Part 3

Human behaviour a paradox

I’ve been trying to model human behaviour. Human behaviour always puzzled me and interested me. So did Paradoxes. Here are a few of them and how they translate to human behaviour…

Schrödinger’s cat

In the world of quantum mechanics, the laws of physics that are familiar from the everyday world no longer work. Instead, events are governed by probabilities. A radioactive atom, for example, might decay, emitting an electron, or it might not. It is possible to set up an experiment in such a way that there is a precise fifty-fifty chance that one of the atoms in a lump of radioactive material will decay in a certain time and that a detector will register the decay if it does happen.

Schrödinger, as upset as Einstein about the implications of quantum theory, tried to show the absurdity of these implications by imagining such an experiment set up in a closed room, or box, which also contains a live cat and a phial of poison, so arranged that if the radioactive decay does occur then the poison container is broken and the cat dies. In the everyday world, there is a fifty-fifty chance that the cat will be killed, and without looking inside the box we can say, quite happily, that the cat inside is either dead or alive. But now we encounter the strangeness of the quantum world. According to the theory, neither of the two possibilities open to the radioactive material, and therefore to the cat, has any reality unless it is observed. The atomic decay has neither happened nor not happened, the cat has neither been killed nor not killed, until we look inside the box.

Theorists who accept the pure version of quantum mechanics say that the cat exists in some indeterminate state, neither dead nor alive, until an observer looks into the box to see how things are getting on. Nothing is real unless it is observed.

courtesy: http://www.paradoxes.co.uk/#schrodinger

This is similar to the human thought and action. You can never be sure what the other person thinks unless he or she expresses it. But there is a catch here. You also don’t know whether the phial contained some life saving drug. So you cannot be sure the person expressed is what he or she had in mind. And there is no way of finding it. So every person is acting out. Well, I believe in Shakespeare

“All the world is a stage”

But analogous to this example, Thought is also not real unless it is expressed. But on the long run, it does turn real. In actuality, it is the purpose of the action that define the actor. But to an observer, it is the action that define the actor. It is what the observer sees , what the observer interprets that define the actor. So it is the talent of the actor to convince the observer and the talent of the observer to see through it. And always there is the concept of reverse psychology which creates a infinite loop of what the actual purpose can be.

Coming to how a situation can be manipulated to one’s advantage, I came across this classic example:

http://www.paradoxes.co.uk/#protagoras

Protagoras’s pupil

Another paradox which has its foundation – real or legendary – in antiquity concerns the sophist Protagoras, who lived and taught in the fifth century BC. It is said that Protagoras made an arrangement with one of his pupils whereby the pupil was to pay for his instruction after he had won his first case. The young man completed his course, hung up the traditional shingle, and waited for clients. None appeared. Protagoras grew impatient and decided to sue his former pupil for the amount owed him.

‘For,’ argued Protagoras, ‘either I win this suit, or you win it. If I win, you pay me according to the judgement of the court. If you win, you pay me according to our agreement. In either case I am bound to be paid.’

‘Not so,’ replied the young man. ‘If I win, then by the judgement of the court I need not pay you. If you win, then by our agreement I need not pay you. In either case I am bound not to have to pay you.’

Whose argument was right? Who knows?

Well, to settle this, this is just a matter of priority. Now the thing to notice here is that both contradict the priorities they follow to bring matters to their advantage. And this is not so easily noticeable. This is a very common tactic used by people.

“If you cannot prove me wrong I’m right.
If you cannot prove Yourself right, You are wrong”

This is the form which people frequently use. This they sound it with a perfectly and convincing tone. I guess this should be a part of the Marketing Management course and that for becoming a fellow of the Bar.

And great orators have always used this… Now go read Mark Anthony’s Funeral speech… You’ll notice this…