It is instructive to think of human society these days to be evolving to a period of greater collusion, with tendencies towards violence distributed evenly in societies, rather than grouped into certain conflit zones. This defies the data we have available presently on areas like the West Bank, The Gaza Strip, Iraq and Afghanistan/Pakistan, but we have to remember that many conflicts that brew in other parts of the world are not documented or given enough attention. My qualms chiefly center around Tibet and the state-sponsored violence there, the Naxal problem in eastern and Central India, the much-discussed conflict in Northern Srilanka, the unrest in Somalia, the genocides in Darfur and other conflicts that we probably don’t know about in detail, in different parts of the world.
I saw a very interesting perspective in Steven Pinker’s talk on TED here. The talk is embedded below for ease, but there is also a discussion on TED that’s worth following on this page.
The talk is instructive because it defies a widely held perception that we are living in a society of increasing violence and unrest. In Indian myth, there is reference to a mythical golden age, the Satya Yuga or the Krta Yuga. This age, as fictitious as it may be, probably points to certain social trends that can help one examine one view of how people can live in harmony. In a stroke of romantic imaginativeness, the Satya Yuga is purported by the ancients to be the longest, lasting 1,700,000 years. The time scales in Indian mythology are staggering, with Brahma the creator having a lifespan of 77 trillion years. Such time scales are probably what prompted Carl Sagan to view them as an exalted and perhaps wondrous, somewhat realistic view of the cosmos (compared to the widely held Western view of a 5000 year old universe). The subsequent ages – Treta, Dwapara and Kali represent periods of increasing moral decay, leading to greater materialism, and perhaps greater violence. Modern science and an examination of human evolution tells us a different story – that human evolution hit a sort of tipping point 2 million years ago, when Homo erectus started transforming into Homo sapiens. It is scientifically plausible that the development of civilization, education and the slow erasure of instinctive tendencies have permitted greater cooperation between tribes and groups that previously would be at odds or would have violent conflicts, but have education and technology taught us anything new? Has technology made killing easier or has it, on the contrary, ended up protecting us from the violence within us better?
What is plausible, given evidence that the Puranic texts with vivid characterizations of the four different Yugas originated around the Christian Era, is that historians and scholars of Ancient India, given their hopeful view of their cultural lineage, ascribed a certain perfection to their ancestors’ existence, in order that this may serve as a paragon of human society. What helped were some of the morals attributed to classical Indian religions – the Shaiva and Vaishnava sects both stressed on a set of human values that could have been developed in classical Indian society, possibly also with influences from kingdoms outside of the boundaries of what is now India. How does such a situation influence the development of non-violent thought in religion and how does this elevate the non-violent to a place of eminence in society? Does such social transformation hold the key to understanding how violent trends may have reduced in society today? I have to ask the bleaker question here also – whether human society has really progressed to a period of less violence or whether violence is reported less often or felt on a less personal level in the past, over the past few decades? Could a portion of this be because of the spread of technology that makes killing easy?
There are other cultures whose studies are instructive when discussion trends of violence. The Norse and the Egyptians seem to be polar opposites – with the Norsemen known for their stereotypic brashness, revelry and bacchanalian behaviour, and the Egyptians known to be analytical, worker ants whose architectural splendour far outlasted the civilization itself. However, closer studies of the Egyptians reveal the ruthlessness with which the Pharaoh and his Viziers exercised their power, and the plight of common people in Ancient Egypt, especially the slaves. Indeed, several Biblical tales are irrevocably tied to this hegemony. A study of the Ancient Norsemen reveals a culture of sophistication and is quite instructive about their less violent side – where metallurgy and filigree art flourished, explorers were welcomed and honoured and pioneers ruled the roost. There is probably an intellectual dynamism to Norse culture that is not well documented enough in the stereotypes.
It is now a well known thing that the Ancient Mayans, a culture of mathematicians, builders and conquerors were also a culture dictated by sacrifice, notably human sacrifice. It is also being uncovered that the Dark ages, known for the widespread plague outbreaks, cruelty, the fall of civilization in Europe, political and social unrest, etc., was a period of social, political and economic development in the Islamic Caliphate, a period where civil society developed in the Middle East from the fruits of the Islamic conquest of parts of India and Europe. Europe’s Dark ages have for many decades mystified historians, but recent studies have also revealed the development of creative thought alongside witch hunts and burnings at the stake. The glory of the Islamic Caliphate probably came at the expense of 80 million Indians who were taken prisoner, massacred or systematically killed off by various emperors as part of their Islamic duties. This could arguably be one of the least discussed, least well known genocides in human history. Would this genocide have been possible without technological advancement that made better weapons possible in the middle east? Are ideas in the end stronger technological tools than implements of destruction?
It can be held that the Renaissance perhaps harboured the beginning of rational thought, but ironically (given the violence in India these days from terrorists and Naxals alike), one has to look back to Ancient India to understand the roots of Ahimsa. The Jain religion and its Thirthankaras pioneered non-violent thought in a religion and aspects of the Buddhist faith helped alleviate social violence and violence with social sanction. These ideas were eventually distilled into interpretations of the Hindu faiths, especially Srivaishnavism. The dawn of the Victorian Era and the conquest of India by Britain probably helped revive these ideas amongst groups such as the Theosophists (as evidenced from Helena Blavatsky and her obsession with Zen/Dhyan Buddhism). Gandhi probably gave a credible face to non-violence as a method of social uprising and protest against colonialism, racism and injustice. If Steven Pinker is indeed right, that we are going through periods of reducing violence in society, would Gandhi figure as one of the key catalysts for non-violent behaviour? Contrarily, are we merely deluding ourselves by thinking that atrocities such as the ones committed in the World Wars and in the decades after are blips on an otherwise peaceful social landscape of modern society? Or is it the case that the non-violent protests by Gandhi were just a much talked about phenomenon – while events such as the genocides of the partition are ignored?
3 Comments
April 27, 2009 at 11:14 am
Hmmmmm…. just reminded me of a jataka tale i read some time back. Goes something like this-
Four learned men walk through a forest and come across the carcass of a lion. Eager to show off their knowledge of the scriptures they try to bring the lion to life. One of them assembles the bones, the second assembles the flesh and the third brings it to life. realising the danger of having to come face to face with a lion, the fourth one climbs a tree meanwhile. And as expected the lion has sumptuous meal of three full grown adults…….
Mere encyclopaedic knowledge of things will never help anyone if it is not wedded to foresight or is if it is entwined with a certain sense of self fulfillment.
I find it amazing that the ancient people of our land have so beautifully woven this truth into a simple story, usually meant from children.
April 30, 2009 at 9:57 am
Madhu, the story you refer to made an impression on me when I was a child – not with respect to the wisdom in it, but the fact that the resurrection of a dead animal was indeed possible. Borges, in his story “The Circular Ruins”, conceives of a man whose fertile imagination gives rise to a human being of his own making, although the science of thermodynamics and the second law (entropy) have taught us otherwise. Interesting analogy – that of a Frankenstein monster (the three learned men and the lion). There are three kinds of lies, said a cynic – lies, damned lies and statistics. I wonder if that opinion accurately explains some of the reasoning behind this elaborate assessment. Having said that, I also wonder (as I expressed in the post) as to whether societies that are improving in their literacy and connectedness have increasing trends in violence.
May 1, 2009 at 11:42 am
‘I also wonder (as I expressed in the post) as to whether societies that are improving in their literacy and connectedness have increasing trends in violence.’
My point, which i tried to convey in my comment, was that mere literacy isn’t an index of a person’s character. The current economic slowdown was caused mainly by people who were highly literate and intelligent yet had a lack of foresight when they took those economic decisions.
Did that cause violence? In the above case it didn’t directly but somehow it soon will.