Prof. CNR Rao, a former Chair of the Scientific Advisory Council to the Indian Prime Minister, is one of the most renowned Indian scientists. However, I see a tint of fundamentalism when he says that IT has destroyed Indian Science. He goes on to say
Why does one need to study engineering if the ultimate aim is to do an MBA and sell soap?
In an interview with the prestigious scientific journal Nature, Prof. Rao goes on:
Q. Aren’t the foreign R&D centres contributing to Indian science?
A. They create jobs but do not help Indian science. They do not interact with us. Six of my PhDs joined General Electric research centre in Bangalore.
————
I have to disagree with Prof. Rao here. An individual is free to pursue the career that he/she wants to pursue in life. Is someone working in an IT company or private sector less moral than someone who does research? Prof. Rao seems to look down upon people who work for IT/private sector in general.
I do not see enough dedicated scientists like in early days. Old timers are working hard but the value system of today’s youngsters has changed. A boy of 18 wants to be a millionaire before the age of 25. He does not think of becoming the best scientist or engineer.
Prof. Rao, please permit me to say something from experience. India does not offer the best educational system to encourage people to pursue research. I still remember how hard it was just to get a research internship as an undergraduate (This, when I was a student in what are supposed to be the best colleges in India). The US and Canada, on the other hand, actively seek undergraduates to come and pursue research, give generous summer research grants, etc. Also, our courses hardly explored things like the role of ethics in science and engineering, entrepreneurship etc…
Now, having said that, I should also point out the range of wonderful career choices that I have seen my peers make. A lot of my friends after engineering have gone on to technical jobs. Many have opened their own companies, or are in the process of doing so. Some have pursued research while some have gone in to consulting and finance. I do not believe that there should be a criticism of ethics based on an individual’s career choice. Everyone has their own vision and priorities in life. Interests and motivations change. If one has done an engineering degree, that should not impose a lifetime of either research or job or any other thing. It is a matter of motivation, choice and vision.
I believe that instead of finding character issues with people who make choices to pursue different careers (or with companies), people at positions where Prof. Rao is should really work hard and make science a viable, attractive choice for potential candidates.
Also, I believe that letting foreign professors and institutions to come to India will not lower our academic standards, nor will it be a threat to our intelligentsia. Instead, just like the liberalization of economy, this will make us more competitive and strong. Not to mention the indirect benefit due to the diverse set of educated people who will come internationally.
I think there is another underlying issue here Ghalib … and that is of how people actually glorify one career choice over the other possible ones. This glorification then is used to ‘recruit’ more to the group – and they have a very valid resource to spunk their advertisement up with, and that is money. So unless science jobs start paying as much as finance jobs this divide will stay – and this divide is not localized to India, it is there worldwide. I still can’t get it out of my mind that our campus is so much full of these ‘glorifiers’ that the whole picture of the world becomes obscure and distorted amongst the people inside the campus. I think what CNR Rao mentioned is partly out of angst against this trend – where unless you make a tremendously big step, no one can do anything – and while people adding ‘real’ money to the economy will sulk about being under-compensated, people making ‘paper’ money will enjoy the riches, and use that as their glorification agenda.
Nice to see you blog about this, cos I wanted to write an essay on this myself – never had that time out of my Grad school work.
Debanjan,
Thank you for the thoughtful comment.
Indeed, the pursuit of knowledge is a noble one. And I am wholeheartedly supportive of the idea to motivate more and more people to do productive research. It has the most significant results for our society in the long-term.
However, I think that for people like Prof. Rao, who occupy senior policy positions in our country, the way to do it is not by criticizing the private sector or IT companies or finance, but by improving the scientific curriculum and research facilities in our country. There is a lot of gap to be filled in creating a culture of research motivation in our institutes. And yes, a scientific career may not be a viable career choice (especially in India) for many who wish to have a higher standard of life. I do not say that should be the case, but is there anything wrong with someone wanting that?
No doubt CNR Rao is angry, he and his buddies used to get slave labor from universities awarding Bsc and Msc Physics and Chemistry, now that has dried up. I know a person who took eight years to complete in Phd in Indian Institute of Science and he came to USA and he told me an MS student will take six months to complete that work. There is no accountablity indian science, the proffessors in science are ego maniacs and treat their Phd students like trash. Ask Indian Institute of Science to publish basic reports like how long does an average student take to finish Phd, how many papers get published. The arrogance of Science proffessors are all gone they can never get students to their bogus science. Thanks to the market, one unwanted profession is dead.