Maatukathe I Session 8

Maatukathe I 

Session 8 (?)

Minutes: Chaitra Mathighatta 

 Comparative Science of Cultures

• Social Sciences – is investigating society. I.e. where and when do we demarcate one society from another? There are three approaches to investigate societies.  They are

1.       Customs and worldviews

2.       Focus on production (technologies) and relations of production (political and legal structures)

3.       Capabilities, Institutions, text discourses and traditions

These approaches more are less use meta-level categories to deal with object level – questions

• Societies are not self enclosed. How do we recognize a society and what are the purposes for which we do that? Is one of the crucial issues and an idea of the historical growth of the study of society would probably help us in making aware of why such a question is being asked.

• First approaches to study societies begin in 18^th century. This can be study of societies in European traditions. It starts with the study of customs and worldviews. These approaches were also helpful in facilitating the smooth administration of colonial bureaucracy. It can also be said that study of customs and worldviews were initiate to administer people of the colonies and many of the scholars who studied these societies were themselves administrators. The idea of “worldview” comes from Bible and it was thought that Church is the institution which facilitates the formation of worldviews amongst people. Genesis in Bible was the basis for the worldview. European scholars were keen on finding similar things about India.

• The second approach to study society was using “production relations”. This approach began to gain momentum with the wake of industrialization. It was embedded in the notion of production (technology) as a means to satisfy the needs of people. (Ex. Europe had a feudal mode of production and India had Asiatic mode of production)

• Third approach, which needs to be established properly, is “capability” approach. Here capabilities are much larger conceptions than mode of production. It involves capabilities, institutions and text – traditions (It must not be confused with Amartya Sen and Martha Nussbaum’s “capabilities” as they are more or less contractual obligations. It is different from capabilities to study societies). Here say “custom” serves as a concept to investigate an object level question. In this approach, if we try building an idea of how to study society, following logical mode of investigation can be built.

Let us ask a question, what colour Indians wear when they mourn?

• This question is an observant level question and not a participant level one. Therefore we must begin with ideas from Europe.

1.       Black is the colour of mourning in Europe

2.       What is the colour of mourning in India?

3.       “X” is the colour of mourning in Europe

In this case “X” – is subject of predicate, “X” – is variable

• Let us take some topic now to move further like Subject and Friendly. Chetan is Friendly – in this case “Chetan” is subject and “Friendly” is Predicate. One can now ask, what is subject? Here it is “Chetan”. One can ask whether it is “Person” (Chetan) or the “term”. Subject and Predicate must be treated as the identifying and differentiating expressions.

• “Variable”:

Chetan is friendly

         X is friendly

         X is variable

• Definite and Indefinite descriptions: Let us examine some sentences

A Bangalorean is friendly – means someone is a Bangalorean and he is friendly 

The Bangalorean is friendly – There is one definite person, he is a Bangalorean and he is friendly.

• Definite and Indefinite descriptions as identifying expressions:

A Bangalorean is friendly – There is X, X is a Bangalorean and X is friendly

Bangaloreans are friendly – can be quite indefinite

-          Any Bangalorean is friendly

-          If X is a Bangalorean, X is friendly

The Bangalorean is friendly

-          There is one definite person, he is a Bangalorean and he is friendly

-          There is one definite X (There is only one X), X is a Bangalorean and X is friendly

Here Bangalorean are friendly does not have existential significance as it refers to a class. One really do not assume that there is such a class. To make it clear further, Bangaloreans are friendly defines a class, but does not assume that there are member who belong to the class called Bangaloreans. It is a property definition of a class called Bangaloreans.

• Let us get back to Colour of Mourning – What is the colour of mourning in India?

“Black” is the “colour of mourning” in Europe

“X” is the “colour of mourning” in Europe

“X” is the “Y” (Here “X” is variable and “Y” is predicate)

“X” is the “colour of mourning” in “Y” (“colour of mourning” is predicate and X & Y are variables)

• Object V/s meta predicate (can refer back to previous class)

Example: “Truth” is a Meta – predicate because it is attributing a quality to a statement or a description. Similarly “exists” is also a Meta – predicate.

• Transition from object to Meta level

“Flying Horse” exists – the sentence asserts that the description or predicate “Flying Horse” exists. Here the Flying horse alone does not mean anything but it exists means an assertion. In this case the existence is parasitic on something (flying horse here) and therefore “exists” becomes a meta-predicate.

Cultures vary variously:

Generating meta-predicates of different sorts as search tools in enquiry of different (other) cultures is a challenge. For example in case of mourning one can formulate following problems

-          If there is mourning, are there colours to represent it?

-          If there is a death in a family, what other alternative features than mourning be represented by wearing of black can be found?

These tools lead to profoundly different descriptions of the world of Indian rituals for example. Following case can illustrate a different story with wearing different colour cloths.

-          Wearing white is a sign of leading a life of renunciation in the face of death of near one

-          All auspicious acts/rituals are done with wearing white

Now with the above example, we can go back to the question of cultures. If cultures vary variously, can “religion” be one of the factors absent in other cultures.

This is completely different from the regular questions of sociology. This is not what other religions than Christianity governs the life of people in other cultures?

It is all about, what are the ways other tha religion can be found as generative of practices in other cultures?