Opinions, convictions and facts

 Each one of us is entitled to hold dear an opinion about anything in the world, or out of the world. But, to make it a conviction and speak to everyone as if so is a very foolish modus operandi. 

I remember Fr Marco narrating the incident of the tennis commentator recieving a said number of letters from his bearers after a particular match. There were talks and media gossip about him being partial to one of the two players. Until he revealed in an interview that half of the letters he received accused him of being partial to one and the remaining half accused him of being partial to the other player. So he naturally took pride in his job and used this very incident of disrespect to prove his competency.

Opinions, facts and convictions!! Easy to have the first, in gallore. Hard to sift through facts and verify opinions and give up most of the opinions. Takes guts to grow deeper in convictions, all the while being open to review them. 

Widening the divide with capitals!

A further reflection on the theme of intolerance and Christian unity, in the context of language - a topic that I'm brooding over! 

Disunity is brought about, in most cases, when an idea is held to be of greater importance than a human being. All cases of religious fundamentalism arise when the concept of religion takes precedence over humanity; when faith becomes greater than human life; when god - and I mean, the concept of God - needs to be protected, but not my neighbour. 

One easy way we fall into this trap of elevating a concept to a status higher than a living being, reducing the latter to such a minimal value so as to count for nothing, is when we capitalise a word!  When faith becomes Faith.  When god becomes God.  When church becomes Church.  These are tell-tale signs of where and what we feel are un-negotiable aspects of our living, at the altar of which everything else (not belonging to me), especially others, can be sacrificed.  Furthermore, with words like 'infidel', 'atheist', 'unbeliever', 'pro-abortionist', 'LGBTQ+', ... we can easily reduce persons, living beings with flesh and blood, families and feelings into despicable things that in their entirety ought to be made to disappear! 

That reminds me of a very stinging remark one of my former Rector's made on a report I put together after my supervision of a batch of third year students involved in the 'Immersion programme'.  Back then it struck me, as 'what's the big deal?' Why make a hue and cry about a regular use?  The phrase I used in the report was a description of a place: '...a place infested with naxalites...'  And the Rector had circled this phrase and written on the margins, "Even naxalites are people, not insects!" Looking back I clearly see.  I did not mind using the word 'infested' in the context of the naxalites, but I would never have used it in the context of seminarians or even a packed railway station!  My prejudices were laid bare.  

Diversifying syllabus

One of the presenters at the Symposium on Diversifying curriculum in the multi-cultural context of the UK, spoke of their department's attempt to understand that there are nuances in this endeavour.  She pointed out that to

• democritize - to go beyond the elite
• diversity - go beyond the white
• decentralize - go beyond the Western
• decolonize - involve local experience and have a multi-dimensional approach, or in the least be critical of prevailing popular sources

It was interesting to note that, in the context of teaching history, she stated that doing one does not automatically mean doing all the other too!

As I listened to the various points spoken about, I felt how greatly philosophy, a subject dealing with critical outlook, can help in this endeavour.  That philosophy content itself needs to be filtered through these biases, is a task not less important!

There were also proposals of how we can ask and get the students to suggest authors or ideas they wish to discuss form a small portion (perhaps the concluding part) of the lecture series.  Thus their preferences or likes of their own background or interest could resonate in the curriculum.  Another aspect was a thorough review of the sources, especially primary sources, cited as part of the reading for a particular course undertaken.

Besides the points I gathered from the symposium, I thought the aspect of a conscious and continuous process of self-awareness regarding the biases and perspectives from which I, the educator, carries out the task of teaching (and learning), forms a very fundamental aspect of this diversification.  It could be as simple as being conscious of the vocabulary that I use, the examples I quote, the authors or ideas I refer to... This personal awareness does go a long way in creating a sensitive and inclusive classroom ambiance, especially with regard to the syllabus.  

Respect

You don't throw a whole life away just because it's banged up a little... 

That's one of the punch lines from the movie Seabiscuit

Why respect some great thinker, politician or celebrity if somewhere in his or her speeches or texts he or she has a very "biased" opinion about a certain group of people?  Why respect Kant and Hume, if they strongly felt that the whites were superior to the coloured skin? Why read and appreciate Aristotle if he felt men were superior to women?  Source: Aeon

• Disrespecting the whole person and all his or her writings betrays a profound lack of understanding of how socially we are influenced, even the greatest of minds of any time. 
• Never take one of their personal convictions to be the bedrock of all their thought and philosophy.  
• We are judging them by today's standards and cultural openness - something that they did not have the privilege to in their times.  
• While an individual is ultimately responsible for his own thoughts and actions, one cannot be held solely responsible, if the whole ambiance of his lifetime is flawed or biased.  (Jesus saying, "You don't give the dogs food meant for the children")
• Accepting and admiring the deep thoughts of such men and women, is not affirming their 'racist or sexist' thoughts.  Racism and sexism were never okay, people simply wrongly believed that they were.
• See if their fundamental way of thinking would be negatively prejudiced if applied today. 

Given Aristotle’s openness to evidence and experience, there is no question that today he would need no persuading that women are men’s equals. Hume likewise always deferred to experience, and so would not today be apt to suspect anything derogatory about dark-skinned peoples. In short, we don’t need to look beyond the fundamentals of their philosophy to see what was wrong in how they applied them.

• Excusing them is not the same as excusing someone who's living today with some of those distorted values. We, the living, have the opportunity to weigh the pros and cons; we have history to learn from; we have the possibility of making amends; we may not be the ones who created such notions but are very much in a position to challenge them; we certainly are 'better equipped'... the dead have no such possibility! 

Prejudice

An interesting forward I received today.  Certainly an exaggeration but does contain more than a bit of truth.  

A world survey was conducted. The only question asked was: "Would you please give your honest opinion about solutions to the food shortage in the rest of the world?"
The survey was a huge failure.  In Africa, they didn't know what 'food' meant.  In India they didn't know what 'honest' meant.  In Europe they didn't know what 'shortage' meant.  In China, they didn't know what 'opinion' meant.  In the Middle East they didn't know what 'solution' meant.  In South America they didn't know what 'please' meant.  And in the USA they didn't know what 'rest of the world' meant.  

Relevance and meaning decide 'the obvious'

What is obvious is not what is out there, but what we sought to seek and find! The famous gorilla experiment, is an example in case.  We human beings always are looking for, not merely looking at.  Blindness and bias are not negative features of our human nature.  They merely indicate that the individual is looking for something else! Something else is relevant and meaningful and therefore, misses the 'obvious'.  (Theory decides the observation.)

Reminds me of Fr TD, who always used to harp on seeing the good in the boys rather than the mischief or the nuisance they create, and when caught in the act say, "See, I told you!"

But the far more important point is that we also need to recognise and investigate the remarkable human capacities for generating questions and theories that direct our awareness and observations in the first place. Bias and blindness-obsessed studies will never get us to this vital recognition.

At its worst, the fascination with blindness and bias flattens humans, and science, to a morally dubious game of ‘gotcha’.

So in the case of Artificial Intelligence (AI), both optimism and worry are justified and valid.  Optimistic that they are better at observation and statistical analysis than human beings; worry, because we human beings are passing on to them our limited framework of what to observe and how to analyse!  Relevance and meaning are vital to intelligence and rationality - computers being good at the latter, not the former.  (Insights and quotes from Aeon)

Extending the boundary

When I was small and along with friends about to play a cricket match, one of the first things we collectively would decide is the boundary line.  If the place was limited or inaccessible, then certain spots would be declared 2-runs by default.

We grown ups do the same with our relationships too.  There are people and I mean certain groups as a whole, certain sections of humanity as such which are either within or without the boundary.  I distinctly remember one of the first conversations I had with someone in Kondadaba when I reached the place for my first year of practical training, way back in 2000.  It was the one who regularly supplied the seminary with the chicken.  Since the Brothers had not yet arrived, I went to shop (as directed by the cooks) and introduced myself.  Since my name wasn't revealing any "affiliation" they gently stated that very many of the Brothers in the seminary were "their" people.  I had no clue of what he was talking! After repeated and creative attempts and only when he realised that I wasn't getting what he wanted to know did he bluntly ask me, "What's your caste?"

The further the boundary we set by which we consciously or unconsciously exclude people is the better human beings we will be.  Some set nationality, colour of the skin, or religion as the boundary.  Greater are the souls who have extended the boundary beyond human beings to include animals (if not all, at least most) within one's relationship circle.  I'm not talking of those who love animals more than human beings, but of those who love animals as much as all human beings!  The greatest see no boundary at all.

We celebrate today the feast of St Francis of Assissi, one of the rare gems of humanity who saw no boundaries at all in relating to the world.

Confirmation bias

In my reading during the day, I came across this phrase 'Confirmation bias' meaning, actively looking for things that help your argument and dismissing things that don't.

This is a tendency we find in everyone.  It is often the same bias that prevents us from admitting that we were wrong.  But there is another side of this as well.  Far from acknowledging mistake or error, we go to great lengths to devise strategies that affirm an outright error.  The author of the book Being Wrong, Kathryn Schulz points out five responses people offer to defend their mistake rather than admit them:

1. time-frame defence: just got the calculations a bit mixed up... but not wrong.
2. near-miss defence: it almost happened as I said it would 
3. out-of-left defence: it was almost going to happen as I said, but for that unexpected incident...
4. I was wrong, but it is your fault: not my doing... if I hadn't listened to your advice, it would have been as I said
5. better-safe-than-sorry defence: thinking and doing what I did, it would have been wrong for me to act otherwise... 

In all these there is a sort of 'mental accommodation' into which we ease ourselves to justify that what we think, hold, and believe is right, even if we know it is wrong!

The Boy in the Striped Pyjamas

For the first time today, I picked up a book from our own community library to read. It was The Boy in the Striped Pyjamas by John Boyne.  

I knew that this book was made into a movie too, but somehow never got myself to see it for it has something to do with the Holocaust.  This morning I said to myself, I will read the book and then watch the movie to see which is better.

The book is the poignant story of two 9-year olds on either side of the fence of a concentration camp in Poland.  One the son of a German officer and the other a Jew in the camp.  The book is narrated from the eyes and mind of the German boy, Bruno.

In spite of the tragedy and gloom all around, the story is lively and the child's innocence keeps it heart-warming - even through and to the extent of death.  There were times in the book, when I wanted to intervene, especially towards the end.  But found myself too stunned and lost for words. I still feel the hair on my hands stand up - watching helplessly as the two boys march on. The fact that those boys go through death, without being aware of it, makes it consoling; yet offers no comfort at all.

Few points that stand out for me:

• How children grow up - or to be precise, fed with - prejudices and theories which are totally contrary to their own world-view.  But still children grow up to believe in the 'theories' or 'rules' set before them because they are done by the ones they love most - their parents.  Their initial innocence is over-ridden by the 'truth' they are told, which they then retell others, even if it meant they do not understand or even do not accept them.  
• How right the children are and as an adult reading the book, you cannot but see it; yet in reality we act as adults! 
• As one reading it I could not but feel the pain and agony, but how much more would the ones who were in that context have gone through.  Not just the victims (Shmuel and the Jews) but even those who stood by helpless but vocal (the grandmother); the silent trying to make sense (Maria); the utterly helpless (Pavel). 
• How harsh realities of life make one mature way beyond ones years. Shmuel knows more of life than Bruno.  His occasional silences are an added confirmation of this fact, besides the times he shares about his life.  

Makes me question, more than wonder, the worth of my own life.

I will never get myself to watch the movie. 

Prejudices

The past few days have been a living example of how personal prejudices - deep and crooked - can be detrimental to any learning or growth.  When so jaundiced about someone whatever the person says or proposes is immediate attacked or thrown out without even a casual look. Ideas and words become stingers and they are thrashed out of one's views without battling an eyelid.

Basically I fear it is a sickness to think that we know it all and therefore there is nothing new to be learnt.  While claiming to know, we actually think we know it all; while in reality we hardly know it.  We proudly proclaim our love and attachment to what we hold dear... but I wonder how much of it do we really know, and understand, to say that 'I love it dearly!'

There is also a great fear of moving out of our comfort zones and trying out something new or different.  But when one is not even open to, leave alone try out, new possibilities and suggestions one is nailing one's own coffin!

Is it so?

Being at Ramanthapur with children, I'm relearning very many things. One of the things is to view the world and especially the daily events and happenings from the perspective of the children.  As one with a few years in my age-kitty, I tend to see things from a particular perspective... needless to say that being in the formation setting, it is ONE way of seeing things.  Looking at what happens around the children, and viewing it from their eyes offers very very different perspectives.  I do not claim to have really learnt the art, but the small and short glimpses that I help myself to, seem very different from my own 'grown-up!' perspective.  But all said and done, viewing things from the child's perspective helps understand much of what they do, without being judgemental or prejudiced about people, especially of children themselves.

I guess if children see how we (grown ups) see things, then they'd understand why we behave so 'differently'... Dennis says it best!

Understanding the other, in myself

We always size up any new person we meet. Right before the first encounter ends, we already "catalogue" him or her.  Though we would like to say it is an unconscious process, in reality it is a very conscious and curious enterprise we all engage ourselves in. I really don't think there is nothing wrong or bad about it, in itself.  It is merely having an opinion about someone we just met and interacted with.  However, it would be immature if we convince ourselves that that is who the person wholly and truly is!  Not being open to seeing more of him or her (knowing the person more deeply) is indeed stunting our own growth.

Jesus too was asked for a sign to prove all that he said or claimed who he claimed himself to be.  The only trouble here was that people were trying to "categorize" him into a mould which they had already decided for him. They were not very keen to see him grow in them... not open to let him evolve in their understanding.  They had already fixed who he was and anything short of it, would disqualify him from "their" understanding of who he was.

Honestly speaking we only condemn or accept our image of the person we meet, and not the real person.  We land in error when we condemn or accept the real person solely on our constructed image of the person, that too from a very very limited and conditioned experience.  

The paradox

A heated conversation between two Catholics:

A: You said a lie. Didn't you?
B: Yes, I lied.
A: That's why I say, you're a liar! 

But didn't he just confess to have said a lie? He just said the truth by acknowledging his lie... and still he's a liar?

My mission? Really?

1 Sm 1: 1-8/ Ps 116: 12-13. 14-17. 18-19/ Mk 1: 14-20

… at once they left their nets and followed Him (Mk 1: 18)

It is certainly possible that before Jesus called Simon, Andrew, James and John, they had heard of him. They certainly would have given a thought to what Jesus had preached and so when His invitation reached them, they accepted it instantly. Each one of us called by the Lord. Have we heard of what He wants of us? Have we given that a thought? Or have I presumed something without ever listening, or verifying that what I believe as my mission is actually what the Lord wants of me?

I knew!

While evaluating a particular student/brother in the community, I could not but narrate this short story I heard sometime ago, to describe him best:

A family of tortoises went on a picnic and after years of walk, reached the spot and began to unpack their picnic meal.  However, they soon discovered that they forgot to get the salt. So after much discussion the youngest of them agreed to make the journey back home to fetch the salt.  However, his only condition was that they should not begin the meal without him. Once everyone agreed, he set out.
Months passed by and still when there was no sign of the youngest tortoise. The eldest then said that they start and he'll join in. So they opened their picnic meal.  The moment the lid was off, the youngest tortoise jumped out from behind a tree and exclaimed: "I knew you wouldn't wait for me! My suspicion proved right. I certainly am not going to get the salt!"

Some just wait for others to commit mistakes so that they can jump on them! 

Me? Really?

A couple of Salesian Sisters (FMAs) from Warangal visited us today on a two-day trip to Vizag.  I had never met them earlier but coming from Karunapuram they had heard a lot about me.  This evening after their return from Borra caves, one of them could not stop laughing when she met me in person.  Only a while later, when she could calm herself she apologised and was quite sincere to tell me that from all that she had heard about me, she had a particular image about me and when she actually saw me first time in the morning as they entered the house, she could not believe that I was 'Castilino'.

It was fun listening to her as she kept repeating how totally different I was from what she had imagined me to be!  

Building Bridges

Bridge-builders, including Jesus, usually start building a bridege from one side.  You can't build a bridge from the middle as even an engineer will tell you.  You must choose a starting point. What the Gospel is saying, pure and simple, is that wherever you're going to start building  your bride, you better start from the side of powerlessness, not power.  Because if you start on the side of power you'll stay there forever. You really won't build any bridges.  

[An extract from Jesus' Plan for a New World, p. 68].

That's quite a revelatory and challenging thought for ministers of today.  Very true given the fact that there are no neutral positions when it comes to discipleship and commitment. 

Biased?

Today is the second day of the retreat.  Yesterday itself was quite a drag and hence right after the first talk in the morning, I switched the preacher!  I had brought with me the book Jesus' Plan for a New World (by Richard Rohr) and given the situation that the preacher of the retreat was merely reading full time some theological and Salesian facts, I fell back to the book for inspiration and reflection.  Nothing against the person of the preacher and I know that he is a very capable man wanted all over the region for his expertise, however, I feel this talks very dry and drab.

As if that was not enough, the Rector of the retreat, soon after the goodnight tonight asked me to say a few words of thanks to the Preacher and the Provincial house community at the end of the retreat!  I was praying that no one asks me to do that for then I'd be forced to lie about the preacher in public (at least say what I am not convinced of).  Anyway, I ultimately accepted when after much persuasion, the Rector told me this:

There is still time, perhaps there may be something good waiting along the way for you!  

Well, I certainly would like to leave that possibility very much open!

Battling different fronts

Within the past two weeks the price of diesel and gas cylinders have gone up considerably.  This certainly burns a big and deep hole in my already torn pocket.  Stretching myself to last the financial year would be a real challenge.

However, more than the financial avalanches hitting us, there are things in the community which I need to attend to... that too immediately.  The poisonous talk of a few has really sickened quite a few in the community.  I need to address this at the earliest... hopefully on Monday itself.  For now, with the exams on, I would not like to come down heavily on those I know for sure are the kingpins behind this whole corruption of ambiance.  So I'm playing it cool, as if I'm following their 'dictates'.  I know not how this will turn out but I hope it will be for the good of the community.  

Judging...

The quote on the board yesterday was quite insightful.  It read:

We judge ourselves by what we are capable of but judge others by what they've already done.