Science Truth and Gandhi Govind Madhav

Govind, Madhav (2009). Science, Truth and Gandhi: Divergence and Convergence. Gandhi Marg: Quarterly Journal of the Gandhi Peace Foundation, 31(1), pp. 57-82. . --.cr:;"", .. ...~ . Science, Divergence ., Truth and and Gandhi: Convergence, Madhav Govind ABSTRACT Gandhi's notion by science. not only In this paper from ..practices of scientists of technical end not ..but His to bring also to application the and prevalent in for knowledge. the today needed in the and experts vicinity seeks who from the He within much the body of and attention the and to put and its production, the nations be directly immediate for of knowledge across and science in man of knowledge would emanated methods advocated humility pursuit articulated of science also from the democratization knowledge, in dialogue affected of our by the scientific policy-makers. my experiments open; and I do not think Far be it from experiments, the of truth criticisms but humanism the scientists people Gandhi's scientific back conception of science to acquire to bring of such community that application argument only ". it is argued the arrogance application. the narrow "theo-centric" practices to transcended the blind incorporation an of truth I claim have not been conducted that this fact detracts me to claim for them from any degree nothing more in the closet, but in the their spiritual for these than does a scientist, who, though he conducts his experiments with forethought and minuteness, never claims conclusions, Qut keeps an open mind regarding of perfection value. the utmost any finality them. "I accuracy, about his IIIn experiments I come to conclusions which, if partly right, are sure to be in part wrong; if I correct by other experiments, I advance a step, my old error is in part diminished, but is always left with a tinge of humanity, evidenced by its imperfection. I' 2 Introduction: T HE AFORESAIDSTATEMENrrsof Gandhi show the sensitivities April-June 2009 I C ,_e._'~~~~ r" Ej 58 .GANDHI MARG of a truth-seeke~ and the acute awareness of his limitations. The quest for truth has been the long-cherished ideal of human beings in all societies. Since time immemorial scientists, philosophers, thinkers, .. " reformers, sages, rishis and even lay men have made their efforts to arrive at truth. Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi was one of the most influential and yet-most eni-gtnatic personalities of the twentieth century. Various scholars have attempted to understand his views on different subjects. However, his conception of "truth" has been the most elusive concept not only for the scholars but sometimes even fot Gandhi himself.3 .- In the reading of Gandhi's primary texts we may get struck that a distinction cannot be made between his personal experiments with dietetics, celibacy, hygiene, nature cure, khadi, his faith in non-violence, satyagraha, social and political reform and his search for "Truth".4 Gandhi was a great experimental scientist and throughout his life he conducted "experiments" in various fields to arrive at truth. In fact, he lived an 'experimental life' and that was why he named his autobiography My Experiments with Truth. Gandhi's experiments were oriented to explore various possibilities of the truth. Now the questions arise: What was Gandhi's idea of truth? How was it different from 'scientific truth'? Is it possible to realize truth through experiments? What was the method used by Gandhi to discover truth? Was he following the scientific method or did he devise some alternative method to realize truth? Where do the Gandhian notion of truth and scientific notion of truth converge and idiverge? Of course, these are important questions in the contemporary world that is facing the crisis of global warming, pollution, depletion of resources, disparities and social conflicts -all supposed to be caused by blind application of I _~.I J modem science and technology. In this paper an attempt has been made to compare Gandhi's notion of "truth" with the "scientists' notion of truth" and its realization through their respective methods. It is argued that scientific truth is not contradictory to the Gandhian notion of truth; rather it is complementary and, in fact, it is the need of the hour to integrate the Gandhian spirit of science with the modern practice of science and technology in order to realiz~ their full potential for the material as well as moral progress of human beings. .This paper is divided into four parts. The first part analyses the nature of truth from the Gandhian perspective and also from the perspective of modem science. The second part deals with Gandhi's 'i 1 i; views on science. The third part explores the divergence and convergence of the methodologies adopted by the scientists and -Gandhi for the realization of truth. The fourth -the concluding -part , " !,. Volume 31 Number 1 , -' -< ~ ..-~:~;~~ t 60 .GANDHI MARG exhorted a group of science students (of Indian Institute of Science, Bangalore) to emulate the great Indian scientists who pursued science not as career but as a vocation -their inner calling. He remarked: ( "J .C. Bose and P.C Ray cultivated science for the sake of it; ...their researches have been devoted in order to enable us to come nearer to our Maker. I feel that we are placed on this earth to adore our Maker to know ourselves, in other words, to realize ourselves' and therefore to realize our destiny."7 For Gandhi, God is nothing but the embodiment of truth which is manifested in various forms of nature. So, when one explores God one actually explores truth in the forms of nature. For Gandhi, God" is the "Ultimate Reality" or 'Supreme Reality' which is beyond the finite capacity of human mind, yet a supreme goal for humanity to .. strive for. However, Gandhi's search was for a "higher order of reality" probably higher than the conception of reality of natural sciences. He never claimed that he had attained or realized the highest order of reality; he only made his life long sincere efforts to come closer to that "supreme reality." Gandhi, like a scientist, acknowledged the existence of an independent reality irrespective of our own sensory perception or mental conditioning. He said: "when our eyes are open, we see the sun; when they are closed, it is not seen. The change here has been in our sense of sight, not in the fact of the sun's existence."S In this sense Gandhi is a believer in the scientific notion of objective reality which is independent of our sense perception. In order to further highlight the independent nature of realities, he argued, "we know that we are not in every way masters of our own life; there are conditions outside of us to which we have to adjust ourselves. For instance, ill a country where Himalayan cold prevails we have to put on adequate clothing, whether we like it or not, in order to keep the body warm.,,9 The acceptance of independent existence is the bedrock of scientific reality and, therefore, of objectivity. Unlike the post modernists Gandhi does not believe in "multiple realities" or' "constructed realities" which exit in people's minds.I0 Thus, Gandhi's '; ~ - experiments with truth seem distinctively modernist in approach with his firm assumption that the individual is the final arbiter of action. 11 However, for Gandhi the notion of truth was much broader than could be grasped by science or reason. He believed that there was a reality beyond what is being perceived by the senses. It is this "transcendental reality" that gi\.Tes meaning and value to our life and action. However, unlike modem day scientists' pursuit of knowledge for wealth, Gandhi's search for truth was not 'to make it a. source of income, a happy facility or a gainful input in the commerce between Volume 31 Number 1 l '.. . -r-- ,:;;j~:" { Science, Truth and Gandhi: Divergence and Convergence. 61 ., nations'. Although he conceded that higher wages increased happiness, material progress are all urgently needed necessi~ies yet he argued that man's true welfare lies in the pursuit of truth for self realization. This pursuit 'is simultaneously an ob.ligation and a prayer. Similarly all discoveries of science and breakthrough of technology should become, above all and for all, the noble and solemn liturgy of truth. For Gandhi, truth is permanent, it always exists. But this permanency was not ultimate as he adopted "a dynamic, open ended, relative and experimentative approach towards truth."12 On relative perception of truth he explains, "what may appear truth to one person I ~ I ! I .is ! ~ will often appear untruth to another person. But that need not worry the truth seeker."13 However, it doesn't mean that Gandhi was in pursuit of "relative truth." In fact, his relativism has an ultimate aim, that is, to achieve "Absolute Truth." He himself underlined this point: "For me, truth is the sovereign principle, which includes numerous other principles. This truth is not only truthfulness in word, but truth fullness in thought also, and not only the "relative truth" of our conception, but the "Absolute Truth", the Eternal Principle, that is, God.,,14 Gandhi's ultimate reality is nothing but the law of the universe. He wrote: "there is an unalterable law governing every thing that exists or lives. It is not a blind law; for no blind law can govern the conduct of living beings. That law, then, which governs all life, is God. Law and the law- giver are one." However, Gandhi acknowledged that though the ultimate reality the Absolute Truth, relative truths are not unrealities. They are in fact, "temporal truths" as against the "Absol4te Truth." They are "the fleeting glimpse of Truth." They are not useless. They are true in r i ! " I their own kind and true only as far as they go and for all practical purposes.IS Gandhi accepted the limitation of the human mind and believed that "through the instrumentality of this body we can not see face to face Truth which is Eternal." To a question: 'how, then to realize Absolute Truth', Gandhi said, ''as long as I have not realized this Absolute Truth, so long must I hold by the relative truth as lhave conceived it. That relative truth must meanwhile, be my beacon, my shield and buckler" ,16 Thus, for Gandhi "relativ"e"'truth" is a means to achieve the end that is Absolute Truth. Like a scientist, Gandhi was in pursuit of progressive knowledge. Commenting on the nature of Gandhian i science Visvanathan observed: "Gandhi's was a fluid science: integral, yet full of shifts and transformation; a sense of tremendous consistency and adaptability. The model allows tremendous free play for transformations, twists and ambiguities.,,17~ Although Gandhi believed that there was a Universal April-June Truth that 2009 -;,;~~c ' , r + 62 .GANDHI MARG he ~quated with God, he never claimed that he or any other human .could ever comprehend this Absolute in .an adequate way. David Hardiman argued that for Gandhi "truths" were contingent and ~I contextual, being searched through experience, praxis, debate and dialogue. His notion of "truth" w,as thus evolving and changing constantly; being in fact a series of "tiuths" with a lower case 't' rather "the Truth."IS In thisfrom respect, histheapproach knowledge was not in practice so different that of scientists.toHe abhorred certainties, .\ .r ! j' preferred debates and honest disagreements to unthinking assent. Moreover, Gandhi's notion of "truth" was combined with humility, unlike the 'scientific truth' which was based on arrogance of exclusion. His method to realise truth was based on non-violence while search of truth in science is based on torturing of nature (in the name of scientific experiment) to reveal its truthsl9. Gandhi's critiques of science and technology were basically concerned with this arrogant and inhuman tendency of subjugation and surrender of human beings to its instrumental rationality. Therefore, Gandhi advocated for inculcating "human spirit" in the ontological premises of modern SCIence. Gandhi's ideas of knowledge have been echoed in the thinking of many natural scientists. The pursuit of knowledge and its application are always claimed to be guided by humanism. But the question is what kind of humanism? Humanism could be 'anthropocentric' or 'Theo-centric.' According to Catherine Roberts (1980) the pursuit of knowledge should be oriented not towards 'anthropocentric humanism' but 'Theo centric humanism'. If we accept Theo- centric ,1 " ; humanism, argued Catherine, as the guiding world view, this humanism being inspired by 'Theo' of the divine God, the striving towards that spiritual reality by acquiring spiritual experience becomes the overatching goal of life and thereby, of life sciences.20 She forcefully advocated for the spiritualization or humanization of biological sciences. Her thoughts echo the thinking of Gandhi about the purpose :: ,Ii !~ of knowledge and science. Many scientists have acknowledged that man once evolved never remain static; rather he is in the process of making a spiritual ascent, and finally he can not remain just man; he is leading to his own "deification"-rais,ing to the level God. Charles Darwin in his evolutionary theory of species, espeGially 'the Descent of Man' (1871) has also pointed towards the possibility of spiritual and cognitive evolution along the morphological and 11 1 i'}' phy~.io~ogica! ev.olution:. The famo~s physi~ist and philosoph~r Schrodmger, 111hIS reflections on. phYSICS and bIology as expressed ill his book ascent My View of theleading World, professed his faith,Although "in the process spiritual of man to deification".21 the wordof Volume 31 Number 1 ~ - I I II ; - .\ f I' : ~"" , ::~:;~~. f Science, Truth and Gandhi: Divergence and Convergence 8 63 'deification' is considered as blasphemy in the scientific community, many scientists do believe and forcefully argue for the merger of divine with 'deification' as'this only can bring back the much needed ~ humility in man and put an end to the arrogance prevalent today in the pursuit of knowledge and its application. Gandhi was not an 'ivory tower thinker' involved in discovering 'truth for its own sake' rather his ideas and theories were firmly grounded in his personal experiences and observation of suffering of people. Truth for its own sake? I I I 1 d!~~~ : ,," Gandhi's quest for truth was not for its own sake, but for some immediate or near future applications. For him an idea or theory which could not be put into practice had no value or worth. The validity of a theory is tested when it is put into practice. Although practical success is no guarantee of its truthfulness, its successfulness provides some evidence for its relevance and validity. As George Sarton observed Gandhi always believed that "no matter what your convictions are, they are worthless if you do not implement them with deeds or rather they are worse than worthless. Not to practice what one believes is untruth; I would say dishonesty."22 However, Gandhi argued that real progress in our knowledge and techniques will come through our dispassionate dedication to our vocation and for inculcating this spirit he exhorted people to spin for sacrifice not as a wage earner: 1f you will yourself spin, the quality of spinning will improve.' Those who spin for wages must naturally be impatient. They will continue to spin the count that they are accustom~d to. The task of improving the count of yarn essentially belongs to the research worker, the lover of spinning. This has been proved by experience. If there had not been a class of spinners including both men and wome:n, who spin purely out of a spirit of service, the amazing progress that has been achieved in the quality of yarn would not have been possible. All the improvements that have been made in the mechanism, of the spinning-wheel and the speed of spinning up till now are solely due to the efforts of those devoted workers who spin for sacrifice."23 This position of Gandhi is very much in congruence with the motives of an academic scientist. Max Weber in his famous essay, "Science as a Vocation" has also described similar attributes -"a passion ~or knowledge,. ideal curios.it~, a.nd ~ltruistic conce:n with the benefIt to the humamty"- for creativIty. In sclence24. GandhI always tried to harmonize his thoughts, words and deeds and as a result he moved closer to truth: . We find a strong symmetrical conviction in Gandhian thought to - - t~\_. April-June 2009 '. -:~q'" , 64 .GANDHIMARG prove that himsa or violence could be conquered only through ahimsa or non- violence. Truth is self- evident in the sense that it does not require to be proclaimed forcefully. As stated by Gandhi, the champion of truth or the seeker of truth must have strong faith in the power of truth and he must show patience and calm in realizing the truth. Like Gandhi, many scientists, Faraday for instance, also believed that "the real truth never fails ultimately to appear: and opposing parties, if wrong, are sooner convinced when replied to forbearingly than when overwhelmed."25 Gandhi made continuous experiments to arrive at the truth and succeeded in proving that eternal peace could be achieved only through non-violent pursuit of truth (Satyagraha). . Thus, although Gandhi~s notion of truth transcended the narrow conception of truth articulated by mainstream science, he saw great possibilities in science to realize 'the Ultimate Truth.' Therefore, it becomes pertinent to examine Gandhi's personal views on science before going into details of his methods to realize the truth and comparing it with the methods of science. In the ensuing paragraphs ",;,e would focus on these issues. II. Gandhi's Gandhi ~ Views on Science has been often portrayed as 'anti -science' and 'anti - technology'26 and there is abundant literature on Gandhi's critical views on technology but very little efforts to understand his views on science. In recent years some scholars have taken his writings on machinery, khadi, health and modern civilization to construct his views on science and they have shown that there are numerous direct 1 ~ references to science in Gandhi's discussions with his co-workers and with fellow countrymen.27 They have gleaned references from his various.writings to show his frequent invoking of the terminology of science to prove his support for science and technology28. There has been little attempt to study how Gandhi's notion of experiment to realize truth was different from the method adopted by the modern scientists and how he applied his methodology in dealing with the social, economic and political issues of his time.Although science as such was not the primary concern of Gandhi, he frequently invoked scientific terminology in his writings and correspondence with people. Once invited to an open ceremony at the Tata Laboratory he exclaimed: "I am wondering where I come in. There is no place here for a r~stic like me who has to stand speechless in awe and wonderment"29. Ho,;,e,:,~r, in h~s lif~, and./teachings there is an em?ed~~d passion for the spmt of SCience WhIch could be called 'the scientIfIc culture.' ; ;, ~ ,i This passion for the spirit of science has inbuilt critiques 'of use and I ! Volume 31 Number 1 l ~'C ;:::;;f. ! , J I Science, Truth and Gandhi: Divergence and Convergence. .in 65 abuse of science. Nonetheless, Gandhi had a real appreciation for sci.eptific education and he made distinction between 'education in science' and other branches of learning in the following words: "Education of man in science is the opposite of literacy training, which, he kept repeating, does not add one inch to one's moral stature. By its learning and research, ::icience is real education. It applies the mind to the reality around us. It promotes objectivity and grounded in the rigorous and disinterested pursuit of truth, forcing out all prejudice and illusion. Education under such conditions is schooling in austerity and courage. ...But science, which can be used to serve man, can also be used against Man. Science is not good or evil but its use and users are."30 (emphasis added) According to Mathai, Gandhi not only advocated science and te~hnical education but also disapproved imparting of higher education arts subjects on a mass scale. Gandhi believed that, "the vast amount of the so called education in arts given in our colleges is sheer waste and has resulted in unemployment among the educated classes."3.1 However, Gandhi wanted to promote and nurture science and research culture in the country. During his stay in South Africa when the members of the British Association for the Advancement of Science visited him in 1904 Gandhi lauded the role of the association in popularizing science and in bringing Britain and the colonies closer to each other. He urged the members of the association to organize its meeting in India and change its name as the British Empire Association for the Advancement of Science. This clearly shows that Gandhi understood the role of science and its need for all colonial countries, of course first to meet the requirements of day to day life of common people. In fact, he strongly urged the scientists to interact with people to understand their problems and requirements while conducting their research. He emphasised on direct intervention of scientific community in the village development programme and chided them for being ignorant and unresponsive towards the day to day life problems of ordinary people. He remarked: . "I sent a questionnaire to seve~al of our well -known doctors and chemists, asking them to enlighten me on the chemical analysis and different food values of polished and unpolished rice, jaggery and sugar, and so on. Many friends have responded only to confess that there has been no research in some of the directions I had inquired about. Is it not a tragedy that no scientist should be able to give me the chemical analysis of such a simple article as gur? The reason is that we have not thought of the villager What kinds of laboratory research ~hall we have to go in for?"32 It is clear, thus, that Gandhi was not opposed to modem science; April-June 2009 ' ~ !_- .66. -~"-~-~~-' r GANDHI MARG rather he wanted scientifically informed knowledge to formulate policy ..decisions. In his Khadi movement he extensively used the term science, and argued for the organization of the Khadi movement on scientific principle. He urged the Khadi workers to acquire thorough knowledge of Khadi as it was critical for the success of the movement. He prescribed very rigorous technical criteria for the Khadi workers to imbibe the true spirit of science. He wanted the Khadi workers to be well- versed in all aspects of cloth -making, and "he should know how to gin and understand about the many varieties of hand-gins used in Indian villages". The Khadi workers should also be able "to test the strength, evenness and counts of yam, know a good charka from a bad one, be able to put dilapidated charka under repair and be a~le to 'straighten an incorrect spindle."33 Gandhi :,strongly believed that- a thorough understanding of the science of rural'. crafts and pl"actices was ne~qed to improve the life of the rural people. Gandhi wanted scientists for the every crafts practised by the villagers. This was the reason why he insisted that there was need for' a number of scientists and chemists prepared to lay not only their expert knowledge at our disposal, but to sit down in our laboratories and to devote hours of time, free of charge, to . experiments in the direction people required.' Thus it appears that Gandhi was fully aware of the significance of the scientific knowledge and its role in improv~ng the material conditions of human life. He criticised the scientific community for using science as an 'improved means' to achieve 'unimproved goals'. It was not only the blind application of science that disturbed Gandhi but also the method it resorted to for acquiring knowledge which, according to him, was questionable. In order to explicate his critique of science it is important to examine the method adopted by science and to compare it with Gandhi's method of acquiring knowledge and arriving at truth. Gandhi provided some innovative methods for acquiring knowledge. In the following paragraphs we would discuss Gandhi's methods of acquiring or realizing truth and compare them with the methods ot modem science. III. Methods of acquiring or realizing truth The method used by Gandhi in his quest for truth was based on the spirit of science. In his autobiography The Story of My Experiments with Truth he underlined the fact that the method he used to realize the truth \-\7as characterized by its "accuracy, fore-thought, and minuteness." .He had no finality about his conclusions which were always open- ended. At every step, he subjected the next step to a process of acceptance or rejection and on that basis he acted. Volulne 31 Number 1 '!f""'2'" ,:::;~~" r Science, Truth and Gandhi: Divergence and Convergence 8 67 I Thus, his method for the search of the reality was very much scientific. He never believed that truth could be revealed or attained through mere meditation or some other mystic practices. He suggested that: "Scientific knowledge requires constant probing into the way and wherefore of every little process that you perform. Mere affirmation that in charka there is swaraj and peace is not enough. A scientific mind will not be satisfied with having things scientific just on faith. He will insist on finding a basis in reason. Faith becomes lame when it ventures into matters pertaining to reasons. Its field begins where reason's ends. Conclusions based on faith are unshak~ble whereas those based on reason are liable to be unstabl~ and vulnerable to superior logic' .34 Gandhi made his personal experiments with diet, celibacy, hygiene arld nature cure in his quest for truth and communicated these personal experiments to the public for their comments and criticism. Gandhi wanted to make his understanding inter-personal which is one of the main characteristics of scientific knowledge. Scientific knowledge is not personal but interpersonal or what Ziman called "public knowledge."35 By this Ziman meant that the results of science are open to inspection to anyone who is interested in testing its validity. Scientific facts and theories must survive a period of critical scrutiny by other competent and disinterested individuals. However, Gandhi was interested in the success of his own experiments primarily to the extent that others might learn from them and subscribe to a regimen of self- discipline. Gandhi always linked knowledge to morality and he wanted to bring about basic but extensive moral changes in society. His criticism of modern science is based on the fact that it does not contribute in enhancing the moral stature of man. However, he never sought to provide a grand theory. He worked out his theory -his truth -as praxis, and understood that it had to evolve constantly in relation to his and other people's experiences. His methotI was essentially dialogical, one in which knowledge'is seen to arise from discussion rather than from a unified philosophical system which is provided in the form of a ,treatise from which the internal contradictions have, ideally, been removed. Gandhi was aware that the result of this kind of dialogfcal meth<;>dmay appear to have inconsistencies, as, hie observed: "I must admit my many' inconsistencies. BrIt since lam cailed "Man.at~a!' I might well endorse Emersol), s saying that: 'fbolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds.' There is, I fancy, a method in my inconsistency".36 Many scholars have despaired of Gandhi's inconsistencies and have concluded that Gandhi was either confused or unwilling to reconcile April-June 2009 ~"--~~~~~~~--~~ 68 .GANDHI MARG the various strands of his worldview. However, Gandhi' s ecl~cticism could be also seen as "a manifestation of Gandhi's experiments with truth, in which he was willing to give up even his own views if they did not test out in experience.,,37 ~ Gandhi believed that any true understanding is dialogic in nature because through such dialogues, systems of. kI;\owledge are both challenged and enriched. Ronald Terchek argued that he adopted the Enlightenment position' of valorizing rational debate over coercion to solve problems.' However, whereas it was a confident belief of the .. enlightenment universal, philosophers Gandhi understood that rationality that different was peoples indivisible. have their and own .definitions of what is 'rationa!' and to insist on the universality of one form of rationality over another and to thereby justify the imposition of one's will on others, represents no more than coercion by another name. In the process, alternative rationalities are silenced.38 For Gandhi, in order to realize truth one must be a satyagrahi and one must also have absolute faith in the power of truth, and devotion to this truth should be accepted as the sole justification for our existence. Ignorance is the root cause of all evils. Truth is by nature self-evident. "As soon as you remove the cobweb of ignorance that surrounds it, it shines clear", he argued39. It. is to be realized as "the voice within, call it conscience, call it prompting of my inner basic nature.,,40 "For me", Gandhi wrote, "the voice of God or conscience of Truth or the inner voice or the still small voice mean one and the same thing.,,41 But the inner voice could be interpreted differently by different people. Gandhi was aware of this pitfall and, therefore, he put certain conditions without strictly observing which one cannot claim to have his or her voice of conscience or the voice of God or truth. Arvind Sharma42 noted that in order to solve this problem Gandhi drew an analogy with scientific experiments to elaborate his solution. He wrote: "Well, seeing that the human mind works through innumerable -media and that the evolution of the human mind is not the saine for all, it follows that what may be truth for one may be untruth for another, and hence those who have made these experiments have come to the conclusion that there are certain conditions to be observed in making those experiments. Just as for'.conducting scientific experiments there is an indispensable scientific course of instruction, in the same way strict preliminary discipline is necessary to qualify a person to make experiments in spiritual realm. Everyone should, therefore, realiz.e his limitations before he speaks of his inner voice. Therefore, we have the belief, based upon experience, that those who would make individual search after truth as God, must go through ~.:' Science, Truth and Gandhi: Divergence and Convergence 8 69 several vows, as for instance, the vow of truth, the vow of brahmacharya (purity) -for you cannot possibly divide your lov.e for Truth and God with anything else-, the vow of nonviolence, of poverty and nonpossession. Unless you impose on yourselves the five vows you may not embark on the experiment at all. There are s~veral other conditions prescribed, but I must not take you through all of th~m. Suffice it to say that those who have made the~e experiments know that it is not proper for everyone to claim to hear the voice of conscience.,'43 Gandhi further qualified that mere observance of these conditions does not guarantee complete success.The truth of 'voice of conscience' like the scientific experiments is validated by its outcome. It is a .well known fact that science tells different 'truths' at different points of time. Yet, this diversity' of results produced by science leaves both the scientists and the lay person unfazed and they do not lose their faith in science. According to Sharma44 this is because lay -men as well as scientists both intuitively distinguish between the scientific method and the products of this method. Therefore, the same method that produces different results at different times does not shake their faith or confidence in the method itself which has turned out to be a trusted and tried one, which has led to, if not linear, then at least steady progress in the form of increasingly reliable and useful knowledge about the universe. The inconsistencies in Gandhian method of arriving at truth could be seen in the same manner as Gandhi also suggested that his later opinion on a subject should be considered more acceptable. The only way for the realization of Truth is through Ahimsa, the law which is already immanent in all of us and the world and for this Gandhi was ready to sacrifice his life. In his autobiography he wrote: "I am prepared to sacrifice the things dearest to me in pursuit of this quest: Even if the sacrifice demanded my very life, I hope I may be prepared to give it.,'45 Thus, Gandhi's method of realizing truth was "self suffering without causing any hurt to others." He resorted to the practic.e of self- suffering (fast, penance, fast unto death, silence etc) time and again for the cause of truth, which he defined in his own way. Some scholars, termed it the 'highly irrational practice' of Gandhi to realize the truth46 while others termed it as 'ascetic-phenomenological'47 analysis of one's own consciousnes.s to be the criteria for truth and justice. Gandhi wanted a seeker of truth, a scientist, to become an intrinsic part of the experiment itself. For this, he conducted his experiments on himself first before putting them before others, as he had realized that his experiments on himself could provide valuable insights for other people. "A seeker of truth is better trained to amplify April-June 2009 r . 70 .GANDHI ; ..would i , i MARG his consciousness. His forays into the body can provide new i~ights and medicines more delicately attuned to it." . It is this process of self-testing that Gandhi had applied, argued Visvanathan, where "the initiate rather than an innocent guinea pig ' ; becomes the source of insight.,,48 With this idea in mind Gandhi suggested the science students to work with their hands, as science required regular interaction between theoretical construct at mental level and empirical testing at physical level. Gandhi observed: "science is essentially one of those things in which theory alone is of no value whatsoever. unless our hands go hand in hand with our heads we be able to do nothing whatsoever."49 Gandhi was not comfortable with the Baconian and Newtonian science which is based on reductionist principles. In a letter to a group of college students, while explaining the meaning of mix (inter-caste) marriages, he observed: "You should understand from this that I never reject a scientific truth that has been established. But you should also note that in (the realm of) science what has come to be accepted as truth today is not unlikely to be proved as untruth tomorrow. Sciences founded on deduction are always bound to suffer from this basic imperfection. We cannot, therefore, regard it as an absolute truth.,,50 Therefore, Gandhi advocated a method that is based on systemic and holistic perspective. For instance, his idea of naturopathy is based on harmony. As pointed by Visvanathan, the body, for Gandhi, is a microcosm of the universe and he visualized two kinds of harmony: first, the harmony of the body and its constituent parts and, second between the body and its physical environment, particularly with earth, water, light and air. All disease is a violation of harmony. In naturopathy one strengthens the Dody to resist disease and a true healer is one who recognizes the wisdom of the body rather than relying on the all sorts of conquering drugs. 51 Gandhi had a systemic and holistic understanding of human body and that was why he wrote.: 'I A I happy working of the human machine depends upon the harmonious activity of the various component parts. If all these work in an orderly manner, the machine runs smoothly. If even one of the essential parts is out of order, it comes to a stop. For instance, if the digestion is out of order, the whole body becomes slack."52 ~~ndhi rejec.ted the d~alitJ:' of body ~nd mind bet-:ause he b~lieved I~ .I I ~ that a body which contams diseased mmd can never be anythmg but disease~.". He wrote: "the present scie.nce ~f medicine is .divorce~ from religion. A man who attends to his dally Namaz or his Gayatn I I .; Volume ", 31 Number 1 , ~ '"' .~ r" Science, Truth and Gandhi: Divergence and Convergence 8 71 ! mantras in the proper spirit need never get ill. A clean spirit must build a clean body. I am convinced that the main rules of religious conduct conserve both the spirit and the body."53 The coPLte~porary thinking in modern health science has acknowledged this holistic. perspective to tackle the complex health issues. The other attribute of Gandhian method is that he never tried to impose consensus on what is truth, rather he persevered, even at the peril of his life, for what he perceived as truth. He believed in the democratic participation of scientists as well as lay people in the construction of knowledge. He had his own notion of truth which he wanted others to realize for themselves. He firmly believed that others could not be convinced by his points of view through force but only by non-violent means which required self suffering. But the question arises: why did Gandhi believe that self suffering will change the hearts and minds of others (opponents) to accept his notion of truth? Gandhi's early socialization in religious plurality and his exposure to Christian beliefs and values in forgiveness and self-sacrifice sowed the seeds in Gandhi of his faith in suffering. The religious traditions about the austerity of Hindu seers and rishis, meditation and suffering of the Buddha, Mahaveera and the ultimate sacrifice made by Jesus thoroughly convinced Gandhi that ultimate truth could be realized only through suffering and self- sacrifice. Then question arises: was Gandhi tt'uly rational in his approach? Rationalism in Gandhi Gandhi's rationalism was not limited only to "instrumental" or "technical rationality" rather, it was much broader in scope, meaning and application. His understanding of rationality comes closer to what Roger Garaudy54 called "pragmatic rationality." Roger Garaudy used the term rationality to refer to an extra and added ingredient that human beings have and brutes do not. For him rationality is roug.hly synonymous with tolerance, with the ability not to be overtly disconcerted by differences from oneself, not to respond aggressively to such differences. It also goes along with reliance on persuasion rather than on force, an inclination to talk things over rather than to fight burn, or banish. It is a virtue which enables individuals and communities to coexist peacefully with other individuals and communities, to live and to let live, and to put together new syncretic, compromised ways of life. .Rationalism in Gand_hi could be found in his commitment to the purity of means and end relationship. He always believed that achievement of ends through any means is not justifiable for ends April-June 2009 ,-, -, --- 72 .GANDHI MARG achieved through impure mea.ns could be retained only through impure means. Anything which is acquired through force could be retained .. only through force. It means perpetual expenditure of energy which cannot be called rational. A decision is rational which ensures the minimum loss of energy not only in ~ttaining the goal but also in .retaining it over a period of time. This was the reason that Gandhi always advocated that freedom, peace, harmony and justice attained through non-violent means will ensure continuous perpetuation of our achievements. Gandhi always justified the rationality of his action in terms of means -end relationship. For instance, dt1ring the Boer war when Gandhi volunteered for providing medical help to the wounded soldiers., he was bitterly criticized for going against his own principle of non-violence. In order to explain his action Gandhi \' wrote: "Those who confine themselves to attending to the wounded in battle cannot be absolved from the guilt of war. It is quite clear to me that participation in war could never be consistent with ahimsa. But it is not given to one to be equally clear about one's duty. A votary of truth is often obliged to grope in the dark. He may not do anything deference to and convention. must always hold himself open toin correction, whenever He he discovers himself to be wrong he must confess it at all costs and atone for it".55 For Gandhi, India was a big laboratory to test some of his' ideas (hypotheses) which he had formulated on the basis of his personal experiences in South Africa and also his exposure to powerful ideas of Western thinkers. After coming back from the South Africa Gandhi established an Ashram and named it Satyagraha Ashram which reflected his desire to acquaint India with the methods to test and vindicate truth he had tried in South Africa and to test them again in India to tryout to see the extent to which their application might be possible.56 . Like a scientist Gandhi never took a blind path. Before taking any course of action he "tested the mood of people and their readiness to accept his authority". Gandhi wanted unconditional -support from his followers as he was aware that dissent even from one man (even one contrary evidence, in Popperian sense) could mar the means of his realization of the ends. Like scientists he was aware that deviant cases (anomaly in the empirical data) need to be accounted for by theoretical propositions. He never allowed his emotions or outside pressure to overtake him and lose his sense of reason and logic. As Nehru wrote about his temperament: 'Tnl'fI'lflO 11 Number 1 . ' ~ --~ I, \ i i Science, Truth and Gandhi: Divergence and Convergence i ',\ ! I, ~ 8 73 "Gandhi was least perturbed by the turmoil and disturbances taking place" in the country. He had a very strong sense of gauging the mood of people and he never acted or spelled out his action before making the proper assessment of the situation."S7 There are some instances where it might seem that Gandhi was guided by blind faith in showing respect to elders irrespective of their faults as a matter of religious injunction. His confession ill his Autobiography abol1t his teacher who prompted him to cheat in the examination indicates his blind faith. "I had thought the teacher was there to supervise against copying... yet the incident did not in the least diminish my respect for my teacher. I was by nature, blind to the faults of elders."S8 However, in another context, Gandhi refused to overlook the elders' fault when he felt that truth was compromised. The instance is related to his elder brother Laxmandas' critical letter to Gandhi casting aspersions on his family obligation. Gandhi in his rejoinder to his brother did not address Laxamandas as "respected brother", as he used to do earlier; instead he addressed impersonally,"dear sir I revere you as my elder brother. Our religion bids us to treat our elders with veneration. I implicitly believe in that injunction. But I have greater regard for truth. This too is taught by our religion."S9 However, Gandhi was bitter critique of instrumental rationality of science dictating the entire aspect of human life. Gandhi considered instrumental rationality argued Bigrami, as "an illicit extrapolation to link the ideals of scientific rationality and modern form of democratic politics with that broader cultural phenomenon of materialism, uncontrolled technology, the alienating and sinful city,,60. Gandhi insisted and argued at length that the notion of rationality, which was first formulated in the name of science in the 17th century and developed and modified to practical and public domains by the philosophers of the Enlightenment, had within it the predisposition to give rise to the horrors of modern industrial life, to destructive technological frames of mind, to rank commercialism, to the surrender of spiritual casts of mind, and to the destruction of the genuine pluralism of traditional life. Therefore, he advocated the incorporation of human values into the body of science and technical practices. It should be noted that Gandhi was not a Luddite or dismissive of the achievements of modern science. What he opposed was a development in "outlook" that emerged in the philosophical surrounding of scientific achievements. In other words, Gandhi was opposed to what Bilgrami called, "thick rationality"61 or what April-June 2009 [ ..-"". ~~-- , :.::~" '".; I I, " " , ,I; if i'! Ik It 74 .GANDHI MARG Heredia .materialism. " called "truncated rationality"62, rationality truncated by Gandhi pleaded not for the suppression of reason, but for a due recognition of that in us which sanctifies reason itself. He was against the unbounded dictation of reason and, therefore,testinsisted putting application. Gandhi would his faithon with his limitation reason butonheits would not allow his Gandhi strived for the higher ' 1; reason to destroy his faith. order of t \' reality which could encompass the entire humanity. He argued that his law of non-violence was a general law of the entire it f ! mankind. It has greater scope and ~pp:ications.than.scientific laws so-called. On the nature and applIcation of thIS umversallaw, he wrote in Young India: "We have to make truth and non-violence not matters for mere individual practice, but for practice by groups, communities and nations. Non-violence is the law of the human race and is infinitely greater than and superior to brute force. The rishis (seers) who discovered the law of non-violence were greater geniuses than Newton. They were themselves greater warriors than Willington. Having themselves known the use of arms, they realized their uselessness and taught a weary world that its salvation lay not through violence, but through non-violence".63 Thus, we can say that Gandhi's notion truth is much more comprehensive and beyond the scope of method of science but " ! much more relevant to understand the contemporary problems. The modern scientists need to integrate Gandhian perspective in their practice of science. However, there are some ambiguities and contradictions in Gandhian notion of truth and its methods to realize them. In the following paragraphs we would deal with \ : 1 this issue. Ambiguities in Gandhian truth and its methods For Gandhi the concept of truth is not static but, like the scientific notion of truth, ever-dynamic. He wrote: "truth becomes my ,sole objective. It began to gro\,,: in magnitude everyday, and my definition of it also has been ever widening."64 However, at another place he describes himself as "a humble seeker after truth", showing one of the most noble personality trait of modern scientists. But when he asserts that his goal to find truth is "to realize himself or his destiny"65 he becomes a seeker of "spiritual truth" instead of scientific truth. He equates this truth with the "voice of conscience,'f This definition confounded his concept of truth. The conscience cannot be intersubjectively communicated -a precondition for existence or even construction of a reality. His notion of truth becomes "transcendental or in other words mysterious. Volume 31 Number 1 - ~ i t ~ r :;~q'- .. Science, Truth and Gandhi: Divergence and Convergence 8 75 ! , His notion of the ultimate truth becomes more problematic when he acknowledges that he has not been able to realize it. Yet, he makes an attempt to describe it's (the Ultimate Truth) features. He describes the features of the Ultimate Truth as follows: "The little fleeting glimpses that I have been able to have of truth can hardly convey an idea of the indescribable lustre of Truth, a million times more intense that that of the Sun". The question is: how Gandhi knew that 'ithe Truth is a million times more intense, brighter than that of the. Sun"? It seems Gandhi's search is based on speculation, imagination or simply traditional myth. George Sarton (1954) also criticized Gandhi for propounding and holding confusing meanings of truth. He remarked, iiGandhi who spoke so much of the truth, did not know what it was. His use of the word "truth" was always ambiguous and dangerous." To Sarton, the main danger in Gandhi's thinking was his confusion of truth with religion. He wanted to solve political problems in \ \ the name of truth, reason, though he admitted that i'faith transcends reason." Truth must be investigated 'ifor its own sake", argued Sarton. "As soon as its discovery is subordinated to a political, national, religious purpose or to any other outside purpose, the investigators are sorely tempted to publish only that part of the truth which favours their argument and to suppress the part which , , is unfavourable to it. On that basis truth is not simply mutilated but destroyed".66 Moreover, truth should not be confused with faith as they are not interchangeable phenomena. The reason for keeping faith in our own religion may be entirely different from the reason of not keeping faith in other religions. Gandhi realized that truth can be reached through a complex dialogue in which reason alone is not sufficient; therefore, he : suggested i, emotional J r \ \ I ..on that the arguments and political pressure." need to be reinforced In order to exercise with emotional pressure, Gandhi adopted the techniques of self-suffering, fasting, penance and silence etc. His political pressures included mass demonstration, non-cooperation, tax refusal, hartal, and the like. Gandhi also suggested that during these protests, the satyagrahi should always be open to the other side, seeking out alternative that could satisfy both. This demanded a spirit of give and take both sides as Gandhi observed: i'all my life the very insistence on truth has taught me to appreciate t!te beauty of compromise. I saw ~n later life that this spirit was an essential part of satyagraha."67 In this sense Gandhi's method diverges from the method of science, which is not based on compromise or give and take relationship. However, recent studies in the sociology of April-June 2009 ~, I;[ " ,I: '- " I j i I ' 76 .GANDHI MARG i I ,I I! ;i science have shown that scientific knowledge is not an outcome of the impartial and objective experimentation of nature. It is, rather, the outcome of the rational consensus evolved among the scientific community through the process of negotiation.68 i I i i, ' :.1;': .. Although Gandhi advocated "dialogical method" for the realization of truth, he himself violated this methodological principle when he closed himself off to dialogues on several occasions. In his own family he acted as a high-handed patriarch, coercing his wife and sons into following the path he decreed as "true." He often ran his Ashram in an autocratic manner, disciplining those who did not accept his dictates. Gandhi wanted to realize the " absolute truth" not only individually , but also collectively. But the kind of truth he was advocating became utopian in practice. Can we achieve something which is permanent? asks George Sarton. Will not the notion of freedom, peace, harmony and justice change over a period of time? Gandhi had paired his 'means ", and ends' methods in transcendental forms making it unattainable in its true sprits. While scientific truth is always progressive, it is an " ,'~ unending process making it compatible with requirements and challenges of the each generation. ~ IV. Conclusion: Ii' : i Gandhi was not orily concerned with the political, economic and social freedom of the colonial people but also with the moral and spiritual progress of the entire humanity. Therefore, when he advocated "self- ! : realization of truth" he desired to evolve a consensus on the perception of the truth. Gandhi was aware that there cannot be a homogenous and universal method for the realization of truth as there are contextual and temporal variations. However, he believed that once truth is self- Relevance of Gandhian Approach the emerging to Truth experienced by all people the common understanding among them will increase and they would feel bonded with one another through their interpersonal "experiential knowledge." Gandhi wanted to achieve "experiential knowledge" which is "inclusive" instead of "scientific knowledge" based on objective and mechanical experiments which remains "exclusive." Gandhi's notion of truth and his method of realizing it have shown the unique quality of combining "reason" with "faith". He would never accept anything uriless brought to the touchstone of reason and subjected to scientific inquiry. '~My life is largely governed by reason," said Gandhi, and "when it fails, it is governed by a superpower force that is faith."69 He was against the "instrumental rationality" as the sole principle governing our life. Rather he emphasized more on the "purity of means and ends." For him the means were as important as i ,;r;~ Volume 31 Number 1 - . ~,.'..~j, 'J , '"v' ,;::;'i - " Science, Truth and Gandhi: Divergence and Convergence 8 77 the ends. It is easier to evolve consensus on the goal but very difficult to arrive at consensus on the means to realize it. If there is no consensus on the method of inquiry there would be no unanimity on the findings of inquiry and then people would keep questioning each other's findings (truth). Then, truth will keep on changing sides as per its convenience which would be dangerous. It is because this variant of truth would require to be backed by force to assert it. In this situation it is not the truth but the force would be asserted in the name of \ : \ truth. r I I \ , In this sense Gandhi's notion of non-violent truth becomes .relevant. Truth cannot be violent and it does not need force for its manifestation; it is omnipresent and omni felt. Gandhi equated these features or attributes of truth with God not in any religious sense which is generally understood in the common parlance. Truth is embodiment of morality. Truth backed by force can win only the body of the human beings while non-violent truth ensures winning of people's hearts. Gandhi wanted to realize this truth and he believed that once the status of truth is self realized it would be whole heartedly adopted and practiced by the people without any external force. Gandhi always endeavoured to achieve or realize the higher order of truth and not get stuck in the "relative truths" or "subjective truths" as some postmodemist scholars argue and he strongly believed that any kind of relativising and subjectivising of truth may undermine the scope for justice. There can hardly be any mutually accepted legitimacy to arbitrate conflicting claims, when consensus irrevocably breaks down, and in that case, might becomes right and power it's legitimizer. ~ , Gandhi's ideas of combining head and hand, in the practice of science and a concern for the welfare of rural people on the part of scientific community is very much relevant for the scientists who are insulated from the suffering of people in their surroundings. Gandhi believed that fruitful and substantive knowledge would be produced only when scientists collaborate not only with other scientists and researchers but also with the l , " \ t ! ~ rural people or lay-men whose life would be directly affected. by such knowledge. Gandhi preferred improvement of traditional crafts and skills by using advances in modern science and technology.7o This view is reflected when he writes: "1 would prize every invention of science made for the benefit of all."71 For Gandhi science that eliminates employment without guaranteeing substitute work is bad but "the technique that alleviates drudgery like inventing the sewing machine, would be of first rate". April-June 2009 ~~---~~ ~- . ~ . ii, !' r , f i; !. ! ! I '! 78 J .GANDHI MARG It is the era of globalization and economic liberalization and there .is a shift in the cognitive orientation of the scientific community from "knowing for its own sake" to "knowing with an eye on patent",72 or what Krishna has described as replacement of "science as public good" by "science as market good".73 As a consequence of this trend even essential commodities such as life-saving drugs are becoming out of i ! '. reach of common people in many countries. In this context Gandhi's I call for the democratization of science to bring people's knowledge and techniques in dialogue with the modem science to produce the "public science" for the welfare of the entire society requires immed~ate attention of our policy-makers. t ft i i.i f .., .Notes and References 1. M;K. Gandhi, An Autobiography or The Story of my experiment with truth,( Ahmadabad: Navjivan Publishing House,1928(2008), pp. xii- [ I i xiii. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. Faraday, Michael Quoted in George Sarton, "Experiments with Truth by Faraday, Darwin and Gandhi", OSIRIS, II, (1954), p. 101. M.K. Gandhi while on his way back to India after attending the RoundTable Conference in 1931 attended a meeting in Switzerland. At this meeting he was asked a question: What is Truth? In reply to this question Gandhi admitted that it was "a difficult question." See,M.K. Gandhi, Hindu Dharma,(Ahmedabad: Navjivan Publishing House, 1958). Joseph S. Alter, " Gandhi's Body, Gandhi's Truth: Nonviolence and the Bio moral Imperative of Public Health", The Journal of Asian Studies, 55(2), (1996), pp. 301-322. Robert K. Merton, The Sociologyof ScienceTheoretical and Empirical Investigation, ( Chicago: Chicago University Press, 1973), pp. 232-35. -Richard Rorty, "Solidarity or Objectivity", in J. Rachman and C. West (eds.), Post-Analytic Philosophy,(Columbia: Columbia University Press, 1984). M. K. Gandhi, "Collected Works of Mahatma Gandhi, (New Delhi: Publication Division, Mi!listry of Information and Broadcasting, Government of India), (1959), Vol. 29, pp. 326-327.Here after referred to as CWMG. Gandhi, M. Ko, The SelectedWorks of Mahatma Gandhi, (Ahmadabad: Navjivan Publishing House, 1968), Vol. 4, p. 17. Hereafter referred to as SWMG. Ibid., p. 25. E:G. Guba, "The Paradigm Dialogue", in E.G Guba (ed), TheParadigm Dialogue, (Thousand Oaks CA: Sage, 1990), pp. 17-27. .Nick Cier, "Gandhi Philosophy: Pre modern, Modern, or Postmodern?" Gandhi Marg, 17(3), (1996), pp. 261-268. Volume 31 Number 1 ! ! ~ ! --., ::::~ 1BIIi' ~ Science, Truth and Gandhi: Divergence and Convergence 8 79 ! 12. Upasana Pandey, "Problem MAINSTREAM. ..13. M. \ K.Gandhi,. Truth, 14. Ibid., i 15. Surendra p. 17. I (ed) p. (New The Metaphysical Story of My Foundation Delhi: Orient Autobiography, Experiments with Debating Longman, op.cit., 1970), P. "Reinventing Gandhi, of P. Delhi: Gandhi's 16. xi Gandhi", (New Mahatma in Oxford A. Raghuramaraju, Universiry Press,2006), 205. 18. David Hardiman, Black, 2003), 19. Goethe called torture chamber I Gandhi", 16. Autobiography: Visvanathan, (Bombay: . p. Modern xiii. Verma, Shiv i p. (2007), Post xiii. Thought, M.K.Gandhi,. .16. An op.cit., r : I 45(41), with Gandhi p. the ideology of science of nature" using for I be Put hounded in constraintin ! scientists, Time as and Ours, (Delhi: Permanent empirico-mechanico-dogmatic in.J Press, science man's the p. Bacon "is 69; to of Culture, promote nature, and "Nature servicearts." torture and Scientists asserted: bound by mechanical into out, Scie1:lce domination Francis pointed .S. Uberoi, 1978), for use. her and wondering moulded Bacon "the quoted University of nature His 9. positive Oxford use in Made The nature's the has to aim a slave of secrets the from I. I her.1I l Twenty-first \ ! 20. Quoted in Roberts Catherine on Biologyll, Gandhi Ibid., p. 22: M. K. by Faraday, 23. M.K. 36(36), University Gandhi",. Science andGandhian This Group and Culture approach.. and .,: Max p. in the 392. Radical Reflection p. 3727. a J.N. published and in its However, better and Ghosh, editorial group in S.K. Gerth & Political C Wright York: Oxford etc by of life Culture, the regularly IIwe and bullock Darwin by and do can same c"if.:, 'tl (1934), p. concer~s moment created Science Gandhian genuine a reverting back cart. II See, M. 1(1), name, criticized for be opposed industrialization. the not Professor'M.N. strongly and appreciated that, Faraday, 1934 Mitra called conditions and by Technology columns techniques and the Science and Sociology,(New formed science, stressed happier Economic an 102. a journal the but scientific the loin-clothe Culture", J.C. also 94. 'Towards H.H. Truth p. group on p. Truth 129-156 (1954), Culture Mukerjee, In with 11, 11(1954), Science' in Essay pr. thinking on with Prasad, Vocationll, Weber: Vol. Vol. Shambhu Views as "Experiments Osiris. in "Experiments and Gandhians, modern wheel, Survival (1997), "Some 313. pp. George Gandhill. Gandhi's (2001), Osiris, the that Truth: 19(1), Ananthu, (1985), Sarton, and f.'Science Sartonf. Saha in Press,1946), George of of From The Marg, in J. 7(6), Quoted Weber, -Mills,(eds) 26. quoted Marg, Darwin Gandhi, Weekly, t Gandhi Quoted Understanding 25. IIGandhi's 315. Gandh, Max Chaudhary, Centaury", 21. 24. Kamla by believe discarding to the N. Saha, spinning "Science 2. . ..,1 ;: ,~ April-June 2009 -r-- ,::;~~ ~~ ~)': . , Sctence, i 12. Truth and Upasana Gandhi: Pandey, "Problem MAINSTREAM. ..13. M. \ 14. Ibid., I 15. Surendra p. 17. p. (New Gandhi, Hardiman, Black, 2003), 19. Goethe called torture chamber p. ideology use of nature her." Quoted on 22. M. K. by Faraday, p. Quoted 36(36), University to Permanent Scie':lce p. 69; Marg, J. p. to aim a slave of the from Survival (1997), "Some the has secrets Truth: pp. and Made The nature's 19(1), (1985), promote "Nature servicearts." Ananthu, Culture, nature, asserted: torture and Scientists of "Gandhi's (2001), Max in the 392. Radical Reflection 313. Science Vol. and and J.N. Gandhian This Group and Culture approach.. p. 3727. as aVocation", pf>. 129-156 published and in its However, and happier Culture", Science etc by the the and Culture, not and can be cart." 1(1), p. by to M. concerns moment created N. Science Gandhian genuine a back (1934), name, criticized See, opposed industrialization. for reverting bullock "'ii Oxford strongly the do of life and Wright Professor'M.N. same regularly "we and C Darwin by and appreciated conditions & Political York: 1934 Mitra called columns technjques loin-clothe in S.K. that, Gerth Faraday, Technology a journal group an and Sociology,(New formed Ghosh, stressed Economic by Truth 94. 102. science, editorial p. 'Towards H.H. Truth p. group the but scientific the (1954), on also In with J .C. thinking Science' in Essay with 11(1954), Prasad, on Weber: Culture Vol. Shambhu Views II, Experiments Osiris. in Mukerjee, Gandhians, better George" "Experiments Osiris, the Sarton, Gandhi". Gandhi's "Science Sarton, Gandhi",. wheel, in Press,1946), George modern "is 7(6), and of From that in Quoted Webe4 Saha (Delhi: .S. Uberoi, Bacon Chaudhary, Marg, Darwin -Mills,(eds) i! Press,2006), 315. Weekly, The Ours, bound by mechanical into Gandhi Gandhi Gandhi, Max and Raghuramaraju, domination Francis quoted Gandh, M.K. , A. University 1978), the out, Centaury", Ibid., of Gandhi's 16. empirico-mechanico-dogmatic in.J for use. Kamla Catherine 21. 26. with Mahatma P. in and "the Press, science pointed in Biology", as her and wondering moulded Understanding i Experiments P. xi Time quoted man's Bacon Roberts 25. of Oxford His science using for Twenty-first in University of i 24. Gandhi", 9. Oxford the scientists, 23. My 1970), Delhi: of nature" ! , of Gandhi", (New positive be Put hounded in constraintin 20. Story Foundation Longman, op.cit., Gandhi I \ Metaphysical "Reinventing Debating David I Modern 79 16. The Delhi: Orient Autobiography, 18. ' Post 8 205. (Bombay: . p. Autobiography: Visvanathan, (ed) (2007), Convergence xiii. Verma, Shiv i p. with and xiii. Thought, M.K.Gandhi,. .16. An op.cit., r : I 45(41), K.Gandhi,. Truth, Divergence the Saha, believe discarding spinning 4 .',;'1 "Science 2. ;,;~ April-June 2009 '::'."'1 ~_.~.~~.~~':: c~cc'-~~'--~-~~~~~"~~ ,; , I 80 .GANDHI MARG 27. Shambhu Prasad, "Towards an Understanding of Gandhi's Views on Science", Economicand Political Weekly, 36(36), (2001), pp. 37213731. 28. JosephS. Alter, "Gandhi's Body, Gandhi's Truth: Nonviolence and Biomoral Imperative of Public Health", The Journal of Asian Studies; : ! 55{2), (1996),pp. 301-322. Quoted in M.S.Adiseshia\:l, "Science and the New Culture", Leonardo, 1.-3,(1970), p. 449. .:"-. .. 30; Ibid., p. 452. 29. 31. 32. 33. 34.. 35. M.P. Mathai, "Revisiting Mahatma Gandhi's Nayee Talim or New Basic Education", Man & Development,22(4), (2000), p. 141. M.K. Gandhi, quoted in Shambhu C.Prasad. "Science and Technology in Civil Society Innovation Trajectory of Spirulina Algal Technology", Economic and Political Weekly,October-l, (2005), pp. 4365. CWMG, Vol. 33, p. 401. CWMG, Vol. 82, p..368. Ziman, J.M. , Public Knowledge: An Essay Concerning the Social Dimension ofScien.cei(Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1968), p.8. 36. CWMG, Vol. 48, p. 314. 37. Richard G. Fox, Gandhian Utopia: Experiments with Culture, (Boston: Beacon Press, 1989). 38. Ronald J. Terchek, Gandhi Struggling for Autonomy, {Maryland: Rowman & Littlefield, 1998), p. 7. 39. Young India, {May 27, 1926), p. 201. 40. Ibid. 41. 42. 43. 44. , Harijan, Guly 8, 1933), P. 4. Arvind Sharma, "What is Truth?", Gandhi Marg, 25(1), (2003), p.123. Ibid., Ibid. p. 124. Gandhi, M. K. The Story of My Experiment with Truth, op.cit., p. xi. George Sarton, "Experiments with Truth by Faraday, Darwin and Gandhi", Osiris, 11,(1954), p. 97. 47. Unto Tahtinen, "Gandhi on Natural Law", in B.R. Nanda (ed), Mahatma Gandhi 125 Years Remembering Gandhi, Understanding -Gandhi, Relevanceof"Reinventing Gandhi, (New Delhi: ICCR, 1995), pp. 198~205. 48. Shiv Visvanathan, Gandhi", in A. Rahuramaraju (ed), 45. 46. Debating GandhiA Reader,(New Delhi: Oxford University Press, 2006), i I [' p.213. 49. CWMG,Vol. 29, pp. 326-327. 50. CWMG, Vol. 53, p. 77. 51. Shiv Visvanathan, "Reinventing Gandhi", op. cit. p. 213. 52. M.K. Gandhi, The Selected Works of Mahatma Gandhi( Ahmedabad; , Navajivan Publishing House,1968),Vol. 4, p. 401. 53. 54. Young India, (February 28, 1921) Roger Garaudy, "Foreword," in Ashis Nandy, Traditions, Tyranny Volume 31 Number 1 I, --r- "!' --C"~;~? I Science, Truth and Gandhi: Divergence and Convergence 8 81 and Utopias (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1987), p. x. 55. M.K.Gandhi, Quoted in. Chadha, Yogesh. 1997. Rediscovering Gandhi, (London: Centaury Books, 1997), pp. 194-195. 56. Ibid., p. 209. 57. J. L Nehru, The Discovery of India, (Delhi: Oxford University Press, 1995), p. 476. 58. M.K.Gandhi, Autobiography or Thestory of my experimentswith truth, ,; i : i 59. 60. i : , 61. ! ,, J l; f op.cit., Part. I, P.6. Gandhi, M. K. quoted in Yogesh Chadha, 1997, op.cit., p. 122. Akeel Bilgrami, " Occidental ism, the Very Idea An Essay on the Enlightenment and Enchantment", Economic and Political Weekly, 41, (34), (2006), p. 3595. Bilgrami made a distinction between a 'thin' and 'thick' notion of scientific rationality. The thin rationality viewed the nature as 'shot through with an inner source of dynamism, which is itself divine.'; while the notion of 'thick rationality' viewed nature in essentially predatory terms as something that is to be conquered with nothing but material gain as its ends. For more details see, Akeel Bilgrami, "Gandhi, Newton and Enlightenment", Social Scientist, October, 62. 63. 64. 65. 66. 67. 68. 69. 70. (2006). Rudolf C. Heredia, " Interpreting Gandhi's Hind Swaraj", Economic and Political Weekly, 34 (24), (1999), p. 1497 . Young India, (February 14, 1940) M. K.Gandhi, Autobiography, or The Story of My Experiments with Truth, op.cit., Part I , X P.52. Young India, (November 17, 1921), p. 377. George Sarton, op.cit., pp. 106-107. CWMG, Vol. 44, p. 201. Science and Technology studies have shown that science and technology do not provide a direct route from nature to ideas about nature, that the products of science and technology are not themselves natural rather socially constructed( for detail analysis See, Karin D. Knorr Cetina , "The Ethnographic Study of Scientific Work: Towards a Constructivist Interpretation of Science", in Karin D Knorr-Cetina and M. Mulkay (eds.), ScienceObserved: Perspective on the Social Study of Science( London: Sage, 1983), pp. 115-140.,: Steven Yearly, Making Senseof Science Understanding the Social.Study of Science,(London: Sage Publication, 2005). CWMG, Vol. 52, p. 114. Scienceand Technology Policy document of the Government of India has indirectly acknowledged the concern of the Gandhi regarding the cultivation of science for the ,welfare of people. However, they have not been translated into any substantive action. For instance the Technology Policy Statement, 1983 says, 'traditional skills and capabilities will need to be upgraded and enhanced, using knowledge and techniques generated by advances in science and technology.' See, Technology Policy Statement,1983,(New Delhi: Department of April-June -"K;; -- 2009 ! ---~-"~-~-~~~-_C~.,~ " " : 82 .GANDHI MARG Science and Technology, Gove~nment of India, 1983), p. 8. 71. A.T. Hingorani, (ed.), Man vs. Machin~, writings of M. K. Gandhi, (Bombay: Bhartiya Vidya Bhavan, 1966), p, 73. 72. Haribabu, E., "Scientific Knowledge in India: From Public Resources to Intellectual Property", Sociological Bulletin, 48(182), (1999), pp. 217-233. 73. V.V. Krishna, "Policy Cultures: Changing Policy Cultures, phases and trends in Science and Technology in India", Scienceand Public Policy, 28(3), (2001), pp. 170-194. I ,, ~ i , MADHA V GOVIND is Assistant Professor, Centre for Studies in Science Policy, School of Social Sciences, Jawaharlal Nehru University, New Delhi-ll0067, Mobile: 09868732956, Email: m~ovind [email protected], m~ovind @mail.jnu.ac.in Volume 31 Number 1