Impact of Indian Culture on Work-Ethos
IMPACT OF INDIAN CULTURE ON WORK-ETHOS
Prologue:
“Such an historical concept … cannot be defined according to the formula genus proximum, differentia specifica, but it must be gradually put together out of the individual parts which are taken from historical reality to make it up.” --Max Weber, ‘The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism’ (New York: Scribner's Press, 1958), p. 47.
Introduction
In the homo sapiens’ race for wealth and power -- economic, industrial and military -- the importance of Research, Design & Development is well recognised. However, before Industrial Revolution[1] the development of Science & Technology was sparse and sporadic.
Renaissance[2] changed, inter alia, the West’s attitude towards work, wealth and scientific inquiry. Similarly in the East, such countries as adapted a reinterpreted Confucian philosophy (e.g. Japan and South Korea) developed faster than those who continued to stick to the traditional view of Confucius. Compared to non-Confucian countries, South Korea achieved within its first three plan-periods more[3] than what India failed to achieve even during the first half century of its five-year planning (including the intervening no-plan periods).
Why does India, with the fourth largest contingent of scientists and engineers in the world, falls in the category of countries that have the lowest per capita income? Can Indian Culture, if it also is reinterpreted, act as a saviour and free us from the bondage of the retrograde pronouncements made on our scriptures by the pandas and international researchers? Can our Cultural heritage – if rediscovered, reinterpreted and holistically integrated (with grey areas explained and parables reduced to logic in a way that is readily intelligible to the mildly dogmatic individuals, yet considered at least as an invigorating exercise by the intellectuals) goad us into achieving excellence in our socio-economic duty-- that is ‘work’ (economic work)? An effort to
Prologue:
“Such an historical concept … cannot be defined according to the formula genus proximum, differentia specifica, but it must be gradually put together out of the individual parts which are taken from historical reality to make it up.” --Max Weber, ‘The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism’ (New York: Scribner's Press, 1958), p. 47.
Introduction
In the homo sapiens’ race for wealth and power -- economic, industrial and military -- the importance of Research, Design & Development is well recognised. However, before Industrial Revolution[1] the development of Science & Technology was sparse and sporadic.
Renaissance[2] changed, inter alia, the West’s attitude towards work, wealth and scientific inquiry. Similarly in the East, such countries as adapted a reinterpreted Confucian philosophy (e.g. Japan and South Korea) developed faster than those who continued to stick to the traditional view of Confucius. Compared to non-Confucian countries, South Korea achieved within its first three plan-periods more[3] than what India failed to achieve even during the first half century of its five-year planning (including the intervening no-plan periods).
Why does India, with the fourth largest contingent of scientists and engineers in the world, falls in the category of countries that have the lowest per capita income? Can Indian Culture, if it also is reinterpreted, act as a saviour and free us from the bondage of the retrograde pronouncements made on our scriptures by the pandas and international researchers? Can our Cultural heritage – if rediscovered, reinterpreted and holistically integrated (with grey areas explained and parables reduced to logic in a way that is readily intelligible to the mildly dogmatic individuals, yet considered at least as an invigorating exercise by the intellectuals) goad us into achieving excellence in our socio-economic duty-- that is ‘work’ (economic work)? An effort to