Platonic Love

Platonic Love

Platonic love is the type of love between two people that transcends obsessive physicality.

Platonic love as it is understood today is a love between two people that is chaste, affectionate, but free of intimacy and sexual desire.

The term has its roots with the Greek philosopher Plato (c. 424-c. 348 BCE), who used it in his philosophical text The Symposium, written in c. 360 BCE. In the text, Plato dissects a series of speeches made by men at a drinking party, or symposium, held in the Athenian household of the poet Agathon. The speeches, expressed in the form of a dramatic dialogue, are written “in praise of love,” and those invited to speak include an aristocrat, a legal expert, a physician, a comic playwright, a statesman, Plato himself in the roles of both host and tragic poet, and Socrates (c. 470-399 BCE), Plato’s own teacher and one of the founders of Western philosophical thought.

It is Socrates’s speech that has since been interpreted as introducing the concept of platonic love. Socrates condemns the sort of love that sees a man and a woman obsess over the physical act of love (eras in Greek) to the detriment of the pursuit of higher ideals in philosophy, art, and science. He speaks of the ideas of a prophetess and philosopher, Diotima of Mantinea, for whom love is a vehicle through which we can contemplate the divine and possess what she calls the “good.” According to Diotima—here “teaching” with Socrates in the role of “naive examinee”—a physically beautiful person should inspire us to seek spiritual things. Her idea of love does not exclude the possibility of physical love, however; the idea that platonic love should exclude physical love altogether is a later, and quite inaccurate, Western construct.

Thomas Hardy said in Jude the Obscure (1895): “We ought to have lived in mental communion, and no more.”

Four Strategic Shifts to Streamline Your Work Flow

Four Strategic Shifts to Streamline Your Work Flow

Behind every business strategy is a belief. What we believe about how the world works determines the policies we enact, the plans we devise, the processes we use, and the way we behave. Often, when we want to alter an outcome and improve results, we need to change the underlying belief. Then the processes and activities can be changed.

New product development is one area where erroneous beliefs keep us from getting the results we desire. The drive is always to achieve faster time-to-market and more predictable product development cycles, since finishing second in a winner-takes-all competition means, at worst, giving up millions in revenues, and, at best, delays in translating spending to revenue.

Here are four shifts in belief and behavior that make a profitable difference:

  1. Increasing throughput. The widely held belief is that keeping everyone going full bore-working long hours will speed things up. But most projects take longer than planned, and keeping everyone working longer does not necessarily improve speed. It’s more important to know what is limiting how much work can get through the system, and focusing resources there. Apply the most precious skills to tasks only those people can perform, offloading lesser tasks and ensuring the work arrives fully prepared.
  2. Exposing capacity. The entrenched belief is that idle system capacity is wasteful and should be eliminated. In reality, not having some extra capacity is sure way to miss deadlines and due dates. Too often, business capacity is pared to the bone, and projects fall behind. With no cushion, the system can’t handle even minor mishaps, let alone major problems. A reasonable extra capacity is not excessive but protective, helping to guard against sudden deviations. Flexible protective capacity can reduce project cost and time.
  3. Coherent work behaviors. Multitasking—working on several things at once—does not speed projects along. In fact, multitasking is one way to lengthen project time. Shifting attention among several different tasks inevitably wastes time. It’s almost always possible to speed up work by 10 to 30 percent just by eliminating multitasking. In truth, people cannot do more than one task at a time; they simply switch back and forth and lose time in between. The alternative is to get it, work it, and move it-working on a task until it is finished or you can’t do any more without more input.
  4. Acting globally. The common belief is that any improvement helps the organization, that local excellence always benefits the larger entity. However, local improvements may have no effect, or a negative one, on the bottom line. Becoming faster as a company simply can’t be achieved by optimizing areas. Since organizations are interdependent systems, it’s not always obvious how a change in one part will affect others. Changes toward “faster and better” may shift the balance of power, and people may resist or subvert change that hurts the ego or wallet. So, shifting to a global mindset may also mean adjusting rewards and incentives.

Speeding up product development requires knowing what makes work flow in a smooth and streamlined way. It’s not about keeping everyone busy all the time, eliminating all “waste,” juggling tasks, or making isolated improvements. The way to speed and quality is through stronger alignment—of behavior and belief, of practices and purpose—that frees us to strategically apply resources where real opportunities for improvement lie.

The Chicken and Egg Conundrum

The Chicken and Egg Conundrum

The age-old puzzle that if chickens come from eggs and vice versa, how do you establish which of the two existed first?

When a hen lays a fertilized egg, that hen will keep the egg warm until it hatches a chick. That chick will then grow up to become a hen and lay other eggs, repeating the process as part of an ongoing cycle. But when did this process start? What was first: the chicken or the egg? This infamous question identifies a problem of causality, a paradox in which both chicken and egg cannot exist without the other, yet there must have been a moment when one of them came first.

What existed at the beginning? How did objects, the world, animals, and humans come to be? These are the basic questions that lie at the heart of the chicken and egg conundrum. When the ancient Greek philosopher Aristotle (384-322 BCE) asked the question, he believed that both must have always been in existence. Over the centuries the question remained a challenge to philosophers, though it became less important after English naturalist Charles Darwin (1809–82) introduced the theory of evolution by natural selection and explained the development of any organism as a process of slow progress over time.

In 2010, British researchers released the results of a study that, they claimed, conclusively proved that the chicken came first. While the solution was not universally accepted, and others claim that the egg existed prior to the chicken, the question’s importance is not solely one of biological history. The chicken and the egg conundrum prompts us to consider beginning, and how they relate to our experiences. Some theologians have answered the question by saying that the creation of the universe necessarily means that the chicken came first. Other traditions hold that time does not have a clear beginning and end, and the idea of what came first is nonsensical because all things have existed for eternity.

Zoroastrianism and Cosmic Dualism

The remains of a Zoroastrian Fire Temple in Yazd, Iran. Fire is held sacred in Zoroastrianism

Zoroastrianism is an ancient Persian religion teaching cosmic dualism.

It is not known precisely when the ancient Persian religion of Zoroastrianism first came into existence, although scholars generally agree that it first appeared in the late Bronze Age (1500-800 BCE) as a development of Persian polytheism. The sacredness of the bull, for example, entered into Zoroastrianism (and Hinduism also), as did the strong insistence on ritual purification and the holiness of fire (for this reason Zoroastrians never burn their dead, but rather dispose of corpses by “exposing” them to the birds). The dominant religion of Persia until the rise of Islam, Zoroastrianism is now largely confined to the Parsi community of Bombay. Its scriptures are known as the Avesta.

The ancient Persians and Zoroastrians alike also revered asha (in Hinduism rta), a term that is best understood as truth or universal law, especially moral law. Asha was itself upheld by three ahuras, or “good deities”: Varuna, Mithra, and, the most supreme of all, Mazda, the lord of wisdom.

Claiming to be a true prophet of Mazda, Zoroaster, also known as Zarathustra, whose time of life is disputed, taught a form of cosmic dualism, namely, that there are two supreme, morally opposed gods—Ahura Mazda (good) and Angra Mainyu (bad). Zoroaster believed that Ahura Mazda and his ahuras were waging a great war against Angra Mainyu and his devas (evil deities), and that humankind, caught in the middle of this war, should choose to ally himself with Ahura Mazda, not only because Mazda is good but also because Mazda will be ultimately victorious.

Zoroastrianism’s influence lies firstly in itself, which is to say that it is one of the oldest living religions. Beyond this, Zoroastrianism gave Islam its format of five prayers a day, Tibetan Buddhism its practice of corpse exposure, Mahayana Buddhism its world savior concept (Saoshyant, or Maitreya), and Gnosticism and Manichaeism their belief that the world was made by an evil spirit. Zoroastrianism’s apparent influence on Jewish and Christian eschatology, however, has proved difficult to substantiate.

Value Investing: Philip Fisher on When to Sell a Stock

Common Stocks and Uncommon Profits, by Philip Fisher

Philip Fisher (1907–2004) is widely considered the pioneer and thought process leader in long-term value investing. Years after his death, Fisher

is widely respected and admired as one of the most influential investors of all time. Fisher developed his long-term investing philosophy decades ago

and discussed them in his seminal book, Common Stocks and Uncommon Profits. Common Stocks and Uncommon Profits was first published in 1958

and continues to be a must-read today for investors and finance professionals around the world.

Philip Fisher, Investor, Author of Common Stocks And Uncommon Profits Today, we will dig deeper into his selling discipline. For many investors, buying a stock is much easier than deciding when to sell it. Selling securities is much more difficult than buying them. The average investor often lacks emotional self-control and is unable to be honest with himself. Since most investors hate being wrong, their egos prevent taking losses on positions, even if it is the proper, rational decision. Often the end result is an inability to sell deteriorating stocks until capitulating near price bottoms.

Selling may be more difficult for most, but Fisher actually has a simpler and crisper number of sell rules as compared to his buy rules (3 vs. 15). Here are Fisher’s three rules for selling a stock:

  • Wrong Facts: There are times after a security is purchased that the investor realizes the facts do not support the supposed rosy reasons of the original purchase. If the purchase thesis was initially built on a shaky foundation, then the shares should be sold.
  • Changing Facts: The facts of the original purchase may have been deemed correct, but facts can change negatively over the passage of time. Management deterioration and/or the exhaustion of growth opportunities are a few reasons why a security should be sold according to Fisher.
  • Scarcity of Cash: If there is a shortage of cash available, and if a unique opportunity presents itself, then Fisher advises the sale of other securities to fund the purchase.

Many investors are reactive and sell at the same time everyone else does—when they’re fearful. But your emotions aren’t the best guide for making critical financial decisions. Long-term investors should not fear occasional swings in the market. When the market dips or takes an unusual turn, that is the perfect time to review your portfolio and re-evaluate your investing strategy.

Megalithic Monuments of Hirebenakal near Raichur in Karnataka

Megalithic Monuments of Hirebenakal, Prehistoric Site, Raichur in Karnataka

The term megalithic culture is used to denote the culture of a group of people who built their large tombs with the help of mega (huge) liths (stone) or huge stones. Literally there are thousands of such tombs all over South India including Karnataka. In general terms they were the successors to the new stone-age people. After the megalithic period we enter into the early historic period.

Chronologically, the megalithic period lasted from about 10th century B.C. to 3rd Century AD., with lot of various dates in between. There is a great variety in their tombs and culturally they are the introducers of iron into South India. Though their habitation sites are rare, their burials have been found in groups in hundreds. They had learnt the technique of quarrying and dressing stones for the purpose of the building their tombs of different varieties. These tombs contain bones and other related grave goods including iron objects. After the systematic excavations of Brahmagiri megaliths (near Chitradurga) many other sites have been excavated which give us a glimpse into the life of the megalithic people.

Benakal Prehistoric Site, Karnataka

Megaliths at Hirebenakal in Raichur, Aihole in Bijapur, and Kumati have been studied in, great detail. Kumati is unique because it has stone anthropomorphic figures of huge size, not generally found elsewhere. Megaliths are locally known as Moriyaramane, Moriyara Angadi or Moriyara Gudda. They may be divided into many varieties on the basis of their external appearance as dolmenoid cists with port-holes, rock-shelter chambers, polygonal cists, dolmens with closed port~hole, stone circles etc.

The underground chambers generally contained various types of pottery with food and water along with iron implements used by the person, beads, other ornaments and skeletal remains. This shows that they had a strong belief in life after death. With the help of these objects, life of the megalithic people has been reconstructed. They belonged to an agricultural community and manufactured iron tools such as knives, axes, hooks, chisels etc. Perhaps they had a class system the details of which are not known. They practiced agriculture and lived in huts. Thus the megalithic people laid a firm foundation for the beginning of historical culture.

How to Reduce Conflict at Work

Fierce battles over decisions, finances, resources, power, and authority are fought daily, and combatants often inflict lasting damage, when the personal interests of ambitious managers take precedence over organizational goals.

Competition can cause managers to backstab one another, hoard information, focus on personal needs, and ignore facts that don’t support their views.

Functions that operate as silos create turf wars. And the costs are high. Creativity is lost, reputations damaged. Frustrated, some executives leave for more collegial settings. Here are ways to reduce conflict:

  • Hold retreats to build camaraderie. Put people through a process to build conflict resolution and interpersonal skills co-operationely to achieve goals.
  • Reward cooperative behavior. If you talk about collaboration yet reward individual achievement, you get the behavior you positively reinforce.
  • Encourage innovation. Process routine may minimize errors and cut costs, but it can close people’s eyes and ears to better ways to do things. Innovation can increase efficiencies.
  • Create a culture of collaboration. Open communications in person, on paper, and online can lead to shared information, trust across disciplines, and reduced turf battles.
  • Clarify responsibilities. Help your people know their roles and the roles of others. Everyone’s key task is to delight customers and gain market share.
  • Seek cross-functional initiatives. Encourage teams from different areas to work together in cross functional initiatives. Invite managers from other areas to visit your team meetings when working together.
  • Enter white spaces cautiously. Certain open areas represent opportunities for revenue generation, but rather than enter them without notifying others, meet with them to gain their buy-in or agree to leverage the space together.

The Socratic Method

A 19th Century painting by Gustav Adolph Spangenberg, depicting Socrates and his disciples.

The Socratic Method is a teaching method that relies on continually asking questions.

The Socratic Method is a pedagogical style named after its well-known exemplar. Unlike the great sophist orators of his time and the later Aristotelian and Scholastic teachers, who disseminated information through carefully planned lectures, Socrates (c. 470-399 BCE) engaged his audience individually and personally with a series of questions. These questions were designed to elicit a reflective and mostly skeptical perspective on various philosophical, political, and religious ideas.

In a well-known case, depicted in Plato’s dialogue Meno (c. 380 BCE), Socrates used his method to “teach” an uneducated slave-boy a set of Euclidean propositions, including the Pythagorean theorem. The central assumption underlying Socrates’s approach is that knowledge is innate—we do not acquire new information, instead education reminds us of what we already know.

'Socratic Logic' by Peter Kreeft (ISBN 1587318083) Socrates’s Method was overshadowed in the Middle Ages by the popularity of classical orators such as Aristotle and Cicero, leading to an increase of lecture-centered pedagogy known as the Scholastic Model (also called the “banking model” because it assumes knowledge can be “deposited” in a student as money in a bank.) A further setback came in the seventeenth century with the rise in prominence of empiricism, the view that we come to the world as “blank slates” and must obtain knowledge through experience. Empiricism implies that innatism is mistaken, and thus challenges the pedagogy based on it.

The question of the effectiveness of the Socratic Method still receives attention from education researchers. Some contend that it constrains learning and fosters aggression. Others respond that, as with all teaching styles, the Socratic Method can be abused, but when used well it can be effective. It is still frequently applied in law schools, as memorably portrayed in the movie The Paper Chase (1973).

“I Must Be Myself” from Ralph Waldo Emerson’s “Self-Reliance”

'Self-Reliance and Other Essays' by Ralph Waldo Emerson (ISBN 0486277909) 

Ralph Waldo Emerson (1803—1882) was an American essayist and poet. Born in Boston, Massachusetts, Emerson was the fourth child of a Unitarian minister. Throughout his writings, Emerson is keenly concerned with the growth of the individual—the development of the individual’s powers, potentials, and capacities—an emphasis demonstrating that his thought is thoroughly centered on educational concerns.

Emerson was one of his era’s leading liberals. His prime meaning in any case is self-reliance intellectually and in everyday life. He urges us to trust ourselves, to recognize human divinity and avoid imitation. It is a simple message but all-important – and far easier said than done.

Ralph Waldo Emerson’s Self-Reliance may be a short essay, but it is packed with advice which is probably more relevant today than it has ever been. At only 30 pages, Self-Reliance has the qualities of a concentrate, perhaps the very essence of personal development. Self-Reliance was one of the key pieces of writing which helped carve the ethic of American individualism, and forms part of the intellectual bedrock of today’s self-help writers. Relish what really matters in your life; the simple things like your friends and family, your hobbies and perhaps your work. Enjoy the freedoms you have and recognise the value of living a normal life outside of the public eye.

Ralph Waldo Emerson’s Self-reliance is one of the major writing that helped carve the ethnic American individualism and form the intellectual basis of today’s writers. The thought of self-reliance inspires people not to conform to social conventions but to rely on themselves. When you are working on your next task, give it your full concentration and really put the effort in to produce the best possible end result. Even if it doesn’t lead to glittering success, you should be proud of yourself for doing your very best.

Emerson’s essay begins by reconstructing volving theory of recognition and the central role it played for his concept of ‘self-reliance.’ Initially having adopted the theorizations of recognition developed by Scottish Enlightenment thinkers, Emerson came to articulate the idea of self-reliance by way of developing an alternative approach to recognition, in which the source allocating recognition is neither society nor an inborn moral sense, but rather the transcendentally conceptualized self. Emerson’s shift towards self-recognition poses questions seldom asked in the contemporary debate on recognition.

“… Live no longer to the expectation of these deceived and deceiving people with whom we converse. Say to them, O father, O mother, O wife, O brother, O friend, I have lived with you after appearances hitherto. Henceforward I am the truth’s. Be it known unto you that henceforward I obey no law less than the eternal law. I will have no covenants but proximities. I shall endeavour to nourish my parents, to support my family, to be chaste husband of one wife,—but these relations I must fill after a new and unprecedented way. I appeal from your customs.

I must be myself.

I cannot break myself any longer for you, or you. If you can love me for what I am, we shall be happier. If you cannot, I will still seek to deserve that you should. I will not hide my tastes or aversions. I will so trust that what is deep is holy, that I will do strongly before the sun and moon whatever inly rejoices me, and the heart appoints. If you are noble, I will love you; if you are not, I will not hurt you and myself by hypocritical attentions. If you are true, but not in the same truth with me, cleave to your companions; I will seek my own. I do this not selfishly, but humbly and truly. It is alike your interest, and mine, and all men’s, however long we have dwelt in lies, to live in truth. Does this sound harsh to-day? You will soon love what is dictated by your nature as well as mine, and, if we follow the truth, it will bring us out safe at last.”

Full essay is here. Emerson wrote Self-Reliance in 1841—well over 160 years ago—and I believe it provides both a delightful antidote for the times in which we live and also holds up an ideal with which to guide us. Self-reliance—the ability to stand on our own two feet and live a life which is our own and not borrowed from someone else, or one which is meaningful and not superficial—is indispensable in instituting our own exclusive identity. So if, like me, you think self-reliance is important, read on.

“A man,” Emerson writes, “should learn to detect and watch that gleam of light which flashes across his mind from within, more than the luster of the firmament of bards and sages.” There is a certain ambiguity in this statement concerning the question of whether social approbation is categorically distinct from the “grace with the loftier deities” or linked to it by inversion. One also notices Emerson’s rhetorically combining Roman polytheism with Protestant grace, the distinction between lesser and loftier deities amounting to a kind of Protestant doctrine of two kingdoms in which two different economies of recognition are at work. Find somewhere you can think and reflect. It might be the public library or the bottom of your garden. It doesn’t matter where, as long as you spend some time thinking and don’t forget to take a notebook to jot down your thoughts. Everything we do depends for its quality on the thinking we do first.

The great philosopher of affirmation is concurrently the great teacher of dissatisfaction, even disappointment. In each of us, the energies of hope should make room for the emotion of philosophical acceptance of the world, as it must be. If you want to feel at peace go for a walk in the countryside and learn to appreciate your surroundings. Better still, do some sport as this releases serotonin which is so critical to the feeling of well-being. You don’t need to spend lots of money on a new car to make yourself feel happy; just go for a run.

Having established these fundamental dimensions of Emerson’s theory of inspiration, it is crucial to see that Emerson’s praxis of eloquence was geared at putting inspiration into effect. This he attempted to achieve by activating the reader’s imagination.

Quotations from Ralph Waldo Emerson’s “Self-Reliance”

  • “Discontent is the want of self-reliance: it is infirmity of will.”
  • “It is easy to see that a greater self-reliance must work a revolution in all the offices and relations of men; in their religion; in their education; in their pursuits; their modes of living; their association; in their property; in their speculative views.”
  • “I must be myself. I cannot break myself any longer for you, or you. If you can love me for what I am, we shall be the happier. If you cannot, I will still seek to deserve that you should. I will not hide my tastes or aversions.”
  • “You take the way from man, not to man. All persons that ever existed are its forgotten ministers.”
  • “In this pleasing contrite wood-life which God allows me, let me record day by day my honest thought without prospect or retrospect, and, I cannot doubt it, it will be found symmetrical, though I mean it not and see it not. My book should smell of pines and resound with the hum of insects.”
  • “Society is a wave. The wave moves onward, but the water of which it is composed does not.”
  • 'The Essential Writings of Ralph Waldo Emerson' by Ralph Waldo Emerson (ISBN 0679783229) “We fancy it rhetoric, when we speak of eminent virtue. We do not yet see that virtue is Height, and that a man or a company of men, plastic and permeable to principles, by the law of nature must overpower and ride all cities, nations, kings, rich men, poets, who are not.”
  • “And so the reliance on Property, including the reliance on governments which protect it, is the want of self-reliance.”
  • “Trust thyself: every heart vibrates to that iron string.”
  • “Inasmuch as the soul is present, there will be power not confident but agent.”
  • “Society never advances. It recedes as fast on one side as it gains on the other.”
  • “In the Will work and acquire, and thou hast chained the wheel of Chance, and shalt sit hereafter out of fear from her rotations.”
  • “The civilized man has built a coach, but has lost the use of his feet.”
  • “Life only avails, not the having lived.”
  • “Be it how it will, do right now. Always scorn appearances, and you always may. The force of character is cumulative.”
  • “We but half express ourselves, and are ashamed of that divine idea which each of us represents.”
  • “I like the silent church before the service begins, better than any preaching.”
  • “Insist on yourself; never imitate.”
  • “What I must do is all that concerns me, not what the people think.”
  • “Truth is handsomer than the affectation of love. Your goodness must have some edge to it,—else it is none”
  • “A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds, adored by little statesmen and philosophers and divines. With consistency a great soul has simply nothing to do.”
  • “Your genuine action will explain itself, and will explain your other genuine actions. Your conformity explains nothing.”
  • “There will be an agreement in whatever variety of actions, so they be each honest and natural in their hour. For of one will, the actions will be harmonious, however unlike they seem.”
  • “I do this not selfishly, but humbly and truly. It is alike your interest, and mine, and all men’s, however long we have dwelt in lies, to live in truth.”
  • “If you are noble, I will love you; if you are not, I will not hurt you and myself by hypocritical attentions.”
  • “Whoso would be a man must be a nonconformist.”
  • “Nothing can bring you peace but yourself. Nothing can bring you peace but the triumph of principles.”
  • “Travelling is a fool’s paradise. Our first journeys discover to us the indifference of places.”
  • “The virtue in most request is conformity. Self-reliance is its aversion. It loves not realities and creators, but names and customs.”3/29/2016
  • “Society everywhere is in conspiracy against the manhood of every one of its members.”
  • “Character teaches above our wills.”

Fatalism v/s Determinism

Sourced in Ancient Greece, Fatalism is the belief that events are predestined and nothing can alter their course. Kazuo lshiguro wrote in Never Let Me Go, “Your life must now run the course that’s been set for it.”

Fatalism, the belief that some events are destined to occur regardless of whatever else might occur, originated with thinkers in ancient Greece. A wellknown example is the story of Oedipus from Sophocles’s ancient play Oedipus Rex (c. 429 BCE). In the play, Oedipus seeks revenge for the murder of his former king and his wife’s former husband, Laius, only to discover that Laius and his wife abandoned Oedipus as a child to escape an oracle that their son would kill his father and sleep with his mother. Yet, despite all their machinations, the prophecy had come true: Oedipus had killed his father and married his mother.

Fatalism is distinct from determinism. The latter is the view that every event is fully determined by prior events, that is, if some prior events had been different, later events would be different. Fatalism neither implies, nor is implied by, determinism.

The ancient Greek Stoic philosophy is often linked with fatalism, though it is unclear whether it is fatalistic or deterministic. Some Stoics suggested that the universe is organized according to a single divine purpose that will be realized irrespective of what humans intend. Others argued that perfect virtue is found through learning to be guided by nature and becoming free from passions. This emphasis on learning and becoming free suggests that some events are left to individual agents. Scholars debate whether this constitutes a conceptual problem for Stoicism or fatalism. Fatalism, especially in regard to moral attitudes and happiness, remains influential in contemporary thought, notably in military training.