The basis of value judgement

The world wants to make sense of events by attaching a certain value to it. Things are either good or bad, and it is this determination which brings about change in the world. However, is value judgment essential? Nowadays, classifying everything as good or bad exposes its own problems. George.W.Bush has tried it, and the whole world is in a dangerous state at the moment. We are just not able to understand that many things are a shade of gray nowadays.

I have used this blog as a method of expressing opinion in a balanced way. But, I feel that I have misinterpreted the meaning of balanced. By giving out opinions, i have fallen into the trap of value judgment. Giving two sides is alright, but giving out many sides, such that the pre-conceived notions are shattered is a real challenge. The media of today are guilty of not giving many perspectives. The public is guilty of apathy as well as lack of seriousness.

Two events have really made the need for the removal of value judgment essential. The protests of the Chinese crackdown in Tibet and the Quota judgment are the starting point from which value judgment could be sidelined. The facts are situational, because these two issues are very hard to pinpoint.

Tibet, as mentioned in previous posts by majority of media, is the peg upon which the world is wanting to hate China. But, if one has to look at it from a Chinese viewpoint, this is a simple aberration. If looked at hindsight, the independence of Tibet may be counter-productive to its own development. If independence is ever achieved, then its viability and sustainability comes into question. The issue will always remain that the world remains unknown of Tibet's real aspirations. The world has gobbled up the propaganda of the west, and is jumping into protests without knowing the true picture.

But, Independence and its issues are such that our mind allows pre-conceived notions to establish our frame of thinking. The emotions that it generates leads to absolute polarization, and this thought can be put out also in the Quota debate that is threatening to polarize India.

The Supreme court verdict on backward class reservation is out. The basic issue of Merit versus Caste has always being a constant talking point in Indian society, and today it is a divisive force threatening to bring about disruption. Now, on this issue, it is instinctive that the media take sides. The magnitude of lives being affected of generations, as well as the thought of revamping the system, is daunting. But, the court's verdict could be the tonic of social justice that the country needs. It is always the question of how this is framed. For the media and several peer groups, the question of merit vs caste will be the framework. For students, it is for versus against reservation. For detached and ordinary individuals, it is change versus turmoil.

Issues by nature are sometimes intent on bringing out pre-conceived notions among the public. Tibet and the Quota system are several of the many which are there in the world. If the media claim that by painting everything good or bad is making the public aware, then they are truly mistaken. This has made the public isolated from the world, and has made them vulnerable.

Tibet and the Quota verdict are watersheds from which the world must know that no issue in this world is black and white. Everything is painted in shades of gray, and that every issue has multiple perspectives. The problem, with the advent of technology, is that people want to make quick decisions, and the media, for more advertising money, complies with not covering all perspectives. The 21st century should now usher in the 'Principles of Multi-Perspectives', not "Principles of Objectivity'.