Should mind-orientations and cultural orientations of Indians change with the times?

 

We had proposed in a previous paper that individuals would have mind-orientations, and the following would be the basic Mind-orientation types. Each Mind-orientation type may be further subdivided into several types, though the latter is mostly left open-ended at this stage for further interpretation and elaboration.

-          Family orientation: In this case, the individual’s efforts are primarily geared towards the satisfaction of familial needs. This is perhaps the most common type of mind-orientation amongst a vast majority of people in different parts of the world, and particularly in traditional and conservative societies including India. Individuals with familial orientation may be adept or expert in making a living through various means, but these efforts are usually geared at satisfying the needs of the family, and are not a goal or an end by themselves.  Such individuals may be punctilious and meticulous, paying great attention to detail and execution. Such individuals may also be often empathetic to the needs of others, often putting their own needs next or even last. Family orientation is very common among women, but not too uncommon among men, either.  A Family mind-orientation has several tangible benefits which include the preservation and transmission of culture.

-          Employment or Business orientation: In this case, the individual’s efforts are primarily geared towards employment of business. I.e. satisfaction of livelihood needs, and all other efforts are subservient to these. Such orientations are common in many parts of the world, including developing and developed ones, and equate to a situation where livelihood is a passion or calling in life. Employment or Business orientation is very common among men, but not too uncommon among women, either. Employment orientation may be distinct from Business orientation, and the modal personal traits or attributes may vary in each case. The former may be marked by humility and attention to detail, while the later may be marked by brazenness and acceptance of risk.  An employment or business orientation has several economic benefits for society, and will lead to a greater well-being for society as a whole. However, this may be suitably sub-categorized for a more granular analysis. For example, accountants may possess different modal attributes from doctors and this may be reinforced through parenting. This is why doctors’ children may be more successful as doctors and not engineers. In some cases, changes may be introduced through rebelliousness and recalcitrance, and we have discussed this in another part of this paper.

-          Individual mind-orientation: In this case, the individual sends to be self-centric in his pursuits. This type of orientation is characterized by a great emphasis or satisfaction of individual goals and aspirations.  He may also attach a great deal of importance to his own personality or image makeup. There may be several variations of the basic theme, and each will be characterized by different personal traits or attributes. A variant for example may be the hedonistic personality type where are other endeavours are sacrificed to the pursuit of undiluted pleasure. Another variant is the Politician and the Manipulator, and this type of person typically seeks unnatural control over others, often going to great length to strategize and legitimize deviant behaviour. Yet another type may be the basic introvert who may be characterized by a general disinterest in the affairs of others around him. 

-          Societal Orientation: This type of Mind-orientation tends to put the well-being and needs of society above individual and all other needs. This type of mind-orientation is relatively rare in most societies, in spite of the fact that has some tangible benefits to offer to society.

-          Religious, spiritual or philosophical orientation: In this case, a great deal of importance is placed on religious, spiritual or philosophical needs often at the expense of all other needs. It may also be recommended to distinguish religiousness from spiritualism or a philosophical bent of mind for further analysis as there may be subtle differences between all the three. Religious, spiritual and philosophical orientation beyond a certain degree of measure may be counter-productive and lower the well-being of society.

-          Intellectual or creative orientation: In this type, a great deal of importance is placed on intellectual needs and creativity. A variant of this may be an Artistic Mind-orientation. A few may however, wish to treat the two as separate categories. This type of mind-orientation is relatively less common particularly in traditional or conservative societies, and may be the exception rather than the norm in most advanced societies.  The exact opposite of this kind of orientation is regimentation and adherence to bureaucracy or a procedural orientation, and this will stifle creativity and imagination in the ordinary course of events.

-          Militant-orientation: In this type of orientation, individuals are geared to fight and protect society from external threats and forces. This type of mind-orientation may be present to some degree in advanced societies, but may be more common in tribal and feudal societies.  

-          The Anarchist or the queer man: This type of mind-orientation may not be a bona fide category per se but a residual type and may be characterized by a partial or complete disorientation on some or many fronts. Many would not accept this as a mind-orientation and may be a resultant of unique personal experiences or a worldview shaped by cognitive dissonance.

-          Other types of Basic mind-orientation: Other types of basic mind-orientation may also defined with a proper justification, but most may be subservient to and slotted into the above categories. 

What are cultural orientations?

The following are Cultural orientations unlike the Mind-orientations described earlier, and we had proposed the Seven Cultural Orientations as described below in the same paper. We had also made a reference to Hofstede cultural dimensions, information about which can be found anywhere on the internet.

Past-orientation versus future-orientation

Past-orientation and Future-orientation is the relative emphasis placed by a society or culture on its past and future. Future-orientation is associated with characteristics such as planning, foresight, personality development directly and with other characteristics such as individualism indirectly. An over-emphasis on the past may lead to a vindication or exoneration of the cultural baggage of the past and may impede cultural progress, both material and non-material. Per the Vertical-horizontal model described in this paper, globalization leads to the multiplication of horizontal factors, thereby weakening vertical factors. We must also bear in mind the fact that Western societies have also been typically future-oriented since the age of Enlightenment. Thus, globalization and modernization gradually make more conservative societies future-oriented as well.

Inward-looking cultures versus outward cultures

Some cultures are undoubtedly more outward-looking than others, and many have traditionally or quintessentially been so. This may also be referred to as the internal or external orientation of society. The presence or absence of Cultural Elitism, key political and cultural institutions as well as the level of physical, educational and social infrastructure and the general intellectualism play a role in determining the Internal or external orientation of society. Remediation may be brought about by means of suitable changes in the education system through suitably-designed pedagogical techniques or an improvement in social or physical infrastructure. A change in a society’s orientation will increase its cultural receptivity and bring in attendant benefits.

A Xenophobic culture is one that harbors a deep-rooted suspicion or aversion towards other cultures as well-demonstrated pan-cultural trait. In some situations, Xenophobia may manifest itself in other forms such as condescension or a desire to maintain cultural or racial purity. Xenophobia may arise due to several reasons, one of them being ethnocentrism, though there may be other causes such as autarchy (autarky), cultural isolation or ignorance. This is strongly co-related with inward orientation, and often with past-centrism.  At the other end of the spectrum, xenocentrism may be observed, though this may not necessarily be accompanied with positive consequences, and a culture may swing like a pendulum from one extreme to another.  This may also be triggered by a popular disenfranchisement or disenchantment with a situation generating a yoyo effect as a precursor to normalization or stabilization (Yoyo theory of Socio-cultural change). Examples of Xenophobia have included the Islamophobia of the recent decades and Anti-Semitism of Nazi Germany. Xenophobia has also been attributed to mid-twentieth  century Japanese culture by some analysts and the more recent Hindutva movement of India.

Rigid versus flexible cultures

Cultures may also be classified into rigid and flexible. Flexible cultures are often those will less cultural and intellectual baggage, and are amenable to change. Cultures which are flexible in some respects, may be rigid in some others and it may be necessary to perform an analysis at the level of a cultural elements. An example to illustrate this point may be the Republican Party’s penchant for laissez-faire economics and neo-liberalism and right-of-centre policies in the USA. 

Individualistic versus collective cultures

Some cultures like the USA may be more individualist, while some others like the erstwhile and the now-defunct USSR emphasized collectivism of thought and statism. Most others can be placed in a continuum between these two extremes, and the merits and demerits of both points of view are still debatable.

Material and non-material orientation 

Some cultures like the USA may be more materialistic, while some other developed countries like Japan much less so. Most others can be placed in a continuum between a material orientation and various non-material orientations such as religious or spiritual orientation, and the merits and demerits of different types of orientation are still debatable.

Contentment versus innovation

Some cultures do not wish to effect changes to the status quo, while some others pursue a relentless quest for perfection and changes in the status quo.  This metric would indicate a culture’s appetite for innovation, and would be commensurate with its innovation indices. This metric may, however be affected by a cultures past or future orientation as well, and in some respects, all the six are inter-related.

Rational-orientation versus Non Rational-orientation

In a rational society, less reliance is placed on myths, legends, superstitions etc. It is expected that all non-rational societies will evolve into rational societies in due course, and the Cultural Anthropologist has a core and a crucial role to play here.

Hindutva and history

Hindutva groups are indeed preoccupied with the idea of rewriting history to suit their own points of view. However, if one adopts a broad view and a broad definition of Hinduism, their efforts would be proven futile, since Hinduism as a geographical expression, is fairly all-encompassing. This also additionally explains why Hindutva groups attempt to rewrite history every time they come to power. According to some of them, Ancient India had prowess in aircraft, flying saucers, warfare, plastic surgery, and what not. Hindutva groups are also hell bent on proving that the Aryans were indigenous to India, and travelled all across the world using India as a launch pad – however, while most notions of Ancient Indian history such as those peddled by Romila Thapar and others are utterly obsolete, the standard consensus is that the proto-Indo European homeland was in Central Asia.  Some even like to claim that Vedic culture equated with Indus valley civilization, or by some accounts, was even older than it. Some would like to claim that the Gangetic plains was the epicenter of civilization, while most mainstream researchers and scholars consider Mesopotamia to be the cradle of civilization. However, we do admit that Dravidian nationalists, some Dalit leaders such as Jyothiba Phule and Kancha Ilaiah followed different contrarian ideologies, and that there must be a change from all sides. We are now however, past the colonial stage of historiography and have entered a state of turmoil and flux where ideological thought leaders, satraps and their minions battle out their ideas. It will take time before the dust settles down, and a new consensus emerges. Therefore, we also badly and desperately need a new group of thought leaders to drive Indian intellectualism forward, and help other countries as well, in the process. Older scholars may not change as easily with the times as the rest, but they will soon die out. This is the way change almost always manifests itself in society. The next generation of scholars and researchers will undoubtedly and unquestionably be open to new ideas, and will be swayed less by ideologies and by political considerations.   

Many Indians, leaving aside Hindutva groups exhibit an intense preoccupation with the past. This not only includes a real or an imaginary Hindutva golden age, but a preoccupation with a hatred of past Muslim rulers, and exaggerated accounts of suppression and subjugation of Hindus under Muslim rule. Other groups are easily swayed by ideologies too; this has not left historians in Pakistan untouched either, with some groups there always trying to seek out Hindus as villains, and project rulers like Aurangazeb as heroes. The RSS also likes to promote an ideological criticism of Gandhi. Yes, some criticism of Gandhi is valid, but criticism of people must be balanced out against their contributions, and must be based on facts. It must not certainly be driven by ideology. Some groups for example, accuse Gandhi of having promoted the partition of India, but this is not true. There are rival ideologies galore, like Marxism, but there is scarcely any objectivity pursued, and scarcely any scientific temper. Religion is also given a larger than life status in Indian society. Both Hindus and Muslims are overly religious, and this contrasts starkly with the declining role of religion in other societies. Many Indians are also extremely superstitious, and lack a scientific temper. Religious-driven and religious-inspired values reign supreme, and we are yet to develop or popularize universal human values, and teach them in schools. Both the left and the right have made no contribution here. Indians are also overly interested in politics, and many of them pay scant regard to science, technology, and economics. People are obsessed with the past, but have not interest in thinking about how to make India and the world a better place to live in.

Hindutva and science

Claiming a direct continuity between the Vedic world and modern science has been one of the bases of Hindu nationalists from the very beginning.  While Indian civilization undoubtedly made many contributions to science and scientific activity in general, it is the present and the future of science that we should be more concerned about. This is possible only Indians possess a scientific temperament and a rational mind orientation. Only then will India be able to catch up with the rest of the world in science, and make huge productivity gains in science. There is no need to make tall and bizzaire claims; we must pull up our socks and deliver. According to G. Nageshwar Rao, vice-chancellor of Andhra University in Visakhapatnam. “Stem cell research was done in this country thousands of years ago,” This statement was met with absolute ridicule. However, many such claims are made from time to time; some even propose that internet and cell phones existed in India thousands of years ago, and that Lord Ganesa represented the transplantation of an elephant head on a human body.

Some people tend to attribute the rapid rise of pseudo science to Vijnana Bharati (VIBHA), which the science wing of Rashtriya Swayamsewak Sangh (RSS). One of VIBHA’s stated and avowed objectives is to educate the public about ancient Indian science and technology and use science to promote India's development, but it also promotes “Swadeshi” or indigenous science and tries to connect modern science to traditional knowledge and Hindu spirituality. VIBHA's advisory board includes Vijay Kumar Saraswat, former head of Indian defense research and the present chancellor of Jawaharlal Nehru University, and of course many others. In 2018, the then higher education minister Satya Pal Singh even went on to dismiss Charles Darwin's evolution theory and wanted it removed from school and college curricula stating that nobody had ever seen an ape turn into man.

One must realize that modernization need not necessarily be in conflict with Hinduism. It all depends on the way we interpret Hinduism. Read our previous blog posts for this purpose.  The names of the posts were, “Why we need an "Indian enlightenment", and "Enlightenments" in other developing countries”, “Towards an enlightened and progressive interpretation of Hinduism”, and “Towards a Vijnana or a Vaignanika school of Hinduism”.  Other such as Hugh and Colleen Gantzer have spoken about the innate and intrinsic tolerance of Hinduism. This view and this principle must be always be respected. If one asks the question, “Do Indians’ cultural orientation and Indians’ mind-orientation need a reboot? The short answer is yes. Indians’ typical mind-orientation and cultural orientation does need a change so that Indians may become more economically and technologically productive. Mind-orientations and cultural orientations are important concepts, because these can be, from our point of view, be quantified and measured by means of apposite social science research techniques. These can also be immense game changers in many different ways. For this to happen and occur changes in pedagogy and the education system are a must. Refer to our publications on pedagogy and the sociology of science. Refer to our papers on historiography too. We need intellectual revolutions in India. We also need bottom up development models. If such as thing happens, our cultural productivity will increase manifold, and our contributions to the rest of the world will increase as well.