Ignorance is bliss?

It is rather creepy to start two articles with the same quote. Einstein has said – “You do not really understand something unless you can explain it to your grandmother.” (The quote has been attributed to other scientists too, like Feynman, or Rutherford – doesn’t matter.) The point, this time, is that the so ‘taught’ grandmother is no position replace Einstein (or Feynman / Rutherford) at his job. She is no position to suggest to Einstein (or Feynman/Rutherford) on how to carry on his profession. If the said explanation made any change in the status of the grandmother, it was just that she is now in a position a.) to appreciate what her grandson does, b.)to increase her understanding of the subject even more by reading the more advanced texts, and finally, c.) to actually achieve the status of a critic and a collaborator. However, there is a vast chasm between stage a and stage c – and if the same is not appreciated by the grandmother, it can lead to two simultaneous disasters – a. the grandmother shall get intellectually stunted, and b. the relation between her and grandson will get a lot constrained.

Dumbing down is a part of the technique of teaching. Teaching is normally done on a ‘capacity to know’ basis. Any student of chemistry can recall his progression through the orderly ‘solar system’ model of the atom, to the shell model, the subshell model, finally followed by the totally nebulous advanced models based on abstract mathematics. It’s not as if the advanced models were not known when the more primitive models were being taught to the pupils in the elementary classes. So why were these students taught a model known to be ‘wrong’? The answer lies in the ideas of truth, capacity and the objective. The idea of ‘truth’ is that none of the linearly evolved models is completely wrong or completely accurate. For the purpose of understanding that atoms are the smallest discrete elemental particles, even the elementary ‘currants in the bun’ model of atom (that an atom has some positive parts and some negative electrons) would do well. The idea of ‘capacity’ shows that for a 12 year old, understanding probabilistic ideas of orbitals or ‘electron gas’ might not be easy, whereas he can easily extend the analogy of the Newtonian solar system to electrons encircling the atomic nucleus. The idea of ‘objective’ tells us that we do not expect the 12 year old to use the course knowledge to do cutting edge Nobel prize work in his 13^th year. What we expect of him is to appreciate the facts that there are atoms – having positive nuclei and negative electrons outside the nucleus. If he continues to study Chemistry or Physics – he can build on it the higher concepts in atomic modelling. Even if he does not continue with Chemistry, he shall not go “WTF” when he hears the word ‘electron’, and confuse it for some alien death ray.

However, in teaching by dumbing down, one must always keep in mind to tell the students about the fact that they are being taught the dumbed down version. It is the absence of this caveat that can lead to quite disastrous results – as is evident in the contemporary world. One of the reasons for this happening is the fact that most of our knowledge these days comes not from the traditional sources of knowledge, but through the internet and the media – mainly the electronic media. Both of these media are prone to give out information at a primary level, without the caveat. Internet, as such, has a variety of information – ranging from the most rudimentary ‘how stuff works’ to the most cutting edge research paper.  However, constrained by our prior academic base and short attention span for most average topics, we tend to filter this information in favour of the lower end of the spectrum. As far as the electronic media is considered, dumbed down bite-sized nuggets of information and opinion are their fastest moving products. The result is a burgeoning number of people who think they are well-informed enough on any subject to make decisions without rechecking their facts, and to lock arms with those who have trained and dedicated their lives in the service of the subjects.

One of the rather innocuous results of this phenomenon is the increased reliance of consumers on brands. While a large part of buying ‘brand’ may be associated with the feel good and esteem associated with the possession thereof, a substantial number of decisions to buy on the basis of brands stem from the inability to really ‘separate the wheat from the chaff’. While brand may be the only criteria of judgement for a customer totally ignorant of the product’s features, it is more likely that such totally uninformed customers confine themselves a few products and develop a horse sense about the merit of such products. The half-informed customer, on the other hand, is usually the one who is expanding his purchase horizon. So brand based maneuverers find them as sitting ducks. They just need to string up a few intelligent & technical sounding taglines to their advertisements, to get them (the customers) eating out of their hands, and while they are at it, they will be totally convinced about the virtue or the demerits of any product, based on pseudo-scientific inputs fed to them. People are quicker these days to make a judgement and stick to that, even in face of mounting evidence. As Sir Winston Churchill said – “Occasionally he stumbled over the truth but he always picked himself up and hurried on as if nothing had happened.” Ask them about the reasons for their judgement – and they draw a blank, or concoct false ‘facts’. It might be innocuous when you are choosing your toothpaste, but might mean a big deal when you are choosing your post-graduation! Recently a close person had a lot of heart burn over choosing between a degree in a college which is among the top ‘brands’ in the country, or to go a job that he likes very much, and which also pays well. Asking many ‘experienced’ persons of the society did not help – all said that he should opt for the college – aankh band kar ke (without batting an eyelid). When asked ‘why’ – they said it is a very good college, everybody dreams of joining it. On probing further, it came out that they knew nothing about it – and yet they were prepared to advise in favour of it with the certainty of an expert. Being the closest person with some experience, I was asked for advice many times – all I told him was to find the facts, and form an independent opinion based on it. So he gathered the information – and decided not to join the college. The truth, it seems, has really set him free. Still there are people who tell him he did wrong; and the funny thing, they still are not able to justify their judgement with facts!

Recently, a couple of RadioJockeys were made to face criminal charges because somebody complained thatthey were spreading fear through misinformation. All that the poor guys had done that they had announced that ‘dihydrogen oxide’ was going to pour out of the municipal supply on the date of announcement. It was meant as a harmless prank – the assumption being that after initially freaking out, the listeners would realize what this was about. The dumb listeners went berserk. For those who have not got it – ‘dihydrogen oxide’ or H2O would be - plain water. On a more closer note, around a year back, our local Hindi dailies carried some flyers about some locally manufactured Induction heaters.  Among the USP’s listed out, the one that really made me double with laughter was the fact that it claimed that cooking on induction is better than doing it on gas stove because the food cooked on induction does not give you gas! Are people stupid enough to believe that? I don’t know. Since the advertiser was highlighting this point, he might have had somebody in mind. During my last visit to my native village, I heard one guy was forcing his hapless wife to cook on the wood choolhaa, as he believed that the gas stove food might cause him gas!

Around two months back, we had our attachment in the Parliament of India, as a part of the training. Amongst everything else, we had an interaction with some senior Honourable Parliamentarians of most major parties. It was that time of the year when the functioning of the Houses was being disrupted because of various issues – we ourselves could not get the opportunity to see them functioning. So somebody in the class asked why this was happening. We were expecting the usual answers which come on our TV. However, the sagacious reply of the Hon’ble Member was stunning. He said that the expectations the electorate had from them was totally out of line with their jobs. Parliament is the National legislature – it has the function to make Union Laws, and hold the Union government responsible. However, the majority of the electorate expect them to get their roads built, to get their kids employed somewhere with the government, to do them petty favours. They are happier if the actual Legislation is suspended and the Members are free to attend to their personal issues! This is the state of the awareness about the polity and the distribution of responsibilities under it among our masses. Why shouldn’t it be, when most of us are taught the humanities, at least till Class X, by uninterested teachers, as something which has to be mugged up and disgorged in the examination.

Iconic comedian George Carlin has said - "Never underestimate the power of stupid people in large groups." The idea is even more important given the fact that a general tendency to attack the established institutions on the basis of half-baked ideas, generally aided by an electronic media bereft both of any restraint or any guilt (about further dumbing down the dumb), has been gaining ground recently. While the administration is generally portrayed as not working, the fact is that it works just as well as any other average organization in the country, for the general good of the greatest – manned by experienced persons, who are not all the bloodsucking leeches they are made out to be. When such pressure groups indulge in petty demagoguery, it often leads to pressures that cause the government to indulge in fire-fighting. This may redistribute the efforts of the government in ways that are not optimal or good for the country in the long run, simply to appease those vested interests that mount such pressures. This can lead to great diseconomies in the efforts of the governments to do things right. Strangely, governance seems to be that one job about which everybody other that the doer seems to know better.

I must say here that I am not against the dumbing down of things, in general – by the textbooks, by the news channels, by anyone. I just wish that it should not be done with a vested interest, and it should be done with a clear disclaimer. It should be done only to spur further interest in the subject matter, and to increase the general awareness of the ideas. After all, nobody can be an expert in all subjects – when scarcely few are experts in their own subjects! However I hope that malicious dumbing down to indoctrinate and brainwash would be fought by those in the know – may be with their own benevolent dumbed down models. These are turbulent times, when the masses long steeped in ignorance are becoming aware, in some measure, and are interacting with the system in the light of this awareness. I hope this is a transient phase, and soon, the new found knowledge would be tempered by an awareness of the limitation of that knowledge. Sir Isaac Newton has described this feeling really succinctly – “I was like a boy playing on the sea-shore, and diverting myself now and then finding a smoother pebble or a prettier shell than ordinary, whilst the great ocean of truth lay all undiscovered before me.” Real knowledge brings with it real humility, real civility. On the back of such knowledge is raised the edifice of a responsible, informed, involved and mature nation.