Science & Religion

Science and religion are two windows that people look through, trying to understand the big universe outside, trying to understand why we are here. The two windows give different views, but they look out at the same universe. Both views are one-sided, neither is complete. Both leave out essential features of the real world. And both are worthy of respect.

Trouble arises when either science or religion claims universal jurisdiction, when either religious dogma or scientific dogma claims to be infallible. Religious creationists and scientific materialists are equally dogmatic and insensitive. By their arrogance they bring both science and religion into disrepute. The media exaggerate their numbers and importance. The media rarely mention the fact that the great majority of religious people belong to moderate denominations that treat science with respect, or the fact that the great majority of scientists treat religion with respect so long as religion does not claim jurisdiction over scientific questions.

Dyson

Second Life? Get a life.

Are we really screwing up our first lives to take care of our second lives? What are all the kids doing now instead of playing, running, walking, biking and above all just "talking" to a human being? They are busy beautifying their Myspace profiles, or uploading pictures and videos to their facebook accounts.

There are good things associated with the kind of communication that Web 2.0 technologies enable. Long lost friends meet, better communication helps long distance relationships. Workforce is more efficient with better communication.

But I think the pendulum is swinging too far too quickly. I am not sure if it is all for the good. Technology evolutions and disruptions are inevitable. Should we leave all the good things from our past as we move into the newer territories? Should we not take care of our real first lives before we start spending major chunk of our time on our virtual lives?

Virtues of Power & Politics

Power is mostly seen in a negative light. Power is an essential component of leadership though. Sooner a leader learns the virtues of power and politics, better it is.

It is good as long as you use the accumulated power ethically for the general good and not you own interests. If you do not get and use power, someone else will. A good question although to ask yourself is - what are your ethical boundaries for use of that power?

A few facts about power -

B confers power to A when: B depends on A for a resource that is important to B over which A has discretion which B can get nowhere else.

Sources of Power: Possible sources of power are
Resources: Information, Expertise, Money
Personal: Energy, Focus, Charisma, System knowledge, reputation, foresight, Big Ideas

Power begets more power: It is contrary to the belief that power accumulation could saturate after one gets enough power. No - the pie is expandable with power. The more power you have, easier it is for you to get more power.

Undervalued resources: Power could be enhanced and savvy politicians do that - by identifying and taking ownership over undervalued resources. Many resources that provide power are underappreciated - who wants to be the Suprintendant of Police (SP) in a rural area?