Questions

---

Mahmudur Rahman
If only Jean Paul Sartre were around to see the implication of the key to his theory of existentialism -- 'I think, therefore I am',….
In the year 2011 when self realisation is taking on newer proportions, one wonders what to make of the next step after those words. For once existentialism is proven, the obvious next questions are 'what am I doing here' or 'why am I here'. It would be good to know how these are addressed. From a distance, though when the 'thinking' is followed by 'doing', it all appears to go awry. Like any good answer they would probably give rise to the next question that is simply 'what next?' That's where it all goes wrong.
The 'thinking' leads to action that by itself has implications not only on one's self but also on others. The recent photographs of friendly and age grown trees being cut down for no apparent developmental reason gives rise to the question 'why?' Is human subsistence the criteria for denuding the very nature that nourishes and nurtures? What substances are these people made of? What substances are they made of who would ordain such acts that really have to border on the 'most foul'?
And so the careless driven motorcycle on the sidewalk is execution of the thought process of getting to a destination a little quicker but paying little respect to the thoughts of those plodding along the same pavement. An instruction to fine pedestrians for jaywalking; drivers for not wearing seatbelts; motor cyclists for not wearing helmets is all very good. But where, pray is the implementation? And why will those enforcing the law be outside the purview of the same instruction?
It is that second level of question after that of existentialist theory where the answer lies. Just as democracy does not mean flouting of laws, tradition and customs, individual action for whatever the cause, should never be allowed to encroach on others' rights. Perhaps that's where the word 'coordination' was derived; from the need to ensure that one set of rules is not in conflict with another. Then again, with 'rights', there is another debate in definition and deployment. It's all terribly confusing -- somewhat like the bundles and batches of wire that are strung along the streets of Dhaka.
There are those among us who are quick in deciphering those bundles. If that is so surely there are those who can decrypt the mess made of rights, privileges and action. Or perhaps a little bit of navel gazing isn't exactly out of turn. Fall back to that entertaining piece of prose "The Three Questions" -when is the right time to do something? Who is the right person to benefit from it? What is the best thing to do?
The answers may provide some interesting introspection. And then again, maybe not.
e-mail: mahmudrahman@gmail.com