ARTICLE
Reflections on Social Movements of Science in Contemporary India
Dhruv Raina and Omprasad
Pages 29-42| Published online: 05 Nov 2023
Raina, Dhruv and Omprasad. 2023. “Reflections on Social Movements of Science in Contemporary India.” Marxism & Sciences 2(2): 29–42. https://doi.org/10.56063/MS.2310.02203
ABSTRACT
Social movements of science in India have had an important role to play in the democratisation of science for more than half a century. The participants in these movements have different understandings of the social relations of science, ideological agendas, and the social origins of the participants in these movements are quite diverse as are their educational backgrounds. The relationship of these movements with the state funded science and technology research system has been marked by ambivalence, now by antagonism and at other times as a resource to be cherished and defended. But the challenges facing them today are of a different order. The ascent of authoritarian regimes globally, as well as in the Indian political sphere pose a threat to the institutions of learning and knowledge production and dissemination. Beyond research institutes and universities facing up to the threat of political intervention and budgetary cuts, the academy that ensconces the three cultures of the sciences, social sciences and the humanities, is a divided house today. While there have been popular movements and democratic struggles led by students and farmers, in a post-truth world defence of the values and ethos of science and the world of knowledge as an open community of scholars oriented towards the production of robust knowledge needs to be defended again. This paper will address some issues presently faced by social movements of science encountering a populist and authoritarian regime. The paper argues why it is important to defend a socially robust theory of knowledge making and one of the arenas for disseminating this conception of knowledge relate to the specific struggles of the social movement of science today.
KEYWORDS: Social Movements, India, March for Science, post-truth, credibility of scientific knowledge, authoritarian governments, populism.
REFERENCES
Acemoglu, Daron. 2021. “AI’s future doesn’t have to be dystopian.” Boston Review.
https://www.bostonreview.net/forum/ais-future-doesnt-have-to-be-dystopian/
Ashman, Keith M. and Philip S. Baringer. 2001. After the Science Wars, edited by Philip S. Baringer. Psychology Press.
Baldwin, John D. 2015. Ending the Science Wars. London: Routledge.
Chakraborti, Anirban, Dhruv Raina, and Kiran Sharma. 2016. “Can an interdisciplinary field contribute to one of the parent disciplines from which it emerged?” The European Physical Journal Special Topics 225: 3127–35.
Delhi Science Forum. 1989. “The Notion of Science According to Bernal.” Social Scientist 17(3/4): 3–12.https://doi.org/10.2307/3517356.
Elzinga, Aant and Catharina Landström. 1996. Internationalism and Science. London: Taylor Graham.
Escobar, Arturo. 2011. “Development and the anthropology of modernity.” In The Postcolonial Science and Technology Reader, edited by Sandra Harding. Durham: Duke University Press. 269-289.
Fuller, Steve. 2002. The Kuhn-Popper Debate: The Struggle for the Soul of Science. Icon Books.
Funtowicz, Silvio O., and Jerome R. Ravetz. 1993. “Science for the post-normal age.” Futures 25(7): 739–55.
Gadgil, Madhav and Ramchandra Guha.1994. “Ecological Conflicts and the Environmental Movement in India.” Development and Change 25(1):101–136.
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.14677660.1994.tb00511.x
Gibbons, Michael, Camille Limoges, Helga Nowotny, Simon Schwartzman, Peter Scott, and Martin Trow. 1994. The New Production of Knowledge: The Dynamics of Science and Research in Contemporary Societies. London: Sage
Green, Andrew. 2019. “Amit Sengupta.” The Lancet 393(10166): 24.
Gross, Levitt, and Martin W. Lewis. 1997. The Flight from Science and Reason. New York: New York Academy of Science.
Guha, Ram. 1988. “The Alternative Science Movement: An Interim Assessment.” Lokayan Bulletin 6(3): 7–25.
Han, Byung-Chul. 2017. Psycho-politics: Neo-liberalism and the New Technologies of Power. London: Verso Books.
Isaac, T. M. Thomas., Richard W. Franke, and M. P. Parameswaran. 1997. “From anti-feudalism to sustainable development: The Kerala Peoples Science Movement.” Bulletin of Concerned Asian Scholars 29(3): 34–44.
https://doi.org/10.1080/14672715.1997.10413092
Jasanoff, Sheila, Gerald E. Markle, James C. Petersen, and Trevor Pinch. 1993. Handbook of Science and Technology Studies. New York: Sage Publication.
Jodhka, Surinder S. 2021. “Why are the farmers of Punjab protesting?” The Journal of Peasant Studies (48)7: 1356–70.
https://doi.org/10.1080/03066150.2021.1990047
Krishna, V.V. 1997. “Science, technology and counter hegemony—Some reflections on the contemporary science movements in India.” In Science and Technology in A Developing World, edited by Terry Shinn et al. 375–411. Netherlands: Springer.
Latour, B. 2004. “Why Has Critique Run Out of Steam? From Matters of Fact to Matters of Concern.” Critical Inquiry 30: 225–248.
McIntyre, Lee. 2019. The Scientific Attitude: Defending Science from Denial, Fraud and Pseudoscience. Boston: MIT Press
McMullin, Ernan. 1982. “Values in Science.” Proceedings of the Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association, 3–28.
Nowotny, Helga and Scott, Peter and Gibbons, Michael. 2001. Rethinking Science: Knowledge and the Public in the Age of Uncertainty. London: Polity Press.
Parameswaran, M.P. 2013. Science for Social Revolution: A Reader. Thrissur: Kerala Sasthra Sahitya Parishath.
Pathak, Avijit. 2017. “Hubris of Science.” Indian Express. August 12, 2017.
https://indianexpress.com/article/opinion/columns/hubris-of-science-scientist-march religious-intolerance-4792700/
Petitjean, Patrick.1999. “Needham, Anglo-French Civilities and Ecumenical Science.” In Situating the History of Science: Dialogues with Joseph Needham, edited by S. Irfan Habib and Dhruv Raina. Oxford University Press: Delhi.
Petitjean, Patrick. 2008. “The Joint Establishment of The World Federation of Scientific Workers and of UNESCO after World War II.” Minerva 46 (2): 247–70.
Poulson, Steve. 2018. “The Critical Zone of Science and Politics: Interview with Bruno Latour.” Los Angeles Review of Books, February 23, 2018.
https://lareviewofbooks.org/article/the-critical-zone-of-science-and-politics-an-inter-view-with-bruno-latour/#!
Purkayastha, Prabir., Indranil, Richa Chintan. 2021. Political Journey in Health: Essay by and for Amit Sengupta. New Delhi: Leftword Books.
Raina, Dhruv. 1993. “Technological determinism embodied in an appro-tech programme: Small science in a high-tech environment.” Journal of Scientific and Industrial Research 52: 471–82.
Raina, Dhruv and Ashok Jain.1997. “Big science and the university in India.” In Science in the Twentieth Century, edited by John Krige and Dominique Pestre. Amsterdam: Harwood Academic Publishers.
Raina, Dhruv.1997. “Evolving perspectives on science and history: A chronicle of modern India’s scientific enchantment and disenchantment (1850–1980).” Social Epistemology 11(1): 3–24.
Raina, Dhruv. 2019. “After the Two Cultures Divide: Transdisciplinarity and the Shape of Things to Come.” In Questioning Paradigms, Constructing Histories, edited by Kumkum Roy and Naina Dayal. New Delhi: Aleph Books. 365–380.
Raina, Dhruv and Omprasad. 2023. “Small Movements, Big Problems: At the Margins of History of Science and Technology.” Paper Presented at the Workshop on“Civil Society, State and Science: Transformative Initiatives in/for Rural India 1980-2020, January 22–23, New
Delhi.
Raina, Vinod, Aditi Chowdhury, and Sumit Chowdhury. 1997. The Dispossessed: Victims of Development in Asia. New Delhi: Manohar
Ruane, J.M. 2018. “Should sociologists stand up for science? Absolutely!” Sociological Forum 33(1): 239–41.
Salomon, Jean Jacquees. 1971. “The internationale of science.” Science Studies 1(1): 23–42. Sarukkai, Sundar. 2017. “A March from Yesterday.” The Hindu. August 10, 2017.
https://www.thehindu.com/opinion/op-ed/the-march-from-yesterday/article19459043.ece
Sharma, D.C. 2015. The Outsourcer: The Story of India’s IT Revolution. Boston: MIT Press.
Siddharthan, Rahul. 2017. “Sundar Sarukkai’s Claim That the ‘March for Science’ Was Unscientific Is Farcical.” The Wire. August 11, 2017.
https://thewire.in/science/sundar-sarukkai-march-for-science-scientific-temper-fundamentalism.
Somsen, Geert J. 2008. “A History of Universalism: Conceptions of the Internationality of Science from the Enlightenment to the Cold War.” Minerva 46(3): 361–79.
Stengers, Isabelle. 2010. Cosmopolitics I. Translated by Robert Bononno. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
Surendran, Aardra. 2017. “Why the ‘March for Science’ Was About the Social Sciences as Well.” The Wire. August 20, 2017.
https://thewire.in/science/march-for-science-scientific-method-sociology
Thomas, Renny. 2017. “Can Science and Social Science Really March Together?” The Wire. August 22, 2017.
https://thewire.in/science/march-for-science-superstitions-latour-sal.
Varughese, Shiju Sam. 2002. People’s Science Movements: A Study on the Ideological Orientations of Kerala Sastra Sahitya Parishad. MPhil Diss: Jawaharlal Nehru University
Venkateswaran, T V. 2020. “‘Science for social revolution’: People’s Science Movements and democratizing science in India.” Journal of Science Communication 19(6): C08.
Visvanathan, Shiv. 1997. A Carnival for Science: Essays on Science, Technology and Development. New Delhi: Oxford University Press.
Winner, Langdon. 2001. “Where Technological Determinism Went.” In Visions of STS: Counter-points in Science, Technology, and Society Studies, edited by Stephen H. Cutcliffe and Carl Mitcham. 11-19. SUNY Press.
Ziman, John. 2000. Real Science: What It Is and What It Means. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.