Senna

May 1, 1994 

1994 San Marino Grand Prix

                    "Race had begun. He was leading the race with Michael Schumacher behind him in second place. Successfully completing six laps, they were in seventh. At one corner, when his car was at 310 KMPH lost balance. He realized that the front tires were slipping. In some hundredths of a second, he reacted by releasing the throttle and pushing brakes hard which made the car to slow to 211 KMPH. In less than 2 seconds, his car hit the concrete wall. Moments or some time later at the hospital, he was declared dead due to fatal head injury." (See footnote 1)

He's Ayrton Senna.

             Its the video of that crash, which I tried to put in words, introduced me to this famous personality. Following that, I watched some more videos and some more videos and some more videos ending up watching the mainstream film (a documentary) of his life.(Senna, See footnote 2)

             I found myself very emotional at the end of the film. But its not I'd like to write here. I've learned a few things of them some are very important, I think.


Opportunity
             I believe that success is a combination of things like opportunity, talent, hard work, luck etc with different weights according to the situation or field of study. And opportunity gathers more weight because lacking the opportunity other things won't be able to take you to your prime.

             Opportunity arrives. But sometimes we just don't notice it. And some other times it disguises us and leaves from the back door. The main motto is that you should be prepared and wait with utmost patience to catch it.

               Okay, granted that you got an opportunity. Lets suppose you got it under very bad conditions or unfortunate conditions. Like, you are called for an interview with a big MNC, when you go there you find yourself competing with several hundreds of other people who are in a desperate need of the job just like you are. Then, despite the very competitive conditions, you've to give your best shot.

               The same thing happened with Ayrton Senna at his first Formula-1 race. Weather was in total bad condition, it was raining yet the race continued. Because of the large bulky rear tires of Formula-1 car, the rain water gets sprayed over making it a view look like its filled with a thick fog for the driver coming behind. For example...

             Ayrton started from 13th position as he's the new entrant then. With those conditions some of them hit the side dividers and some stopped driving, Ayrton didn't. He continued chasing the two players who are in the lead, despite some minor skids.
             Later, the second racer hit the rails. And Ayrton Senna went on approaching the first car fiercely. However, owing to the bad conditions the race was stopped. Senna finished in second place. Some pundits of F-1 race said that Had the race continued further, we'd have seen him in winning position. (See footnotes for the video of that race)

             I thought more about that race, that situation. He knew that there was no other driving on that time except him and Alain Prost ( Driver leading the race). But he din't go for the second place willingly. He didn't accept or compromise with the conditions to give up. He went on and on and took total damage or fatal risks to win. To win is his goal. Following are his quotes: (See footnote 3 for race video)

                                      "Winning is the most important. Everything is consequence of that."
   
           "I am not designed to come second or third. I am designed to win."
                                               
                                                           "Being second is to be the first of the ones who lose."


Risk 

           There is so much complexity, fragility & uncertainty around us, involving risk. Combined with that our brains won't like uncertainty. To overcome these its better to think of everything as a gamble or in terms of probability. Likes odds in favor and odds against.

           When we look at driving cars or riding bikes in this view, it can be concluded that its a huge gamble involving fast assumptions, quick probabilities and possibilities of the situation. (Quick as in milliseconds)

           We face risk all the time, I don't have to specify how risk is involved with driving. I drive bikes. I don't about other's opinions but I think when I'm riding my bike, a process runs in my brain which keeps on making assumptions, probabilities and possibilities. And it also takes the help of the past data which is stored already in brain.

            Being a racing driver, he understood this thing in depth. We use these skills such as probabilities, possibilities to put ourselves on safe side but racing drivers use this to take advantage. Of them, Ayrton Senna is a top notch racing driver.He used these skills to make the car dance around corners. (See footnote 6 for a great lap overtaking two cars at a time)


Some people claimed that he's gifted with sixth sense that sees the grip where it lies. Some people's comments:

            John Bisignano(Journalist):  There's only one word that describes Ayrton's style, and that is: fast. He would take the car beyond it's design capabilities. He would brake later, fly into these corners where the car was just over the edge, and somehow, he could dance and dance with that car, to where it stayed on track. (From the movie: Senna, click on the link for the interview video)

             “Senna made the car dance," says former F1 driver John Watson. "He did things with the car that I hadn't even thought about, let alone put in to practice.” Watson added “after witnessing this, I knew that my time as race car driver was effectively over.”

               In 1984, a racing track was opened with a joint venture with Mercedes and 20 star-studded racing drivers were invited to race with equal cars. Of them, Mercedes recruited F-3 (Formula-3) racing champ Ayrton Senna, and old F-1 champions.

 It was considered as a fun event by everybody except Senna. The event was won by Ayrton, no one expected this.

Some former champions said like this:


               John Watson remembers,"The main memory I have of it all is of Ayrton and how he attacked the circuit and in particular the chicane, which in those days was much quicker than today. He was just launching the car over the kerbs like a stone skimming across the water. He went to a different level.

               "It was, I suppose, his calling card. That was the minimum accepted standard from him on display. He was clearly exceptionally gifted. Everyone else had turned up basically for the beer. It was a fun event, a thank you for Mercedes, a nice weekend in Germany in a hotel and nobody got stressed about it - except Ayrton, that is" (See footnote 5)

That's it.

P S: After writing this I found something else which is against what I thought. In the opportunity section, I wrote that he grabbed that opportunity very nicely at the race on rainy day. In one of his interviews, he said that, he was very bad initially with wet roads at cart racing. This made him to work and work and work on the wet tracks. And he improved.

P P S: The writing style with pics is inspired from my professor.

Thanks for reading!


Footnotes:
1. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tpp7OCngXQM (His last lap of life, on board camera, not for the faint hearted!!)
2. http://previewsandreviews.blogspot.in/2011/10/senna-no-fear-no-limits-no-equal.html ( A blog review on the movie Senna)
3. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1hUWuR2Dj78 ( Monaco GP 1984, first race)
4. http://autos.yahoo.com/blogs/motoramic/why-ayrton-senna-remains-greatest-racer-history-191054410.html (Comments taken from this.)
5. http://en.espnf1.com/f1/motorsport/story/54800.html (Twenty equal cars-ESPN article)
6. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-k4pun6j0Fg ( On board camera)
7. Quotes taken from Brainyquote
8. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n9qZu7h5ys0 ( Lap of life)

Feedback

If a friend of yours is about to do something for the very first time and you've already done that and you know the likely bad consequences of it, then would you advise him not to proceed or would you let him(her) learn from that experience on his(her) own ?

I think the action one should take in that particular situation depends on the feedback-time. By feedback, I mean, the analysis from the results or the consequences on doing that particular 'something' and by "time", I mean, the duration needed for your friend to feel or experience the results or consequences.


From that, I'd say that I'll advise my friend or caution him not to do that 'something' if the "feedback-time" is very long, say months or an year. And I'll keep my mouth shut in contrast. ( Using this conclusion only for illustration purpose).

Feedback is very important.

 Let's divide feedback into two types based on point of reference: 1. Direct 2. Indirect

Direct Feedback

The name itself is self explanatory, I hope. We get feedback on our own by self assessing the decisions and the end results of those decisions.

 For example, you decided to watch a movie because you came across a high rating given to that movie in some website. Later, you resented that movie and your decision of watching it. The feedback from this decision: " Read more reviews. Not one".

You can get self or direct feedback also by not doing the act on your own. Read my previous blog: .Vicarious experience

Indirect Feedback

It is the feedback given by others.

There are fields where this indirect feedback is very important, like teaching, surgery, athletics, investing, etc. Its important because we may be more biased when thinking of ourselves. And if you want to master something, you have to have an environment where there is an ample opportunity to learn and a ready feedback. So that you can have insights regarding your subject and on practicing like that for stretch ( deliberately ), you'll master it. Almost anyone can work hard, even the donkey can. But without feedback, hard work's value may come down.

So How can one create an environment with ready feedback available ? One way is to have an associate watch you perform or simply have a coach. There is a lecture given by Dr. Atul Gawande (author of The Checklist Manifesto),  watch it for more insight into this concept.  (see link in footnotes)

And I agree that its very difficult to have coaches or friends tell us feedback. But We must give importance to feedback, I reckon.


Negative & Positive Feedback Loops :

There are wide range of applications of these loops in various fields of interests. I'm limiting myself to how I view or how I see using simple definitions.

Negative : This loop occurs when the result of a process you picked up creates a dissatisfaction which in turn cause regulation or provide a cap on your improvement. It goes on and on, if you do not abandon that negative feedback loop.

And the important thing is that we forget about this feedback when we are experiencing that negative, like when we lost in a match, failed in studies, race, game etc. Feedback dances in front of you after you lost, but we tend to ignore it and hug the negative emotions so tight.

The thing we need to do, I think, when we lost or failure occurs, be sad, cry, rewind, get feedback, and move on to other. That's it, nothing more.


Positive: In contrast to the above, this creates a result or consequence which maintains satisfaction (psychologically).

The result from the process you took up creates positive things and improves your learning course. That's how learning is done. If you happen to have positive feedback loops in your life, there is no turning back.


Footnotes:

1. Atul Gawande's lecture:  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VabtGPVVihA
2. Positive and Negative feedback's wiki pages : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Positive_feedback  &  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Negative_feedback


P S: This is no ideology, just my views.

P P S: Images were used to enhance the vividness of the content. This style is copied from my professor.


Thanks for reading.

Machiavelli & Prospect Theory

Machiavelli 

There is this quote in his book (The Prince) , which influenced me a lot. 

"The only way to appear generous is to be mean. Then your occasional acts of generosity will be remembered. If you try to be generous all the time, people will remember only your occasional acts of meanness." 

I believe in this ( which also states that I am highly likely to be biased in favor of his views too ). 

Prospect theory 

This theory was authored by Daniel Kahneman & Amos Tversky. 

I'll take two concepts from this theory, which are Possibility effect & Certainty effect. Consider the following gamble: (directly take from the book)

In the four examples below, your chances of receiving $1 million improve by 5%.  Is  the  news equally   good  in  each case?

A.   From  0  t o  5%

B.   From  5%  t o  10%

C.   From  60%  t o  65%

D.   From  95%  t o  100%

In each case, the prediction increases with the same 5%. That means the expected value of the utility has to be the same. But almost everyone agree that Case A ( from 0% to 5%) & Case D ( 95% to 100%) are more impressive. 

The large impact of 0% --> 5% illustrates possibility effect, and the other illustrates certainty effect.

This means that we give more weight to low probability events, such as this ONLY 5%. 

For example ( In perspective of boys) : Lets see this as a gamble and nothing more, a boy approaches the girl whom he's interested in,

and consider these two independent scenarios. 

Case A : The girl rejects him then and there itself. (Check-mate)

Case B : The girl (out of her empathy) responds smilingly though not promisingly. 

Case A suggests the probability of 0% likely, and Case B suggests the less probability ( say 5%). The mere transition from nil to small probability causes possibility effect, which in turn makes the boy filled with LARGE HOPE. 

Conclusion of possibility effect : We misjudge the events of less probability which are likely to yield a large outcome ( in the above example, girl loving back).

Machiavelli & Prospect theory

You've seen the negative part of possibility effect. Now consider the following which is somewhat positive.

Read that quote again. And I am sure that some of you guys might have thought that quote is bad or dictating evil. I entirely disbelieve such opinion. 

And I think Prospect theory provides psychological proof for that quote. Consider a following example: You have a complex question and you are looking for an answer, and you know that  only two persons can answer that. Mr. X and Miss. Y. 

Mr. X is consistent wit you, generous with you all the time and less likely that he can solve the problem.

Miss Y on the other hand is not generous with you all the time, but when needed she solved your problem in the past and provided good advice. This states very high outcome with very less probability. 

With the possibility effect, you tend to approach Miss Y. (Who is of directly opposite of nature what you believe in - generous all the time)

Example breakdown :

What happens exactly? 

When you face this choice that whom to approach, your mind starts recollecting the past history and data. In the case of Miss. Y, the rare events such as written above helping or solving the problem in the past with using her intellect and advice comes to mind very quickly if that event is vivid enough. This makes you assigning more weight in the choice to approach Miss. Y. 

This is what Machiavelli conveyed for future leaders: Be generous only few times but you should do those generous acts in such a way that people will have a vivid memory. 

P S : If those events are not vivid enough to be recalled , then you may favor Mr. X because of constant impressions he created. 

P P S : The writing style was predominantly made this way to create vividness. (And it is inspired from my professor) 

Thanks for reading. 

Boiling frog syndrome

If you take a frog near a bowl of water which is at boiling temperature, it flees off. It won't come even near to it. 

But if you place the same frog in a bowl of water at a room temperature and starts boiling on slow flame. It won't come out. It starts adapting to its surroundings and finally it dies. 

Watch this video:Link

In professor's words: "...And so, imagine that everyday I consume 100 calories more than I expend. Will I look fatter the next day? Of course not. Not even the day after or the week after. Will I?

But if you saw me after an year, you’d notice that I have gained some weight. And if you saw me after 3 years, you’ll notice that I am obese. But if you saw me every day, you won’t notice that I gone from being fit to being obese in 3 years.......

I can assure you that there is no truth whatever in this story, but the human equivalent of the boiling frog is there in all of us. Cognition, misled by tiny changes involving low contrast, will often miss a trend that is destiny.

But this is all negative way of seeing this. There is a positive way too. Consider yourself as a Frog and you can manipulate yourself with this effect. 

Suppose you want to have a habit, a good habit for example reading books. Start with tiny little increments, first week you will read few pages. And next you'll read some more, and next some more. I hope you are getting the powerful idea behind this. 

“A journey of a thousand miles must begin with the first step.”

“When you improve a little each day, eventually big things occur. When you improve conditioning a little each day; eventually you have a big improvement in conditioning. Not tomorrow, not the next day; but eventually a big gain is made. Don’t look for the big, quick improvement. Seek the small improvement one day at a time. That’s the only way it happens-and when it happens, it lasts.” -John Wooden, one of the most successful coaches in the history of college basketball

All changes, even positive ones, are scary. Attempts to reach goals through radical or revolutionary means often fail because they heighten fear. But the small steps disarm the brain’s fear response, stimulating rational thought and creative play.

                                                                      

Machiavellian thinking

"Morality is how do you want the world to be. And Economics shows you how the world actually works."- Steven Levitt in his book Freakonomics.

"...that he who neglects what is done for what ought to be done, sooner effects his ruin than his preservation" -Niccolo Machiavelli.


I've started reading The prince right after Freakonomics. Freakonomics is a very good book on incentives and its effects on people. In brief there are three types of incentives (1) Moral (2) Social (3) Economic.

The prince by Niccolo Machiavelli influenced my thinking.

On Law of higher goodness:

The very reason why I started this book is to get to know about this principle. In simple words you can be some what cruel to be more kind or to do some higher good. And it is practically true that your good virtue for majority may seem harmful to others. The whole book states this. That to achieve a higher virtue you can do some wrongs or mean acts. Surely, you can't be virtuous or good all the time because there aren't many good ones around you.

On Morality:

He proposes one should be practical more. That is to think of the consequences which are about to occur with what you choose to be. It is you can choose to  be either cruel or generous.

"The only way to appear generous is to be mean. Then your occasional acts of generosity will be remembered. If you try to be generous all the time, people will remember only your occasional acts of meanness."

How come? I asked myself. Being generous all the time is not good for oneself?

Suppose that you are very generous all the time and you are avoiding any act of meanness. Then in the mean time, you'll encounter to do something which seems good for you but may seem harmful for others. This makes them to hate you. And they will remember this.

With availability bias, people will give over weight to the experiences which are readily available to their memory.

You are trying to be good. But all people are not good. There are wicked men who'll do harm or who'll exploit your goodness.


On Risk: 

“All courses of action are risky, so prudence is not in avoiding danger (it's impossible), but calculating risk and acting decisively. Make mistakes of ambition and not mistakes of sloth. Develop the strength to do bold things, not the strength to suffer.”

This is a good concept that one should ponder. You have to calculate the risks and choose the least possible risky act or situation.


On Religion:

Before this the worth noting fact is that one should be bound by laws. It is either ministers or people. Because you have to consider that all men are wicked in nature.

"THEY WHO LAY the foundations of a State and furnish it with laws must, as is shown by all who have treated of civil government, and by examples of which history is full, assume that ‘all men are bad, and will always, when they have free field, give loose to their evil inclinations;

and that if these for a while remain hidden, it is owing to some secret cause, which, from our having no contrary experience, we do not recognize at once, but which is afterwards revealed by Time, of whom we speak as the father of all truth."

I've learnt some good things about religion.

The first one is that the religion's image must be preserved to keep a kingdom away from disorders. He quoted one example about pagan religion that the views or sayings of the religious elders were seem corrupted with will power of the generals or rulers after some time. And the people started disbelieving it.

So, it is much more important that law is enacted for both the rulers as well as people. But the author says that wrongs committed by people prove less costly when compared to wrongs or selfish acts committed by rulers.

And the second point is about the fight for freedom question. The question is why people are not fighting for liberty as the ancient people used to be. His opinion is that the answer lies in the difference in education and the difference in religion that comes from it.

The present religion made men to be more soft than that of ancient ones. In pagan culture worldly honor is sought after. It teaches to be fierce and brave, as is evident from their rituals or practices. But in the present day it teaches the courage in a way how many blows you can take.


On Love & Fear:

“It is best to be both feared and loved; however, if one cannot be both it is better to be feared than loved.”  

First there is a slight difference between Feared and Hated. Some rulers were feared but not hated. And there are rulers who commanded people for more period of time with LOVE. As it is evident from the quote that it is to be feared than loved, one can readily say that the author is cruel or evil. But immediately he says this.

"He who seeks to deceive will always find someone who will allow himself to be deceived.”

This again will make you read the first quote in this notes. About being generous in few situations.

On Prudence:

“A prudent man should always follow in the path trodden by great men and imitate those who are most excellent, so that if he does not attain to their greatness, at any rate he will get some tinge of it.”  

And he also said that not to worry that you can't accomplish what others have achieved. He states that all the men are born, live and die in quite a same way.  

“Whosoever desires constant success must change his conduct with the times.”  

And John Maynard Keynes puts it  "I'll change my opinions when the facts change, what do you do Sir?"


Overall :

He didn't state any ideals in this book. He stated how one should not to be. That's the important part. To become smart one should avoid being dumb first. And his practical thinking says that what ever you do you've to think about the consequences , considering how the world actually works not with your own morale code. 

And one has to act or change with times, when the facts change. 

Vicarious experience

Me: "Read books!!"

Mr.X : " Why? I read enough till college".

Me: "You can learn something"

Mr.Y : "I know enough to deal with my life "

Mr Z : " I don't have time".


Sure I replied back with reasonable answers like " Even Albert Einstein had the same 24 hrs". But, I didn't have the right one until recently a thought occurred to me.

A person forms opinions or beliefs based on incidents, circumstances and experiences. There are direct experiences and indirect or vicarious experiences. Obviously, direct ones dominate in forming those opinions and beliefs.

I have a friend who is well bred. He is very lucky to get that type of behavior because of the upbringing and the surroundings he lives. But I bet every one can't be as lucky as he is.

And I have other friend who had some bad experiences with the people surrounding him, so there is a chance of taking this experience to generalize or to have a no good general perception of the world.

I have seen people who formed their belief system based solely on their own experiences or perceptions from those experiences. I am not saying it's wrong. But the problem is those people generalized those views and began to make logical decisions based on those.

Edward de Bono has noted " 90% of our errors of logic at all but errors of perception. Logic cannot control perception. Logic within a system cannot determine the starting point of the system. This hyper emphasis on logic has two disastrous effects. The first is that we have paid insufficient attention to perception and the second is that we have the highly dangerous 'feeling' of being right-when we have selected the perceptions".

I asked to my friend, who is more silent, obedient, reserved, and not open for friends, some months ago about his behavior. My doubt was whether he behaved the same since the start or something bad happened. He told me that something happened and he got hurt. And he formed opinions and he generalized those views about the world around him. He built a barrier around himself, not to let anyone enter or preventing him to come out of it.

I do not know whether he made a right choice or wrong.

I understand how much acute agony those experiences create. And those experiences have the power to create upside down everything.

One way is questioning the belief system like being skeptical about one's own beliefs. And experimenting oneself with more experiences.

So, the point is to have a way of perceiving is to have more experiences. But, common sense says you can't get all the experiences by doing it yourself.

This leads us to VICARIOUS learning.

"There is a limit as to how much one can learn from one's own experience. As a famous quote goes, the man who learns from his own experience is destined to continue learning from his own experience."- Prof. Sanjay bakshi.

Reading books is the best way. And read books of the extreme people is very good to get to know various experiences. And I think watching good movies is also a good way in attaining wisdom.

I am not saying to read only non-fiction, psychology e.t.c. What I meant is " Try reading books!"

Finally, It's not that my perceptions are 100% right. But I follow this principle:
"It is better to be roughly right, than to be precisely wrong" -John Maynard Keynes.

To all the people, who think like we-stopped-reading-after-college,please read this quote.

“I cannot teach anybody anything. I can only make them think” 
― Socrates

"The secret of success is learning how to use pain and pleasure instead of having pain and pleasure use you. If you do that, you're in control of your life. If you don't, life controls you."

-- Tony Robbins

Questions

Asking right questions is more important than worrying for right answers.
The Questions  I ask direct my thinking. And this thinking process is very important. So, to get the right questions, we have to ask more questions.

To ask more questions, our thinking has to be  divergent rather than convergent.

So which way it is better.

Is it to ask one question at a time?

or

is it better to write down all questions at once and think about them later?

 But, writing all the questions at once has the possibility in limiting the time for divergent thinking. And also, after thinking about one question and arriving at the very reasonable answer has the possibility of stopping there and not asking enough questions.

I think I've to follow negative empiricism rather than a positive one, because it is easy to get confirming evidence rather than dis confirming one. Some times dis-confirming evidence is the best. It is difficult to prolong the quest for dis-confirming evidence.

Still, I've to adopt this method of thinking. How? Being skeptical?

 Skeptical empiricism is the good way.

This needs to preserved :D

"When I saw you, I was lost.
I wondered you were a ghost.
When I befriended you, I was reborn.
But I din't know that you have so much scorn.
She parted from Me.
I realized She took away most of ME.




Neither poetic nor creative. It's just framed for the last sentence I felt real. As for the rhymes, we can get anything we need from the web. 

Please stop showing that much love on me !!

My friend came to stay over with me for a few days. He's sensitive, talks too less. Like I was previously( don't know whether I'm still).

I was helping in some situation and I was just showing genuine not over care.Then he said to me that made my senses on " Don't show love on me, I can't handle"

What is this feeling? When I heard those words, I felt like I was seeing my own reflection. How can one make that opinion?

Take me. I too had been rejected. So, may be he also got rejected. The intensity of that feeling is so potent  i guess.

Did they reject me? May be . May be not. Because they haven't told me their opinion about me . I'm sensitive.May be this was the very reason creating all this nonsense. Of course it is nonsense. I used to keep thinking and judging about what others were thinking about me. Famous Dale Carnegie said- Don't think of what others might think about you if you are going to do something. Instead do something that makes others to think good about you.

The hatred is such a high intensive thing. It makes us to make our own judgements. And I assumed and believed things to be true until I face that are not.

I've learnt that I should prevent myself from showing anger which basically anger because of myself. My friend told me that " He is the person who easily gets angry is the one who can't solve his own problems/baggage.So much confusion.

Carrying the guilt for long is not good. May be somethings are bound to happen. And not valuing oneself is also not good. I was there once. Some authors' books changed my thoughts. I started believing in myself and I have value.

Twisted

Some stories show villains as evils or dangerous. I believed it. But later on, it came to know that some people are with some twisted beliefs. But I have not seen any body till I join my new office. Here is an office boy, with twisted mentality or twisted beliefs.

The work he has to do is to go and buy somethings. Some times there will be a bill shown to us and most of the time no bill. Just he won't say anything. And we have to imagine that he has spend all of it to bring these things. He lies very easily. Initially, I thought he's morally damaged. Of course I know that morals we form because of our community, religion and more important is his experiences with outside world. He interpreted those incidents as general ones may be.

He once told me that he's in high debt and needs ready money, and he shared his thought of creating fake bills. I told him that's not correct. He said, " How should I make a living then?" I said " You'll get money based on how much you work." He din't argue later then.

Then I read something about stealing. Why people steal? 1.Because easy to steal. 2. There will no evidence that I've stolen. And with Consistency principle he acted more than once. He's still doing it. And I must say, our office administration is damaging him morally, in some way.

The main point is how he is getting rationalized?

" Nothing sedates rationality like large doses effortless money"- Warren E. Buffett.

I came to know about this quote from Prof. Sanjay bakshi. Reading revealed, there are many cognitive process are in the show. He knows what it takes to earn so much money. I know this : " There is no such thing as something for nothing."- Napoleon Hill.

What is about morals? My brother told me this " The level of morality depends on the shame of yours".

In the initial case, he had these thoughts in his mind. But not concrete enough. Then at the first time he'll be having so much difficult war of thoughts regarding morals in his mind. But there is a big justification because of that stealing. Justification is getting effortless money. He made those beliefs concrete.

This is what happens if there is less integrity. I don't know how to make the system to change his mind frame work. I have to think of it.