How I got over and done with this ridiculous concept of karma

My post on karma created quite a stir amongst many of the readers of this blog. I am also aware that there is much anticipation for the post that describes how I transformed my belief system. Not to disappoint anyone of you but my explanation is not based on any grand theories. As you will find out, our manifestation of karma, as it is perceived largely amongst the society, is because of a simple folly of human nature – our tendency to be affected by biases….

There is some evidence that our brains may be wired in such a way that we can never avoid certain mistakes. No, I am not kidding. In such cases, there is no learning curve such that you may learn to avoid them. We are certain to make a few of the same mistakes, over and over again. Yes, welcome to the world of biases!

What is a bias? A bias is a non-rational factor that systematically pushes one’s beliefs in some domain in one direction or very simply put, a bias refers to a specific, predictable error pattern in the human mind. All human beings suffer from many types of biases all the time.

Do you think the car you own is the best in its class of cars? Well that is because of the choice-supportive bias.

How many times have you thought that you will finish something in a certain amount time but have repeatedly failed to do so? Yeah, I know you have been there. It is because of the optimism bias or the planning fallacy.

In the Google age have you searched for something and then realised that it did not really help you but you would do it again anyway? or you have done a particular medical test even though you were told that it will not really benefit your diagnosis? Well that is because of the information bias.

Do you think you are a more rational person and less susceptible to these biases? Well that is because of the bias blind spot.

Do you think I am wrong and that you truly are less susceptible to biases? Well that is because of the confirmation bias.

I can go on and on with examples. Each one of you will have suffered from more than one of these biases (I suspect, many times) in your life. I am pointing out these biases only to make you aware that it’s a combination of these biases which have lead me to have a continued belief in karma as it is portrayed in the Indian society.

To be able to change my belief system, I had to take a step back and observe myself. I had to look at my daily activities, observe my reactions to events and analyse them as carefully as possible. I had to put in special efforts to rid myself of biases and once I was able to do that it was not hard to see what was wrong with my assumptions in the first place.

From my previous post you will see that my concept of karma wasn’t taught to me by reading some religious text but was passed down to me as an ideology. This kind of bandwagon effect or more exposure effect, which is the same that leads us Indians to believe in cricket as a religion rather than baseball or like Amitabh Bachchan much more than Sean Connery or Harrison Ford.

Then somewhere along the way I transformed my views of karma to suit my needs. I made it in to something that agreed with the kind of efforts-lead-to-good-results theory that we have all been exposed to through out our school education. Remember the story of Mahatma Gandhi or Bhagat Singh? I am not saying that these stories gave us any wrong ideas. As a matter of fact I am proud to have grown up reading about these great men but you can see why I would equate effort with karma points. And I’d class this as the result of choice-supportive bias.

And as this ideology pervaded my being, I was under the illusion of control. I thought about all the injustice in our society and started believing that karma will prevail and that the culprits will be punished. It made me a passive observer of all that around me, and if at all I was enraged, karma doused the fire within.

My choice of friends, clearly a confirmation bias. My reasons to keep believing in the theory and ignoring events that did not conform with my ideology, a status quo bias. And just like before, I can go on giving examples of how different biases played a role in my belief of karma. I think I have made my point. I am not trying to say that I was being affected by all these biases all the time. But it isn’t very easy to defeat an ideology like that of karma when there are so many biases that are bent on defeating you on your way out.

The success stories of our times

I’ve always loved reading the Readers’ Digest. Thanks to my mum and dad who have subscribed to it for the past twenty years. Apart from all the well-picked and topical articles, I always enjoyed reading their interviews. Recently, Suchitra sent me a link to an interview of Will Smith which was published in RD sometime ago. And after having read an RD interview after such a long time, I felt like reading more of them. I am sharing the most interesting bits of the interviews that I read:

Will Smith

RD: Have you ever thought about going back to college?
Smith: The things that have been most valuable to me I did not learn in school. Traditional education is based on facts and figures and passing tests — not on a comprehension of the material and its application to your life.

RD: Some would say there’s no reason to stay if a marriage isn’t good.
Smith: Once you say that, you’ve lost. With Jada, I stood up in front of God and my family and friends and said, “Till death do us part.”

RD: So getting to where you are is all just about running hard?
Smith: Most people you are going to be in competition with are not gonna give 100 percent.

RD: You work harder than the next guy?
Smith: I consider myself to be of basically average talent, right? What I have that other people do not have is a sick, obsessive, raw animal drive.

Jon Bon Jovi

RD: But then again you are always looking for new responsibilities.
JBJ: I never was one to rest on yesterday’s successes. I’m much more motivated to find new challenges.

RD: How do you feel today about your very first job selling women’s shoes? Is it something you’re ashamed of?
JBJ: Not at all

Michael J Fox

RD: You joke in your new book that you are fortunate to have married someone — actress Tracy Pollan — who is smarter and better looking than you. Do you think marital bliss boils down to that one choice: marrying the right person?
MJF:Obviously, that’s fundamental. But the key to our marriage is the capacity to give each other a break. And to realize that it’s not how our similarities work together; it’s how our differences work together. The least amount of judging we can do, the better off we are.

RD: Your last book, Always Looking Up, was about optimism. It’s the rare person who is as positive as you are. What’s your prescription for dealing with really negative, difficult people?
MJF: I think the scariest person in the world is the person with no sense of humor. I would say be patient with people who are negative, because they’re really having a hard time.

Hilary Swank

RD: Who instilled you with that belief in yourself?
Swank: My mom. She said, “You can do anything you want in life, Hilary, as long as you work hard enough. Don’t take no for an answer.” She didn’t want me to be afraid of taking life by the reins and making the most of it.

RD: There’s a lesson in that, right?
Swank: If you go into life with a good attitude, you’ll get more out of it.

Harrison Ford

RD: Your movies have grossed $3 billion. Is money all it’s cracked up to be?
Ford: Money is really only important if you don’t have any

Uma Thurman

Thurman: The purest relationship I have ever had, aside from with my children, is with my work. Whatever you give it, it gives you back double. That’s an unusual kind of relationship

RD: You’ve been at this for 20 years. Do you ever get tired of it?
Thurman: I’ve always approached work as a worker. Whatever it takes — endurance, discipline, practice, repetition, courage, working through it — I just have always been willing to pull myself up and try again. I’ve never taken success for granted.

Tom Cruise

RD: You’re lucky.
Cruise: I know.

Ok I admit these were all celebrity interviews. But I hope you enjoyed them nevertheless. 🙂

The acceptance of our existence

I finished reading Thomas Nagel’s What does it all mean? It is a very short introduction to philosophy which explores nine fundamental questions: How do we know anything?, Other minds, Mind-body problem, the meaning of words, Free Will, Right and Wrong, Justice, Death and the meaning of life.

In the very last chapter, on the very last page of the book, Nagel writes on the meaning of life:

If you every ask yourself the question, “But what’s the point of being alive at all” – leading the particular life of a student or bartender or whatever you happen to be you’ll answer, “There’s no point it wouldn’t matter if I didn’t exist at all, or if I didn’t care about anything. But I do. That’s all there is to it.”

Some people find this attitude perfectly satisfying. Others find it depressing, though unavoidable. Part of the problem is that some of us have an incurable tendency to take ourselves seriously. We want to matter to ourselves “from the outside”. If our lives as a whole seem pointless, then a part of us is dissatisfied – the part that is always looking over our shoulders at what we are doing. Many human efforts, particularly those in the service of serious ambitions rather than just comfort and survival, get some of their energy from the sense of importance – a sense that what you are doing is not just important to you, but important in some larger sense: important, period. If we have to give this up, it may threaten to take the wind out of our sails. If life is not real, life is not earnest, and the grave is its goal, perhaps it’s ridiculous to take ourselves so seriously, perhaps we just have to put up with being ridiculous. Life may be not only meaningless but absurd.

But a friend, Michelle, disagreed and introduced me to a new way of thinking about our own existence. Her philosophy is that

We think or act or feel only to be able to accept our own existence at this very moment.

That is certainly a big claim and definitely worth investigating further. “So what do you exactly mean?” I asked.

M: Ok. So what are you trying to do now?

A: I am trying to understand the meaning of life.

M: Ok. So you are doing this because if you are able to understand the meaning of life then you will feel satisfied or contented of your existence.

A: If very simply put, yes.

M: Then, right now, it is the means of accepting your existence at this very moment.

A: Hmmm…may be. Can you can give one more example?

M: Ok. Think this way, you are working on making this molecule which when developed can prove to be an anti-cancer agent and may help some people over come the disease.  When that happens it will make you happy. But at this very moment,  you reason that you are doing what you are doing so that you are able to seek that happiness then and it gives you a reason to accept your own existence at this very moment.

A: But that is a cyclical argument. Anything we do can be reasoned that way.

M: Yes, it’s true. I’ve asked this very question very many times and this is the best I could come up with. Isn’t it a neat way of looking at things?

A: Yes. It puts you in a state of mind such that you value the present more than the past or the future.

Ok. Sounds great. It is a cyclical argument and does not give an absolute answer to that question of what is the meaning of life but it gives us a good way of thinking of our own existence. That’s all fine and dandy. It’s a great philosophical thought. Sweet. But does this way of thinking have any practical use? Because, isn’t it very easy to keep saying that I am thinking about the fact  that we think about things so that we are able to accept our existence so that I am able to accept my existence.

M: We can use this to help us put things in perspective or to be able to prioritise things that we do at any given moment.

A: Hmm….ok. So how do we do that.

M: Well, think of any moment as a vertical line on a horizontal timeline. Then think of all the things that you can choose to do at the very next moment. (For simplicity we are going to restrict ourselves to doing only one thing at any given moment). Now, you can say that you can do X which is something you have spent a certain amount of time in the past doing (Mx) and doing it now will impact a certain amount of time in the future (Nx). Now you can mark Mx and Nx on the timeline and then draw a slanting line from that point towards the point where your current moment meets the timeline. This gives you a cone.

A: Hmm…ok. What next?

M: So now you  can do this for other activities like Y and Z and for that you will have respective points My and Ny and Mz and Nz and they will in turn give you two more cones. Now you priorities X, Y, Z such that the activity which will give you the highest area under the cone is the most important one to do now because it will have to be the most efficient use of your time now.

A: Ah, I see. That’s neat! So like now it’s 1 am and we are standing outside in this cold and talking about these things. At the very next moment I can decide to leave because I need to get some sleep so that I can be in the lab early and do n number of things. But that area under this cone may be less, because even tomorrow I will think about these problems and probably not be as effective in the things I do. Where as I if I stay for sometime longer then we can use this superb conversation to yield us some more effective tools of thinking about the world and the area under this cone certainly seems more to me.

Right. So obviously when we have built on a good base to philosophise and find things to add to our self-manipulation toolbox then we should think about more practical ways of developing these tools.

M: Have you heard of the 21-day rule of habits?

A: What is that?

M: Well, if you do something for 21 days without breaking the cycle and doing it religiously and with the same rigour then you will form any habit you want.

A: Hmm…interesting. You know it took me about three weeks to fully adapt to my polyphasic schedule last year. I wonder where this comes from, may be there is some scientific way of explaining it. It sounds like the 11-gulps of water rule.

M: What?

A: If you want to get rid of hiccups then have 11 continuous gulps of water, they will go away. Every time. Have you heard of the 10000 hour rule to become an expert?

M: No, what is that?

A: Malcolm Gladwell wrote this in his book called Outliers which was based on some study by a psychologist that if you do anything for enough time (he found the golden number is 10,000 hours) then you will become an expert in that field in definitely succeed.

M: Sweet. So that translates to what 4 years of doing it all the time.

A: Yeah sure! Only if you give up everything and do it but, in general, it is more long-term.

Actually, think of it this way, doing a PhD is 3-4 years of full-time working on solving a handful of problems by using similar sort of tools and thinking about your subject all that time. Seems like a good reason why one should be awarded a PhD if they do it religiously! 🙂

Disclaimer: Such digressions, although intellectually appealing, may have detrimental effects on your work.