Mind Your 'Footprint'

Global warming has transcended debate to a growing reality with most educated people. They are slowly getting exposed to the ominous repercussions; the world is likely to face with this change. A fifth of global wetlands are threatened, up to 300 crore more people will face water shortages, 40 crore more people will be staring at hunger and so on. These facts are widely shared.
What is not so widely shared is that methane (20 times more harmful) and nitrous oxide (300 times more harmful) are the other two major green house gases, in addition to carbon dioxide. But people do know that the single biggest source of carbon emission is burning of fossil fuels, and certain industrial processes.
Yet, most of us consider themselves to be bystanders affected by this new reality, and not the contributors to global warming. We may even get offended if someone were to point out that at least some of our actions may be leading to more global warming and it is possible to be more prudent, without so much coming out of our comfort zones.
Home solutions
Let us take a check, whether we are a part of the solution, or we are a part of the problem.
1. We are being a part of the problem if we unnecessarily lower AC temperatures. Human comfort range is 24 to 28 degree Celsius with light clothing. Likewise, we can comfortably sleep if the temperature is below 27 degrees. There is no basic need to lower AC temperatures below these. Even 2-3 degrees can make a lot of difference to energy consumption. When I was working in a Japanese company, Denso, I saw that one was supposed to switch on Ac only when the room temperature went above 28 degrees.
Most of us counter that they are paying the charges. They do not realize that they are only paying conversion charges, and not the cost of side effects. After all, the electricity for air-conditioning may be coming from burning of fossil fuels, pushing up overall temperatures.
2. Do we switch off appliances, when we are not using? These appliances may be sipping electricity when they are in standby mode. Do we watch and promptly switch off chargers when mobiles, i-phones, etc. are fully charged, instead of leaving them on?

3. If we eat local, in-season agricultural produce then we are a part of the solution. If we have a fascination for exotic fruits and vegetables coming from faraway places, then we are a part of the problem.

4. Likewise, if we prefer bottled water over the one from water purifier at our home, we are being a part of the problem.

5. If we are predominantly vegetarian, we are part of the solution. Beef is especially harmful because cattle belch out methane, which is more harmful, as mentioned earlier.

6. If we prefer and use shower or a bath tub, instead of a bucket and mug bath, we are surely not being a part of the solution. The same goes for a car wash. In Denso, it was a serious offence, if a driver was seen washing a company car with a pipe!

7. If we plant gardens, especially low water consuming plants and trees, we are surely being a part of the solution.

8. If we hang out clothes for drying, instead of tumble drying, we are a part of the solution.
Likewise, if we do not use half filled dishwater or a washing machine, we are a part of the solution.

Travel
9. If we drive to the gym, instead of running, we are being a part of the problem.

10. If we leave the engine or AC idling at traffic lights, we are a part of the problem.

11. If prefer overnight train instead of flight, then we are a part of the solution.

12. If we walk or cycle short distances, we are a part of the solution.

13. If we do weekly or longer shopping in single trips, we are a part of the solution.

Office
14. If we use glasses, instead of plastic cups, then we are part of the solution.

15. If we use double sided printing, we are a part of the solution.

16. If we switch off lights etc. when we can do without them, we are a part of the solution.

17. If we unnecessarily use search engines, when we can do without it by remembering or recording sites, we are a part of the problem.

18. If we wear light clothing reducing the need for more air-conditioning, we are being a part of the solution.

19. More than anything else, if we champion change and spread awareness, we are being a part of the solution.

The underlying idea is that we should endeavour to reduce our ‘carbon footprint’ as a responsible citizen of the world. For those new to this debate, carbon footprint is the sum of greenhouse gas emission directly or indirectly attributable to a person or an entity.

Happily Yours

If you were to choose between success and happiness, what will you choose? Or, if there is a possibility that you may not be happy after you achieve success, what will you do?

If you are ambivalent, it is natural. While it is human to pursue growth and success, happiness is a biological goal of every human being. In fact, our ancestors put happiness on divine pedestal, calling even God, Sachhidanand (the eternal happiness). They went even a step further putting sex statues on the walls of temples- an unthinkable proposition in any other part of the world. In a culture, where there are even precise descriptions of planetary constellations at the time of birth of Lords Rama and Krishna, there is no reference of their dates of death. In fact, the concept of death anniversary first came to this land with Buddha's Parinirvana diwas. It was not without reason. The overarching philosophy was to celebrate happiness and underplay sadness. 

What is happiness? Is it pursuit of material success? Or, something more than that? Does it have many flavours or textures? We will share some research findings. We will also talk about who is likely to be happier than others.

There is an emerging movement led by social scientists like Dr. Martin Seligman and others. They call it a positive psychology movement, devoted to study of happiness, and how people can be happier?  Their research talks about three kinds of happiness. One is through pursuit of pleasure, symbolised by celebrities. Researchers steer clear of value judgments and affirm that there is nothing wrong in this kind of happiness. The effects and results are immediately tangible.

The second kind of happiness comes from an intense engagement of any activity. Ask a mother breast feeding her child, a composer composing music, or even a software developer writing a new package. Their excitement and thrill is beyond words. They derive happiness through the intensity of involvement in whatever they do.

There is a third kind of happiness and this comes from and this comes from leading a life of significance for others. There is a saying in Sanskrit that the crux of Vyas’s eighteen puranas is that there is no greater virtue in doing good to others and no greater sin than hurting others. That is the source of happiness for Gandhi, Mother Teresa, Vinoba Bhave, and countless others who live and die for others.

As said earlier, there is nothing better or worse in any of these three types, and an individual’s happiness is a combination of the three types of happiness at any point of time. Those who have more types have more likelihood to be happy than those who rely only on material happiness.

Is happiness an inside thing or depends on external factors? Again, the answer is both. There are certain personality traits that make one happier than others. For example, extroverts are happier than introverts, says the research. One’s world view, philosophy and vision have a large role in one’s happiness.

On the other hand, research also shows that certain level of prosperity is positively associated with happiness. People around a person also make a difference. Those who live in the company of happy people are happier than those surrounded by whiners, critics, run-downers.

Research also says that happiness is learnable and one can train himself or herself to be a lot more happier even in the same circumstances.

So, in an allusion to Biblical injunction, let us go forth and be happy, our vicissitudes notwith standing! We even have a cultural and divine sanction.

FAQs on Science of Love

Love has been defined and interpreted in countless ways. However, most rationalise it as God's gift and divine, just as they treated moon before they could understand that it is just another planet or a satellite. It is just a 'chemical locha' as propounded in one of the Bollywood films, as one of my friends reminded. I have attempted to compile existing understanding and extrapolations therefrom.

The attempt is merely to demistify and understand the scientific basis. It does not make it any less fascinating, just as knowing the science of childbirth does not reduce its profoundness as a human experience.

Q: What is love?

Ans: As per Wikipedia, love is any of a number of experiences related to a sense of strong affection and attachment . It can refer to a variety of different feelings, states, and attitudes, ranging from generic pleasure ("I loved that meal") to intense interpersonal attraction ("I love my boyfriend"). In abstract sense, love is a combined feeling of bonding, caring for the other beyond self.

Q: Why does one chase romantic love?

Ans: Brain mapping shows that early stage intense romantic love activates the same sub-cortical reward regions that are rich with dopamine and are associated with the motivations to win rewards in contests.

Q: Is attractiveness of the beloved necessary for romantic love?

Ans: No. Activation regions of romance and attractiveness are on the right and the left side respectively. Romantic love is distinct from, though inter-related to sex-drive for which attractiveness may be a stimulant as a part of natural mate selection process.

Q: What is love-at-first sight?

Ans: Love-at-first sight is a basic mammalian response to speed up the mating process.

Q: Does love evolve?

Ans: As per Dr. Helen Fisher of Rutgers University, NJ, The USA, there are three stages. First is lust stage, in which a male or female notices and chooses a mate. Second stage is that of attraction. The third and the final stage is attachment. Different chemicals come into play at each of these stages. Testosterones and estrogens promote aggressiveness and have a role in the first stage.

Dopamine plays an active role in the second stage creating a craving and a feeling of ‘not being able to get enough of each other’. This leads to day-dreaming and a partial detachment from the reality.

Another chemical produced during this phase is Serotonin. Serotonin produces light mood and happy feeling. Serotonin combines with dopamine to promote fantasizing and a partial disconnect with the reality. It is partial because one is able to see ‘beautiful things’ like flowers, butterflies, etc., but may not be able to see a precipice in front. Wikipedia says that chemically, the serotonin effects of being in love have a similar chemical appearance to obessessive-compulsive disorder. This could explain why a person in love cannot think of anyone else, people say that love is blind.

Attachment is the third stage of love. There are two key chemicals in this process, oxytocin and vasopressin. Oxytocin creates emotional bonding and physical contractions in child birth and orgasm. It also creates bonding of mother with child during breast feeding.

This bonding makes it difficult to let go of the relationship and triggers production of dopamine etc., which, in turn creates desperation for uniting with the absent partner. However, with the passage of time, as the contact dwindles, these chemicals get depleted and there is a realization and acceptance of break.

Vassopressin strengthens attachment as the relationship grows older. If there is no reinforcement, production of vasopressin also goes down, slowly reducing attachment.

Q: Why does the heart get broken in the event of unrequited love?

Ans: Heart does not appear to have any role in matters of love; a broken brain would have been more appropriate. Generally people associate brain with thinking processes and, therefore, they had to find an alternative place to associate with feelings.

There is also a chemical associated with the second stage of love, and is called norepinephrine (Norpee in short). When a lover sees or thinks of another, this chemical creates ‘butterfly effect’, in which, there is a rush of emotions creating goose bumps, healthier looking skin tone, increase in pulse rate and heart rate, sweating, etc. This may be the cause of associating love with heart.

In fact, the ubiquitous heart is not the symbol of love as we understand. Any biology student will tell you that heart’s actual shape is different. According to Desmond Morris, much before the advent of ‘missionary position’ in the western world, common love making position was from behind and this so-called symbol of love is actually a representation of ‘female behind’.

Q: What is true love?

Ans: A balance of serotonin, dopamine and norepinephrine counters the negative effects (like continued craving) of each other. This is called true love. There are shades of positivity, longing and This may or may not be accompanied with other chemicals associated with love making, and therefore, true love may not be restricted to stereotypical man-woman relationship.

Q: Is it possible to have platonic love?

Ans: Yes but as it is all about interplay of neurochemicals, there is no guarantee that it may or may not remain so.

Q: Is it possible to 'switch off and on' love medically?

Ans: Successful experiments have been done on animals in the regard.

Soda water training

Being a trainer, I often get calls, especially from event management companies, for delivering a motivation lecture. The expectation is that I will say something which will immediately fire up employees, particularly sales team and they will instantly deliver a distinctly superior performance. There are some speakers who jump and shout and make the participants also do the same. Everybody is happy even though this hardly ever translates into better performance in the long run. I call these soda water events and the fizz is gone after a while.  Obviously, I decline politely. There is another flip side to these events. Employees of the company, where these programs are often held, start equating all programs with all fun and get disinterested whenever any skills and concepts are sought to be taught. Fun is very important for better learning transfer, but we must not confuse means with end.

There is another set of employers who want a one-day training program and look forward to it as a remedy for low morale, alienation, disengagement, lack of teamwork, etc. Had this been so simple, life would have been simple not only for employers, but spouses, parents, everybody. I try suggesting them an alternate capsule on ownership and service culture. If we are able to instil a sense of ownership and how it is in their own interest of growth and happiness, at least a part of the purpose is served. This generally gives better results.

Once we were face to face with Sri Sri Ravi Shankar, founder of Art of Living. Someone asked him, “Guruji, how do we motivate employees?” He answered, “Motivation is a dirty word. Motivation means manipulation and is, therefore, dehumanizing. Do you remember the famous carrot-n-stick paradigm? You end up making a donkey out of human being.” He suggested inspiring people, instead. “Sell them a vision and how it will be beneficial for everyone, including them. This is the only way you can get out of carrot-n-stick trap.” Profound indeed!

Origin of Indian philosophy

It is always a profound learning experience meeting my partner Raghoo Sinha. Recently, we were discussing how and why agnosticism is one of the six major schools of Indian philosophy. Some of  my learning is as follows:

1. One of the first appreciations was that there is an exorable Law of Karma, which is Newtonian in nature. We will have to pay for our actions or inactions, and there is no escape. 
2. Yet, in real life it was seen often enough that those who do good suffer and those who have bad karma enjoy. In an effort to reconcile this contradiction, concept of multiple births was propounded. It was surmised that one not only reaps the fruits of present-life karmas but also previous lives' karmas that have not been 'redeemed'. 
3. Unredeemed karmas also get shaped as 'samskaras'.
4. Now, who will ensure proper record of these karmas and transfer of these records from one birth to the other? Thus, came the construct of 'indestructible' atma which carries on. It is to be noted that the concept of atma was propounded much before the concept of 'brahmatma' came in.
5. What happens when one day, all the karmas are redeemed and balance is neither positive nor negative? This is called 'moksha' and the cycle of births and deaths is no longer necessary. If this were so, what will happen to atma, which was the vehicle of continuity? Here 'brahmatma' was brought in and atma is suposed to get merged with brahmatma. 

In ancient philosophy, the concept of inexorability of karmas was so strong that no propitiation of gods could save one from bearing the fruits of one's karmas. This later got diluted in vedas and more so in bhakti period. Influence of western thought processes and religions also played a role in cultivation of benign God or gods who could be 'won over' through bhakti and one could 'wash away' one's sins through worship or a holy dip or such 'remedies'. Some gods could also turn vindictive suitably punish the non-believers!!  Birth and perpetuation of 'priests and middlemen', who could help one in this manipulation of God, was both a cause and an effect of this new development. 

Now, back to the first question. If the Law of Karma is perfectly Newtonian and one can not escape the fruits of one's karma, then the scope for 'manipulation of God'  is diminished and belief or non-belief in Him becomes inconsequential.