On Changing the World

I spent close to a year of my life in tilburg studying at Universiteit van Tilburg; mostly watching documentaries and sitcoms, reading up random articles on wikipedia and cooking. I studied when I absolutely had to in order to pass an exam and rarely ever ventured out. So while it was a satisfactory endeavor intellectually, it lacked a wholesome experience, possibly due to lack of adequate social interaction. Even so, during one of the few social gatherings that I partook in, I was reminded and very powerfully so, of the one(many) thing(s) that I wanted to accomplish when I was younger.

The relevant part of the conversation, which involved my good friends - Jesus and Chiara - so transpired (its been paraphrased):

Me: Why did you choose to study economics? (I think this question was borne out of exasperation brought about by realization of the futility of studying the subject)

Chiara: My reason is stupid..

Jesus: Come on Chiara, we were all younger and dumber when we decided. Spit it out..

Chiara: I wanted to change the world....

And then it struck me how often I wanted to change the world when I was younger. I had promised myself that I will never give homework (if I ever became I teacher), fight to abolish exams, dispose of corruption, design the first car to run on water, decipher the theory of everything etc etc..At the point in time when I dreamt up each of these ways in which to change the world, they seemed plausible, even possible. Juvenile and naive as it may seem but for those brief moments (or in some cases not so brief) I genuinely believed that I could accomplish them. Even when I realized that I couldnt put my plans into practice at that time, they were not shelved, but put on the things to do list. Over the years the list grew longer and though doubt and pragmatism were diminishing the value of the list in my consciousness, it still warmed my heart to know that there is so much out there for me to do..But the advance of time and wisdom (as some would have you believe it is) cannot be denied and the list was inevitably lost, residing only in the sub conscious memory centre of the brain.

Why is it that Chiara thought that 'Changing the World' was no longer a rational reason to choose a subject to study? What is it about us that makes conformists out of even the most devout rebels? Does our risk aversion grow over time?

I made a choice soon after leaving school, when I was about to enter college that the days of rebelling and fighting for what I thought was right are behind me. Those days haven't returned since and I think my life is much the poorer for it; for though I might not have made any real difference to anything around me, there is no elixir stronger than hope and no aphrodisiac stronger than a wish to change the world.  

On Communication Skills and 'Porn Movies'

For some strange reason, the people in charge at my current place of work place an inordinately high importance on improving the communication skills of their students. Therefore, not only do the students have to endure a course in English/Communication Skills and a course in Foreign Language (German - a compulsory optional subject being the only language offered of the six listed in the course structure), but also a weekly class on 'Extra-Curricular Activities', where they are expected to hone their ability to communicate under the able guidance of their core subject (as opposed to english or communication skills) teachers.

And so it transpired that I was asked to conduct a Group Discussion in the 'Extra Curricular Activities' class scheduled for 12:25 pm every Thursday. There were to be two topics, one subject (in my case economics) related and the other I was free to choose. Despite being informed of this onerous task moments before entering a room full of students miffed at loosing out on an extended lunch break, I said a small prayer thanking my 17 year old self for ensuring that I did not have to come to this place as an undergraduate before proceeding.

I introduced myself to the class and told them that their topic for discussion today would be - The Changing Face of Indian Cinema. I thought given all the talk surrounding 'Delhi Belly', the students would have strong opinions about something like this and might therefore be more inclined to participate in a discussion. However, my faculty colleagues seemed to think otherwise, or at least that is what their looks of absolute horror and disgust conveyed. But the arrow had been fired and the discussion had begun.

I spent the first few minutes to figure it out, though I could not imagine the problem that anyone would have with a discussion on this issue. But then I heard it (from the students) and watched with a sinking feeling the look of horror and disgust return to the face of my colleagues.

The discussion had somehow meandered its way to the question of how realistic is the portrayal of foul mouthed youth who talks in expletives with some prepositions and conjunctions used to maintain the stream of thought. From there it was only a small distance to the dreaded P-word; 'Porn Movies' as they called it. The discussion had gone to a place where our elders (teachers or otherwise) fear to tread and so had to be killed and it was with short crisp announcement - "We are done with this topic"! (not by me of course)

While not entirely relevant to the topic at hand, I found their short descriptions of lack of realism in porn and hypocrisy that surrounds it well thought out and articulated. It was probably the first time in the last few weeks that I had seen these students speaking up and in the process disclosing a side to their personalities that I will never get to see in a classroom setting.

For all the cynicism I had about having such a class, I came out of it thinking that the given constraints that we operate with, its a wonderful opportunity to accomplish one of the primary goals of education - to help develop and open young minds to arguments and discussions, to foster a world view that is arrived at by observation, thinking and analyzing.

I was of course chastised later on for having such 'liberal' views and asked to come up with ways of making the session more interactive and meaningful for the students - Make them talk about global warming and growth and development of India, talking about movies never did anyone any good.

(mind you while referring to what transpired in the class later on, the p-word was replaced, 'you know what they were talking about')

On India and Indianess

Dr. Devdutt Patnaik explains how our world view here in India is different from the west. He uses mythology as an exposition for the idea, in the process illuminating how, stories, rituals and symbols are simultaneously both the result and cause of our conception of the world around us..

On bombs and bombay

So bombay (or mumbai if you please) has become a victim of terror attacks yet again. On July 13, 2011, three explosions killed an estimated 30 people, injuring many more. The bombs went off in the evening rush hour and two of the three locations were khau gallis (food streets).

The prime suspect so far is lashkar-e-taiba from across the border and its Indian accomplice indian mujahideen. At the expense of repeating what scores have asked before me, what can motivate such depravity in men? Can any such inquiry ever be successful?

Are these men, as alfred (batman's butler) said,  just plain evil? If so, isnt it frightening that we have so many evil men? Or is it that biological evolution has fallen behind the technological one, giving who are more or less still competitive apes, the power to destroy the world? Or is it religion? Maybe it is something more basic, like identity. Or maybe the modern is giving rise to a generation of men and women who dont know what to do with their lives, suffering from a lack of identity, with no sense of self and purpose, maybe in these acts of wanton violence (in the name of religion, nationalism, regionalism etc) they find their salvation?

I am rambling now, not sure if this even makes sense anymore..

On Arguments and Conformity in Education

I dont know about the experiences others had in school, but I got the impression that raising uncomfortable questions is never advisable for someone who wants to stay in the teacher's good books. Is it that as a society we prefer not to have our youngest members think too much? Or is it that the collective conscious of human society is a control freak, relying on controlling the range of our thoughts to preserve the current social structure, with its hierarchy and power structures? Or is it that restricting the things about which a modern student thinks is made necessary by the now vast treasure trove of knowledge gained by us over time, which has lead to modern curriculum being so vast and extensive that the opportunity cost of any digression is very high?

I now stand on the other side of the table. Now I have to decide what sort of a teacher do i want to be.

What should be the role of a teacher in the development of a student? Should/Can it be impressed upon students that books are the real sources of knowledge and the role of a teacher is to help in the process of reading and understanding them? How does one encourage students so used to being spoon fed chapters/topics for all their life to educate themselves? How should the diversity of intellectual capability in class be dealt with? Can students ever get over the sense of hierarchy that permeates our existence and not judge themselves with respect to others and learn for the sake of learning?

These and many other questions are yet unanswered..Any ideas?

On the Matter of Corruption

There is a lot to be said about how and why arguments are stifled or at the very least, not encouraged in social groups cutting across time, space and political boundaries. However, before the discourse on the dynamics of change is taken any further, I would like to say something about an issue that has been hogging the headlines in India lately - Corruption.

The New Oxford American Dictionary defines corruption as:
dishonest or fraudulent conduct by those in power, typically involving bribery

I would venture to suggest that this definition is reasonably concise and accurate and conveys what most people would understand by the term. However, it is also suitably vague. It is difficult to fathom how it can be used to isolate individual cases of corruption without having to rely on our fair judgement.

Would landing a job or a contract through your 'network' be construed a corrupt practice? The bribe in the this case being non-monetary bonds of social contracts that friends or family members are bound by..

Even more difficult is conjecturing on the factors that foster corruption. Although here in India, with most people having had multiple encounters with corrupt officials, there is simple explanation that is oft repeated, that of poor wage rates leading to corruption.

Yesterday, while talking about the state of the law enforcement agencies in India, inevitably the question of corruption came up. A lawyer friend of mine, like countless many have done before him, suggested that corruption is rampant in lower levels of the police as the constables and inspectors are not paid as well as they should be.

Extending this logic would imply that the private security guards stationed outside so many office blocks and residential apartments, who are paid even lesser, should be more corrupt. And should be expected to demand for extra money (over and above his wages) from individual house owners/employees to ensure that their cars arent stolen. Police constables dont have better qualifications than most private security guards and cant therefore claim to be underpaid with respect to their skill sets. Infact they are very well taken care of by the government, never having to fear loosing their jobs or paying medical bills etc..

I think that they are corrupt because they can be. If there was a way for me to get an FIR registered without meeting with a constable and therefore be required to pay a bribe, the incidence of demand for bribes would reduce. The same would hold, if government jobs were not granted forever, or if the lower levels of the judiciary were in not as derelict a state as it is in..

As to the question of money (wealth as opposed to income), i think it is probably the only commodity to which law of diminishing marginal utility doesnt not apply.

What do you think?

On Encouraging Arguments

Its been a long time coming and maybe this should have been the first post. So here it goes:

It seems obvious to me that the ability and willingness to question and articulate them; to search for their answers and disseminate them comprise one of the fundamental forces that have and continue to shape human society. Fueled by curiosity and sustained by the breadth of the mental faculties of man, argumentative men and women have challenged the status quo, maintained checks and balances on power wielders and perhaps most importantly, have been the source of that most essential ingredient of change, ideas.

Why is it so that cultures through the ages have created mechanisms to stifle dissenters? Languages have so developed that arguments or their synonyms have distinctive negative connotations? Why has human society not been able to internalize change?