Comments/Contributions by Ashish Kothari, Manu Mathai, Prof. Sundar Sarukkai, Paul Schafer, Prof. Sohail Inayatullah, Jinan and Victor (as of June 2017)
Comment By Ashish Kothari [An Indian environmentalist working on development, environment interface, biodiversity policy, and alternatives. He is one of founders of Kalpavriksh, a Non-Profit Organisation in India which deals with environmental and development issues. He has been associated with peoples' movements like Narmada Bachao Andolan and Beej Bachao Andolan. At present, he is the chairman Greenpeace India’s Board. (from Wikipedia)]
=======
Dear Nat, some quick comments on the document you sent:
1. Excellent, much-needed initiative!
2. The challenge is not only to become inter/transdisciplinary in the social sciences/humanities, but to also become epistemologically diverse, to embrace the fact that there are diverse knowledge systems and epistemologies, of whcih the modern (social or natural) sciences are only one. How do indigenous knowledge systems, for instance, interact with the social sciences, and how can students be exposed to them?
3. Part of this is to also decolonise our cognitive selves and collectives, to question the domination of 'modernity' and 'rationality', to consider non-rational and traditional ways of knowing and acting ... while questioning anything in any knowledge and action system that is inequitous, exploitative, and unsustainable.
There is considerable recent work on some of the above, including some by indigenous scholars and activists of various kinds, that could be used.
4. Yours could be the first formal School to bring on board 'teachers' from communities, including those who have no or very little formal education but are incredibly knowledgable in their own fields and contexts. I have been challenging universities to do this, but so far none has, as far as I know. The govt system may now allow for their formal appointment (anyway they may not want to be appointed as such), but informally they can be considered teachers in many ways.
5. Creating inter/transdisciplinarity amongst the social sciences is of course important ... but one should not make the mistake of continuing to separate these from the 'natural' sciences. Learning the sociology/economics of the environment, without learning something about the ecological/biological foundations of our lives, would be rather incomplete.
I am attaching a recent output that may be relevant to what you are doing, an attempt to look at things from a more comprehensive, coherent perspective, putting together various aspects of transformation. This is v. new, and we will be using it in the near future with one or two communities to see if it is useful for them. It may have relevance in an academic context too.
That's it for the moment, and I'd be happy to continue giving inputs if there is more to say,
Thanks, and all the best for this exciting journey
(CC'ing Manu as some of this may also link to a proposed collaboration between Kalpavriksh and APU, including the use of the framework I've attached.)
=======
Dear Nat, some quick comments on the document you sent:
1. Excellent, much-needed initiative!
2. The challenge is not only to become inter/transdisciplinary in the social sciences/humanities, but to also become epistemologically diverse, to embrace the fact that there are diverse knowledge systems and epistemologies, of whcih the modern (social or natural) sciences are only one. How do indigenous knowledge systems, for instance, interact with the social sciences, and how can students be exposed to them?
3. Part of this is to also decolonise our cognitive selves and collectives, to question the domination of 'modernity' and 'rationality', to consider non-rational and traditional ways of knowing and acting ... while questioning anything in any knowledge and action system that is inequitous, exploitative, and unsustainable.
There is considerable recent work on some of the above, including some by indigenous scholars and activists of various kinds, that could be used.
4. Yours could be the first formal School to bring on board 'teachers' from communities, including those who have no or very little formal education but are incredibly knowledgable in their own fields and contexts. I have been challenging universities to do this, but so far none has, as far as I know. The govt system may now allow for their formal appointment (anyway they may not want to be appointed as such), but informally they can be considered teachers in many ways.
5. Creating inter/transdisciplinarity amongst the social sciences is of course important ... but one should not make the mistake of continuing to separate these from the 'natural' sciences. Learning the sociology/economics of the environment, without learning something about the ecological/biological foundations of our lives, would be rather incomplete.
I am attaching a recent output that may be relevant to what you are doing, an attempt to look at things from a more comprehensive, coherent perspective, putting together various aspects of transformation. This is v. new, and we will be using it in the near future with one or two communities to see if it is useful for them. It may have relevance in an academic context too.
That's it for the moment, and I'd be happy to continue giving inputs if there is more to say,
Thanks, and all the best for this exciting journey
(CC'ing Manu as some of this may also link to a proposed collaboration between Kalpavriksh and APU, including the use of the framework I've attached.)
Comment by Dr. Manu V. Mathai, Assistant Professor, Azim Premji University (APU), Bangalore, India
========
1. Orienting XHS to help foster what the American sociologist C. Wright Mills called the ‘sociological imagination’ in the contemporary Indian milieu is worth considering. Essentially the idea refers to the intersection of ones own biography and history to build an awareness of identity and purpose.
2. The above is an uphill task as school and college education in our systems are decidedly against fostering such orientations. The humanities and social sciences are disaggregated and disconnected in their treatment, over and above their second class status to a narrow interpretation of what used to be called the ‘practical arts’ into a blind veneration of ‘science and technology.’
3. In all of these endeavours fostering critical scholarship is essential. What do I mean by critical scholarship? Simply the scholarly orientation to unravel the historical moment and the axes of power and privilege that characterise it, with the intent of engaging them to advance an agenda of well-being for all on a shared and finite planet.
4. For these purposes, must we ‘reimagine the humanities and social sciences’? Or is our task, a more modest but tremendously difficult one about seeking to strengthen, expand, revise the scope of these engagements and introduce critical thinking and being through these processes?
5. The in-depth study of knowing and knowledge outside of what we have received from the European Enlightenment is perhaps needed for an initiative and ambition of this nature. Specifically, what I have in mind are a serious effort to reclaim Indian traditions of knowledge, knowing and practice. Can the lost ‘ecology of knowledge’ be recreated to use Shiv Viswanathan’s formulation? This I suppose entails deeply engaging knowledge accessed through the written word, but perhaps more importantly through oral histories in vernacular languages and lived experiences.
6. The question of citizenship, empathy and multiple, collective and shared identities seems critical at this moment in our country’s history. How to foster citizenship and empathy seem to be essential objectives here? Especially on the substrate of primary and secondary education systems that are largely oblivious to such needs.
7. The need to reorganise the balance of power between Science and Technology on one hand, and the Social Sciences and the Arts on the other. This is essentially a question of epistemological orientation and social purpose that is empowered.
8. Have to keep in mind the real concerns of gainful employment that students will expect, and rightfully so. How is this practical need to be achieved within this reorientation?
9. Considering a Centre for Political Ecology could be a useful.
========
1. Orienting XHS to help foster what the American sociologist C. Wright Mills called the ‘sociological imagination’ in the contemporary Indian milieu is worth considering. Essentially the idea refers to the intersection of ones own biography and history to build an awareness of identity and purpose.
2. The above is an uphill task as school and college education in our systems are decidedly against fostering such orientations. The humanities and social sciences are disaggregated and disconnected in their treatment, over and above their second class status to a narrow interpretation of what used to be called the ‘practical arts’ into a blind veneration of ‘science and technology.’
3. In all of these endeavours fostering critical scholarship is essential. What do I mean by critical scholarship? Simply the scholarly orientation to unravel the historical moment and the axes of power and privilege that characterise it, with the intent of engaging them to advance an agenda of well-being for all on a shared and finite planet.
4. For these purposes, must we ‘reimagine the humanities and social sciences’? Or is our task, a more modest but tremendously difficult one about seeking to strengthen, expand, revise the scope of these engagements and introduce critical thinking and being through these processes?
5. The in-depth study of knowing and knowledge outside of what we have received from the European Enlightenment is perhaps needed for an initiative and ambition of this nature. Specifically, what I have in mind are a serious effort to reclaim Indian traditions of knowledge, knowing and practice. Can the lost ‘ecology of knowledge’ be recreated to use Shiv Viswanathan’s formulation? This I suppose entails deeply engaging knowledge accessed through the written word, but perhaps more importantly through oral histories in vernacular languages and lived experiences.
6. The question of citizenship, empathy and multiple, collective and shared identities seems critical at this moment in our country’s history. How to foster citizenship and empathy seem to be essential objectives here? Especially on the substrate of primary and secondary education systems that are largely oblivious to such needs.
7. The need to reorganise the balance of power between Science and Technology on one hand, and the Social Sciences and the Arts on the other. This is essentially a question of epistemological orientation and social purpose that is empowered.
8. Have to keep in mind the real concerns of gainful employment that students will expect, and rightfully so. How is this practical need to be achieved within this reorientation?
9. Considering a Centre for Political Ecology could be a useful.
Comment by Prof. Sundar Sarukkai, Professor in Philosophy, National Institute of Advanced Studies, Bangalore, India
======
Dear Nat
Thank you for your mail. The roundtable looks interesting - will definitely be enlivened with Ashish and Claude there!
I had primarily two comments: I think the number of Centres are perhaps more than needed. If the aim is to focus on certain topics then there should be lesser number of them especially because some of the topics of the centres will draw on the other centres. Moreover, with very broad themes for the centres, I am afraid that there will be no specific focus. This is always a bit of a challenge having programs around concepts (I had done a similar model when I created the MA courses at MCPH, Manipal and did find that it needs lot more work to sustain it.)
The topics of the centres (except perhaps the Odisha centre) have strong thematic overlaps. The fundamental problem with focussing on these broad concepts is the lack of specific disciplinary perspectives that would be very important to have a coherent program. For example, the topic of truth: there are many ways of approaching this question. The way philosophy approaches this is quite different from other perspectives and even within philosophy there are many different schools. There are also Indian philosophical traditions. So how does one approach this theme in the centre? What kind of disciplines will they draw upon?
Also, it is important that what we teach these students should not be a regurgitation of stale western intellectual thought. It is extremely important to have an egalitarian approach to teaching/learning/knowing which will draw on both textual as well as non-textual traditions. And in the textual tradition, it is necessary that our students learn much more from Asian, Middle Eastern and African civilizations as they would from the west. This is possible in a humanities program but we have to do that extra bit to make it happen.
Thirdly, part of the non-textual tradition involves labour. We have really failed in our education when we failed to include physical labour as part of intellectual labour. (That was my great hope at MCPH but was the one bit which I couldn't really pull off.) Physical labour as well as body training (performance, art, theatre etc.) must be as important as classroom learning.
I hope these are not too broad and too idealistic!
======
Dear Nat
Thank you for your mail. The roundtable looks interesting - will definitely be enlivened with Ashish and Claude there!
I had primarily two comments: I think the number of Centres are perhaps more than needed. If the aim is to focus on certain topics then there should be lesser number of them especially because some of the topics of the centres will draw on the other centres. Moreover, with very broad themes for the centres, I am afraid that there will be no specific focus. This is always a bit of a challenge having programs around concepts (I had done a similar model when I created the MA courses at MCPH, Manipal and did find that it needs lot more work to sustain it.)
The topics of the centres (except perhaps the Odisha centre) have strong thematic overlaps. The fundamental problem with focussing on these broad concepts is the lack of specific disciplinary perspectives that would be very important to have a coherent program. For example, the topic of truth: there are many ways of approaching this question. The way philosophy approaches this is quite different from other perspectives and even within philosophy there are many different schools. There are also Indian philosophical traditions. So how does one approach this theme in the centre? What kind of disciplines will they draw upon?
Also, it is important that what we teach these students should not be a regurgitation of stale western intellectual thought. It is extremely important to have an egalitarian approach to teaching/learning/knowing which will draw on both textual as well as non-textual traditions. And in the textual tradition, it is necessary that our students learn much more from Asian, Middle Eastern and African civilizations as they would from the west. This is possible in a humanities program but we have to do that extra bit to make it happen.
Thirdly, part of the non-textual tradition involves labour. We have really failed in our education when we failed to include physical labour as part of intellectual labour. (That was my great hope at MCPH but was the one bit which I couldn't really pull off.) Physical labour as well as body training (performance, art, theatre etc.) must be as important as classroom learning.
I hope these are not too broad and too idealistic!
Comment by Dr. Saamdu Chetri
Executive Director, GNH Centre, Bhutan
===========
Dear Dr. Nadarajah,
Congratulations!
It is a wonderful, wonderful initiative. We need a different education (rather Sanskaric Education - back to the concept of Gurukul) if we wish to see our generations remain a part of this wonderful nature.
Today, education makes people shewred, competitive, selfish and approach to bank balances at any cost. We need to change to collaborative, others happiness is mine, we from I/me, ours from mine, and so on...if we can not decolonise our education system today...we will be run over by greed like in Americas.
I wish you the very best in taking this tall and daunting program ahead...I will be happy to come in if I am capable of anything in your journey.
With much love and respect,
Saamdu
Executive Director, GNH Centre, Bhutan
===========
Dear Dr. Nadarajah,
Congratulations!
It is a wonderful, wonderful initiative. We need a different education (rather Sanskaric Education - back to the concept of Gurukul) if we wish to see our generations remain a part of this wonderful nature.
Today, education makes people shewred, competitive, selfish and approach to bank balances at any cost. We need to change to collaborative, others happiness is mine, we from I/me, ours from mine, and so on...if we can not decolonise our education system today...we will be run over by greed like in Americas.
I wish you the very best in taking this tall and daunting program ahead...I will be happy to come in if I am capable of anything in your journey.
With much love and respect,
Saamdu
Comment by Jinan
Dear Nada and friends
As you mentioned the time we are together is too short for any meaningful interaction. Around 25 people and 4 hours. Hope we can begin the process through email.
Two things I wish to raise.
One is regarding the process rather than the content which also means the environment or conditions for learning itself. Second is that as mush as we are rethinking higher education simultaneously the 'lower education' also needs to be addressed because the real damage is inflicted in schools and today the early childhood programs.
I am raising this because, I along with higher education, have been exploring the issues in the education of children. Because once the root or foundation is destroyed I don't think much can be done at the higher education level except some minor changes.
It is interesting to note that at Design schools, especially at NID etc almost one full year is spent in addressing the damages of schooling. As education at NID is experience/practice based the book
based teacher taught paradigm doesn't work.
My research of almost 30 years has been about the fundamental damages that 'modernity' has been doing to human beings and also the biological roots of human cognition. This has been a deep, existential research where the research was undertaken to deal with my own damages- alienation, fragmentation, compartmentalization, etc.... However, this naturally led me to explore larger context of modernity as well as the non-literate communities.
My research is also unusual in the sense that in order to understand what is happening I stopped reading altogether for few years. This gave me a glimpse into the cognitive system of non-literate people. On hindsight, I realized that the cognitive system that had been developed in me due to reading stopped functioning and the natural cognitive system began to re-emerge. That is I started using my eyes to see instead of reading, the obsessive analytical mind stopped on its own and began to take part in SEEING/ EXPERIENCING the real WORLD instead of making imaginary stories within the mind. In order to understand what is wrong with the education I studied how knowledge gets created among communities (traditional potters in particular), focused my attention also to how children' learn' thecraft and also contrasted this with schools and colleges that I began to visit. I also began to pay attention to the process in me.
My education at NID (National Institute of Design) was crucial in making me understand some fundamental issues about learning environment as well as the mechanics of learning. (NID was the first and the last institution I saw where total freedom was given to students to learn and almost all students were totally committed to learning )
Unique Features of Design Education
Design education is practice based, responding to the now. This demands the designer to be constantly on their toes, learning all the time, being attentive to what is going on with total openness and flexibility. Design education and design as a profession demand creativity, sensitivity, empathy from the practitioner and this can be only achieved by a shift from the way one has been educated in the school.
Design education demands the designer to have holistic overview- an understanding of (1) art/ culture (2) science/ technology (3) finance, management and (4) humanities (anthropology, history, sociology,
psychology) (5) communication (language and other means like computer etc) and holistic abilities development of physical skills- making, drawing etc as well as intellectual abilities. Even more interesting is the need innovation/creativity on one hand and practicality on the other. Ability to observe, comprehend, articulate and communicate is very crucial for designers.
Foundation program
Foundation program is the most important program in most design schools as foundation program helps the student to become a real learner, one who creates knowledge instead of merely receiving knowledge. Design education demands abilities, attitudes, skills and qualities that have not been developed in the regular education and foundation program is required to meet this needs. Design education demands fundamental shift from the way students have been studying in school. As the shift is fundamental and demands habits and attitudinal changes. The foundation program in general and orientation program, in particular, is geared towards achieving this. So when I embarked on the research this experience helped me a lot. In fact, NID gave the space/ condition/ freedom and environment to initiate the research.
I have also had a unique opportunity to 'run' a school for three years near Pune. I called this RE-IMAGINING SCHOOLS as we- all the adults- in the schools were involved in a true enquiry- What do children learn naturally if left to themselves, what is the process of learning, why children play, make 'toys', why do they draw and also why are they creating knowledge?......
We documented children- around 4000 videos and several images, studied their activities, studied their drawings etc and it was very clear that left to themselves children learn the REAL WORLD and they are biologically equipped by life to learn what is required for sustaininglife.
Learning the WORD completely turns everything upside down, reverses the process and even damages the qualities required for living. Knowledge precedes knowing, quantity takes over quality, certainty kills the openness or the tentativeness, false confidence kills the humility and a certain type of superiority complex gets built in, hierarchy gets established in all relationship, fragmentation and
compartmentalization become our way of engaging with the world. The list is long......
In short what we are encountering is a deep cognitive crisis, a civilization crisis.... Addressing this requires a total shift in our beingness...It may take several centuries for the recovery. But baby
steps are required...And like the baby tentative, open, humble, innocent and trusting.....
Dear Nada and friends
As you mentioned the time we are together is too short for any meaningful interaction. Around 25 people and 4 hours. Hope we can begin the process through email.
Two things I wish to raise.
One is regarding the process rather than the content which also means the environment or conditions for learning itself. Second is that as mush as we are rethinking higher education simultaneously the 'lower education' also needs to be addressed because the real damage is inflicted in schools and today the early childhood programs.
I am raising this because, I along with higher education, have been exploring the issues in the education of children. Because once the root or foundation is destroyed I don't think much can be done at the higher education level except some minor changes.
It is interesting to note that at Design schools, especially at NID etc almost one full year is spent in addressing the damages of schooling. As education at NID is experience/practice based the book
based teacher taught paradigm doesn't work.
My research of almost 30 years has been about the fundamental damages that 'modernity' has been doing to human beings and also the biological roots of human cognition. This has been a deep, existential research where the research was undertaken to deal with my own damages- alienation, fragmentation, compartmentalization, etc.... However, this naturally led me to explore larger context of modernity as well as the non-literate communities.
My research is also unusual in the sense that in order to understand what is happening I stopped reading altogether for few years. This gave me a glimpse into the cognitive system of non-literate people. On hindsight, I realized that the cognitive system that had been developed in me due to reading stopped functioning and the natural cognitive system began to re-emerge. That is I started using my eyes to see instead of reading, the obsessive analytical mind stopped on its own and began to take part in SEEING/ EXPERIENCING the real WORLD instead of making imaginary stories within the mind. In order to understand what is wrong with the education I studied how knowledge gets created among communities (traditional potters in particular), focused my attention also to how children' learn' thecraft and also contrasted this with schools and colleges that I began to visit. I also began to pay attention to the process in me.
My education at NID (National Institute of Design) was crucial in making me understand some fundamental issues about learning environment as well as the mechanics of learning. (NID was the first and the last institution I saw where total freedom was given to students to learn and almost all students were totally committed to learning )
Unique Features of Design Education
Design education is practice based, responding to the now. This demands the designer to be constantly on their toes, learning all the time, being attentive to what is going on with total openness and flexibility. Design education and design as a profession demand creativity, sensitivity, empathy from the practitioner and this can be only achieved by a shift from the way one has been educated in the school.
Design education demands the designer to have holistic overview- an understanding of (1) art/ culture (2) science/ technology (3) finance, management and (4) humanities (anthropology, history, sociology,
psychology) (5) communication (language and other means like computer etc) and holistic abilities development of physical skills- making, drawing etc as well as intellectual abilities. Even more interesting is the need innovation/creativity on one hand and practicality on the other. Ability to observe, comprehend, articulate and communicate is very crucial for designers.
Foundation program
Foundation program is the most important program in most design schools as foundation program helps the student to become a real learner, one who creates knowledge instead of merely receiving knowledge. Design education demands abilities, attitudes, skills and qualities that have not been developed in the regular education and foundation program is required to meet this needs. Design education demands fundamental shift from the way students have been studying in school. As the shift is fundamental and demands habits and attitudinal changes. The foundation program in general and orientation program, in particular, is geared towards achieving this. So when I embarked on the research this experience helped me a lot. In fact, NID gave the space/ condition/ freedom and environment to initiate the research.
I have also had a unique opportunity to 'run' a school for three years near Pune. I called this RE-IMAGINING SCHOOLS as we- all the adults- in the schools were involved in a true enquiry- What do children learn naturally if left to themselves, what is the process of learning, why children play, make 'toys', why do they draw and also why are they creating knowledge?......
We documented children- around 4000 videos and several images, studied their activities, studied their drawings etc and it was very clear that left to themselves children learn the REAL WORLD and they are biologically equipped by life to learn what is required for sustaininglife.
Learning the WORD completely turns everything upside down, reverses the process and even damages the qualities required for living. Knowledge precedes knowing, quantity takes over quality, certainty kills the openness or the tentativeness, false confidence kills the humility and a certain type of superiority complex gets built in, hierarchy gets established in all relationship, fragmentation and
compartmentalization become our way of engaging with the world. The list is long......
In short what we are encountering is a deep cognitive crisis, a civilization crisis.... Addressing this requires a total shift in our beingness...It may take several centuries for the recovery. But baby
steps are required...And like the baby tentative, open, humble, innocent and trusting.....
Dr. Victor Karunan's Comment
Dear Dr. Nat
Greetings from Bangkok. Sorry it has taken me a while to review the advance comments/inputs from participants to the RTD on 6 July at XUB. Here are a few of my own comments and inputs:
I hope these initial thoughts are helpful as part of our dialogue. I look forward to discussing and exchanging further with colleagues and to a productive discussion at XUB in July.
Additional Point
Two interesting initiatives:
a) The Center for Social Well-being Studies, Institute for the Development of Social Intelligence, Senshu University, Japan. See link: http://www.senshu-u.ac.jp/swb Recently, we collaborated with them to organise a the First Conference of International Consortium for Social Well-being Studies on the topic “Social Well-being and the Sustainable Development Goals” at Chulalongkorn University in Bangkok, in collaboration with the Asian Development Bank Institute and the Japan Center for Economic Research. See agenda and topics discussed attached.
b) Social Progress Index Initiative – Harvard Business School and MIT. See link: http://www.socialprogressimperative.org/social-progress-indexes/
Dear Dr. Nat
Greetings from Bangkok. Sorry it has taken me a while to review the advance comments/inputs from participants to the RTD on 6 July at XUB. Here are a few of my own comments and inputs:
- I feel a real “add value” of this innovative programme on humanities and social sciences would be to develop on the “local knowledge and wisdom” generated by numerous initiatives in India and elsewhere in the Asia Pacific region that not only provide sound theoretical framework and approaches to society and social (peoples) development, but also has proved evidence of relevance, impact and social change. Some excellent examples, among many others, is the “sufficiency economy philosophy” in Thailand; “rice theology” of Fr. Niphot in Chiang Mai; environmental and ecological movements among indigenous peoples in Asia Pacific, etc. This will help us “break” the dependency on Western and external models and frameworks that is currently dominating the social sciences and humanities. I see that Ashish Kothari referred to this in his comment – what he called “indigenous knowledge systems”.
- I feel we – in India and Asia Pacific – have also not paid much attention to the vision, values and relevance of the “Gross National Happiness” philosophy and development agenda of Bhutan. There is much we can learn from it and it also fits neatly to the aspirational goals/targets of the SDGs – Sustainable Development Goals – which should be then of interest to Governments and policy makers.
- On both the areas above, we have a vast repository of knowledge and people in the Asia Pacific region who have worked for decades and who can bring their knowledge and experience to bear on an inter-disciplinary academic programme that merges social sciences and humanities. This is in line with Ashish Kothari comment – point 4.
- There is also some other useful sources of normative frameworks and approaches we can learn from – e.g., the “Common Good of Humanity” approach by Dr. (Fr) Francois Houtart (who recently passed away – RIP). Attached is a pdf version of his paper – which will be useful to share with participants.
- In terms of some specific comments on topics/areas to cover in a Humanities and Social Science inter-disciplinary programme:
- SDGs: I feel we need to include understanding and critical analysis of the Sustainable Development Goals – as part of Public Policy in our academic programmes. This is necessary and there is demand as well – not only from Government agencies, but especially from NGOs, civil society, professionals, academics and students – at both graduate and post-graduate level. I teach a course on the SDGs as part of the “Politics of Public Policy” programme in the M.A. International Development Studies, Faculty of Political Science, Chulalongkorn University in Bangkok – which I would be happy to share with colleagues.
- Politics of Public Policy: there are so many courses in public policy – but very few deal with the “politics” of policy making – both at national and at regional and global levels.
- Agree with Dr.Saamdu Chetri, GNH Centre Bhutan – that we probably have too many centres and too many topics to cover. Without knowing the scope and content of the topics/areas to be covered by each proposed centre – I can already see a lot of overlap and redundancy across the centres. Better to focus on a few that are relevant and innovative/creative – i.e., those that are not offered by other Universities in India, and where XUB can fill a void.
I hope these initial thoughts are helpful as part of our dialogue. I look forward to discussing and exchanging further with colleagues and to a productive discussion at XUB in July.
Additional Point
Two interesting initiatives:
a) The Center for Social Well-being Studies, Institute for the Development of Social Intelligence, Senshu University, Japan. See link: http://www.senshu-u.ac.jp/swb Recently, we collaborated with them to organise a the First Conference of International Consortium for Social Well-being Studies on the topic “Social Well-being and the Sustainable Development Goals” at Chulalongkorn University in Bangkok, in collaboration with the Asian Development Bank Institute and the Japan Center for Economic Research. See agenda and topics discussed attached.
b) Social Progress Index Initiative – Harvard Business School and MIT. See link: http://www.socialprogressimperative.org/social-progress-indexes/
Article/Comment By D. Paul Schafer
Director, The World Culture Project,
Canada
Read article here:
The Arts: Key to a Full and Fulfilling Cultural Life
Director, The World Culture Project,
Canada
Read article here:
The Arts: Key to a Full and Fulfilling Cultural Life
Article/Comment by Prof. Sohail Inayatullah, UNESCO Chair in Futures Studies. He is a political scientist/futurist at Tamkang University, Taipei; an Associate at the Melbourne Business School, the University of Melbourne; and Adjunct Professor at the University of the Sunshine Coast, Australia.
Read article here:
Our Future Selves
Read article here:
Our Future Selves
