RSS 2.0
Add to Technorati
Save to Del.icio.us
Take it backEducation & Abstraction in India
One of the most important things that the Indian culture (like most Asian cultures) insists upon is a good education. Growing up, the value of education is drilled into you, time and again.
And when it comes to education — and this is important — it is not just any education that is valued. It is education that serves a practical purpose that is considered “good”. You either get into engineering or medicine. If you are looking for variety, you do accounting, finance or law.
Even those that get into the sciences do so as a springboard for doing their graduate studies in something “practical” — like an MCA. If you’re studying something like fashion, art, economics or journalism, you must either be rich or just plain nuts (or just plain dumb, of course).
And of course, there is always that good old fashioned MBA. Do your penance of four years of engineering, either work for a short while (or not), and get into a B-school — any B-school. And Viola! You now have the perfect combination and all Indian parents will point to you as the perfect little example of how wonderful a son (or daughter) you are.
The really adventurous ones, of course, apply to graduate schools and come to the US (or go to Europe) to pursue an education (in the sciences — what else?!). The radicals come here and do *gasp* business.
But doing a PhD in Pure Math? Or studying History or the Classics? Or Philosophy? Music Theory? PLEASE!
You’d be insulting the Indian intellect by suggesting these subjects, because they have no practical value. You see, most of India’s educational system is not based on what you like, but rather what your family and friends deem you capable of.
Competition is rampant from the very beginning of your high school years, and if you still want to do Art History, you must not be very smart. Hell, I don’t even know if any school in India offers a degree in Art History.
Now, this is understandable since India is a relatively young nation, and a developing one at that. Therefore, the luxury of an impractical education is not one that is offered to most people. You get out of high school, and you study a subject that has the maximum earning potential (choice translates into what branch of engineering or medicine you want to do). And once you graduate, you take up a job and earn money.
But what does this mean for India, as a nation? There is a rich intellectual tradition in India, and we’ve had our share of Chanakyas and Aryabhattas.
However, by implicitly attaching a lower value to subjects such as the Pure Sciences, Classics, History, Art, Economics etc., we are destroying that intellectual tradition. How many Ramanujans are lost because they do engineering and take up an IT job, rather than do pure math? How many Raja Ravi Varmas are slogging away at a call center? How many people study Sanskrit? For some reason, all the Sanskrit scholars I’ve met seem to live in either Cambridge, UK or Cambridge, Mass. And let’s just say that none of them are Indian. You would think that a Nobel-winning economist would inspire people to study economics, but no. Hell, the Indian Prime Minister is one himself, but that does not seem to matter. Because you see, India may need to open more engineering colleges because they can’t keep up with the demand.
There is a very significant downside to this. There is a reason that undergraduate degrees in Classics or Philosophy are valued before you do business, law, medicine or just about anything. It is because it broadens your perspective. It gives you critical thinking ability. You get skilled at abstractions, and at conceptualizations.
Indians are excellent at details. Given the emphasis on pragmatism, this is obviously to be expected. However, Indians are not good at looking at the big picture, simply because over the years, they have not been trained to do so. If anything, if you want plebes, looking at the big picture is probably not a good thing because you do not want your measly programmer to get delusions of grandeur.
But long term vision, long term planning and strategic thinking ability only comes from looking at the big picture. Intellectual traditions are very, very vital to the soul of a nation. And I am afraid that India as a nation is sacrificing its vision for tomorrow in its short term pursuit of practicality for today.
Prasenjeet Said,
November 20, 2008 @ 5:38 am
Hey, in Bengal there’s an economist on every street corner
I think the critical metric to watch is per capita income. As one rises, so will the other, because there’ll be less anxiety about making a living. And if/when India finally gets a social security net, things can only get better.
Also, it’s amusing that the US+Europe faces the opposite problem: too many people enrolling into Econ. courses (it’s the most popular undergrad major in the UK, for example, can’t find a citation right now) but most don’t actually become economists. Then there’s *snork* subjects like media studies and women’s studies, which are really intellectual masturbatory exercises. Too bad more people there don’t buckle up and do something actually useful.
rads Said,
November 20, 2008 @ 12:00 pm
Nicely written, and thought provoking.
I recently was told that Arts and especially History departments at local colleges in India were being dropped due to poor enrollees. That was a shocker to me. I understand the rush towards computers and s/w craze for instant success (read $) but to actually take that step to remove a branch of study that we Indians ought be proud of was just plain foolish imho.
Though I must say that compared to 10-15 years ago, Indians in India seem more accepting towards non-science professions than they were. It’s a good sign. Just need to make it practical too
Beck Said,
November 20, 2008 @ 5:02 pm
“I must study politics and war that my sons may have liberty to study mathematics and philosophy. My sons ought to study mathematics and philosophy, geography, natural history, naval architecture, navigation, commerce and agriculture in order to give their children a right to study painting, poetry, music, architecture, statuary, tapestry, and porcelain.”
— John Adams
And:
Prasenjeet, if you still think that courses in Women’s Studies, etc. are useless endeavors you missed the point. Studying history, no matter the history of what, is recognized as essential to our ability to act wisely by many more than just John Adams. A very intelligent and well respected Indian Ph.D. that I happen to know can recite Indian history and tell stories of the migrations of various ethnic and religious groups across India throughout history. The number of people in the population of India is smaller than half the number of people in the population of earth. Women make up half of it. Should we ignore the history of India? Is it useless to understand? What about the history of women, by far a larger population? Only someone foolish would be arrogant enough to believe that he has all the wisdom acquired by millenia worth of people and so has no use for anything they thought it prudent to write down for him to read later.
Also, arts like Adams’ studies of painting and poetry allow us to have the Media Studies disciplines we have today. Without the literary archetypes in Beowulf we could never have science fiction. Without the color symbolism in the Great Gatsby absorbed into the collective consciousness movies would be that much less vibrant. And if you’re looking for usefulness (as defined by you Indians as equal to money making ability) just ask a person in Hollywood whether they’re hurting for money right now… Then ask an investor.
Karthik Narayanaswami Said,
November 21, 2008 @ 4:35 am
Beck, you assume that what Wall Street did was useful to begin with…
Prasenjeet Said,
November 21, 2008 @ 2:15 pm
> Prasenjeet, if you still think that courses in Women’s Studies, etc.
> are useless endeavors you missed the point.
Beck, what I typed was the sort of ha-ha-only-serious statement Slashdotters like to mod -1, Flamebait. That said–
I don’t think media studies is useless. I can name a number of professors whose culture/communications classes I give my eyeteeth to attend (Lawrence Lessig, NYU’s Siva Vaidyanathan). That said, look at the number of media studies grads and you’ll see that (like Econ grads in the UK) these aren’t people studying media because they’re deeply interested in the media, but because it’s a subject that’s easy to get credits for.
> What about the history of women, by far a larger population?
Except that women’s studies != history of women. A history department would do pretty well at recording that, as it would be at recording the history of African-Americans, or Tibetans, or Polynesians (perhaps setting up specialisms within itself.) Women’s Studies invites ridicule, IMO, particularly because of the bits it incorporates from postmodern/feminist “theory” (in scare quotes because precious little of this theory has any academic rigor).
> And if you’re looking for usefulness (as defined by you Indians as equal to money making ability)
Yup, no generalizations there. All of us Indians are totally dedicated to maximising value propositions and shareholder value and all that. Bloody miracle that any art gets done in India at all.
(also, Hollywood is supposed to be fine art now?)
Re usefulness: given the number of media studies grads, one would expect the US to have a richer cultural scene (correcting for its larger population) than France. I might be biased, but that hasn’t happened yet. My hypothesis: the typical US media studies is what the Brits lovingly call a wanker. Similar conclusions can be reached for women’s studies. Sure, there’s the odd exception, but I believe it’s a fair statement that a large number of folk in these departments are wasting their time*.
* There is some reason to believe the vast majority of people in high-enrollment subjects in Higher ed. are wasting their time: google for critiques of the massification of higher education. So maybe I’m being unduly harsh on Women’s/Media Studies. At the very least a similar criticism would apply to Econ in the UK, or to Engineering in India.
Beck Said,
November 21, 2008 @ 2:34 pm
Was referencing Karthik on “you Indians”.
Jass Said,
December 2, 2008 @ 4:17 am
Very nicely written karthick!
Karthik Narayanaswami Said,
December 19, 2008 @ 10:49 pm
Thanks, Jass!