Thinking Out of Box

Many hundreds of years ago in a small town, a merchant had the misfortune of owing a large sum of money to the moneylender. The moneylender, who was old and ugly, fancied the merchant’s beautiful daughter so he proposed a bargain. He said he would forgo the merchant’s debt if he could marry the daughter. Both the merchant and his daughter were horrified by the proposal. 

The moneylender told them that he would put a black pebble and a white pebble into an empty bag. The girl would then have to pick one pebble from the bag.If she picked the black pebble, she would become the moneylender’s wife and her father’s debt would be forgiven. If she picked the white pebble she need not marry him and her father’s debt would still be forgiven. But if she refused to pick a pebble, her father would be thrown into jail. They were standing on a pebble strewn path in the merchant’s garden. 

As they talked, the moneylender bent over to pick up two pebbles. As he picked them up, the sharp-eyed girl noticed that he had picked up two black pebbles and put them into the bag. He then asked the girl to pick her pebble from the bag.

What would you have done if you were the girl? If you had to advise her, what would you have told her? 
Careful analysis would produce three possibilities: 
1. The girl should refuse to take a pebble. 
2. The girl should show that there were two black pebbles in the bag and expose the moneylender as a cheat. 
3. The girl should pick a black pebble and sacrifice herself in order to save her father from his debt and imprisonment. 

The above story is used with the hope that it will make us appreciate the difference between lateral and logical thinking. 

The girl put her hand into the moneybag and drew out a pebble. Without looking at it, she fumbled and let it fall onto the pebble-strewn path where it immediately became lost among all the other pebbles. “Oh, how clumsy of me,” she said. “But never mind, if you look into the bag for the one that is left, you will be able to tell which pebble I picked.” Since the remaining pebble is black, it must be assumed that she had picked the white one. And since the moneylender dared not admit his dishonesty, the girl changed what seemed an impossible situation into an advantageous one. 

MORAL OF THE STORY: Most complex problems do have a solution, sometimes we have to think about them in a different way.

Dr.Hahnemann- A Good Old Modern Medical Thinker

The world celebrated the "Hahnemann Day" yesterday. Dr.Hahnemann made the discovery of Homoeopathy in Germany in 1810. He was a doctor in the western world who expected the doctor ( and all ) to be "the Unprejudiced Observer"- an observer who observes without any pre-judgement, without any preconceived notions, weighs the situation ( medical or otherwise), takes into account "Medicine of Experience" , thinks logically, has empathy and tries to "Heal the Sick".

Dr.N.L.Tiwari askes," What is prejudice? What is its link to perceiving? How is perceiving linked to perception? Are perceptual niceties and difficulties linked in any way with niceties and difficulties of perceiving? We will explore this at the outset.

Perception and Perceiving

The link between perception and perceiving, we can say, is observation. Let us observe the two pictures below and see what is revealed.

Picture 1

What do you see in Picture 1?

If we carefully observe it, we can see horses camouflaged in the background. There are 5 such horses that can be seen distinctly. All one needs is careful observation so that the details may not be missed, as the images may be inseparable from their background. With partial observation, one may miss the 4th or the 5th horse.

Picture 2 should now be easier to observe and comment upon.

Picture 2

What do you see now in Picture 2? Many people beautifully describe the picture as a romantic couple standing on the seashore near a weird shaped tree, probably very old. The couple is watching the sunset and admiring the mountains on the horizon. My son asked me whether I could see an infant in it. I searched but could not find it. Even the small stone lying near the couple was not it.  My wife standing next to me could see the infant in no time, but it took me 24 hours to see the infant in the picture."

Picture 3

You will certainly look at this picture again..... Why?

Basic principles of homeopathy

The fundamental idea of homeopathy is the Similarity (or Similia) Principle: ‘Similia similibus curentur’ (‘Let like be cured by like’). This implies that substances capable of causing disorder in healthy subjects are used as medicines to treat similar patterns of disorder experienced by ill people. Hippocrates wrote of curing 'like with like' more than 2,000 years ago but it was formally systematized by Hahnemann. He viewed health as a dynamic process tending to maintain a state of optimum equilibrium. Homeopathic medicines are aimed to direct and stimulate the body’s self-regulatory mechanisms.

A second principle in homeopathy is individualization of treatment for the patient. The characteristics of the chosen medicine should be as similar as possible to the characteristics of the illness in the patient. This closest match is called the ‘simillimum’. Similarity may be at the ‘whole person’ level, taking into account the symptoms and signs of the disease, the patient’s physical build, personality, temperament and genetic predispositions. This high level of individualization is not always required: ‘similarity’ may be at a more specific, local level, especially in the treatment of acute conditions.

A third principle is the use of the minimum dose. The doses used in homeopathy range from those that are similar in concentration to some conventional medicines to very high dilutions containing no material trace of the starting substance – the latter are referred to as ‘ultra-molecular’ dilutions. Vigorous shaking of the solution together with impact or ‘elastic collision’ (known as succussion) during the manufacturing process is a key element in the production of homeopathic medicines.

Long Live Hahnemannian Thought !!

Philanthropy

I am amazed by the good people do and try to do. We read everyday about all the ' bad' that is happening around us, we watch it on television. In all this hype and hoopla the small things that people do are not noticed easily.

The big 'philanthropists' always are noticed, and rightly so. They are reported by media all over.
Now a days the word 'Philanthropy' is associated exclusively with its most conspicuous manifestations, foundations and grant-making.

Philanthropy means "love of man" in the sense of caring for, nourishing, improving, and enhancing the quality of life for human beings. But we no longer use the term for the small acts of goodness.

In the recent times, a new(?) form of Philanthropy has emerged. Marking money for donations in future.. bequeathing. 
See Some large individual bequests listed below
(Source: Wikipedia)
Note: These are nominal values and have not been adjusted for inflation

• $31 billion from Warren Buffett to the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation (initial value of the gift)
• $9 billion from Chuck Feeney to Atlantic Philanthropies
• $2 billion from Azim Premji to the Azim Premji Foundation in 2010.
• $1 billion from Ted Turner to the United Nations
• $500 million from T. Boone Pickens to Oklahoma State University.
• $500 million from Walter Annenberg to public school reform in the United States
• $350 million ($7 billion in modern terms) from Andrew Carnegie in 1901 who distributed most of his wealth to good causes, including the building Carnegie Hall New York City.
• $424 million from managers of the Reader's Digest fortune to the Metropolitan Museum of Art
• $350 million from Michael Jackson who distributed most of his wealth to good causes, and who supported over 39 charity organizations. He was listed in the Guinness Book Of World Records for the "Most Charities Supported By a Pop Star".
• $350 million from Yank Barry and his Global Village Champions in food, education and medical supplies to the needy around the World from 1990 to the present.
• $225 million from Raymond and Ruth Perelman, parents of Ronald O. Perelman, to the University of Pennsylvania School of Medicine in 2011.
• $200 million from Joan B. Kroc to National Public Radio in 2003
• $100 million from John D. Rockefeller to the Rockefeller Foundation, 1913-1914

 You may feel that Philanthropy is not for you.
But have a look at this short talk and decide for yourself !

Happy Philanthropy !!

Weird Ideas !!.. for the Better World

I came across these ideas quite accidently. In my curiosity for information, i jumped from one site to another on the net. I think most of us do the same. But one such "web-site" hooked me. It is store-house of different " ideas worth sharing", not necessarily weird.

Have a look of the ideas from the world of "Technology, Entertainment and Design", famously known as "TED"... talks, conferences.

Here is a small list that sound "wierd" from thousands of titles available
1) A Test for Parkinsons's with a Phone Call
2) Dare to Disagree
3) Is Life really that Complex?
4) The Mad Scientist of Music
5 ) Behind the Great Firewall of China
6 ) Why the X is Unknown?
7) Advice to Young Scientist
8) The Happy Secret to Better Work
9) Science versus Wonder
10) Battleing Bad Science
... and there are thousands of talks to choose from.
More about TED: (From Wikipedia)

TED (Technology, Entertainment and Design) is a global set of conferences owned by the private non-profit Sapling Foundation, formed to disseminate "ideas worth sharing."
TED was founded in 1984 as a one-off event.The annual conference began in 1990, in Monterey, California.TED's early emphasis was technology and design, consistent with its origins in the Silicon Valley. The events are now held in Long Beach and Palm Springs in the U.S. and in Europe and Asia, offering live streaming of the talks. They address a wide range of topics within the research and practice of science and culture, often through storytelling. The speakers are given a maximum of 18 minutes to present their ideas in the most innovative and engaging ways they can.

"The New Yorker" has praised the worthy efforts. The article also lists "Five Key TED talks".

"The Entreprenuer" lists " the Top Ten TED talks for Startups".

We all get different ideas. We all get some weird ideas. How many have the ability to pursue those ideas? Some are good at Ideas and some are good at Implementation. Here on TED, you will find people who have the courage to think differently and also to see the results of their ideas.

I thought this is "worth Sharing". What do you say?