August 2005 - Posts
a lot of people ask me what it's like to study at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. many of them are inquisitive family members enchanted by its global reputation while others are former classmates, curious friends and the many random people i encounter on a daily basis. in fact, i've been asked this question so many times that i find it is time to attempt to try to encapsulate what i feel about this place in a neat and tidy summary that i can use with rote. but of course this is silly, not because such a task may sound cliched but because my feelings and admiration for the school and its cause are continually evolving. so i guess it's better to articulate what i feel now and see how things change in my second year which will officially begin in a couple of weeks. when i first visited for my orientation on a cold, dreary day in march 2004 i was struck by the pace of activity here. the chilling feeling i got when i first walked into
77 mass ave and beheld the towering dome with the famous inscription "established for advancement and development of science its applications to industry the arts commerce and agriculture" finally enunciated for me what i had been seeking in an institution of higher learning. with the endless assortment of problems that plague our world, i found solace in a school that has as its motto "mens et manus" (mind and hand). for it is not enough to just have ideas, but one must apply them rigorously for the betterment of our society and the billions of people in the world whose lives could change dramatically with the advent of new technology. and it is the 't' that reigns supreme in the acronym for there is an omnipresent emphasis on application that has enveloped every department and school within the institute: whether we are charged with making our cities more livable, understanding the biological underpinnings of unconsciousness or tasking a variety of research groups to work across disciplines to focus on renewable energy sources and policy, research has been elevated to an art form. i remember vividly standing frozen in lobby 7 overcome by a rush of excitement when i came in from the biting cold on that first day. and when i took my first steps into the infinite corridor, i realized that i had entered a world brimming with ideas, ambition, and drive. here was a place where people were in such an extreme haste to get from one corner of the infinite to the other, that the flow of human traffic through the hallways was reminiscent of the weaving and bobbing of cars in a 12 lane wide california superhighway. even to this day, i feel a certain sense of adrenaline when i walk to class in the mornings and have to behold this organized chaos. yet bricks and mortar do not a prestigious place of higher education make. i've had the pleasure of interacting with some of the most brilliant people to have crossed my path in life. and the one person who embodies the very spirit of mit just happens to be
my advisor who not only finished his undergraduate and graduate degrees here, but also did a postdoc and is now a professor in the math department. he's what they call a 'lifer', certainly no euphemism.
with the recent wave of religious fundamentalism pouring out of the middle east over the last few years and the ubiquitous reporting of a jihad being waged against the west by islamic fundamentalists, it is time to ask the one question that seems to have been lost in this debate: what are the terrorists really after? suicide bombings, car bombs, roadside ambushes, mortar attacks, subway explosions and of course 9/11 have enveloped our society with fear, our borders have been tightened, our civil liberties have been encroached upon not to mention two regime changes have occurred. if the role of terrorists is to strike fear into the hearts of ordinary citizens in order to shape public opinion against their government's foreign policy, we need to ask what aspects of this policy seem to incite these people to sacrifice their lives for their cause. i have struggled to answer this question and i'm not convinced that anyone, including the suicide bombers themselves, know the answer. one indirect explanation that i briefly contemplated involves the value that different societies of the world place on our existential lives. in regions overrun by illiteracy, dogma, sectarianism, lack of human dignity, appauling civil rights, absent women's rights, and meagre educational systems you are almost certain to create conditions in which the hopelessness and despair of everyday life make it quite easy for people to take their own lives and of others. yet the perpetrators of the london subway bombings on july 7 proved that home grown terrosists urged by idealogies do exist and the worst fear of western scholars is finally realized with the invalidation of the previous thesis. so it must be a universal ideology that is driving these killers to achieve their goals, but what is it? the creation of a theocratic islamic state? a return to the age of rule by the caliphates? a complete hault to the rapid western style modernization in the middle east? the destruction of israel? there are many theories yet none definitive. i believe that the current times we live in with sleeper cells and a decentralized organization of terror poses the greatest threat to human civilization. there is no accountability, no nation to point the finger to, no government to supplant. our globalization has meant the free flow of people across borders and lands, and given risen to what has been the blessing and at the same time bane of our lives, an open society. diplomacy, despite what you think of its efficacy, is not even an option. goverments cannot resort to employing their traditional ploys for the enemy is not a signator to the geneva convention, does not subscribe to any concept of fair play, has no moral inhibitions but has ample resources and a vast network. he has no face nor a voice to speak with. but somehow we feel we can wage a 'war on terror' and make everyone feel like we are doing something to contain this enemy and to weaken him. such delusions will have and are having dire consequences.
some friends and i went to the Boston commons this evening to watch a play that many of us had read as teenagers, William Shakespeare's Hamlet. the setting for the play couldn't have been more appropriate with people stretching out on blankets and lawn chairs before a magnificent stage that was set against the backdrop of the majestic State house on a cool, midsummer night. the performance given by the commonwealth shakespeare company was superb with strong individual performances for all of the main characters in the story: claudius, gertrude, polonius, ophelia, horatio, rosencrantz & guildenstern, the ghost of hamlet's father and of course hamlet himself was brilliantly played by jeffrey donovan. although staying true to the original victorian script, the setting of the play had been suitably adapted for modern times as evidenced by claudius' armani suit and hamlet's stylish turtleneck and green corduroys. even though i had not studied this particular play since high school, i found myself following the story very closely and appreciating the sharp wit and lyrical dialogue of shakespeare with a heightened sense of awareness (how distant those high school days seem now). yet the one thing that resonated with me most while watching this play was the depth of human emotion and moral conundrums that i was not fully cognizant of the first time i had encountered this story. take for example the main driving force behind the play, hamlet's desire to gain revenge for his murdered father against his vile, merciless uncle and his cold-hearted mother who "ere yet the salt of most unrighteous tears had left the flushing in her eye, she married". his personal feeling of being wronged consumes him and he is forced to confront the gripping dilemma in "whether 'tis nobler in the mind to suffer the slings and arrows of outrageous fortune, or to take arms against a sea of troubles." thrust into a most wretched of situations, hamlet must face up to and confront his own inner soul while acknowledging the fact that making the decision to seek revenge will ultimately lead to his own destruction. this begs the question whether revenge indubitably portends eventual downfall. if so, how must we react to the routine injustices of the modern world that are imposed on us on an everyday basis without derailing our lives. what shakespeare believes on this topic is obvious as revenge and inevitable self-destruction are manifest in the play. the course of human history has most certainly validated shakespeare and even in our scientific age of profound advancement we live in a world where some
politicians believe it acceptable to obliterate holy sites in the name of revenge which shows how little we have thought about this issue and how primitive our likely response is. these are deep questions and the fact that they were raised some 500 years ago is startling in itself yet is a testament to the enduring elements of human behavior.