I know it is after a very long time. Somehow, I could post my thoughts as a blog only now. However, I now have a series of them listed down and will post them one by one. Thanks for your visit and comments in advance.
I have just finished reading a Michael Connelly book - Chasing the Dime. It was a page-turner. I had the urge to complete it as fast as possible, which is not always the case with all the novels. Therefore, the point is it was an awesome read for me and you too can try this author if you have not yet.
My interpretations and inferences:
The novel is about the industrial giants preventing a revolutionary invention to happen, as it would affect their business. Despite the fact that it would change everything in the world the way it is. It would dramatically improvise all that is done for the welfare of life. It would make impossibilities possible.
However, for this to happen, the idea has to be encouraged, the invention needs funding for a proof of concept and prototype. Later on, it should reach people making them realise its capabilities and should be widely accepted by many of them, which is very important. What if it is capable, it is of no use unless people believe that it is.
Therefore, it is not so easy to improvise or change the system with just the idea, urge and good intentions. One has to struggle to make the society believe. Otherwise, he fails pathetically. The irony is one who is not capable but is able to convince people, wins.
Why is this so difficult? Is not improvisation and change that would benefit the society as a whole, a people's need?
Actually, people need improvement and benefits but only for them. They are not bothered about what should happen to others and the world.
That is the reason the industrial giants does not want a revolutionary invention to happen. It would destroy their business. Not all that they do at present may make sense after that invention is widely accepted by people. Therefore, they do not want it to happen despite the fact that it would be of great benefit for the whole world. You can find several such examples in real life. Good intentions are not being encouraged unless it personally benefits people.
Is this being selfish? So, is being selfish wrong? Does this mean that if people are selfish nothing good can happen!
There is nothing wrong in being selfish, you have to be selfish. Actually, every body is selfish because that is how one can be. Even a person who does lots of charity and social work is selfish. He does that because he feels happy in doing that.
So, how a common good can happen if everybody is selfish? It can. Just that apart from being selfish, you should realize that you are responsible for everything in the world. It is not being responsible. It is realizing that you are responsible because you already are responsible. Whatever you do has an impact in the society and in turn the whole world.
It is like every cell in the human body having an impact in the functioning of the body. Like every component of an atom determining its characteristics. We are after all a component of the society. Whatever we do therefore has an impact in the society. Not just that, whatever happens to the society has an impact on us. You feel the pain if you get hurt. You will feel the same pain even if the society you live in gets hurt.
Therefore, we already are responsible for everything happening around us. Around us does not mean just ourselves or our family and friends. It means our society, country, the whole world and even more than that.
Once this realization of universal responsibility happens, being selfish would definitely lead to a common good. If the industrial giants had realized their responsibility, they would have made a better decision even being selfish and benefit from the revolutionary invention.
I cannot imagine the kind of harmony, happiness and collaboration that would result if this realization happens in a large scale.
