There is a question which has disturbed me for enough time. Every time I thought that this is the correct time to pen down my thoughts, I got confused and left writing in between. But now I think that I should give it a shot without thinking much.
Actually it is like a battle with myself, with my thought process and acceptability of this new thought.
But for this new thought, I can't tell you all some fine story on the origination of this thought. It just percolated so down in my processor system and stayed there for so long that even I don't remember that exactly how it all started.
*** *** ***
In this society everything is either RIGHT or WRONG.
You file a suit in the court for anything and some
person (known as Judge) will tell you whether you deserve to spend your entire
life behind the bars or not. But who actually standardizes this process of
saying things as wrong or right? Is it just what he/she feels or what our
so-called “society” feels is right? Is it really so that a person is hanged to
death just because some fine man says that he deserves so? Is it true that value of one's life is reduced to such labels of Right and Wrong?
I am sorry to all my readers if these questions sound absurd but the point I am trying to make here is that in day to day working I see so many things happening just the way they were happening before and many radical thinkers (at least this is what they think they are) also feel that these things are not debatable just because they will upset the working of the society.
What has happened to our society goes back in past.
During ancient days, human being struggled in every aspect of life as nothing was well synchronised and standardized. He (along with she) learnt that the best way to live is to live together in a group. This will not only ensure protection to all but also can serve the purpose of division of labour. Hence, they divided work between them. Someone started growing wheat while someone started growing rice. At that time, agriculture was the only point of concern for all as it was an unavoidable need. But he saw that there is some distress in the working of the society. Few bad elements or outliers are not allowing things to move smoothly. Hence, he started making rules on the basis of his "limited" understanding and as per "desired" situation.
With time, we only diversified our working portfolio (by adding manufacturing, service etc) but forgot to change those rules which were set up by our ancestors. For convenience, they were kept very much same without thinking that it was thought process of a single person or probably a group of individuals which may think very much same (due to various obvious reasons).
Hence, we developed in the areas of lifestyle, working and habits but just attained rigidity in the field of basic laws for the working of the society. In other words, we acquired what was taught without any questioning.
*** *** ***
“Why so serious?”
For those who actually don't have any idea, he is
Joker or Heath Ledger.
He is not just a character of some movie or I should say of some legendary movie. But he is the owner of
"The Chaos".
He actually represents an idea, a revolution and a change from usual working style.
It is well described in the movie that nature is into chaos while humans are into orderliness. Due to this difference in ideology, there is a difference in the law. Laws of nature are very different from laws of human civilization. In nature, survival of the fittest holds true but in human world survival and fitness share very little overlapping area.
This man showed the difference. He showed that natural laws are to be followed and these over and aboves should be torn into pieces. And if we follow natural laws or chaos, we know it is indifferent. Again quoting Joker for this, he says that "Chaos is fair."
And fairness is my key target here.
Quoting and labelling things as right or wrong is not giving them an equal chance to prove themselves. It is unfair.
*** *** ***
I somehow feel that all this is just a game of one’s
perception.
I see something half empty or half filled. Just like
this, I see something good or bad, okay or not okay, right or wrong.
One’s perception changes the rules of the game.
Everything revolves around this and everything is decided as per my vision.
If I think something is right, I will think so and will justify that whereas if I think that same thing is wrong then I will try to put my point forward.
When something is so subjective then why do you want to categorize?
Time to think some more...
