Abstract
This essay purports to highlight the creative dimensions of modern Indian philosophy by focusing on the ways it configured colonial reality and came to terms with the question of modern science and technology . The three main perspectives on colonialism can be characterized as (a) a theory of Total Subjugation (b) a theory of Cultural Self ; and (c) a theory of Revitalization to which correspond, respectively, three points of view regarding modern science and technology , namely (a) unqualified acceptance, (b) qualified acceptance and (c) qualified rejection. The first and the second responses promoted, with different degrees of vehemence, the project of India as a nation state to be built under the leadership of a scientific and technological elite , whereas the third response made room for the project of India as a civilizational endeavour led by artisans and craftsmen .
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
This is so for every kind of creative endeavour in colonial India. Both in aesthetic theory and practice, tradition was mobilized as ‘an oppositional category in the decolonization process’ and as a source of creative possibilities (Kapur 1990: 49–53). In her excellent work, Janaki Bakhle (Bakhle 2005) vividly brings out how, among others, V.N. Bhatkhande and V.D. Paluskar sought to make Hindustani sangeet the national music of India by integrating it into cultural nationalism . Their attempt to classicize, categorize and thus ‘sanitize’ Indian classical music was aimed at making it part of the nationalist project. Their attempt involved, among other things, a radical change in the institutional framework of its practice and pedagogy .
- 2.
I am indebted to the late D.R. Nagaraj for the identification and characterization for these three broad responses to colonialism as well as the folktale (Nagaraj 1996: 3–8).
References
Bakhle, J. (2005). Two men and music: Nationalism in the making of an Indian classical tradition. New York: Oxford University Press (Permanent Black, Ranikhet 2006).
Brantlinger, P. (1996). A postindustrial prelude to post colonialism: John Ruskin, William Morris and Gandhism. Critical Inquiry, 32.
Dharampal. (2000). Collected writings (Vol. 5). Mapusa, Goa: Other India Press.
Kapur, G. (1990). Contemporary cultural practice: Some polemical categories. Social Scientist, 18.
Killingly, D. (1995). Hinduism, darwinism and, evolution in late nineteenth century India. In D. Amigoni & J. Wallace (Eds.), Charles Darwin’s the origin of the species: New interdisciplinary essays. Manchester: Manchester University Press.
Ling, T. (1980). Karl Marx and religion. In Europe and India. London: Macmillan.
Mamdani, M. (2005). Good Muslim, bad Muslim. Delhi: Permanent Black.
Nagaraj, D. R. (1996). Sahitya Kathana (in Kannada). Heggodu, Karnataka: Akshara Prakashana.
Parel, A. J. (1997). A note on the history of the text. In A.J. Parel (Ed.), Gandhi: Hind swaraj and other writings. New Delhi: Cambridge University Press.
Riepe, D. (1986). Objectivity and subjectivism in the philosophy of science with special reference to India. Calcutta: K.P. Bagchi and Company.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2015 Indian Institute of Advanced Study
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Kulkarni, S.G. (2015). Philosophy in Colonial India: The Science Question. In: Deshpande, S. (eds) Philosophy in Colonial India. Sophia Studies in Cross-cultural Philosophy of Traditions and Cultures, vol 11. Springer, New Delhi. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-81-322-2223-1_3
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-81-322-2223-1_3
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, New Delhi
Print ISBN: 978-81-322-2222-4
Online ISBN: 978-81-322-2223-1
eBook Packages: Humanities, Social Sciences and LawPhilosophy and Religion (R0)