Skip to main content

To like or not to like

To like a post is to like the person. Or to signal your affection. Or to signal you care.

But should it?

Should you like something because it matters to the other? One perspective is,  obviously you should. That is what a kind person would do. A low cost act that brings happiness to someone - why not?

Another perspective is, obviously you should not - you are validating the other person's addiction to 'likes'. We are all addicted to likes. And we all need intervention. Maybe the kind thing would be to not 'like' the post.

The third perspective is, damn - if I like the 10th photo of a baby/ wedding/ travel pics, facebook algorithm will feed me more of it until all that remains of the feed is these pictures of important milestones/ happy moments of others but which are also wholly inconsequential to me. And as my addiction grows, i will be submerged in trivialities and inconsequential projections of others.

So choices are -
1. Contribute (or not) to the momentary dopamine surge of the other
2. Intervene (or not) with inaction - Contribute in weaning away from likes
3. Submerge (or not) in trivialities of others.

I Guess,
Don't 'like' unless you like.  
Give affection if you need affection.
Care, if you want to be cared.
But then there are more eloquent ways to give affection and show that you care.


Comments

Popular posts from this blog

I am a salmon

I am a salmon. It's been a decade away from my hometown, and yet my dreams refuse to relocate along with me. When sleep hasn't claimed me yet, but neither am I awake, you may find me in Nasik.
My senses fall back into their default states of Nasik when in-between. The space is of my home in Nasik, the sight is of the things around it. I might be hungry and thinking of eating a laddoo and my hands reach out for the steel dabba stacked on an elevated wooden cupboard stuck on the left wall of kitchen. In my mind's eye, I grope for the dabba momentarily as the search yields nothing - poof. the image disintegrates. I am snapped back to reality with a mild jolt. My mind reminds me of the layout in my own kitchen. There is no airborne shelf, there is no steel container, there is no laddoo. It says, go back to sleep. and I do.

_____

I shifted 3.5k km for a less polluted and less dangerous city a year ago.
And all was good. I get to walk and how I love to walk. I am truly happi…

How many shots of the girl dancing or laughing aimlessly does it take to establish her as a Manic pixie dream girl?

Learning from bad writing: Meri Pyaru bindu These days I am writing my first story that I intend to complete and publish. So as you can imagine, I am in the writer mode most of the time - anxiously looking for writer's intent, choices, character arcs, alternate story lines etc, while watching any movie or reading any novel. With a well written story, these choices are not that apparent. You have to look hard and yet you might miss out on essential choices that the writer made, to make the film/ novel a great piece of art. It feels as if the story flowed out from the author's mind onto paper with zero loss in translation. For that reason, it is difficult to learn much from good writing. It inspires, yes of course. It helps you get in the mood or get into the right frame of mind. But it can't teach as well as a badly written movie/ novel can.
A badly written story makes you aware of your own fallibility. It grounds you. Most importantly, it helps you see the many ways in wh…

Scratch that Label

Chomsky apparently is a 'Contrarian'. Amartya Sen is 'anti growth'. 
Labels come easy, comprehension not so.
Chomsky is 84 and Amartya Sen is 79 - Both have spent major part of their lives in bringing to light facts and ideas that the mainstream and the powerful want to dust under the carpet. They are not attention seekers and side show freaks. They are heroes, the few brave ones who are fighting for well being of people through justice and truth. 
and these heroes get branded as 'Contrarian' and 'anti growth'. The question to be asked is - by whom? Often these are people who don't read enough or don't read what should be read. They do not (or don't want to) comprehend the effect of ideas.(who benefits? how so? at what cost?). The ones whose source of perspective is Arnab Goswami and such other sensationalist prime time TV trash. For them, ideas are like fashionable clothes or a recent movie - useful as social conversations and nothing beyond …