Vilamit has now become so Vilambit, that I forgot the link to my own blog, and as I haven't kept it in My Favorites, I googled to find it. Diligent practice of such laziness, (lad in Bengali is phonetically more appropriate) is our family tradition, though not-so-ancient. Here are some of the specimens:
My younger brother's blog: http://baidurya1.blogspot.com/
And my eldest cousin's blog: http://rajanchakravarty.blogspot.com/
Friday, August 14, 2009
Friday, June 19, 2009
Wednesday, March 25, 2009
Buddha
My friend Imran has sent this painting of Kazi Nasir to me. I like it- simple composition, but poignant. I do'nt know why it reminds me of Sidney Nolan.
Tuesday, March 3, 2009
Inexactitude? Exactly!
The description looked sexy to me: "Inflexibility and falsifiability in economics, and the failure of rigid worldviews". (http://sanhati.com/articles/1253/). I guessed rightly that Professor Bhaduri will be at his pugnacious best. I guessed wrongly that this is a serious critique against methodological foundations of mainstream economics. After a paragraph or so, it's clear what follows next, because by now, I know what usually follows next. Preachers and pedagogues repeat. Ramakrishna's did that, Professor Bhaduri's do that.
There's nothing inherently wrong in repetition. There's nothing logically wrong in analysing neoliberal economic ideology in the way he does. Problem lies elsewhere. More precisely, in this opening paragraph:
"A badly kept secret among economists should be shared with non-economists. Economic theory, insofar as it consists of results derived logically from clearly stated premises, is mostly precautionary knowledge which warns against unfounded economic propositions. Very rarely, is it positive knowledge for guiding policies. There is an even more fuzzy area of economic knowledge which infers from quantitative data through statistical techniques and historical analogies. Such knowledge is even more tentative, yet essential in a subject like economics where controlled experiments are impossible. With data generated over time subject to observational error, bias, and random shocks, we would do well to remember the saying of the Greek philosopher Heraclitus, a rough contemporary of Buddha, “It is never possible to step twice into the same river”."
Given the complexity of the problem and limitations of the tools at disposal, any serious economist should be wary of certitude. In fact, many of them are, and that's the origin of famous "Give me one-handed economist" joke. However, during last twenty years or so, mere pedagogic tools have become the "Holy Grail" of free-market religion, useful theoretical assumptions have become the Eternal Truth at the "end of history". "Theorems of welfare economics" first became an ideology, and then they became a credo. A new religion was born.
One of my favourite out-of-syllabus economics book was Deirdre McCloskey's "The Rhetoric of Economics". I became convinced, and still I am, that economics works best when it is instrumentalist, dealing with mundane management issues, with a short and medium-term view. "Inexactitude" and "falsifiability" of "dismal science" demand humility and self-discipline. It demands avoidance of "grand narratives". Interestingly, one of the most popular "grand narratives" of recent times- "Development with Dignity" have been authored by Professor Bhaduri himself.
It's a lucid and logical Neokeynesian macroeconomic model for Indian economy, charting the path towards full-employment. It opposes reckless anarchy of free-market fundamentalists, and avoids blunt absolutism of Statists. It incorporates a third category of co-ordination mechanism, one in vogue, "community" and "participatory democracy", neatly into the narrative. The model is not a rehash of ubiquitous Keynesian model, but neither it's greatly ingenious. It's Professor Bhaduri's way of "telling the story". And it's one of many "stories". I hope Professor Bhaduri seriously considers possibilities of plurality.
Smith, Marx and "story-tellers" of their times were brilliant narrators and rhetoricians, because their "stories" were more of serious moral philosophy and less of positive economics. Marx's "story" was persuasive, because he didn't balk at the idea of jumping headlong into political nitty-gritties. Professor Bhaduri is honest to acknowledge that his "grand narrative" presumes political mobilization which is not beyond "the realm of feasible politics", but he refuses to get into details. Neither we see any interest to delve deeper into moral philosophical issues. So "Development with Dignity" remains a curious "parable" with lofty aims, built with "inexact" tools, and "falsifiable" ideas of "reasonable economics".
We should remember Heraclitus. Boomerang is a rogue weapon.
There's nothing inherently wrong in repetition. There's nothing logically wrong in analysing neoliberal economic ideology in the way he does. Problem lies elsewhere. More precisely, in this opening paragraph:
"A badly kept secret among economists should be shared with non-economists. Economic theory, insofar as it consists of results derived logically from clearly stated premises, is mostly precautionary knowledge which warns against unfounded economic propositions. Very rarely, is it positive knowledge for guiding policies. There is an even more fuzzy area of economic knowledge which infers from quantitative data through statistical techniques and historical analogies. Such knowledge is even more tentative, yet essential in a subject like economics where controlled experiments are impossible. With data generated over time subject to observational error, bias, and random shocks, we would do well to remember the saying of the Greek philosopher Heraclitus, a rough contemporary of Buddha, “It is never possible to step twice into the same river”."
Given the complexity of the problem and limitations of the tools at disposal, any serious economist should be wary of certitude. In fact, many of them are, and that's the origin of famous "Give me one-handed economist" joke. However, during last twenty years or so, mere pedagogic tools have become the "Holy Grail" of free-market religion, useful theoretical assumptions have become the Eternal Truth at the "end of history". "Theorems of welfare economics" first became an ideology, and then they became a credo. A new religion was born.
One of my favourite out-of-syllabus economics book was Deirdre McCloskey's "The Rhetoric of Economics". I became convinced, and still I am, that economics works best when it is instrumentalist, dealing with mundane management issues, with a short and medium-term view. "Inexactitude" and "falsifiability" of "dismal science" demand humility and self-discipline. It demands avoidance of "grand narratives". Interestingly, one of the most popular "grand narratives" of recent times- "Development with Dignity" have been authored by Professor Bhaduri himself.
It's a lucid and logical Neokeynesian macroeconomic model for Indian economy, charting the path towards full-employment. It opposes reckless anarchy of free-market fundamentalists, and avoids blunt absolutism of Statists. It incorporates a third category of co-ordination mechanism, one in vogue, "community" and "participatory democracy", neatly into the narrative. The model is not a rehash of ubiquitous Keynesian model, but neither it's greatly ingenious. It's Professor Bhaduri's way of "telling the story". And it's one of many "stories". I hope Professor Bhaduri seriously considers possibilities of plurality.
Smith, Marx and "story-tellers" of their times were brilliant narrators and rhetoricians, because their "stories" were more of serious moral philosophy and less of positive economics. Marx's "story" was persuasive, because he didn't balk at the idea of jumping headlong into political nitty-gritties. Professor Bhaduri is honest to acknowledge that his "grand narrative" presumes political mobilization which is not beyond "the realm of feasible politics", but he refuses to get into details. Neither we see any interest to delve deeper into moral philosophical issues. So "Development with Dignity" remains a curious "parable" with lofty aims, built with "inexact" tools, and "falsifiable" ideas of "reasonable economics".
We should remember Heraclitus. Boomerang is a rogue weapon.
Thursday, February 26, 2009
Never-say-nothing-to-say
One of my classmate's Geography answer script used to be like this:
"X is an Indian river. There is an Indian river called X. We have a river in our great country India which people call X. X is one of the greatest rivers of India. India has a lot of rivers and one of them is X..............".
Most of the "Breaking News" moments in Bengali news channels are exactly like my classmate's Geography answer script. Just replace "X is an Indian River" with "There has been a fire in X". And then it's the same never-say-nothing-to-say spirit:
"We have just now heard that a fire has broken out near X. Our correspondent has already reached X and he's confirmed that a fire has broken out there. In fact, we can show you the live footage of the fire. You can see that there is fire in X. We have just got the news that there has been a fire in X. Our correspondent is a few feet away from the fire. You must be seeing the fire in your TV screen........"
It was a survival strategy for my friend.
For media, it's inanity.
But they are doing their job well- job of a perfect mirror.
"X is an Indian river. There is an Indian river called X. We have a river in our great country India which people call X. X is one of the greatest rivers of India. India has a lot of rivers and one of them is X..............".
Most of the "Breaking News" moments in Bengali news channels are exactly like my classmate's Geography answer script. Just replace "X is an Indian River" with "There has been a fire in X". And then it's the same never-say-nothing-to-say spirit:
"We have just now heard that a fire has broken out near X. Our correspondent has already reached X and he's confirmed that a fire has broken out there. In fact, we can show you the live footage of the fire. You can see that there is fire in X. We have just got the news that there has been a fire in X. Our correspondent is a few feet away from the fire. You must be seeing the fire in your TV screen........"
It was a survival strategy for my friend.
For media, it's inanity.
But they are doing their job well- job of a perfect mirror.
Friday, February 20, 2009
Bypass at eleven
zero sky
blunt melancholy
neons
and billboards
jurassic trucks
waiting shadows
trembling speedometer
bypass
at eleven in the night
science city
culture city
dog's city
crushed dog
dogged love
loving police
police patrol
herr sergeant, would you be the woman of this night?
bypass
at eleven in the night
ruby island
emerald trees
topaz garden
cash and carry
free signal
no breaks
empty malls
there's no madhushala
no insight
bypass
at eleven in the night
then there're dusty trees
and sleeping chai shops
torn kites
and vigilant lamps
fading history
and rising cities
lakhs of citizens
and lakhs of homes
and that ghost
that fight
that solemn mass
let there be light
bypass
at eleven in the night
blunt melancholy
neons
and billboards
jurassic trucks
waiting shadows
trembling speedometer
bypass
at eleven in the night
science city
culture city
dog's city
crushed dog
dogged love
loving police
police patrol
herr sergeant, would you be the woman of this night?
bypass
at eleven in the night
ruby island
emerald trees
topaz garden
cash and carry
free signal
no breaks
empty malls
there's no madhushala
no insight
bypass
at eleven in the night
then there're dusty trees
and sleeping chai shops
torn kites
and vigilant lamps
fading history
and rising cities
lakhs of citizens
and lakhs of homes
and that ghost
that fight
that solemn mass
let there be light
bypass
at eleven in the night
Thursday, February 19, 2009
On Silence
"Do not speak unless you can improve on silence."
I don't know who said this. Google search produces a plethora of sources- Buddhist Philosophy, Lawrence Coughlin, Chinese proverb, New England proverb etc. Doesn't matter really. I find an approximate corrollary of the same in the last line of Tractus:
"Whereof one cannot speak, thereof one must be silent".
Though this must be of immense philosophical importance and spiritual significance, I've a bit perverse, but more pragmatic reading of this. Given the social class ( in a loose non-Marxian sense) to which he belonged, Wittgenstein must have been tired of "words".
I often wonder about ourselves, people who are nothing but "words", perpetually talking and writing- writers, academicians, activists, journalists, executives- full gamut of educated, enlightened and voluble members of intelligensia. Don't we ever get tired of "words"- of self and of others? "Words" can be so tiring. It's not that we can't escape from it, but we don't want to. We are attached to it. We depend on it. Though we tend to think that it's just the other way around.
This is not about our day-to-day utilitarian communications. It's more about "profundity" of thoughts and ideas, supposedly achieved via our language, interactions and communications. Probably true, but I wonder why I feel so drained out and claustrophobic when I walk this path to profundity. One of most gifted speakers of our times, Swami Vivekananda, probably suffered from this fatigue at the end of his life when he gradually withdrew from active social interactions and started to spend more time with his pets. I got this impression from Sumit Sarkar's brilliant treatise on Ramakrishna: ""Kaliyuga", "Chakri" and "Bhakti": Ramakrishna and His Times".
I have always been a reluctant talker- reluctance often bordering on pathological shyness. I've been admonished too many times by my elder relatives for this, specially during my childhood. Though these days I've bettered in this resepct, still I nurture a yearning for silence. All these metaphysical speculations, may just be my way to find "words" for this yearning. It's ironic.
It's ironic that someone's first post on blog is on silence, wasting so many words. :-)
I don't know who said this. Google search produces a plethora of sources- Buddhist Philosophy, Lawrence Coughlin, Chinese proverb, New England proverb etc. Doesn't matter really. I find an approximate corrollary of the same in the last line of Tractus:
"Whereof one cannot speak, thereof one must be silent".
Though this must be of immense philosophical importance and spiritual significance, I've a bit perverse, but more pragmatic reading of this. Given the social class ( in a loose non-Marxian sense) to which he belonged, Wittgenstein must have been tired of "words".
I often wonder about ourselves, people who are nothing but "words", perpetually talking and writing- writers, academicians, activists, journalists, executives- full gamut of educated, enlightened and voluble members of intelligensia. Don't we ever get tired of "words"- of self and of others? "Words" can be so tiring. It's not that we can't escape from it, but we don't want to. We are attached to it. We depend on it. Though we tend to think that it's just the other way around.
This is not about our day-to-day utilitarian communications. It's more about "profundity" of thoughts and ideas, supposedly achieved via our language, interactions and communications. Probably true, but I wonder why I feel so drained out and claustrophobic when I walk this path to profundity. One of most gifted speakers of our times, Swami Vivekananda, probably suffered from this fatigue at the end of his life when he gradually withdrew from active social interactions and started to spend more time with his pets. I got this impression from Sumit Sarkar's brilliant treatise on Ramakrishna: ""Kaliyuga", "Chakri" and "Bhakti": Ramakrishna and His Times".
I have always been a reluctant talker- reluctance often bordering on pathological shyness. I've been admonished too many times by my elder relatives for this, specially during my childhood. Though these days I've bettered in this resepct, still I nurture a yearning for silence. All these metaphysical speculations, may just be my way to find "words" for this yearning. It's ironic.
It's ironic that someone's first post on blog is on silence, wasting so many words. :-)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
