We hear everyday of accidents occurring, but usually the cause is limited to rash driving or the driver loosing control of his vehicle. However when I went to get my drivers license from the Regional Transport Office, I learnt that it is less of the driver and more of the officials looking after those who are authorized to give license to new drivers who are responsible for these accidents.

Very few people undergo formal training of driving before officially becoming a lerned driver. During the theoretical testing process, there were people who were cheating and getting the correct answers. The test was only of road signs but without knowing the signs a person cannot be expected to drive properly. There were officials who were conducting the test but they did not do any thing about the cheating that was going on. This enraged me but I still could not do anything as no one would listen to me.

Everyday there are new breakthroughs in road safety but no one realizes that maximum road safety can be achieved by training new drivers first and then concentrating on unforeseen situation in which there are chances of accidents.

Car simulators can be used to give experience and improve ones driving skill. There are games for doctors who can perform a surgery in a virtual environment to have some understanding in real time situations. The newly developed chaos theory has applications in these games to prepare the doctors for every situation as with every virtual stitch or cut made to the virtual patient the equation of the game changes. These simulators can be of excellent use to test new learners.

Driving cars is like an art, even though there may set theories or rules, things can change at any instant. Due to this reason the officials need to know who is capable enough to not only keep himself safe but also keep others around him safe. Improvements need to be made in the system of the Regional Transport Office in the selection process of individuals.

In conclusion I would like to say a counter argument can be that even though I may think that the process is faulty, I got my license through a private coach and I do not know the governmental procedures but till where I have seen, I feel the process is still inadequate.

Movie Appreciation- Saw 1

How far can a man go to save his or his families life? The movie saw explores this argument. A man terminally from cancer devices a plan and kidnaps two people (known as the Jigsaw Killer). He chains their legs up to a pipe and keeps them in a room with a dead body. One of them is a surgeon and the other is a person who takes pictures of rich men to show their true self. Both of them do not know how or why have they got there.

The surgeon had presence of mind. He did not let his emotions take over his sense of judgment. On the other hand the photographer was in a state of panic and his rationality was impaired. The surgeon knew the only way both of them could get out was if the talked and worked together. Later they found a saw with which was not sharp enough to cut through their chains, the capturer wanted them to cut though their feet. The photographer had thought for a moment that this was all a part of realty television. In another scene another person, Zep, is taking the surgeon’s wife and daughter as hostage. The Jigsaw Killer had told the surgeon that if he killed the photographer before six o clock he could save his family. The surgeon had to choose between murdering a man he does not know and being the cause of murder of his family. The surgeon had an intuition that the Jigsaw Killer was one of his cancer patients.

The viewer feels that Zep was actually working for the Jigsaw Killer, however by the end of the film, the viewer gets to know that the killer had injected a slow acting poison in him and he had to murder a wife and a child (the surgeons family) in order to get an antidote from the killer. Zep faced an ethical dilemma but chose to save himself.

Later in the movie, the surgeon had found a mobile with which he was receiving calls from his captured family. However when the time was up he could hear gun shots being fired. He thought his family was being shot at but an ex- detective was shooting Zep. Getting frustrated at this he sawed off his foot and shot the photographer with a gun to save his family.

The Jigsaw killer wanted to explore human nature. He would capture people and play such gruesome games of life and death. He wanted to show people the gift of life. The captives usually had to choose between saving themselves and saving other people. The killer wanted to see how far a person would go to save himself- would he gouge his eyes out or cut a living mans stomach to get a key. There is always a clash of reason versus emotion and for most emotion overpowers reason. The captives would not communicate and sort out a plan so that their chances of survival would increase. Each one of them would think that only one of them could survive but that was not the case. They had to help each other to survive.

The traps set by the Jigsaw Killer were like art. Each trap was unique though horrifying, in its own way. In order for a person to escape a trap, he had to follow the rules, there was no other way of escaping, the killer had thought of every possible reaction of the captives. Even though the Jigsaw Killer was portrayed as a sadist, those that survived his traps gained a new respect for life and some did become his apprentice. The killer was teaching the captives not through words but by forcing them to survive the traps. A drug addict quit consuming drugs after surviving the trap but also became one of the apprentices of the killer.

In conclusion I would say that seeing this movie through the perspective of theory of knowledge has made me see more than I would have other wise seen. Seeing the reason behind the sadism of the Jigsaw Killer and the emotions faced by his captives and noticing things that I would not have noticed without knowing that words are not the only thing that comprises of language was a great experience. The movie explores the will, selfishness and desperation for people to survive. There was a captive who had a suicidal tendency but when he was given a choice to go through a webs of barb wire or to die in the room he was in before the exit shuts, he chose to live and go through the barb wire.

Knowledge at Work.

India gained its independence on August 15^th 1947. However at the same time the Dominion of Pakistan was formed too. There are several causes for the formation of Pakistan but the man mainly responsible for it is Jinnah (from article). Was there a need for the formation of Pakistan, I do not think so. Today people from all different religions reside in India without any conflict. Why then should Jinnah want to create a new country by splitting not only the country on bases of geography but also splitting the people on bases of who are Hindus and Muslims? This rift developed in the 1940’s has caused countless terrorist attacks in both countries by fanatics.

The article is biased towards Hindus but also gives evidences to prove its bias. The author at the beginning of the article has said that following the speech on July 19, 1946 there was a great massacre of Hindus in Calcutta. This clearly influences the reader’s perception by attacking his or her emotions.

There is no reason given in the article of why Jinnah wanted the partition but it is clearly shown that he was an extremist and wanted it at any cost. He was responsible for the ‘great Calcutta killings’ in 1946. He aroused his fellow Muslims but did not even know how to speak Urdu. Jinnah was not a true Muslim. He was more of a Catholic than a Muslim. “He changed his birthday from 20 October to Christmas Day. As a student at Lincoln's Inn, he anglicized his name from Jinnahbhai to Jinnah.” Jinnah is portrayed as a selfish leader who can resort to any sort of violence to get his way.

The article gives the only the point of view of the different Hindu leaders and subtly criticizes Jinnah’s actions while praising the RSS. Syama Prasad Mookerjee was the leader of the Hindu Mahasabha. He plays around with words and uses it effectively to target the people’s emotion to trigger anti- Muslim sentiments- “Jinnah is out to destroy the very soul of India.” This statement encourages people to become patriotic as well as pro-Hindu. He reasons out that a partition is not the answer for India, and not just propagate it-

“Hindus regard this country as their sacred and holy land. Irrespective of provincial barriers or the diversity in faiths and languages there exists a remarkable economic and cultural unity and inter-dependence which cannot be destroyed at the will of persons and parties who think it beneath their dignity to regard India as their motherland. We must live and die for India and her liberty.”

This article is a subtle propaganda for the RSS. The author is artfully telling the reader that he is associated with the RSS and feels that the change in the views of the Bharatiya Janata Party is wrong. He feels that the RSS is right in its views about being an extremist pro-Hindu party.

The author has spoken about Hindu leaders who I have not heard of and glorified them, he has on the other hand he has given Gandhi, a person every Indian has heard of less prominence. Gandhi was a pacifist and the extremists did not agree upon his methods.

I feel the partition was just an excuse for Jinnah to gain some importance and make sure he is remembered for a long time. I feel that there was no logical need for a partition to occur. Why should there be any kind of war between people living in the same country when a third party (the British) can be root cause of it and also take advantage.

Religion Abhinav Todi

Today religion is something, which everybody follows; it does not have to be related to God. It can range from music to football. However during the time when people were not very open about new ideas, religion was only related with God. To me religion is just a way of saying “I believe in God”. But I ask if there really is a “God” why do so many people pray to different “Gods and Goddesses” Take Hinduism for example, there are so many Gods that the followers pray to that I do not even know some of their names. I feel some people use blind followers to make money. The Hindu ‘pundit’ may be uttering something that even he does not know what it means while performing a ‘pooja’ and the layman himself does not know whether the ‘pundit’ is really a ‘pundit’.

When a person follows a particular religion, he believes in something. He tries to find something, which may or may not have an answer to. I believe praying to pictures and photos, which has been conjured, up by an artist is irrational. Nonetheless I do believe in an entity. I do not believe that following a particular religion is the way to give respect to that entity. Why would a ‘God’ give something to a person who prays everyday wealth and another who also prays everyday nothing at all?

When a person sees a ‘miracle’ occur, he believes it to be of supernatural origin without examining the situation. During this time of awe a cunning person can begin preaching that it is the work of ‘God’. In certain villages, people dig the earth and place a statue of a ‘God’ and cover it up. But before placing the statue in the ground, place seeds underneath the statue. Then when the seeds get soaked with water from the rain, they expand and push the statue out of the ground and claim it is the work of ‘God’ and trick people into donating money in the name of religion. Fear also makes a person believe in religion. By giving hopes that people who follow a particular religion will create a path for them to go to heaven. Just before the European renaissance occurred, no one questioned the church when it preached something, when the church condemned someone everybody around did the same. The church imposed its will upon the people. People lived in fear of the church. I can relate religion to an analogy of putting some monkeys in a deep pit such that they cannot get out of it. Every week a new monkey is put into the pit. When several generations pass the later generation will not even question why they cannot get out of the pit. Getting out the pit will become ‘forbidden’.

Religion might give a person psychological satisfaction. It might give him or her hope or a wall to lean on when a rainy day occurs. Followers believe that by praying and sacrificing they will get what they want. However one cannot get anything without trying himself.

Changing ones stance on a particular religion is very tough. I would need a lot of evidence that I have to follow Hinduism in order for me to go to heaven. It is not easy for a person who has a faith in someone or something to change it.

People use a lot of biases when it comes to religion. Interpretation of certain texts is a major fallacy when the question of what ‘God’ wants particular followers to do occurs. There can be many meanings to a simple statement like ‘as he ran the earth shook’- for the person running the earth will look as if it is shaking or during the time he was running, an earthquake occurred. People use this misinterpretation and blame their actions on the religion. The fanatic Islam followers have bombed an terrorized Hindus and other religion in the name of God. Why would God want such acts of crime to occur?

As the years pass more number of people question the ultimate truth of the existence of ‘God’. Science has taken over the minds of people and a sense of rational thinking has set in. Having faith in something is not a goo thing, not having faith in anything is worse as the person has nothing to support him. However blindly doing something is a irrational approach to life. Without faith life has no meaning.

Order in chaos? How can this be? I was reading a book chaos from which I was enlightened with the knowledge of seeing order in chaos. Something as random as the fluctuation of the economy of a country could be looked as a chaotic field and hence through a certain mistake found by Edward Lorenz that dynamic systems are dependent on the initial conditions of the system. This was an eye opener to me as its application was finding out the future conditions of the economy was made possible.

I had not known anything about theory of relativity. I knew it had something to do with relative motion of objects but after coming to school I learnt that it has to do with particle moving with speeds near to the speed of light. I learnt that when objects move fast time slows down for them to an observer in rest. This was a revelation to me. The formulas and theories used made a lot of sense once I read and understood the chapter. I was excited to know that I could understand such a phenomenon without external aid.

Another thing that was an eye opener to me was that I learned that physics that I learned earlier was shattered by the development of quantum physics. Particle without mass had momentum. Not only that but the very nature of particle and waves interchanged which could not be defined by classical physics.

The media source claims the Iran is engaged in the creation of nuclear weapons and the USA wants answers. This article is completely biased towards the USA. The author of the article subtly shows his contempt for Iran. I feel that the article does not look at Iran’s point of view and makes accusations against the country.

The author also makes a generalization on how the Iran has always ‘defended its right to continue its nuclear program’ supporting this statement with only one instance. This bias can be looked at from the author’s point of view by saying that USA and Iran have ha certain issues in the past since the Iranian Revolution. However this does not give the author the right to only talk about the Iran’s failure to address the nuclear issue. This article is like propaganda to turn its readers against Iran. The author has only used confirmation bias to support his accusation on Iran.

However through evidence in the article, I can say that Iran is using vague language to delay or evade the talk about the nuclear deal. Due to this Hillary Clinton seems to show some agitation and frustration and wants a ‘head on’ answer from Tehran. Iran is clearly evading the question put forth by the USA on the nuclear deal by saying that it wants to discuss about certain issues but does not mention about the nuclear deal. The USA has taken up this issue with the United Nations so that they get an answer but at the same time telling the world to be scared of Iran. I feel the USA is trying to divide the world just like it did in the Cold War. But doing this however there is a lot of potential for another outbreak for war and could be known as World War 3.

Nuclear energy should be used for creation of power and not war. It was the USA who had originally built the destructive weapon and used it on Japan. From that time on, countries have been stock piling such weapons as if preparing for another world war. The issue for accumulation of weapons has been a major cause for countries. War does not only kill people and damage property but also cause economic decline in the countries. This issue is a very important and is it rational and ethical to stockpile such weapons. Is there really need for armies to protect us? Such matters need to be discussed to earth as whole and not with certain countries. Science has turned from being used to advance mankind into a one-way ticket for mankind to be bombed back to the stoneage.

the only thing we learn from history is that we learn nothing from history

No one knows where is Hitler after he fled. However we do know the atrocities he committed against the Jews, against mankind. The amount of damage and destruction both mental and physical because of the wars is unaccountable. Mankind has learned that nothing good comes out from war. There is no one right or wrong in war. There is no one right or wring in history. History is the view of different people complied into a document. G.W.F. Hegel’s saying ‘ the only thing we learn from history is that we learn nothing from history’ applies to some things concerning history but not all.

We learn a lot from history, whether it is something as big as the discovery of an atom or something as small as a method of recycling of paper, we learn a lot from history. History teaches us the existences of different tribes, their culture and hence their origin. We can learn where we came from through historical evidences of different tribes. It is not allowed for women to get up from their bed for forty days after they have given birth to a child in Hinduism. This is not related to the religion it self but history. Since the woman is still healing she was not allowed to get up from her bed in the past. This was slowly modified into the religion it self, and even though the new generation may not know it, they still follow it. We are incorporating history into our daily lives an are constantly learning from it. Gunpowder was used by the Japanese in the early 5^th century and is still used now in fire works. Today’s scientists look back into history to make progress in fields like medicine and mathematics. The Vedic science of medicine and mathematics are more effective than this era’s counting and medicines.

However history itself it not reliable as there are different viewpoints each historian gives. Like in theory of relativity when two events occur at an instant of time, a person may see them occur at the same time but another person will not see it occur at the same instant of time. Neither of them are wrong but there is no right answer. Lack of methods of preserving local dialects and cultures have eroded evidences of tribes existing and left scientists to assume many events occurring in tribes. We cannot learn from what does not exist. Interpretation of certain texts is a lot of work. Even the slightest errors in translation can result in a completely wrong interpretation of the text.

One cannot always look at history to learn something. There is a clear distinction between what is half true and what is completely false. It is up to the one reading that particular historical evidence to decide whether it is true or not. One cannot sleep overnight and reason out history as mathematics.