The title
question may relate to something a long way off in the future, but do not thumb your nose
on that score. It is highly relevant, if we put a non-zero premium on history.
Will it be a professional politician, a technocrat, a farmer, an honest leader?
Who?
‘In Physics the truth is
rarely perfectly clear, and that is certainly universally the case in human
affairs. Hence, what is not surrounded by uncertainty cannot be the truth’ - Richard P Feynman
Not too long ago, to be precise, on the day Dr.
Raghuram G. Rajan took over as the Governor of RBI, he said and I quote: “We
don't have a magic wand to make the problems disappear instantaneously. But I
have absolutely no doubt, we will deal with them…”
I felt then and
there, if only Prof. Richard Feynman had been alive how much he would have
relished manifestations of such honesty and the determination to succeed.
I am not
blowing hot air, believe me. In one many books that have been written on and compiled
out of Feynman's speeches, I came across a gem of a paragraph of truth. In that he asked
us to imagine a situation where there is an intractable problem facing the
society. There are two people who want to sway the public in his direction. The
first one says something like, “We would do this, would do that and things will be set right.”
The other says that he has not had the time to study the problem deeply but he
would “pore over it, consult experts, figure out a way to solve the vexing
problem.” The rhetorical question was who would the general public vote for?
I do not know,
but I would vote for the second. Why? Feynman
said, and I subscribe to the idea, that what is not surrounded by uncertainty
cannot be the truth. The first is certain he knows what the problem is and knows what to do.
Therefore what he knows cannot be the truth! The second person is certain not
of the situation but of the effort he will put in to solve the problem. Hence,
to my mind he is on the right path.
Now, I see the
same attitude in what our current RBI governor said. Therefore I think he is
eminently suited to be the prime minister, say 20 years from now. In the meantime
he would have learned to convey uncertainty in words of absolute certainty.
That is, he would have become an effective politician and a leader! But, he would risk losing the endorsement of Feynman!
Raghuram Ekambaram
2 comments:
There are two people who want to sway the public in his direction. The first one says something like, “We would do this, would do that and things will be set right.” The other says that he has not had the time to study the problem deeply but he would “pore over it, consult experts, figure out a way to solve the vexing problem.” The rhetorical question was who would the general public vote for?
I do not know, but I would vote for the second."
Don't know about 2035 but this surely gives some hints on who your choice of PM would be in 2014..
2014 is too far away for me Bharath and I am, to my eternal shame, not too keen on voting.
I typically like people who promise to look into the matter rather than those who promise to solve the problem before understanding it.
RE
Post a Comment