EPW_Science Movements and Science Wars

8/13/2019 EPW_Science Movements and Science Wars

1/7


2/7

heritage.Itseeks to identifya set of focusedobjectives within PSM because they con-sist of many voluntarygroups throughoutIndia.Theonlycommonthreaduniting hesegroups is that they fall on the interfaceof S and T in society and are not a directdivision of government.Second, the agenda of PSM is not totargetthe state by forming trade unions orpolitical partiesof the socialist orcommu-nist type to win state power by electionsor undergroundactivities. Instead, PSMfocuses on grass roots activities by form-ing loose associations.Theirorganisationalstructure is ratherdecentralised, lackingregulation, differentiation, control, andpower. Their officials and members con-sist of voluntary workers who rely onnominal donation. They publicise theircauses by speaking publicly and demon-strating against governmental policies.Many groupsuseart, ongs, poems, dances,puppet shows, and plays to wage theirstruggles. Tilly (1985) has argued thatdemonstrationhas become a key form ofcollective action due to the growth ofelections and the beginning of popularparticipation in national politics.Third, activists in PSM do not view

notsufficient to analyse theIndiansociety.PSM are rooted in the middle classes andtheirgoals areclass-unspecific anddiverse.Their modes of action are based on grassroots activities that are informal, sponta-neous, and legal. MahatmaGandhi's phi-losophy of non-violence, tolerance,spirtiualisation of politics, and self-reli-ance influence many PSM activists. Eventhough PSM go along with the status quo,they advocate for changes in structuredinequality and empower people to standfor themselves.

Political Activities of PSMAfter independence in 1947, Indiaemerged as underdeveloped in relation tothe west and sought to eliminate povertyand unemployment with large-scaleindustrialisation.Nehru(1985: 31) believedthat without 'catching up' with the scien-tific and technological advances made inthe west, India would remain weak and

vulnerable to foreign domination. He feltthatIndiansmust learnto thinkandbehavescientifically to overcome traditional,mystical, supernatural, uncritical, andinward-looking way of life so they can

of supernaturalismand superstitirealised thatscience was one amoknowledge systems, yet stressepremacy in the study of societyHowever,asKSSPexperiencedin communicating their scientificpeople, the lack of scientific temproot cause of India's problecriticised inside the movement.

thing it amounted to blaming petheir misfortune. It was arguedscientific temper ike anyotherbehattribute could not be made a urequirement for modernisation1984]. The Dependency School iunderdevelopment or poverty of world (periphery) as the basis ofment or wealth of the west (core1975, Amin 1976, Wallerstein 197rejected the possibility of self-scapitalist development in the pwithout breaking its historicalwiththecore.Indian cholarssuch Kumar Bagchi, Nirmal ChandraLall, Deepak Nayyar, Ashok RuRanjitSau showed that the mainthe backwardness of India was dreproduction of economic andstructures n accordance with the


3/7

tific knowledge between thescientific com-munityandthepeople.The Medico FriendsCircle has been campaigning againstglobal corporations marketing non-essential and dangerous drugs in India.The same group exposed cover-up of thehealth effects on the gas victims whenMIC leaked fromthe Union Carbideplantin Bhopal in 1984, killing over 2,500 andaffecting 2,00,000 people. Many groupshave initiatedexperimental science teach-ing programmesbased on the discovery orinquirymethodas opposed torotelearningin ruralareas. Generally, these groups nolonger aim to teach atheism or confrontreligion even when they experience oppo-sition from those representing religiousorthodoxy [Kannan 1990]. They believethatthe issue of religion and tradition canbe addressed successfully only after sig-nificant economic and political changeshave occurred.Most of these groups feel that scientificknowledge and technology should not beconcentrated in the west and in the handsof Indianelite, and it should be distributedfairly. As pointed out earlier, India hasbeen trying to revitalise its economy byintroducing S and T, which has been

role in empowering people with science,when it has been increasingly becominganoppressive instrument n the policies ofmodernisation and development. This ledto redefining the role of science in PSMto the mobilisation and participation ofthe people for their own development -as distinguished from the kind of 'devel-opment' handed out to them [Kannan1979:1]. PSM rejected the idea that theycan solve people's problemsfromoutside;instead proposed to learnfrom the people[Bhalla and Reddy 1994].People in India have been gettingorganised to oppose destruction of theirlivelihood inthename of scientific progressand national development. With defores-tation,ruralwomen havetotraversegreaterdistances to collect fuel, fodder, andotherbasic necessities, which has cut timeavailable forwage labourandstretched thenormal working day up to 14-15 hours.These women waged the world famousChipko Movement by clinging to trees tosave themfrombeing felled. The NationalFish Workers Forum is fighting off thethreat of mass displacement and damageto the ecosystems by the industrialfishingpractices of gigantic factory ships. Bhopal

the project. Similar withdrawalglobal corporationstook place in1999. Now the movement is figUS power utility Ogden Energwhich hasdecided to invest into thelectric project. In response tofiled by the movement againsSarovar Project in 1994, on Oct2000 the Supreme Court orderedto be completed as 'expeditiopossible.In 1993, several groupsthatoppprevailing model of industrialment came together to form theAlliance of People's Movemenredefined development in terms ity, peace, happiness, and self-They want people to be involvedecision-making, and have contthe naturalresources in theirvicinadvocate self-reliance of both urural communities for their basiwith limited dependence on emarkets. For them, industrial prshould be labour-intensive, decenand based on renewable energpropose sustainable use and consof soil, water, forests, andotherreThey believe that such action


4/7

work has been to reassess modernsciencethat has grown within the context ofcolonialism and imperialism, to evoke adebate on western versus Indian science,andtopopularise hatheritageof theIndiansystemthatwasdestroyedduring heBritishrule. They argue that the claims of truthin modern science are no more universalthanclaims of truth n Indianscience. Theythinkthat theIndiansociety has its versionof truth and thus interpret knowledgeaccordingly. They affirm the epistemo-logical right of Indian people to under-stand the world from their own culturaland metaphysical assumptions.The theme of appropriatedevelopmentor alternative society is not without criti-cism. The implementation of appropriateS and T or a returnto the golden past isseen asapanacea ormany problemsfacingIndia. Yet, there are no plans on how toimplement goals of appropriatedevelop-ment or alternative society on a widerscale.Science Wars?

Much of the science practised through-out the world draws on the basic prin-

that decisions on scientific methods areshaped by disciplinary cultures, availabil-ity of funds, networking politics, and soforth. Instead of the institution of science,they focus on the conduct of science suchas facts, theories, methods, technical de-signs, andexperiments to show how socialcontext is essential in the scientific activi-ties. For instance, historian Mackenzie(1978) has shown that Pearson's correla-tion statistic was to produce a scientificbasis for eugenic ideology to support theemerging professional class; in contrast,Yule's Q statistic was tied to public healthto support the programmes of the estab-lished upper classes. Feminist scholarKeller (1985, 1983) has demonstratedthegender bias in locating the seat of geneticcontrol in the single master molecule(a masculine trait)over interaction afemi-nine trait). Social constructivist Latour(1987) has found scientific controversiesamong scientiststo be moreimportant hanestablished facts because this is wherefacts areeither accepted or rejected. Simi-larly,Knorr-Cetina 1981) foundthatthereis no single scientific method and scien-tists to be opportunistic in their use ofmethods. My own research on scientists

counterculturefor non-western cties, and dedicates his book to science teachers I never hacolonialists, such as Nandy (19-Alvares (1990) argue that moderfails to give due recognition to tculture and helps constitute theculture in which it was producronmentalist Shiva (1988) findsdian women are closer to naturehave anespecially privileged viewprotect nature.In the 1990s, self-proclaimed dof science launched an attackscholars nscience studiesbycharthem as 'the academic left'. Withlication of Higher Superstition(a biologist) and Levitt (a mathemin 1994, the so-called science wbroken out in the west. The Sokis considered a pivotal point of thwars in which Sokal (1996a, 1physicist, published an article suculturalcritiques of science in Soonly to reveal thathis article wasHis affair was carried on the frof TheNew YorkTimes,followedother publications and by the nein the US and around the wor


5/7

studies, they dismiss science studies withcaricature, condescension, and parody.They portraycritics of science as 'thebibleof North Americanscience', 'doctrinaire','eco-apocalyptic rhetoric', 'goddess wor-shipping', 'hotbed of postmodern irratio-nalism', 'hostile', 'ideological', 'left'sdisenchantment with science', 'muddle-headed', 'nonsensical thesis', 'radicals','sloppy thinking', 'too marginalised tochange the world', 'refugee from an un-satisfactoryscientific career', andso forth.They do not acquire detailed knowledgeof science studies but proceed to judge itanyway. They fail to address how sciencestudies have established themselves in thelast 30 years and why they have a largefollowing in universities both in the USand around he world.Theydo notprovidea 'scientific proof' why scientific episte-mologies are necessarily better than alter-native ones; instead, they keep reiteratingtheir ideological convictions.Second, even though defenders of sci-ence do not find a theoretical core amongthe critics of science, they still refer tothem as constituting 'the academic left'.Marxists, postmodernists, environ-mentalists, feminists, multiculturalists,

that observations are shaped by socialfactors orstructuredbyculturalcategories,but they are, at the same time, shaped andstructuredby an.external reality. Insteadof assuming the supremacy of modernscience, however, they argue that otherknowledge claims deserve the same re-spect. Such investigation is likely to offera basis for deciding which claims oneshould believe in and why.Finally, it is importantto point out thatscience has become an integral part ofmodern society and the goals of sciencestudies is to providea forumfordiscussionon the social and ethical dimensions of.scientific activities. Because of such rolescience studies are not always popular.Yet, science studies have acquiredpromi-nence andestablishedthemselves byshow-ing the role of society, culture, race, gen-der,and class in scientific activities, whichdefenders of science are refuting. If mod-ern science was not limitedin its scope andhad developed its own scientific methodsto remove value, it would not be open tointerpretations by science studies. None-theless, the critique of science is a matterof science practice. It appears that toomuch has been made of two little of the

movement. If scientific tempertioned in PSM, it is to critique thgovernment (Indian Science Coninternational symposiums (e g tbranch of the InternationalPolicy) that continue to discuss to inculcate scientific temperpeople. PSM use science in the possible sense to develop the min the country.There is aneed toseparate heolof scientific temper from the newof popularisation of science in Pformer prioritises scientific knowopposed to other knowledge sybelieves in changing people's fristic, supernatural,traditional, ancal prejudices to scientific rationlatter, however, believes that sprogressshould notbe confined toand the educated sections of Indety. Many groups, therefore,popularise science in a numbersuch as health, education, nutritiing, environment, communicaticulture, and sanitation so peopleenjoy benefits of science. The samalso realise the threat sciencepeople and environment in m


6/7

with the ong-termgoalofdeveloping PSM.The main characteristic in PSM is diver-sity, and not antagonism or hostility.Some scholars like Shiva, Nandy andAlvares, andsome PSM groups like PPSTdo defend the traditional Indian systemstodevelop themasalternatives.They speakof Indianglory before theBritish colonial-ism when Indians had lived at the pace ofand in harmony with nature. They thinkthatsustainabledevelopment andpeople'sempowerment are possible by rejectingmodem worldviewandgoing backtoIndiantraditions.Yet, it is not clear whether theyare rejecting all aspects of modern S andT and supportingall aspects of traditionalIndian systems. There are many changesthathave takenplace generally associatedwith modernisation and developmentpolicies such as communication, electric-ity, electronics, hospitals, laboratories,media, transport,universities, and scien-tific institutes with which these scholarsare quite happy. Ashok JhunjhunwalaofPPST is involved in bringing the Internetcheaply and quickly to rural population[McGivring 2000]. These things as suchare not viewed as evil; instead, tailoringIndian society to suit modem S and T

For one thing, science is not a single toolfor social emancipation though sciencehas had an impact on society and sometimes for social emancipation. Changes inpeople's consciousness, values, styles, andactions are a productof many phenomenaincluding science, leadership, history,culture, economic, and education. Castesystem, untouchability, patriarchy, evilcustoms, inequality, and injustice can notbe demolished by scientific rationalityalone. Even people, who take an oath toabide by the scientific temper, do not leadtheir lives according to the scientific ratio-nality [Sarukai1999]. Besides, historicallyfascism has been a' product of westernsocieties when they were strong in S andT. Lackof scientific tempercannot be heldresponsible for the rise of fundamentalismand thus fascism in India. The Indianelitestartedbuilding India after independenceby accepting the spirit of scientific tem-per. If there is a shift, it is because of thefailure of modernisationanddevelopmentpolicies.Yet, increasing fundamentalism andreligiosity does not mean being anti-modern science, which Nanda is afraidof. India hasbeendesperatetoindustrialise

whole new classes of abusescontrolled by the Hindu governmwarrantmoreopposition thanevAfter 50 years of independenceseeking the status of great poweeconomic achievements or by ascience tothecause of poverty, bunuclearjingoism. Withsuch a nataken by India one hope is nemovements like PSM, which areing for change by involving peofor themselves. PSM are opposcience because, instead of helpinit is leading to social and economter for India. They are reclaiminto work for people in India.[B[An earlierversion of this paperwaat the annualconference of the SociaScienceandSociety(4S) in SanDiego,1999.]ReferencesAlvares, Claude (1990): Science, Deand Violence:The RevoltagainstOxford UniversityPress, Delhi.Amin, Samir(1976): UnequalDeveloEssay on the Social TransformPeripheralCapitalism,MonthlyReNew York.


7/7

Documents

EPW_Science Movements and Science Wars