Marriage n scientific careers....

Scientific Success: WhatÂ’s Love Got to Do With It? from http://sciencecareers.org

"The productivity of male scientists tends to drop right after marriage," says Kanazawa in an e-mail interview from his current office at the London School of Economics and Political Science in the United Kingdom. "Scientists tend to 'desist' from scientific research upon marriage, just like criminals desist from crime upon marriage."

Kanazawa's perhaps controversial perspective is that of an evolutionary psychologist. "Men conduct scientific research (or do anything else) in order to attract women and get married (albeit unconsciously)," he says. "What’s the point of doing science (or anything else) if one is already married? Marriage (or, more accurately reproductive success, which men can usually attain only through marriage) is the goal; science or anything else men do is but a means. From my perspective, scientists are no different than anybody else; evolutionary psychology applies to all humans equally," he adds.

and there is much more that it says not just this aspect.

The Dilemma

To laugh is to risk appearing a fool.
To weep is to risk appearing sentimental.
To reach out for another is to risk involvement.
To expose feelings is to risk rejection.
To place your dreams before the crowd is to risk ridicule.
To love is to risk not being loved in return.
To go forward in the face of overwhelming odds is to risk failure.

But risks must be taken because the greatest hazard in life is to risk nothing.
The person who risks nothing does nothing, has nothing, is nothing.
He may avoid suffering and sorrow, but he cannot learn, feel, change, grow or love.
Chained by his certitudes, he is a slave.
He has forfeited his freedom.
Only a person who takes risks is free.

--Janet Rand

Quotes

Courage is never to let your actions be influenced by your fears.
--Arthur Koestler


Optimism is the foundation of courage.
--Nicholas Murray Butler

Some how this article feels incomplete but it good read...

Seduced by an elusive idea of India from The Hindu

People may no longer ask you if you have computers in India, but they still wonder whether there is clean drinking water and believe that India, despite its booming economy, remains a "terrible place to be poor," as New Statesman noted in a special issue on India recently. The magazine's South Asia correspondent William Dalrymple voiced concern over the "unevenness" of the boom India is experiencing and pointed out that "much of India remains completely untouched" by it. The jury on India's future was still out, he suggested.

"India is changing with a speed that is astonishing, but ... much still remains uncertain and the country remains as fascinatingly unpredictable as ever," he wrote.

Translated in blunt language, it means that the idea of a "new" and "prosperous" India poised to become a "modern" super power is slightly exaggerated. Eventually, India will be defined not by the swanky new neighbourhoods in Gurgaon but by its crushing poverty that makes the country seem like "one land, two planets," as a headline in the magazine put it.

And what about India's much talked-about "soft power" in this "new era"? Its capacity to influence the world culturally? There is a worry that far from being able to influence others, the country itself is in danger of descending into a cultural black hole. "India goes Bollywood" was the topic of a debate, held as part of the Bonn Biennale, to explore the impact of India's economic boom and increasing "commercialisation of society" on its media.

Is there a danger that artistes and journalists in India are becoming too dependent on market forces? How big is the space for non-commercial art? And to what extent is entertainment replacing serious information and debate?

These were the questions posed to a mixed Indo-German panel, which included Dorothee Wenner, head of programme at Internationale Filmfestspiele. Opinion, as happens on such occasions, was divided with at least one participant — an art consultant from India — strongly opposing the view that space for serious debate back home was shrinking and being taken over by commercial forces. But because there was no consensus does not mean that the issues surrounding the relationship of culture, media, and the market disappear. These are real concerns and, in fact, the debate that took place in Bonn should be happening in India.

Ask any dispassionate observer of the post-liberalisation "modern" India and the answer you are likely to get to the above questions is: yes, artistes and journalists are becoming too dependent on market forces; there is little space for non-commercial art; and serious debate is almost non-existent. In fact, "India goes Bollywood" is a very apt description for what is going on in India on the cultural front — and in much of the media, especially in electronic media, which was supposed to herald a brave new world of information.

Those of us who live abroad and "get" their India through private satellite TV channels (alas, Doordarshan remains curiously invisible) get the sense that culturally nothing is happening in India outside of Bollywood. Watching Indian TV channels is like watching a long Bollywood sequence, only occasionally interrupted by news or current affairs. Even news is not Bollywood-free. Clearly there is a perception in Indian TV newsrooms that the only way to spice up news and make it interesting is to pepper it with filmi stardust — Shah Rukh Khan endorsing a new computer brand; Preity Zinta opening a new jewellery boutique; Amitabh Bachchan on a visit to Dubai; Bobby Deol showing off his new restaurant.

In a sense, what is happening in the media, especially in television, is symptomatic of a wider indifference to ideas in India, whether in the academia or in cultural institutions. And this does not augur well for a country aspiring to become a super power even if only as a "new sort of super power," as New Statesman called it.

Quotes

They have stopped deceiving you, not loving you. And it seems to you that they have stopped loving you.
--Antonio Porchia, Voces, 1943, translated from Spanish by W.S. Merwin

He felt now that he was not simply close to her, but that he did not know where he ended and she began.
--Leo Tolstoy

Mary Magdalene -- interesting read

An Inconvenient Woman from MSNBC

She witnessed the resurrection, then vanished, leaving popes and painters and now 'The Da Vinci Code' to tell her story. In search of the real Mary Magdalene.

It is worth a read if you r interested in religious history and if u r a Christian and get offended by the 'The Da Vinci Code' then skip the first page.... But it is not about the that book it is in general about Mary Magdalene's character and the mystery around it due to the fact that she was a women.

One step ahead... but will it work?

Reservation — an alternative proposal from The Hindu

The proposal involves computing scores for `academic merit' and for `social disadvantage' and then combining the two for admission to higher educational institutions. Since the academic evaluation is less controversial, we concentrate here on the evaluation of comparative social disadvantage. We suggest that the social disadvantage score should be divided into its group and individual components. For the group component, we consider disadvantages based on caste and community, gender, and region. These scores must not be decided arbitrarily or merely on the basis of impressions. We suggest that these disadvantages should be calibrated on the basis of available statistics on representation in higher education of different castes/communities and regions, each of these being considered separately for males and females. The required data could come from the National Sample Survey or other available sources. It would be best, of course, if a special national survey were commissioned for this purpose.

Besides group disadvantages, this scheme also takes individual disadvantages into consideration. While a large number of factors determine individual disadvantages (family history, generational depth of literacy, sibling education, economic resources, etc.), we believe there are two robust indicators of individual disadvantage that can be operationally used in the system of admission to public institutions: parental occupation and the type of school where a person passed the high school examination. These two variables allow us to capture the effect of most of the individual disadvantages, including the family's educational history and economic circumstances.