Being Human

Discussions about the Salman Khan verdict and the after effects continued on media, social media, around coffee tables and on the elevators for couple of weeks. Friends and fans of Salman Khan are happy that he has got off the hook for now and hope the higher courts will give him a lesser punishment, if at all they find him having done any serious offence. A large number of sensitive and morally outraged citizens disapprove of the way Salman and his fans have reacted to the verdict and celebrated the victory in the lower court. They think that while Salman has done lot of charity through his ‘Being Human’ Trust, his actions project himself less than human.

There were enough articles, debates and TV Talk shows on the legality and morality of the event and the after-events. I leave the legality and morality to the experts.

Is Salman Khan not ‘being human’?

Let us look at what is really meant by being human. Human beings are inherently imperfect, occasionally rational, mostly self-interested, at times, magnanimous, often biased, influenced by immediate environments, close relatives and friends, and connected more to one’s own tribe, community, religion, profession or club. Most humans are well intentioned but often unable to match intentions with speech, nor speech with actions. In short, human being is a bundle of paradoxes, but not always good or bad but most often somewhere in between and often both.

Salman Khan is no different. He is no angel. He is just being human. And his fans too are just humans. Some of us expect him to suddenly shed his self interest just like he would do with his shirt. There lies the problem! It is more of an expectation issue rather than reality issue.

It is not that human beings started behaving like this after WhatsApp got acquired by Facebook! Ever since human life started on planet earth this is how they behaved. Even in our great epics- religious and others- human characters are depicted mostly selfish, wily, frail, deceitful, remorseful after the event and get back to normal life sooner than later. And to break the monotony of this negative picture, occasionally some ideal men, women or angels were sprinkled among the huge crowd of ordinary human beings. Some with an intention to save the world of all evil and some with the immediate task of destroying a dominant demonic man, woman or creature so that it becomes a lesson for the rest and they behave better. Yet for most humans, lessons in morality are no better than lessons in history and geography. While history repeats geography becomes history.

Some of us still have the faint hope that truth shall win. Let that optimism drive the world.

In modern times we have the government, police and the judiciary- all emerging from the same mass of human beings-to check the excesses of society. How can we expect full justice, fairness and equitable treatment from our representatives when we practise all these according to convenience and personal advantage? Hardly anyone deserves all these in return to one’s own behavior. Yet we all expect the rest of the world to act with moral uprightness, fairness and kindness.

The more socially recognizable a person the greater the expectations on him or her! Celebrities are no greater human beings than any one of us. We made them celebrities, supermen and super-women. Treat them just as any one of us and that is the first level of empathy. We all want to mask our human failings and tend to cling to the heroes and heroines of real life or reel life. Everyone wants a selfie with the great men and women and wants only the bright side of the picture!

‘Man is the only creature that refuses to be what he is.’ – Albert Camus 

Disclaimer: I am not a fan of Salman Khan. I haven’t seen any of his movies at least in the last 10 years. However, I am being human like him, his victims, his fans and his critics!  

In Search of Happiness

A typical candidate these days looks for ‘challenging’ jobs. When I ask such candidates why they want a challenging job there are differing answers. Some say they get easily bored with ‘routine’ jobs and others would say only a challenging job can do justice to their potential. No one wants to be the average Joe and there seems to be no one below the median line! I explain the job on offer and say that the job is almost the same as what he/she was doing in the previous organization and it can be boring very soon. At this point some candidates deftly switch to other topics. Some would start enquiring about the ‘compensation’ the job brings along. This is a hint that a boring job with high salary ‘compensates’ the absence of challenge or variety. There are interesting contrasts too. We see brilliant professionals who leave their high paying jobs with MNCs, IMF or the UNO to pick up low paying but highly challenging jobs in politics or government bureaucracy.

What do these people seek? Happiness!

‘Can money buy happiness’ is a popular rhetoric question. The politically correct answer generally is that money can’t buy happiness. Some believe that money can buy happiness or at least buy things or services that in turn lead to happiness. But we can’t stretch the argument to the extreme and say that more money can buy more happiness. Infinite amount of money will not give infinite amount of happiness.

Beyond a certain tipping point money leads to unhappiness, frustration and even creates a sense of guilt. This is when the marginal utility of money turns negative, meaning more money leading to more misery. (Well, some of us may prefer such misery to the current level of prosperity! That’s because many of us are utterly ignorant and do not understand the agony of the uber rich.) At this point the rich man starts throwing money just like a frustrated person throws tantrums. Case in point: the neighborhood billionaire suddenly turns philanthropist and pledges half of his fortunes to the greater good of the poorer folks. 

The same way too little money leads to deprivation and unhappiness. Both these extremes have happy exceptions. With lots of wealth Mr. Warren Buffett seems to lead a happy life and with practically no money in hand or in bank many ascetic people seem to lead happy lives too. Unfortunately most of us are neither Warren Buffett nor penniless ascetic folks.

Does this mean that happiness, like virtue stands in the middle? Are the middle class salaried employees the happiest lot? Not many would agree. Ask an employee, ‘are you happy with your pay hike?’ The very question will rub salt on the wound of unhappiness! So what is the solution for the company? I have no answer. My friend gave a suggestion: appoint a CHO- Chief Happiness Officer or if the company cannot afford another CXO position the CEO can double up as a CHO as well. The CHO will measure the ‘as-is’ condition of the company’s total happiness quotient (THQ) and set targets for every year. Two CHOs in the recent past undertook very effective initiatives to improve the THQ of some companies. One such measure was to give iPohone-6+ to key employees and another one was to give Mercedes Benz cars to the top honchos. Both companies reported better THQs and lower attrition in the recent quarter! Who says money can’t buy happiness?

Buddha said: ‘happiness does not depend on what you have or who you are. It solely relies on what you think.’ 

What do you think? Will the next generation be happier?