The Conversation. With the logic, thought, idea and the pinch of salt. – or was it a football match?
June 29, 2011 § Leave a comment
Equations change. Paradigms shift.
Aastha Aggarwal And people adjust.
Shreya Ray Nah! Adjustment is just a name given to what happens by default. It is not really an action.
Jane Ewelyn It is an action cuz ur compromising in the end……u jus hv to notice that someone’s doing that for you!!! be sensitive!!!
Aastha Aggarwal Adjust is not by default. Circumstances are. What you do with them is- adjust yourself accordingly. A more precise word- adapt. (Is that better ma’am? :p)
Sankash Sood but cant things just fit in, no adjustment? i thnk shreya here means that:P
Siddharth Krishna You mean if I went out for a cheeseburst pizza and was offered barbecue instead and I chose to take it,it kind of happened by default?
Best way to explain it: Nash Equilibrium.
When equations and paradigms change, a new circumstance is created, one that may/may not allow one to do exactly what they want to and in the way they want.
But the rational person adjusts to the new situation and makes his decision, by choice- to maximise his current marginal utility (which in most cases is not the same as his dominant strategy).
So, Equations change. Paradigms shift. And people, according to the new situation, by choice, adjust.
Siddharth Krishna ’By choice,adjust’.Doesn’t that make it an action?As much as game theory interests me,but the very idea of a paradigm shift controlling my ability to adjust *shiver*.
Shreya Ray But there is no ‘choice’. There is no other option than to adjust. People might only choose in what way they adjust, like waiting for cheesecrust (compromise with time) or going ahead with the barbeque (compromise with interest). The other option is getting out of the shop, which is really not an option when we are talkin in terms of life.
Shreya Ray So, if you are doing anything different from what you had wanted to, because circumstances changed, its an adjustment.If you are changing what you want because you couldnt get exactly what you had wanted, its also an adjustment. And either is bound to happen. That’s called default.
Shreya Ray If you throw a guy, who doesnt kno how to swim, into water, you aren’t really giving him a choice, are you?
Aastha Aggarwal Siddharth- shifting of paradigms don’t change our ability to adjust. Nothing except our own conceptions and ideology can change that. What it does change is how we perceive and measure the choices on our palate when making that decision.
Now earlier when one has the want to have cheeseburst pizza- he has a choice to make- go to pizzahut and have cheeseburst pizza, go to pizzahut and have anything else (which includes the barbecue), (for both of the first two options though- he will weigh the taste-satisfaction with the current action he will have to abandon for going and having it) or not go to pizzahut at all. But at this point of time- his satisfaction from each is say 3, 0 and 0.
Later, when he is offered the barbecue, he again has a choice to make- wait longer for the cheeseburst (which he would if in context of that situation he valued savouring the pizza over the next event on which he is going to lose onto because of time), have the barbecue (again he would weigh having a satisfactory but not the tastiest meal with the next event which he may hold more importance to than the lunch- say an important meeting where he has the chance of getting a promotion, or a date!), or he may decide to walk out (which you, Shreya have ruled out as a possibility because your satisfaction from it is negative- I could have walked out, most loonies can/do- again is your satisfaction- maybe you know that two shops from this place you have a street-food centre which offers a dish- whose taste gives you satisfaction equal/more than the pizza!- a choice you had simply overlooked in the first place).
To think of it, I find the third possibility the best- as I get my satisfaction for the food, and don’t loose onto time. But you would choose to wait (as you seem to imply). And well, Siddharth here has said he would accept the barbecue instead (looks like he has one hot date later! :p …or was that a football match?). Again three different people- three different decisions.
But the best part- if you noticed- the choices we have in the second situation are actually quite the same as the first! (Pizza/anything else/out of pizza hut and a compromise on an earlier/later action of ours).
The only thing that the change of equation did change is our perception of and satisfaction from each.
Its still is a decision.
And it still calls for an action (after all talking to the waiter for the change of order/ eating the food on the plate/ or walking out of the outlet- all three are actions! :p)
So equations change, paradigms shift and people adjust.
All three are actions.
The two actually happening by default or out of the hands of the person are the first two.
The only action he can change is the third- by making a decision weighing the situation.
It is this action which differs from person to person and makes every persons individual lives (with his mistakes, lotteries, learning, struggles and happiness- each one is a choice).
Aastha Aggarwal Oh and did I forget to mention that?
Make them the person they are. 😀
Aastha Aggarwal P.S.- Sorry for the number of comments. Phone does not allow more than 1000 characters in a comment. Boy I wrote! :p
To cater to the comments I haven’t addressed :p-
Shreya- As for throwing the person into the water – no he doesn’t have a choice other than 1)call out for help 2)push himself to use his instincts and at least stay afloat for as long as he can or 3)give up and drown.
Not a choice at all.
Yet a decision and an action- that can make all the difference. 1)a normal person- scared of death 2)a brave-heart. An inspiration. And a ray of hope. 3)either too-cowardly or just too saintly.
The pushing (circumstance) was out of his control- kind of a default situation given to him- what he chose to do with it- his action.
Sankash- What exactly does it mean by things fitting in?- if the decision we make after the circumstance changes actually has an equal or better result than our earlier one we say so. Isn’t that again a choice and a decision followed by a definitive action?
Shreya Ray arrey yaar… what I am saying is no matter what you do, it will be called adjustment. Unless you die, of course.
Aastha Aggarwal And all I am saying is adjustment is also an action. And that too my choice and decision of the person- NOT by default! 🙂
Shreya Ray u kno, we both hav a diff meaning of ‘default’ in our mind 😛
Sunny Barua Ladies, Timeout, jst wanted to say, *Best Philo discussion Ever*, carry-on………….!
Shreya Ray :)
Sunny- thank you. Glad at least we have audience! :p
Shreya- Now now. I thought we were talking of the same meaning of the word. A different concept of default (siunds interesting) and that’s why I looked into the dictionary- and it seems to agree with me:
Default: the preset selection of an option offered by a system, which will always be followed except when explicitly altered.
What other meaning could there be I wonder.
^Point seconded,provided time,interest and rationality are parameters,variables and constraints respectively in the framework of the discussion.
One more thing I would like to add is about outer influences or to put it in a better way favourable/unfavourable chance or luck/bad luck.
What if somebody decided to build Domino’s in a place isolated from other eateries,what if there is a boat in that pond.
It brings us with a new set of choices or defaults to ponder upon.
Siddharth Krishna BTW,more likely a football match 🙂
There is one thing that you want- put this single constant element, whose value depends on the initial parameters, in a set, say set 1. And there is another set, say set 2, containing all the things that are different from this element.Now if you change the parameters, the control passes from set 1 to set 2 by default. I am making a reference to this default.
Now, you are saying that you have the powers to choose values from set 2, and yes, you sure can, whenever you have more than one element in set 2, which is usually the case. You might be referring to the absence of a default here.
Shreya Ray Outer influences…wel, I did not take them into consideration. But then , well, adjustment wont be the correct word here, but this will still come in set 2, i guess.
Siddharth- again, what you have offered are the changes in equation and shifts in paradigms which Shreya mentioned.
Shreya- yes the audience is great. Thank you! :p
As for the description of default- I don’t deny with a single thing except I am just showing you the broader view of what you just said-
Consider this- when I choose an option from the set 2 you mentioned that is my choice (say another singleton set 3). And this is what seems to be my want in this situation. Now super-imposing this interpretation on our initial want we realise that that too was a choice from yet another set of choices which were dependent on the circumstances present then.
Then again this implies our initial choice too was due to some default.
Now look at things in a slightly different light:
Consider the universal set of choices (set 1 U set 2) say set A. And the entire range of our satisfaction in terms of utils (or any quantitative measure) in another set B. Then, a relation R:A->B is what shows the satisfaction one receives from each of the choices. It is based on this that one makes his decision, and frames his plan of action.
When the scenario changes, one has two choices- to remain at the same plan of action or not. But the Relation R changes. Not by default but because my want/utility from each situation changes. Not necessarily for the bad.
Based on this new relation, I change my decision- because that particular choice (say x) no longer gives me the maximum satisfaction(not because I CAN’T choose it) and instead choose another one (which was available to me even earlier- though did not me as much satisfaction) which now gives me the maximum satisfaction. By choice- simple rational choice.
Aastha Aggarwal Even by your interpretation- the shift of choices is not a default. Because the universal set of choices was not a singleton set 1 or all other set 2. It is set1 U set2. And yes set 1 and 2 change as per the situation but still remain a part of the universal set. The re-allocation of choices between the two subsets is nothing but a rational concious decision.
Piyush Dhoundiyal sounds like science :P:P or is it maths!!!!
Aastha Aggarwal It is a football match where the goals are philosophical but the ball with which we are aiming for our goals is science/logic. Maths has always been only a tool for understanding. 😛
Shreya – “Now if you change the parameters, the control passes from set 1 to set 2 by default.”
While changing the parameters you assume here that none of the parameters are under your control, which is never true, so suppose there are a few parameters in your control and a few out of your control, you can always play with the ones in your control to go back (or go wherever) you want no matter what happens with the parameters which are not in your control.
Life almost always works on a multiple regression model and a few of the independent variables are always under your control.
So in effect, there is no default.
PS: I hate my internet, it keeps deleting this for some reason!
Brijesh Bharadwaj Reactions are the default. Not adjustments. Adjustments are a subset of reactions. Take it up from here.
PS: Dear Lord, I so wish this discussion was actually happening in person and not on Facebook 😀
Shreya Ray Well, u ppl r sayin this bcoz u r not considering the strategy as a part of the choice. I want to get x by doing y. You want to get x, no matter by doing y, or by doing z, whichever givs u x under the present circumstances.
Aastha Aggarwal When i want x by y or z, no matter- then i am talking of one want. But when i am talking of having x by only y, i am actually talking of two wants (x and y) which can be explained simply by the same theory twice.
Shreya Ray That is not the point. What I am saying s dat my entire (x,y,z,…..) makes the entire thing I want so unique that a change in even a singe variable will not give me the same satisfaction, and I’ll just have to adjust with that.
Shreya Ray Talking of reactions, what I was saying is that, all reactions, whether conscious or unconscious, with the exception of leaving the game in some way or the other, is an adjustment!!!
Shreya Ray And it will just happen.
Shreya Ray ANd this phenomenon of it just happening is what I was calling default.
Shreya Ray Aastha Aggarwal : You just wanted to say that adjustment is a result of conscious action, right? Yes, that is true. But adjustment also results otherwise. You don’t really have to ‘act’ to adjust.
Brijesh- As far as parameters being in your hand are concerned- you dont always alter them and go back to the initial choice- because in the new scenario some other choice makes more sense
Shreya- Again if (x,y,z…) give you combined satisfaction that actually simplifies matters.
Say the total satisfaction you receive is some A. Now when the equations shift two things may happen- 1) (x,y,z…..) gives you a satisfaction not equal to the initial one, here A. Then you obviously (i hope you agree) will have a different set of choices (1,2,3…) giving you a satisfaction either more than or equal to A. or 2) (x,y,z…..) still gives you the same satisfaction (which you seem to assume) – then as i have said before there still exists at least one more combination or rearrangement of the same such that the satisfaction at least equal to A.
Aastha Aggarwal Shreya- yes. Adjustment is conscious and you do need to “act” to do it if not all then at least most of the times.
K. Tell me this- before the equations changed, in the initial situation- was one ‘act’ing?
Aastha Aggarwal If yes (which probably should be the answer)- then well- that couldn’t possibly have been the first change/shift ever, can it?
Doesnt that imply that it was rather the same scenario before the equations changed than after they did?
And if that is a yes too, then doesnt this “adjustment” qualify for “act”ing as well?
Brijesh Bharadwaj @aastha – yes, hence I said you can always go back OR go where ever you wish to. No default. I guess we each define adjustment in our own ways and hence the discussion. Shreya seems to put any rational decision under adjustment which is different from how I do. For me adjustment has an undertone of compromise and hence I refuse to accept it as ‘default’ in life.
Aastha Aggarwal True. Adjustment seems to give people the idea of compromise- which it actually may/may not imply because compromise only means that you are now worse-off. I spoke of adjustment or adaptation as making a new choice- maybe even better than the earlier.
But in anyway it cannot be termed as default- at least according to me.
Govind Raj Ayyangar i wonder 60 comments for such a short status?!..:P
lol read few of da comments bt later outa patience couldn’t read those big comments…lolol so can somebody finally write da exact jist of dis whole conversation???simple way!!!
Shreya Ray I’m tired. I am not disagreeing with what u r saying. I am just saying something else. Lv it.
Difference of closely-related opinions seem to be harder to clear than others.
But then again- we all enjoyed discussing it- and saw so many sides of a particular thought.
Govind- It was a discussion about different opinions about adjustment, action, and default.
To think of it- three small words stirred up quite a conversation.