On Theory, Theorists and Theorizing

KC - 10:24 AM

reading ur blog! fun stuff…..you "sexist"

AD - 10:24 AM

lol

any feedback?

KC - 10:26 AM

ur experience reminded me of gandhi and his attempt to humanise the (forced on) profession of dalits by calling them harridan…..it back fired big time

harijan*

KC - 10:30 AM

gandhi wanted to elevate the position of the dalits and their work (manual scavenging and other menial tasks) by calling them 'harijan'

AD - 10:30 AM

right, but what parallel do you see?

are you equating it to my argument on women and domestic work?

KC - 10:30 AM

but he didn't realise that he ended up sounding patronising and inadvertently ended up humiliating the dalits

AD - 10:31 AM

whoops- that is interesting!

may be that is what happened in my case

KC - 10:32 AM

the parallel that i saw was that u too in good conscience were trying elevate the status of house hold work….but it backfired

AD - 10:32 AM

right right

interesting, how language is received

KC - 10:33 AM

am yet to read

AD - 10:33 AM

yet to read what?

KC - 10:33 AM

ur language piece

AD - 10:34 AM

oh ok. i meant that i just realised from our present conversation how language can be received in absolutely inverse way as compared to the intended

KC - 10:35 AM

oh like that…ya….like they say "author is dead after his work'

AD - 10:36 AM

i am realizing this more and more as i practice writing and reading. as well as day to day interactions

the multiplicity of (un)intended interpretations baffles me, and at the same time pushes me to silence myself

unfortunately, silence then assumes its own unintended meaning

or interpretation so to say

KC - 10:37 AM

ya i have the same experience but maybe relatively less intense

AD - 10:38 AM

less intense?

KC - 10:38 AM

the space i am in too is very liberal and feminist oriented

here we are expected to use 'she' and not 'he' when referring to a common person

AD - 10:38 AM

ah i see

well, as long as you put a disclaimer, i think its too much to expect

but the problem of academia or even academics is this: that while we do apply theories to everyday events and acts, we still remain too academic. There has to be a way of drilling in the theory into the everyday with ease, so that you can really intervene into the society

KC - 10:41 AM

i am not complaining….i see their point….when for millenniums together iof we go on saying that 'man is a political animal' even though it means both the sexes, somewhere the bias in usage of pronouns does creep into the psyche

AD - 10:42 AM

yes, i am sure you have read Simon De Beauvoir on this

KC - 10:43 AM

ya i feel the same like u every single day….but one thing i have realised is that today disciplines have gotten so fucking specialised that unless u are in that discipline u won't understand the nitty grit ties of their arguments

AD - 10:43 AM

yes, i buy that

KC - 10:43 AM

actually i haven't read that book….my friends doing literature are reading that

AD - 10:44 AM

its so hard hitting

superb text

KC - 10:44 AM

i will read it sometime this year then

AD - 10:45 AM

you type very slow :P :-/

KC - 10:45 AM

shut uppp ok

AD - 10:46 AM

i am serious

do you use only to fingers out of the 10?

like all old people of our generation do?

only 2*

KC - 10:58 AM

it is the tormentor's way of pacifying the oppressed by making them believe that their is some (imaginary) space where the oppressed is powerful

AD - 10:59 AM

what is this jargon

*please use simple language*

KC - 11:00 AM

it is like carrot-policy

AD - 11:01 AM

what is carrot policy?

KC - 11:01 AM

i dunno about your day to day experience in US but in popular culture, there is a lot of sexist tone

AD - 11:01 AM

you are going in some imaginary space without enough referents for me to relate our conversation :P

KC - 11:02 AM

there is this super-popular tv show called modern family….its a great show but in spite of being calling themselves 'modern family' none of the women characters in the show work in a 'formal' profession

AD - 11:02 AM

lol

all they care about here, is that women must work

the man woman equality, in much ideological conception here, is that man=woman

and so whatever a man does, a woman HAS to do

i find that very literal

KC - 11:06 AM

what is even more amazing about the show is that there are couple of gay characters who are partners….one is more effeminate than the other….guess who goes to work? the less effeminate one

AD - 11:09 AM

sigh!

KC - 11:09 AM

it is only after being criticised by the media that now the show shows the female and the effeminate guy to be working

but u know honestly i don't see a solution apart from women working and earning their own money….we forget the super powerful influence that money plays

KC - 11:12 AM

money is a such basic requirement in every person's life that if one has to be dependent on others for it, the self-esteem of that person goes for a toss

AD - 11:13 AM

umm

you are saying that money brings independence

and independence brings confidence

and confidence gives a voice to unheard

agreeable

KC - 11:14 AM

ABOUT THINGS I DIDNT MAKE CLEAR EARLIER - i was referring to ur observation of how the these husband-wives jokes portray women to be stronger but implicitly it means the opposite

AD - 11:14 AM

ah ok

but my argument is more fundamental - there is a certain agency that the biological make up of the body brings

or allows

KC - 11:15 AM

hence i was trying to draw ur attention to another case in our country whereby we worship so many goddesses but it doesn't translate into anything when it comes to respecting women

AD - 11:15 AM

it is that which is at the political contestation

i am fed up of the goddess-woman equation also

all these cliche metaphorical debates that try to elevate the status or the state of response of women

i think instead of man woman, we have to begin to think of all of ourselves as human

it is only then we begin to respect each body

and the irony of the goddess example is that even in Gods exist man-woman divide

or the male-female divide

KC - 11:18 AM

hence i argued that it is the tormentor's (men) away of pacifying the oppressed (women) by showing her and falsely making her believe that there is some space (imaginary and in this case the divine space) where women are powerful

AD - 11:20 AM

the effiminacy in gay-world is also such a terrible cliche

i think that steretopying is essential in the medium of image

KC - 11:21 AM

and like u pointed out to the horror of women themselves posting and enjoying such sexist jokes, similarly but more horrifying is when women in this country yearn for a boy-child and rue their fate when it is a girl instead

AD - 11:22 AM

i thought that was a done-to-death debate in our society

KC - 11:22 AM

it amazes me that they are so unreflexive

AD - 11:22 AM

i mean there was nothing to academics to push on that front

KC - 11:23 AM

but apparently effeminacy in gays is a very common thing

AD - 11:23 AM

absolutely

KC - 11:24 AM

true but when the phenomena continues, the debate can't end

AD - 11:24 AM

i mean there is nothing new to debate

you can only educate and you can mull over the same debate again and again as an academic

and secondly, the debate doesnot have to be dispensed academically to people, it has to be at a humanistic level

that is the problem - i think the academia makes such issues almost into an industry

an industry of publishing papers

an industry of education

an industry of knowledge

KC - 11:27 AM

true there is nothing to the debate for academicians

AD - 11:27 AM

in this specific case

the academicians have to go out in the field and apply their theories

then they will understand the challenges of changing mindsets

they cannot sit in their class rooms and research cabins and merely write and talk about it

that is the difference of an armchair intellectual versus a teacher

KC - 11:29 AM

the big schism between academics and common people is worrisome but like i said earlier knowledge itself has gotten so complicated that unless one is training oneself formally one doesn't have access to such knowledge

AD - 11:30 AM

absolutely

i feel what is also worrisome is the amount of information that one has to process today to merely add a new comment

to any discipline

KC - 11:32 AM

to take the example of history itself….the way history was constructed by professional historians fifty years ago and the way it is done today has gotten so intricate and so many methodologies and evidences have come into play that history no longer in the 'story' format!

the linear trajectory of history is a dead and gone thing

AD - 11:32 AM

sure

infact the emergence of historiography as a field itself is a pointer to your comment

KC - 11:35 AM

but if i try to argue and explain the common person that simplistic notions of past are no longer possible….he or she doesn't understand at all…human beings by nature carve for the comfort of an explanation and if a simple one does the trick, they will stick to that

AD - 11:35 AM

well, that is what I understand as an exciting challenge

and that is what I believe is the practice of a teacher

KC - 11:35 AM

CRAVE*

AD - 11:36 AM

to step by step construct as well as dismantle this wall of questions

for their students

KC - 11:37 AM

but i don't understand when u say academicians should apply their theories? like how do apropos they do that

propose

AD - 11:39 AM

i believe it is one thing to sit back and look objectively and theorize, but another to really instrumentalize it into an action for intervention - that requires a pedagogical capability

and it is probably a third thing to really practice the pedagogy, and perhaps learn from it so that it can be revised, which ultimately inform back the theory

KC - 11:41 AM

i think if academicians are able to disseminate their theories more widely that itself should do a lot of the job…that itself would be a lot of 'practice'

AD - 11:42 AM

ah well, this brings us to our initial dilemma

of the worry about how the theory is actually received

rather than how it is disseminated

KC - 11:43 AM

i didn't understand the 'received' part

AD - 11:43 AM

i personally do not think that disseminating theory in today's media saturated and made-accessible world is any difficult

and as we know the medium is the message, so to control the medium and the control its reception is the key if it was in the hands of the academician

but still, the academician can not understand how his or her theory will be interpreted and operationalized if at all

KC - 11:47 AM

media which is like butterfly chasers can only disseminate limited ideas….but a formal and disciplined dissemination of knowledge has a more long lasting effect

AD - 11:48 AM

honestly, dissemination doesnot worry me

and theories i also feel, are territorial

and belong to an area, they have a limited sphere of influence

and they must have that

otherwise one loses the specificity

KC - 11:50 AM

but that uncertainty about reception of knowledge will always be there…that shouldn't deter one from transmitting knowledge…and honestly a big deal is made out of not knowing the intention of the author argument

unless one is too stupid i don't see how can go terribly wrong in grasping the message of the theorist especially if he or she is explaining it repeatedly

AD - 11:52 AM

oh no no - you are missing an important thing, and this is what you realize when you study in a globalized university - the charges of words and their meanings held by different cultures is so different that theories are more often than not, misinterpreted

KC - 11:56 AM

ya bro but we are studying western theorists all the time but that is not leading to us COMPLETELY misinterpreting the author…i agree that we can never completely know the intended argument but with effort and some sympathetic reading one can beta gist of the other person's argument

get a*

AD - 11:56 AM

and that is my biggest problem with our education system

we have internalised a western view of all the problems of our state and culture

our knowledge production is a mere regurgitation of the methods adopted via western theorists

do we even have a theory of our own ? probably we had it before!?

(and i am saying this at the risk of being understood as a hypocrite, for I too came here to perfect my theorietical skills, at Yale)

KC - 12:00 PM

that is a problem but u know what, earlier when we were discussing about gender parity, gender rights and ethics, we were arguing on western lines…feminism, the principle of equality of all human beings, secularism etc are all western concepts!

AD - 12:01 PM

i dont think so, i think they have just been verbalized by the West for the Modern society

KC - 12:01 PM

if we are going to question western ideas and methods, we will also have to question the above mentioned ideas which promote equity

AD - 12:02 PM

now that brings us to a very interesting cross-junction

do you think adopting western methods make us think in foreign ways?

KC - 12:04 PM

untouchabality was not a problem in this country until the britishers pointed it to us….neither was sati

AD - 12:05 PM

i realized that i would be thrown at by these examples

KC - 12:05 PM

our entire notion of equality was so skewed up…equality existed only among members of jati….west had to come and break this ridiculous notion

AD - 12:05 PM

but that is more to do with modern thought than method

but well, modernism itself was a method

KC - 12:06 PM

ya exactly! modernity (post renaissance) was not just a set of ideas but method too

AD - 12:07 PM

we are essentially debating if theory and method are interrelated

or if they are two sides of the same coin

KC - 12:08 PM

hence what i am saying is that even though we might hate it, there are lots of things about western ideas which we will reject only to our own peril

AD - 12:09 PM

thats quite a deterministic statement

i think it is more nuanced

and it needs to be seriously discussed in detail

KC - 12:09 PM

even i have debated this point several times with my professors…they argue that the theorising itself is a sort of activism for them….

they argue that any social change in the world has a thought behind it which can always be traced back to the much hated theorists of academia

AD - 12:10 PM

ah now i see, they mean to indicate theorising as activism, as politics

ie political thought

that makes sense

KC - 12:12 PM

and also ideas have a longer shelf life than ground activism itself hence in that respect too theorists are extremely valuable

AD - 12:12 PM

there is no question on the relevance and importance of theorists

i was just debating in my head on theory and method

but they are inherently tied

so would you think that there lies a revolution in the reworking of a method

a method that will realize an alternative form of theory?

(look for example the ideas that came from surrealism)

KC - 12:14 PM

u mean art and literature being the new sources of theory?

AD - 12:14 PM

the question also is, if theory in itself has a form, or shapes a form?

art and literature have always been sources of theory, and have always been political anyway

i mean devising a new method altogether

for eg. twitter is a new method of thinking

(very lame eg.)

but you get what I mean to say?

KC - 12:16 PM

ya but am unable to relate to ur example….internet might be a revolution when it comes to source of information and its ease of access but that very ease of access allows so much shit to be published online

AD - 12:17 PM

i didnot want to point to the internet, but the FORM of TWEETING

tweeting as a method

tweeting as a way of thinking

in snippets

in small fragments

that cross reference

and so on

(just to take an eg.)

KC - 12:18 PM

since accessibility is the concern here i think we should do what many of the scientists are doing...

AD - 12:18 PM

the question still being, if there is a new form of theory waiting in the discovery of a new method

KC - 12:18 PM

science is the worst when it comes to over-specialisation

AD - 12:19 PM

i think we are not on the same page

KC - 12:19 PM

hence many scientists today write popular science books in order to make complex scientific knowledge graspable for the lay person

we are on the same page! the reason u are suggesting tweeting is because it presents knowledge in simple form and is very accessible….i am suggesting another method addressing the same concerns

AD - 12:22 PM

no no, i used the example of tweeting to refer or explicate an example of a new method

(badly framed sentence_

but i was wondering if changing or finding a new method will change the act of theorizing

it certainly will

i am sure

KC - 12:23 PM

oh! but anyways i meant that there should be academicians who just take the task of simplifying social theories for the general populace (like ur heidegger and the hippo)

AD - 12:24 PM

haan

but again, that is not the point i am trying to question you

I am asking you - if you think - that the revision of a method will revise the act of theorizing

KC - 12:27 PM

if just method will change theorising itself, i am not sure….see no one can start theorising out of the blue….he or she will have to deal with the theories presented earlier and critique it to move forward…hence in that respect u will still be dealing with old theories

but a new method backed by strong reason for it and also backed by new theory can bring about a change

KC - 12:29 PM

husserl, heidegger, wittgenstein are some of the figures who tried new style f theorising

AD - 12:29 PM

what is the relationship between method and reason?

KC - 12:29 PM

in fact they didn't wanna theorise….they just wanted to DESCRIBE human experiences

AD - 12:30 PM

interesting

does reason translate into method or is it vice versa?

KC - 12:32 PM

going by the few figures as examples in my mind…i would say reason translates into method

AD - 12:33 PM

so reason dictates method?

KC - 12:35 PM

ya….because academic community is just like any other community…it has its own customs and traditions which it loves to follow….hence someone who wants to 'disrupt' their tradition better have a very good reason to do so

AD - 12:36 PM

how do you measure reason ? (borrowing from david harvey perhaps)

KC - 12:38 PM

there are two parts to this reply:

one is of course, human rationality judges the validity of a reason by scrutinising the premises and the conclusions generated from it

but another equally important factor is that a particular reason needs to be accepted by multitude of people….here the assumption is that if one's reasons are 'sound' one will manage to garner support for his or her position

but we need to remember that we are always living in an age whereby particular ideas or ideologies are always dominant. hence when we come up reasons which challenge the status quo even if they are 'good' reasons, people find it hard to accept it because they are still committed the dominate ideology

in such cases change and acceptance are slow processes

AD - 12:49 PM

very beautifully put, and what in your mind steers the change in reason?

but also, I was a bit disappointed in learning that you suggest that the success of reason relies on the measure of its acceptability by people

but at the same time, I find it interested to learn that the affect of theories, or the acceptances of each theory varies as society evolves itself

KC - 12:52 PM

oh ya it does! there are so many thinkers who were thought to irrelevant in their own times but suddenly jumped to prominence in a later age

but bro ask yourself can u make your theory relevant if u are the only one supporting it??

others will just brand u to be a narcissist

and since social change is what u intend with ur theories, society will have to accept it too

AD - 12:55 PM

thats a strong argument

but that is also assuming that theories are directed outwards

i mean, towards social change

but, if you think that the society begins with you, as the agency of social change, then the only person that the theory has to affect primarily is YOU yourself

thus, theories have to be turned inwards first

and that requires an investment in the self, and the working of the self - and should there be an independent theory of the method of the self ?

how much then should the self be concerned about social change?

KC - 12:59 PM

agreed….but ask urself if one creates knowledge just for oneself??? i don't think so….theories are pieces of opinion about the world and hence the world has a direct stake in your theory

world starts with a self, agreed….but are we living alone??

AD - 12:59 PM

i dont believe so, infact, in the renaissance, the pursuit of knowledge of was to unravel the self

KC - 1:00 PM

we are born in a collective, extremely dependent on others, more than we even realise

AD - 1:00 PM

do we have a choice, in your opinion, to remain secluded and alone?

i mean is it a compulsive "choice" to be in community?

KC - 1:01 PM

and yet da vinci went ahead and attempted the designs of so many contraptions which were thought to be useful for the society

AD - 1:02 PM

while kafka implored

or so did nietzche

KC - 1:02 PM

and yet painters painted images from the christian tradition which obviously was meant for the larger audience….u seriously think these artists didn't crave for external validation? these artists in fact had rich patrons!

AD - 1:03 PM

i am pointing to the inner recesses of the mind they themselves wanted to extract

(referring to the Burrow by Kafka)

(using the self as a repository)

KC - 1:04 PM

who is stopping you from leaving the society and living in a forest?

AD - 1:04 PM

thats a powerful rhetoric

KC - 1:04 PM

but u won't and can't…..not just because others want u in their lives but even u wants others in your life….human beings can't live in seclusion

AD - 1:05 PM

you have jammed me

i submit!

check-mate

wow, this was such a productive conversation!

KC - 1:06 PM

yes it was! a lot of clarity came to some of my ideas

AD - 1:06 PM

same here

but i am sure this wouldnt be possible in a verbal conversation

i think textual chat gave us the time to think and articulate our responses

KC - 1:08 PM

ya thats the advantage of indirect chat especially for someone like me who takes time to articulate

AD - 1:09 PM

no, you take time because you type using two fingers :P

KC - 1:10 PM

actually i just noticed that u were right….i do use only two fingers :-o

AD - 1:10 PM

SEE! I told you

KC - 1:10 PM

but i also take time to frame a reply

AD - 1:10 PM

LEARN typing, it will benefit you

same here, but right now the speed of your thinking adds to your speed of typing

when infact, the speed of your thought must marry the speed of typing

so you are able to type as you think, and then read and rethink if what you thought is indeed what you are thinking

KC - 1:14 PM

i have a lot of typing to do in the next eight months! i will try to drastically improve my speed during this time

AD - 1:14 PM

learn the finger placement - 15 minutes a day

KC - 1:14 PM

what is that

AD - 1:14 PM

you have these free typing softwares

placement of fingers on the keys of the keyboard

KC - 1:15 PM

oh ok i will definitely try that! thanx

AD - 1:15 PM

yup yup

chalo

i will go now

good night

KC - 1:15 PM

ok bro! bye….nice talking

AD - 1:15 PM

:)

--

Above chat with a cousin, a budding philosopher.

12th Sept. 2014