Authority, Anarchy and Intellectual Pragmatism

                                             Authority, Anarchy and Intellectual Pragmatism

Orhan Pamuk , the Nobel  Laureate from Turkey writes: “ When we see that other writers have had experiences similar to our own, we are inspired not just to read but to write and most particularly, to explore the differences.”.  When I read his piece on Traffic and Religion that discusses the tendency among drivers in Tehran to circumvent the traffic rules, I saw the similarity of disobeying the rules of the road in our own country. Pamuk says that this tendency is the same as the tendency among many in Tehran to circumvent the Sharia in the privacy of their homes.

When the roads are clear and there is no traffic from the opposite side, we often wonder if the one way traffic signal should be followed strictly or should one take the forward lunge and zoom through! If there is an empty road, it seems a trifle foolish to stop at the red signal and wait for it to turn green. This dilemma spotlights the perennial clash between intellectual pragmatism and obedience to authority.  If we discard the ‘No entry-one way’ signal and move ahead, we fear that we may- even if we are not caught on the CCTV camera- end up with head on collision with the vehicle from the opposite side and it is this that makes us wonder whether to be governed by intellectual pragmatism or by the rule of authority.

I mused over the phrase ‘intellectual pragmatism’ and realized the unleashing of                                anarchy if we as individuals collectively subscribe to ignoring the rules on the wise perceptions of practicality.  Rules are mandated to prevent traffic anarchy. But what is to be done when rules do not factor in intellectual pragmatism and mock at our imagination and thinking faculty. 

It was a Eureka moment for me when I suddenly hit upon an equation

Authority-intellectual Pragmatism= Anarchy

I tried to validate this equation in respect of the innumerable daily occurrences. Before I do so, let me clarify that Authority is not just the faceless authority of the Government or the Dictator or the ruling establishment; it also includes religious authority, parental authority, male authority, institutional authority, the clerical authority(in all government offices),the management authority, the media authority(that adopts a hectoring tone to quiz the lambs on their TV shows)- in short authority of any kind. No one can claim to be free of the rule of some Authority –not even if he is a Prime Minister or a Dictator or  a Corporate giant because the big brother Media and the Judiciary are watching  each and every action and in particular the actions of omission and commission of those who are leaders in their own right.

Authority everywhere claims to be self righteous as the impartial voice of law, but in reality it often uses its power and privilege to tweak the law as the situation demands. The Scottish proverb says “Show me the man and I will show you the law” is not an empty aphorism but a reality. It has the power to protect as well as the power to destroy a person and his/her reputation. An intellectual Pragmatist (IP) understands this and stays true to the course in his wisdom. Pragmatism that grew up after Darwin’s Theory of evolution insists on the belief that chance rather than providence guides human affairs, and that persistent adherence to established authority will lead to violence.  Kloppenberg who wrote about Obama the Pragmatist says that ‘Pragmatism maintains that people are constantly devising and updating ideas to navigate the world in which they live; it embraces open-minded experimentation and continuing debate. It is a philosophy for skeptics, not true believers’.  So when the IP is confronted with inane and arcane authority, his intelligence conflicts with his sense of loyalty and adherence to the rule of law.  Casting aside his hesitation to go counter to established Authority he rebels and in his rebellion sows the first seed of anarchy. He looks at Authority as coercive and gradually spreads the ideal of anarchy by enlisting individuals and groups as the principal mode of organized society to overthrow it. 

We see the growing tendency towards anarchy in contemporary society as it is attractive to live in the absence of any cohesive principle or any form of authority. It thrills the aam admi to don the robes of David and fight an imaginary Goliath as he considers all forms of authority to be demonic and draconian. It seems normal for a youth in his/her adolescence to rebel against parental authority that does not take into account the changed practicality of contemporary life. Respect for authority- be it parental or institutional or for the Guru – is demeaning for the youth who has a mistaken notion of being an intellectual pragmatist. The youth priding himself as a skeptic prefers to be dictated by his personal predilection than submit himself to the established wisdom of the earlier era founded upon tradition which he feels authoritarian. The Maoist killing of the police and security forces is another instance of intellectual pragmatism going awry as it is devoid of any intelligent approach to relieve poverty haunting the tribals, the poor and the lowly in different parts of the country. So are the religious genocides in response to a group’s religious fanaticism without any intellectual tolerance and pragmatism resulting in death, grief and misery to millions of people. The Khap Panchayat’s diktat of sanctioning honour killing goes against intellectual pragmatism that upholds the validity of love between a man and a woman belonging to different castes/religions/class. The surest recipe for anarchy is to misunderstand intellectual pragmatism as a license to follow one’s own perception and not be bound by any cohesive principle or order that makes for a stable society. Similarly the surest way of ushering in anarchy is for the Authority to ignore intellectual pragmatism. Those who call themselves anarchists can neither practice intellectual pragmatism nor exercise authority.

Authority has to have a human face. It can enforce people to obey its rules and regulations, pay theirr bills and taxes, observe fundamental principles of law and order provided these mandates do not skirt the problems they may hold for the majority. Intellectual pragmatism is the protective armour around Authority and Authority risks ignoring it at its own peril.  Similarly intellectual pragmatism cannot ignore Authority without descending to anarchy. The two need each other to fend off anarchy.