Daulity. Premise.

Premise. I never tried to think of the importance of this word until i started reading ‘Atlas Shrugged’. And then it just came, hit me actually, with the realization that it was one word that was to be the panacea for all the thinking i did based on, the one word to explain the basis, the root.

The premise that i choose to muse, think, debate or decide.

All the factors affected by or affecting a single point of discussion were important in that. Delete one of the factors and we are already creating a lopsided view of the point. Accepted, putting all the factors in place would not be a feasible idea, but deleting any one major factor, is a methodology we cant accept as a method of debate.

As in duality, this was something that i learnt about couple of months ago, about god and stuff. Our conditioning [i would use this to mean education] teaches us that there exists dualities and conveniently deletes any existence of grey areas. Deletion of grey areas comfortably makes us see in black and white and all the hues are lost.

I still remember distinctly when we had a debate in our class regarding biological cloning, suddenly the professor springs about the issues with ‘educational cloning’. We all went ‘huh?’.

Same is happening all around. I mean look at us. What are we, but more like clones with the thought processes to be more in conformance with some abstraction called society, something which is constituted of someone as close as my mom and dad to some stranger 300 kms away, whom ill never meet all my life.

Isnt this cloning aimed towards a balance? Whats it that suppresses the individual rebellion? Whats it that evokes this struggle/violence? Is the balance we see set of carefully crafted rules to suppress rebellion?

I was going thru DC[Disc. Ch. not the mind-retarding Deccan Chronicle] a week ago and saw someone talking. The current civilization is made to craft food in such a way[esp packaged meat, etc] such that any sign of violence is carefully suppressed to the end consumer.

Similarly, is the balance we see, just a ongoing struggle? A superficial calm of the sea devoid of any traces of the underlying violent currents?

On the eve of WWD, there was a program on TV regarding women and such. And you have feminists talk about the destruction of patriarchy. But if patriarchy is destroyed would it be matriarchy? Suddenly, i was reminded of the reviews on ‘the vagina chronicles’ and alyqee padamsee joking about writing ‘the penis chronicles’. I guess women have been conditioned to play below men, but what i want to know is, if its not patriarchy, would it be matriarchy?

Yes, women have been mistreated and have been wronged for many decades. They need to be given that respect that they have to. I guess the answer is in women to assert their positions. But I wonder, i dont know, will women stop using their sexuality and men their physicality?

Im confused now.

Advertisements

8 thoughts on “Daulity. Premise.

  1. Regd. Premise,

    Did u know of the story of Kumarilabhatta and Shankaracharya, when Shankaracharya will be forced to take up the role of a Grihastha and live the life of a married man in order to argue with her.

    Great story…goes to show you have to “BE” in a position to understand how it feels to be and properly appreciate a view.

    yo
    cb

  2. No, if it is not patriarchy – it is not matriarchy either… that’s not what feminism is about..

    To But I wonder, i dont know, women will stop using their sexuality and men their physicality? I bow to you… for that is the King (Queen??? 🙂 ) of all questions that you can ask a feminist… Which is why a Shobha De or an Arundhati Roy ever appeals to me as much as people like CS Lakshmi and Medha Patkar…

  3. woodworm, thanks for the comments. you make me probe this thing deeper and deeper.

    btw Which is why a Shobha De or an Arundhati Roy ever appeals to me as much as people like CS Lakshmi and Medha Patkar…I guess you wanted that to be never and not ever…!?

  4. Ok.

    I mean you know, it makes talking with the reasonable feminists who have a cause and can see the problem in all the facts that are the cause.

    It makes communicating with the militant feminists who just shout that makes any attempts at a reasonable communication impossible.

    Ciao 🙂

  5. Well, more or less yes.

    I think the really great feminists who are actually doing some good work are not as well known as the crappy kinds who are blown up beyond their worth in the media…

    As I said somewhere else, we only get to know Mallika Sherawats and she is the last thing that feminism needs as an icon…

  6. Good thoughts RL,

    So who can be the icons for feminism here? I mean how many would like to model/look themselves as Medha Patkar or CS Laxmis and not as Des and Mallikas?

    I mean going by the looks and the page space they get, its quite natural where/whom they choose!

    What say?

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s