So welcome to this new channel and I am so glad that you are here for this conversation. I was wondering with which topic we should start. There were many suggestions. In my mind too. In the end, it was decided to take such a topic which is very basic, which is necessary for every person, which has importance. If I think why I started this channel, what is its purpose? If one purpose is to be decided, all other purposes are already there. The desire for fame can also be a purpose. If it happens in everyone's mind, it
will happen in my mind too. But if I think what is actually an honest purpose of this channel? So I think of my contribution, I want our society to become a better society in the process of thinking. We should not be in the form of a sentimental society. We should be an intellectual society as well. In social discussions, there should be some depth in discussions, thinking should be better, why should we get swayed by rumours. That's why we thought why not keep the first topic as “how to think” itself? How to make decisions? I often
tell a story of Panchatantra in class. Let me narrate with a little change. You know Panchatantra. It is a story collection by Vishnu Sharma. It is of ancient times. There are many such stories in it, which give us a lesson about daily life. There was a story in it, If I remember, I used to read in school, its name was 'Pandit ki Bakri'. The story was slightly different. Let me tell you a little different from that. So that the importance is more understood in today's environment so the story is. I am telling the story but
I have changed it slightly. So that no one attacks later that you are narrating in a different way, the story was this. How did you change it? It was in that story that a pundit ji is going to buy a goat. There were three people and They were greedy and started thinking that they will eat the goat. To fool Pundit Ji, one said where are you taking the dog? Another one said- Which animal’s name you took? In this way, the names of different three animals were taken. Where are you taking this animal? Now, Pundit ji
got confused that there must be some disguised animal. So he left the goat and ran away. Let me mould this story a bit. That once a man was going to buy a small calf. And 3-4 thieves started following him. One of them felt that I wish! May we get this calf. And try to get it cheap. It will be good if we get it at half price or less? So they hatched a conspiracy. They, in turn, met that man on the way. First one person met, making a very serious face. He said, Pandit ji, how
much did you buy the goat? Pandit ji said, friend, this is a calf, not a little goat. He started laughing.okay, this is a good calf. After saying this, he left smiling. Pandit ji felt that what a strange person he was. As it was only a calf. Now he is moving ahead, after about 100-200 meters another man came from a different place. And he does not know that there is a nexus between them. Another man came and said as soon as he came. Wow! Pandit ji, it is such a fat goat. Looks like a calf. Now
the matter is getting intense. Pandit Ji looked carefully and said no, friend, I have brought only a calf. He said that's what I am saying, looks like a calf. But it is a fat goat. After saying this, he also left. Then after one kilometer, Pandit Ji got the third one. And he said that Pandit ji only such a goat is needed. I also want this. Where to get such goat? Then Pandit threatened him a little and said - brother, it is a calf. But now Pundit Ji himself was under pressure. So he also laughed out
loud that a calf is like this. Good! He said this and left. And then the fourth man who was the real mastermind, the chief conspirator, then he came. Counting the money, he said, hey hey, hey hey want a goat like this. Such a goat is needed. How much will you want? So Pandit Ji felt that he had made a big mistake. I bought a goat and brought it in the name of a calf or a heifer. Then he thought he will go home, I will get beaten. the better would be if I will bear some
loss and get rid of this trouble. So imagine, in those days it was taken for around 100 rupees. So he told that I have taken it for 100, only 100! Goat comes for 20 rupees. But if it is healthy and if you want, I can give you 40 rupees instead. And Pandit ji said come on friend, the loss of 60 is correct, at least it will not be of 80. And gave 40 to him and returned home happy that he was saved. Now this story of Panchatantra, it is because when we make decisions in life,
we have various futile inputs. and if you are not a very sensible person, there is every danger that someone or, will make a fool of you sooner or later. And the times we are in. We are in the era of WhatsApp University. All knowledge comes from there. There is social media. I think you people must have become slaves of mobile phones. I am also half slave. You will also be there, you are the people of the new generation, you will be more slaves. You must have opened the mobile phone without any reason. Then you would
keep clicking on it like this. If you are watching the reel, then you are watching only the reel. If you are seeing shorts then you are seeing only shorts. your mind is not filling itself. Got tired of looking at the phone and kept the phone and after a minute picked up the phone saying that you are tired because dopamine is released nowadays by looking at the phone. This addiction is a dangerous addiction. And some or the other message is being conveyed in every video. There has never been so much information surrounding us. As much as
it is coming nowadays. And that too is coming in audio-visual format. In the era of newspapers, written information used to come. Only literate people used to read, the rest did not read at all. In today's era, information is in audio, visual, text, in every language. No individual can survive and if a group has power. it should have 10,000 such unemployed people, who would be given the task of sending five hundred messages a day, for each message they would get Rs.2. So a group can force the whole society to think in its own way. Think of
Mahabharata and see, is there a war of Mahabharata? On one side are the Pandavas, on the other side are the Kauravas. Krishna is with the Pandavas. Morality requires that the Pandavas must win and Krishna is there with the whole plan. But, Pandavas are not able to win. One of the many reasons for which is that Dronacharya is also there in the army of Kauravas. His son Ashwatthama is also there. Dronacharya is the Guru of the Pandavas as well as Kauravas also. But he is following Rajdharma because he is with this state, standing with it. The
armies of the Pandavas are unable to defeat them and Krishna finally understands that some diplomacy will have to be resorted to in order for the Pandavas to win. Krishna is the pinnacle of diplomacy. He asks one thing to Yudhishthira, but Yudhishthira is not ready to say a wrong thing. And in the end, Krishna uses all his diplomatic power to create a situation. An elephant named Ashwatthama is killed. The word is spread that Ashwatthama was killed. Ashwatthama is also the name of Dronacharya's son and Dronacharya suddenly starts getting depressed, he feels that once I should authenticate
the news, whether it is authentic or not. So he asks Yudhishthira, the most authentic man of his time. Yudhishthira is Dharmaraj, he does not lie. Even when the entire Pandavas army, the team told him, he did not get ready. that I will not lie. But it's not a lie anymore. Ashwatthama has been killed, what if the elephant has been killed? There is someone. And yet he wants to tell the whole thing. Dronacharya asked - Was Ashwatthama killed? Yudhishthira is saying- 'Ashwatthama hato, naro wa-kunjro wa'. Ashwatthama was killed. Was it a man or an elephant? But
as soon as Naro Va, Kunjarova is saying, Krishna's conch shell sounds very loudly at the same moment. And Dronacharya could not hear the whole thing in the sound of that conch. But because all he hears is that Ashwatthama was killed, he become disheartened. Abandoned weapons. He sits down on the ground in the battlefield and taking advantage of this moment, Drishtadyumna kills him. I think many a times that Dronacharya was such a capable person. If they could be convinced of a wrong fact by misinformation or by manipulative information, then in today's era when social media attacks
everywhere, how can a person take the right decision. Had Dronacharya heard that voice Naro va-Kunjaro va, he might have changed his decision. So maybe the story of the war would have been different but how did the information reach. Which information should not be conveyed properly? How to remove the matter from the context? What should the society do if informers are expert in this? What should the common man do? What should a great thinker like Dronacharya do? And so, a few things that I think should happen on this issue. I have lived about two-thirds of my
life. As for the rest, there is no hope of tomorrow. But if I see according to the normal age of India, then I have lived two-thirds of my life. You are one- third. So, you have big life decisions left to ponder upon. Most of you are not even married, are you? Your face is telling. You are shining now, are you not? Hence, you have to make big decisions and the decision making was difficult in every round. It is the most difficult in today's era. So some precautions must be taken when you decide. But what precautions
to take in life? So that mistakes are minimized. Mistakes will happen even after that. Who is the one who does not make mistakes in judgement. Everyone makes mistake. You will also. But make fewer mistakes. There should be more correct decisions. One of my favourite philosophers is Jean Paul Sartre. French Philosopher. The essence of his philosophy is called existentialism. Its essence is that we ourselves write the story of our life but how do we write it? We write it with our decisions. Writes it with our decisions. What decision did you take in any situation? This will
write the further story of your life. So I think this topic is a bit important. So let's name it decision. What care should be taken in taking the right decision, this is the basic thing. When a question comes to your mind, ask a question. First let me keep my point. Then you can ask questions. Whenever you get into the process of making a decision. What is the first step? The very first step is to see whether you are fair and neutral before diving into the decision making process. There is a word ‘तटस्थ’ which is called
neutral in English. ‘तटस्थता’ is called neutrality. A similar topic is impartial or impartiality. This is called being Impartial. Here Impartiality is Equality. I am saying this before getting into the process of decision making. Whatever happens we will see that later. As our society is surrounded by many socio-political issues at this time. Like an issue came up a few days ago. That is the issue of hijab. A debate arose from Karnataka regarding Hijab. Then there is an issue going on nowadays of Uniform Civil Code. Which might come before us in some form soon. Then talk about
population bill nowadays. Had been proposed in Uttar Pradesh. And now there is talk of bringing to some more states. It may come in centre too. One issue you must be hearing about conversion for the last few days. Must be listening to the issue of conversion, The issue of love jihad. All the issues keep coming in front of us. We will talk about all these in due course of time. Will talk about all these gradually. But before talking on any topic, it is necessary to see whether we have already taken a decision and the biggest problem
of our society is that the decisions have already been made, the idea comes later. The correct process is to think first and then decide. But the decision comes first. Many of friends, Hindus, Muslims, Sikh, People of every religion. Bytheway, I am a very lonely type of person. There are not many friends, but the diversity among those are good. I also observed in the classes and I found that when it comes to Hijab, a Muslim child generally looks at it with the feeling that it is going wrong. with us. And many Hindu children look at it
with the feeling that it is perfect. And it should be. And the interesting thing is that neither this nor that knows the topic. What is the judgment of Karnataka High Court of one hundred and twenty eight pages, neither this person nor that read it. What was the direction of the Government of Karnataka, what was the rule, neither he nor he read it. And what is the exact meaning of the decision, no one knows. But we go on forming an opinion even before the topic starts. E H Carr is a very good scholar, he has a
very good book in history, what is history… It's a very good book. He proved that whatever you say about history, there are so many facts, so many proofs, so many useless things. Ultimately, whatever is sitting in the mind of the historian, he proves only that. That's why if Marxists write historians, you will find that everyone's decisions come in the same way. And those who are nationalist historians, their decisions always come in the same way. Think about any historical figure, talk about Akbar, talk about Aurangzeb, the decisions of one stream will always come from one, the
decisions of the other stream will always come from one. If we move with such a mindset… and the same thing happens in our universities too! It is very interesting that the teachers in the university are divided whether they are Marxist or BJP. And I think that the person who holds the responsibility of teaching the country in the university, how can he get used to seeing things bound by one ideology? Why doesn't he have so much ideological courage that some other ideology can have a better opinion than mine on some issue? Why isn't this courage? And
that's why, where will it come from in the society if it is missing even in the universities? The work of the university is to give the right direction to the society. If it is not there, then where will it come from in the society? First try to be unbiased, to be neutral. Before understanding the issue, neither I am on this side nor I am on that side. Regarding hijab, I don't know, I will complete my study first, after studying, if I find the matter right then I will say yes, it is right, if it is
wrong, I will say it is wrong. Why decide first? This is such a basic thing! When neutrality comes in real situations, it is called impartiality.. Impartiality. Keep in mind, there are two ways of not being fair. Impartial means that in the fight between X and Y, I am neither on the side of X nor on the side of Y. For example, if there is a fight between two children, and the mothers of both of them come down. The general perception is that the mother will take the side of her child in the children's quarrel. It
is not that we are talking about social construct, we are talking about the level of biology. Because mother's love is generally considered unconditional. And what I am saying, I am not saying this on the basis of rumours. Erich Fromm is a great psychologist, I am saying based on his book The Art of Loving. Mother's love is usually unconditional that if my child is upset then I am with my child.I don't care about ideologies, nation, society, politics, I just care about my child. That's why if a mother is very objective about her child... So this is
a big deal. Generally it is more likely that she will stand a little on his side. In the process that fathers go through, there is a high risk or a high possibility that they may not be seen leaning too much in favor of their child. Sometimes it will not happen. But there is a danger in that too. Sometimes we lean to the other side to make ourselves appear impartial. You must have seen many fathers, that there was a fight between two children, one of them is his. As soon as they leave, they start beating their
loved ones directly, that you must have committed the mischief. Give it to me To show you how fair I am. This is not fairness. Being fair does not mean always standing against your side. And being fair does not mean standing against the other side. You have to listen to both the children that yes son, you tell me what is the perspective, you tell me what is the perspective. After that take the right decision. Why would I start beating my child to prove to the other child that I am impartial? Situations will also come in front
of you too whether to marry her or the other. Don't make it in your mind in advance, first you have to know everything, Be impartial and neutral, only then decide Ask her also whether she has a choice or not! It's not that it's just a matter of your choice! she should have choice too! So this is the first step that when you enter into any process, first try that the opinion is not already formed. Because if you have already made the decision, then it is useless, isn't it? The decision was first that hijab must be
there, then you started thinking… And you are looking for those arguments, which will prove what has already been proved in your mind. Then why to even discuss it This is the first step. Now let's go ahead. Now number two starts from here. So when we understood the process of beginning, now the process is that when we will move towards judgement, what all we need to know before deciding on that issue! So the second step is, which is your input, how should it be collected? Input means all the information on the basis of which you will
take decision. In your language, how is that boy, how is that girl, ten information has to be gathered about them first. So the inputs you will take, first of all they should be adequate. Otherwise what would happen! Ashwatthama Hato! Didn't take hear anything after that! If he would have listened the whole sentence after that, things might not have happened like that! So don't decide in haste, take adequate inputs first. And there is a rule of Natural Justice, our Supreme Court in Maneka Gandhi case, which is a very famous case of 1978, about Article 21, court
said a very good thing, most of you are also preparing for UPSC so you must be aware that the concept of the basic structure of the constitution came in 1973, on April 24, in the Kesavanand Bharti case, since then the Supreme Court has started telling in between that what all is part of the basic structure of the constitution. Referring to the Maneka Gandhi case, it came to the point that Article 14 of the Constitution that says that there is a right to equality, It may not be written in it, but within it lies the right
to adequate hearing. Right to adequate presentation or representation. It means any court, any commission, any authority, it was about passport authority, it was about passport officer… any government official can not take decision without hearing the side of the person, that is, without hearing the other side can not take a decision. This is necessary and this is the basic structure of the constitution, no official of the government can take any decision against you without giving you a chance to be heard. Yes, give a chance for hearing and you say that I don't have anything to say,
so I can. But you should get a chance. If you listen to one side and don't listen to the other side... there is a first party or second party. and suddenly things changed drastically. like I remember the story of a child, the story of a father and his child, a child I met once, from a friend's family. I like to talk to children, children also like to follow me in general, I have a good relationship with children, so I asked him how he was… What is happening in life? So children tell me all their affairs
very quickly. Within 5-10 minutes everything opens up and tells.. well that was another thing, I asked him tell me son how is everything going on in life, then he told everything, while talking suddenly I felt that He is very angry with his father. So I said what happened! He said look…Trip is going from my school, all the kids are going, I am the only one who is not going. As Papa has refused. I said man, why did father refuse? What happened? There was not much expenditure, looking at father's income, the expenditure was not such that
he could not afford it, he was so angry, said, I think he brought me from the drain. Because all the children are going, only I am not going. well, children very quickly decide that they came from near the drain. And it is not known why they choose the drain! Could have said beside the road, they choose only the drain, all the children were brought from near the drain. Either you must be seeing your appearance in the mirror. Seeing this, it would seem more close that you have come from near the drain, so I said man.
I am not liking this as well. Ok, if someone asks me whether some children are going on a trip from school, whether I should send my child or not. People are ready for son, they think more about daughter. My advice is you should definitely send them because in the family you will not be able to teach what they will get to learn on the trip. So I talked to his father, separately, who was nearby. That brother your son is very angry, he is saying that father is not sending me on the trip. Now think, when
I met his father, I had this feeling in my mind that why is he doing such stupidity? Why not sending him? And what did his father tell me, taking me to the corner? He said sir, the problem is, the doctor has forbidden. There is a problem in his heart. The doctor has said that he should not be sent out even by mistake. And it has also been said that he should not even know that there is a problem. If it is told at this age that there is a problem in the heart, then life is
over, if sent, then it is over. So what to do? Now see what happened on listening to the other side, the perspective changed completely. You were angry that what kind of father is he. Now the child is asking me. The child thought that I had gone to approach his father, to recommend him. He is asking me have you talked? What should I say now? Many times it happens that you heard one side, you felt that it is so authentic, enough, to decide. But the other side is so dramatically different, it is so important that after
listening to it you feel that the decision could not have been taken without this side. Without it the decision could not have been taken. so That's why no matter how much convincing a party is, the whole family, the whole religion, the whole society, the whole politics are speaking on one side, even then it has to be kept in mind that there is another side as well. Unless you see the other side of the coin, you will not be able to get closer to the truth. Always see, if some information has come, there can be a
question of intention, isn't it? Why did someone tell you? Someone tells you that you know where the person you like was roaming today? You say well tell me, first tell me, completely. Take the information, what is the problem! Then think why did he come to tell this from so far by spending on auto fare, maybe he is the third candidate? This too can happen! Brother, the scope of a doubt always remains, doesn't it? You will take so much precaution, how will you decide about someone like this? And until it is decided that that person is
wrong, till then he is not to be considered guilty. We will try very soon to understand Narco Polygraphy, what is the philosophy behind it? What are the systems? What is the basic principle of law? Thousands of criminals may go free, but not a single innocent should be punished. There was a philosopher He was Jewish. It is his statement. And all the civilized countries of the world follow this principle. And its simple its meaning is that until it is proved that someone is a criminal, he is not considered a criminal. Otherwise your life will be ruined.
Now you will keep doubting everyone, doubting everyone. People will stop talking to you. There are only two ways, one is, I will trust until it is proved. Secondly, I will doubt until it is proved. what is better? Trust it. Unless it is proved that the trust is wrong because it is difficult to build trust. It is very easy to break. Now that so much has happened, you all have also seen natural justice. You have Adequate facts, we have seen all those from both sides this side and the opposition, then the question comes, now we will
judge that which side we have to move to. What are the mistakes we have to avoid while judging. There is a word, you must have heard the name of a subject that means logic. Have you heard? It is called तर्कशास्त्र in Hindi. Logic is a part of philosophy. There are some branches of philosophy, one of them is logic. And the work of logic is to tell that what errors we make while making logical decisions those errors are called fallacies or in Hindi, Tarkdosh. What mistake do we usually make while reasoning? If we don't take precautions!
If we do not act wisely, then while making judgments, we have to avoid some such mistakes, which in general we can call fallacy. There are many fallacies, these are very common things, we will talk about those things which apply in common life, often. One such thing is that you should always keep in mind that the proportion between your input and judgment should be right. The principle of proportionality should work properly. What does this mean? This means that as much as the input is, so must be the decision. You will not be able to understand such
a thing, without an example. Let's understand through examples. You people are very advanced generation people. but we were primitive. In that era, children did not sit in the class room in such a way that boys and girls sit together, so when I came to the eighth grade in the school where I studied, It was only a boys' school. It is as if several thousand boys have been locked together in jail. But school was good. Look, students dont go to school only for the studies, they also do some fun. They want to live a good life.
Then there came a thing called co-ed that the school has been co-ed. so the boys were very excited at that time. Now for the first time they started feeling the desire to go to school. That if we go to school now, we will feel very good. Then they came to know, children will study together in English medium only because there must have been very few children in it. In Hindi medium, there was a separate section for girls and a separate section for boys. It used to be co-ed. The boys' section means the blocks were also
different. It is a prison for boys, that is a prison for girls. It used to be like this. And there were some islands in the middle where boys and girls used to attend class together in English medium. Many children took English medium in that cycle, when they did not know English at all, but in that cycle, many children took English medium, I was one of them, so I was also not so good in English in those days, but it is okay. Lots of friends were there.. Then I came to know that there were four rows,
three of boys and one of girls for sitting. The highway (gap) in the middle was huge. There was less gap between the boys. There was such a gap between the girl and the boys, there was a feeling like Taliban, there was such a gap. If you think for the first time a co-ed school will be started in a small town, then it will be like this only All the boys were curious to talk to someone. Everyone will not be able to talk, some of them will only get succeed. What will one even talk, he will
ask for a pen. Will ask for a copy and it s this what happens generally, the talk generally starts with the pen itself. And the day a boy asked for a pen, the rest of the boys used to congratulate him, wow wonderful. You asked for a pen. Amazing. And in asking for Pen, people used to assume that now both of them are going to get married. Many people also started thinking of names for the children. We understood after many years that if a girl asks a boy for a pen, it only means that the girl
has asked the boy for a pen. It took us many years to understand, at first we thought that the engagement is sure, at least the marriage is an affair, don't know what - after many years, I understood that I have only asked for a pen, and asking for a pen means I have only asked for a pen. I also give this example in the class and explain a lot to the children so that they also think a little bit properly and understand. Because how the mind works, if 3-4 people like you are sitting together, your
mind will also be open. We were very closed at that time. So suppose a girl's pen has run out, a girl is sitting with her, she also doesn't have an extra pen, first she asked her but she doesn't have a pen. The class is going on very forcefully, very important thing is going on, what should she do now? So two or three boys were sitting around and asked one of them if he has a pen? So that boy was bringing an extra pen for a long time that if he ever got a chance, if I
gave him a pen, he gave it to me like a firecracker. Boys even give their pen saying that yes, you can take it. We had come to the class just like that. Now the discussion is going on among those children after class that why asked from this one? Because 3 people were sitting there. There is something special to be demanded from this and the whole debate is going on because it has a car and the other two are car-less. Then nothing else is going on. It looks good. No this, no that, then in the end
someone asked him. The sister of one of these boys was a classmate. His sister was brought in between asking that she has to ask and tell what was the matter. She asked why did you ask for a pen from this man? Three people were sitting. Do you know what she said? With whom? Who was it? You are saying that these were 3 people, so why did I ask for a pen from this one. Well, were all these three there? I didn't even see them, just asked for pen, brother. I didn't even think about it. And
then that Maharaj comes to know that he has not been selected, he was sitting by chance, so he was asked for a pen. So in your age, chances are little more that we have the habit of seeing the input in a big way, so we must see input as it is. If someone has asked for a pen then take into account that they have only asked for a pen. Isn't it. Seeing someone smile, it also happens that sometimes boys are not able to bear it. I used to come across such cases in class. A boy
came and said that Sir, a girl complained about a boy that he talks in a wrong way, so I asked and said, Sir, one day I came, she smiled seeing me. What should I do then? Strange condition brother, if someone smiles seeing you, human smile also exists. There is a big problem in developed countries. When I went out of India for the first time, I went to a country in Europe. I was a rustic man of India, and rustic means I was in Delhi but my mind was rustic, wasn't it? When I went there, I
was taking a morning walk on the road, a woman came in front of me and started smiling. I am an Indian man, I looked behind, who is it? There is someone, Somebody must be coming behind me. No one was coming. I thought their might be some ghosts that I cannot see. They can see and I have behaved very strangely. I got out of there because something is wrong here. I felt something like the shadow of a ghost. Later saw that every man there is doing this. Be it a man, be it a woman, be it
alone on the road or with someone, those people have a habit of saying hello to each other with a smile. Everyone greets everyone with a smile. There is no separate rule and law in it and after 3-4 days we also started doing it. Those who meet greet each other. Well, they also says Namaste politely many times due to tourism. Now when you coming back to India with the same mood, so there will be a problem, you smiled when you go out on the road, you came to know, then an FIR was lodged straight after that.
Isn't it. So the meaning of saying is that whatever decision is taken from that input, take that much decision. Don't judge more than that. That is called proportionality. Most of us jump to judgment. Someone just told you that man did not like that you did this work today and what decisions did you think inside your mind. Equally, if someone said something in a mood,in temperament, in emotions, then keep its value the same. Don't increase that thing too much. It should be as important as it should be, not more than that. The second fallacy of judgment
is called Illicit generalization. Illegal generalization is called this in Hindi. We all do this a lot, a lot. And I have seen such innocent children many times. Even small children like someone for the first time, believe them, it is a natural thing. This is bound to happen. If you want to feel good seeing someone in 10th 12th graduation, then it is very natural. If this is not happening at all then it is a matter of concern. If it is happening then it is a normal thing and in the same innocence he said that I like
you very much and did not have the manners to refuse the other person. Brother, there is also a manners of refusing, isn't it okay if you don't want to be in that relationship, then refuse properly, but he said that it would have been better if he had seen the mirror once before telling me. This girl's heart is broken or the boy's heart is broken, dangerously broken and he has decided that all the boys in the world are like this. All the girls of the world are cheaters. Now don't want to talk to anyone, now you
will be alone for the rest of your life. This is a generalization, a sample, a small person, how many 800 crores have become, isn't it? only one have spoken badly out of 800 crore. how many you have decided about? If 400 is considered half of that, then a decision has been taken about 400 crores. So if it ever happens that all Biharis are like this, all Haryanvis are like this. All the people of Punjab are like this. Whenever someone does such nonsense, it doesn't happen not to speak to him. You talked to four people from
Bihar, talked to four people from Haryana about it, measured the whole state in one go, it is possible that there may be exceptions that you have found. Why decide for everyone? That's why it is very important that you should not make too many generalizations while making a decision. Don't make big decisions. Do the same. Do as much as you need to. What is the third fallacy, we all must have heard the word binary, nowadays it works a lot. We live in a special mindset, it is called binary or dichotomy, a word used in philosophy. The
name of a mindset is called dichotomy, binary thinking. It means either this or that and in the world of logic in philosophy its name is all and nothing either everything or nothing or black and white this is another name. Black and White. There is a fallacy called Slippery Slope which is somewhat close to it but it is slightly different from it. What does it mean that while deciding things we must be either standing on this side or standing on that side and we are not ready to think that apart from these two there can be
third or fourth, fifth way also. This man is either good or bad or honest or thief or loyal or unfaithful whereas nothing like this happens in reality. Only one person is honest and also a thief. There are few people who would be 100% honest in office matters. There can be thieves in family matters, there are 100% honest people in the family. There is number one thief in the office. There are such people. There are many. For the first time in Hindi literature, Premchand explained to Hindi literature that no collector is just good or bad. There
is good and bad and it is only a matter of proportion. Some 45% is good, 55% is bad, some 55% is good, total 45% is bad. Someone 65 is at 35. Any 72 would be at 28. Any 24 would be at 76. We call this the approach of Continuum and the meaning of Continuum is that when you decide, do not always be at any extreme, do not stay at any extreme. Modi ji is good, very good, bad, very bad. Don't do this drama. What to say, I like these policies of Modi ji very much. This,
this, this looks fine. This and this don't look right. Will talk like a sensible person, won't he? Why would you jump and talk like a drifting person. And why only Modi ji, be it any leader Why are you not ready to see and understand different aspects of a person at different levels, why make a complete decision about him forever and the fourth thing that matters more in your age is that Whenever decision to take, always keep in mind that whatever decisions you take, they are temporary. And that's why always keep so much flexibility that if
you get some new and authentic inputs, then you can change your opinion, your decision, your thoughts. Many time we are so rigid about our decisions and tend to think what people will say. Now how can I change my point of view, this would require courage to say that what I was saying was wrong. Today I feel that I am a better version of myself. I am my own better version. I remember that I have been a staunch rightist during my childhood. When I went to university, I was influenced by the Left to a great extent
and today I feel that both ways were wrong. Why shouldn't your vision be there? Why shouldn't your vision be there? Why should I follow someone's views brother? Why should I become someone's follower? Will must see with our own eyes. The courage to say that yes I was wrong. Kant has been a very great philosopher in the world of philosophy. Very great if my most beloved is in the west then it would be Kant. First he walked on the path of Rationalism, Rationalism is one sect, Empiricism is another sect. called rationalism and empiricism. He became crazy
about intellectualism. In the meantime, he read an empiricist philosopher Hume and went completely mad. Oh man that's right. Then read another philosopher of rationalism and said, no that, this is correct. Then he learned a few things from Hume and said no, that's right... like a pendulum to and fro... and finally he declared, both are wrong... we'll go our own way. And named that path - समीक्षावादी क्रिटिसिज्म.. Critical Philosophy. Why should I be someone's henchman? Wittgenstein came in the 20th century. He was a very lovely man and was attached to Cambridge. His name was Ludwig Wittgenstein
and Time magazine ranked him among the 100 greatest people of the 20th century. His philosophy is very difficult. It is very difficult to understand.. But what I am trying to tell, the interesting thing about him.. He wrote a book called Tractatus, the book became very famous. It became so famous that on the basis of that book, two or three schools were started in philosophy. Everyone became crazy about it. Then he went for a walk. Started living on the banks of the river. Then came back after a few years.. Said that whatever I had written in
that book is all nonsense. I dismiss myself. People said, you will reject it, we don't know to what extent we have built buildings on the same basis... He said no.. If it is wrong then it is wrong. I said what I understood at that time...everything is wrong. Then came up with a second theory.. a second theory against my own first theory.. this courage that I have decided, may be after a point of time I'll find enough input to understand that the decision was wrong.. If it was wrong, then why should I keep carrying the wrong
decision. Why not honestly admit that yes there was a mistake. Now I am correcting that mistake. This was my opinion then, this is my opinion now and still no guarantee that it will always be so. It may change tomorrow. Yes, you cannot do this in human relation.. but you can do it on social and political issues. And so in today's era if you take care of these precautions, then I think we will be good judges.. Being a good judge is a difficult task. We judge too much. One immediately becomes a lawyer in one's own case
and a judge in the case of others, but to be judgmental is not to be a judge. To judge rightly without being judgmental is to be a judge.... So this was what I wanted to discuss today. If some questions are arising in your mind regarding this, then ask..Discuss it. Yes.. tell me. Hello sir my name is Shiv Shankar Shukla. Sir sometimes we have to take decision only on one opportunity… and at the same time many other opportunities slip out of our hands… speaking in simple terms, many offers are coming together and one Have to be
chosen.. means as if connected with life... at the same time like should I choose engineering or medical... or do BA or something else.. Suppose we are taking one decision and another means.. I am not able to describe properly.. You mean sometimes there is such a moment in life where again and again there will be no opportunity to decide... I believe Take only one chance. Means engaged on an occasion. In taking this decision that we will think about this and many other chances which are ours have been left behind, then how can we take it together
and go ahead. He will definitely be released... Sit down... He will definitely be released.. Have you heard the name of Aristotle? He said a very good thing... He said that when we are born, there is a lot of Potentiality and there is nothing... That is, like a small child now, what will he become? Can become an engineer, can become a doctor, can become a player... can become anything..can become whatever he wants.. in reality nothing is made. Slowly he will take decisions of life. For example, suppose after 10th class he has decided that I will study
Humanities…. Now after studying Humanities, he cannot become a doctor, cannot become an engineer, cannot become a scientist, cannot become a chartered accountant. Now he can become a historian, a political scientist, a sociologist. As you move ahead in life, the potentiality starts decreasing and the actuality starts increasing. Later on you move to specialization. If you go to super specialization, then you have one or two options left. This is just a general rule of life, isn't it in today's era. What to do is that when you are standing at such a junction, at some point where you
have to decide, there is a crossroad... Don't decide just because of what your society has said? What has the family said or what have the friends said.. The decision of life is less a matter of intellect and heart. It is more a matter of conscience and when there is a dilemma in such matters.. intelligence is also needed.. like choosing 1 out of 3. Note down what are the advantages and disadvantages of all three. Sometimes in the process of noting down, it will be understood that this decision will not be right. You will leave yourself.. Your
intuition will also agree for that. And if there is such a dilemma that the conscience is not feeling right, then I believe that the final decision should not be taken from the intellect. It should be from the inner soul and the inner soul is that voice which you hear from time to time inside you. It flashes.. It is believed that it is the voice closest to your personality. There can be a mistake in taking a decision with intuition, but the mistake will be the least in that. There will be minimum mistakes and the people of
existentialism say this again and again. It is said thousands of times that whenever there is a dilemma in life, a decision has to be taken from the conscience.. Will talk about conscience in more detail some other time, as a hint.. Ok. Yes, tell me… Hello Sir.. Hello.. My name is Kavita Sir.. Yes.. As you told about the input, there is a question related to it Sir.. Like input earlier we used to do a lot of work at the ground level and understand things by searching and talking. Now sir, we search those inputs somewhere on the
platform of YouTube. In that too we see which one is of 1 hour? Which is of 30 minutes.. and go ahead with a very small option. Now that things have become brief and have come in shorts and reels, so somewhere the mind remains confused as to which one to pick? let's say an input is correct. How to create your mind in it in such a way that things are clear to us while selecting the input? See, my way of input is… like let's say, I want to talk about some issue.. what we said is hijab,
there is some issue that I want to talk about..so what I do.. first of all I save 5-5 or 6-6 good articles of left and right wing in my phone and then take out the print out. Some good articles will be found in ‘The Hindu’, some will be found in ‘India Express’. These newspapers are of left orientation. Which are right wing platforms or newspapers, some good articles, research articles will also be found there. Some will be found in Panchjanya also.. May be in Organizer also.. you never know if any special number has come out on
that, then it is not to be assumed beforehand that they are right or they are right. You can at least take a printout of the balancing perspective together and analyse with patience.. because you have to talk about it. In trivial cases there is not much need that you take 50 inputs. The amount of input should be decided according to the seriousness and importance of the matter, so my approach is this. Before talking on any topic, I should read at least two-three authentic articles from all the ideologies that have perspective on that topic, extract the essence
from them. I use my consciousness to see which argument is correct... taking all that into account I develop my own opinion. Well then, there is a problem in the social media in the era of YouTube... but when an important issue comes up, there will be a need from within you that you give time to it. If I ever get a chance, two words.. I am just indicating.. Two words go for our way of thinking – one is heuristic processing. And other is systematic processing. Will discuss sometime when we use systematic processing and when heuristic.. We
do not take much load on non-important issues, this is called heuristic processing. But, when an issue is very important to us, we automatically go into systematic processing and invest a fair amount of time, before making a decision. We all do this. you do too. Do you have any question There are so many questions.. ask..good after noon sir..my name is ishika.. ishika is your name? Yes sir.. Ishika. Sir two questions have come in my mind during this whole lecture... Sir, when there are more suggestions, then what should be done in that situation. Basically if I am
in a situation and I am getting more suggestions, inputs, then what should be my decision related process? Because if I talk about objectivity, either all or nothing, either black or white, but there I have basically right that it will remain so limited and in this only I have to do But I am getting more space, more suggestions are coming, so what should I do in this case? See, if the inputs are coming from more places, then first of all your mind will also tell that which input giving person or channel or platform is so accurate,
then first of all remove those persons and channels from your surroundings, Those who stay away from talking very concrete. Those around you will be like this, I also see. We all have a filter in our mind, like if we say a joke, like some people in the staff, some have the habit of exaggerating things, some have the habit of saying less, and some After interaction, a filter starts working in our mind. Like someone comes and tells me that Sir is very urgent; I got a message like someone that Sir, I want to talk very urgently.
Two-three incidents have happened, so I know that its urgency is such that there is no problem for four-five days and some people will be like this. Will write that there is a need to talk, please tell if you have time. And I know that he is not saying it but it is very urgent so he must have written like this. So with whom you are in dialogue, slowly understand their personality, that how much authentic someone is, how deep, what kind of person they are and in such case always give preference to such a person, who
knows how to talk deeply and intelligently and give more inputs. More input increases confusion. This is correct. But when the options are more then there are chances that you will be able to reach the right option and in better way. There will be confusion, so reduce the options, that is not a good thing. Isn't it? It is a good thing that the decision making process should be better. Sir, sometimes it happens that we have already taken the decision. But still we go for a suggestion, so in that case. It doesn't happen sometimes, it usually does.
Usually the decision has already been taken, then why do we go for suggestion. There are two reasons for this. One is self defense mechanism. You are trying to show others that see, I decide after listening to everyone, whereas you have already taken the decision. Firstly, so that you can say in front of everyone, look how much thought I have taken in my decision. I took opinion from them too, took opinion from others too. this feeling remains in the mind. Sometimes you have taken a decision, but you yourself have a slight doubt, whether the decision has
been wrong or not. Sometimes we seek extra suggestions so that if we make a mistake, we can rectify it. The second thing is fine. The first thing is only so that you can justify to everyone that look, I had asked this much, is it okay? Sir My name is Madan Mohan and you talked about Immanuel Kant, whatever he followed, he rejected his own book. And again gave a new theory, whatever it was. At the same time, we are also in a time when we have to take many decisions and we want to take them too.
Many take it and they fail in it, then when they fail, sometimes it seems that the other person is criticizing us We know that they may not be true. We judge ourselves that no we were better than him, but he is teaching us, but when we are failing four to five times in such a decision, our experiment is failing, then a time comes When we say no.. maybe. We tell him on his face that no, you are wrong, I am doing right, but when you think in private, we question ourselves that weather we are right
or not, then next time we have to revolutionize then how will you get the courage and how to decide whether it was from here or not? If they insulted or said or suggested. Sometimes you got even 10 percent praise, yes it is okay, you have done well then in those situations how should you proceed. If you have taken decisions four times which proved to be wrong, then first get out of this ego that only I take the best decision. Isn't it? Or maybe you are actually making a mistake. Inputs may be less or objectivity may
be less, it might be possible right? Yes sir, the other person is giving you advice, but his language is stinging, so put the language aside. Understand the matter. If someone gives advice in stinging language and gives good advice, then put the language aside and take advice. If someone is talking nonsense in sweet language, then keep them away. Just listen to the language and stay cool. What does it mean... Keeping the essence the same, we have to do it, we have to extract the essence, so if three or four decisions are wrong, then we can humbly
accept that maybe we have made a mistake and if someone is giving advice, accept that part of the advice. There is no harm in doing it and what will people say? Don't pay too much attention to it. But yes, if there is any good advice, then of course people will say that look, you have copied it, no problem, take your decision and go ahead and whatever you do, people will say something or the other, so it is better to choose the right decision and What will People Say. I have a catchphrase that what will people
think, if I think about this too, what will people think, so let them think, do what you feel is right, okay? Sit down, hello sir my name is Rekha Verma. Sir as you mentioned that Kant rejected his own book. It is generally believed that a consistency on any issue or on any matter is linked to social credibility that this person is trustworthy. Will stick to his word but we think during life process. The same refining principle that this thing is fine. Got it wrong from experience. Let's do it better in future and if this is
happening again and again then how can we counter the social reputation. I had already said that this thing does not apply in personal relations. I am referring to social relations and relationships, yes I am talking about the same, in case of relations if you are dismissing again and again. So its really a danger that you might not be seen as a perfect person, because childhood is different. After maturing, when you choose your relationship, it is expected that you must have chosen wisely. There could be a single mistake. But if it happens again and again, it
means mistakes are happening in your thought process. Here it is a matter of thoughts, if you say that I voted for this party last time, but in the meanwhile I felt that my decision was wrong. That's why I will vote for this party on this. I don't think anyone is going to lose their credibility with this, what are your decisions on social, political, economic issues if they are changing and changing so with facts. If you can explain to people why you changed your opinion, then their opinion about you will improve your reputation. It will not
become bad, but yes, if there are a lot of fluctuations in personal social relationships, then it is a sign that you are not able to think with a very stable mind. that's right too So I had already said that it is not a matter of relationship, it is a matter of thoughts. It's about issues. There is nothing wrong with changing your opinion on issues with changing facts over time. What is the problem, then sir, as we have to explain, we have to present our side, then will we be stuck in the same process again? Then
how do we test ourselves? Then there comes a point when you stop caring what other people are thinking. Then why talk about reputation? Like my reputation is zero in my area, in this case.. it doesn't even matter to me. Why should I think so much that what he is thinking about me.. I am relaxed..It doesn't matter to me at all... And even if you get angry with someone, don't have enmity with him. A lot of time goes into that. It is best to ignore it... Mentioned, not the name on the tongue, There is no greater
revenge.than this... Don't even think. Get on with your life, be cool. Thank you sir Take a seat.. Thank you very much, you guys took out the time.. Will see you soon in the next session. Thank you.
