-
This forum contains old posts that have been closed. New threads and replies may not be made here. Please navigate to the relevant forum to create a new thread or post a reply.
-
Welcome to Tamil Brahmins forums.
You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our Free Brahmin Community you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our community today!
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact contact us.
Intellectuals
- Thread starter fire
- Start date
- Status
Brahmanyan
Active member
Good query. As per my understanding, Intellectuals are decided and certified by the Left oriented Media in our Country. These "intellectuals" are perfectly "secular", have scant regard for our ancient culture and values and anti rightists to the core. Some of them are "great Historians" constantly rewriting the History of India inventing new theories. Then there are other intellectuals who will lead group of so called NGOs against any thing considered National interest. Some other Intellectuals who are professional protesters whom we will find from Narmada Valley to Nandigram. You may even find some intellectuals in Cine-fields too.
If you watch the English visual Media you will find them invited to sit in the front row of all group discussions to offer their valued opinion with lot of statistics.
Kindly correct me if I am wrong.
Regards,
Brahmanyan.
If you watch the English visual Media you will find them invited to sit in the front row of all group discussions to offer their valued opinion with lot of statistics.
Kindly correct me if I am wrong.
Regards,
Brahmanyan.
N.R.Ranganathan
Active member
Dear Mr.Fire,
A good question ! The dictionary meaning is ' a person with a highly
developed intellect ' ( used as a noun ). Intellect is ' the power of
reasoning and understanding objectively '.
Marxists believe that they have monopoly to world's wisdom. They suffer
from intellectual arrogance, as Bernard Shaw opined. But, if you discuss
with them you will find , to your horror and dismay, that they have not
even read Karl Marx properly !
A good question ! The dictionary meaning is ' a person with a highly
developed intellect ' ( used as a noun ). Intellect is ' the power of
reasoning and understanding objectively '.
Marxists believe that they have monopoly to world's wisdom. They suffer
from intellectual arrogance, as Bernard Shaw opined. But, if you discuss
with them you will find , to your horror and dismay, that they have not
even read Karl Marx properly !
navy-eswaran
Active member
dear sir,
intellectual in INDIAN term denotes the one who has passed out from JNU or has SFI background, wears crumpled shirt/jibba is better , has a jolna pai and has a beard.
they are classified superior to even Dr(real doctorate)manmohan singh.
regards
eswaran
intellectual in INDIAN term denotes the one who has passed out from JNU or has SFI background, wears crumpled shirt/jibba is better , has a jolna pai and has a beard.
they are classified superior to even Dr(real doctorate)manmohan singh.
regards
eswaran
H
hariharan1972
Guest
By definition, i believe the term 'Left Intellectual' is an oxymoron.
Since the 'technical' definitions of an intellectual has already been dealt with, i restrict myself to defining a 'Left intellectual' : A gregarious moron is a Left intellectual.
The quickest way to improving Indias average IQ would be to shunt the Leftists to Utopia.
That apart,
Generally speaking, in India, Intelligentsia has almost been reduced to a movement of renegades or those who fuel anti-incumbency among the masses.
The inconsistency of the intelligentsia is so apparent given the way they react to situations. where Hindu sentiments are hurt they are muted while they would rush in defence for others.
They cavil endlessly about the 'system' without reflecting what their contribution has been in improving it.
Intelligentsia in India as a concept is forlorn.
N.R.Ranganathan
Active member
Sirs:
A good many interpretations! Marx said that ' intellectuals aim to universalise
their ideologies and then turnabout and expose the partialities of those
ideologies '. A discussion on 'Intellectuals' is found in this link:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intellectual
Some interesting reading if you have time to spare.
A good many interpretations! Marx said that ' intellectuals aim to universalise
their ideologies and then turnabout and expose the partialities of those
ideologies '. A discussion on 'Intellectuals' is found in this link:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intellectual
Some interesting reading if you have time to spare.
left vs right
LEFT - here means a section of a society who are labourers and are treated like the left hand of a body in yesteryears. This particular practice of putting down by the right hand section of the society becomes unbearable to them after a certain extent they couldn't tolerate the audacity of the rights, intellectuals of that time who are sympathisers of the left society demanded "left" be treated equal to "rights" they were called "left intellectuals".
The movement enjoyed enviable developments. In europe , US and India, labour unions played major roles. Fearing them, the then commercial giants in Japan,US and Europe set up companies in singapore,malaysia,indonesia in late 1960's and they also invested heavily on automation.
In particular Singpaore benefitted by manging the expectation of unions and the commercial giants effectively (In other words balancing the right and left effectively). Seeing this strategy in the early 90's china also began to see its folly of being one-sided and implemented the managment practice of balancing the left and right with rich rewards.
India's intellectuals also know this is the correct way , but due to multi-party system of democracy, there were a lot of hindrances in implemeting this. But having clearly saw the other options are ineffective the giant is slowly moving in the correct direction.
Regards
Malgova.mango
LEFT - here means a section of a society who are labourers and are treated like the left hand of a body in yesteryears. This particular practice of putting down by the right hand section of the society becomes unbearable to them after a certain extent they couldn't tolerate the audacity of the rights, intellectuals of that time who are sympathisers of the left society demanded "left" be treated equal to "rights" they were called "left intellectuals".
The movement enjoyed enviable developments. In europe , US and India, labour unions played major roles. Fearing them, the then commercial giants in Japan,US and Europe set up companies in singapore,malaysia,indonesia in late 1960's and they also invested heavily on automation.
In particular Singpaore benefitted by manging the expectation of unions and the commercial giants effectively (In other words balancing the right and left effectively). Seeing this strategy in the early 90's china also began to see its folly of being one-sided and implemented the managment practice of balancing the left and right with rich rewards.
India's intellectuals also know this is the correct way , but due to multi-party system of democracy, there were a lot of hindrances in implemeting this. But having clearly saw the other options are ineffective the giant is slowly moving in the correct direction.
Regards
Malgova.mango
Last edited:
N.R.Ranganathan
Active member
Dear Mr.Malgovaji,
Please say it clearly - whether it is vested interest or stupidity of our
politicitans !, in either case they are not intellectuals.
Please say it clearly - whether it is vested interest or stupidity of our
politicitans !, in either case they are not intellectuals.
In reply to the question
Dear Ranganathanji!
My answer is general in tune with the question asked and not specific to any countries or any "ism's" or politics.
Thanks
Regards
Dear Ranganathanji!
My answer is general in tune with the question asked and not specific to any countries or any "ism's" or politics.
Thanks
Regards
Dear Sri malgova.mango Ji,
A very thoughtful analysis.
If I may add. Singapore essentially got rich because they played the west/east arbitration game of risk. Mr. Lee Kwan Yew admits this and forecasts that the role of Singapore to arbitrate this in the future will diminish greatly.
The labor unions are a thing of yester years. Unions work only when the labor is abysmally exploited as they were in Europe and in USA after bad economical periods. In fact, the middle class in the USA was built by the Unions. But this is no longer true as today they stand opposing the global transformation known as 'globalization'. No one can stop this transformation - it is a juggernaut. A 'perfect storm' fueled by technology and the ever increasing productivity is fueling this transformation. As a country, you either play or you will be left behind.
Without 'intellectuals' there would be no advancement in civilization. Without 'intellectuals' there would be no horrors visited upon the meek of this earth.
Pranams,
KRS
A very thoughtful analysis.
If I may add. Singapore essentially got rich because they played the west/east arbitration game of risk. Mr. Lee Kwan Yew admits this and forecasts that the role of Singapore to arbitrate this in the future will diminish greatly.
The labor unions are a thing of yester years. Unions work only when the labor is abysmally exploited as they were in Europe and in USA after bad economical periods. In fact, the middle class in the USA was built by the Unions. But this is no longer true as today they stand opposing the global transformation known as 'globalization'. No one can stop this transformation - it is a juggernaut. A 'perfect storm' fueled by technology and the ever increasing productivity is fueling this transformation. As a country, you either play or you will be left behind.
Without 'intellectuals' there would be no advancement in civilization. Without 'intellectuals' there would be no horrors visited upon the meek of this earth.
Pranams,
KRS
N.R.Ranganathan
Active member
Dear Sri KRSji and Malgovaji,
While the labour is conscious of their rights, they are oblivious of their duties.
The workers are backed by the Trade Unions. The leaders of these Unions
are invariably politicians. The workers constitute a sizeable vote-bank.
Therefore the leaders behave irrationally with the Management and try to
get more benefits for the workers. In India, even sick units without even
a slender chance of economic viability are forced to run the show and are
not allowed to close down. The nationalised textile units and other sick
public-sector undertakings drain the public exchequer and this is a form of
indirect tax on the people.
The Supreme Court has pronounced many landmark judgments emphasising
the rights of the management to demand performance from the workforce,
but the companies find it dificult to enforce their rights because of the
unions' recalcitrant behaviour.
That is why I said we in India lack the political will.
While the labour is conscious of their rights, they are oblivious of their duties.
The workers are backed by the Trade Unions. The leaders of these Unions
are invariably politicians. The workers constitute a sizeable vote-bank.
Therefore the leaders behave irrationally with the Management and try to
get more benefits for the workers. In India, even sick units without even
a slender chance of economic viability are forced to run the show and are
not allowed to close down. The nationalised textile units and other sick
public-sector undertakings drain the public exchequer and this is a form of
indirect tax on the people.
The Supreme Court has pronounced many landmark judgments emphasising
the rights of the management to demand performance from the workforce,
but the companies find it dificult to enforce their rights because of the
unions' recalcitrant behaviour.
That is why I said we in India lack the political will.
Dear Sri N.R.Ranganathan Ji,
I agree with your above posting. India lags far behind China in manufacturing in the global economy precisely because of some outdated labor rules that the government is afraid to remove.
Hopefully, with the pressure of globalization, things will get better.
Pranams,
KRS
I agree with your above posting. India lags far behind China in manufacturing in the global economy precisely because of some outdated labor rules that the government is afraid to remove.
Hopefully, with the pressure of globalization, things will get better.
Pranams,
KRS
Dear KRS,
I don't think the Harward professor Dr.S.Swamy would agree to that. I read in one of his articles/books, I can't remember which one, that the Chinese are actually doing either assembly or lending their trade mark mostly to its hinterland countries' products and once they find that India to be more beneficial they could become our hinterland. He has also made a convincing argument that given the freedom in India the long range outlook is to our advantage.
Regards,
I don't think the Harward professor Dr.S.Swamy would agree to that. I read in one of his articles/books, I can't remember which one, that the Chinese are actually doing either assembly or lending their trade mark mostly to its hinterland countries' products and once they find that India to be more beneficial they could become our hinterland. He has also made a convincing argument that given the freedom in India the long range outlook is to our advantage.
Regards,
Dear Sri Desi Ji,
I don't know which one of my statements above that Dr. Swamy would find objectionable. I was in India for a few years about ten years ago and first hand know about the manufacturing policy issues. I was also posted in China recently. My stetements come from observing things on my own.
I did not say anything about any long term vision. I was only talking about present day government policies.
If Dr.Swamy finds that something else is true, then obviously I must be wrong.
Pranams,
KRS
I don't know which one of my statements above that Dr. Swamy would find objectionable. I was in India for a few years about ten years ago and first hand know about the manufacturing policy issues. I was also posted in China recently. My stetements come from observing things on my own.
I did not say anything about any long term vision. I was only talking about present day government policies.
If Dr.Swamy finds that something else is true, then obviously I must be wrong.
Pranams,
KRS
It s about balancing left and right
Dear Ranganathan Ji,
I fully agree with you, becaue of the weight given to "Left" in India , India couldn't develop to its potentiality.
What I want to emphasis is on balancing left and right . Whichever country manage to do that , they attract a lot of investments and job. This is what I want to emphasis.
Too much on right side, also produces the ill effects of labour exploitation , too much rich - poor divide affecting the morale of the public etc.. on the other hand Too much on left side , aslo increase the business cost,strikes and productivity issues.
So the best is to manage the expectations of both sides, which is done effectively in countries like Singapore.
Thanks
Dear Ranganathan Ji,
I fully agree with you, becaue of the weight given to "Left" in India , India couldn't develop to its potentiality.
What I want to emphasis is on balancing left and right . Whichever country manage to do that , they attract a lot of investments and job. This is what I want to emphasis.
Too much on right side, also produces the ill effects of labour exploitation , too much rich - poor divide affecting the morale of the public etc.. on the other hand Too much on left side , aslo increase the business cost,strikes and productivity issues.
So the best is to manage the expectations of both sides, which is done effectively in countries like Singapore.
Thanks
N.R.Ranganathan
Active member
Dear Mr.Malgovaji,
Absolutely correct. But we will have to reckon with the facts of life. In our
country, the number of poor people is more than the affluent. The politicians
want to please the poor and appease them with lot of sops, concessions,
reservations etc to get votes and come to power ( but with a view to make
money for themselves !).
In chennai, there are encroachments on the roads obstructing free-flow of
traffic, but, if the police wants to evict them, the local leaders would not
allow the police to act. This is an example of how our politicians function
in this country.
Absolutely correct. But we will have to reckon with the facts of life. In our
country, the number of poor people is more than the affluent. The politicians
want to please the poor and appease them with lot of sops, concessions,
reservations etc to get votes and come to power ( but with a view to make
money for themselves !).
In chennai, there are encroachments on the roads obstructing free-flow of
traffic, but, if the police wants to evict them, the local leaders would not
allow the police to act. This is an example of how our politicians function
in this country.
It is interesting that the question "Who is an intellectual?" is given to very few interpretations in this thread. Invariably, the views border on sarcasm and satire, especially directed at the Left movements. In all cultures, there is the Advocatus Diaboli who is especially well suited to show the mainstream where they stand. Indeed, specific types of people are more comfortable being so - they enjoy having differences of opinion with others. And it is desirable in a sense, since they will usually have the smack to stand up and blow the proverbial whistle on the Emperor's clothing.
In India, these have taken on a strange proportion, which is unlike the type of intellectual found in other countries. A well known western intellectual was J Robert Oppenheimer (commonly known as J ) - who many of you may know a bit about. he was not only a renowned theoretical physicist, but also a communist sympathizer and a linguist, an exceptionally capable one, at that. When someone like J presents
an opinion on something, it was not always studied and well weighed from all sides - it was a very personal approach to a stance, which was conceived with some objective in mind. J was also popular for having studied Sanskrit and learnt all of the Bhagavad Gita - apparently he used quotations from the Gita in social occasions.
An intellectual in my mind is necessarily idiosyncratic, necessarily different from most people in the main stream, because it is in the difference of ideas from others that he derives his strength. There are capable leaders who know situations that they are in but will, because of the dynamics of their respective situations, conspire to act towards a collective disadvantage, at times. It is at these times, that intellectuals are necessary.
An intellectual should also be very principled, and that automatically disqualifies many or most Indian politicians from being intellectuals. I do not say this in jest or in satire, I say this because I have made the same observations about them which I have made about others.
APJ Abdul Kalam may be considered an intellectual, as also Amartya Sen, Narayana Murthy, Azim Premji, J R D Tata, and others. There are many candidates to choose from, but they exhibit certain characteristics and these are probably what we should look closely into.
In India, these have taken on a strange proportion, which is unlike the type of intellectual found in other countries. A well known western intellectual was J Robert Oppenheimer (commonly known as J ) - who many of you may know a bit about. he was not only a renowned theoretical physicist, but also a communist sympathizer and a linguist, an exceptionally capable one, at that. When someone like J presents
an opinion on something, it was not always studied and well weighed from all sides - it was a very personal approach to a stance, which was conceived with some objective in mind. J was also popular for having studied Sanskrit and learnt all of the Bhagavad Gita - apparently he used quotations from the Gita in social occasions.
An intellectual in my mind is necessarily idiosyncratic, necessarily different from most people in the main stream, because it is in the difference of ideas from others that he derives his strength. There are capable leaders who know situations that they are in but will, because of the dynamics of their respective situations, conspire to act towards a collective disadvantage, at times. It is at these times, that intellectuals are necessary.
An intellectual should also be very principled, and that automatically disqualifies many or most Indian politicians from being intellectuals. I do not say this in jest or in satire, I say this because I have made the same observations about them which I have made about others.
APJ Abdul Kalam may be considered an intellectual, as also Amartya Sen, Narayana Murthy, Azim Premji, J R D Tata, and others. There are many candidates to choose from, but they exhibit certain characteristics and these are probably what we should look closely into.
N.R.Ranganathan
Active member
Dear Tech_ rsr,
At first we did take this term seriously and I started it with the correct
meaning of 'intellectuals'. But, as things stand today, many people claim
themselves as intellectuals - like the Indian communists, journalists and
artists who have the habit of condemning normally accepted principles and
practices. Hence the discussion changed its course.
At first we did take this term seriously and I started it with the correct
meaning of 'intellectuals'. But, as things stand today, many people claim
themselves as intellectuals - like the Indian communists, journalists and
artists who have the habit of condemning normally accepted principles and
practices. Hence the discussion changed its course.
In my early days in the West, friends used to ask me a general question "Who is a Brahmin?". I had picked up a definition from somewhere which I liked.
The Brahmins are the Intellectual Aristocracy of India.
Brahmins have always been justifiably proud of their intellectual capacity. One of the definitions of Nirguna Brahman is "Pure Intelligence."
It is a sad state of affairs when demagogues claim to be intellectuals. The only Communist Intellectual was Karl Marx and Engels of course. But then they were strictly not Communists.
We should all recognize the Demagogues.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demagogy
The Brahmins are the Intellectual Aristocracy of India.
Brahmins have always been justifiably proud of their intellectual capacity. One of the definitions of Nirguna Brahman is "Pure Intelligence."
It is a sad state of affairs when demagogues claim to be intellectuals. The only Communist Intellectual was Karl Marx and Engels of course. But then they were strictly not Communists.
We should all recognize the Demagogues.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demagogy
Last edited:
Does this mean that the ambiguity in terms cannot be separated? We do have the expression pseudo-intellectual to describe the latter.
Having said that, I don't think I fully agree with your classifications.
It should not be possible theoretically for someone uneducated about Communist policy to become a communist. Only two groups of people may find that motivating to do in the country - the Bengalis and the Keralites. They would always exist on the fringes and gain from the mainstream, while being disconnected and contributing minimally to internal growth. Most of all, the derive their ability to appear intelligent, by having the opportunity to be different. Although it is true that intelligent people can be different, it need not always be true or necessary to be different to be intelligent or effective. This should be understood by all right-wingers, if they intend to answer communist intellectuals.
Journalists are in a position to be informed about the nitty gritty of polity, and could indeed be a good source of information, and perhaps could inspire thought. Indeed, journalism is the very science of interpreting events for public consumption - and that is something which gives one the standing of being informed in the first place. But of course, when one digs deeper, one discovers whether or not these claims made to understanding something such as a situation or a person or a concept - are indeed true.
Artists I have always had a doubt about - they become popular not for the reason that they perform in an art which everyone likes - and indeed the concept of media influence is driven strongly by a non-linear trend: an artists reinforces a certain idea present in some people in a society, and these people, if otherwise of a good standing or if well networked, pass on the idea to others. This makes them influential, but not necessarily correct (or intellectual, for that matter). (For example: what do you see in an MF Hussain painting? I don't see a great deal!)
Do we undermine right-wing people who have a firm understand of why we need the mainstream? Shouldn't they be considered intellectuals? Or are they indeed, by a significant degree?
N.R.Ranganathan
Active member
Dear Mr.Kunjuppu,
Rosa Luxemberg, yes; that's why Com.Dange named his daughter as Rosa,
later known as Mrs. Roza Deshpande.
But, I would put Christopher Caudwell above all. He was a great scholar
and his interests ranged from physics to poetry to philosophy. He was
a British marxist and he died at the age of 30 during the Spanish civil war.
He has authored several books, notably The crisis in physics, Studies in
dying culture , Further studies in dying culture, Illusion and Reality. He was
a man of rare vision and courage and in him both theory and practice
combined into a grand fabric.
Rosa Luxemberg, yes; that's why Com.Dange named his daughter as Rosa,
later known as Mrs. Roza Deshpande.
But, I would put Christopher Caudwell above all. He was a great scholar
and his interests ranged from physics to poetry to philosophy. He was
a British marxist and he died at the age of 30 during the Spanish civil war.
He has authored several books, notably The crisis in physics, Studies in
dying culture , Further studies in dying culture, Illusion and Reality. He was
a man of rare vision and courage and in him both theory and practice
combined into a grand fabric.
- Status
