Scientific OBJECTIVITY in Subjective WAY !!!

-----------------------------------------

Objectivity and Subjectivity are always been subject of contentious debates. There is a saying, “We all are objective in our subjective ways.” When considered from point of view of ‘scientific method’, then this enquiry acquires many frames of analysis inspired from sociological, philosophical, hisotiographical perspectives. Feminist enquiry of growth of science and technology as a discipline and as a rigorous investigation approach for descriptive, inductive writings of Science Technology Society has been lately very much being discussed.   

The concepts of objectivity, truth, and the authority of empirical standards have come under serious challenge by some critics of the social sciences in the past several decades.  Feminist critics charge that the concepts and methods of the social sciences reflect an essential patriarchalism that discredits the objectivity of social science knowledge.  Marxist critics sometimes contend that the social sciences are enmeshed in a bourgeois worldview that makes objectivity impossible. And post-modernist writers seem to disdain the ideas of truth and objectivity in the social sciences altogether, preferring instead the slippery notions of multiple discourses and knowledge/power. (http://www-personal.umd.umich.edu/~delittle/POSITIV6.htm)

Feminist thoughts like any other critical perspective challenges hierarchy, patronizing attitudes and patriarchic mindset which is historically been not absent from science-technology enterprise. Before someone enters the arena to understand what feminist enquiry of academic writing in history, STS studies, social construction of S&T; it would be better to understand a) What is the structure of academia, b) Whose academia is it?, c) What are the relations between learned and people learning, d) Interfaces through which knowledge is shared, disseminated and appropriated. (Donna Haraway, Fox Keller, Erich Charles Conrad, Helen E. Longino, Peter K. Machamer, Gereon Wolters, Karen Cordrick Haely, Philip Kitcher, Georg G. Iggers)

Since the publication of first journal Philosophical Transactions in 17^th century, it took 300 years for Royal Society to admit women as its prestigious member. (On 22 March 1945, the first female Fellows were elected to the Royal Society. This followed a statutory amendment in 1944 that read "Nothing herein contained shall render women ineligible as candidates", and was contained in Chapter 1 of Statute 1.)

Androcentrism in Democracy and University is one of the most prominent threats to free thinking. Androcentrism is the practice, conscious or otherwise, of placing male human beings or the masculine point of view at the center of one's view of the world and its culture and history. Breaking the walls in access of opportunities for education remained the pivotal challenge ahead of women before the development of feminist critic of history of science and technology. However before going ahead with the conviction of feminist critic of all the history, understanding the definition of ‘women’ is very essential. Women may be a universal group of vulnerable people who are always fighting for their rights, their justice, socio-cultural and economical equality; but considering the vast array of diverse discriminatory practices in developing countries, the process of defining ‘Women’ becomes more and more contestable. We just have to remember that even though there are consistent efforts throughout the history to treat women as a cohesive group for gaining voting rights, fare wages, access to knowledge, political representation, employment; still the emergence of category of ‘universal women’ is far from realized. 

Every scholar, journalist, writer, politician, student, marketing person, business developer, artist is a ‘human body with a context.’ A recent essay published in EPW by Anirudh Deshpande describes the objectivity in history vis-à-vis other natural sciences. It says:

      

          “The postmodernists criticize history for being a subjective narrative imposed   on selected facts by historians through the use of linguistic devices. In the postmodernist submission, since all historical narratives are poetic acts performed by historians, it is impossible to access a verifiable objective past through the historian’s carefully constructed imaginary plot of events. Hence, and logically following the postmodern submission, all history is  subjective history, and therefore there is not much to choose between several carefully constructed interpretations of the past. If history is thus reduced to a project of cultural relativism and ideological subjectivism, it becomes easy to first denounce and later reject it altogether.”

The analysis, either through frame or through any other way, it is necessary to know who is the person arguing, writing and documenting is; from what belief system, vantage point they articulate their opinions. We have to be aware of contexts, situations, personal histories, ideological-professional biases, approach to knowledge creation, method of enquiry etc. 

History and biography both posit a dialectical relationship between life (as information) and art (as an expression of subjectivity). Both have a ‘truth’ claim and are represented as forms of narrative. If we were to recall some of the characteristic features of history, we would perhaps expect a coherent, continuous narrative, with objectivity and sufficient analysis, thereby enabling us to produce some ‘generalisable typicality’. Even a complex history should yield points of significance that would enable us to understand/interpret in its light events, movements, and large sections of time. (Recovery, Recontextualisation and Performance: Questions on the Margin by Rimli Bhattacharya; Biography as History, Indian Perspectives; Ed. Vijaya Ramaswamy, Yogesh Sharma, Orient Blackswan) 

In his more specialized collection in 2009, Philosophy of the Social Sciences: Philosophical Theory and Scientific Practice, Chris Mantzavinos offers this description of the field:

 “Philosophy of science examines "scientific knowledge." It tries to illuminate the specific characteristics of science, the way it is produced, the historical dimensions of science, and the normative criteria at play in appraising science…. The philosophy of the social sciences, on the other hand, traditional deals with such problems as the role of understanding (Verstehen) in apprehending social phenomena, the status of rational choice theory, the role of experiments in the social sciences, the logical status of game theory, as well as whether there are genuine laws of social phenomena or rather social mechanisms to be discovered, the historicity of the social processes, etc.”

 Producing, creating, constructing, shaping scientific facts depends on many attributes of scholarship and their history. Scientific objectivity depends on method of investigation—qualitative, quantitative—understanding of scientific method—grounding in sociological, humanities orientation—setting of arguments in ideological mesh—impact of tools used—influence of different technologies being deployed for finalizing the data collection or field visits etc. Scientific objectivity may be defined as rigorous fashion consistent with any particular philosophy of science. According to Popper, scientific objectivity consists of the freedom and responsibility of the researcher 1) To pose refutable hypothesis, 2) To test these hypothesis with relevant evidence, and 3) To state the results in an unambiguous fashion accessible to any interested person. (from ‘On Scientific Objectivity’ by Emery N. Castle)

 ------------------------------------------------------

Faultlines at Food, Education and Health: From Raghuram Rajan to Harsh Mandar !

“The problems are rooted in indifferent nutrition, socialization and learning in early childhood, and in dysfunctional primary and secondary schools that leave too many Americans unprepared for change.”—Rajan

In above words, Raghuram Ragan, a Chicago School economist describes the reasons behind western, in a true sense, American subprime financial crisis, which caught up with throats of all economies of the world. His critic of financial system in contemporary times leading upto 2008 bubble bust originated in the farewell conference in honour of former Federal Reserve Chief Alan Greenspan who famously admitted in Congressional hearings, ““This modern risk-management paradigm held sway for decades. The whole intellectual edifice, however, collapsed in the summer of that year.”

Describing in detail the roots of hidden crisis, Rajan tells:

“I use the term education to refer to employability, but a better term is human capital, which refers to the broad set of capabilities, including health, knowledge and intelligence, attitude, social aptitude and empathy that makes a person a productive member of society.”  

In many ways, book of Harsh Mandar published recently gives overwhelming confirmation of what Rajan was saying all along. ‘Ash in the Belly: India’s Unfinished Battle Against Hunger’ makes sad reading of the fact which Mr. Mandar shares with us,   

“It is a profound irony that 200 million Indians should sleep on an empty stomach in the world's largest producer of milk and edible oils, and the second-largest grower of wheat and sugar. 

Arguing about the role of government which is inescapably crucial in eradicating hunger and resulting degeneration of social health, he says: “…One has to understand the paradox in India. The paradox is that countries which do not have the kind of capacities that our government has have actually done better than India in terms of reversing malnutrition and battling hunger.”

Conscience Keeper: Resigned from IAS in protest of riots in Gujarat

Speaking to The Hindu, Mr. Mandar exposes our lack of understanding about the social tension which cuts through this entire problem of food. This book opens the debate about the newly introduced ‘Right to Food’, its impact on Public Distribution System, on people’s health, nutrition and well-being. Mandar recently wrote an article about our community practices related to food which historically being inspired by empathy and compassion reflected in food distribution by the humanist and egalitarian Sufi Chisthi and Sikh traditions. He writes in his column Barefoot discussing other faiths also: “Christian missionaries care for the destitute, and Jain sects serve and feed the disabled. Islamic traditions require setting aside a regular fraction of one’s earnings to feed the hungry and destitute.” Mandar sadly argues that these community practices in recent times have been withering away by classification and segregation of receivers of the food according to their class, creed and affiliations.

Combination of nutritious food, degree of mental-physical growth of children, varying levels of children`s concentration and continuation in education, obstacles in learning and crippling of aspirations to aim high in life are well documented. Rajan in his book ‘Fault Lines: How Hidden Fractures Still Threaten the World Economy’ lists three main reason why burden of neglect towards development of children in early age can lead to not only collapse of society but also possible financial crisis, as US economy witnessed. He says,

“a) Quality of learning experience in schools is so poor that far too many students drop out before completing high school.

b) Even among those who graduate from high school, many are unprepared for the rigours of university education.

c) As the college premium increase, the cost of higher education also increases.”

To add emphasis on above three observations, Rajan says: “Despite attempts to expand financial aid, a quality education at a private university is passing beyond the reach of even middle class families. Learning does not take place in classroom. Differences in aptitude for education emerge in early childhood as a result of varying nutrition, learning environments, and behavioral expectations. ” Impact of all these leads towards ‘social insecurity’:

“As more and more citizens realize that they are simply not equipped to compete, and as they come to terms up with their own diminished expectations, the words economic freedom do not conjure open vistas of unlimited opportunity. Instead they offer a nightmare vision of great and continuing insecurity, and growing envy as the have nots increasingly become the have-nevers. Without some change in this trend, destructive class warfare is no longer impossible to contemplate.”

His NYTimes Piece "How did Economists got it so wrong?

Rajan describes in detail, by narrating the various economic, taxation, education, health policies to build the case that prevailing and increasing inequality in US society was responded with ambitious spur to the real estate and housing sector thus leading to the manufacturing of ‘debt sponsored derivative sky scrapers’ which created sub-prime crisis.

Success of Mid Day Meal scheme is beyond question. Spirit behind Right to Food Law is historic considering it took our country 65 years to recognize it as fundamental right. Any political correctness behind Conditional Cash Transfers is partially welcome subject to the limitations of its caveat to weaken public distribution system and submit ourselves to market dynamics, be it oil, gas or be it food. In closing speech of 100^th Science Congress held at Kolkata, where STI Polciy 2013 was unveiled by PM, noted policymaker M.S. Swaminathan argues:

“Since the new STI paradigm calls for attending to the needs of the people, it may be worthwhile reminding ourselves that our position today in various global indicators relating to human development and nutrition is the following:

--> National Family Health Survey [2005-06J Malnourished Children under 5--  above 40 %

            --> Low Birth Weight Children – 21 %

             --> Union Planning Commission (2072) - About 217 Million are undernourished

            --> Global Hunger Index (IFPRI, 2012) - 65th position among 79 countries

--> UNDP Human Development Report (2072) - 134th position among 187   countries

            --> Nutrition Barometer (Save the Children, 20L2) - Very Low position

Dr. Swaminathan emphasizes on redoubling our efforts in harnessing science for meeting the needs of our people in food and nutrition, water, sanitation, education, healthcare, shelter and energy. Urging for ensuring food security through home grown food from the historic sheep to mouth food, Swaminathan urged to change language of our aspirations in agriculture from green revolution to ever green revolution.

We are witnessing fervent debates about the possible ways of improving productivity in the agriculture, ways to improve storage quality in our mandis/godowns/containers across the country, ways to incentivize farmers to invest in biotechnology or moving away from it, ways to harness benefits from emerging-expanding domestic investment and upcoming FDI in retail sector, ways to fight against scarcity of irrigation against all odds like politicization of water share across districts, states and nations.

We are witnessing historic Right to Education legislation and Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan, upcoming Rashtriya Madhyamik Shiksha Abhiyan (RMSA), Integrated Child Development Programe, Teachers Training Progrmae discussed by 12^th Plan, rapid expansion in higher education through newly proposed number of institutions like Central Universities, IITs, IIMs, IIITs, NITs, IISERs, AIIMSs all in the emerging crucible of unified regulatory body of higher education and research by dissolving all regulatory bodies of higher education in India. Planning Commission working paper on Higher Education in 12^th plan notes following objectives on this front:

i)  Provide greater opportunities of access to higher education with equity to all  eligible persons and in particular to the vulnerable sections;

 ii) Expand access by supporting existing institutions, establishing new institutions, supporting State Governments and Non-Government Organizations/civil society to supplement public efforts aimed at removing regional or other imbalances that exist at present;

 iii) Initiate policies and programmes for strengthening research and innovations and encourage institutions – public or private – to engage in stretching the frontiers of knowledge;

 (iv) Skill development so as to reap the benefits of the demographic advantage

of the country;

 (v) Promote the quality of higher education by investing in infrastructure and

faculty, promoting academic reforms, improving governance and institutional

restructuring;

 (vi) Engage with civil society, state governments and with the international community in furtherance of knowledge, language and culture. Initiate policies and programmes for strengthening research and innovations and encourage institutions – public or private – to engage in stretching the frontiers of knowledge;

(iv) Skill development so as to reap the benefits of the demographic advantage of the

country;

 (v) Promote the quality of higher education by investing in infrastructure and faculty, promoting academic reforms, improving governance and institutional restructuring;

 (vi) Engage with civil society, state governments and with the international community in furtherance of knowledge, language and culture.

We are also witnessing starting of the debate related to Right to Health bill, proven success of ASHA (Accredited Social Health Activists), success of immunization programs like Polio, failure on the front of Cancer, TB and other equally deadly diseases, progress on the front of NRHM, emerging National Urban Health Mission, debates about health insurance and many new initiatives in the health sector. Planning Commission paper on Health outlines four goals on this front:

a)    Universal access, and access to an adequate level, and access without excessive burden.

b)    Fair distribution of financial costs for access and fair distribution of burden in rationing care and capacity and a constant search for improvement to a more just system.

c)    Training providers for competence empathy and accountability, pursuit of quality care and cost effective use of the results of relevant research.

d)   Special attention to vulnerable groups such as children, women, disabled

You can't postpone social development forever: Rajan in recent interview

In a way, if we try to understand the dynamics of Human Capital i.e. Health, Education, Food, Employability etc. number of institutional, policy, legal initiatives have been taken in recent five years. In the context of economic policies we want to implement, (if we have any), the success of all those policies will indisputably and unequivocally depend on germination of all the initiatives mentioned in the above lines i.e. food, agriculture, health, education, ways of distribution, legal enforcements of rights along with innovation thriving on free expression, experiment and collaboration across marriages of social, economic and political resources, imagination and convictions.

Our life is truly at the crossroads and cross-connections of faultiness. The intersecting nodal points carry enormous potential to empower us as we are living in the world powered by science-technology, mobility, internet, whirlwind of democratic movements across the world, debates about equality, freedom of expression and human development index. Thus exposing the possibilities of weak and strong tectonic plates in the 21^st century Indian society will enable us to simulate the ways in which we can cement those faultiness with social, political and economic initiatives having sustainable—constructive impact. 

=======================================

"Jaipur Literature Festival: From Ideas of Republic towards Republic of Ideas !"

========================================== ======

“I have nothing new to teach the world. Truth and Non-violence

are as old as the hills. All I have done is to try experiments in both 

on as vast a scale as I could.” ---Mahatma Gandhi

==========================================

Bhalchandra Nemade, author who broke with traditions of sacrosanct style of presenting culture, literature and language was speaking in exactly same tone as Mahatma was expressing few decades ago. Born in pre-independence days and having written path-breaking Novel Kosala (Cocoon) in experimental, rebellious days of 1960s, as was the case all over the world; Dr. Nemade has tried to immortalize heritage of our most basic emotions out of daily life i.e. longing towards cherishing virtues of life while at the same time without being detached from vacuum, nothingness and futileness of temporary matters in our affair with material quest. Dr. Nemade said that by breaking up language, text and symbol he has done nothing new but only lived to the great legacy of Tukaram, Buddha and Phule. In fact, while realizing that all rebellious voices have been uttered by these great thinkers, he considers it as just emulating them without slightest impact the legendary characters of history had.

If you consider yourself a literary rebel, then be sure that whole world is shaped and decided by you. This point was emphasized by one session which discussed 'Maps of Love and Hate: Nationalism and Arab Literature'—that not a single identity of the countries in middle east, west Asia has been defined by politicians, statesmen but by authors, novelists, playwrights.  The dissent which I represent has to be inspired from the diverse coalition of all castes, creeds, religions, languages and beliefs. When I write, I have to write for all of them.  I feel very rich having a rich and extended family of kins—organic and social. These views were echoed by Jeet Thayel whose recent novel ‘Narcopolis’ was nominated for Booker Prize. 

There are many types of narratives and different streams of interpretations in our culture and literature. There are norms with which these interpretations has to be documented in literature, expressed in performing arts, broadcasted and disseminate through traditional and modern media.  But subverting those styles, those “biased sacred norms” for mocking at the history, reimagining history and thus reinterpret our present and perspectives towards future in more nuanced / native`s way is my core idea of thematic narration of daily life which I did in Kosala (Cocoon).

“I was the first person in Marathi to use the Khandeshi language for writing a novel by breaking the long standing tradition and admanant one sided belief that creativity can be expressed in only one manner and that is tried but not contested by out of the way experiments. I used diary form to great extent in the novel to open up my unorthodox way of looking towards life. Strength of diary form refuses categorization of communities, cultures, thinking. I wanted to use humour, sarcastic way of mocking at history.”  

From another session where Anjum Hasan, Gayatri Chakravorthi Spivac, Manu Jospeh, Chandrahas Chaudhari discussed what constitutes criticism, reviewing and appreciating books, literature. Criticizing any work is all about writing, thinking and building connections between them. We should always try to understand what writer wants to say. Thirty fourty years ago when the voices of oppressed and downtrodden were started to be echoed in the sub-altern   literature it was largely following tradition of powerful convictions of French deconstructionists.

“You cannot approach subaltern with metaphor. You have to be direct, explicit, provocative and honest in your submission.”

Manu Joseph, writer of a novel ‘Serious Men’, referred cook Rat in a movie ‘Ratatouille’. The protagonist in this movie describes the great experiments Rat cook does while being in Paris. Role of critic or reviewer is not to write what people want to read. One cannot be good critic who wants to play safe. Great artist/writer can come from anywhere no matter what the background is. Christhopher Ricks said that we have to remember where the technique starts and where it ends. We have to rehear and re-imagine the  ways of interpreting literature. Wit is so important a weapon in inspecting the opinions and review, critic gives a sharp way of doing it. We have to develop analytical skills, sensibility of method, how much a personality has invested in understanding the thoughts and arguments in the book. He also said that there is a difference between what critic from academia writes and that what reviewer from media writes about contemporary and historical books. Reviewers educational background may help them to become critic but reviewer`s ability to connect to the thinking, aspirations of readers is better suited to them to become a dependable reviewer. Criticism brings in lot of information about the history of the subject of text, knowledge about the diversity, problem areas, arguments existing, evolving in literature and thus the ability to analyze the complex texts. Reviewers have to do the same thing considering the positive intention of the readers towards the books which they might read after going through the review.

Anjum Hasan referred to Amit Chaoudhari who analyses often the necessity to go beyond virtues of ‘cultural nationalism’; creating inhabitation of our self transcends national, racial, regional boundaries. Local, nuanced and thematic appreciation of the making of the book leads to global because the original virtues are essentially diverse, located in specific locality and always having special ecology.  What writer is doing has direct connections with a theory put by Ronald Barthez  i.e. Death of Author. Sometimes believing the ‘death of an author’ after the book has been published may infuse limitations in our assessment of the work. We have to understand how author has negotiated self with text; what exactly author is doing, rather than what author has said in a text? What about mind behind writing? When asked by someone  that for a common reader who does not know deconstruction by Derrida, Foucault how meaningful and relevant can be book criticism and book review then panel replied that we should be able to give entire picture, spectrum of arguments from contemporary, literary history so as to respect freedom of readers mind to think about it proactively. 

Gayatri Spivac said that criticism can become boring as a teaching subject except when one looks at it out of historical context. “First we have to teach how to perform a reading of a text”, she said. Ranajit Guha, Dipesh Chakravarty have written extensively about sub-altern movement and literature. By invoking Derrida, she said that “Reason” remains the principle weapon behind the strengthening of sub-altern voices. But we have to be sensible for understanding the difference between “reason” and “reasonable”. For fearless critic of writers, we have to expand our reading base. By consistent reading we have to manage to discover unearthing gems from ocean of literary criticism.

Finally Anjum Hasan said that book reviewer should not be a reviewer alone, they should do their other day jobs. By just being book reviewer, one can become monotonous, narrow minded conservative in assessing books through one lens only. We have to be grateful by acknowledging the great legacy of work done in particular theme because we cannot move ahead in reviewing any work without reflecting on the great body of work done previously either supporting or rejecting our point of view. Every work has great historical relationship with previously published equally and more compelling works so listening, reading of those voices is very significant process while reviewing, criticizing upcoming work. It must be remembered that reviewing is not being judgmental. Quick opinion must not be confused with slowly developed argument. Our judgment has to evolve through carefully crafted through arguments. In a way book-reviewing and book-criticism has a long way to go in India.

Its all about engagement with a text, culture and minds. Review is a bit follower of charm of writing but critic may patronize particular tradition of the intellectual history while finalizing the critic of new books. Panel expressed their unhappiness over the fact that book reviewing and book criticism has become hostage to the marketing, advertising, and promotion professionals in India and therefore one can get swayed away by torrent of PR so as to ignore original/harsh reviews.

“Colonization of mind through English language was another issue of discussion of another session where diplomat Pawan Verma, journalist Ravish Kumar, critic Ashok Vajpayee, academic and write Uday Narayan Singh, write Ira Pande were discussing the dialectic between Hindi and English. All of them agreed that Hindi has become colonial ‘English’ for all of the Indians in a way we can’t live without it but still being hegemonised by it.

In session, The Vanishing Present:Post Colonial Critiques Anjum Hasan interviewed Gayatri Chakravorthy Spivok and Amit Chaoudhari. They discussed literature in the era of globalization, ethical impulse s in literature, relevance of aesthetics education, status of education in 21^st century and place of literature in university.

Prof. Spivac expressed great anguish that place of literature in university is vanishing slowly. You can’t train youngsters to read literature by emphasizing on the value or benefits of it. We have to sensitize about the process of how literature evolves in our life, how words get expression. We have to engage students in a dialogue about how to train our mind deeply into ethical impulse of literature with our whole soul, body and mind. We have to train our imagination though active imagination to change the ways of how we know.

Amit said that we have to imagine for whom we are writing for, who our foreign audiences are. While reading a text, we have to be aware about what the literary affiliations of the author are and what the literary arguments of author are. We have to understand how author creates oneness with readers? Assessing Literature is a very complex field. Current post-colonial literature suffers with a problem that it has allowed to glorify exotication of everything, language estrangement. There are different feelings about how we should write about different places. There is a special mythology about exoticizing we need to move away from. We have to develop a way to read things which have travelled. Globalization and changing profile of readership is compelling us to look towards literature and readership in a certain prejudiced way. English being engine of globalization, there are massive forces which are impacting provincialising of literature. German and French provinces of literature have their own way in thinking about life. We have to be aware about increasing trend in masses of writers in India who are thinking in English so not able to express themselves the issues from the roots here.

Discussing question that “Is reading literature an ethical practice?” Prof. Spivac said that We read to transform ourselves. We constantly try to learn through languages, books, experience, events, and processes. Literature allows us freedom to act of becoming different person, to feel unique experiences characters in book are having and thinking each jeanre in text is giving. Like Marathi poet Arun Kolhatkar, who used to say that I keep my pencil sharpened at both ends and I believe to write away from King`s English. Same was reflected when Bhalchandra Nemade was talking about his novel Kosla.

All the Ideas of Republic were at the forefront on 26^th January for confrontational debate on different stages named ‘Republic of Ideas’ participated by Tarun Tejpal, Patrik French, Ashish Nandy, Richard Sorabji, Urvashi Butalia. Another session on same day was devoted to ‘ Freedom of Speech and Expression’. The row created by previous session justified the perfect positioning of later. Ashish Nandy in his complex argument dealt with idea of equality in Indian context being strengthened by unavoidable evolution of corruption in all castes, classes and creeds leading towards making Indian republic more robust, vibrant and thriving living up to the great struggle of social and political movements our country witnessed for equal opportunities, justice and well-being to all kinds of people. This particular way of presenting argument received conservative political/social response leading towards exit of Prof. Nandy from the festival.

Session of freedom of expression was presented by John Kampfner, Shoma Chaudhury, John Burnside, Basharat Peer and Timothy Ash. This session greatly dealt with how government authorities react to the freedom of expression and how public deal with notion of free expression. To how much degree there is a desire in public to accept or be flexible to take offense. In todays India, we take freedom of expression for granted. Questioning the Article 19 (2) and its provisions which list the exceptions under which our right of freedom of expression can be repealed, is the need of the hour. In the age of “Market of Ideas”, we are debating democratic processes.  While discussing the freedom of expression there are two areas where the contestation about this is most prevalent; in cultural production and in public discourse. In creative culture production industry there must be freedom to experiment with text, art-form and craft unless it provokes communal disharmony and violence. In democratic/public discourse we have to develop senses, culture and environment where we respect the culture to take offenses in constructive ways. Freedom of expression in armchair activism has also created many problems, by taking absolute freedom.

Police are doing surveillance of press activities. Lot of magazines, newspapers remains dependent on advertisements given by central government agencies like DAVP etc. Legal threats, possibility of hacking by state/non-state actors are also possibility. Our laws give sanction to legislative actions if legislature is not satisfied with the coverage of specific issue. All those discussions were tested immediately in the real-time of festival as all types of threats were exercised on Prof.Nandy from boycott to arrest. 

Many colours and shades of Republic and lot of grey areas, surely !!!

==================================

Our scientific experiment (THE UNENDING WISHLIST !!!)

Authored by Deepak Pental, Posted online: Fri Jan 18 2013, 02:57 hrs by The Indian Express

============================================================

 

Of all the nations that got freedom from the colonial powers in the 20th century, India had the most progressive leadership, not only in political thinking but also in science and technology. Almost everyone admires and appreciates Jawaharlal Nehru’s passion for science and technology, both for the economic well-being of the country and for deepening secular values through the development of a scientific temper. Fortunately, all those who have followed him have more or less been benevolent towards science and technology. However, a passionate approach towards advancing science and technology has been missing among the political class, policy-makers and science-technology practising community. That is why, in spite of a visionary start, we are still struggling to be counted as a big science and technology nation. In general, we are people with a quasi-feudal mentality. Hierarchies are more important to us than passion for knowledge. Rituals and superstitions come more naturally to us than a scientific temper.Although the scientific community will claim to be more progressive than society at large, a quest for exclusivity, a bureaucratic disposition and comfort with mediocrity are hallmarks of India’s science and technology community. There is a deep sense of inferiority to western science, although there is a general lack of desire to follow the good practices of science and technology management in the western countries. 

The Science, Technology and Innovation (STI) Policy 2013, authored by the ministry of science and technology and released at the 100th Indian Science Congress in Kolkata, unfortunately reflects all these propensities. It is a tepid document, full of wishes and desires, but it hardly describes any structural or procedural changes which will achieve the grand goal of integrating science, technology and innovation to create value in an inclusive manner. The declaration lists 12 points to capture India’s aspirations in STI — promoting the spread of scientific temper; enhancing skills; making careers in science, research and innovation attractive; establishing world-class infrastructure and gaining global leadership in select frontier areas; making India among the five top global scientific powers; enhanced private-sector participation in research and development (R&D) and converting it into applications through a PPP model; seeding science and technology based high-risk innovations. All of these aim to create a robust national innovation system.

Haven’t we wished all this before? Various departments of the science and technology ministry, as well as other ministries, continue to run scores of schemes trying to promote all these facets. In fact, there is a tendency to start new programmes and let the existing ones decay. What we need is an honest appraisal of all the schemes and learn from both the failures and the successes. Unfortunately, the cultural deficits of Indian society and the scientific community cannot be easily wished away. The hope lies in making structural changes that will circumvent our cultural deficit and break the vicious cycle of over-bureaucratisation in science and technology and comfort with mediocrity.

Here I will suggest some structural changes in the way we deal with STI issues which may bring better dividends. India’s grand challenge lies neither in science nor in innovation. Great insights in science cannot be seeded or wished for, they just happen, provided there is passion for knowledge in society. In innovation, India has done well. A recent report on India’s STI achievements commends it for frugal innovations. With India’s brightest opting for engineering and management degrees, innovation is bound to happen. What we should worry about more is creating a science-technology interface to develop robust technologies for meeting national needs and for the creation of wealth. This is where organised thinking and a proper policy framework could be most useful.

The most appropriate vehicle for supporting science, and a science and technology interface, is a competitive grants system funded by public money. All strong science and technology countries have excellent competitive grants systems where scientists and technologists individually, and more recently in large consortia, submit R&D projects that are reviewed and funded. Fortunately, in India, all the science departments have competitive grants systems for funding R&D projects. However, there are too many schemes and decision-making is excruciatingly slow. The most important innovation we require is a proposal tracking system that will track the progress of the proposal from submission to peer review to rejection or acceptance to final release of the grant. Currently, these procedures are taking about one to two years. If we care for science and technology, we need to cut short this time to six months. In any case, science departments very urgently require enterprise resource planning to streamline their processes. Innovation should start from the science departments itself.

The second important structural change is comprehensive funding of R&D projects, at least to the universities and public institutions. With the increased funding for R&D promised in the 12th plan, there is no reason to keep the concept of comprehensive funding out of the reckoning. This will bust the ill-conceived design of keeping universities starved of research funding.

Once the project is sanctioned, investigators should be given the freedom to use funding earmarked for consumables and procuring services without bureaucratic hassles in their own institutes. The vice-chancellors and directors of our universities and institutes must trust the scientific community to use the project funds properly.

Every effort should be made to expand and strengthen institutions that serve the cause of both teaching and research rather than to open exclusive research institutions around personalities. The culture of research institutes, in any case, is antithetical to creativity in the long run as scientists and technologists in such institutes do not teach and therefore do not contribute towards inspiring the next generation.

While some attempts are being made to attract young scientists and technologists who have drifted abroad for post-doctoral research back to the country, it is critical that a new generation of human resource is created by sending students for doctoral work in leading science and technology institutes across the world. The new IITs, central universities and Indian Institutes of Science and Education Research should be populated with such researchers and teachers, but our comfort with mediocrity is so high that we do not seem to care to look at a model through which East Asia, China and, more recently, Latin America have benefited tremendously.

All these structural changes can be carried to meet India’s science and technology aspirations, but implementing them will require strong convictions and the ability to cut through the current policy haze. Otherwise, wishes will mostly remain just wishes. 
===================================