Status
Available
Call number
Publication
Farrar, Straus and Giroux
DDC/MDS
| 954 |
Description
India is a country with many distinct traditions, widely divergent customs, vastly different convictions, and a veritable feast of viewpoints. In The Argumentative Indian, Amartya Sen draws on a lifetime study of his country's history and culture to suggest the ways we must understand India today in the light of its rich, long argumentative tradition. The millenia-old texts and interpretations of Hindu, Buddhist, Jain, Muslim, agnostic, and atheistic Indian thought demonstrate, Sen reminds us, ancient and well-respected rules for conducting debates and disputations, and for appreciating not only the richness of India's diversity but its need for toleration. Though Westerners have often perceived India as a place of endless spirituality and unreasoning mysticism, he underlines its long tradition of skepticism and reasoning, not to mention its secular contributions to mathematics, astronomy, linguistics, medicine, and political economy.… (more)
User reviews
LibraryThing member yosephus
Noble prizewinner in economics Sen debunks the planks of the Hindu Nationalist platform one by one, revealing the historical depth of diverse and open public debate in India beginning with the open questions about cosmic origin in the Vedas. Sen was awarded the Noble Prize for his work
The prose isn't always graceful, which is a bit of a surprise considering the ammount of writing Sen produces. He does do an amazing job balancing a sort objective-humanist approach to research with a personal dedication to the issues.
One thing among many I appreciate about Sen is his presenting as a given that an economy that doesn't serve all its members is not in good working order.
More particularly, his insights into Indian politics and economic development are invaluable to anyone wishing to understand the events of the past couple of decades there, especially Westerners. Especially Western progressives, who can easily get caught in the thought-trap that little they know qualifies them to speak about justice in a culture so different from their own.
Show More
understanding why famines occur even in years with plentiful harvests. One wonderful echo in this particular book is his assertion that democracies do not suffer famine. Famine is in part a product of closed, vanguardist governments. The prose isn't always graceful, which is a bit of a surprise considering the ammount of writing Sen produces. He does do an amazing job balancing a sort objective-humanist approach to research with a personal dedication to the issues.
One thing among many I appreciate about Sen is his presenting as a given that an economy that doesn't serve all its members is not in good working order.
More particularly, his insights into Indian politics and economic development are invaluable to anyone wishing to understand the events of the past couple of decades there, especially Westerners. Especially Western progressives, who can easily get caught in the thought-trap that little they know qualifies them to speak about justice in a culture so different from their own.
Show Less
LibraryThing member PiyushC
When I started the book, I was really amazed at the different themes put together right from Ashoka to Akbar, Vedas to Mill’s history of India. After I finished the book, I was not any wiser than when I had read the first 100 pages. The repetition of ideas with the very same examples doesn’t
I personally had more respect for Amartya Sen before I read this book and one of the reasons I am so critical of this book go beyond the obvious fact that it is badly written. If the same book had been written as “My Own Views”, I would have been more tolerant, but what really tested my patience was his effort to disguise his pre-conceived notions as the best an intellectual and rational mind can come up with. While his book may appeal more to an ill-read and/or uninformed audience, it didn’t appeal to me. Somewhere down the line, he seems to have lost contact with India as it has grown in the last decade and a half and I don’t only refer to the economic progress, but the country as a whole and maybe that is why this poor effort.
Finally, if I wouldn’t have known, I could have never guessed that an economist and that too a Nobel laureate has written this book.
Show More
make reading any easier or interesting. While he criticizes nationalism throughout his book, citing Ravindranath Tagore, he himself comes across as one. Again, his views on arguments fall flat when one reads the single-minded views of his from which it becomes very evident that instead of thinking a given issue through and then making an analyzed and rational statement; he is much more inclined to use his arguments to prove his point. He has used the opposite view in some cases, but only to substantiate his own points rather than as a value add to the book and all objections to his theory which he couldn’t have explained away even in this unilateral channel of communication, he has conveniently ignored. Having made all these points, I cannot deny that the book is very informative and the author has been successful in bringing up most of the points which should be discussed when one wants to understand, discuss or write about India, for this I would rate this book above average with a score of 3.5 on a scale of 5.I personally had more respect for Amartya Sen before I read this book and one of the reasons I am so critical of this book go beyond the obvious fact that it is badly written. If the same book had been written as “My Own Views”, I would have been more tolerant, but what really tested my patience was his effort to disguise his pre-conceived notions as the best an intellectual and rational mind can come up with. While his book may appeal more to an ill-read and/or uninformed audience, it didn’t appeal to me. Somewhere down the line, he seems to have lost contact with India as it has grown in the last decade and a half and I don’t only refer to the economic progress, but the country as a whole and maybe that is why this poor effort.
Finally, if I wouldn’t have known, I could have never guessed that an economist and that too a Nobel laureate has written this book.
Show Less
LibraryThing member dragon178
Finished reading Amartya Sen’s The Argumentative Indian. It is an erudite collection of essays on various aspects of Indian culture, art, religion and identity. It is just what an intellectual from the liberal school would write. So there were no surprises, as I found myself in agreement with his
He starts the book by reflecting on the strain of heterodoxy ever present in India, even though this country is generally considered to be the repository of Asian values, which uphold hierarchy at the cost of merit, and do not encourage dissent. Even the Bhagawat Gita which distils the essence of Hindu religious philosophy is basically an argument between two points of view, he says. These two points of view are summed up in T.S. Eliot’s Four Quartets, when Ulysses decides to Fare Forward rather than take recourse to Fare Well. In the Bhagawat Gita, the debate is on whether it is right to fare forward in the name of duty, when the certain consequences of that action would not result in the welfare ( Fare Well ) of large numbers of friends and relatives of the warring cousins, but on the contrary bring certain death and destruction to them. Arjuna is definitely justified in hesitating to take a course of action that would decimate his larger clan. Though eventually Krishna’s argument prevails, that the only way of action is doing one’s duty, faring forward, yet enough space and thought is given to dissenting viewpoints. Sen argues there never has been any stifling of radical ideas, whether in the area of philosophy or social arrangements including caste. Even in the Mahabharata lower caste thinkers are shown questioning the basis of the caste system in open forums. One such questioner asked the same questions
“We all seem to be affected by desire, anger, sorrow, worry, hunger, and labour; how do we have caste differences then?”
asked by Shylock a thousand years later:
I am a Jew. Hath not a Jew eyes? Hath not a Jew hands, organs, dimensions, senses, affections, passions; fed with the same food, hurt with the same weapons, subject to the same diseases, healed by the same means, warmed and cooled by the same winter and summer as a Christian is? If you prick us do we not bleed? If you tickle us do we not laugh? If you poison us do we not die? And if you wrong us shall we not revenge?
This tradition of dissent, argument and heterodoxy has infused the culture and society of India with plurality and diversity of approach, and thought, so that local variations interact with external influences to make an ever changing dynamic of the country.
But there is one perspective that he holds that I am not convinced about. He argues that Indian culture is a mix of Hindu, Muslim, British, Persian, Greek and Arab influences, and not exclusively or predominantly based on Hindu influences. The basis for this argument is that the Hindu religion is so intermeshed with culture, rites, traditions, and these vary across time as well as space, so there is no such thing as a definitive Hindu religion, such as those laid down in the book religions. From this flows his idea that Indian culture is not the same as Hindu culture. While this is a fine goal for a liberal to aspire to, it does not quite reflect the reality. I would agree that Hindu religion and Indian culture are not congruent, but at the same time recognise that there are vast swathes of overlap.
The collection of essays is just what I would prescribe for a dilettante interested in knowing more what being an Indian means: it seeks to establish the Indian identity, which superimposes itself on the other primary identities. Here I cannot help but remember Fukuyama’s essay on the Black Hole of State Policy, which reflects upon the problem of Bureaucracy in underdeveloped societies being hijacked by the vested interests and motives of the primary identities of its members, because multiple identities flow from development. Amartya Sen is confident that Indians have these multiple identities, which make them see themselves as Indians first and their other sub-identities of community, caste, religion, etc being subsumed under this. I feel he is being optimistic.
The book is well worth reading, especially for Indian people educated in convents and raised on English language and literature, who would like to know more about where they come from and who they really are.
Show More
views on almost all the topics. In fact, I found that he has expressed my ideas and philosophy in a much more precise, pragmatic and understated manner. I would love to cultivate such a manner of writing, which persuades through examples from a panoramic and eclectic selection of thought, put down in an understated and dispassionate manner, rather than in my usual hectoring style.He starts the book by reflecting on the strain of heterodoxy ever present in India, even though this country is generally considered to be the repository of Asian values, which uphold hierarchy at the cost of merit, and do not encourage dissent. Even the Bhagawat Gita which distils the essence of Hindu religious philosophy is basically an argument between two points of view, he says. These two points of view are summed up in T.S. Eliot’s Four Quartets, when Ulysses decides to Fare Forward rather than take recourse to Fare Well. In the Bhagawat Gita, the debate is on whether it is right to fare forward in the name of duty, when the certain consequences of that action would not result in the welfare ( Fare Well ) of large numbers of friends and relatives of the warring cousins, but on the contrary bring certain death and destruction to them. Arjuna is definitely justified in hesitating to take a course of action that would decimate his larger clan. Though eventually Krishna’s argument prevails, that the only way of action is doing one’s duty, faring forward, yet enough space and thought is given to dissenting viewpoints. Sen argues there never has been any stifling of radical ideas, whether in the area of philosophy or social arrangements including caste. Even in the Mahabharata lower caste thinkers are shown questioning the basis of the caste system in open forums. One such questioner asked the same questions
“We all seem to be affected by desire, anger, sorrow, worry, hunger, and labour; how do we have caste differences then?”
asked by Shylock a thousand years later:
I am a Jew. Hath not a Jew eyes? Hath not a Jew hands, organs, dimensions, senses, affections, passions; fed with the same food, hurt with the same weapons, subject to the same diseases, healed by the same means, warmed and cooled by the same winter and summer as a Christian is? If you prick us do we not bleed? If you tickle us do we not laugh? If you poison us do we not die? And if you wrong us shall we not revenge?
This tradition of dissent, argument and heterodoxy has infused the culture and society of India with plurality and diversity of approach, and thought, so that local variations interact with external influences to make an ever changing dynamic of the country.
But there is one perspective that he holds that I am not convinced about. He argues that Indian culture is a mix of Hindu, Muslim, British, Persian, Greek and Arab influences, and not exclusively or predominantly based on Hindu influences. The basis for this argument is that the Hindu religion is so intermeshed with culture, rites, traditions, and these vary across time as well as space, so there is no such thing as a definitive Hindu religion, such as those laid down in the book religions. From this flows his idea that Indian culture is not the same as Hindu culture. While this is a fine goal for a liberal to aspire to, it does not quite reflect the reality. I would agree that Hindu religion and Indian culture are not congruent, but at the same time recognise that there are vast swathes of overlap.
The collection of essays is just what I would prescribe for a dilettante interested in knowing more what being an Indian means: it seeks to establish the Indian identity, which superimposes itself on the other primary identities. Here I cannot help but remember Fukuyama’s essay on the Black Hole of State Policy, which reflects upon the problem of Bureaucracy in underdeveloped societies being hijacked by the vested interests and motives of the primary identities of its members, because multiple identities flow from development. Amartya Sen is confident that Indians have these multiple identities, which make them see themselves as Indians first and their other sub-identities of community, caste, religion, etc being subsumed under this. I feel he is being optimistic.
The book is well worth reading, especially for Indian people educated in convents and raised on English language and literature, who would like to know more about where they come from and who they really are.
Show Less
LibraryThing member gaurid3
It was refreshing to read about India's history, culture and identity. The first half of the book spans wonderfully across various topics and different era : from Ashoka almost 2000 years ago to Akbar 400 years ago to BJP government at the turn of the millenium. The facts are quite captivating and
Until I crossed midway in this book or even 3/4th of this book, I was determined to rate this book as 5 stars. But somehow, the last section of the book isn't quite captivating, it's interesting but I had to force myself to stay with the book to finish last 15 pages. Hence the 4 stars.
Inspite of that I say it is wonderful book and every Indian must read it.
Show More
really shed a new light on Indian history, atleast for me who hated to study history in school. Sharing of Indian ideas and cultures with China and middle-east and thus with the west in the first millenium is fascinating.Until I crossed midway in this book or even 3/4th of this book, I was determined to rate this book as 5 stars. But somehow, the last section of the book isn't quite captivating, it's interesting but I had to force myself to stay with the book to finish last 15 pages. Hence the 4 stars.
Inspite of that I say it is wonderful book and every Indian must read it.
Show Less
LibraryThing member prasenjeet
I bought this book because I was curious what Amartya Sen (a noted economist had to say) on India's history and philosophical traditions. Apart from a few good points he makes about India's intellectual traditions, I found the essays to be very repetitive. I thought that the points that Amartya Sen
Show More
makes are over simplistic. He sounds like a typical secular apologist.For example, he paints a very rosy picture of Mughal and Delhi Sultanate rule using only Akbar as an example. It is true that Akbar was tolerant but he was not the only one who ruled India during the middle ages. Moreover, Amartya Sen claims that Akbar continued to remain a good Muslim ignoring the fact that he was declared as an apostate (punishable by death in Islam) by the Ulema. Amartya Sen in any case is an authority in Economics but certainly not in History and Philosophy. Show Less
LibraryThing member danoomistmatiste
Halfway thru this book and here are some thoughts. Hard to put a single description on this one, but here is a weak attempt. A very interesting collage of articles running the gamut and trying to encompass in it's vast swath the essence of Indian History including it's most enlightened citizens,
Some of the observations on attempts by western minds to grapple with India and Indian Thought. The early ones such as Alberuni, Hieun Tsan, Megasthenes got totally picled in Indian culture to an extent that they took back these learnings to enrich their own unique cultures. The spread of Buddhism in China is one good example.
The later ones especially the British were subject to some unique introspection. Their totally unwelcome presence is best described as swine at a garden party. Material wealth being their ultimate goal, legions of these minions of the flawed empire were sent to their prized colony to study the culture. This they did by dabbling in Sanskrit and as they got increasingly mesmerized by the complexities, depth and pithiness of this rich Indiana Jonesy journey, their parallel pursuits of subduing the local fiefdoms and exercisng their power through the barrel of the cannon continued. This is about the same time that they were being kicked out of the American Colonies.
This attempt at comprehension and the result was superficial at best and were not sincere, it's main goal being propaganda to win over the hearts and minds of the natives and not to truly gain a true understanding of the texts that were subject to academic scrutiny.
Once convinced that their grip over the subcontinent was complete, these subservient supplicants had the temerity to refute their earlier glowing accounts, maybe on express orders from high above. So here you have the earliest examples of stooping to conquer, a technique they would successfully deploy in their other colonies.
Later chapters include detailed analysis on myriad topics such as food distribution, population imbalance and even the nuclear arms race in the subcontinent.
Show More
Chanakya, Aryabhatta, Ashoka, Buddha, Gandhi, Tagore among others. Some of the observations on attempts by western minds to grapple with India and Indian Thought. The early ones such as Alberuni, Hieun Tsan, Megasthenes got totally picled in Indian culture to an extent that they took back these learnings to enrich their own unique cultures. The spread of Buddhism in China is one good example.
The later ones especially the British were subject to some unique introspection. Their totally unwelcome presence is best described as swine at a garden party. Material wealth being their ultimate goal, legions of these minions of the flawed empire were sent to their prized colony to study the culture. This they did by dabbling in Sanskrit and as they got increasingly mesmerized by the complexities, depth and pithiness of this rich Indiana Jonesy journey, their parallel pursuits of subduing the local fiefdoms and exercisng their power through the barrel of the cannon continued. This is about the same time that they were being kicked out of the American Colonies.
This attempt at comprehension and the result was superficial at best and were not sincere, it's main goal being propaganda to win over the hearts and minds of the natives and not to truly gain a true understanding of the texts that were subject to academic scrutiny.
Once convinced that their grip over the subcontinent was complete, these subservient supplicants had the temerity to refute their earlier glowing accounts, maybe on express orders from high above. So here you have the earliest examples of stooping to conquer, a technique they would successfully deploy in their other colonies.
Later chapters include detailed analysis on myriad topics such as food distribution, population imbalance and even the nuclear arms race in the subcontinent.
Show Less
LibraryThing member gottfried_leibniz
I'm afraid, all essays were botched and he had put pieces together.
LibraryThing member gottfried_leibniz
I'm afraid, all essays were botched and he had put pieces together.
Subjects
Original publication date
2005
ISBN
9780374105839