choice is an illusion. In reality, our lives are controlled by the society in which we live

This is more of a tussle between the common-man and the society that he lives in. Societies as we know are made up by these people. But the society when taken as a whole seems to differ in stark contrast to the people that form a part of it. This is thanks to the fact that no two people think alike, hence our society has evolved over the time based on different thoughts from everyone of them, how many share a similar thought and which ones can voice their thoughts better.

There are as always 2 sides of the argument. While we can constantly scream at the top of our voice that we just cannot exercise our choice in anything and everything we want to, there is always the truth that we indeed make up the society. The society mirrors the people that make it. Or more precisely the majority of the people in it. There goes the catch. A persons view on this issue will depend on the strata of the society he is in. If he forms a part of the majority who dictate the ways everyones life is controlled, then he will probably tell you that there is nothing called the society and we indeed form it. So the society can never have a thought that is different from what the people in it have. These are the people that form the rules, set the limits and thus are very happy. But not just because they think they have done a good job, but because they think they are helping others who are not of the same impression as they are in a specific issue.
This goes by the phrase, everything is right till the majority thinks that way. but what happens when they are wrong? do they have it themselves to realise the mistake and accept it magnanimously and set things right. In cases where the society has gone wrong, most of them have been where the society knows it is indeed wrong, but is in a too high a stature that it cannot accept it and correct it. this is the problem many are weary of.

Consider another man from the other side of the story, the part which is an outcast group just because it failed to follow the rules set by the other part. That is the beauty of freedom of thought. everyone wants to have his way. I say give him his way, fine until he does not force that on others. But isnt this exactly what the society is doing on this group, force its ideals. People who do not follow these are looked upon with contempt. There is always this problem where the society had gone way beyond its limits. Should not it just recommend how people should live and leave the choice to the people. Good or Bad let them decide for themselves. There are instances where there is just nothing good or bad. take in case of attires, there is not a single attire you an condemn as bad or good. the thing that may seem good to one may not necessarily get the same response from another. so, this shakes the very foundation of a common rule for the entire society.

Although the society is being perceived with anger that some are not allowed to go with their instincts, there is still the thing that they do not need to care what the society thinks of them. If they can show no heed at what it advices them to do, maybe they should follow the same doctrine when there are not accepted by the society. The blame not only resides with the minority but with the society as well. while it for the society to see to that people do not get carried away with anything, it must allow every individual to think for themselves and more importantly learn to respect his/her choice. Only can can this issue be made totally redundant.

Many people admire idealism, but it usually leads to disappointment or trouble

Admiring is one thing, but following it with discipline is another. What people lack is not the thought process, but how to implement their thoughts and bring them to reality. Many people have perished without even trying to bridge the gap between their ideals and their practices, between their dreams and reality. And a few others have tried but in vain, but history remembers only those who had succeeded. Those select people had the power to transform their thoughts and integrate those to their daily walks of life. The main problem with idealism is that when people cannot think of ideals that they can follow in principle. If a student who is below average wants to top the class plans to study everything in overnight and be the best, that is not going to happen however determined he or she is. But on the other hand another student plans to get to the top in the span of a year, that is clear thinking. There are basically two important things that people need to understand and get clear about. First they need to set proper ideals and secondly follow them with zeal and discipline. As always easier said than done. The above case was a vivid example of the problems people have had with the first point. There have also been cases where many have faltered during the second process. They set very good ideals, but hardly have the determination to follow them persistently. This is very hard to set right, while the earlier one just needs a proper insight into how the student needs to go about following his ideals. But with what I have seen so far, people have had more trouble with the latter than the first one. Everyone sets his ideals right, but miss out trying to pursue them. Another important issue to be addressed in this regard is how far can one stick to his ideals. For instance, if there is someone who does not lie, how far can he keep himself to do his bidding. He may strictly adhere to his principles in day to day life, which is by no means a mean task. But what will he do when he is really tested. If there is a guy who has seen his friend commit a crime for which he will be hanged if proven guilty. And in a court, when he is asked to testify, will he be able to keep up his principle and not lie and send his friend to the chair? Tough ask. For anything and everything there is a limiting factor or the breaking point as it is called more popularly. So as in innocent until proven guilty, idealism will work until it has met its test of character. The real question then changes to how long can one push himself to thread the path of determination. The longer we go, farther we go from disappointing others and more importantly ourselves. The simple fact that people have seen more disappointments is because they dont have the courage to continue beyond the limit they can go. Some give in way to easily than others. Very few have the determination to go through with their ideals and have had some luck so that they were never put to test beyond what they can bear. Hence, idealism does lead to disappointment or trouble. But people must also get to learn to go past disappointments and more importantly learn from all that so that they can still stretch themselves a yard further.

Dravid!! you too??

people generally know tht being a captain of our indian cricket team is no mean job, infact quite its opposite. the word burden loses its meaning and seems an under-statement. but i thot he was the man for the job, and i still do. if there is anyone who can lead the high hopes and ride on high pressure, it is, without the slightest of doubts, the man we call 'the wall'. il make myself clear, by no means can this be described as crumbling. maybe he loved his batting, rather the game, too much to stay skipper anymore. but stil the ques that looms large, 'is there something more to the story?' but given the gentleman and diplomat that he is, we wil never get to know wat really went through his mind. but he need not tarry about this. he is not the first to succumb to the pressure and most certainly not the last. almost all prev skippers had been victims of this one time or the other. sachin had been there, sourav's is a more recent story and azhar was no different. infact when we look back about this, never has there been a captain who had not been weighed down by the immense pressure and expectation. never has indian cricket been without politics, clashes of ego.. but lets move forward as we have done always, but have we learnt from this.. learn from this? hmm. when have done that last time? anyway who's next? there is dhoni of course. but has he the experience to deal with the post... i really have doubts . if dravid itself cannot handle the pressure or watever reason that forced him to retire, can dhoni take it. obviously il bet anything that he wil find dravid behind him anytime he wants and take a step back before dhoni can mention to him.. dravid was a wonderful team leader mainly because he is a wonderful team-man.. so i look for reason beyond what bcci tells us and wat dravid tells us.. hmm. but always he wil stay as one the best servants of not only indian cricket, but for the game as a whole, the best batsman the subcontinent has produced, who can play away from home better than at home..

finally entering d bloggers club

for a long time i had been contemplating with myself about creating a blog, constantly finding reasons for not doing it to be frank.. for sometime now i was running outta excuses to delay becoming a blogger ;) basically being lazy to even create a blog. now tht i knw how simple d job is, am a little freaked out realising how lazy i actually am. anywy this is a strt! :) but lemme not get carried away n strt writin a long post first up. so adieu, atleast until later.. :)