Defining Indianness by Omair Ahmad

MULTIPLE VOICES
Defining Indianness
Given the tremendous diversity of India, is it possible to construct a coherent Indian identity? But, hasn't defining Indianness become more important than ever? Omair Ahmad tries to decode the concept of ‘Indian identity’.  Read more from Deccan Herald

Sphere: Related Content

Make healthcare a legal entitlement, says Binayak Sen

Human rights activist Binayak Sen on Wednesday called for making healthcare a legal entitlement for all.

Speaking at the first meeting of the Steering Committee on Health, constituted by the Planning Commission to advise it on the Twelfth Five Year Plan (2012-17), Dr. Sen said the proposed National Health Act must be enacted to ensure healthcare for all as in the absence of such legislation effective implementation of schemes was not possible.

The proposed Act would guarantee the right to comprehensive, quality healthcare at public expense in health institutions to all people.

Appreciating the recommendations of the high-level expert group on universal health coverage, Dr. Sen described it as “appropriate and something that recounted the aspirations of the people.” He, however, felt that nutrition needed to be given more focus and a separate working group on nutrition must be set up.

Dr. Sen, who was included in the steering committee, within weeks of his being granted bail by the Supreme Court in a case of sedition, also advocated the universal public distribution system and increased allocation for each family. Financial devolution for States was equally important, he said.

Dr. Sen will provide his input on the health of tribal children, based on his experience as a paediatrician in Chhattisgarh's tribal belt. He represents the Bilaspur-based healthcare organisation Jan Swasthya Sahyog. The 40-member committee on health is chaired by Syeda Hameed.

The high-level expert group on universal health coverage was set up by the Planning Commission last year to develop a blueprint and investment plan for meeting the human resource requirements to achieve ‘health for all' by 2020. Dr. Srinath Reddy, who chairs the group, also made a presentation on the preliminary report of the group which would be incorporated in the steering committee's final report and eventually in the 12th Plan document. The final recommendations of the expert group will be presented by the end of next month and the steering committee will meet one more time in September for finalising its report.

The meeting gave a general reflection of the goals, which could not be achieved in the 11th Plan, and asked for suggestions for better implementation. Presentations were made by the Planning Commission Adviser on Health; Union Secretary, Health and Family Welfare; the Secretary, Department of Health Research; and the Director General of the National AIDS Control Organisation.

Dr. Devi Prasad Shetty of Narayana Hrudayalaya said there was a need for having more paramedical staff and health workers and fewer sophisticated hospitals. This could be done by strengthening district hospitals. He also suggested setting up more medical colleges.

On the issue of creating a separate cadre of healthcare workers for rural areas, the Indian Medical Association continued to oppose the proposal even though the members said the degree could be renamed as Bachelor of Primary Health Practice.

The steering committee will deliberate upon the given recommendations on an adverse sex ratio and child sex ratio, maternal health and nutrition, child health and nutrition, elderly persons, population stabilisation, occupational diseases, conflict and related diseases including mental health.

Sphere: Related Content

Michael Krämer Are quarks real?

Are quarks real? A philosophical Interlude.

The Nobel-Prizewinning physicist and sometime bongo-player Richard Feynman famously said

Philosophy of science is about as useful to scientists as ornithology is to birds.

I have actually always liked philosophy. As a physics undergraduate I regularly attended philosophy seminars and lectures. Later during my PhD in elementary particle physics at the national laboratory DESY, in Hamburg, I often got together with students from all kinds of backgrounds to drink wine and discuss philosophy. While I can't remember what kind of books we read and talked about, I always enjoyed the debates, especially the different points of view. Unfortunately, while pursuing a career in particle physics, I lost touch with philosophy. However two years ago my colleague and friend Robert Harlander told me about a working group on particle physics, philosophy and history which had formed in Wuppertal.
Robert invited me to one of the meetings, and I was very impressed how the group interacted and worked jointly on various topics at the interface of LHC physics, philosophy of science and contemporary history of science. Recently, the Wuppertal group organized an international spring school on particle physics and philosophy, which I found very exciting and enjoyable. It included a mixture of lectures by physicists, philosophers and historians, as well as working groups where students debated topics like the "theory–ladenness of experiments" and the "reality of quarks". Everybody was very enthusiastic, and the talks and tutorials triggered plenty of discussion between lecturers and students. There was a good feel about the school, with some memorable late night conversations, where I learned about the role of shoes in Heidegger's philosophy, Berlin's street art scene, and the magic of the Bergisches Land.
Murray Gell-Mann, captain quark, by Toyah Walker, from Lily's quarks.
Back to philosophy! Paul Hoyningen-Huene from Hannover presented a stimulating introductory lecture on positions and limits of physical knowledge. One position which is quite popular among physicists is that of "convergent realism". Simply speaking, a convergent realist believes that physics theories over time approach the correct theory and that entities in these theories (like quarks) are real. Well, I did assume every physicist is some kind of a convergent realist: why else would one do fundamental research if not to understand more and more about the underlying truth of nature!? And doesn't everybody agree that science has made dramatic progress from the time of ancient Greek philosophy, where it was believed that the fundamental building blocks of matter are fire, earth, air and water? Today we know that chemistry can be described in terms of atoms, that atoms are made of protons, neutrons and electrons, and that protons and neutrons are made up of very few basics constituents, i.e. quarks. And who would dispute that atoms are real? Atoms can not only be seen, but they can also be individually manipulated.
I mentioned this to Robert Harlander who was sitting next to me during the lecture. To my surprise Robert answered that he does not believe in the reality of atoms – or in the reality of anything, for that matter. We argued for a while and tried to place our beliefs into the philosophical categories at hand. I finally settled for "progression realist", not least because the alternatives of "instrumentalist" or "anti-realist" sounded too negative to me. Robert called himself an "anarchist" which gave me the impression that he did not take the reality discussion very seriously. In any case, one of the good things about philosophical labels is that there are arguments and counter-arguments for almost every point of view, so you can easily change your position when you get tired of it.
Now, I think the reality of things is a serious matter, so let me mention one more point of view which I found particularly attractive and which was presented by Holger Lyre from Madgeburg. Holger introduced "structural realism" which says that all that exists and that can be known about the world is structure. Now this sounds very appealing to me as a theoretical particle physicist, as there is a very special structural principle at the heart of our description of nature, i.e. symmetries. Specifying the symmetries, specifically Lorentz and gauge symmetries, determines the structure of the three fundamental interactions: the strong, the weak and the electromagnetic force. A very powerful and very beautiful principle. But then wait, who first introduced symmetries to describe the fundamental structure of matter? It was the Greek philosophers. Plato's building blocks of matter correspond to polyhedrons (the Platonic bodies), geometric figures which are special because of their high symmetry and which actually represent mathematical symmetry groups. Of course, these are not the symmetry groups we use in modern physics. But if you think that symmetries shape the laws of nature, well, that has been proposed more than 2000 years ago. So maybe our progress is not quite as steady as I thought and there is something to be learned about physics even from ancient philosophers? Well, I'm not so sure, but it is certainly a lot of fun to think about...
Wuppertal is actually the only University Feynman ever visited in Germany and despite his scepticism, I think he would have enjoyed our discussions.

Posted by Michael Krämer Friday 17 June 2011

Sphere: Related Content

Binayak Sen and Bulu Imam to share Gandhi Foundation's International Peace Award

RANCHI: The noted artist-cum-campaigner fighting for preservation of tribal art and culture of Hazaribag, Bulu Imam, and human rights activist from Chhattisgarh, Binayak Sen, have been jointly selected to receive the Gandhi Foundation's International Peace Award 2011.

The foundation's executive committee unanimously decided to give its 2011 peace award to "the tribal people of India" selecting Imam and Sen to receive the award on behalf of tribal people in a ceremony in London later this year.

Confirming the selection, foundation's trustee Omar Hayat, in an email sent to TOI, said Gandhi Foundation is giving this award "to the tribal people of India as it wants to highlight the importance of their culture and the damage being done by large corporations to these indigenous people's habitat, way of life and livelihood and the rising level of violence occurring in these areas". More...http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/topic/Binayak+Sen

Sphere: Related Content

Elizabeth Johnson’s 2007 book, “Quest for the Living God” undermines Gosepl: Bishops; Theologians Refute

                          

  

Theologians express regret over bishops' rebuke of Johnson book

CTSA body says doctrine committee failed to employ established procedures

Jun. 11, 2011

By Thomas C. Fox

• Theology

CTSA resolution passes 147-1 (photo: Tom Fox)

The Catholic Theological Society of America June 10 overwhelmingly passed a resolution recommending the U.S. bishops establish a committee to evaluate procedures that led to their doctrine committee’s April statement, which severely criticized a book by a noted U.S. theologian.
By a vote of 147 to one, the society approved a statement saying it “deeply regrets” the bishops did not follow procedures they established in 1989 aimed at resolving conflicts between bishops and theologians.
It was the first time in recent memory the full theological society passed such a resolution, an indication of its deep displeasure at the way the bishops’ doctrine committee handled an investigation of Fordham University Sister Elizabeth Johnson’s 2007 book, “Quest for the Living God.”
The resolution was put before the full body of the theological society by Jesuit Father Michael J. Buckley who said the bishops need to know the “theological reputation of a theologian” can be threatened by a mishandling of this kind of investigation.
“The Catholic Theological Society of America regrets deeply that the provisions established by the American bishops in the document ‘Doctrinal Responsibilities: Procedures for Promoting Cooperation and Resolving Disputes Between Bishops and Theologians’ were ignored in passing judgment on ‘Quest for the Living God’ by Professor Elizabeth Johnson,” the resolution reads.
 

Theologians and bishops have wrangled for decades over how best to handle disputes between them. In 1980, working with the bishops, committees of theologians and canon lawyers were formed to assess the question. In 1983 a the “Doctrinal Responsibilities” statement was unanimously approved by both the Catholic Theological Society of America and the Canon Law Society of America. It was then taken up by the by the Bishops’ Committee on Doctrine, sent to the Vatican for input, and eventually formally approved by the National Conference of Catholic Bishops in 1989.

Under the heading “Ecclesial Responsibilities” (which considers the responsibilities and rights of both bishops and theologians) it stated: “It is inevitable that misunderstandings about the teaching of the gospel and the ways of expressing it will arise. In such cases, informal conversation ought to be the first step towards resolution.”
The bishops’ doctrinal committee said it studied Johnson’s book for more than a year before issuing its stinging critique. Admitting it never notified Johnson it was investigating the book, doctrine committee president, Cardinal Donald Wuerl of Washington, explained the book had been published for more than three years when it undertook the study, and that the committed felt an urgency to deal with the book because it was being used widely in colleges and seminaries.
In a statement Johnson issued June 1 she said that had she been invited into dialogue she could have helped the bishops avoid serious misunderstandings and misrepresentations of numerous arguments in the book.
Last April, just weeks after the doctrine committee issued its critique of Johnson’s book, saying it “undermines the gospel” and does not adhere to authentic Catholic doctrine, the board of the Catholic theological society issued a statement defending Johnson, faulting the doctrine committee for not following their 1989 guidelines.
Defending its own handling of the matter, the doctrine committee has stated that the 1989 procedures adopted by the U.S. bishops were aimed at settling disputes between local theologians and bishops, and that the committee had its own directives by members of the U.S. episcopacy.
“We are greatly disturbed that the Doctrine Committee did not follow the approved procedures of [the 1989 U.S. bishops’ conference document] ‘Doctrinal Responsibilities,’ which advocate that an informal conversation be undertaken as a first step,” the CTSA board statement read.
The CTSA statement further charged that the Doctrine Committee’s assessment of Johnson’s book was “deficient” because it misrepresented thinking presented in the book.
The resolution passed June 10 by theological society did not venture into theological matters, recognizing, members said, that differences of opinion on theological matters exist within the body. Instead, it limited itself to criticism of the bishops’ procedures.Johnson, second to left, voting for resolution (Photo Jan Jans)
Capuchin Fr. Thomas G. Weinandy, executive director of the doctrine committee, responding to criticisms from theologians and other academic colleagues of Johnson, in a late April letter written to the faculty members at Fordham University said the doctrine committee never intended to tarnish Johnson’s reputation or impugn her honor or dedication to the church. Weinandy’s letter stated the committee “in no way calls into question the dedication, honor, creativity, or service” of Johnson.
He added the committee had written to Johnson reiterating its willingness to enter into dialogue with her and that it might be time to review the 1989 bishops’ document. “Such a review,” he wrote, “might also provide an occasion to see how well its provisions are understood and applied.”
Weinandy was present for the vote of the full body. NCR could not immediately determine if he voted on the resolution.
What is clear is that both some bishops and theologians appear eager to take another look at the 1989 “Doctrinal Responsibilities” statement.
Fox is NCR Editor

.

Sphere: Related Content

Campaign against Valson Thampu

Campaign against St. Stephen’s principal

St. Stephen’s college principal Valson Thampu’s message of “teach and preach” and advocacy of an audit to examine Christian presence among teachers, students and other employees are being used by college alumni in their campaign against his policies.
Thampu had, in a document “Towards a spiritual renewal of our mission to educate”, spoken of the “the need for mission audit vis a vis institutions” that is spelt out in examining “how strong is the Christian presence in a given institution”.
He had pointed out the need for “institutional renewal” and the need to reinforce Christian values.
Thampu had said that “Biblically, teaching is complemented by preaching. We are to teach and to preach, even if ‘preaching’ has become suspect even among Christians today.”
The alumni campaign against the alleged attempt to strengthen the influence of the church over the college is gathering momentum with over 300 former students extending their support to the campaign.
Within two days of the start of the campaign, which also raised concern over the bishop of Church of North India disregarding Delhi University (DU) authorities and the selection committee in appointing Thampu as principal, 150 alumni from Mumbai, 83 from Delhi, 50 from Chandigarh and 15 from US have confirmed their support.
The four-page statement of the alumni with four annexures and Thampu’s controversial document point to the DU letter of February 20, 2008, addressed to bishop Sunil Singh who chairs the governing body (GB), stating the need for the candidates to possess a relevant PhD degree. “…The GB should ensure incumbents shortlisted for the post of principal possesses a PhD degree in a relevant subject that is being taught in the college,” the letter had said.
The alumni say these directives were ignored as the bishop was keen to “plant a fellow priest (Thampu) who lacked the requisite qualifications”.
- Times of India

Sphere: Related Content