Chapter 4 of the little prince

Chapter number 4 reflection.

Of all the chapters in the book this one appealed most to me. It is laden with truth, so innocently pure, that one cant help but see the meaning of this. A book that might seem funny to a child is actually meaningful to me. From all the chapters this I perceived to be the best.
The narrator of the book talks about the planet the little prince comes from. It is a small asteroid; seen only once by a Turkish astronomer through a telescope. When the man introduced his discovery to the IAC, they rejected his knowledge. But when he did the same presentation in European clothes, his ideas were accepted and he became world-renowned. The narrator points out that grown-ups are like that. This part of the chapter is what really interested me. While a child would read this as something funny that the author randomly put in, I see it as a mockery of human mentality. A subtle still obvious criticism of racism; and the worst part is that we see this everywhere we go. Doctors are taken more seriously is they are not from the Arab origin. The most common place we do see this is at the airport. A man with a Muslim surname will be taken in for questioning. A person with a long beard will be looked at with fear, while a Muslim man in a suit will not, or will probably get one look. If an Arab man in Arab clothes stands next to an Arab man in a reputed suit, all eyes will be on the man in Arab clothes. This is our mentality. It is what we have let ourselves become. Emotion has taken over our ability to reason out, and we perceive all Arab men to be inferior and give them no attention. We speak condescendingly to them, and make them rise in anger. We feel the emotional loss when they act; but do we question why they act? Yes some Arab people act with violence, but so do some Hindus and some Jews and Christians.
The world’s population seems to be turning so narrow minded. It I so common that an Author actually writes about it in a children’s book. This is how inhumane we have become that the few smart people will talk straight to the children who can still be trusted with some hope. The so-called leading youth and the often-called old and wise generations of our times seem to think they are always right. The way they go about things, the generalizations they have made. According to me, forget the same mental level, it doesn’t even seem likely that were all living on the same planet anymore. The ways people think are so twisted that I actually loathe the little prince who has the luck to go back to a planet so far away from this one. A planet that could only be seen by this wretched Earth once.
The narrator goes on to talk about grown-up responses to a child making a new friend. It is usually about his age and his financial backing. Parents ask their kinds things about a child’s parents’ professions. They often even ask which caste the boy belongs to. It is never really about the personality of the boy, it is about his credentials. It is like an interview parents take to approve of their children’s friends.
When in comes to houses, a house is no longer judged by what is in it. It is priced. It is labeled to be top of the line, or as good as a slum. Everything theses days has a label. A label rich, a label Muslim, a label unworthy, a label terrorist! Enough! How long can we be so oblivious to the harm we are inflicting upon none other than ourselves. The narrator says that it mustn’t be held against them, but it should. People must be held accountable for the sins they commit. What man has been doing, this categorizing, it is nothing but a sin. Children see no colour, they see no thickness of wallets and brands of clothes. They see heart, they see the truth.
Most adults wouldn’t even understand the purpose of the narrator’s book. they would see it as just an entertaining story for children; but its more, its way more than that. It is to remind him, everyday of the lesson and the symbol of the little prince. The little prince was freedom. Freedom from the pain and suffering, freedom from the oblivion and mob mentality. The narrator writes his story to remind himself of what he never wants to become like. He writes it to remind him of what the grown-ups did to him when he wanted to paint. He writes to share his story with us, hoping that some will see what he is trying so hard to say.
Man has reached the day where he sees everything in black or white. It is about the money, it is about the safety. There is no middle line; a line of compromise with humanity. We have denatured into rocks and stones, with hard hearts. We call ourselves humans, but it seems that with everyday, we lose every last ounce of humanity left within us. man says evolution is still occurring, but according to me, we seem t be going backward. We need to find the grey. The middle between the black and white. We need to find our humanity and hind a way to go soft again.
The little prince is one woman’s cry to the hardening of mankind. It is her own lesson and a lesson for others. Living on Earth the narrator could not see the sheep through the holes, because with the sickness of the Earth, the spread to even the purist sanest minds is inevitable. This needs to stop before its too late, and this is what the author is trying to do, and this is what I learnt form this one chapter. What have we become; are we really proud to call our selves the most evolved superior living species?

Appy Fizz add 22nd april.

Today for the first time i saw the new Appy Fizz add. In this add the new drink Grappo fizz cracks a joke, and when Appy fizz feeling left out and bad tries cracking one of his own, no body laughs and all his original friends leave the room along with Grappo Fizz. This add made me really sad. I felt bad for Appy Fizz. Even though Appy is just an inanimate object, i could see the jealousy and the neglect that Apy felt. It is only natural.
Appy's portayed feelings managed to create a feeling of apathy in me. We see this happen so often. If we aren't the victims, we are party to the mockery, or we are the reason for the sadness of the other. This emotional truame is bad for everyone because it creates feelings of hate. It maes a person hate the thing that made them lose the attention or stay away from people to prevent themselves from gettign hurt. this fallicious reasoning leads to an actions that could harm others, and emotional language and very often it strngthens the feelings. If somethign further pushes down the ego of a person, they become even more emotional.
People are sensitive and we all must make an effort to perevnt this happening. I'm a true believer of the thought that 'what goes around comes around' and when it does indeed inevitably come around, it will come with regret and an accelerated amount of pain. Such a silly add managed to arrouse my emotions and got me thinking. The power of language is very well seen by this fact. I perceived this from a simple add and I got thinking in such depth making my belief even stronger. is there really a reason as to why we let another person feel low? it it really needed to push one person down to make another person feel special?

Intuition 20th april.

whose intuitions should you trust? are some people's intuitions better than other?
Well according to me, an intuition is something personal. It comes from within and has no true reason behind it. though people may share the same intuition, when it comes to trust, i am the only person whose intuitions i can trust. while i might believe in the Intuition of others, it is not the same feeling i get from within. though it is true to say that when a person who knows me has an intuitive feeling against a person who might hurt me in the future i will listen and stay wary of them, i know that on hearing another's gut feeling i will reason out a possible explaination of why that feeling might be true before pulling myself away from that person. When it comes to trusting an intuition it depends on who it comes from. it is a person you Intuitively feel is a perceptive person, then trusting them would be smarter that to trust a person who doesnt seem very perceotive. Therefore i feel primary trust can only come from my intuitive feelings.

If something is intuitively obvious must everybody agree about it?
There was a time where it was intuitively obvious that the white man was superior to the Black man. For years Africans were treated as objects that were sold and bought. they were slaves and treated no worthier than posessions. Though this was the case to white men, the black man did not agree. To him he was not destined to live this tyranny-bound life. Though societies have intuitions that they might believe, everybody need not agree with it. Muslims believe they are superior to all man, and that was the same with the Aryan race. While a Muslim or an Aryan can believe this, another person need not.

Is the anythign that everybody agees about?
acoording to me, this is to broad a question. While there a million things people disagree about, there are things that everyone agrees about. these are the factual things of existence. Things like the Earth is round, and the Sun is hot, things that the Earth revolves around the Sun and Matter exists are all things that all people believe in. But there are things that will never be agreed upon. Things like the exsitence of God, the creation of the world, the bad in killing a human, and even the Taliban being bad are htings that every peron will never agree upon.

Could you be wrong to think that something is Intuitively obvious?
While many gut feelings and hoped intuitions did not come out right, it is not wrogn to think that soemhtign is intutively obvious for it might just be. Intuitions are natural. We have them everyday. we wake up thinking if the day will go of well or not. But many a time intuitions can go wrong. trusting a person because it seems obvious that they will never hurt you can often be a mistake for something can happen that makes that person change, and then you might get hurt.

Might you one day come to see that something you tought was intuitively obvious is in fact a deep rooted prejudice?
i had a fixed belief, a feeling that love could never exist free from lust and passion. since me early teens i always believed this, but after hearing a story about my great grand parents and their love, i saw that love can exist. just with one story my preconvceived notion vanished and some sort of hope in the system of love took over me. maybe love truly can exist. If not for all, then atleast for some.

Knowledge at work- i dream to dream.

youtube.com britains got talent- Susan Boyle sings i dream to dream.

Probably one of the most judgment shattering videos ever seen, the 47 year old unemployed woman tried her luck at the show Britain's got Talent. On walking in, she was the cause for a sequential laughter amongst the audience. Not a very appealing face, and quite awkward in mannerisms, everyone perceived her to be one of those talentless fools, coming to try their luck to gain humorous attention. Everyone in the audience and the judges themselves didn't take her seriously. Claiming she wanted to be like Elane Page, everybody had a sort of gut feeling that she wouldn't be able to sing a straight note. Even the much cynical Simon spoke to her with an undertone of mockery.
But then, she began to sing "I dream to dream" and with less than 5 seconds, the laughing crowd converted to an audience full of fans, giving her a standing ovation. She managed to prove every single person wrong. She went back home with all three yeses, her head held high, and praises from one as rude and egoistical as Simon Cowell.
The video was a shock to me. her voice a shock all around the globe. Most people have the habit of judging another instantaneously. A label is stuck to their foreheads, and they are branded. people have their "gut feelings" about a person which in reality comes out of physical appearances. they perceive a person without reason, or justifications, and most of the time, the labeled person has no real way out of it no matter what they try doing. We see this so often in our everyday lives. A girl is labeled as a loose person. Even if the stories people have heard are simple rumors, or she is dressed to party for an occasion unknown to the onlooker, she gets this label, and people start talking. By the end of a couple of days, her name is associated with being loose, and she is branded for good. Even if the girl tries to change to improve her reputation, no body really gives her a chance. History shows us times where women weren't taken seriously. Where they were inferior, and no matter what they said, they were taken lightly. It is hard to prove a large group of people wrong when you stand alone, because no body likes being proved wrong.
Susan manages this in less that a minute over a hundred people who laughed at her, were now standing up and cheering her on. the so called "gut feelings" were all proved to be wrong, and she stood there, singing as though it was her last laugh. How often do we label people based on appearances? i myself thought it she was crazy wen i first saw the starting, but after being proved wrong i see how so often i might have been proved wrong, but never gave the labeled party that chance. How would i feel if the tables turned, and it was me against the world? its not right to assume before proving, and as a knower, i now know how terribly wrong it is. We all do it, we do it to our peers, to randoms on the road, to our teachers, and to mere acquaintances; and it is wrong. Susan Boyle managed, but often others don't, and so we must think twice, think a million times before sticking a label on a person who might not deserve it. Can we really reason out before letting ourselves make such risky assumptions?? what happens when the assumptions made, and out "gut-feelings" are on matters of more importance? can we always leave it to chance, and wait to see if by that tiny possibility, we are proved wrong? Susan Boyle is a reminder to all of us around the world, that a book must never be judged by its cover!

Equilibrium April 18th.

The third world war came to an end, and with it, came the mark of a new era. The era of Libria, where the survivors head bent on preventing any further aggression, decide to eradicate the disease that plagued all existence, and caused such destruction. With symptoms such as hate, anger rage, and finally the thirst for war, the apocalyptic terror, EMOTION. An era where no form of emotion could be expressed, no marriages, no sex, no art, no pictures, no ornaments were permitted. There were people who were meant to enforce these laws, clerics and council members with an arms all instructed to shoot any person who was guilty of “sense offending”. If needed to be question, they were locked into a room until the questions were complete, and then they were incinerated.
The worst part of the holocaust was that everyday, man was drugged at specific times with an emotion-numbing drug, which ceased man’s ability to feel or sense. This the time during which the movie “equilibrium” is shot. It is a story based on a cleric John Preston missed one of the drug doses he is meant to take, and instead of going to the place “equilibrium” to get a refill of that dose, he just skips it. Due to this, he starts t feel. After 4 years, he feels the loss of his wife, and pain in shooting a dog for existing. Finally he feels bad for killing his own partner for feeling. A partner who told him that dying was something he would gladly do instead of losing out on emotion. The girl he falls in love with it burnt in front of his eyes, and he can not stop it. She tells him that he lives in a world where the strife for the future means giving the future the position to strive for the generations to come.
One of the most controversial lines in the movie is by the vice council of the “father”( the man in charge), who says, “ without restraint, without control, emotion is chaos.” How true is that statement? Is man really incompetent and unable to control his emotions, or can emotion be controlled?
After watching the movie, one cant help but think about the first and second world wars. Were they really a direct result of emotion, and the truth is, they were. Starting from the German ego, to British imperialism, then going on to the second world war which began with the French anger lay out in the Treaty of Versailles, to Hitler’s rage against the Jews, it all indeed was triggered by emotion. Recently there was a rape in north Bombay where a Group of college boys, took advantage of a drunken friend, out of lust and frustration. Emotions out of control leads to destruction of so many lives, so is it really needed? Is it really a disease?
But then again, a life with no emotion, where today and tomorrow are no different. where life is all about preventing future problems, ignoring the lack of joy in life. Yea there is a down side to emotion, but should man realy sacrifice his happiness for the sake of the ruin caused by sadness? Even it that were true is there really any way to subdue emotion?
Today we all need reason to live. It is the thirst to find joy, to find love, to be content. Even when tings are hard, people have motivation to live, even after a woman is raped, she still wants to survive, because the feeling of happiness is so precious and so worth every minute of the pain. Today people take drugs to mimic that ease, but its still not good enough. That pristine state of happiness is so pure, that one moment of clarity is worth all the moments of sadness. We see stories of people surviving long distance relationships, running away from home to be one with the people who bring them happiness, we see the poor still fight to survive when they know that at the end of the day they must return to a slum. Why what motivates them? Well its simple, the hope that someday they will be happy. In equilibrium, the motive was so futuristic, that the people of the present lived a life only serving future generations, whom they knew would be bound to the same terrible fate.
Where is the line drawn between reason and emotion? Is there a possibility to balance them out? Can it ever be found? I don’t know yet, but I do know one thing for certain, life will cease to exist without emotion!

15th April (wednesday)

Our emotions lead to a vicious cycle if they are not brought under control. Emotions, not kept under control can often lead to rash decisions, that one might regret on a later date. what starts off as strong emotion, causes the mind to make generalizations which are extremely biased. This further impairs judgment, and one's reasoning abilities might now by fallacious. This makes one's language emotional. often Language becomes hostile, and can touch the emotions of others too, creating a whole new set of emotions. Hence one is finally back to where they started, harbouring Strong and powerful emotions. these emotions have other sources as well.
Taking History to prove this cycle, we go back to the end of the first world war, in the ruins where the victors, France, UK and USA meet with the biggest losing party, Germany int he Hall of Mirrors, Versailles, France. France having most enmity against Germany was all ready to come to some sort of harsh consensus. Clemenceau, the Prime minister of France, was overwhelmed by the strongest of emotions against Germany. He was angry and this anger made him hate all Germans. He blamed all of them for the war, and came down to the generalization that all Germans are guilty of aggression, and hence, decided that all Germans deserved to be punished. If the Germans could create such destruction, it was time now for them to beput into teir place. And so ignoring the prospect of rational thinking, his mood for revenge was consoled by the writing of the treaty of versailles. this was the emotional Language Of Clemenceau through which he punished Germany, and attempted to pull the very soul out of the country. This fallacy of his, created a whole new set of issues, and not only was it not enough to make the Frenchman feel better about the war and the loss of life in his country, but it also angered the Germans to such a great extent, that it paved the way for the rise of Hitler, sowing the seeds for the second world war. Thus, the cycle continues even till today, and we see the scars in the protected trenches, and memorials of all the sodliers.
Man needs emotions guaranteed, but they must be under some restraint, for emotional outrage can lead to events as serious as a world war. The vicious cycle is taking over our ability to reason, and so we must learn to control it, and end this cycle, of error after error.

13th April (monday)

James Lang theory says that emotion arises from a physical change. he claims that if a person physically forces himself to smile, the feeling of joy will actually spark in him. i disagree with this theory. we can not emote out of force. Today we see masked people all around us. Not many people are truly honest about their feelings, and even if they are, the truth comes out only in front of those people one trusts. we mask our emotions, and many a time, even I pretend to be happy when truly i am sad. But putting on that smile, it doesn't make the pain go away. True sadness isn't so weak that it can change with a forced expression. The theory should be the other way around. It is our emotion that portrays our expressions, but even then, sometimes people don't show how they truly feel. When it comes to primary emotions, there always isn't a need for an external factor to shape one's emotions, but even for an emotion like happiness, one can not become happy by plastering a smile across their face. Happiness comes from within, it can not be reasoned out, for sitting to reason out happiness would probably give us so many reasons to frown, that the smile goes away. happiness is something that takes long to feel, and a simple physical action is not the key. Sure smiling may make others feel that you are happy and they perceive truth int hat smile, and they too might smile, but for the person who is smiling, are they truly happy, or is it plastered? Can the key to happiness, something that people take years to find really be that simple?

emotion and reason April 8th

media source: video on emotion and reason (one showed to us in class.)

Is it our emotion, or reason that drives us? According to the video i saw in TOK class, one should not be the driven by emotion as it leads to unfortunate circumstances. the video used Hitler as an example of being guided by emotion. those who let Hitler touch their emotions, joined the Nazi party, and created havoc and were guilty of genocide. on the other hand, listening to our ability to reason, made the person act rationally and one did not make a fool of one's self. the conclusion was that one shouldn't be driven by emotions, but one should still look after ones emotional needs.
I disagree with this completely. one mustn't get carried away by their emotions, but keeping them on the back seat is incorrect. Life is too short to live in fear. Life is too short to live by the rules. our emotional hunger must be fulfilled for if we don't live a satisfying life, we will die full of regret. before my grandfather went in for surgery, my Grandmother said that if only he hadn't lived a life on the edge, drinking, smoking, eating all sorts of food, gambling and getting so stressed out because of the activities he got himself into, then he wouldn't be there int he first place. in retaliation what my grandfather said really changed how i felt. he said that she was right, he probably wouldn't, but then again she wouldn't be by his side, for she loved him for who he was, and living on the edge was his "thing". he said he wouldn't change his life even on his deathbed, because it was satisfying and at least he was leaving knowing that he had no regrets and did everything he ever wanted to do. That is the kind of life i want to lead. A life where there is no risk, is a life too boring. letting our emotion take a backseat is not being true to ourselves, and is sacrificing our own happiness.
I'm not saying that we mustn't give reason importance, for without reason, fun can go out of control, and then we might regret giving emotion all the power, before we must give reason a fair say. act within the rational limits reason gives us. reason must cooperate with emotion and draw a line that mustn't under any circumstances be crossed, for example doing drugs would cross the line for a teenager. Using Hitler as an example in a way was hitting our emotion. The directors tried making us anti emotion power by telling us that Hitler used that method to brainwash the Germans. But we should not tel ourselves be affected by that for our emotional satisfaction is what we all live for. giving it a back seat is like punishing ourselves for living and dreaming.
The claim i feel is wrong and misguided. it is not rational and people shouldn't follow it. for if the claim were right, then most people would be living a life that they shouldn't lead, and all lives would come to a stand still. we should worry about the possibility for it being true, because do we really want to live a life in chains? should we surrender to emotion and remain bound for life?

6th april(monday)

Are we misguided by our emotions? Do they control our actions and make us fail? is this always the case? Are we but the slaves of our emotions? Our ability to reason, a gift given to prevent us from self destruction caused by our own emotions, is there to help us survive. But what i wonder is, if we listen to reason, and ignore emotions, then will we not be satisfied by life? taking risks, looking beyond, trying things that don't seem reasonable are things that make our lives exciting. Living on he edge is what makes me different from most others. if we only listen to reason, then most of the things we do based on spontaneity will stop, and our lives will get boring. we might lose that thrill we get every morning when we wake up for a new day comes with new possibilities and ways of having fun. i think that listening to reason can make life monotonous. is there a balance to the two? can we satisfy our emotional hunger and live a safe life reasoning out our actions? is it really that simple to satisfy the hunger of our emotions? and what happens when our emotions want what our reason says in impossible? do we just let what we passionately feel for go in order to live on the safe side, or should we agree to bare with the pain for the joy and the happiness it gives us through the pain is still better than not having anything at all. i fear that the struggle for power will never stop, but acording to me, emotions shouldn't take a back seat for we have one life, and if we dont take chances now, we will die with regret.