Newsletters
@Evening: 📖 On Textbook Revisions Leaving Out Evolution And Periodic Table, A Big-Picture, Hindu-Dharma Perspective
Context: The culling of the theory of evolution earlier this year and now the periodic table from the Class 10 NCERT school syllabus has caused concern among not only scientists but across a broad spectrum of scientific-minded people in India.
This revision of Class 10 subject matter is said to be a part of a "rationalisation" meant to reduce the "burden on students."
Students can still learn about these subjects, but only if they opt for one or more of them subjects in Class 11 and Class 12.
For instance, students who elect to study chemistry in the two years before university will learn about the periodic table.
Until Class 10, science is taught as a compulsory subject in India. And it is here that topics like evolution and the periodic table won't feature.
Swarajya comment. Writing for the magazine, contributing editor Aravindan Neelakandan has already spared considerable ink arguing for the retention of the theory of evolution in Class 10 while also discussing the criticality of the subject matter and the need to know it well and early.
Read 'Why Teaching Evolution Is A Must' and 'Bring Back 'Evolution' In Class 10 Textbook' for Neelakandan's takes on the issue.
Evolutionary biologist chimes in. In response to the Class 10 textbook revision, Richard Dawkins took a swipe at "Modi's BJP" and drew a false equivalence between "two idiotic religions" Hinduism and Islam in a tweet.
Former consultant, entrepreneur, and writer Harsh Gupta Madhusudan, who also writes for Swarajya occasionally, took to Twitter to share his perspective.
It is not limited to the teaching of evolution in Class 10, but touches upon the broad, long-standing, and profound Hindu tradition.
We urge you to read it and let us know what you think.
I heard about the brilliant 1960 movie "Inherit the Wind" from @arvindneela - about the 1925 Scopes Trial (creationism/evolution debate) though it is also an allegory about McCarthyism. I recommend all to watch it to understand the trauma that Only-True-Path-ism can cause.
Hence I also understand the itch to bring in Hindu Dharma by those who are visibly scared to criticise Islam and go on to call themselves secular Christians, but it is not just intellectually dishonest - more to the point, it is silly.
(Of course, evolution must be taught as it has long been in India - I have no strong view about in which grade, though earlier the better and to more students the better.)
Some within the Umbrella of Dharma may also not like this Vedic aspect being highlighted, because of its innate skepticism. But it is essential - for doubt completes faith. Doubt makes faith faith.
For Hinduism is not a "religion", it is a "commonwealth of religions" as Dr Radhakrishnan - our second president and a great scholar - said. There is no One Right Path though the Truth is still One. We mortal humans can only get closer to it.
It is an earnest call then not for relativism and/or all views being equal, but for Anekantavad, for acknowledging multi-sidedness. Semantics and specifics may vary, the essential spirit of mutual respect should not.
The relationship with the Gods - including one of disbelief - is intensely personal, evolving and context dependent. I am shamelessly transactional in worshipping Shiva and Shakti when loved ones are in danger, and I maybe more lax when they are not. Perhaps even former 'Nastikas' do not reside in foxholes.
But I do not feel in any way cornered or threatened in discussing my very imperfect spiritual journey. As Vivekanand said, and I paraphrase, perfection is a contradiction in terms.
When I read anything about cosmology to the human cell, the thought does not cross my mind - does this contradict any of "my" sacred literature. I am not scared about the sacred.
What does cross my mind is look at the immense beauty of creation and the incredible smallness of the human experience in front of it. I do want to know what my great ancestors said about it, but it is just one more important view.
Whether I think then of Gods as symbolic of Forces of Nature or in a suspension-of-disbelief sense, I do not know. It depends.
The limits of "science" after all are also patent. They cannot explain Sentience, they can only explain Evolution. They cannot explain the Beginning except as one more Layer of the Onion.
The ancient Greeks - those "rationalists" who their white descendants now worship as the Inventors of Logic - also prayed to the Gods. Whether they "believed" them in contradiction to falsifiable science, I do not know. Maybe, but unlikely.
Similarly in India, you will see Bindi-wearing, Krishna-worshipping female ISRO scientists taking us all to the stars. There is no contradiction in their minds or hearts. They do not even have to artificially compartmentalise. They think about the Infinite much like a Spinoza or Einstein might have. In some cases, perhaps in even more profound ways.
Learn to appreciate the Lila of the Gods. We Hindus do, and very soon so will the world once again. Not every reference to Ganesha means we think there was an actual surgical transplant there. It just means that our ancestors thought of it, invented some aspects of it, and yes worshipped Ganesha too probably before they began an especially difficult surgery.
Om.
