After going through my last post Prof.Sangal replied to my post via e-mail. As per his request I am putting his reply on my blog. I am writing it as separate post because there is too much clutter on the previous post and I felt that his reply may be lost in the mess. The reply is posted as is.
------------------------------------------------------
Dear Rishabh,
This is to provide clarifications to many points of misunderstanding.
Note that I am addressing only the substantive issues, I am not responding to many speculative statements and remarks.
(1)
When IIIT-H took the decision to introduce Human Values as an essential part of the curriculum, we placed 4 conditions which must be satisfied by the content in such courses. The content must be:
A. Logical - Should follow reasoning and should be open to discussion and questioning in the class.
B. Verifiable - One should be able to observe and verify through experiments by the self. (No mystic element!)
C. Universal - Applicable to all human beings without regard to their caste, creed, colour, religion, etc. (No sect of any kind!)
D. Human - Should be for the good of the human being.
Jeevan Vidya was chosen because it satisfied all the above. IIIT-H is open to using any other philosophy which satisfies the above.
(2)
It was also decided that Human Values course must be taught without preaching or dos and donts.
In JV shivir, there is no insistence on anyone to accept what is being said. In fact, on the first day itself, it is written in bold, asking people not to accept, but examine and evaluate. They should accept only if they find them ok after evaluation!
(You have said that JV asks people to do good, control their desires, etc. But JV never gives any dos and donts including these two! It only says "what can make a human being happy", and there too, it says that one should accept only after verifying on one's own right. Have you attended a complete JV shivir as yet? You can attend a full shivir, and indeed point out to the teacher, if any do's and dont's are being given.)
(3)
When you use the word "religion" for JV, it suggests that it is sectarian. It is normally understood that if you are a Hindu you cannot be a Muslim at the same time, and if you are a Sikh you cannot be a Christian, etc. Jeevan Vidya is not like that. Whatever be your religion, you can follow or relate to JV. Most people are able to connect JV with whatever religion they are practising. As a philosophy, it is even "open source". (See the attached article on Evaluating a Philosophy by Vineesh Gupta.)
Today, it is "fashionable" to say that I do not believe in any philosophy or thought, and that I am free. In such a prevailing situation, one might brand others who might have come to some conclusions as "religionists", and pass snide remarks at them. But one should examine whether that is an acceptable mode of conduct.
(4)
Education means not just training in a narrow discipline but developing an ability to think critically and independently. It implies an ability to separate "essence" from "form" when faced with any situation in life, not limited to problems in a narrow discipline alone. (It also means developing the strength to take decisions, particularly about one's own life, and acting on them.)
An academic institution strives for excellence in education and research. It functions in a cultural and social milieu, using accepted practises and procedures. In higher education today, accepted practise is to have a 4-year curriculum with semester-long courses with credits. We accept it and implement it at IIIT-H, even when 4-year duration or semester long courses might not fit everybody. Are we forcing every student to follow it? Probably we are, because of the currently accepted practises of society. But is "forcing" the right word to describe the situation.
In a curriculum, the courses are designed to cover the breadth and depth of educational goals. In the existing curricula, many courses are compulsary whether data structures, communication theory, or human values. We are even asked at times why are we forcing students to learn such and such a course in their discipline, when it is not needed for most jobs? We are also asked why do we have broad education with Human Values? But all this is the goal of education. Is "forcing" the right word in such a situation. (It goes without saying that Human Values should be conducted without preaching.)
Society today puts a lot of pressure on the individual, without taking into account their interest. Students succumb to this pressure, and take admission to areas they have no aptitude for, or come into higher education even when they do not wish to study! As a result, for many things they perceive being forced when these things are a part of education. (We would like to help by making it possible for the students to choose their area of interest, to the extent we have the facilities and disciplines. IIIT-H has examples of such help in the past. But doing something is difficult when the student has no interest in higher study and perceives the entire curriculum as "being forced".)
As the society and the individuals evolve, we hope that we will move towards a situation, where only the truly interested come for higher education, pursuing the areas they love, in a journey of joy.
- Rajeev Sangal
14 January 2010
Thursday, January 14, 2010
Monday, January 11, 2010
The Al-Qaeda of Jeevan Vidya
For a long long time I have thought about writing this post. I refrained from writing it because I was not sure about my competence to comment on a philosophy so many "educated" people have subscribed to. After attending a Shivir (over the course of 2 years!!) and taking a course that was for all practical purposes JV - 101 (Understanding Work and Life), I think I have some background to make certain observations about JV and it's tryst with IIIT.
The Philosophy itself : Having read a bit about JV, I can say that JV as a whole is pretty much oriented like any other religion is. Do good, be good, be in harmony with nature, surroundings, control your desires and so on. Since the philosophy has roots in a modern society, there seems to be a trend to rationalize every argument presented as part of the philosophy. The validity and thoroughness of these rationalizations is a debate better left to theologians rather than MSbR students :). There is also no component of JV that prescribes rituals or anything of that sort. In it's simplest form, the message of JV is pretty elegant and I couldn't not help appreciating it. If I was an alien visiting earth I could very well believe that JV was yet another among the various religions practiced on earth with a decent following.
Which is where my problem with JV's association with IIIT begins. Today, if the powers that be at IIIT were prescribing to interpretation of a Hindu or Islamic or Christian ideology the same way they seem to be enamored by JV, there would have been an uproar of epic proportions. Since JV doesn't quite have the status of a proper religion like say Hinduism or Islam, people just don't know how to give a name to whats going on. I don't think you can talk about Human values and spirituality without imprinting on the listener, a certain version of your own religious beliefs. Now, no matter what Prof.Sangal or anybody else says, I do consider all JV activities to be religious. Which is in itself not bad. But only provided you do not provide official patronage and pamper only JV. I don't see any Hindu Shivirs or Islamic Halaqas being arranged on campus. Do you ?
One of the reasons the Muslim League argued for a separate Islamic state was that, "Islam and it's tenets extend to every aspect of life, whether it is social discourse or even business. There is no activity that is not religious by nature. A separate Islamic state that understands this notion is required to safeguard the Islamic way of life". While I don't fully agree with this statement I can understand the sentiment. A close look at our lives would tell us that our religion shapes almost all aspects of our decision making in some way or the other. It would then come as no surprise that the philosophies of JV made their way into the decision making process at IIIT. A number of changes in the campus over the last 5 years, can be attributed to a JV or JV-ish justification from the decision makers. As time progresses, JV is firmly embedded in the psyche of a lot of influential people at IIIT. What is the result you ask ? Well in it's simplest form, I am forced to study a course on Literature from Vinish Gupta (as learned as he may be). I would rather take my chances with Prof.Sudhakar Marathe who is conspicuous by his absence. The fact that half the Humanities courses are offered by people strongly associated with JV or even officially associated with it, is troubling. I have already written about this.
But there is more. I see a more orthodox IIIT. I see JV inspired people complaining about girls in skimpy outfits in felicity. I see "Swayamsevak" committees popping up and I see faculty members making sure that they don't miss a single session of JV, all while MS student's can't get placed, IIIT is short of funds, ECE is a mess and we have a new main building reminiscent of a WW2 ruin. I see certain civil engineers have a greater say about the way IIIT is run, than the experienced pioneers of science that grace our campus. I see dance teachers being paid more than the people who help maintain the IT in IIIT. I see a lot of people not being valued for sharing different beliefs. I see a systematic removal of people with non-JV or anti-JV views from the seats of power in IIIT. It's almost like JV-ists are the new communists !
Where there is a religion there are fanatics. A few months ago I was reading Osama bin Laden's biography (by Adam Robinson). The book provides a detailed description of how Osama, fed up with his life, saw redemption in Islam and Jihaad and how he rallied thousands from different nations, from Kings to commoners and from the educated to the illiterate to form Al-Qaeda. The parallels I see with JV in IIIT and the people concerned are amazing. Both started out as small movements. Al-Qaeda had Afghanistan-1989 and JV had this. Boosted by their initial success and the charisma of their leaders the groups snowballed into fanatical movements, convinced about their interpretation of a religion, each wreaking their own version of a catastrophe on the world they interact with. Hell, we even have our own Osama bin Laden and Zwahiri, with a dollop of young impressionable lieutenants. Both believe in catching em' young (JV in the 1st year), and sending them to training camps far away in the mountains (Mussoorie). It is interesting to ponder over the question if it is JV that is to be blamed or the people who follow it here at IIIT ? That said, a more pertinent question remains : Is there a JV 9/11 round the corner ?
PS : The Al-Qaeda comparisons to JV are obviously satirical. But isn't the problem pretty much correctly described ?
----------------------------------
An Update
After reading this post, Prof.Sangal commented via email. His reply can be read here
----------------------------------
The Philosophy itself : Having read a bit about JV, I can say that JV as a whole is pretty much oriented like any other religion is. Do good, be good, be in harmony with nature, surroundings, control your desires and so on. Since the philosophy has roots in a modern society, there seems to be a trend to rationalize every argument presented as part of the philosophy. The validity and thoroughness of these rationalizations is a debate better left to theologians rather than MSbR students :). There is also no component of JV that prescribes rituals or anything of that sort. In it's simplest form, the message of JV is pretty elegant and I couldn't not help appreciating it. If I was an alien visiting earth I could very well believe that JV was yet another among the various religions practiced on earth with a decent following.
Which is where my problem with JV's association with IIIT begins. Today, if the powers that be at IIIT were prescribing to interpretation of a Hindu or Islamic or Christian ideology the same way they seem to be enamored by JV, there would have been an uproar of epic proportions. Since JV doesn't quite have the status of a proper religion like say Hinduism or Islam, people just don't know how to give a name to whats going on. I don't think you can talk about Human values and spirituality without imprinting on the listener, a certain version of your own religious beliefs. Now, no matter what Prof.Sangal or anybody else says, I do consider all JV activities to be religious. Which is in itself not bad. But only provided you do not provide official patronage and pamper only JV. I don't see any Hindu Shivirs or Islamic Halaqas being arranged on campus. Do you ?
One of the reasons the Muslim League argued for a separate Islamic state was that, "Islam and it's tenets extend to every aspect of life, whether it is social discourse or even business. There is no activity that is not religious by nature. A separate Islamic state that understands this notion is required to safeguard the Islamic way of life". While I don't fully agree with this statement I can understand the sentiment. A close look at our lives would tell us that our religion shapes almost all aspects of our decision making in some way or the other. It would then come as no surprise that the philosophies of JV made their way into the decision making process at IIIT. A number of changes in the campus over the last 5 years, can be attributed to a JV or JV-ish justification from the decision makers. As time progresses, JV is firmly embedded in the psyche of a lot of influential people at IIIT. What is the result you ask ? Well in it's simplest form, I am forced to study a course on Literature from Vinish Gupta (as learned as he may be). I would rather take my chances with Prof.Sudhakar Marathe who is conspicuous by his absence. The fact that half the Humanities courses are offered by people strongly associated with JV or even officially associated with it, is troubling. I have already written about this.
But there is more. I see a more orthodox IIIT. I see JV inspired people complaining about girls in skimpy outfits in felicity. I see "Swayamsevak" committees popping up and I see faculty members making sure that they don't miss a single session of JV, all while MS student's can't get placed, IIIT is short of funds, ECE is a mess and we have a new main building reminiscent of a WW2 ruin. I see certain civil engineers have a greater say about the way IIIT is run, than the experienced pioneers of science that grace our campus. I see dance teachers being paid more than the people who help maintain the IT in IIIT. I see a lot of people not being valued for sharing different beliefs. I see a systematic removal of people with non-JV or anti-JV views from the seats of power in IIIT. It's almost like JV-ists are the new communists !
Where there is a religion there are fanatics. A few months ago I was reading Osama bin Laden's biography (by Adam Robinson). The book provides a detailed description of how Osama, fed up with his life, saw redemption in Islam and Jihaad and how he rallied thousands from different nations, from Kings to commoners and from the educated to the illiterate to form Al-Qaeda. The parallels I see with JV in IIIT and the people concerned are amazing. Both started out as small movements. Al-Qaeda had Afghanistan-1989 and JV had this. Boosted by their initial success and the charisma of their leaders the groups snowballed into fanatical movements, convinced about their interpretation of a religion, each wreaking their own version of a catastrophe on the world they interact with. Hell, we even have our own Osama bin Laden and Zwahiri, with a dollop of young impressionable lieutenants. Both believe in catching em' young (JV in the 1st year), and sending them to training camps far away in the mountains (Mussoorie). It is interesting to ponder over the question if it is JV that is to be blamed or the people who follow it here at IIIT ? That said, a more pertinent question remains : Is there a JV 9/11 round the corner ?
PS : The Al-Qaeda comparisons to JV are obviously satirical. But isn't the problem pretty much correctly described ?
----------------------------------
An Update
After reading this post, Prof.Sangal commented via email. His reply can be read here
----------------------------------
Saturday, January 09, 2010
Interview Shinterview contd....
Fortunately or unfortunately for me, I did not get shortlisted by IBM IRL. I spent the whole day wondering why I did not manage to get shortlisted by a company where I have enough research work in 3 different areas that I could easily fit into 3 different groups at their lab. I thought it might be GPA, but they shortlisted people with lower GPA's. Was it the level/quality of publications ? Was it the nature of my work ...what the bloody hell was it ? Chunni (aka Anshul )spent an hour calming me down and told me that it might be something as simple as them not having a vacancy in any of the groups that I can fit into !
I also kind of figured out that things like A+ and A are truly meaningless methods of classifying research work when it comes to placements (Many would feel that it's a stupid way of classifying work for any purpose !). One man's A+ is another mans F-. I will take this opportunity to welcome myself to the club of people wondering why they haven't been shortlisted or selected.
I was also happy that Bharat Joshi got his first interview today. The guy is smarter than most 9 pointers you would meet and a bumper job would be fair reward for some smooth work he has done over the years. I am also sure that the IBM people would have liked some nice lessons on secure multiparty computation from Hans :)
more to follow...
I also kind of figured out that things like A+ and A are truly meaningless methods of classifying research work when it comes to placements (Many would feel that it's a stupid way of classifying work for any purpose !). One man's A+ is another mans F-. I will take this opportunity to welcome myself to the club of people wondering why they haven't been shortlisted or selected.
I was also happy that Bharat Joshi got his first interview today. The guy is smarter than most 9 pointers you would meet and a bumper job would be fair reward for some smooth work he has done over the years. I am also sure that the IBM people would have liked some nice lessons on secure multiparty computation from Hans :)
more to follow...
Thursday, January 07, 2010
Interview shinterview
We have IBM IRL coming to campus 2moro. I did send my resume with 2 recos. It'll be interesting to see what they have to ask me. The only group that I could possibly fit into is their High Performance Computing group. Now, while I do have relevant research work(s) (in a conference titled IEEE-ACM High Performance Computing) I have no fracking idea about multi cores or parallel algorithms or anything remotely "high performance". If the state of my laptop is anything to go by, I barely manage to get any performance at all. They do not have a crypto group, so impressing them goes out the window. The only hope that remains is that they ask me something about distributed computing and preferably PRC :D
But whatever the outcome, I hope to meet a few people from IBM and see what they are up to. It is after all IBM. They have been great pioneers in electrical engineering and computing. I am sure that whoever they send would be somebody senior. I also hope they send a guy called Vijay Garg. He has a nice range of research work covering theoretical and applied distributed/parallel computing. It would be worth my while just meeting him.
But whatever the outcome, I hope to meet a few people from IBM and see what they are up to. It is after all IBM. They have been great pioneers in electrical engineering and computing. I am sure that whoever they send would be somebody senior. I also hope they send a guy called Vijay Garg. He has a nice range of research work covering theoretical and applied distributed/parallel computing. It would be worth my while just meeting him.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)