John Samuel
There is indeed a whole range of issues related to gender, women's political participation, space and voice in Kerala. But I also think there is increasing awareness and discussion on these issues in Kerala, in relation to many other states.
In spite of relatively better human development index and gender development index of Kerala, there is indeed a real question about the entrenched patriarchy and less space for women' voice in the political party process, public debates and discussions.
This paradox of gender "development" index and the relative lack of women's empowerment in Kerala need to be discussed and understood. There are a number of paradoxes, contradictions and tension - operating in Kerala society (and that is also the case with almost all other societies.)
The paradox of ‘empowerment’ and ‘space’ is one among them. In spite of having one of the biggest percentage of highly ‘qualified’ or ‘educated’ women in Kerala, there is relatively less space in the leadership roles, articulate voices and empowered roles within the public and private spaces. The fact that such issues are discussed is also the beginning of a change process. Such a process of transformation requires more affirmative action and more active political participation of women in all arena- in academics, politics, media, and social action.
The first thing women and men will have to fight is an entrenched sense of cynicism.
It is important for enlightened and educated women and men to work together to expand the quantity and quality of those spaces. It is important to participate and shape the discussions elsewhere. When we begin to believe in change, change begins to unfold within us and beyond us.
There is nothing like a homogeneous category of ‘women’ or ‘men’- beyond their physical/biological differences. Multiple identities are as much operational among women as much as among men- class, cast, religion, locality, sexual orientation etc.
Both women and men can be perpetrators of patriarchy. In fact, many such values may be perpetuated by women- partly because of the internalized sense of ‘norms’ constructed and made almost pathological over a period of time.
Just because a woman is part of a reactionary, or fundamentalist or established power structure does not necessarily make such structures and processes less patriarchal. Almost all women leaders in South Asia are the torchbearers of a set of conservative values -- and not expressions of feminist politics-- by any stretch of imagination.
I wonder whether the kind of trend of growing fundamentalism is specific to one gender- women. In fact, the "patriarchal" power is perpetuated by the men - who control religious establishment, consumer stores and institutions of spirituality and religion. It seems there is nothing new in the fact that women seem to be more in to "bhakti" mode or more manifestly religious or spiritual. This also may have to do with ‘family' behavioral pattern (again perpetuated by a patriarchy). And there is nothing new about the trend- about relatively more spiritual/religious inclination among women. This aspect requires more serious research in relation to the constructed roles of gender in different societies and its relation to "cultural", "spiritual" "creative", "reproductive" and "fertility" etc.
There is indeed a revival of religion- in its conservative as well as consumerist avatars. And this new revival of religion - in institutional, political and market varieties- is a larger trend. So how can one link this only with "gender"- or say that "why women are like that?" Of course, we tend to see what we look for.
The new revival of religion- and "spiritual" customer-care oriented new market approach has a lot to do with new sense of alienation and insecurity - in the midst of economic growth, increasing disintegration of community/family spaces, saturation of "secular" dreams, and increasing sense of social, economic and political insecurity, as well as political reactions to perceived sense of marginalization, exclusion etc. So it is nothing peculiar to Kerala. This is happening all over Africa, Latin America, and parts of Asia, Europe and the USA.
The new revivalism is also partly a reactionary response to and partly a byproduct of aggressive economic globalization. These days there are many "drive in Churches"- very customer-care oriented, well-marketed, no-strings attached- of course one is expected to pay for a well-organized/managed "Sunday" service. There is no-community or real communion. They are the new service providers in a new market place- because there is new demand for a particularly packaged "psycho-comfort," "feel-good" product- available, accessible and affordable.
We need serious discussions and explorations about the "gender spaces" in Kerala. We need to explore the apparent dichotomies and tensions of such gender-power relationship in the ‘public’, ‘private’ and ‘intimate’ spaces. There are serious contradictions in Kerala between the perceived ‘empowerment’ of women- taking the social development and gender-development indicators and real ‘disempowerment’- particularly in the private spaces of family and ‘intimate’ spaces of bedrooms, though seemingly ‘empowered’ in the public sphere.
This also may have to be done by challenging our own personal attitude, behavior and communication. It is true many of men (including me) tend to be arrogant and argumentative in our communication- without enough patience or grace to listen to the perspective and perception. Many may find the aggressive argumentative mode of communication (which many of us men are used to) as a sort of masculine behavior. At a personal level, it is indeed a struggle to challenge and change our default mode of aggressive mode of arguments and modes of communication. I hope we all can continue to challenge and change ourselves at the personal and societal level.
Though there are some discussions in the Kerala on issues related to women's space and empowerment and the entrenched patriarchy, I think Kerala society has to go a long way in terms of recognizing and addressing the issue of women's space and empowerment -at all levels.
( This is a part of my discussions on women's rights in the Fourth Estate e-mail discussion group- moderated from Kerala. I would like to thank my partner Dr. Bina Thomas and my friend Mr.NP Chekkutty, senior journalist, for stimulating and compiling the discussions on women's rights in Kerala)
Wednesday, September 30, 2009
Saturday, September 26, 2009
On Leadership and Organizational Culture
John Samuel
The quality of an organization- its culture, its over-all character- is to a large extent influenced by the quality of its leadership models. Many institutions unconsciously tend to imitate the leader in terms of culture, character and leadership styles. The character of Leadership can be contagious in a positive as well as negative sense.
Confident leader will induce a confident organization. Insecure leader can induce an insecure organization.
Insecure leaders and organization can also develop an acute sense of paranoia; a derivative of "self-doubt"-and internal crisis of conviction. When a leader or an organization suffers from "self-doubt"- or credibility-deficit, they tend to externalize a problem. They will not take the responsibility for their leadership gaps and the consequent crisis within an organization. Usually insecure leaders tend to find fault with others, external factors rather than taking responsibility by themselves. They tend to correct others and less inclined to introspect or correct themselves.
Any one in leadership positions in any organization will have to be aware of one slippery road. Once your are in a position of power within the hierarchy of an organization, most of the people will tell you what you want to hear. Once you get in to that mode, slowly there will be more and more people around you, telling what you want to hear. Gradually only those people who say what you want to hear- will be around you. That is how coteries are being formed. They will tell you that you are the most fantastic leader they have ever "experienced". - They will use "superlative' to tell more and more lies about you to make you happy. Who does not like to be flattered? Who does not like praises?
Such coteries will keep “alerting” you about impending dangers, problems, about lurking trouble makers or about those who are not loyal. Coteries create a power-grid around the leader- to derive power for themselves. Coteries are usually formed by those who do not have their own steam or capacity and they derive their power through their perceived proximity to the leader. And those insecure leaders who cultivate and nurture a coteries around her/him need them to boost her/his sense of confidence and to guard against their perpetual fear about those who may try to undermine them. Eventually the coterie becomes an insulation around the leader- and the leader begins to lose touch with the pulse of an organization or the real issues within the organization. That is the beginning of the down fall of those who are in the leadership.
Usually those leaders with the courage of conviction and ability to rise above the rest will not cultivate or encourage coteries or partisan groups within the organization.
But those who get in to the trap of coterie will never “grow- within”. To grow- “within’- one has to constantly outgrow oneself. And one can not outgrow oneself if someone does not challenge oneself- constantly and consistently. Unless one keeps challenge oneself, one can not grow. Unless one begins to learn to listen, to be challenged and learn to absorb and manage them, one can not outgrow oneself. Unless one constantly learn and unlearn, one can not nurture her/his leadership quality.
Leadership is all about Integrity, Imagination, Ideas and Influence. Leadership is all about the ability to learn, listen, advance, enable, renew, and synergize. Leadership is all about the capacity and confidence to be honest, to initiate, to innovate and to inspire. Finally good leadership is driven by deep sense of people and purpose. The corner stone of good leadership is a sense of integrity, fair-play and courage of conviction. Leadership is also the ability to manage people, resources, and systems to make the best impact. Those with good leadership skills and capacity can become good managers. Those with managerial capacity do not have to be necessarily leaders or those endowed with high leadership qualities.
Managers are those with ability to make the best use of available resources in an effective and efficient way to get the best desired output or out-come. Managers are often driven by their task and targets within a given point in time. Good managers can optimize the use of people, and systems through plans, process and performance. Leadership requires the ability to inspire, envision and conceptualize strategies much larger than a given task or target or an operation. Leadership requires an ability to see the big picture and small picture at the same time.
An ethical and empowered leadership means enabling a creative, learning and confident culture with in the organization- through walking the talk and consistently bridging the gap between words and deeds. This also means the ability to be challenged and challenge – in an enabling manner. Such leaders will encourage colleagues to be frank and honest about their perception and perspective.
One of my most respected colleagues was the one who asked tough questions to me; the more he questioned, the more I learned- the more I listened to him, the more I learned. And when he realized that the more I learned, the more he supported and respected me. In the course I learned something I was less inclined to: Financial Management.
How does a leader derives power? What are the sources of power within a leader?
It matters weather a leader derives a sense of "power" from deep "within: - (from his or her sense of mission or calling) or from the positions he/she occupies in the organization
Many who derive power from "positions" tend to exert "power over"- through 'control' and 'manipulations. Their "empowerment" is directly proportional to the position they climb. When such people are internally insecure -emotionally insecure, they may even have 'self-worth" issue. When someone is internally insecure, they will begin to suspect many people who are smarter than them; who are more competent than them, who may be more recognized by the peers than them. Then they need a coterie to keep them float. They will use power over others to dictate, to discipline and to control. Those who manage a team through dictation, discipline and control will not induce a sense of ownership and consequent sense of creativity.
Such leaders may be able to “deliver” a project efficiently – but they will not be able to make change happen or to make path-breaking innovation within an organization.
Such people want to climb the ladder somehow- and since they may not have their "steam"- they derive it from those in positions of power. Those who get power- through loyalty or through "patrons"- also tend to cultivate "loyalty" and a coterie. They need a "coterie" to get a sense of power- because internally they are neither inspired nor empowered.
Loyalty is demanded. Commitment is committed. Commitment requires conviction.
In the case of "loyalty"- the agency is with someone more powerful. The more powerful may demand loyalty from the less powerful.
Those leaders and organization that demand "absolute" loyalty are those who are perpetually "insecure" about themselves- and they need "loyalists" - to sooth them- to tell them what they want to hear. Those who question or challenge the leader will be seen as someone who is less loyal to the leader and those are seen as less loyal to the leader will be projected as those who have less loyalty to the organization. Insecure leaders also induce insecurity all around. Such a sense of insecurity can create an organization consisting of people driven by a sense of “fear” and “punishment”. If the overall culture of an organization is that of mistrust, fear and insecurity, that organization will be a less effective organization and if such an organizational culture prevails, decay and degeneration sets in and the very organization itself may collapse or fade away.
Unlike loyalty, "commitment" is a choice made by a person out her/his own conviction- with a sense of freedom.
Good leadership thrives on challenges within and beyond. Without people challenging them, probing them, questioning them - there is no excitement. And if they are confident, they will induce confidence. The entire organizational culture will become positive, energetic and confident.
Confident leaders will recruit people smarter than them- better than them. A good leader is as good as her/his team. And one can only make creative team when you get the best of people- better than the leader in many ways. Smart leader takes smarter people. When you are surrounded by a creative, committed and competent team- the creative instincts and the learning curve of the leader keep moving to a higher plain- someone with an ability to see the big picture.
Someone whith high leadership quality will have greater instincts to understand and perceive a situation, a group of people and crisis, in much sharper and quicker way. They can understand the individual psychology of a person and the social psychology of the group. Such leaders will have a sense of critical self-awareness.: aware about their own strengths and limitation, opportunities and threat. Such leaders with critical self-awareness will constantly seek feedback from colleagues. They are not afraid to make mistakes and admit a mistake. They are not averse to take risk. They are keen to share credit with others.
A leader with highly evolved leadership quality can rise above the rest and see the things others can not see. Someone who can see the same issue from various angles. Some one who can see the sky and earth at the same time. A good leader is someone whose feet are firmly on the ground and eyes seeks to go beyond the horizon. Someone in a constant mode of learning and listening begin to develop instincts and wisdom to see the unseen, to hear the unheard, to feel the ripples and make the waves. Such leadership will be intuitive enough about the future to shape and make future.
Inspired leaders will induce inspiration. If they are honest with themselves, they will induce people to be honest about their perception. Good leaders can induce positive energy- and once people learn that they can share their perception and feeling honestly- without fear or favor, then the magic happens. Everyone get energized because everyone begins to feel this is "my organization"; this ‘our’ cause- and I too have space and freedom.
The moment people have sense of space and freedom- they take initiatives, they begin to innovate, they begin to create. A good leader is someone who can induce a sense of space, freedom and ownership to each and every person in the team, treating every person as unique. An organizational culture that nurtures a sense of freedom from fear and freedom of expression can become a creative organization.
A creative organization can do wonders. Good leaders are those who can nurture leadership and leaders. The sign of great leader is not how or she is competent or charismatic. The sign of a great leader is how many leaders he/she helped to create. Someone with high quality leadership can simply outgrow herself/himself and move on to new arenas of learning and new sources of challenges. When they outperform themselves, they become redundant within an organization. Such leaders will soon outgrow the organization itself to become the leadership of a the whole sector or the larger society itself.
When the leader gives full credit to the individuals and team- they begin to transform together- and they enjoy mutual critiquing- as friends. Then the most creative discussions and ideas come through fierce arguments and endless debates in a pub or park. They thrive on arguments – and not on submissions.
A good leader will be empathetic, enabling, educative, empowering and enduring.
That is the magic of good organization- a magic of leadership willing to listen and learn; a leader who is slightly skeptical about his/her own ideas- someone who search for the best of ideas from anyone and anywhere- willing to learn constantly. Their enthusiasm and energy can radiate across the organization. They do not need any coterie- because they are driven by a sense of mission much larger than them.
When leaders have a sense of history and purpose larger than them- they know they are actually simple human beings- with feet of clay. Then they know how much they do not know. They should be able to laugh at themselves. When someone say “Sir/Madam you were not in element" or say" your lecture was boring"- they can laugh at themselves and say "Thank you for your feedback. I will try next time”
When we have sense of how much we do not know, then we begin to learn. And leadership is all about learning... from every single person and occasion...endless learning, unlearning, reflection and reworking- constantly thinking and acting....driven beyond the immediate interest, immediate criticism or immediate "loyalists”
Unfortunately in most of the organizations, there are more bureaucrats- and less leaders- with inspired leadership qualities.
Bureaucratic leaders derive power from their appointment letter, those who above them- from their chair. Without their chair, they become zero. So they self-preserve- somehow. There are indeed many good and sincere bureaucrats within organizations- those who go by the books, those with integrity. But they are a product of a structure and system. - not the vehicle for a larger mission- much larger than the person.
(This is a part of my interventions in a discussion on Modes of organizations and power in the Fourth-Estate Critique – an e-mail discussion groups moderated from Kerala, India. I thank my friend Mr. Damodar Prasad of CDIT, Trivandrum for stimulating this reflection largely based on my twenty years of experience in leading and managing organizations and team)
The quality of an organization- its culture, its over-all character- is to a large extent influenced by the quality of its leadership models. Many institutions unconsciously tend to imitate the leader in terms of culture, character and leadership styles. The character of Leadership can be contagious in a positive as well as negative sense.
Confident leader will induce a confident organization. Insecure leader can induce an insecure organization.
Insecure leaders and organization can also develop an acute sense of paranoia; a derivative of "self-doubt"-and internal crisis of conviction. When a leader or an organization suffers from "self-doubt"- or credibility-deficit, they tend to externalize a problem. They will not take the responsibility for their leadership gaps and the consequent crisis within an organization. Usually insecure leaders tend to find fault with others, external factors rather than taking responsibility by themselves. They tend to correct others and less inclined to introspect or correct themselves.
Any one in leadership positions in any organization will have to be aware of one slippery road. Once your are in a position of power within the hierarchy of an organization, most of the people will tell you what you want to hear. Once you get in to that mode, slowly there will be more and more people around you, telling what you want to hear. Gradually only those people who say what you want to hear- will be around you. That is how coteries are being formed. They will tell you that you are the most fantastic leader they have ever "experienced". - They will use "superlative' to tell more and more lies about you to make you happy. Who does not like to be flattered? Who does not like praises?
Such coteries will keep “alerting” you about impending dangers, problems, about lurking trouble makers or about those who are not loyal. Coteries create a power-grid around the leader- to derive power for themselves. Coteries are usually formed by those who do not have their own steam or capacity and they derive their power through their perceived proximity to the leader. And those insecure leaders who cultivate and nurture a coteries around her/him need them to boost her/his sense of confidence and to guard against their perpetual fear about those who may try to undermine them. Eventually the coterie becomes an insulation around the leader- and the leader begins to lose touch with the pulse of an organization or the real issues within the organization. That is the beginning of the down fall of those who are in the leadership.
Usually those leaders with the courage of conviction and ability to rise above the rest will not cultivate or encourage coteries or partisan groups within the organization.
But those who get in to the trap of coterie will never “grow- within”. To grow- “within’- one has to constantly outgrow oneself. And one can not outgrow oneself if someone does not challenge oneself- constantly and consistently. Unless one keeps challenge oneself, one can not grow. Unless one begins to learn to listen, to be challenged and learn to absorb and manage them, one can not outgrow oneself. Unless one constantly learn and unlearn, one can not nurture her/his leadership quality.
Leadership is all about Integrity, Imagination, Ideas and Influence. Leadership is all about the ability to learn, listen, advance, enable, renew, and synergize. Leadership is all about the capacity and confidence to be honest, to initiate, to innovate and to inspire. Finally good leadership is driven by deep sense of people and purpose. The corner stone of good leadership is a sense of integrity, fair-play and courage of conviction. Leadership is also the ability to manage people, resources, and systems to make the best impact. Those with good leadership skills and capacity can become good managers. Those with managerial capacity do not have to be necessarily leaders or those endowed with high leadership qualities.
Managers are those with ability to make the best use of available resources in an effective and efficient way to get the best desired output or out-come. Managers are often driven by their task and targets within a given point in time. Good managers can optimize the use of people, and systems through plans, process and performance. Leadership requires the ability to inspire, envision and conceptualize strategies much larger than a given task or target or an operation. Leadership requires an ability to see the big picture and small picture at the same time.
An ethical and empowered leadership means enabling a creative, learning and confident culture with in the organization- through walking the talk and consistently bridging the gap between words and deeds. This also means the ability to be challenged and challenge – in an enabling manner. Such leaders will encourage colleagues to be frank and honest about their perception and perspective.
One of my most respected colleagues was the one who asked tough questions to me; the more he questioned, the more I learned- the more I listened to him, the more I learned. And when he realized that the more I learned, the more he supported and respected me. In the course I learned something I was less inclined to: Financial Management.
How does a leader derives power? What are the sources of power within a leader?
It matters weather a leader derives a sense of "power" from deep "within: - (from his or her sense of mission or calling) or from the positions he/she occupies in the organization
Many who derive power from "positions" tend to exert "power over"- through 'control' and 'manipulations. Their "empowerment" is directly proportional to the position they climb. When such people are internally insecure -emotionally insecure, they may even have 'self-worth" issue. When someone is internally insecure, they will begin to suspect many people who are smarter than them; who are more competent than them, who may be more recognized by the peers than them. Then they need a coterie to keep them float. They will use power over others to dictate, to discipline and to control. Those who manage a team through dictation, discipline and control will not induce a sense of ownership and consequent sense of creativity.
Such leaders may be able to “deliver” a project efficiently – but they will not be able to make change happen or to make path-breaking innovation within an organization.
Such people want to climb the ladder somehow- and since they may not have their "steam"- they derive it from those in positions of power. Those who get power- through loyalty or through "patrons"- also tend to cultivate "loyalty" and a coterie. They need a "coterie" to get a sense of power- because internally they are neither inspired nor empowered.
Loyalty is demanded. Commitment is committed. Commitment requires conviction.
In the case of "loyalty"- the agency is with someone more powerful. The more powerful may demand loyalty from the less powerful.
Those leaders and organization that demand "absolute" loyalty are those who are perpetually "insecure" about themselves- and they need "loyalists" - to sooth them- to tell them what they want to hear. Those who question or challenge the leader will be seen as someone who is less loyal to the leader and those are seen as less loyal to the leader will be projected as those who have less loyalty to the organization. Insecure leaders also induce insecurity all around. Such a sense of insecurity can create an organization consisting of people driven by a sense of “fear” and “punishment”. If the overall culture of an organization is that of mistrust, fear and insecurity, that organization will be a less effective organization and if such an organizational culture prevails, decay and degeneration sets in and the very organization itself may collapse or fade away.
Unlike loyalty, "commitment" is a choice made by a person out her/his own conviction- with a sense of freedom.
Good leadership thrives on challenges within and beyond. Without people challenging them, probing them, questioning them - there is no excitement. And if they are confident, they will induce confidence. The entire organizational culture will become positive, energetic and confident.
Confident leaders will recruit people smarter than them- better than them. A good leader is as good as her/his team. And one can only make creative team when you get the best of people- better than the leader in many ways. Smart leader takes smarter people. When you are surrounded by a creative, committed and competent team- the creative instincts and the learning curve of the leader keep moving to a higher plain- someone with an ability to see the big picture.
Someone whith high leadership quality will have greater instincts to understand and perceive a situation, a group of people and crisis, in much sharper and quicker way. They can understand the individual psychology of a person and the social psychology of the group. Such leaders will have a sense of critical self-awareness.: aware about their own strengths and limitation, opportunities and threat. Such leaders with critical self-awareness will constantly seek feedback from colleagues. They are not afraid to make mistakes and admit a mistake. They are not averse to take risk. They are keen to share credit with others.
A leader with highly evolved leadership quality can rise above the rest and see the things others can not see. Someone who can see the same issue from various angles. Some one who can see the sky and earth at the same time. A good leader is someone whose feet are firmly on the ground and eyes seeks to go beyond the horizon. Someone in a constant mode of learning and listening begin to develop instincts and wisdom to see the unseen, to hear the unheard, to feel the ripples and make the waves. Such leadership will be intuitive enough about the future to shape and make future.
Inspired leaders will induce inspiration. If they are honest with themselves, they will induce people to be honest about their perception. Good leaders can induce positive energy- and once people learn that they can share their perception and feeling honestly- without fear or favor, then the magic happens. Everyone get energized because everyone begins to feel this is "my organization"; this ‘our’ cause- and I too have space and freedom.
The moment people have sense of space and freedom- they take initiatives, they begin to innovate, they begin to create. A good leader is someone who can induce a sense of space, freedom and ownership to each and every person in the team, treating every person as unique. An organizational culture that nurtures a sense of freedom from fear and freedom of expression can become a creative organization.
A creative organization can do wonders. Good leaders are those who can nurture leadership and leaders. The sign of great leader is not how or she is competent or charismatic. The sign of a great leader is how many leaders he/she helped to create. Someone with high quality leadership can simply outgrow herself/himself and move on to new arenas of learning and new sources of challenges. When they outperform themselves, they become redundant within an organization. Such leaders will soon outgrow the organization itself to become the leadership of a the whole sector or the larger society itself.
When the leader gives full credit to the individuals and team- they begin to transform together- and they enjoy mutual critiquing- as friends. Then the most creative discussions and ideas come through fierce arguments and endless debates in a pub or park. They thrive on arguments – and not on submissions.
A good leader will be empathetic, enabling, educative, empowering and enduring.
That is the magic of good organization- a magic of leadership willing to listen and learn; a leader who is slightly skeptical about his/her own ideas- someone who search for the best of ideas from anyone and anywhere- willing to learn constantly. Their enthusiasm and energy can radiate across the organization. They do not need any coterie- because they are driven by a sense of mission much larger than them.
When leaders have a sense of history and purpose larger than them- they know they are actually simple human beings- with feet of clay. Then they know how much they do not know. They should be able to laugh at themselves. When someone say “Sir/Madam you were not in element" or say" your lecture was boring"- they can laugh at themselves and say "Thank you for your feedback. I will try next time”
When we have sense of how much we do not know, then we begin to learn. And leadership is all about learning... from every single person and occasion...endless learning, unlearning, reflection and reworking- constantly thinking and acting....driven beyond the immediate interest, immediate criticism or immediate "loyalists”
Unfortunately in most of the organizations, there are more bureaucrats- and less leaders- with inspired leadership qualities.
Bureaucratic leaders derive power from their appointment letter, those who above them- from their chair. Without their chair, they become zero. So they self-preserve- somehow. There are indeed many good and sincere bureaucrats within organizations- those who go by the books, those with integrity. But they are a product of a structure and system. - not the vehicle for a larger mission- much larger than the person.
(This is a part of my interventions in a discussion on Modes of organizations and power in the Fourth-Estate Critique – an e-mail discussion groups moderated from Kerala, India. I thank my friend Mr. Damodar Prasad of CDIT, Trivandrum for stimulating this reflection largely based on my twenty years of experience in leading and managing organizations and team)
Thursday, September 24, 2009
What Constitutes Knowledge?
John Samuel
What constitutes "knowledge"? What and how "knowledge" is generated require more explorations and discussions.
During various periods of history, there have been privileged paradigms of "thought process" "analytical modes" of thinking and expressions. How "knowledge" get constituted, generated, documented and conveyed, need to be understood from a historical, linguistic, technological and political perspective.
For example, stories, parables and poetry ( Jathaka Kathas to one line Taoist sayings to biblical parables) were also means of expressing knowledge at a given point in time. Alchemy was also a knowledge process at one point in time. So was theology. Many of the religious rituals also might t have had a knowledge-constituting function. A novel like Dostoevsky's Brothers Karamazov may give us more insights, illuminations and understanding than a well-argued and academically valued book on Existentialism, Human Behaviour and personality types.
So "critical thinking"( and critical theory etc) are only one of the many modes of thinking. Knowledge get constituted through language, communities, communications, signs, symbols as well through socialization. Various modes of thinking and expressions of such thinking can be involved in such process. The old carpenter could easily find the "sthanam" or "location" for a well and a house, without the aid of any modern technology or “formal knowledge”. His modes of thinking and expressions of thinking and technology may be different from that of a formally trained water-engineer.- who would use 'scientific" tools to understand "water-table" etc
Our own "privileged" notions of what constitute knowledge may be because of particular Institutional acculturation, 'disciplines", and socialization of knowledge through the modes and modules of "education" many of us have gone through. It may also because of our own preoccupations with the credentials, degrees, skills and language competence
. To a large extent we see what we are trained to see, what we are "socialized" to see, what we are "used" to "seeing" and "reading". We all may have delusions about our own "knowledge" and "competence"- because we are all "products" of particular institutional model of "education" and "knowledge process". It is also because of a particular "disciplinary legitimation'
. For example, for someone publishing a paper in the Economic and Political Weekly( EPW) is seen as signifier of "knowledge generation". For some other's it may be something else. This is also that we have our own "received" notions about who is an "intellectual" or who is a "scientist" or who is an "expert" etc- due to specific forms of legitimation and institutionalized power in various arena and domains of knowledge process.
One of my relatives is a top-rate mechanic- a school drop out. He has deep "critical" understanding and "knowledge" of what will work and what will not work and how to make an Ashok Leyland truck run in the top conditions. His cumulative understanding and knowledge of repairing - around 10 thousand vehicles a year- is amazing. I am almost sure that it is better than a top-end automobile engineer (who got a formal systematized knowledge- acquired in a particular manner).
The only difference is that modes of acquisition and modes of expressions of such knowledge are very different from each other. While the society at a given point in time "legitimize" on form of knowledge because of the received “statuses, other forms and modes of knowledge generation in every day world get ignored.
( This is a part of a discussion on Media and Knowledge in the Fourth Estate Critique – an active google discussion forum moderated from Kerala, India)
What constitutes "knowledge"? What and how "knowledge" is generated require more explorations and discussions.
During various periods of history, there have been privileged paradigms of "thought process" "analytical modes" of thinking and expressions. How "knowledge" get constituted, generated, documented and conveyed, need to be understood from a historical, linguistic, technological and political perspective.
For example, stories, parables and poetry ( Jathaka Kathas to one line Taoist sayings to biblical parables) were also means of expressing knowledge at a given point in time. Alchemy was also a knowledge process at one point in time. So was theology. Many of the religious rituals also might t have had a knowledge-constituting function. A novel like Dostoevsky's Brothers Karamazov may give us more insights, illuminations and understanding than a well-argued and academically valued book on Existentialism, Human Behaviour and personality types.
So "critical thinking"( and critical theory etc) are only one of the many modes of thinking. Knowledge get constituted through language, communities, communications, signs, symbols as well through socialization. Various modes of thinking and expressions of such thinking can be involved in such process. The old carpenter could easily find the "sthanam" or "location" for a well and a house, without the aid of any modern technology or “formal knowledge”. His modes of thinking and expressions of thinking and technology may be different from that of a formally trained water-engineer.- who would use 'scientific" tools to understand "water-table" etc
Our own "privileged" notions of what constitute knowledge may be because of particular Institutional acculturation, 'disciplines", and socialization of knowledge through the modes and modules of "education" many of us have gone through. It may also because of our own preoccupations with the credentials, degrees, skills and language competence
. To a large extent we see what we are trained to see, what we are "socialized" to see, what we are "used" to "seeing" and "reading". We all may have delusions about our own "knowledge" and "competence"- because we are all "products" of particular institutional model of "education" and "knowledge process". It is also because of a particular "disciplinary legitimation'
. For example, for someone publishing a paper in the Economic and Political Weekly( EPW) is seen as signifier of "knowledge generation". For some other's it may be something else. This is also that we have our own "received" notions about who is an "intellectual" or who is a "scientist" or who is an "expert" etc- due to specific forms of legitimation and institutionalized power in various arena and domains of knowledge process.
One of my relatives is a top-rate mechanic- a school drop out. He has deep "critical" understanding and "knowledge" of what will work and what will not work and how to make an Ashok Leyland truck run in the top conditions. His cumulative understanding and knowledge of repairing - around 10 thousand vehicles a year- is amazing. I am almost sure that it is better than a top-end automobile engineer (who got a formal systematized knowledge- acquired in a particular manner).
The only difference is that modes of acquisition and modes of expressions of such knowledge are very different from each other. While the society at a given point in time "legitimize" on form of knowledge because of the received “statuses, other forms and modes of knowledge generation in every day world get ignored.
( This is a part of a discussion on Media and Knowledge in the Fourth Estate Critique – an active google discussion forum moderated from Kerala, India)
Tuesday, September 15, 2009
Hamara Bharat Mahan!
.
John Samuel
"And we will also make sure that there are no duplicates. That's another important decision. "-
Nandan Nilekani, Chairman of the Unique Identification Authority, CNN-IBN: Interview with Karen Thaper (September 2009)
This is pure India!
Only for pure Indians.
No duplicate, please
Identity –
will now have a number.
Finger prints,
Nose, eyes, ears,
genitals., ass and assholes.
Height, weight, coloure and creed.
Biometry online.
Grandpa can now die peacefully, with a number…
Every child will be born – with a number..
Without a number, no one will be born.
And without a number, no one can fall in love,or
To make love
To procreate..
To work
To eat, shit or shag
Identity cards, all inclusive
For everyone.
No duplicates, please.
No more duplicate Indians,
All original one will have a number…
Number with the biometry
With a billion numbers
And a billion noses,
two billion eyes
Available online. everywhere...
From Kanyakumari to Kashmir
From Aizwal to Ahemedbad.
Henceforth, everyone will be online
Everything will be online
Food and fuel on line..
Hospital on line
Schools online
Poverty online
Happiness online
Economy online
Trees and forests online
And rivers , valleys and mountains,
will also be available online...
Eat, shit or procreate online....
Online orgasm for everyone...with a number.
Socialism, democracy....secularism online...
And "civil society" "civil service"...all online..
Let the hungry die....
First let them have numbers....
Each dead body can be identified- with a number
...easily online.
And each burial of hungry child-
Can be now marked....
Each raped woman...can have a real number....
Dalits can have a number too...
for being discriminated.
Adivasis can have a number...
for being displaced!
Muslim, Christian, Sikh,
Mizo, Nagas..
All need numbers
To be easily identified …
Burning can be planned online..
Burials can be planned online...
Everyone with a number..
Better have a number…!
Be patriotic.
Be Indian.
Buy a number please.
No duplicate in this great Nation.
Mahatma will get a new number
With retrospective effect.
Mother Theresa may apply for one.
All pregnant women can apply
for a new number
for the forthcoming child.
Only those with numbers can father a child
A child with an empty belly..
Can die in peace
In this Republic of Hunger.
Jai Ho. Jai Ho.
Hamara Bhart Mahan.
No duplicate please!!!
John Samuel
"And we will also make sure that there are no duplicates. That's another important decision. "-
Nandan Nilekani, Chairman of the Unique Identification Authority, CNN-IBN: Interview with Karen Thaper (September 2009)
This is pure India!
Only for pure Indians.
No duplicate, please
Identity –
will now have a number.
Finger prints,
Nose, eyes, ears,
genitals., ass and assholes.
Height, weight, coloure and creed.
Biometry online.
Grandpa can now die peacefully, with a number…
Every child will be born – with a number..
Without a number, no one will be born.
And without a number, no one can fall in love,or
To make love
To procreate..
To work
To eat, shit or shag
Identity cards, all inclusive
For everyone.
No duplicates, please.
No more duplicate Indians,
All original one will have a number…
Number with the biometry
With a billion numbers
And a billion noses,
two billion eyes
Available online. everywhere...
From Kanyakumari to Kashmir
From Aizwal to Ahemedbad.
Henceforth, everyone will be online
Everything will be online
Food and fuel on line..
Hospital on line
Schools online
Poverty online
Happiness online
Economy online
Trees and forests online
And rivers , valleys and mountains,
will also be available online...
Eat, shit or procreate online....
Online orgasm for everyone...with a number.
Socialism, democracy....secularism online...
And "civil society" "civil service"...all online..
Let the hungry die....
First let them have numbers....
Each dead body can be identified- with a number
...easily online.
And each burial of hungry child-
Can be now marked....
Each raped woman...can have a real number....
Dalits can have a number too...
for being discriminated.
Adivasis can have a number...
for being displaced!
Muslim, Christian, Sikh,
Mizo, Nagas..
All need numbers
To be easily identified …
Burning can be planned online..
Burials can be planned online...
Everyone with a number..
Better have a number…!
Be patriotic.
Be Indian.
Buy a number please.
No duplicate in this great Nation.
Mahatma will get a new number
With retrospective effect.
Mother Theresa may apply for one.
All pregnant women can apply
for a new number
for the forthcoming child.
Only those with numbers can father a child
A child with an empty belly..
Can die in peace
In this Republic of Hunger.
Jai Ho. Jai Ho.
Hamara Bhart Mahan.
No duplicate please!!!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)