 | |||
|
HCI VISTAS, VOLUME-II, 2005-2006 | |||
 |
'Caste System' Psychology Behind Reluctance to Multi-disciplinary Collaboration | ||
|
Article IRN-6./Dec. 2005 |
|||
|
Human Computer Interaction (HCI) requires you to employ multi-disciplinary or inter-disciplinary approaches. Throughout my professional carrier, I had to penetrate the fortified walls of computing domain to make my place and to earn my share of opportunities. It is because I am not a computer engineer but a visual designer at the core. I had to confront the resistance of engineers to prove that I could visualize and design more usable user interfaces and products. Further to my Ph.D. in HCI, I realized that this suffering is true for every other discipline in India. Many have agreed with my observation that in India one profession looks down upon the other profession, one discipline is reluctant to collaborate with the other. For example, doctors would discriminate others as non-medicos. Of course there are exceptions to it but by and large one tends to follow the uni-disciplinary path. HCI has no chance of succeeding in India unless professionals develop mutual respect and accept to collaborate with each other. Social scientists and computer scientists need to join hands to design better and usable systems.
I was haunted by this thought for several days. Why is this so? Why don't we give equal respect to other professions? Why don't we like to collaborate with people from other disciplines? Then I realized that perhaps this is due to the Indian caste system (Varna Vyavastha), which is linked to the profession of a person. It existed in India from time immemorial. In later stages of evolution, it became hereditary and one was not even allowed to change his profession. Traditionally, new members to caste are brought by birth only. It is not possible for one to change the caste to get an inside view of the community. In the orthodox families, inter-caste marriages are not permissible. The pride of one cast is asserted by ridiculing the other. There is also a classification in terms of higher and lower castes.
In the modern scenario, we have engineers, doctors, designers, architects, scientists and a host of other professions. Unconsciously, the psychological inheritance of Varna Vyavastha forces many of us to choose uni-disciplinary approach. Inter-disciplinary collaboration is resisted similar to the inter-caste marriage. There are very few unorthodox families in India, which are able to look beyond the castes or communities and appreciate the real worth of a person. You see them encouraging inter-caste marriages as well as multi-disciplinary collaborations in academic and professional activities. We need to rise above these mental blocks!
But the western world need not teach us about the importance of multi-disciplinary approach. Look at Bhartruhari's Shloka that he wrote hundreds of years back.
 By adopting and sharing multi-disciplinary approach,
knowledge is transformed into wisdom.
How much can one imagine by simply employing one's own logic?
--Bhartruhari, Vaakyapadiya, 5th Century AD-- Here are some afterthoughts. The perspectives of the participants during the discussion have been helpful in understanding many finer aspects. In summary, if one proposes to take the anthropological perspective of the 'issue' in question, one can not escape the influence of the following.
Anthropological Aspects-
1. Caste System
2. Feudal System and
3. Colonial history of India
Aspects from the present life style-
4. Parental System
5. Education System
6. Corporate System
All abovementioned aspects are responsible in shaping the attitude of individuals towards multi-disciplinary approach. These are part and parcel of why many of us think and do things in a particular way. Feedback at
 Contribute Articles To
| |||
|
© Copiright 2006-2007 | |||
|
Perspectives | |||
|
Someone said, Great teams make great products. Success lies with people. We as individuals and teams keep creating and moulding systems.
1. Parental system could nurture their kids to respect various disciplines. Pay should not be the only criteria with which they should judge disciplines. Knowledge is one very important aspect they could look at. 2. Education system could promote inter-disciplinary movement. So young minds can be moulded better to not fear other disciplines. Don't we learn biology, history, maths in school so can education system keep the same pace so there is less knowledge hierarchy.
3. Corporate system could reward inter-disciplinary movement so innovations could take place. A subordinate could give brilliant ideas than his boss. Very few people except and encourage this today.
Not assuming that systems will continue to function the way they are - is a personal responsibility. Yes - people, friends, parents, teachers could support this through their own ways. One way of breaking this barrier as an individual is to befriend people. Nothing works better than this. The more you befriend people the more you get to know more about them and what they do. The more you know - the more you forget your inhibitions. I guess if not by current system, people have to break out of their silos and try practice this to reshape the system. You and me are the systems of tomorrow. The next generation better says good job! Prasad Bartakke (Project Manager, HFI) | |||
|
Isn't it just natural to be secure with the information we are aware of? to be wary and insecure of unknowns? It gives us all a sense of control. This is in continuum of an excellent social conditioning. We confirm to the tribe however much we rebel from it.
Magnified in a generation of super specialized practitioners who are under stress in a rapidly changing and increasingly complex environment, this safe playing can turn vicious, killing innovation. Specialists scoffing at non specialists have an incentive - propagation of their tribe. With the knowledge of a specialist, the person is able to solve most problems, so what's the issue?
The problem comes to us who work across many parallel verticals to come up with solutions. Our ability to sift through this information can lead to innovative solutions. Do need a game plan to scoff back at the specialists! :) Just Joking! We, designers are super specializing too ...
Sneha M Lakshman (Designer, Dig Design Studio) | |||
|
Firstly, by your basic premise, we will presume that it is a fact that desis have a reluctance in operating in a cross-disciplinary manner. Now, to consider why this may be so, let us not directly jump to the single favourite whipping-boy aspect of Indic history - the caste system. To jump so directly to one cause would indicate a conditioned reflex. There is a possibility that there may be many more other causes, and like all complex problems, this is bound to have an eclectic answer.
Here's a logical derivation from various angles-
1. Basic fact - the formation of various disciplines of education and the subsequent professions has not been created by Indians themselves. This has entirely been architected by non-Indians. Hence, the result of such an educational system cannot be blamed on Indians. 2. The habit/practice/attitude of cross-disciplinary interaction does not really start at college level - it starts in school. At a scholastic level, are children taught to think creatively, and across boundaries? Does any geometry schoolbook talk about the aesthetics of form? Not by a far stretch of imagination. Hence, the inability to cross disciplines appears to be really a result of a scholastic upbringing by methods of angrez origin. This aspect appears to be critical in this issue, IMO.
3. What does cross-disciplinary interaction represent and encourage? It essentially encourages thinking out-of-the-box - bringing creativity and fresh perspectives into so-called "dry" subjects. Did the people who designed our educational system really want to encourage such out-of-the-box learning and original thought? Again, not by a far stretch, their intent was the very opposite - to prevent original thought and to create a nation of closeted thinkers. I consider them successful at this.
Hence, if we consider that our educational system is the primary entity which shapes our attitudes towards educational disciplines and professions, and that the fav whipping-boy (the caste-system) was not responsible for this angrezi educational system, then our basic premise that it is the caste system which responsible for our educational/professional closeted-ness starts to fade away.
The primary culprits seem to be clearly the people who designed our educational system, and I believe they sat in London, not Varanasi. Lets stop kicking our own history and culture for our miseries. If at all we have to kick ourselves, let us kick ourselves only for letting our land be hijacked by the pirates who dress as gentlemen, in the first place. To accept the mess that they left behind (poverty, ill-planned cities, a retarded educational system, etc) as our own mistakes would be very, very non sequitur.
Pankaj Sapkal (Industrial Designer, Remote 3D) | |||
