Sir, You are a big ocean of enlightenment.I have been struggling with the book 'Selfish Gene', By Dawkins.Your comment has enabled better understanding. YM Sarma
On Sat, Feb 22, 2025 at 8:47 AM Rajaram Krishnamurthy <[email protected]> wrote: > SELF ESTEEM > > > > Indians have a veru slow self-esteem as evident from our groups > aand the nations far and wide; Mr Sekar often quotes to make us rise and > awakened. But what aare the four perceptions of the self esteem ? > > xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > > I Do you agree with the fact that Indians have relatively low > self-esteem? > > I completely agree. I am an Indian who has lived in US for 15 years but > have come back to India. I studied and worked in Engineering there. > > I see that Indians are all about pleasing, fitting in, hero worshipping, > aping the west. The simplest example is the obsession with American accent > in English while not caring about speaking Hindi fluently. In fact many are > ashamed of speaking in Hindi. Yes English is a stylish, attractive sounding > language but that is it. That way if you see, Hindi is a very scientific > language. They are just languages. > > Now when I came back to India and started working somewhere (an Indian > company but MNC) I was asked by Indian colleagues -Why aren’t you using > American accent? They also associated it with my capability to do my job > right- as if speaking in American accent meant being able to do my job. I > was in a senior management position. But still I am in India! My job had > nothing to do with selling or interacting with foreign clients. So why will > I use an American accent? Also Americans dont care about your accent as far > as you speak clearly. I never had any issue with my accent in US. People > mostly said, I speak very well. And in engineerimg your job is quite > technical. Why is this a matter of shame and pride in India? Where is our > self esteem? We should be proud to speak in Hindi or have our own English > accent. Yes, clarity is important. But otherwise, China is doing it. France > is doing it. Germany is doing it. Korea is doing it. They all speak English > with their accents. And there is American English and British English. > > More on this- my friends in US who have settled there have American > accents - they are extremely well educated people doing great in their > lives and careers. Now American accent for English in America makes sense > since you need good communication skills and you are living in a foreign > country. But over time their Hindi accents have changed to American accent > as well. Hindi is a separate language spoken differently. I understand this > can happen naturally if you are not paying attention to your speech. But > when it is important to speak English in American accent because that is a > “truer version” of English, why is it not important to speak Hindi in its > “true” accent? Especially because it's your native language that you spoke > in all your life! > > > > It's simple. No self esteem. They think English is superior. I think this > is the exact reason why Britishers could rule in India. Indians simply > bowed to them and thought they were better. Why? Because they don't care to > know about their country and it's greatness. Just blind followers. > > (ps: Another small example and observation. Buddha taught mindfulness to > the world in the form of Vipassana meditation. I have sat and served > Vipassana courses for more than two decades. The west, especially US, > noticed this and started selling it (like they always do, US is great at > selling anything). Now they have courses in mindfulness in their > universities especially Stanford etc, incorporated mindfulness in cognitive > therapy etc and have started re-teaching it to the world. Even UK top > universities have seen the value of it and are teaching it in universities. > Many world renowned names like Ekhart Tolle, Jon Kabat Jinn etc are > teaching mindfulness as if they have discovered it themselves , they never > give any credit to the Vipassana courses they have done and the teachers > from whom they have learnt, especially the Buddha. However now Indian > psychologists go and learn these new psychology courses from the west and > are in awe of it. In a few years, people in India will think mindfulness > came from the west. Same story for Ayurveda or Yoga. Why? Because Indians > have no self-esteem. They just want to praise and hero-worship “others”. No > self-knowledge or pride about their own nation.) {QUORA} > > > > II Whenever someone is pulled up for jumping the queue at, say, > passport counters in international airports, we are embarrassed—as it is > almost always an Indian or an equally insensitive person from our immediate > neighbours. As soon as a plane lands or a train stops, everyone jumps up > and seems to be in a tearing hurry, jostling with co-passengers, to get > out. It may sound too sweeping to brand an entire people as too restlessly > self-centred, but we all know that it is quite true. We are not arguing > that others may not be self-obsessed; we are only trying to understand why > most of us appear to be so inconsiderately pushy. > > In 1976, Richard Dawkins created quite a stir with his The Selfish Gene, where > he declared that winning genes are self-reinforcing and spread faster and > greater because they succeed in achieving their tasks. He also introduced > the theory of ‘memes’ describing them as elements of a culture or systems > of behaviour that are passed from one individual to another—by imitation. > As in the physical world, in society too ‘memes’ or imitational behaviour > spread more voluminously if they achieve their targeted gains. Applying > this trait to our society, we may put it rather simply and surmise that > everyone pushes around as those who pushed first profited in their > objective. They were not reprimanded despite violating normal decency and > patience, and they succeeded in moving forward, even at the cost of causing > discomfort to others. On the other hand, Dutch historian Rutger Bergman > argues in his recent book, Humankind, that humans are not as intrinsically > selfish as believed. He insists, after considerable mapping of humans and > their actions, that acts of kindness are also powerfully contagious. > > What then triggers the ‘me-first’ attitude among Indians that really > stands out more in international comparisons? Honking cars unnecessarily is > just another aspect of this same inconsiderate social behaviour. The same > person would be driving perfectly quietly, without blowing his horn, if he > were abroad and there he would abide by the consensus or face heavy fines > and public scorn. The same unconcerned disposition is quite visible in the > practice of keeping our homes as clean as possible but bothering little > about littering public places and thoroughfares. Before we go deeper in > examining why our inclinations differ so sharply when it comes to ‘common > concerns’, let us also analyse the notable international sporting events > where Indians have won medals. We are talking of the Olympics (woefully few > medals), Commonwealth Games, Asian Games and such other prestigious > championships. > > We discover that almost all of these medals were for individual > excellence—shooting, wrestling, boxing, athletics, badminton, tennis, > weightlifting, chess, swimming and so on. Yes, we have won medals in team > games like hockey, which is really an exception to this ‘rule’. Our > post-colonial obsession with cricket is thanks to the incredible amount of > investment made in the game and in its seductive and addictive televising. > The point is that we seem to excel where we have to fight it alone, whereas > where we need to work as a team, say, in football, a nation of 1.3 billion > has not yet produced its ‘eleven’ for top class international football. > > > > The whole idea of this little exercise is not to denigrate but to try to > understand the phenomenon. One possible reason is evident in the most > populous religion on this subcontinent, on which base ‘grew’ other later > religions. The mad rush at many temples and other sacred sites during > festivals and pilgrimages is certainly not for the faint-hearted. And > frankly, while everyone jostles, elbows and tramples over everyone else, we > pray only for our welfare and prosperity and, of course, for our family. > This, again, needs to be appreciated as an act of seeking ‘individual > salvation’ ,not necessarily (or rarely) for the community. Abrahamic > religions, on the other hand, emphasise communitarian brotherhood, while we > are genetically programmed to obtain our own good, come what may. The > lavish gifts or daana at the temples are often quite transactional in > nature, and piety is quite purchasable—as in some churches. > > How else would a completely unorganised religion that has no Vatican, no > one Bible, no agreed cadre of preachers survive through so many > millennia—had it not been for the mandate to pay for the services of the > priest and the ritual practitioner? The latter belonged to one varna or > caste group and were often quite captive within a society that demanded > that they do not seek better vocations. We are, of course, referring to the > prescribed norm. The short point is that this priesthood needed its clients > and benefactors. They served them by connecting them directly to the > Almighty, even if it warranted shoving others out of the way. What we need > to note is that this class succeeded in uniting an incredibly diverse > country by injecting common beliefs and rituals. > > It is quite possible that we inherited this socially accepted behaviour > that shaped our cultural genes and stamped our ‘memes’, which, in turn, > left its indelible mark on our general attitude to life. The ‘community’ > emerged much later—during the Bhakti movement, with bhajans and other > institutions. But the core attitude continued to be self-oriented even when > we became more inclusive and egalitarian. > > Jawhar Sircar > > Retired civil servant. > > > > III The assertion that the majority of the population in India is > "self-centred" is a generalization that needs careful examination. While > it is true that many individuals across the world exhibit self-interest in > various degrees, this statement about India specifically requires a deeper, > more nuanced analysis of socio-cultural, economic, and psychological > factors. In this essay, we will explore the concept of self-centeredness, > analyse its roots in Indian society, and consider whether this trait is > widespread or whether it is merely a perception. The analytical focus will > examine the role of truth, societal expectations, and the influence of the > environment in shaping individual behaviour. > > 2 Understanding Self-Centeredness and Truth: Self-centeredness is > often described as excessive preoccupation with oneself, disregarding the > needs, feelings, or rights of others. This trait can manifest as egoism, > narcissism, or individualism. It can also be seen as a natural survival > instinct, where one focuses primarily on personal gains, well-being, and > success, sometimes at the expense of others. Truth, in this context, can > be seen as the objective reality about human nature and societal behaviour. > However, the interpretation of truth is subjective and can differ based on > culture, history, and personal experiences. In Indian society, like in any > other, the concept of self-interest exists but is intricately intertwined > with collective values and a complex social fabric. To understand the claim > of widespread self-centeredness in India, we must explore factors such as > family structures, cultural norms, religious teachings, and socio-economic > conditions. > > 3 Cultural and Religious Influence on Self-Interest: India’s > social structure has historically been defined by *strong communal ties.* In > traditional Indian society, the family unit has been a cornerstone of life. > In many parts of India, extended families live together, where individuals > are taught to prioritize family honour over personal desires. However, in > the past few decades, societal changes, particularly the shift towards > urbanization and globalization, have introduced a more individualistic > culture. This shift, often associated with Western influence, has led to a > growing > sense of personal autonomy. Religious teachings also play a significant > role in shaping attitudes toward self-interest. Hinduism, India’s > predominant religion, often advocates for a balance between self-care and > altruism. The idea of dharma (duty) suggests that individuals should act > selflessly for the greater good. Similarly, Buddhism and Jainism, which > have roots in India, emphasize compassion and non-violence, promoting > selflessness and consideration for others. However, in practice, the > pressures of modern life, including competition, economic disparity, and > societal expectations, can lead individuals to focus more on personal gain > rather than communal or familial well-being. The pursuit of material > success often overshadows these spiritual teachings, creating a tension > between self-centred behaviour and traditional values of interconnectedness. > > 4 Economic Factors and Individualism: India’s rapid > economic growth over the past few decades has transformed the country in > numerous ways. The liberalization of the economy, an increase in > entrepreneurial opportunities, and a growing consumer market have > encouraged people to pursue personal success. In cities, this has led to > the rise of individualistic values, with a stronger emphasis on > self-reliance and personal achievement. The competitive nature of the job > market also fosters an environment where individuals may adopt a > self-centred mindset to survive or thrive. On the other hand, India is > still a country with extreme economic disparities. In rural areas and among > lower-income populations, survival often becomes the primary concern, > leading people to focus more on their own immediate needs rather than the > larger social or collective good. *Here, self-centeredness could be > understood not as a moral flaw, but as a survival mechanism. *In such > circumstances, truth about human nature and self-interest could be seen > through the lens of economic necessity, where personal well-being takes > precedence. > > 5 The Role of social media and Modern Influence: The rise of digital > media and the proliferation of social media platforms has drastically > changed the way people interact, especially in urban India. Social media > often promotes a culture of self-presentation, where individuals are > encouraged to focus on their image, personal achievements, and lifestyle. > In this environment, it is easy to see how individuals might become more > self-centred, as they compete for attention, validation, and approval from > their peers. Moreover, the curated reality presented on platforms like > Instagram, Facebook, and Twitter may lead to unrealistic expectations and a > heightened focus on personal success. People may be driven by the need for > external validation, often at the expense of authentic connection with > others. In this context, self-centeredness is not only a product of > personal desire but is also a consequence of a media-driven culture that > prizes individual achievements over collective progress. > > 6 Social Expectations and the Pressure to Conform: Despite these > individualistic influences, Indian society also places a strong emphasis on > social obligations, duty, and respect for elders. However, the pressure > to conform to societal norms can create a paradox where individuals must > balance personal desires with collective expectations. For instance, many > Indians experience intense pressure to succeed academically, > professionally, and financially, often for the benefit of the family or > community. This can lead to self-centred behaviour in the pursuit of > these external goals. On the flip side, the desire to maintain social > status can foster selflessness when it comes to certain communal or > familial responsibilities. In many Indian communities, contributing to the > welfare of the family and larger society is seen as a source of pride. > Nevertheless, the balance between fulfilling personal ambitions and social > responsibilities can be difficult, especially when personal success becomes > equated with self-worth. > > 7 The Truth About Self-Centeredness in India: The question of > whether the majority of the population in India is self-centred is complex. > It is essential to recognize that self-centeredness, as a trait, is not > inherently good or bad; it is shaped by societal norms, economic > conditions, and cultural influences. The truth about self-centeredness in > India lies in the nuanced interplay of traditional values and modern > pressures. In some contexts, self-interest may be a reflection of survival > instincts or the pursuit of individual achievement in a rapidly changing > world. In other cases, it may be a manifestation of the struggle to meet > societal expectations or compete in an increasingly globalized economy. > Ultimately, the extent to which self-centeredness dominates the behaviour > of individuals in India depends on their socio-economic background, > exposure to external influences, and the evolving cultural landscape. The > path to understanding this issue requires acknowledging the complexity of > human nature and recognizing that self-interest is often balanced with the > drive to contribute to the larger community. > > > > In the broader sense, the truth about self-centeredness is not absolute, > but rather subjective, shaped by the ever-changing realities of Indian > society. > > > > IV 'I think Indian men are terribly selfish and egoistic about > childbearing' > > Talking of compulsory sterilization, Bulbul said, "It should have happened > ten years ago. I am all for it even now. After all, the population > explosion is the most basic of all our problems." She thinks that a small > family calls for a much healthier atmosphere. "I think children need more > attention than affection, and the only way a mother can give them enough > attention is to have fewer children. I personally wanted to have only one > child but some of my friends who are only children themselves convinced me > that that was hard on the child." > > Bulbul Sharma, a young mother with a two-year old daughter is expecting > her second child. Her husband and she have decided that she undergo > sterilization after the baby is born this September "It's easiest for a > woman to have herself sterilized at the time of childbirth, and since that > is the case, I don't see why my husband should go through it unnecessarily " > > Talking of compulsory sterilization, Bulbul said, "It should have happened > ten years ago. I am all for it even now. After all, the population > explosion is the most basic of all our problems." She thinks that a small > family calls for a much healthier atmosphere. "I think children need more > attention than affection, and the only way a mother can give them enough > attention is to have fewer children. I personally wanted to have only one > child but some of my friends who are only children themselves convinced me > that that was hard on the child." > > In the case of the economically deprived classes, she feels that > inhibitions in facing the facts of life are gradually dying. "The younger > generation is becoming quite aware. But the other day I came across an > educated army officer's wife with four daughters who yet wanted a son. I > was quite shocked." > > Bulbul thinks that the attitude of the Indian male towards sterilization > is a major obstacle. "I think Indian men - particularly from the working > class - are terribly selfish and egoistic about childbearing. Sterilization > strikes them, even when applied to their wives, as an insult to their > capacity to produce children or an offense to their virility " > > Mr K.K. Handa, secretary in a government enterprise, was completely in > favour of compulsory sterilization. He felt that though sterilization is a > "stern and strict" measure it nevertheless seems to be becoming a > necessity, "if there is to be a major control of the country's population > growth." > > A father of two sons, Mr Handa said, "Even if I had daughters, I wouldn't > have tried for a third child with the hope of producing a son." Children, > he feels, are expensive and he cannot afford to have more than two. He > feels that if a parent takes the responsibility of bringing a child into > this world, they owe the child a comfortable upbringing at least and should > try to offer the child the best opportunities possible. > > However, Mr Handa said he could quite understand why people insist on > having a son. "How many openings are there for women in India? He felt that > though there have been tremendous changes in the old concept of women being > the men's shadows, there is still a great deal left to be one "before the > position of a daughter becomes equal to that of a son." > > Unlike many, Mr Handa is aware that sterilization can be reversed. When he > went to a doctor to get sterilized the doctor advised him to wait till the > elder son was at least six years old because of the high infant mortality > rate. > > Mr Handa felt that the reason why so few people believed in sterilization > was because nobody had bothered to convince the men or women concerned that > sterilization does not cause impotency and makes no difference in the > sexual relationship of a couple. > > Dhanno is a middle-aged housewife of Masijad Moth village her husband is a > mali and between them they have produced eleven children, eight of whom are > living today They are conscious that they have too many children, and like > couples in their position, are honest enough to believe that realization > came too late. > > As a result Dhanno has to work in the nearby colony of South Extension to > support her family "What could I do?" she said, "the babies came one after > the other It is only now I realize how much simpler life would have been > with fewer children. But now that they are in this world, I naturally wish > the best for them." > > Dhanno had herself sterilized three years ago, after her youngest son, who > is now three years old, was born in a taxi on the way to the hospital. "I > was sick and tired of the old routine," she said, talking of child bearing > and rearing. When she had herself sterilized it was in the face of severe > opposition from her husband, who knew nothing about it till she had > actually enrolled herself in the hospital. "He grumbled like mad when he > had to sign the papers but the doctors finally persuaded him. He kept > thinking that the operation would kill me, he created a terrible scene in > the hospital saying, who will look after the children after you are gone," > said Dhanno laughingly > > After her operation was over and she came back to the village, several > other women, assured by her safety, went along and had themselves > sterilized. > > "But," says Dhanno with pride shining through her eyes, "I was the first. > I was the one who introduced it in the village." > > "Lack of resources and overpopulation is a fatal combination which leads > to sterilization becoming a necessary evil," said Mrs. R. Bedi, a mother of > two daughters, a golfing enthusiast, and wife of a Director in Dunlops, > living in Calcutta.rs. Bedi felt that the initial reaction regarding > compulsory sterilization was not a very pleasant one. "One tends to > consider it an encroachment on one's personal rights." But because of the > explosive problem India is facing, she thought this would be the "quickest > means to control population growth." > > She was of the opinion that it was unnecessary to overpublicize > sterilization. There are already so many problems in imposing such a > measure like religious prejudices, superstition and ignorance. Too much > publicity will only succeed in accentuating them rather than solving them." > According to her sterilization should be made routine. "Immediately after a > woman has her third child she should be sterilized." If a couple already > has more than three children then the operation should be performed on > whichever partner for whom it is medically simpler " > > Commenting on the problems of those who continue to produce children in > the hope of producing a boy Mrs. Bedi said, "It's one thing to bring in > children into the world and another to bring up children." She too would > have liked to have had a son "but there is no guarantee that the next child > is going to be a boy There has to be a stop somewhere. Besides there are > more important issues at stake rather than what sex your children belong > to." > > The husband Inderjit is a Sikh and the wife, Nasreen, a Muslim. They have > three daughters, all under six. Nasreen said she felt compulsory > sterilization should be enforced, but only in the case of a certain class > of people. "Those who cannot afford to have more than two to three children > should not be allowed to produce more." The husband, though of the same > opinion, felt that unless the couple could be guaranteed a free operation > to reverse sterilization if their child happened to die or anything like > that, the operation as a compulsory measure was too harsh. > > Who should undergo the operation, the husband or the wife? "The husband > definitely," said Nasreen. She felt that women had their share of physical > pain during childbirth and it was about time the husband shared some > responsibility Nasreen also said that in India, if at all, either one of > the couple was unfaithful it was usually the husband. Sterilization, she > thought, could act as a safety measure making it impossible for a man to > get other women pregnant. Inderjeet also felt that it was better for the > man to undergo sterilization, though not for the same reason. "There are > fewer complications and the operation is simpler if performed on a man," he > said. > > With their eldest child already at boarding school, Inderjeet Singh said, > "I want to be able to give my daughters the best of education, and not just > in the academic sense. So that they can pursue whatever career they want > without having to face any difficulties. Frankly, these days it does not > matter at all-women are doing greater things than men." > > Dorcie Roche 24, a Roman Catholic married Michael in February 1975. Since > she had been working as a help for the past six years, she was keen to > retain her job. She said, "I enjoy working and I enjoy being married. I did > not want to have a child immediately My husband did not want a child either > We thought if I went on what they call 'the pill' I would easily be able to > prevent having a child." In keeping with her desire she went to the nearest > Family Planning Centre to get herself a reliable contraceptive. > > The doctor on duty dissuaded her from going on the pill explaining, > "Before having the first child you should not use any contraceptive. It is > important for you to bear a child. Your age is just right. If you go on the > pill now it might hamper your being able to conceive when you want to. Have > your first child and at the most one more, then have yourself sterilized." > After her visit to the Family Planning Centre, Dorcie was frightened at the > prospect of not being able to bear any children. In a slight panic she let > circumstances take their own course, as a result of which she was pregnant > a month after her marriage. Now she has a beautiful four month-old baby boy > > For the future, Dorcie and Michael both plan to wait a couple of years. In > fact, they are even considering not having any more children so that they > can concentrate all their resources and care on Perkins Roche-their son. > "That," said Michael, with considerable pride , "is what matters the > most-how you bring up your children." > > Xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > > K Rajaram IRS 22225 > -- *Mar* -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Thatha_Patty" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/thatha_patty/CACDCHCKsp2ozHrEG7CBicutDBeFMt2dxiptqgC%2Bsmx-DOvr4yw%40mail.gmail.com.
