Assigning Identities to Distinct Notions & Contents

Bemused! The duplicity reflected in the distinct confounding perceptions. Why? One entity’s distinct opinions for the same issue but that too depending on who is involved. No issues! It exists and is justified. Or else Liberty cannot be defined and it would lose its sublime.

But then somehow the significance of the opinion looses the ground and levitates, randomly, when the opinion is placed with no conformity and inclines towards whatever suits the best. But again the assumptions in this context can be diverged as no two situations are same and its underlying reasons or cause can differ fundamentally. Even the same issue can have distinct fundamental reasons.  

Now, coming back to the contents or opinions, but that too depends upon how that has been expounded. Subject specific not included as there can be two proposed aspects of it in which it can be explicated while not deforming the contents: Uncomplicated or Hard and furthermore here the contents cannot be diluted by anyone in this regard.

Now the alternate side or context or opinions (penned or displayed as an act) can be witty, splendid, claptrap, unsavory etc and that would depend who exactly is perusing that content and the number of reflections of the minds and eyes adhered to it in perusing the same. And what defines that context for them and in which essence.

On the discussion on the contents or opinions or elucidations (penned or displayed as an act), on one hand we define some conformity while making opinions and views which should exclude dogmatism, risqué & odious demeanor and should not be reflected in the contents adhered to any context, while on the other hand, even if it includes the essence of three beautiful inclined words herein above, the assertion of liberty plays a role. The issue is not to condemn anything or any opinion unless really debased or vile. Because if done, it would defeat the sole purpose of Liberty leading us to the middle age earth saga. But the real issue is intermingling or amalgamating every content (penned or displayed as an act) under one roof so as to define and form a category whenever and wherever we want to associate or disassociate certain contents or views as per our own desires, requirements and thoughts or for some specific purpose and to weigh it with the perception of how many eyes and sometimes minds it had attracted. Something odious cannot be concluded as witty or splendid and vice-versa. Furthermore it's the self conscious which should decide how to put your opinion or views without nipping, pestering or including any derogatory content which is defined by the term troll.

Like on any Land, distinct entities with distinct flavors and perceptions exist, same with the contents or opinions. They too reflect distinct identities when we perceive. Equality to 'all' contents or annotations or observations? Certainly Not. Well at that juncture we should define to ourselves with the existing fact categorically as what’s hilarity, witty, risqué, splendid, off-color, debased etc and what we should absorb and what to neglect. And that should be categorized, instead intermingling the same according to the needs or aspirations. And let that not be generalized.

All flavors are required and should be tasted, but they should be defined with separate identities and not by establishing any affiliation between them or exchanging essence along with their identities just to conduce something was good, bad or in need, furthermore on the number of counts of the viewership.       

Copyright ©  Pranav Chaturvedi 2015

Discovery++: Regulated or Opened?

Innovation evolves with motivation or exigency. It is an investment and not philanthropy, well some make such assertions. But whatever,  it plays an important role and keeps the world ticking and progressing.

The legitimacy to prove first is to find that the originality is not a mere discovery or replication but a novel product. That is and how I define invention as  (Discovery+1) or Discovery++, one or many steps ahead of discovery. And how this is regulated and achieved? Through Patents. Kinda intangible assets, granted to an individual but with Restrictions.

However, distinct opinions would always surface, some may be critical by saying that It:

1. creates stifle in the competition;

2. is a commodity to maintain;

3. is an unwanted necessity or onus that has been imposed on them to remain in the market or competition.

4. an expensive affair.

It is true that the process is too long and endeavors should be forged to expedite the same. But it’s unfavorable to question the credibility of it.

Furthermore the rights conferred are not absolute. But there could be averments as at what reasonable cost? Well that should depend upon the Country’s Infrastructure, Per Capita Income, inhibited by how many people with lower incomes etc.. There would always be distinct opinions on Patents. But seems neither Patents are stifle in the competition nor they are onus to the society.

Though in some notable cases the issues were thoroughly debated for prolong as to whether Business Methods, Abstract Theories, Mathematical Calculations etc. are patentable or not. You ask 10 different Experts to interpret this with a substantial conclusion, all would have distinct subjective interpretation specially when it comes to Software.

Simply putting like this from a Layman's perspective:

Why Word a patentable product? Though MS lost the word Patent Appeal later for its Version. But why it is for some and it isn't for some. Supporting it and without unfolding it's ingredients, characteristics and process, when Word was created with the help of existing Keywords of some Programming Language and Dictionary along with the Technology as it made people to possibly modify, alter, append, remove, align, make additions, create several documents & layouts, copies of documents etc. to express the content of their speech and thoughts in hard copy which was not possible for human beings to either remember the exact sequence and flow of the words in their mind chronologically what they wanted to share or send or to transfer to others or to retrieve the same manually, electronically in the form of Documentation. Even if it would have been possible, it would have been too tedious for any human if they would have done it manually. Therefore, it was novel, not a mere discovery or amalgamation or addition to any existing product and should be a patentable product. But these Simple justifications could be Negated by more strong Elementary averments like given herein above in distinct locations and by different people.

OSS!! A good Perspective?? To many, Yes but with some Restrictions!

And further not a bygone case of Natco & Bayer about the generic drug Nexavar and its compulsory licence. Here too conclusions can be drawn from both the angles, from the investment point of view and from the perceptions of the patients who ultimately are the recipients in the end.

And who can forget the neoteric case of Toyota opening it's whopping 5600+ Patents in the open market, as what they claim, for a good hydrogen future. 

But are they Commodities but quite expensive to maintain? Depends upon its valuation and its performance at the commercial scale.

But to maintain a balance between development and fulfilling the needs of the republic, is an arduous venture to achieve anywhere.

Copyright ©  Pranav Chaturvedi 2015

Lost in Interpretation!

Was a part of one fleeting discussion where I was just a passive listener, some time back! Somehow the concept of Faith evolved in the Discussion between these two persons. So this genuinely Respectable man with Impeccable Credentials told that accomplishment is achieved by someone 'only' to create a place and stand, up there, else what one would go and tell to his Creator with what other justifications?

As that was really a brief conversation, it just ended in no time.

But I was baffled with this concept! Self: Development; Realization; Empowerment; Establishment; Achievement: that’s all Personal. That’s one’s Personal Aspiration, Ambition and Need, which is perhaps a ‘Necessity’ for Human and Societal Development. And further precisely  restricting the same till Individual level. But how can we dovetail the two distinct aspects, that’s confounding.

Self Development, Personal Aspiration and Faith and Commitment towards, it may be in anything, all reside in segregated Aspects. The first two in the same and the latter in the distinct Horizon.

But then what’s Faith? Truth; Belief; Confidence; Commitment; Compulsion; Coercion; Concept; Illusion? Can we dovetail our Personal Ambitions with Salvation?

But it’s bemusing when the concept of achieving our personal aspirations and ambitions is correlated with the faith. Though the Former is a Necessity for the Human Evolution, but is certainly detached from the Latter.

Or are we really victims of Lost in Translation? We implement the aged Theories with ‘Blanket Affirmation’ without realizing in which Context and under what Circumstances or for whom they were written!

But from one particular angle, Faith or Devotion can be defined as a Belief and I presume affirmatively and confidently which exist from where one can get Confidence while perceiving  or facing ‘some’ unpleasant creations, further which is not an illusionary concept or followed by compulsion. And furthermore, certainly not for fulfilling your personal ambitions just to justify yourselves up there. 

I Presume whoever up there would see how good we were rather how godly we were being considered.

Note: All My Blogs are Subjected to Copyrights

Reflection of an Issue!

If the components of any issue is perceivable, does it require vexation or disgruntled reflection of any guileless idiosyncratic perspective to put efforts to make it cognizable amid any system?

For instance, an opened borewell, perceivable to many, but only becomes actually perceptible when a child or some entity falls into it, as such cases had been observed in the past as well as covered by the Projectors for many days also. Well that's at a trivial level though utterly unfortunate instances. Bigger instances creates the foundation of any Cause.

What precisely profound me is the existence of a belief to acknowledge the resentful agitation first, then the plight or concern which perhaps could have been simply extinguished before any subsequent resentment. The reasons are perceptible but ignorance is adopted. With deliberation, and if emphasis peculiarly is made on the conventional demeanor, is the inherent reaction only to the noises from some disgruntled entities and their resentment further resulting sans transmuting the same into any substantial conclusion. Thence making it impliedly and possibly a reflection of a passive unsparing and unconcerned aspect of the mysterious entity hidden within ourselves. Subsequent illumination and then recognition of the cause or concern shouldn't be a part of any system. And Furthermore if the precipitation of any cause or concern can be perceived, an action for the rectification or any corrective measure should be made first rather waiting for some agitation or resentment as an effect of the same.

Now, could we surmise entities as passive spectators?

Can we conclude this as an unsparing and if more narrowly explained, a sadist attitude which is not reflective but infused within the persona of every entity if seen through a prism? Do we impliedly cherish the grief of any separate unaffiliated discrete individuals, even knowing the cause or predicament but blindly discern it unless the reflection of the effect of the same, that might be desolation of the entity, is perceivable?

This could be more 'Publicly Visible' in the Below Developing and Developing Locations compared to the Developed where it exists in a 'Stealthy' state. May be the fear or insecurity that triggers the reflection of our distinct entity which presides within everyone, forces such deportment at the individual level just to be in coherence amid the system with selfsame structures.  

But if reason or concern is known, rather expecting any agitation or disgruntled opinion or resentment, an efficacious endeavor to resolve the uncertainty or impediment would be more valuable which will form a strong cohesion within the system. Thence, why Ignore any concern when they can be Resolved with manageable and simplistic approach.     

Note: All My Blogs are Subjected to Copyrights.

Historical Aspects!

A Neophyte Questions Substantially. Followers on the behest of whom they Follow are good at Nipping coz that’s their Academy.

Now the Historians’ distinct perspectives, though all true, only conclude into distinct Philosophies with divulged perceptions. Though with the evolving cognition, a trend to question the existence of all perspectives, thus leading us to divulged beliefs and not to any one precisely, which is furthermore impliedly a healthy belief in itself. But to whom more inclination should be given as a matter of fact, forged by transparency, as who should be considered as an impeccable Icon, that’s where the question ensues.

A Learner won’t dissect each and every piece of information unless kindred to the said subject specific domain. A Learner would go through distinct conceptualized Historical Facts concluded by any Historian only waking his ‘preferential’ part of cognition which will then conceive as, on which Fact or Entity he should believe or follow. But that would again be a personal perspective.

Though Historians uses distinct modules and existing historical facts to conclude chronologically the reasons for any cause or action, still their own philosophies and ideologies might play a certain role in surmising or concluding the historical facts into documentation. They might be selective, protective, descriptive,  affirmative, reactive, creative or reflective while comprehending facts. And though many of them come with impeccable backgrounds, their perspectives would differ on the same historical fact though inclusively everything would be true.

But even if their protectiveness or ideological inclination plays a certain role, they should also unfold the true facts even if it ends up unraveling any icon being a beholder of wrong demeanor at any given particular of time. The Learner could then conclude whether that instance was coercion, compulsion, necessity or a mere idiosyncratic temperament.

Furthermore the Projectors also play an important role in Projecting any Entity as how reasonably or in which flair or flavor they project anything. The existing Projectors at any given point of time shouldn't recline and watch the making of the facts but should also project the facts categorically.

Thence, Learners would never go and keep corroborating the Historical facts with other existing antithesis theories unless they are working on any assignment or contemplating them with an interest or are an associates to this specific domain. Whenever and whoever project a Historical Entity as an Icon or unfolding any Historical Fact, the Historians first shedding their Personal Ideological Perspectives, Opinions and Differences, should collectively come to a conclusion which the Learners could understand with deep Thoughts. The only thing is to find not the spotless but the facts with less spots.

Copyright ©  Pranav Chaturvedi 2015

Is Narcissism in Vogue?

So, is Narcissism standardized, is in vogue and used as a constructive tool to appraise to conduce one’s efficacious Individuality. There were Researches conducted where from Selfies to taking cognition of Societal Stature were all made kindred to the aspect of enduring with Narcissism. And then, there were Counter Researches Negating these antecedent Theories. That’s why we call it Re-Search, Searching what has already been searched but coming with distinct substantiated outcomes, if any.

The Moment we come across to this locution, we start making abstract shapes and structures of some Merciless Entities. What we forget that this expression can also be effectuated while describing or comprehending idiosyncratic identities. Now few questions ensue:

1. Are Excessive Promotional Adventures, cramped up to discrete notion which further restricted at individualistic level, is an indication of, not may be entirely, but a tinge of being impregnated with Narcissism?

2. Can it live in both Dormant and Active Phase while in latter transmuting into being merciless and in the former, being excessively obsessed? 

3. Is on Social Platforms or otherwise, exhibiting the snapshots, in Excessive, of the clan or family one is directly kindred to, could be substantiated as being a part at minuscule level of being Narcissistic?

4. Giving more priority to one’s stature thus defying any protocol at the time to save the repute among the enthusiasts could be said to be the beholder of this obnoxious expression?

There is a distinction between Self-Respect and being Self Obsessed. The one defined in the supra points are the features of the Latter not of the Former. Self Respect is when he who doesn't care of the outcome following the right 'Instincts', right or wrong, which even may lead that entity and force him to drift against the tides. That cannot be surmised as being adamant, rude or rough. That’s simply self respect. The Selfless is another distinguished expression not associated with the supra denomination.

Thence, it’s not conclusive and not deniable also that this vile expression is somehow becoming a part of the habitat. From intemperate obsession about your own Stature to finding the Recognition among the extensive societal, is this expression unfolding itself covering everything under the same blanket?          

All the suppositions are made considering this expression only at the Excessive Level. 

Copyright © of Pranav Chaturvedi

Parallelism of Perceptions!

Wondering, why always the coherence between the perceptions dwindle even before reaching to any denouement which may be a necessity for any Model. If we Segregate Perceptions aka Point of Views, Four categories would Evolve:

·         From Projectors Point of View:

This Type is the most Hegemonized and thus Command most part of the Republic. Their Analogies are utterly Complex where Deciphering the Background as why they chose such conclusions is arduous. Mere Business Desires or on a veracious belief is a complex structure to unravel the mystic beliefs.

·          From Social Point of View:

The Social Structure is Complex too. Is it the unwarranted Justifications,  thence surmised into Theory or Mere in the Hope of Recognition among the extensive Societal as to be perceived with approbation, concluding would be strenuous.

·          From  Legal Point of View:

·         From Organizational Point of View:

Adopted with the selfsame Parlance, this follows a pre defined Protocol. Protect the Wrong Inside, Ambush the Unimpeachable outside. This is not a Pattern, but a Static Cohesive Perspective.

Distinct Perceptions is a Healthy Practice and should be Part of Every Republic. But  while accomplishing the essence of what might be the need of an Hour, the Sectarian Issues and Beliefs transpire with no cohesion between the Point of Views, profoundly accepting that the same analogies traversing towards the wrong. Is it the Personal Aspirations or Standing with each other in Sectarian just to achieve idiosyncratic goals without making cohesion negating realization of what would be the required outcome, collectively.

Onerous to Explain!! 

Note: All My Blogs are Subjected to Copyrights. All Rights Reserved.

Is Being Schooled -> Being Educated Precise?

Taking this Fine Thought and Concept of Someone who has transcribed this notion that Being Schooled doesn't mean one transmutes into an Educated Being, there also exist this distinct Notion of Being Schooled and Being Educated.

But the Conclusion Somehow is missing. Mere concentrating towards providing Better Amenities has been made the only Theory existing for Better Learning. No Doubt it does play a significant Role, but eventually symbolizing this as the utmost concern discharging other factual phenomena would be a mistaken belief.

Schooling and herein not limited to this word in verbatim but expanded more towards the Higher level also: So What’s Schooling? Is it a Pattern? A Pattern with same dimensions with certain selfsame classification of excellence. A Pattern with the curriculum which constitutes a concept. A Pattern which encompass beings within its surroundings producing selfsame Products. So would be an errand, undertaken for the band or for distinguished groups under one Structure? It might be not a wrong belief which is further somehow bewildering!

But Could the Schooling would impliedly make a Being, Educated. On several occasions, even many ‘Scholars’ have acknowledged, affirming this snag but the Pattern has never changed its path. Might be when defining or expanding this concept, the significance of only acceptance from one being kindred to the same band doesn't actually expands the competence but creates lot of more concerns.

In exploring Horizon, there are always Permutations and Combinations that are implemented while testing the readings which may lead us to what we may be looking at. But it is this Band or group that first needs to change its perception the way it perceives the surroundings within the system. Might be the Pattern is not wrong but the Perception of comprehending the other existing attributes amid the system are disregarded.

Being Educated is when we comprehend and understand the entire system and not just the concerns and significance of the conclusions made by those kindred to a Band. The latter one would be Being Schooled. But Treating Schooled -> or proportional to Educated would be somehow imprecise. 

Note: All my blogs are subjected to Copyrights

The Notion of Being Decent!!

Sometimes! ERR! Always Adapting the Methodologies without any hunch or query Not with Respect to the any Technical Part, obviously unless an Alternate Theory is subsisting or Defined, but those implemented towards the Social System, is a Tradition. But Narrowing down to the Social Perspective, where now, the Definition of Decency is more or Less debased.  One doesn't have to meticulously go through the tedious Technical Analysis or Study of Data while making any inference towards, where one can conduce to some conclusion.

But if Decency is Defined as the Requirements of Accepted or Respectable Behaviour or the Behaviour that conforms to accepted standards of morality or respectability, who would conform the more accurate predefined Accepted Respectable Behaviour? Why? Because if the accepted behaviour which presumably concocted with the Refined Education Imparted to the Decision Makers at any Level would have been refined, than such Social Chaos anywhere wouldn't have been Existed. Would it be Decent to be good in playing Politicking Hunger Games by remaining Numb? Would it be Decent to Learn Not to be Emotional? Would it be Decency to Learn or Teach to make Enthusiasts learning's diluted for their own purpose? Would it be Decent not to Accept your Fault which preposterously been Taught everywhere?  And such demeanors are Accepted by the Enthusiasts. With no conformity of Wrong or Right, and Neither of Those wanting to Resurrect the Enthusiasts propositions because of the insecurity about losing their own position. But Without Reacting, Abusing and Using well versed language, Pleasing: would it be Decency?

  

The Developing Phase concentrate to project an entity with an Attitude with a Good Approach Learnt but which might not be an Implied Decency. How would a Person conclude that the Appearance has avoided impropriety or immodesty? How? How would those Fake Manners or demeanor be differentiated from Decency in verbatim? Could the Decency be Goodness towards the Good and the Bad too OR Goodness only towards the Good? Here Goodness is adapted in verbatim with no Motive or Opportunism diluted with it.

An Emotional Angry Homosapein could be Decent; Also an Unemotional Bloke with good refined presentable attitude with no tinge of anger but only a smile, might not be Decent.

Like Decency Doesn't generate while kindred to any Dynasty or Fraternity or to any Household or Profession, the same cannot be acquired on the Basis of Selection. Which to me also is paradoxical. Still would be Learning. But equating Standard with Decency would be Wrong and Concocted Learning.

Copyright ©  Pranav Chaturvedi 2014