Ever since the economic crisis began banks and bankers have frequently been the topic of discussion. One thing which irritates me always is people saying "... but we need banks" as the reason why we are tolerating over-payed and under-performing bankers. For some reason we cannot seem to be able to distinguish between banks and bankers. We need the banks as institutions, not as a collection of bankers. One of the the requirement to keep any institution running is to get rid of poor performers before they cause too much damage. Bank boards claim that they need to keep paying exorbitant bonuses to keep attracting good talent to work for them. Surely the strategy is not working because if they had really attracted talent, the same talent would have asked them to stop paying bonuses until the banks financial position started to look respectable. So I don't believe you attract real talent by offering loads of money. By offering loads of money you do attract the most greedy and unethical of the managers.
We make the mistake of thinking that the highest paid are the most talented. The highest paid should be very talented but often the best talent in an organization is not the highest paid. These are the guys, not listening to whom, the highly paid ones led us into this hole. Another thing happening here is that because we do not know enough about banking and finance we like to hire talent but we don't know even that which we need to know to assess the talent we are hiring. So what do we do in this situation? Increasing our own knowledge of banking and finance might not be an option. Whether we know something about a trade or not, we can always assess the end result. Anybody can assess the end result. Why don't we assess our bankers by the results they have produced? Is it because we have made them so big that we dare not assess them! They themselves lack the moral uprightness required to assess themselves and admit that they have performed poorly, forego their bonuses, and put their heart and mind into salvaging the situation. Instead they are too busy protecting their own bonuses. Surely this is not the talent we are competing to hire!
So how do you attract real talent to work for you? You attract them by offering them a strong and positive corporate culture where they can build something great. You can even attract them by being very honest and saying that you are in trouble and need help and that you cannot pay a lot for that help. You can attract them by promising support for their visions and endeavours, and recognition for their achievements. You could reward achievement with bonuses but just ensure that it is not unconnected to performance.
Friday, December 31, 2010
Staff training
Yesterday we went to Bennetts in Longwater. After looking at a few TVs we placed an order for Panasonic Viera TXL42D25B. The waiting time is about 3 weeks. We were given two stapled sets of papers, one was the receipt and the other was the paper for the 5 year warranty stapled to a another paper. They said once I get the TV I should fill in the serial number on the guarantee paper and send it off to Panasonic. From Bennetts we went to Sainsbury's where I had coffee and Kake did some small shopping. On reaching home I had a better look at the papers we had got from Bennetts and I saw that the paper attached to the 5 year guarantee paper was not for me but for someone else. So I went back to them and this guy on the till says "Oh you don't need this paper" and simply detached it. I asked for the second piece of paper I was supposed to send along with the guarantee paper and he just said all I need is the receipt and the guarantee paper. He was right, but I did not know that. I said that I needed another paper to send to Panasonic along with the guarantee paper. I also insisted to speak to the girl who had served me. Ultimately she came out of a cabin and gave me a copy of my receipt saying that this is what I needed. I said that this is not the same as the paper I had been given earlier but in a different name. When I asked to see the original paper again she said I cannot see it because it is somebody else's.
I this whole conversation the word "sorry" was not mentioned even once. The idiots had made a mistake, given me somebody else's guarantee paper, I had driven 3 miles to bring it back to them, and they did not have the decency to either thank me or apologize for their initial mistake. I am not going to buy from Bennetts again. But the issue is much bigger than just Bennetts. What has happened to staff training? What has happened to training in general? Why do I come across clowns doing jobs they are not properly trained for so often?
Some time ago we bought a digital clock from John Lewis. We ordered it online and then collected it from the store. So far so good. On opening the packaging I found that although the clock was what I had ordered the invoice/receipt was for something else in somebody else's name. I did not bother to do anything about it because it was only a £30.00 clock and I could afford not having proof of having purchased it.
In both the Bennetts and John Lewis incidents, a well trained staff whould have double checked the papers they were giving me and spotted the error before any damage. In Bennetts, they should also have explained to me how the 5 year guarantee works. It wouldn't have taken long and I would have known that the second piece of paper that I have to send to Panasonic along with the guarantee paper is nothing but a copy of the purchase receipt. Had this been done I would not have insisted on a second piece of paper thinking that it is something special. Finally there is the matter of common business courtsey. If you make a mistake you apologize. You do so in your day to day life so why can't you do it in your working life. At the very least do not treat the customer as incapable fo understanding anything.
Until now my experience of Jessops has been nice. When I bought the D60 from them there was a cashback of £30.00 on it. They explained to me very clearly what I had to do to get the cashback and also gave me a duplicate copy of the receipt to send to Nikon.
Companies are simply not paying enough attention to staff training. They just hire people and let them loose to learn on the job. The trouble with relying on your staff to learn on the job is that you do not have any control over what they will learn. Depending upon circumstances they will learn good and bad things. It will probably work out on average, but what you are loosing here is the opportunity to build a corporate culture which leads to consistently high performing employees. Maybe companies are not aiming to build a good corporate culture. Maybe they are simply just aiming to make money. Maybe the senior management doesn't know what corporate culture is. Whatever it might be, it leaves me very disappointed.
I this whole conversation the word "sorry" was not mentioned even once. The idiots had made a mistake, given me somebody else's guarantee paper, I had driven 3 miles to bring it back to them, and they did not have the decency to either thank me or apologize for their initial mistake. I am not going to buy from Bennetts again. But the issue is much bigger than just Bennetts. What has happened to staff training? What has happened to training in general? Why do I come across clowns doing jobs they are not properly trained for so often?
Some time ago we bought a digital clock from John Lewis. We ordered it online and then collected it from the store. So far so good. On opening the packaging I found that although the clock was what I had ordered the invoice/receipt was for something else in somebody else's name. I did not bother to do anything about it because it was only a £30.00 clock and I could afford not having proof of having purchased it.
In both the Bennetts and John Lewis incidents, a well trained staff whould have double checked the papers they were giving me and spotted the error before any damage. In Bennetts, they should also have explained to me how the 5 year guarantee works. It wouldn't have taken long and I would have known that the second piece of paper that I have to send to Panasonic along with the guarantee paper is nothing but a copy of the purchase receipt. Had this been done I would not have insisted on a second piece of paper thinking that it is something special. Finally there is the matter of common business courtsey. If you make a mistake you apologize. You do so in your day to day life so why can't you do it in your working life. At the very least do not treat the customer as incapable fo understanding anything.
Until now my experience of Jessops has been nice. When I bought the D60 from them there was a cashback of £30.00 on it. They explained to me very clearly what I had to do to get the cashback and also gave me a duplicate copy of the receipt to send to Nikon.
Companies are simply not paying enough attention to staff training. They just hire people and let them loose to learn on the job. The trouble with relying on your staff to learn on the job is that you do not have any control over what they will learn. Depending upon circumstances they will learn good and bad things. It will probably work out on average, but what you are loosing here is the opportunity to build a corporate culture which leads to consistently high performing employees. Maybe companies are not aiming to build a good corporate culture. Maybe they are simply just aiming to make money. Maybe the senior management doesn't know what corporate culture is. Whatever it might be, it leaves me very disappointed.
Sunday, December 26, 2010
Views on news
A friend of mine recently emailed me to say that he has started a news website, www.infonary.com. It got me thinking. Why did he have to start a news website? It does not add any value. Lots of websites give you the news. If they want to, people will find news with or without infonary.
I am not good at watching or listening to news. But if you ask me whether I am interested in what is happening around me the answer will be a very emphatic "yes". So I am interested in what is happening around me but I do not watch / listen to news. I think that my basic problem is that I am interested in issues rather than individual pieces of news. I want someone to help me make the connection between news and issues. So the following is my message to this friend who has just established infonary.com.
Not everything in the news is important. Not everything important is in the news. All news relates to one or more issues. I want news to be told to me as it relates to issues. I don't want to have to make the connection between news and issues. The hierarchy I wish to establish is
such that all news belongs to one or more issues and all issues affect each other so I recognize that there is a network of issues of which all issues are nodes.
I want someone (not me) to
The reason I want this is because I am interested in the bigger picture in spite of the fact that I am not capable of painting one for myself. The reason I am interested in the bigger picture is that I am interested in solutions rather than the issues per se. You should try this some time. Give a mathematician a problem and see how they attack it. They follow the following steps approximately.
It may not be obvious to you that they are doing so but they are. Why are they able to follow the above procedure more or less always? It is because whenever mathematicians have been faced with a problem they have not only found the solution to that problem but also established a solution for all problems of the same type. Mathematicians have always been interested in solving general rather than specific problems. The result is that they have ready made solutions to lots of classes of problems which can be applied to a huge number of specific problems. Lazy bastards!
For a problem to be solved, it has to be clearly stated. When news are connected to issues and issues are connected to a network of issues, a crystallization will take place. A clear bigger picture will emerge. In this picture, any problems that are there will be clearly stated for all to see.
We all know what news is, but what do I mean by "issues"? A shop being robbed is news but the issue it connects to is crime. A road accident is news which belongs to the issue of traffic control. Other issues are education and health care. Education is a very good example of an issue which is important but almost never in the news.
An example. Let us say that we have an issue called negligence and another one called achievement. Now news comes in of a newly built bridge collapsing. It immediately gets tagged as negligence. Another news comes in of the police having caught a criminal. It gets tagged as achievement (and crime). News of, say, the tenth robbery of exactly the same pattern gets tagged as negligence. Similarly with bank frauds, river pollution levels, deforestation, wild life killing and so on. Another imaginary scenario; let us say a tiger is shot dead (negligence) and then it is discovered that the forest officer of the forest to which the tiger belonged has assets beyond his obvious income. The second news should be tagged as corruption. After a while of tagging news like this you will have lots of news items tagged as negligence and lots tagged as corruption. Now when you start to establish your network of issues you will find all the news items which are tagged as both negligence and corruption. Just start looking for common links between these news items. Ask, in how many cases there is a link between negligence and corruption. If there is a link then the negligence is not simple, it is criminal negligence. This connection may seem obvious but when you do this for lots of news items, connections which you could not have imagined will emerge. Such is the power of networks.
Illiteracy in a state should be news (belonging to the issue of education). Changes in the levels of illiteracy should be news. Actions government is taking to tackle illiteracy should be news. If the government is not taking any action be tackle illiteracy, that should definitely be news. Number of deaths in a state due to infectious diseases should be news. There are lots of issues without which the network of issues will remain incomplete and the bigger picture fails to emerge. As a consequence problems go unrecognised and unacknowledged. What I am asking for is issue driven reporting in addition to news driven reporting. Let us say you start this month by saying that there were so many deaths due to infectious diseases in this state in the month of January. Even if the number has not changed significantly, I still want you to report the number of deaths in the month of February and March and so on. This is what I mean by issue driven reporting. All issues should be reported upon at regular intervals (regardless of whether there is news related to them or not) so that people interested in the bigger picture can get it. Crime figures should be reported regularly. Usually only bad things are in the news. Issue based reporting will bring good things in the news too. This will have the positive side effect of people and organizations responsible for the good things getting some well deserved recognition. It might turn out that crime figures drop wherever a particular police officer gets posted.
Each of our national resources should be an issue and reported upon at suitable intervals. Look at forest cover. Do we know the rate of deforestation in India? Or even whether our forest cover is growing or diminishing? Why is there so much deforestation going on? What causes people to take up this activity as a career even when it is illegal? Do they have viable alternatives? If not, whose job is it to think of them and create them?
I can also imagine a discussion, involving people from law enforcement, inland revenue, professors of law, psychiatrists, psychologists and social scientists about why a lot of (but not all) Indian politicians have the tendency to amass lots of illegal wealth. Case by case, dig into their backgrounds starting right from their childhoods and families to the education they got. Is there a correlation between childhood poverty and being corrupt? Is there a correlation between education and corruptness? After proper analysis you could state on your website that there is a clear connection between education level and corruptness of politicians and that people should avoid voting for politicians with poor education and should mount pressure on the government to improve access to education at all levels.
Issue of population. We know at what rate it is growing. Is the rate of growth slowing down? By how much in each state? Which states have the highest population growth rates? What is it that they are not doing which the states with the lower population growth rates are doing? Is the lower growth rate due to planning or, is it due to high infant mortality or lower life expectancy?
Education: What number and percentage are illiterate in each state of India? How accessible is primary and secondary school education to children. The worst states. The best states.
I think that our growth and development are very unbalanced. We are getting more and more roads but poorer and poorer road safety. We are getting more and more universities and institutions but poorer school education. Cell phones are getting cheaper but good primary education is getting more difficult to find and expensive. More multi-storey housing and an increasing population in our slums. Why can't we see these obvious anomalies? Why can't we do something about them? I think the reason for both is that nobody is giving us the bigger picture of India.
Another thing I would like to see is quantification. If you want to improve something or monitor the progress you are making, you have to come up with a measure for it. We should use news to measure the progress (positive or negative) we are making on issues. Come up with lots of indices. Like we have the sensex for the stock exchange we could have a crime index, a health index, a housing index, a transport index, an education index and so on. We believe what we want to believe. If you stand in shopping mall in India and ask a 100 people whether they are proud of India they will almost all say yes. Two days later you change the question to "Would you be proud of a country where most poor children have no access to primary education?", almost all will say no. And we are talking of the same country. What I am trying to say is that the India we are all proud of is what we want it to be, not what it really is. I want you to tell Indians what it really is and challenge them to make it the India they want to be proud of. Give the people of India some figures so that they can set themselves targets to achieve. You may even suggest targets. Something like "20 percent population of state X cannot read or write while only 1 percent population of state Y cannot read or write".
We are envious of the developed countries but reluctant to follow in their foot steps to get where they are today. These countries work hard to constantly improve. They do not sit idle boasting of their past achievements. They are constantly scrutinizing their actions and circumstances to foresee problems and take action to deal with those problems before they get too big. Why can't we do the same? I see two things here. One is the detection and acknowledgement that we have a problem. The other is acting to do something about any identified problem. I would like you to help in convincing us that we as a country (like all other countries) have problems. Not only that, I would like you to somehow quantify the problem (e.g. number of children not going to school on any given day in a state).
I believe that there are lots of people in India who want to do things for their country. They just don't know what to do, what to aim for. A lot of people do not realize the impact of their actions on the country. If you ask a village school teacher who does not go to school regularly whether he loves his country he will say, "yes". And he will not be lying. We need to convince him that his action of not teaching the students regularly is damaging the very country he loves. We need to show him the illiteracy figures in his state and tell him that he is contributing towards them.
If an illegal logger comes across a foreign terrorist in the forest where he is logging I am sure he will risk his life to get the terrorist caught. So the logger does love his country but the same logger is spending his lifetime destroying the forest wealth of the very country he loves. Why? Because he does not think. He has not been taught how to think or he does not want to think or he is incapable of thinking. Whatever the reason, I want people to think. I want people to think about the consequences of their actions or inaction. And the first step is to show them the results of their actions / inactions. Show them India as it really is and which they have built by their actions. It is not just people is small jobs. We need to show the education ministers of states that their inactions are resulting in a large population being illiterate. We need to show the bureaucrats that their inactions or inappropriate actions result in children dying of infectious diseases. I want for every citizen of India to be able to challenge every other citizen of India to show by their actions that they love their country. I think an issues based news website can provide the basis for these challenges.
I am not good at watching or listening to news. But if you ask me whether I am interested in what is happening around me the answer will be a very emphatic "yes". So I am interested in what is happening around me but I do not watch / listen to news. I think that my basic problem is that I am interested in issues rather than individual pieces of news. I want someone to help me make the connection between news and issues. So the following is my message to this friend who has just established infonary.com.
Not everything in the news is important. Not everything important is in the news. All news relates to one or more issues. I want news to be told to me as it relates to issues. I don't want to have to make the connection between news and issues. The hierarchy I wish to establish is
- News
- Issues
- Network of issues
such that all news belongs to one or more issues and all issues affect each other so I recognize that there is a network of issues of which all issues are nodes.
I want someone (not me) to
- Connect all news to issues
- Establish a network of issues
- Show me this network of issues and allow me to query for fine grained information if I wish to.
The reason I want this is because I am interested in the bigger picture in spite of the fact that I am not capable of painting one for myself. The reason I am interested in the bigger picture is that I am interested in solutions rather than the issues per se. You should try this some time. Give a mathematician a problem and see how they attack it. They follow the following steps approximately.
- Restate the problem in general terms.
- Recognize the class to which the problem belongs.
- Use the well established solution for the class of problems to solve your specific problem.
It may not be obvious to you that they are doing so but they are. Why are they able to follow the above procedure more or less always? It is because whenever mathematicians have been faced with a problem they have not only found the solution to that problem but also established a solution for all problems of the same type. Mathematicians have always been interested in solving general rather than specific problems. The result is that they have ready made solutions to lots of classes of problems which can be applied to a huge number of specific problems. Lazy bastards!
For a problem to be solved, it has to be clearly stated. When news are connected to issues and issues are connected to a network of issues, a crystallization will take place. A clear bigger picture will emerge. In this picture, any problems that are there will be clearly stated for all to see.
We all know what news is, but what do I mean by "issues"? A shop being robbed is news but the issue it connects to is crime. A road accident is news which belongs to the issue of traffic control. Other issues are education and health care. Education is a very good example of an issue which is important but almost never in the news.
An example. Let us say that we have an issue called negligence and another one called achievement. Now news comes in of a newly built bridge collapsing. It immediately gets tagged as negligence. Another news comes in of the police having caught a criminal. It gets tagged as achievement (and crime). News of, say, the tenth robbery of exactly the same pattern gets tagged as negligence. Similarly with bank frauds, river pollution levels, deforestation, wild life killing and so on. Another imaginary scenario; let us say a tiger is shot dead (negligence) and then it is discovered that the forest officer of the forest to which the tiger belonged has assets beyond his obvious income. The second news should be tagged as corruption. After a while of tagging news like this you will have lots of news items tagged as negligence and lots tagged as corruption. Now when you start to establish your network of issues you will find all the news items which are tagged as both negligence and corruption. Just start looking for common links between these news items. Ask, in how many cases there is a link between negligence and corruption. If there is a link then the negligence is not simple, it is criminal negligence. This connection may seem obvious but when you do this for lots of news items, connections which you could not have imagined will emerge. Such is the power of networks.
Illiteracy in a state should be news (belonging to the issue of education). Changes in the levels of illiteracy should be news. Actions government is taking to tackle illiteracy should be news. If the government is not taking any action be tackle illiteracy, that should definitely be news. Number of deaths in a state due to infectious diseases should be news. There are lots of issues without which the network of issues will remain incomplete and the bigger picture fails to emerge. As a consequence problems go unrecognised and unacknowledged. What I am asking for is issue driven reporting in addition to news driven reporting. Let us say you start this month by saying that there were so many deaths due to infectious diseases in this state in the month of January. Even if the number has not changed significantly, I still want you to report the number of deaths in the month of February and March and so on. This is what I mean by issue driven reporting. All issues should be reported upon at regular intervals (regardless of whether there is news related to them or not) so that people interested in the bigger picture can get it. Crime figures should be reported regularly. Usually only bad things are in the news. Issue based reporting will bring good things in the news too. This will have the positive side effect of people and organizations responsible for the good things getting some well deserved recognition. It might turn out that crime figures drop wherever a particular police officer gets posted.
Each of our national resources should be an issue and reported upon at suitable intervals. Look at forest cover. Do we know the rate of deforestation in India? Or even whether our forest cover is growing or diminishing? Why is there so much deforestation going on? What causes people to take up this activity as a career even when it is illegal? Do they have viable alternatives? If not, whose job is it to think of them and create them?
I can also imagine a discussion, involving people from law enforcement, inland revenue, professors of law, psychiatrists, psychologists and social scientists about why a lot of (but not all) Indian politicians have the tendency to amass lots of illegal wealth. Case by case, dig into their backgrounds starting right from their childhoods and families to the education they got. Is there a correlation between childhood poverty and being corrupt? Is there a correlation between education and corruptness? After proper analysis you could state on your website that there is a clear connection between education level and corruptness of politicians and that people should avoid voting for politicians with poor education and should mount pressure on the government to improve access to education at all levels.
Issue of population. We know at what rate it is growing. Is the rate of growth slowing down? By how much in each state? Which states have the highest population growth rates? What is it that they are not doing which the states with the lower population growth rates are doing? Is the lower growth rate due to planning or, is it due to high infant mortality or lower life expectancy?
Education: What number and percentage are illiterate in each state of India? How accessible is primary and secondary school education to children. The worst states. The best states.
I think that our growth and development are very unbalanced. We are getting more and more roads but poorer and poorer road safety. We are getting more and more universities and institutions but poorer school education. Cell phones are getting cheaper but good primary education is getting more difficult to find and expensive. More multi-storey housing and an increasing population in our slums. Why can't we see these obvious anomalies? Why can't we do something about them? I think the reason for both is that nobody is giving us the bigger picture of India.
Another thing I would like to see is quantification. If you want to improve something or monitor the progress you are making, you have to come up with a measure for it. We should use news to measure the progress (positive or negative) we are making on issues. Come up with lots of indices. Like we have the sensex for the stock exchange we could have a crime index, a health index, a housing index, a transport index, an education index and so on. We believe what we want to believe. If you stand in shopping mall in India and ask a 100 people whether they are proud of India they will almost all say yes. Two days later you change the question to "Would you be proud of a country where most poor children have no access to primary education?", almost all will say no. And we are talking of the same country. What I am trying to say is that the India we are all proud of is what we want it to be, not what it really is. I want you to tell Indians what it really is and challenge them to make it the India they want to be proud of. Give the people of India some figures so that they can set themselves targets to achieve. You may even suggest targets. Something like "20 percent population of state X cannot read or write while only 1 percent population of state Y cannot read or write".
We are envious of the developed countries but reluctant to follow in their foot steps to get where they are today. These countries work hard to constantly improve. They do not sit idle boasting of their past achievements. They are constantly scrutinizing their actions and circumstances to foresee problems and take action to deal with those problems before they get too big. Why can't we do the same? I see two things here. One is the detection and acknowledgement that we have a problem. The other is acting to do something about any identified problem. I would like you to help in convincing us that we as a country (like all other countries) have problems. Not only that, I would like you to somehow quantify the problem (e.g. number of children not going to school on any given day in a state).
I believe that there are lots of people in India who want to do things for their country. They just don't know what to do, what to aim for. A lot of people do not realize the impact of their actions on the country. If you ask a village school teacher who does not go to school regularly whether he loves his country he will say, "yes". And he will not be lying. We need to convince him that his action of not teaching the students regularly is damaging the very country he loves. We need to show him the illiteracy figures in his state and tell him that he is contributing towards them.
If an illegal logger comes across a foreign terrorist in the forest where he is logging I am sure he will risk his life to get the terrorist caught. So the logger does love his country but the same logger is spending his lifetime destroying the forest wealth of the very country he loves. Why? Because he does not think. He has not been taught how to think or he does not want to think or he is incapable of thinking. Whatever the reason, I want people to think. I want people to think about the consequences of their actions or inaction. And the first step is to show them the results of their actions / inactions. Show them India as it really is and which they have built by their actions. It is not just people is small jobs. We need to show the education ministers of states that their inactions are resulting in a large population being illiterate. We need to show the bureaucrats that their inactions or inappropriate actions result in children dying of infectious diseases. I want for every citizen of India to be able to challenge every other citizen of India to show by their actions that they love their country. I think an issues based news website can provide the basis for these challenges.
Sunday, October 24, 2010
Negligence
I can't help commenting on news. A guy released from Durham prison shot dead his ex-girlfriend's boyfriend, shot and injured his ex-girlfriend, and shot and injured a police officer. They are still looking for him. Nothing wrong with all this except that it has now emerged that Durham prison had warned the police that this guy could possibly harm his girlfriend. This makes it all so wrong because this makes all these incidents preventable. IPCC have been asked to investigate whether there was negligence on part of the police.
The other bit of news is from India. I learned about it from an old friend Aashish, via facebook. A child fell to his death through the floor of a sixth floor restaurant in Juhu, Bombay. This is worse than the Durham prison guy being allowed to shoot 3 people. This is negligence beyond belief. There are quite a few comments about this news on the Times of India website, all saying something along the lines that lessons should be learnt from this incident and the management should be punished. And there is call for severe punishment for those responsible.
Such incidents happen frequently and every time there are similar calls - punish, inspect regularly etc. Still the incidents keep happening. There has to be a deeper underlying problem. I think it has to do with the fact that we do not take pride in "a job well done" any more. We have completely lost sight of quality in our day to day working. Quality is not just a set of standards which a product or service should meet. If I am experienced enough I can produce a product which will pass all quality inspections but I know that it is not as good as it could be. Quality is an internal standard of the person doing the job. The people who did the floor of this restaurant were aware of its poor quality. They were aware of the fact that it could give way if stood upon at certain places. This is borne out by the fact that they did not fall through the floor! The floor did not meet industry standards in this case but it also did not meet the internal (moral) standards of the people making it. They chose to violate their own personal standards as well as the industry standards.
Industry standards should be there. They should be enforced. But I think from the workers point of view they should be informative rather than something to aim to meet. They should be the minimum. The worker should strive to meet his / her own internal standards which will make him feel comfortable and also proud of his workmanship.
Our problem is that we have stopped being proud of what we do or produce. Instead, we are proud of how much we earn doing no matter what. A glaring example is the IPS officers in India. They are very proud of their positions and what they earn. And they are not ashamed of the law and order situation is most places of India. They should be but they are not. They get a decent salary, a car, a driver, and numerous other perks and they are genuinely proud of these and they are genuinely not ashamed of the result of what they do at work.
The other bit of news is from India. I learned about it from an old friend Aashish, via facebook. A child fell to his death through the floor of a sixth floor restaurant in Juhu, Bombay. This is worse than the Durham prison guy being allowed to shoot 3 people. This is negligence beyond belief. There are quite a few comments about this news on the Times of India website, all saying something along the lines that lessons should be learnt from this incident and the management should be punished. And there is call for severe punishment for those responsible.
Such incidents happen frequently and every time there are similar calls - punish, inspect regularly etc. Still the incidents keep happening. There has to be a deeper underlying problem. I think it has to do with the fact that we do not take pride in "a job well done" any more. We have completely lost sight of quality in our day to day working. Quality is not just a set of standards which a product or service should meet. If I am experienced enough I can produce a product which will pass all quality inspections but I know that it is not as good as it could be. Quality is an internal standard of the person doing the job. The people who did the floor of this restaurant were aware of its poor quality. They were aware of the fact that it could give way if stood upon at certain places. This is borne out by the fact that they did not fall through the floor! The floor did not meet industry standards in this case but it also did not meet the internal (moral) standards of the people making it. They chose to violate their own personal standards as well as the industry standards.
Industry standards should be there. They should be enforced. But I think from the workers point of view they should be informative rather than something to aim to meet. They should be the minimum. The worker should strive to meet his / her own internal standards which will make him feel comfortable and also proud of his workmanship.
Our problem is that we have stopped being proud of what we do or produce. Instead, we are proud of how much we earn doing no matter what. A glaring example is the IPS officers in India. They are very proud of their positions and what they earn. And they are not ashamed of the law and order situation is most places of India. They should be but they are not. They get a decent salary, a car, a driver, and numerous other perks and they are genuinely proud of these and they are genuinely not ashamed of the result of what they do at work.
Tuesday, February 02, 2010
Respect for the law
There is a glaring lack of respect for the law in Indians. Many people (even well educated ones) think that if the law is unfair to them they have a justification for breaking the law. The do not say this for small issues but for big ones. Such as that the hindus were right to riot against the muslims in Gujrat because "they asked for it". In this particular case the administration colluded with the hindus to "teach muslims a lesson" or "discourage them for ever from trying similar things in future".
I am not taking sides. And, I do not claim to know the truth. All I am going to comment on is how the situation was handled. So I will refer to two religions as A and B. Let us say that the A community started the rioting against B community. The administration should have made it clear to the A community that they are breaking laws and that there will be consequences. Evidence should have been collected for prosecution while measures were being taken to maintain law and order. Immediately after the first rioting, the police should have made arrests and prosecuted some of the rioting criminals. This would have sent a message to community A that truly there are consequences of breaking the law and a message to community B that the law is punishing the criminals so there is no need to take matters in their own hands. To really drive the message home, there should have been some warning issued by the police to both the communities that there would be consequences for any law breaking.
It is the responsibility of the police to maintain public confidence not only in the law but also in its proper enforcement. This can only be done by properly treating every crime only as a crime. Politicians want to claim that a crime is more that just a crime, that it is part of a bigger malicious plan against a community etc. Even if this is the case, the police should still treat every crime as a crime and follow the legal procedures for dealing with it. If individual crimes become too costly for the criminal they will not be willing to commit crimes for a bigger malicious plan either because of the risk involved.
If committing crimes becomes too costly, communities will have no option but to move towards the proper democratic procedure of lobbying to get the laws changed to their liking.
When B community attacks community A in retaliation they essentially take matters in their own hands. They do this because the cost of committing a crime is quite low especially under conditions of riot. The criminal thinks "too many people are doing it so I can also get away with it." And then there is this moral justification for breaking the law because of being offended by the other community. By prosecuting even a few criminals a message can be sent very easily to all the criminals that it could be them being prosecuted the next time. And also that being wronged against does not give one the right to break the law.
Unofficially inciting community B against community A may lead to a temporary solution (still illegal) but it also results in under currents of tension between the two communities and loss of confidence in the administration and police.
I am not taking sides. And, I do not claim to know the truth. All I am going to comment on is how the situation was handled. So I will refer to two religions as A and B. Let us say that the A community started the rioting against B community. The administration should have made it clear to the A community that they are breaking laws and that there will be consequences. Evidence should have been collected for prosecution while measures were being taken to maintain law and order. Immediately after the first rioting, the police should have made arrests and prosecuted some of the rioting criminals. This would have sent a message to community A that truly there are consequences of breaking the law and a message to community B that the law is punishing the criminals so there is no need to take matters in their own hands. To really drive the message home, there should have been some warning issued by the police to both the communities that there would be consequences for any law breaking.
It is the responsibility of the police to maintain public confidence not only in the law but also in its proper enforcement. This can only be done by properly treating every crime only as a crime. Politicians want to claim that a crime is more that just a crime, that it is part of a bigger malicious plan against a community etc. Even if this is the case, the police should still treat every crime as a crime and follow the legal procedures for dealing with it. If individual crimes become too costly for the criminal they will not be willing to commit crimes for a bigger malicious plan either because of the risk involved.
If committing crimes becomes too costly, communities will have no option but to move towards the proper democratic procedure of lobbying to get the laws changed to their liking.
When B community attacks community A in retaliation they essentially take matters in their own hands. They do this because the cost of committing a crime is quite low especially under conditions of riot. The criminal thinks "too many people are doing it so I can also get away with it." And then there is this moral justification for breaking the law because of being offended by the other community. By prosecuting even a few criminals a message can be sent very easily to all the criminals that it could be them being prosecuted the next time. And also that being wronged against does not give one the right to break the law.
Unofficially inciting community B against community A may lead to a temporary solution (still illegal) but it also results in under currents of tension between the two communities and loss of confidence in the administration and police.
Monday, January 18, 2010
How to get a roadside open drain cleaned in Unnao
Mrs. A lives in Unnao along with her husband. Her brother is a judge in the Supreme Court of India. He rang up to say that he wished to visit her. Mrs. A asked him not to because the drain right in front of her house in Unnao was overflowing making it difficult to get into and out of the house. The judge would have none of it of course and made a few phone calls to the administration in Unnao. Sometime later the District Magistrate of Unnao was at Mrs. A's doorstep supervising the cleaning of the overflowing drain. He even offered to send a few men to clean the inside of the house. It does need cleaning you see.
So now you know how to get a drain cleaned. Simple isn't it? All you need is to have a close relative in a senior government position. Don't have one? Now that is a shame because although you do pay your taxes you do not have the right to a hygienic life. Some would even question your right to live.
So now you know how to get a drain cleaned. Simple isn't it? All you need is to have a close relative in a senior government position. Don't have one? Now that is a shame because although you do pay your taxes you do not have the right to a hygienic life. Some would even question your right to live.
Friday, January 15, 2010
Indian news again, Satish Shetty
A guy named Satish Shetty was killed yesterday in Pune, India. He was attacked with swords as he was coming back from his morning walk. Just a few days ago he had requested police protection.
What he was doing is real bravery and it is a shame that those whose job it is to do what he was doing left those things undone. Basically, he resorted to the right to information act (RTI) to expose dodgy land deals in and around Pune.
Let us look for the villains again. There are those officials (Development Authority, Municipal Corporation and so on) whose job it is to ensure that property transactions are fair and proper. Obviously they are not doing their jobs otherwise Satish Shetty would not have needed to do what he used to. Then there is the police. It is always there. They failed to protect a citizen whose life was in very obvious danger.
What Satish was doing is a very brave thing and his death is certainly tragic. I have doubts if anyone else will be in a hurry to take up his role. The biggest tribute to Satish would be that the rest of us do our jobs properly and with due diligence. We can ensure that brave men like him do not have to resort to bravery to ensure fairness in the life of those around. Remember him, and just do our jobs well.
What he was doing is real bravery and it is a shame that those whose job it is to do what he was doing left those things undone. Basically, he resorted to the right to information act (RTI) to expose dodgy land deals in and around Pune.
Let us look for the villains again. There are those officials (Development Authority, Municipal Corporation and so on) whose job it is to ensure that property transactions are fair and proper. Obviously they are not doing their jobs otherwise Satish Shetty would not have needed to do what he used to. Then there is the police. It is always there. They failed to protect a citizen whose life was in very obvious danger.
What Satish was doing is a very brave thing and his death is certainly tragic. I have doubts if anyone else will be in a hurry to take up his role. The biggest tribute to Satish would be that the rest of us do our jobs properly and with due diligence. We can ensure that brave men like him do not have to resort to bravery to ensure fairness in the life of those around. Remember him, and just do our jobs well.
Saturday, January 09, 2010
Heros and Heroism
There was a news item on an Indian TV channel today telling that in Tamil Nadu a policeman was attacked by some crooks, beaten up brutally, had his leg hacked off and, left bleeding on the road. A convoy of some minister (I think it was two ministerial convoys) passed by and did very little to help him. The Deputy Collector of the region was with the convoy and he phoned for an ambulance. However this policeman died because of loss of blood by the time the ambulance arrived. People in the convoy did not make any efforts to take this policeman to the hospital. Very sad. What is more sad is that the TV channel is asking its viewers to communicate to them their views about the incident. The saddest part is that people are actually sending messages to the TV channel saying that these ministers do not deserve to be ministers or that the ministers should be charged under section 302 (murder) and so on.
In my opinion
What exactly is the TV channels moral responsibility? First of all they should not mislead the people into thinking that their opinion is important when it is obviously not. In this case it is not important what people think. When (and if) the case goes to court the judge will not ask what the people think. She will want to know what laws have been broken. Public opinion is important during an election. Public opinion is important with regards to laws but not when it comes to enforcement of the existing laws. The public should know that they can, by the power of their votes, change the people who make the laws but they cannot change the enforcement of existing laws.
Some video footage was shown of this policeman lying bleeding on the road. It was taken not by the TV channel but by an onlooker who just happened to be there. Why did he not call for an ambulance? Is there a number we can call if there is an emergency and hope to get some action? Like there is 911 in the US and 999 in the UK and such like in other countries? Why not?
Why does the public not demand that there be such a phone number along with the proper setting up of emergency services? Let us say it is not practical for a poor country like India. Why do the policemen not demand it as part of their service contract? Why do they not demand that there be a phone number, well known to the public and police alike, which can be called if a policeman is injured or in serious trouble? There are no such demands because our TV and other media do not let the public think like this. They want the public to feel good by blaming and accusing others for being bad. They do not want the public itself to take the blame that it rightfully deserves. The public is to be blamed for not being demanding of its leaders and officers. The public is content to accuse and berate those who do wrong but it will not demand that its leaders and officers do the right things to begin with.
I am not a lawyer but I do not think that in this case the ministers can be charged with anything. Morally, they should have done their best to get this policeman to a hospital which they did not. But that is no crime. Surely what happened or did not happen must be somebody's responsibility. I think it is the responsibility of the senior officers of the the dead policeman. What needs to be investigated is whether they knew of the danger to this policeman's life. If they did then why was he left alone, vulnerable to attack? If they did not know about the danger to his life why not? It is their job to know. Why are they so far from the realities of day to day policing? Why don't they demand that policemen have access to fast emergency help if needed? Why was this particular policeman without a radio?
Surely the angry public must do something about the neglectful ministers. The best thing to do would be to not forget woeful behaviour of these ministers in this incident till the next election. Voting is a matter of opinion and the public should respect its own opinion and not vote for these minister in the next election. This is what the media should be telling the public instead of providing the placebo of making it the judge, jury and executioner in its own imaginary world.
Is the dead policeman a hero? And the two ministers villains? As far as I know the dead policeman is a dead policeman. He may have died because of being true towards his duty or he may have died because of getting mixed up with the wrong kind of people for all the wrong reasons. Whatever the reason of his being killed, his superiors have some responsibility for it. If he died because of being faithful to his duty then his superiors are to be blamed for not looking after an upright subordinate. If he died because of wrong dealings with the wrong people then the superiors are to be blamed for ignoring what was going on or not knowing about it at all. What about the ministers? I do not know what their legal duties were when all this was happening but I do know what their moral duties were. Ignoring ones legal duties is a crime, ignoring ones moral duties is not a crime, it is just plain immoral. The public has a right to expect the conduct of its leaders to be both legally and morally exemplary. If the ministers broke a law it is the responsibility of the police to bring them to justice. But the public can punish the ministers for substandard moral behaviour (although not illegal) by not voting for them in the next election.
So in this whole episode there are no heros. People writing in to the TV channel their opinions about the ministers are certainly not. Who are the villains? I agree that the two ministers displayed far from heroic behaviour but it does not make them villains. The real villains are those who let such incidents happen. The police officers who failed to protect a fellow policeman. The police officers who have indicated, by their regular negligence of duty, to the criminals that they can get away with such act.
Negligence of duty is a far bigger moral crime than most of us think. Often, it is also a legal crime. So, everybody who ignored their duties leading to this incident is a villain. The ministers for not having an emergency service in place for such situations. The police officers for failing to protect a fellow policeman.
Most of us think of heroic deeds as exceptional. Sometimes they are, but only rarely. Most of the time heroism is simply a matter of being faithful toward ones designated responsibilities and duties. Yes, that is what real heroism is. It goes unnoticed when things are fine but as soon as people start neglecting their duties things start to go wrong. Sometimes a heroic deed might save a bad situation. Whenever this happens one should, apart from rewarding the hero, look for those whose actions or inactions led to the bad situation in the first place.
A shop owner fights off a burglar and saves his shop. Brave? Yes. Hero? Umm. But why are we not looking for the villains who are responsible for the burglary to happen in the first place? You think burglary is simple? Think again. It is not simply a burglar who is involved. Before the burglary there are those whose (in)action or collusion leads the burglar to think he can get away with it. After the burglary there is someone who deals with the stolen goods. Finally there is someone who buys the stolen goods for personal use. It is a whole bloody industry! If the police are not aware of this then they are not doing their jobs properly. If they are aware of it and are not doing anything about it, again they are not doing their jobs properly. Anybody not doing their job properly is a villain. Simple. In the worst case, the police are on the take and look the other way when stolen goods are bought and sold.
Am I calling the police villains? Yes, and I am also calling everybody else who are not faithful towards their duties villains. Doctors not showing up in rural health centres. Programmers selling unreliable software to poorly informed clients and companies. Senior executives taking exorbitant bonuses while their companies fall to pieces.
People think a country is built by heros. Yes it is. But it is not built by just a few heros who happen to be in the police or armed forced. It is built by lots of heros doing their duties to the best of their capabilities and expecting others to do theirs with the same diligence and care.
Let us all be heros. It will not only ensure that bravery will be rarely needed but also build a nation where everybody is happier.
In my opinion
- What happened to the policeman is tragic.
- What the TV channel is doing is disgusting.
- And the people who are sending messages to the TV channel are thoughtless.
- A crime has been committed. A law (several laws) has / have been broken.
- Some ministers and officers have neglected their duty of care towards a fellow citizen.
- And finally a TV channel is trying to cash in on the incident to gain popularity.
What exactly is the TV channels moral responsibility? First of all they should not mislead the people into thinking that their opinion is important when it is obviously not. In this case it is not important what people think. When (and if) the case goes to court the judge will not ask what the people think. She will want to know what laws have been broken. Public opinion is important during an election. Public opinion is important with regards to laws but not when it comes to enforcement of the existing laws. The public should know that they can, by the power of their votes, change the people who make the laws but they cannot change the enforcement of existing laws.
Some video footage was shown of this policeman lying bleeding on the road. It was taken not by the TV channel but by an onlooker who just happened to be there. Why did he not call for an ambulance? Is there a number we can call if there is an emergency and hope to get some action? Like there is 911 in the US and 999 in the UK and such like in other countries? Why not?
Why does the public not demand that there be such a phone number along with the proper setting up of emergency services? Let us say it is not practical for a poor country like India. Why do the policemen not demand it as part of their service contract? Why do they not demand that there be a phone number, well known to the public and police alike, which can be called if a policeman is injured or in serious trouble? There are no such demands because our TV and other media do not let the public think like this. They want the public to feel good by blaming and accusing others for being bad. They do not want the public itself to take the blame that it rightfully deserves. The public is to be blamed for not being demanding of its leaders and officers. The public is content to accuse and berate those who do wrong but it will not demand that its leaders and officers do the right things to begin with.
I am not a lawyer but I do not think that in this case the ministers can be charged with anything. Morally, they should have done their best to get this policeman to a hospital which they did not. But that is no crime. Surely what happened or did not happen must be somebody's responsibility. I think it is the responsibility of the senior officers of the the dead policeman. What needs to be investigated is whether they knew of the danger to this policeman's life. If they did then why was he left alone, vulnerable to attack? If they did not know about the danger to his life why not? It is their job to know. Why are they so far from the realities of day to day policing? Why don't they demand that policemen have access to fast emergency help if needed? Why was this particular policeman without a radio?
Surely the angry public must do something about the neglectful ministers. The best thing to do would be to not forget woeful behaviour of these ministers in this incident till the next election. Voting is a matter of opinion and the public should respect its own opinion and not vote for these minister in the next election. This is what the media should be telling the public instead of providing the placebo of making it the judge, jury and executioner in its own imaginary world.
Is the dead policeman a hero? And the two ministers villains? As far as I know the dead policeman is a dead policeman. He may have died because of being true towards his duty or he may have died because of getting mixed up with the wrong kind of people for all the wrong reasons. Whatever the reason of his being killed, his superiors have some responsibility for it. If he died because of being faithful to his duty then his superiors are to be blamed for not looking after an upright subordinate. If he died because of wrong dealings with the wrong people then the superiors are to be blamed for ignoring what was going on or not knowing about it at all. What about the ministers? I do not know what their legal duties were when all this was happening but I do know what their moral duties were. Ignoring ones legal duties is a crime, ignoring ones moral duties is not a crime, it is just plain immoral. The public has a right to expect the conduct of its leaders to be both legally and morally exemplary. If the ministers broke a law it is the responsibility of the police to bring them to justice. But the public can punish the ministers for substandard moral behaviour (although not illegal) by not voting for them in the next election.
So in this whole episode there are no heros. People writing in to the TV channel their opinions about the ministers are certainly not. Who are the villains? I agree that the two ministers displayed far from heroic behaviour but it does not make them villains. The real villains are those who let such incidents happen. The police officers who failed to protect a fellow policeman. The police officers who have indicated, by their regular negligence of duty, to the criminals that they can get away with such act.
Negligence of duty is a far bigger moral crime than most of us think. Often, it is also a legal crime. So, everybody who ignored their duties leading to this incident is a villain. The ministers for not having an emergency service in place for such situations. The police officers for failing to protect a fellow policeman.
Most of us think of heroic deeds as exceptional. Sometimes they are, but only rarely. Most of the time heroism is simply a matter of being faithful toward ones designated responsibilities and duties. Yes, that is what real heroism is. It goes unnoticed when things are fine but as soon as people start neglecting their duties things start to go wrong. Sometimes a heroic deed might save a bad situation. Whenever this happens one should, apart from rewarding the hero, look for those whose actions or inactions led to the bad situation in the first place.
A shop owner fights off a burglar and saves his shop. Brave? Yes. Hero? Umm. But why are we not looking for the villains who are responsible for the burglary to happen in the first place? You think burglary is simple? Think again. It is not simply a burglar who is involved. Before the burglary there are those whose (in)action or collusion leads the burglar to think he can get away with it. After the burglary there is someone who deals with the stolen goods. Finally there is someone who buys the stolen goods for personal use. It is a whole bloody industry! If the police are not aware of this then they are not doing their jobs properly. If they are aware of it and are not doing anything about it, again they are not doing their jobs properly. Anybody not doing their job properly is a villain. Simple. In the worst case, the police are on the take and look the other way when stolen goods are bought and sold.
Am I calling the police villains? Yes, and I am also calling everybody else who are not faithful towards their duties villains. Doctors not showing up in rural health centres. Programmers selling unreliable software to poorly informed clients and companies. Senior executives taking exorbitant bonuses while their companies fall to pieces.
People think a country is built by heros. Yes it is. But it is not built by just a few heros who happen to be in the police or armed forced. It is built by lots of heros doing their duties to the best of their capabilities and expecting others to do theirs with the same diligence and care.
Let us all be heros. It will not only ensure that bravery will be rarely needed but also build a nation where everybody is happier.
Sunday, January 03, 2010
Spending leisure time
I think a lot of us are very poor at making the best out of our leisure time. Most people are quite good at planning the use of their work time although something can be said about that as well. But when it comes to leisure time most of us do not plan at all. By leisure time I mean the time when we are not working or doing routine things everyday. I am excluding holidays from this because then you are not working at all. The best use of leisure time is do something which is mentally and physically stimulating. Exercise is purely physical although one does think of other things while exercising so it is not strictly so. Reading is purely mental. Writing is also purely mental but it is a very different kind of stimulation compared to reading.
Unplanned watching of TV is the worst way of spending leisure time. I do not feel relaxed at all after doing so.
Exercise is important. Very important. Do some regularly. Even if you think it is important you still don't know how important. It is very, very, very important. And that is all I will say about it.
Back to mental activities during leisure time.
What about TV? Unplanned TV watching is the worst way of spending leisure time. TV watching is not stimulating at all. While you are watching TV you don't think at all. If you don't think, there is no mental stimulation.
There is one physical exercise which I cannot help but mention here, that is walking. I mention it because it is not purely physical. It is also a brilliant opportunity to think without any distractions.
Unplanned watching of TV is the worst way of spending leisure time. I do not feel relaxed at all after doing so.
Exercise is important. Very important. Do some regularly. Even if you think it is important you still don't know how important. It is very, very, very important. And that is all I will say about it.
Back to mental activities during leisure time.
- Day dreaming
- Reading
- Writing
- Video games
- Board games (backgammon, card games)
What about TV? Unplanned TV watching is the worst way of spending leisure time. TV watching is not stimulating at all. While you are watching TV you don't think at all. If you don't think, there is no mental stimulation.
There is one physical exercise which I cannot help but mention here, that is walking. I mention it because it is not purely physical. It is also a brilliant opportunity to think without any distractions.
Saturday, January 02, 2010
Why astrology is a pile of stupidity.
There is something in science known as controlled experiment. To know whether something has an effect or not scientists take two sets persons (or bacteria or plants or animals) and subject them to the factor being studied. Suppose the effect of heat is being studied then we have to take two sets of persons and bring a hot iron close to their palms (say 3 cms). For each set we bring the palms close to the iron but for one set (set A) the iron is hot (switched on) while for the other (set B) it is not. Let us say that there are 10 persons in each of our sets. People in set A will want to take their palms away from the iron within a few seconds. People in set B will also want to take their palms away from the iron (because it is boring to hold it there) but they will take longer to want to do so. We measure these times and then compare the times between set A and set B. After applying some statistical procedures to come to the conclusion that the times are different between the two sets. Which then leads us to the conclusion that heat does have an effect on how long a person will want to keep their palm within 3 cms of an iron. Crudely, we have demonstrated that heat does affect human beings.
In the above experiment, set A is referred to as the treatment set while set B is referred to as the control set. Supposing you are not allowed to use a control set. In other words you are not allowed to used an unheated iron on one set. What conclusion can you reach about the effect of heat on human beings. You will still get a response, people will remove their hands from near the iron. But can you be sure that it is because of the heat? No.
My problem with astrology is that their is no control in this racket. Someone wins the lottery and an astrologer claims that it is because they were born under a particular condition of the constellations, implying that they would not have won the lottery had they been born in a different condition of constellations. We can never test this, can we? We cannot go back in time and make this person be born under a different condition of constellations and then travel back to the present to see whether they buy a lottery ticket and win. So you see, there is no control. So anybody can make any claim of astrological influence and the claim cannot be verified by any means.
The other things which astrologers do is predict the future. This one is relatively easy to test but astrologers make predictions in ways which make it difficult to test their correctness. Mostly they do not make any concrete predictions. Fuzzy predictions are difficult to test for correctness.
So how can we test how correct the predictions made by an astrologer are? Let us say we can find an astrologer willing to make testable predictions. This is not really possible because none of them really do. But for the sake of convenience let us say we can find one. Now let us go to a T junction on the road and ask this astrologer to make predictions whether cars approaching it will turn left or right while the cars are still at least 200 yards away from the junction. The astrologer should not be familiar with the junction. Now we count how many times the prediction is correct and how many times wrong. What will we find.
Whether you are an astrologer or not, there are ways of improving your percentage of correct predictions. It is by having what statisticians call a model. Supposing you have opportunity to study this T junction beforehand. You could count what percentage of cars turn left. Let us say it is 70%, while 30% turn right. Now when you are making predictions you could always say that the car will turn left. And you will be right 70% of the time. Better still, you could mix 7 left turns with 3 right turns for every 10 predictions you make. Given a large enough number of predictions you will be right more than 70% of the time. See anybody can make predictions if less than 100% certainty is acceptable! So prior observations can lead to a model which can lead to better predictions. Models vary. Some are better than others. In general, better models will give predictions of higher accuracy. Coming back to the T junction. Supposing that we do not make any prior observations on the T junction but we know that the left turns leads to a major road while the right turn leads only to a small village. Now without making any prior observations we can still arrive at a model with just this bit of information. Most cars will turn left to take the main road. We could guess any thing, 60%, 70%, 90% to use in our model. As long as we estimate that more than 50% cars will turn left our model will have improved predictability.
At least some astrologers use prior information to make predictions although they deny doing so. They claim to rely on astrological calculations only. There is a lot one can guess from body language, expression, speech etc., and all these can be used to draw general conclusions even about someone you are meeting for the first time. If someone has come to you for astrological consultation then they are already predisposed to believing you. So all the astrologer has to do is to make some intelligent guesses and some generalized predictions based on those guesses. Incidentally, this is exactly what con men do. They make some intelligent guesses about you, predict your behaviour based on those guesses and, then manipulate the circumstances to make you do something silly which will enable them to pull off the con.
Actually friends can do the same. Friends who know you quite well can easily predict that you will not do well as a writer but will do well as a teacher. Their model is their knowledge of you. Their knowledge of you is better than that of any astrologer. So get some good and honest friends. They are much better than astrologers and a lot more fun.
Nobody knows yourself better than you. Be your own friend. More importantly, don't be your enemy. Be honest with yourself. Widen your horizons but do not move too quickly and too far from your core competence. Know your fortes, develop them and use them with confidence. Just like your friends help you know yourself, help them know themselves. Just like you should never be dishonest with yourself, never be dishonest with friends (or anybody else for that matter).
Hopefully I have convinced you that astrological predictions are not purely astrological and that you do not need them to live a happy and fulfilling life.
In the above experiment, set A is referred to as the treatment set while set B is referred to as the control set. Supposing you are not allowed to use a control set. In other words you are not allowed to used an unheated iron on one set. What conclusion can you reach about the effect of heat on human beings. You will still get a response, people will remove their hands from near the iron. But can you be sure that it is because of the heat? No.
My problem with astrology is that their is no control in this racket. Someone wins the lottery and an astrologer claims that it is because they were born under a particular condition of the constellations, implying that they would not have won the lottery had they been born in a different condition of constellations. We can never test this, can we? We cannot go back in time and make this person be born under a different condition of constellations and then travel back to the present to see whether they buy a lottery ticket and win. So you see, there is no control. So anybody can make any claim of astrological influence and the claim cannot be verified by any means.
The other things which astrologers do is predict the future. This one is relatively easy to test but astrologers make predictions in ways which make it difficult to test their correctness. Mostly they do not make any concrete predictions. Fuzzy predictions are difficult to test for correctness.
So how can we test how correct the predictions made by an astrologer are? Let us say we can find an astrologer willing to make testable predictions. This is not really possible because none of them really do. But for the sake of convenience let us say we can find one. Now let us go to a T junction on the road and ask this astrologer to make predictions whether cars approaching it will turn left or right while the cars are still at least 200 yards away from the junction. The astrologer should not be familiar with the junction. Now we count how many times the prediction is correct and how many times wrong. What will we find.
- Not all predictions will be correct.
- Not all predictions will be wrong.
- Some percentage of predictions will be correct.
- Not all predictions will be correct.
- Not all predictions will be wrong.
- Some percentage of predictions will be correct.
Whether you are an astrologer or not, there are ways of improving your percentage of correct predictions. It is by having what statisticians call a model. Supposing you have opportunity to study this T junction beforehand. You could count what percentage of cars turn left. Let us say it is 70%, while 30% turn right. Now when you are making predictions you could always say that the car will turn left. And you will be right 70% of the time. Better still, you could mix 7 left turns with 3 right turns for every 10 predictions you make. Given a large enough number of predictions you will be right more than 70% of the time. See anybody can make predictions if less than 100% certainty is acceptable! So prior observations can lead to a model which can lead to better predictions. Models vary. Some are better than others. In general, better models will give predictions of higher accuracy. Coming back to the T junction. Supposing that we do not make any prior observations on the T junction but we know that the left turns leads to a major road while the right turn leads only to a small village. Now without making any prior observations we can still arrive at a model with just this bit of information. Most cars will turn left to take the main road. We could guess any thing, 60%, 70%, 90% to use in our model. As long as we estimate that more than 50% cars will turn left our model will have improved predictability.
At least some astrologers use prior information to make predictions although they deny doing so. They claim to rely on astrological calculations only. There is a lot one can guess from body language, expression, speech etc., and all these can be used to draw general conclusions even about someone you are meeting for the first time. If someone has come to you for astrological consultation then they are already predisposed to believing you. So all the astrologer has to do is to make some intelligent guesses and some generalized predictions based on those guesses. Incidentally, this is exactly what con men do. They make some intelligent guesses about you, predict your behaviour based on those guesses and, then manipulate the circumstances to make you do something silly which will enable them to pull off the con.
Actually friends can do the same. Friends who know you quite well can easily predict that you will not do well as a writer but will do well as a teacher. Their model is their knowledge of you. Their knowledge of you is better than that of any astrologer. So get some good and honest friends. They are much better than astrologers and a lot more fun.
Nobody knows yourself better than you. Be your own friend. More importantly, don't be your enemy. Be honest with yourself. Widen your horizons but do not move too quickly and too far from your core competence. Know your fortes, develop them and use them with confidence. Just like your friends help you know yourself, help them know themselves. Just like you should never be dishonest with yourself, never be dishonest with friends (or anybody else for that matter).
Hopefully I have convinced you that astrological predictions are not purely astrological and that you do not need them to live a happy and fulfilling life.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
