HSC Arts (Marathi Medium) १२ वीं कक्षा - Maharashtra State Board Important Questions for English

Name of the interviewee:

Field / Reputation

Date / Venue / Time

Duration of Interview,

Questions

Questions based on:

1. Motivation
2. Initial Preparation
3. Support
4. Idols / Gurus / Teachers
5. First Break
6. Public response
7. Recognition
8. Goals / Dreams

Love is a great force in Private life; it is indeed the greatest of all things, but love in public affairs does not work. It has been tried again and again; by the people of the Middle Ages, and also by the French Revolution, a secular movement which reasserted the Brotherhood of Man, And it has always failed. The idea that nations should love one another, or that business concerns or marketing boards should love one another or that a man in Portugal should love a man in Peru of whom he has never heard — it is absurd, unreal, dangerous. ‘Love is what is needed,” we chant, and then sit back and the world goes on as before.

The fact is we can only love what we know personally. And we cannot know much. In public affairs, in the rebuilding of civilization, something much less dramatic and emotional is needed, namely tolerance. Tolerance is a very dull virtue. It is boring. It is negative. It merely means putting up with people, being able to stand things. No one has ever written an ode to tolerance, or raised a statute to her. Yet this is the quality which will be most needed after the war. This is the sound state of mind which we are looking for. This is the only force which will enable different races and classes and interests to settle down together to the work of reconstruction. 

The world is very full of people— appallingly full; it has never been so full before and they are all tumbling over each other.

Most of these people one doesn’t know and some of them dosen't like. Well, what is one to do? If you don't like people, put up with them as well as you can. Don't try to love them; you can't. But try to tolerate them. On the basis of that tolerance a civilized future may be built. Certainly I can see no other foundation for the post-war world.

The government of India is encouraging medical tourism in the country by offering tax benefits and export incentives to the participating hospitals. Medical visas are being cleared quickly without any hassles. With a view to facilitating the growth of medical tourism industry, the Ministry of Health and Family Welfare along with the Ministry of Tourism has set up a task force to evaluate the opportunities in the industry. Efforts are being made to standardise procedures and to guide foreign patients to select the hospitals most suited to their needs. Meanwhile, several private hospitals are seeking to take advantage of the booming medical tourism industry and are investing hugely in acquiring equipments and skills.

However, medical tourism carries some risks that locally provided medical care does not. Some countries like India, Malaysia and Thailand have very different infectious diseases rarely found in Europe and North America. Exposure to disease without having built-up natural immunity can be a hazard for weak individuals specially with respect to gastrointestinal diseases like Hepatitis A, amoebic dysentery etc., which could slow down the recovery process. Also, medical tourists may be at risk from mosquito-transmitted diseases, influenza and tuberculosis. The quality of post-operative care can also vary dramatically depending on the hospital and the country. Finally, after returning home, a patient has limited contact with their surgeon. This may make it difficult to deal with any complications that may arise later, such as a delayed infection.

The concept of medical tourism raises some important questions regarding accessibility, affordability and ethics in medical care. It is unfortunate that a large section of the Indian population has little or no access to private health care. Public health care system is inadequate and lacks proper infrastructure and facilities. One wonders if it is sensible to make provisions for medical tourism in a democratic country like India, which has failed to provide nourishment, sanitation and health care to its masses.

This is what Camus meant when he said that "what gives value to travel is fear"-disruption, in other words, (or emancipation) from circumstance, and all the habits behind which we hide. And that is why many of us travel not in search of answers, but of better questions. I, like many people, tend to ask questions of the places I visit, and relish most the ones that ask the most searching questions back of me: "The ideal travel book," Christopher Isherwood once said, "should be perhaps a little like a crime story in which you're in search of something." And it's the best kind of something, I would add, if it's one that you can never quite find.

I remember, in fact, after my first trips to Southeast Asia, more than a decade ago, how I would come back to my apartment in New York, and lie in my bed, kept up by something more than jet lag, playing back, in my memory, over and over, all that I had experienced, and paging wistfully through my photographs and reading and re-reading my. diaries, as if to extract some mystery from them. Anyone witnessing this strange scene would have drawn the right conclusion: I was in love.

When we go abroad is that we are objects of scrutiny as much as the people we scrutinize, and we are being consumed by the cultures we consume, as much on the road as when we are at home. At the very least, we are objects of speculation (and even desire) who can seem as exotic to the people around us as they do to us.

All, in that sense, believed in "being moved" as one of the points of taking trips, and "being transported" by private as well as public means; all saw that "ecstasy" ("ex-stasis") tells us that our highest moments come when we're not stationary, and that epiphany can follow movement as much as it precipitates it.

Love is a great force in Private life; it is indeed the greatest of all things, but love in public affairs does not work. It has been tried again and again; by the people of the Middle Ages, and also by the French Revolution, a secular movement which reasserted the Brotherhood of Man, And it has always failed. The idea that nations should love one another, or that business concerns or marketing boards should love one another or that a man in Portugal should love a man in Peru of whom he has never heard — it is absurd, unreal, dangerous. ‘Love is what is needed,” we chant, and then sit back and the world goes on as before.

The fact is we can only love what we know personally. And we cannot know much. In public affairs, in the rebuilding of civilization, something much less dramatic and emotional is needed, namely tolerance. Tolerance is a very dull virtue. It is boring. It is negative. It merely means putting up with people, being able to stand things. No one has ever written an ode to tolerance or raised a statute to her. Yet this is the quality which will be most needed after the war. This is the sound state of mind which we are looking for. This is the only force which will enable different races and classes and interests to settle down together to the work of reconstruction. 

The world is very full of people— appallingly full; it has never been so full before and they are all tumbling over each other.

Most of these people one doesn’t know, and some of them doesn't like. Well, what is one to do? If you don't like people, put up with them as well as you can. Don't try to love them; you can't. But try to tolerate them. On the basis of that tolerance, a civilized future may be built. Certainly, I can see no other foundation for the post-war world.