This is my belief that damage done can't be reversed or undone. Crying over spilled milk is useless.
Imagine an event E with two actors, A and B. A did some damage to B. Sometime later in the timeline, B decides to payback and does some damage to A to feel better. Now, damage done by A to B can never be same as damage done by B to A because of different circumstances. "An eye for an eye makes the whole world blind."
Forgiveness doesn't help either. People take advantage of such attitude. Striking back is definitely better strategy but then, its as good as useless once the damage is done...! We try to find a solution, a way around it, but it stays, it always stays even if the wounds are healed, the pain is gone...
Some bad damage had been done to Maoists, i.e., tribals living in naxalbari and other regions by the government officials. Now, who cares for tribals? Do you? But then sudden switch from being indifferent to hating those people... is that really justified? We read some news one day and conclude the people or organization doing the damage are the bad ones.
The case of Maoists is not the same as terrorists (based on religion). Terrorists are blind, Maoists are victim of circumstances and they're fighting back now, making other innocent people victim of circumstances like them. This makes punishing Maoists inevitable but doesn't justify hating them. They're following a very fundamental law of nature: response to stimuli.
Any animal scares me at first because I can't talk to it or make sign languages to establish some kind of communication. The hosts, in case of a dog, always told me, "he doesn't bite, just stroke him, or let him sniff around and he'll leave." Well, why would the dog do anything to me unless I, or some other human have done some damage to the dog? I've heard similar stories about snakes, and perhaps this applies to every living species.
The series of killings from either side must be stopped asap. If not, more people would be subjected to, what I'd call, series of unfortunate events.
Friday, May 21, 2010
Monday, May 17, 2010
'Dictation' part of the English language period was the scariest part to me. Teacher spoke out the words, and we had to write them down and then submit it to her for correction. I always wished that 'dictation' never happen, but now that I recall I do remember that I also wished I get all the spellings correct. Perhaps that's what keeps me from making spelling mistakes and catching one if it exists. Perhaps that's what pisses me off when I see one.
On my second visit to Salarjung museum, I had a startling revelation. I found spelling mistakes in many labels, especially in the halls displaying cutleries, and weapons. A few errors may creep in, but they were more than few.
Funny thing about spelling mistakes: Not all arrangements of wrong spellings would bother you, only few, as per my personal experience. Especially the ones which look silly. Writing a diary as dairy changes the whole meaning, or field written as feild. Such spelling mistakes can be missed so its not a bother... but writing habit as habbit can be identified and irritating to a person who reads rather slowly and can pick up such mistakes or to someone who reads fast and has a keen eye.
Typos, which is a byproduct of writing through keyboards, aren't a serious issue while casual chatting or exchanging information, but in final draft for a paper or article to be submitted for publication can really bring down the image of the piece of writing. I have seen spelling mistakes in some well written research papers.
P.S. - Wouldn't it bother you if your name's misspelt in some certificate that's given to you?