| Swayam's profileSwayzoneBlogListsNetwork |  Tools  Help |
|
10/13/2006 Line of ClassificationEver wondered why we call someone a loser? Ya... many answers in your mind:
"Because he hasn't won anything" : This is THE classic definition..
"He hasn't been famous or among the favorites"
"He pests me a lot" "He's too sincere.."Plenty! I guess some of you have might already have the I-may-fit-into -one-of-these-for-a-particular-set-of-people doubt. Ever tried telling someone he is a loser? Observe his reaction. If he's too full of himself, or confident or as-they-say bold, he will shrug you off. Little does he know that he's just being a jerk. Just like you are, when you label him so. He suffers from a sense of insecurity. He is not at fault if he compares himself with the "ideal loser" at the back of his mind for years, and tries to hide the inner self from the outer world. Once again doubts are raised in him. He may fake, but he sure knows.. On the other side, if the guy you have labeled, is coy and nervous, he'll doubt himself. He'll keep on asking, "Is that so??" and that too not in a direct obvious way... His mind now is deep within himself retrospecting every moment where he was embarrassed. "Do all these events sum up to me being a loser?" He's just weak to hide these moments and is visibly shaky. And sure enough, doubts are raised.
There is no ideal response to being termed a loser. In fact being termed one, itself doesn't fall in the 'ideal' category. (Sure enough, who wants to be called a loser?) But is labeling someone justified? I have been with people who are looked up to as Gods and those who have been disregarded at the same time.... in the same room. Why is it that the latter category has developed so? and what about the former deities? Even more importantly, what about the middlemen who make up the third category? Is anything going in the right direction?? Aren't these people a subset of something?? something bigger and more general??
The so-called geniuses may have natty brains. People hail them and why not?? They have worked hard and deserve every compl i/e ment they receive. People tend to believe that these are born winners. But were these guys always so? The passive snubbed ones... well they're quarantined (make no mistake, even computer viruses aren't meted out that handling) And even more certainly when the environment around them changes, so does their reputation... The world is big and some pack may well treat this guy like we treat the geniuses...
Get any linearity?? What am i trying to prove here?
Sure there's an infinite line of classification... similar to the number line we've studied in Math but only vertical, and the people around us aren't at the terminal ends (Infinity does not exist, right?). You'll always find someone better than you in all aspects! And i am talking on both ends. Up and Down! So, where should you be? Intermediate may seem the safest option. But is it the right one? People crave for success. And for optimum success, intermediate is surely not the optimal choice. A positive extreme sounds the right one: be adulated by your comrades, people respect you and success is there for you. It should be noted that these people who recommend you are the ones who are in the intermediate zone, or better put, below you! (Some ego trip huh?) So basically you need someone below you to lift you up. (The topic might tread through 'gravity' as well.. try applying it!)... Mind you i am only being relative. You might 'appear' above a certain section but that pertains your reference frame... Change the frame and the line changes... significantly! The third kind, i.e. the other extreme.. the passive snubbed losers whose existence should be barred? Are they, again, born losers? Wait a minute, change the frame of reference! Now, are they even losers? Someone horrible at studies might be excellent at sports or music! Someone who isn't as street-smart as you expect might have better thinking power than you! Once again, the line changes! Still dare to look down upon someone?
Ill only state the classic known examples: Galileo belonged to the third kind during his time. Sure he was a scientist, but his sanity was questioned. And with the time dimension changing, he is one who is looked up to as the father of astronomy. Who is more successful? The people during his time, who were above him in the line (or so they thought), or he himself???
MK Gandhi was thrown off a train by the people who thought they were above him in the line of classification. But with the reference changing, he is one of the topmost people in the other line for people. Once again, who is better known? Those who threw him or the Father of the nation himself?
Again, i am not comparing the scenarios w.r.t fame alone. Someone might be on a higher post in the line when it comes to fame. But when it comes to knowledge/success (sometimes success and fame don't go hand in hand)... the same guy wont be visible near the top! Again, these are relative positions on the line. The greats mentioned above were considered losers by those who felt they were highly placed. This applies even to you. The person, you feel is a complete goner may have the potential more than you could ever dream of. The line of classification is never constant and people can leapfrog you in a jiffy. What will you do now? There's darkness below and scorning faces above you.
|
|
|
