Maatukathe IV, Session 1
Ninasam, Heggodu
April 27, 2016
Minutes: Shashikala Srinivasan
Mathukathe began with the
recapitulation of the questions animating the sessions so far: what it is to
lead a good life (how to live well and responsibly) and how to lead a life of
learning. Living well involves a) reflection on our actions and conditions
under which we live b) the awareness that life goes on before, during and after
reflection which means actions cannot be indefinitely postponed.
A distinction was made between
engagement as a citizen (grahastha – one who sustains family and society)
versus enquirer. Two logically distinct types of reflection were singled out:
Deliberation to decide versus reflection to make alternatives available. While
the former is used in executive function, the latter is mainly used in advisory
functions. While reflection involves mapping different alternatives, deciding
involves fixing one alternatives among others. Often the process involves the capacity
to judge which objectives (ends) are right and which means are appropriate.
Another important point
reiterated was that we inherit Customs, Institutions and the accompanying
language to talk about them which together form “traditions.” As we grow up, we get acquainted with and accustomed
to:
- A Habitat (distinguished into objects, events, customs and institutions
- Some grade of knowing how to deal with it
- Some grade of knowing how to use the language accompanying it.
Language here functions as a
scheme of distinction and our experience is structured through these schemes of
distinctions passed on to us. How do
these distinctions come into play? Not through deliberately constructed
theories for we can we can switch from one set of distinction to another. These
distinctions are passed on to us through use.
The session then moved on to the
conditions that sustain and make the way/s we live possible. We were asked to
visualize the “globalized world” at a different time (in the form of a thought
experiment). The attempt was to lay out a scheme to distinguish times and
worlds. The question “What does it mean to speak about our ways of living
depend on certain conditions that sustain our world” was posed. Different kinds of institutions/environment -
social (families, schools, castes, clubs), legal and political (courts,
parliament), economic (farms, factories, markets), technical and infrastructural
environment (roads, railways, internet , gas, electricity) as well as semiotic
preconditions (traffic lights, railways signals, standardized languages and
scripts) were listed as various kinds of
institutions/systems required to make communication across space and time
possible. Systems of representations
such as calendars, maps are required to coordinate activities across time and
place and these are conditions that sustain and
make the way we live possible today.
Next, the question “What kind of
life of learning and institutions to accompany it exist?” was posed. Various
kinds of semiotic skills were and arts were listed: a) The art of articulation,
persuasion and argumentation b) The art of interpretation. The academic
institutions, libraries, museums, parks, reserve forests etc...and
corresponding ethos and legal structures are the accompanying institutions to
make possible the corresponding forms of life of learning.
We become what we are, mainly by
Learning. Learning takes place in an
environment shaped by our past/s or our traditions. Since we are Macaulay’s
children, our inheritance, broadly can be classified in to two sets of
traditions: The Indian – the family background, rituals, practices around us
that govern our everyday life and the Western comprising most of our
institutions of governance and education.
Conceiving the task of education,
particularly higher education involves the notion of maturing into wisdom. It involves the acquisition for a capacity
for judgement through life long practice and reflection. Often higher education
as academic study is distinguished from learning through apprenticeship and
training for a job. It involves the acquisition of theoretical competence and
competence to do research.
Higher education can be seen as a
process of initiating one into themes, questions and forms of enquiry along
with the traditions in which they are embedded. How are questions and themes
related to enquiry? Investigation
presupposes adequately clear questions. The clarity of the questions depends on
the contexts they have. Theoretical questions may be inspired by practical
issues in one’s milieu such as reservations, notion of social justice and
therefore may be more difficult to resolve. Notions of academic freedom likely to
be embedded in intellectual traditions. Contexts can include intellectual
traditions and not just spatial and temporal but to be understood in terms of
conceptual unpacking.
Post-lunch
Session
The afternoon session was a brain-storming on expectations by
way of discussing a text by Adam Alter, Popular Science, in http://thepointmag.com/2014/criticism/popular-science.
Two ways of approaching the world through disciplines were distinguished: a)
where one has a broad-based approach and focuses on information and content,
often cutting across disciplinary boundaries b) burrowing /covering a narrow
field in greater depth and showing how large effects grow from small, with
effects often cutting across disciplines. The importance of good science
writing consisting “not the sharing of particular ideas, but the sharing of
general approaches to perceiving the world” was emphasized.
The discussion was
linked to the purpose of higher education which is train more than a
“specialist.” While it was recognized that no teaching could be possible
without particular ideas, the point however, was always general. Whether the skill of reasoning in one field
makes possible easy forays into other disciplines was taken up. The idea of
research as operating with concepts was put forward. Questions such as what is it to enter a
discipline, what is it shift from the language of one discipline to another,
what is it to fit into a particular scheme of distinctions, its histories and
connections were raised. The fragility and inadequacy of conceptual
distinctions the moment we enter new surroundings was highlighted with
examples.
The last session of the day focussed on “Grasping the World
and the times we live in” and introduced the “givens” or the preconditions of
the way we live today. This was captured in the form of recurring slogans to
reflect on:
- We live in a world of nation-states enmeshed by globalized network of trade and production chains
- India is a developing country
- India is a constitutional democratic republic
- India has one of the ancient civilizations
Both Science and Polity are constantly
remade
- In case of science reconstruction of the predicates passed on from the past
- In case of political associations, the re-designing of the institutions passed on from the past.
- The task is that of evolving the appropriate standards
The next few sessions would probe into the implications of
these slogans.
No comments:
Post a Comment