Discussing Worldviews, Machines, & Red Indians with a Nepalese sociologist.
Feb 5, 2020Following is the English transcription of my confab with the prominent sociologist of Nepal, Dr. Krishna Bhattachan. I met him at the book launch event for Dr. Ramesh Sunam, organized by the SAMATA foundation in the Nepal Tourism Board's office at Pradarshani Marga, Kathmandu. Brother Yubaraj Gajmer, then GESI officer in SAMATA had invited me to the event where Bhattachan was one of the keynote speakers. Other speakers included CK Lal, the veteran political analyst; Chaitanya Mishra, the professor of sociology at Tribhuvan University; and others. At the end of the session during tea, I encountered him for an ad-lib exchange. I wanted to know how the Nepalese academia is influenced by Hinduism, the major worldview of the Nepalese also and what his personal worldview was. Unbeknownst to me, Yubaraj had recorded our audio with his cell phone. The audio is patchy and I have tried to transcribe most of the conversation.
About the Sociologist
Dr Bhattachan is a UC Berkely alumni who co-founded the Department of Sociology & Anthropology in Tribhuvan University in Kathmandu, Nepal. He engages in right-based advocacy research for the upliftment of marginalised communities of Nepal including the indigenes, the Madhesis (Terai denizens), religious minorities, and the Dalits (untouchables).
Dialogue Transcript
| (Ale: A, Bhattachan: B) | |
|---|---|
| A | Dr Bhattchan, Hinduism is the dominant worldview of the Nepalese people. How does this affect the Nepalese academia - particularly the sociological scholarship? |
| B | Dr Bhim Rao ‘Babasaheb’ Ambedkar, the architect of the Indian constitution once proclaimed, "I was born a Hindu. I solemnly assure you that I will not die as a Hindu." Denouncing the fundamental tenets of Hinduism, significantly the caste hierarchy, he later embraced Buddhism. The Nepalese academia and its literature, however, is rife with Hindu influences, whether you like it or not. |
| A | Does Nepalese academia have philosophers of religion? |
| B | The study of religion in Nepal is hegemonized by the Brahmin professors of religion whose worldview is Hinduism. There has been virtually no work done from our (a non-Hindu or a philosophical) perspective. That would have been a noble initiation. |
| A | There exists objective and absolute Truth irrelevant to held beliefs. Does academia consider this? |
| B | We the sociologists apprehend the notion of Truth as a function of an individual’s interpretation. Thence, objective Truth per se does not exist. |
| A | Do you not think that kind of relativism is self-defeating? In effect it says, there exists no objective truth, concurrently making an objective proposition. |
| B | I understand that. In a roundabout fashion, relativism does make an absolute proposition. But, we sociologists view meaning as a subjective and dynamic entity dependent on the kind of ground one stands on. For example, those saturated in Hinduism renders one kind of meaning. The dejected groups within Hinduism have contrarian interpretations. Yet, non-Hindu worldviews have a different explication. And so on. Also, meanings tend to change with regards to the conflict of many interests. Take, for instance, justice. Justice is not everlasting. It is a human invention with subjective meaning. What seems just from one vantage point may seem unjust from another. Regardless, at the end of the day if the verdict accommodates everyone’s view then the disparity between just and unjust could be resolved. |
| A | In order to establish the existence of objective and absolute Truth, there are the correspondence and coherence strategies. Aren’t there? |
| B | In my view, Gautam Buddha is absolutely right. In light with his doctrine of impermanence, there is no absolute Truth. The only thing true is your desire. To discern truth, question everything and discern propositions with rationality. If it has functional value embrace it, if not, reject it. |
| A | Is that some kind of scepticism? |
| B | I am not sure it is so. Everything can be explained. Take for example how I am able to attend today’s event. I could do so by skipping my household errands and using time otherwise allocated for my home (chuckles). Had I been a government appointee, I could have escaped at will from the event as minsters in Nepal do (perhaps alluding to then labour minister Gokarna Bista who was a guest speaker at this event. He had left immediately after delivering his views citing important work in due). |
| A | I have not witnessed anywhere in Nepal, any discourses at a metaphysical or a philosophical level. |
| B | Well, in the Vedas and the Buddhist scriptures, there are discussions spanning the small to the big matters. But when social science talks about religious matters...For instance, my advisor was a professor of sociology of religion. In 1950, he was a researcher of the religion of the Tokugawa period in Japan. He passed away two years ago. In the day of his demise, a senator’s son who was his former student posted an exchange with the professor. It described when the professor was alive, the student had asked him where we had come from and where we are headed to. These were philosophical questions. And my advisor, the professor had responded as such: “If anyone has a belief in a certain religion, then I don’t want to speak on whether the person’s belief is true or false. Everyone has the right to have faith in any religion. As far as I am concerned, these existential questions are in fact futile. Because I began in the Big Bang. And I shall exist up to the point following its logical consequence. Therefore my origin is Big Bang and my fate ends with the end of the universe. If so, what purpose could the questions in between the origin and the end, bear?” |
| A | Your professor seems to implicitly assume materialism by conflating fate of the universe with the fate of human existence. Moreover, he thinks that the totality of reality is boxed within the timeframe of this universe. |
| B | No, no...not just timeframe (audio is incomprehensible)...Wherever you are, you are part of the universe. |
| A | Can't there be a metaphysics of the universe itself? |
| B | There could be. But even if it (perhaps alluding to the universe) is transformed, you are transformed along with it. The two does not exist mutually exclusively. We are part of the universe. Like Buddha explained, the identity of a paper as a paper, for example, is merely temporary. And once it is burnt down then the ashes merge away with the universe. |
| At this point, I remember someone dialled Yubaraj which interrupted the recording. The audio cuts off and jumps to another topic. The transition has escaped my mind. I've continued transcription as is. | |
| B | He was a professor of mathematics and had applied fuzzy logic. What happens in fuzzy logic is there is no binary truth value - 'yes' or 'no'. |
| A | You mean truth exists in degrees in fuzzy logic. |
| B | Yeah. Inside there are myriad shades of truth. And who falls wherein the shade is unknown. He reminded one must take heed of this phenomenon. In the 70s, no one paid much attention to this. In the 80s, Toyota picked it up. Before the application of fuzzy logic, appliances like a washing machine operated in either 'on' or 'off' state. The dirtiness of the clothes was not considered. You would pour a static amount of water and detergent every time, regardless of the dirtiness of the clothes. And thus they were wasted. In today's washing machines driven by fuzzy logic, the machine computes the dirtiness levels of the clothes and uses only the required amounts of water, detergent, and spin. |
| A | Sure, it renders resource efficieny. |
| B | That was the application of fuzzy logic coming from mathematics. When I was in Berkely, I was curious about what other professors were up-to. And interestingly, some were engaged in discovering optimized algorithms for untying knots. Yeah, that kind of crazy stuff happens in Berkely.What that means is, Einstein and Newton were scientists. However, if they were true students of science they would never become the giants they are today. This was observed by Paul Feyerabend. What they did was broke out from the scientific shells. That is why you need to break free. You need to thrive. |
| A | I second that. I think the worldview of many scientists like the giants you mention played a vital role in significant discoveries because of they...(Bhattachan interposes) |
| B | In the early student days, the teacher would guide the students to perform a titration. They would instruct to do this and to do that - prepare solutions, drop the solution, record the amount, swirl the flask, note the colour changes and so on. And if you merely learn things like this in science and go on to teach the same things to others, then nothing significant will come from that. You have to break away from the framework. Get out of the box. You have to be diligent though. Only then significant values and discoveries are attained. No matter what is said and who says it...Take for example that apple. The falling was not limited to apples. The world would observe anything fall down. But why was Newton the first to explain this phenomenon with the gravitational forces? This must have been an astounding discovery back then, compared to today. |
| A | These scientists also assumed that the universe was comprehensible. That the universe operated in certain laws. |
| B | That is a true observation in natural sciences. Things can be determined given certain known variables. However, humans are a different story. Permutations and combinations explode the possibilities (Ale interposes) |
| A | What does it mean to be a human? This is the grand question. Isn't it? |
| B | I think humans will be displaced with the advent of robots. It is for sure. You must have heard of Sophia. |
| A | But I don't think that will happen. Humans will not be replaced. There is this...(Bhattachan interposes) |
| B | Not just replacement. We are headed for total extinction. |
| A | There is a solid critique against general artificial intelligence put forth by Robert J Marks of Baylor University. |
| B | That human won't extinct? |
| A | Yes. Machine intelligence will never come close to human potential far from overtaking us. |
| B | No, no. I understand that. That is coming from today's mathematicians. But today we also have 3D printers. It is being used in medical science. Humans cannot perform such printings. Also, some days back, Sophia was asked where its button was. If a man goes berserk and asks such question then where is the answer? Which man asks that except computers? (I don't understand what Bhattachan was saying here). There is this petite computer in Finland and it has started teaching 23 languages. You know during love one does not marry...(Biju interposes) |
| A | Again, according to RJ Marks, machines can never perform non-algorithmic tasks whatever current or future advancements may be. |
| B | Understood. I understand. I understand. But regardless, the way it is advancing. I feel like miracles are happening. There is global warming today. Forests belonging to the indigenous people are all wiped off. Down the hill are all those mining works. And you have to pay the price of global warming. And this payment for us means meeting the same fates as the dinosaurs - extinction. This was also said by Stephen Hawking. He proposes looking for another habitat within a century. And within another ten, advises migrating there. We are facing so many difficulties in our current favourable habitat. I don't how survival is possible in the difficult environment of other planets and bodies. What is he going to do on the moon? (Yubaraj giggles) Even in this abundant planet, what is the state of a Dalit? And when he migrates to the moon and...(chuckles) assumes fantastic life...(laughs again) |
| A | Those Americans, the native Americans. Where are they now? |
| B | They were slaughtered in millions. When Columbuses set foot in America, they were guided by the Indians. Later the foreigners decimated them and seized from them, their lands. |
| A | Don't they exist today? |
| B | Only sporadically. |
| A | If I wanted to visit them and learn about their world view and culture, how could I? |
| B | Well, you couldn't visit them per se. But you can visit certain areas under the Indian reservation. You could go to the Indian operated casinos. Talking about this, only recently they have arranged for my wife to go to Arizona for a field visit to Indian sites. It is an organizational thing. But that is quite difficult. 24 dollars worth of gift was consumed which was reserved for New York payment. There are Vikings...I mean the Dutch. She had said to them, 'Come, sit, eat, and when your work is done, return'. They did not leave. They ate away. (I lose Bhattachan here. I don't understand what he is discussing here, neither the context.) |
| A | They seem quite bonded with nature. Their dream catcher reflects this. |
| B | (Bhattachan switches gear) Yeah. That's it. We need to strive for innovative pursuits. |
| A | Coming back to the academia talk. What I observe is there exist no discourses on the philosophical levels in Nepal. The critiques dwell only in the sociological and anthropological domains. |
| B | I understand. I urge you to take do work on that. Alright? |
| A | Thank you, sir. (Yubaraj remarks about Bhattachan's congenial demeanour and his engaging conversation.) |
Closing Remarks
In this dialogue, Bhattachan encourages me to take up the baton in the philosophical fronts regarding issues in social criticism. He agrees that there exists the gap of the philosophical engagement in academic discourses in Nepal. Like Yubaraj notes, Bhattachan is quite amiable and well-spoken. His academic prominence does not hinder his engagement with a layperson. Despite some of the shortcomings in his reasoning, he was among the most friendly and honest Nepalese intellectuals to talk to. It was an illuminating exchange to get a sociologist's perspective on the current landscape of Nepalese academia, the influence of Hinduism, the need for transcending boundaries, and to know about Bhattachan's own worldview. Some of his interesting anecdotes from his Berkely days, his fear that humans are going to be displaced by machines, and field visits on the Red Indian culture were informative, & amusing.