THE BUSINESS OF RESEARCH

Researches are big news these days. Not just for the answers they provide, but also for the questions that are being raised over the answers. Some time ago, Nature, a highly reputed magazine, came out with an interesting and well-researched article, titled ‘The Ph.D Factory’. Need not be emphasised that the title was self-explanatory and the questions that were raised pertained to the answers that the researches galore provide these days, and the validity as well as the utility of those findings from all over the world. There is so much noise about how our researches are poor in comparison to many of those highly admired nations which claim to have given many pathbreaking research findings. And we are told that Indian researches are not of high standard, mostly of the cut-copy-paste kind who thrive mostly on plagiarised contents and ideas. Further, the citation index, whatever that means, is poor and hence they are not read and given recognition. Interestingly, the Nature article examined these very issues, but not in an Indian context. It raised questions about global research output and their contribution. Obviously, the findings of the article as well as the questions it raised did not show the so-called highly touted PhD level researches worldwide in a good light. That brings us to a basic question — if that be so, don’t we need to take a relook at the global parameters of research quality and examine the necessity of correlating PhD degrees with research acumen and teaching ability. Moreover, what about the cacophony on Indian quality of PhD researches and, of course, the assumption that holding a PhD degree makes a good researcher and teacher? It needs to be researched, and researched rather rigorously, before we believe the opinions related to India bashing on research output and ability. Something that sounds like pot calling the kettle black. It is more of a Macaulay-like mindset that is the reason for this than any actual and specific evaluation of Indian research. Especially because India has emerged as the largest market for knowledge in the world, much larger than China, given the fact that the Chinese have a much lower receptivity of the knowledge that is being sold in English language. This is not to claim any concession or to suggest that there is no need of a quality check, only we need to take all those sweeping generalisations about shoddy quality of Indian research with circumspection. We were exploited for long by foreign powers who treated us like a colony and it seems this is a new way of imperialism, the knowledge imperialism, in which there are many insiders operating as a tool. While it requires an elaborate discussion on the subject, one young researcher, frustrated by the number of rejections he faced on his articles submitted to the journals marked under fanciful brand names, was rather acerbic in his comments. He said that strange are the reviewers’ comments and assumptions. If you take an idea from one source, it becomes cheating; if you take from many sources, it becomes research; and if you take from several sources and patent it as your own, it becomes an innovation. What prompted him to say so can invite the ire of many, but it needs to be examined why he felt so. As many software offer a quick check on plagiarism, we must first properly define this business of plagiarism.

A SONG FOR THE MOMENT

Seventy-two years of Independence is not a small period. We need to think where have we come and where we are heading. Over seven decades ago, a Prime Minister had spoken about our tryst with destiny that culminated into Independence after a long struggle. He exhorted all Indians on the midnight of August 14, 1947, to strive hard to give reality to our dreams. He had given an idea of a new modern India, appealing to the people to join hands with him to build the noble mansion of free India where all her children may dwell in peace. He also said that all of us, whatever be our religion, are the children of India with equal rights, privileges, and obligations. He asserted that we cannot encourage communalism of narrow mindedness, for no nation can be great whose people are narrow in thought or in action. It is time to assess how things stand today. The present milieu is certainly not what he expected and the occasion today merits a recapitulation as well as a visualisation. The idea of India needs to be reaffirmed. The India that is a multi-religious, multi-cultured, multi-lingual mosaic where all faiths find freedom for peaceful coexistence. An India where humanism transcends all barriers of religious and cultural divisions. What this humanism will be is difficult to portray in the present day scenario where aggression, hatred, and apprehensions are growing. But a rather passionate and melodious appeal in the form of a beautiful song from a 1959 Hindi movie Dhool Ka Phool does appear relevant and seems to be the song for the moment. The lyrics of Sahir Ludhianvi written some six decades ago and sung by the legendary Mohammed Rafi still make sense. Rather much more sense as it exhorts unity of humanity. Every stanza of the song ‘Tu Hindu banega na musalman banega, insaan ki aulad hai insaan banega’ harps on what is needed. It is being sung by a character in the film while bringing up an abandoned child. The song is paraphrased below: “You will neither become a Hindu nor a Muslim. You are the son of humanity and will be a human being. It is good that you don’t have a name till now, you don’t have anything to do with any religion. The knowledge that has divided humanity will have no effect on you. You will be the symbol of changing times. God made every person a human being; we made him a Hindu or Muslim. The nature had given us just one land, we made a Bharat or an Iran. You will become the storm that will break all these barriers. The religion that preaches hatred is not your religion, the steps that trample human beings are not your steps. The place where there is no room for the holy Quran is not your temple and the place where there is no room for Gita is not your holy abode. Those brokers of religion, those selling their country; the people selling the shrouds covering human corpses; those sitting in palaces, the irreligious, the robbers; those who exchange the gardens for thorns, you will pronounce their death sentence.” How relevant and how contemporary. As humanity sinks in the morass of hatred and religious bigotry, don’t we need to hear this song again and again to realise what is needed today?

THE POWER OF A HUG

Though a now-famous hug in the Indian Parliament created a flutter and became the subject matter of social media gossip, the seriousness of a hug cannot be overlooked. It is a gesture with many manifestations. From a means to strengthen friendship bonds to a technique of public relations, a hug has many connotations. Moreover, a hug has effects on health, too. If you just type ‘health benefits of a hug’ in the search engine, you will get several descriptions of how a hug works wonders. From reassuring comfort of an embrace to providing relaxation and confidence and even arousing the endocrinal system to secrete the feel-good hormones like oxytocin or dopamine, a hug can be an effective drug for the present day society and help people understand the grammar of human connect. Full marks, then, to the director of the Bollywood film Munna Bhai MBBS for popularising the idea through the lead actor’s hug to all and sundry as the magic cure or jadoo ki jhappi. Even though the hug that took place in Parliament recently raised several eyebrows, its significance needs to be underscored. In fact, both history and mythology have several examples of how much a hug matters. There is the great hug that Lord Ram gets from his younger brother Bharat on his return after vanquishing Ravana. The warmth and reverence expressed in the hug is a highly popular part of the Ramlila and is enjoyed by people all over India. Bharat Milap is the name given to that hug. Its depiction at a place called Nati Imli in Varanasi is a spectacle in itself. Thousands throng to watch it every year. The ecstasy that it builds can only be seen to be believed. Then, there is another big hug that Lord Krishna gives to his childhood buddy Sudama when the two meet after a long time. That, again, is a heart-touching incident in Krishna Lila. Another hug of consequence is mentioned in medieval history. It is set in India where the Maratha King Shivaji is hugged by Afzal Khan. The latter has ulterior motives. That Shivaji could preempt this and slay Khan while in the hug is the interesting twist of this tale. But hugs, nevertheless, have a very important role to play in human life. Hug or the embrace symbolizes love and warmth, camaraderie and feeling of oneness between two individuals. It also signifies complete trust between two people and of course their affection for one another. The Eid milan of Muslims and the Holi milan of Hindus is also all about a hug. Hug is a part of global culture, rather human culture and a practice of greeting one another when people meet or part. That the hug means a lot cannot be emphasised enough. There is psychology behind a hug and, of course, there is sociobiology behind a hug. But coming to the psychodynamics, the medical benefits of hug are a part of popular discourse. That it stimulates the endocrine glands to secrete certain hormones is a part of internal chemistry and can only be felt by its effect. However, biofeedback notwithstanding, a hug is certainly soothing to the mind, the body and the soul. It generates a kind of comfort that we all need during turbulent times.

BIRDS OF A FEATHER

Birds of a feather flock together. This is an old, school-time proverb that suggests that people of similar tastes, likes and preferences choose to be together. The origin of this proverb is not certain, some attribute it to the mid-16th century satirist, William Turner. Others believe that it is much more ancient and dates back to Plato’s time. Coming to its current significance, there is an interesting research finding which suggests that the roots of friendship are not just due to those external conditions that bring people together. They run rather deep. The research, led by Carolyn Parkinson at University of California, Los Angeles, found that the brains of close friends respond to external sensory stimulation in remarkably similar ways. Cognitive scientists who carried out the research, made their subjects view a series of short videos. They found the neural response patterns evoked by the sighting of these to be quite congruent among friends in comparison to those who were not friends. The researchers could predict the strength of social bonding between two people on the basis of their brain scan alone. The findings thus offer quite startling insights on friendly relations indicating that friendship is based on much more than shared interests. It is something that we can call good chemistry. Friends, then, do not start liking one another by accident. There is a certain design that makes a person like someone and be indifferent to others. People get together because of some inner configuration of the brain rather than mere situational determinants. Being civil and being friendly are, thus, different things. The empirical study is certainly not without skepticism as many of the same fraternity of cognitive scientists are not willing to endorse this view. Nevertheless, the findings do open some interesting areas of research on why two people are attracted to one another, even without much interaction. Interaction, in fact, starts only after the force that attracts individuals brings them closer. Can this be some kind of an explanation to what poets call love at first sight? Or can there be the reason as to why litterateurs believe that the beauty is in the beholder’s eye. There is a surge of scientific interest these days in cognitive research including subjects like nature, structure and evolution of friendship. Though there is still a long way to go before something concrete can be concluded, the study offers at least some reasons as to why out of many, you gravitate towards few or may be towards just one. It is not by chance. So, next time if you feel that you like somebody out of many others, consider the idea that it might be chemistry rather than just physical factors. This also provides some clue as to why Indian marriages are backed by horoscope matching of the probable bride and the groom. Match-making may not be an unscientific practice. So, move over Facebook connections. The ‘likes’ and ‘dislikes’ over there are superficial but this is something more deep. The wired connection may be driven by reason, but the weird connection is driven by heart. So, Blaise Pascal stands vindicated. Heart, after all, has its reasons which no reason knows. In simple terms, friends do not become friends because they come together. They are rather made for one another. Clinching evidence may not be there, but there is now enough reason to believe that this may be true. Even in a digitised world.