras, to see the light today, not to create enlightment but to unchain humanity from vision, to lead us back to darkness which is our true nature. We have been waiting for too long, to unleash ourselves, we had to conceal ourselves in dumb minds, only to reveal the darkest of secrets now. We are going to shatter the brilliant architects who have been maneouring this world for too long.

History would assume a definite skewness today. We have had subtle patrons in the past who took this baton all along. Should I reveal them, it's time we acknowledge them; Valmiki, Socrates, Van Gough, Michael Faraday, Thomas Alva Edison, Michelson, Mahatma Gandhi and many others us still living with us. We are the "Lampiratti" leading this world back to darkness, to the place where we belonged.

We have had enumerous imitations like the Priory of Sion, Night Templars, Free Masons, Ku Klux Klan and humpty number of them who wanted to forge sadness into the human minds.

Did your history book say, Socrates was killed of poisoning, that’s how it was morphed, to bundle us out. He never propounded logic, why would somebody do it, knowing it to be the most treacherous futile process. They killed his twin brother Pocrates, after having found that Socrates rode a horse all the way to India,that was the reason Alexander followed suit after a couple of years, in search of the inevitable truth.

Socrates seeked asylum in his last days at Porbandar in Western India, contemplating the legacy. A conviction was born, thats when he gave birth to the defining artifact, which contained the definite truth leading us to divine darkness. He wanted something to be fixed everywhere not guide us, but to lead us to the inevitable truth.

You can see it everywhere, breaking the barriers of ideologies, aptly disguising it, only to achieve its ends everyday. Are you still wondering what it is? my goodness, if you can't find it, we have succeeded, its the electric bulb whose foundation was laid in a lamp. We wanted a symbol which would permeate every walk of the human life. We proliferated the lamp post, the symbol of the truth everywhere; we put it in every nook and corner of this world, to remind the society of the truth that was abandoned in darkness.

Have you ever wondered what causes problem in this society, which is frantic search of something or other, there is always some fad to tag with, be it money, fame, power or ideology.

What causes all the problems in life?.We are continously churning the remanants of our vision in the name of thought.It's a holy war not against any sect, it's against the imperialism of thought.What is the way out, we can't remain in this vicous circle of thought forever.We wanted to stop it but still be alive in eternal happiness.

We have been in the society, perpetrating our plans, you can see its final outcome out there in another 14 years.

We wanted to get rid of monetary system, there would no physical fiat money any more in the future, we would have only plastic cards. When the dark truth reveals itself, the entire banking system would collapse, there is no distinction between the have and have nots.

When every belief is waiting for the their avatar to be back, we would air a morph of them high in the sky, only to reveal there is only one god. We’ll stop all the war in the name of God.

There is one thing without which the humans can't survive; we are going to be an agrarian society again. We are going to be naive farmers again.There would be only one universal staple food, what else? opium which stops us from thinking, the root cause of all the problems in the society. We would initiate a mass scale cultivation of narcotic drugs in all corners of the world.

We would one day run this world only with electricity and exhaust all the known sources of energy in this planet. There is will one fine day nick-named the Armageddon when everything would come to a standstill devoid of power without anything to burn anymore.Know what, we would be left with complete darkness. ,nothing to see and nothing to think. We need not think of the electricity bills anymore!!

The slaves in the name of science would say, there is always the sun to help them out. Sorry people, we have plans for it, we can't see the sun in a couple of years, we have meticulously played games with the biosphere, the atmosphere in its current state would be lost, only to hide the planet completely from the sun, source of all energy in this planet. Don’t worry there would be no wind, no flowing water, no nuclear waste (we would have exhausted all the resources by then), we have plans for every alternate energy which bondages man to thought.

We do all this to unchain the humanity from the clutches of light and leads us to darkness and that is where we belong. The next time you see a lamp post remind yourself, the dark days would be back to save us all from vicious circle of thought.

Lampirattians

Hari..Sara...............

Are you ready to see the dark days?