[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: physical versus economic force



========================================================
Administrative Note:
-------------------

Week's Agenda: Economy
========================================================

Dear Ash

I agree with you that economic incentives and disincentives also constitute 
force (though as I said in an earlier mail) economic ones are less "forceful" 
than physical ones.

>My point of view (where others may disagree) is that this tolerance is best 
>preserved when we are not vested with the right to try to change each others' 
>faith. The minute you claim the right to try to change my faith, I am 
>disinclined to treat you as an equal member of my society. It's that simple. If
>we must be tolerant, then we must both be. Proselytization is UNFAIR to me, 
>(remember that we continue to put off debating what fairness is).

This is not only an unreasonable position, it is also an impractical position: 
we all try, even in our daily lives, to discuss and argue and persuade each 
other (about policies, as here in IP) and about matters that may be less or more
important.  It is precisely because I believe that you are an equal that I try 
to persuade you, argue with you, reason with you, show you the evidence, get you
to think about the rules of the game, and so on.

Every school is in the business of teaching that 2 and 2 make 4, and NOT 3 or 5 
or any other number if I happen (due to some childish mischance) to believe 
otherwise. Political science courses are in the business of explaining 
accurately what a constitution is, and how that of the US differs from that of 
India (for example).  If I start thinking (having the faith) that 2 and 2 make a
number other than 4, I will soon be put right.  Similarly, if I mix up something
in the British Constitution or whatever.

We are ALL, as individuals and as organisations, involved in the business of 
arriving at, explaining, and PERSUADING OTHERS of the truth as we see it.  The 
fact that one person is trying to persuade me of a "religious" truth and another
is trying to persuade me of a "historical" or "scientific" or "economic" or 
"political" truth is of course relevant to that discipline, but all these 
disciplines are sub-disciplines of the human endeavour to live a worthwhile 
life.

You cannot take away the right to "proselytisation" without taking away the 
right to give and receive education as well as the right to debate, argue and 
persuade.


Professor Prabhu Guptara
Director, Organisational and Executive Development
Wolfsberg Executive Development Centre
(a subsidiary of UBS AG)
CH-8272 Ermatingen
Switzerland
Tel: + 41.71.663.5605
Fax: +41.71.663.5590
e-mail: prabhu.guptara@ubs.com



______________________________ Reply Separator _________________________________
Subject: physical versus economic force
Author:  ash.mahesh (ash_mahesh@hotmail.com) at nyuxuu
Date:    12.10.98 19:59



----------------------------------------------------------------------------
This is a posting to India_Policy Discussion list:  debate@indiapolicy.org
Rules, Procedures, Archives:            http://www.indiapolicy.org/debate/
---------------------------------------------------------------------------