Theory of perspectives

(Keep Calm and let our young Economist sprint through your brain. Also, let your love flow through your comments below.)

Is the sun a circle or sphere? For a child who hasn’t learnt what a sphere is, the sun is a circle. But an 8th standard student would vehemently argue it to be a sphere. Are they right? Yes. For what they know, it is the truth to them. Are they wrong? Yes. Apparently, the sun is not a perfect sphere either. (I didn’t know this fact until google taught me this a few weeks back)

During my school days, when juniors would crib about how tough their class is, like every ‘responsible’ senior, I too would share the profound pearls of wisdom. Invariably all of us used the same dialogue- You are complaining about such a small thing (sigh of disapproval)!! When you reach __ (the class we were in) standard, you shall know the real challenges.

Once again, the question pops up, are they correct? No one can say.

A first standard kid might find the addition of two digits to be very difficult. When he reaches fourth standard, he might struggle with division and addition would be a cakewalk. Was he lying in his first standard? Definitely not. Leaving the addition and division aside, the pain of learning was equally difficult in both stages.

A friend shared a meme a while back in which one person had put up a post saying that he failed in his 12th standard and did not feel like living anymore. Another person put a comment saying- Bro, if you stop living, you will have to start from 1st standard once again. Do you really want to do that?

The main crux of all these is that it is a matter of perspective. There is no clear definition of right or wrong, easy or difficult or anything. In fact, there is no clear definition of anything in this world. Everything comes with a lot of terms and conditions and not absolute.

If everything is grey, then this world would turn into hell. People would go about doing anything they will because they are right in their perspective. I am reminded of my teacher, who would often use this phrase- Desha, Kaala, Paristhiti. I didn’t understand the depth of this statement then, but I have now understood it to a small extent at least.

A soldier who kills enemies on the border is awarded medals and showered with honours. Was killing justified? Yes. If the same soldier killed an enemy in his own country, he would be sent to jail. When is killing justified then? We can't tell explicitly. Paradoxically, our existence is based on violence. Our breathing itself kills bacteria and several other microorganisms. We are living because there are several more who die for our survival. I would pose the same question, is killing justified? I will leave this for you to ponder.

There is a duality of life as well. If taking in oxygen is one aspect then leaving carbon dioxide is its complementary object. In accounting terms, debit has to always match the credit. That is why for every right action, there is a wrong too. At the larger frame, nothing is right or wrong, ethical or unethical. It is at the micro-level that a definition exists, which is necessary too. Just a small example, we all might know the story of Manthara provoking Kaikeyi to send Rama into exile. She has been called a vile and vicious lady due to this. The story has a prequel that most of us do not know. Manthara, in her previous birth, was humiliated by Ravana for which she took a vow that she will take birth once again and make sure that Ravana gets slain. At the micro level, Manthara's actions were wrong and at the macro level, it justifies.

At the end, there is no perfect truth in this world. "Sun rises in the east" is a fact that is true irrespective of time. The bigger truth is that it is true in our universe. There might be universes where the concept of the sun itself may be alien. Do we know of those universes; well, we do not. Can we prove that they do not exist? Well, most likely not.

If we are not even aware that there are greater truths then we are limiting our growth. Similarly, if every truth is not the absolute, then is it worth knowing partial truth? In economics, every model or theory has its own disadvantages. No theory is perfect and all are in the pursuit of making it perfect. Ironically, perfection is a matter of perspective too because who defines what is perfect? Are there any parameters set for perfection? The concept of best is a bubble that shall burst any second. Currently, Usain Bolt holds the record of the fastest man on earth. Before Usain Bolt broke the world record, there was a best set by Asafa Powell. In the years to come, Usain’s record too would become second to the best. Perfection was never a destination but an endless journey.

Now to get back to economics, if every model and theory is flawed, why should we learn those because none of them gives the entire truth!! If we stick with this thought, then we can never progress. To be better, there has to be something to be better than. There has to be a version 1.0 to get to 2.0. I am not saying that 2.0 would be perfect and neither would the 38754.0 version be. But definitely, the ‘n’ th version is better than the first. None of us can know the entire truth but we can learn the partial truth. Real knowledge lies in being aware that we do not know everything.

If I were to give this whole thing a summary, I would not be able to, because there is no one perspective to this either. At the end of the day, this is also one of the infinite perspectives and these are the perspectives I live by, do let me know yours.