Monday, June 16, 2008

Rationality and irrationality of being Indian

Dr M Ambekar "One simple example I would like to mention here is that if a Mother has two children one is Disabled. Who she will look after with care? I live it your imagination to answer it.
Your view will be welcomed. "

BP>>First of all I would like to thank Dr M Ambekar to give me opportunity to explain further on the point of irrationality and existence of nation-and thereafter nationalism.

Answer to his question is yes- a mother will look after more for his disabled kid. From the stand-point of economic theory, it is irrational decision. In economic theory, a children is a product of a company formed by partnership of parent. Since a disabled kid is less likely to carry their genetic survival (and therefore a defective product), a rational decision would be to take care more for her able kid. But because we are human beings, we opt for irrational decision!

In Anthropology, we have seen many ethnic groups, where disabled kids are abandoned on birth. Ancient Sparta was a example. Hitler brutally implemented elimination of disabled kids in the name of Darwinism (which is a shame-because natural selection does not mean killing of each other in the name of survival-it means weaker genetic pool will automatically be unable to reproduce their genetic imprint-and therefore their bloodline will be discontinued.). However these are exception-and in human society, parents do care for disabled kids.

But, does it violate Darwinism? Not at all. That disabled kid is less likely to get married. Parent will be kind to him- but dating market will abandon him. I am sorry but bride's mother will not be kind to give her daughter to him. He will not get a prospective match to reproduce his genetic print because of his disability. And thus Darwinism will be in work.

But question is--parent's irrational decision to care for disabled kid. Does it violate the notion that Economic theory is not at work? Not at all. Philosophy of science as founded by Sir Karl Popper, demands that there should be exception to hypothesis to form a scientific synthesis. Literature, arts, religion, culture--by large, these activities do not help human beings to be economically rich-expanding their material wealth. But these irrational behavior of human beings make us human and not a machine or robot. However, our survival is not linked to our human behavior but to our rational steps to increase our wealth. How does it shape up in India?

Let me give a simple example. Bengali culture are practiced in two places-Bangladesh and West Bengal. Standard of culture practiced in WB is quite higher than that in Bangladesh but Bengali culture is dying in WB but flourishing in Bangladesh because existence of Bangladesh as a nation depends on Bengali culture. Most of Bengalis in WB may think, their culture will be better protected if WB can form a separate nation like Bangladesh which won it against Pakistan. However, they will never like the idea of breaking up from India because then, where they will work to earn a living? Years of leftist rule yielded a sterile economy in WB and all most all the capable Bengali people are earning their living elsewhere in India!!! So rational decision is forcing them to stay with India! Or consider Maharathra. It has great economy-but where this economy will head if Siva Sena wants a separate Maharasthra state? The day Maharathra will be independent nation, 80% of its industry will be shutdown because their survival is linked to 1.1B Indian population.