'The Argumentative Indian': Insight into Amartya Sen's genius (Review)
Subhash K. Jha
It is a miracle that this vital documentary throwing light on one of India's brightest minds, ever made into theatres. Miracle, because the film's architect and director Suman Ghosh (whose feature film "Nobel Chor" fictionalising the real-life theft of Rabindranath Tagore's Nobel prize) had to fight a long and hard battle with the Indian censor board to stop some hard-hitting comments on India's politics from being cut.
It is also a miracle to see Amartya Sen reach the age of 84 when 66 years ago, the doctors had given him only five years to live after he was detected with mouth cancer. We hear Sen's mother speak of that miracle -- of her son surviving a serious death to become one of India's most perspicuous minds. We also hear Sen describe the self-diagnosis that he undertook and which probably saved his life.
What comes across in the hour-long documentary is the Nobel laureate's tenacity and obstinacy. He does bend but you won't catch him tripping over his thoughts or contradiction his own views. He is not immovable in his opinions either.
The documentary is essentially a two-part interview conducted by the famed economist Kaushik Basu, conducted with a 15-year gap between the two conversations. Although the conversations per se are illuminating and deeply reflective of Sen's intellect, I craved for more insight into his heart rather than focusing almost entirely on the mind.
Sen's mother comes forward with her cursory thoughts and she is specially disarming as she recalls her son's phone call about winning the Nobel prize. We see Sen receiving the Nobel prize early in the narrative. Just why vital events from his life occupy a particular place in the documentary is not explained.
But where are Sen's two daughters? We would have loved to see them speak on their father. While the documentary sheds illuminating light on the Nobel laureate's academic pursuits, there isn't enough on his other roles in life. This perhaps is a conscious omission indicative of the lacuna that all intellectual minds are familiar with.
A life so devoted to the pursuit of knowledge tends to preclude domestic duties. What we see in the documentary is the academician, the teacher, the philosopher and the intellectual, but seldom the man in his domestic environment.
Towards the end, the discourse veers towards, what else, mortality. But Sen seems uncomfortable discussing that subject. He is far more expansive talking on his growing up years in Dhaka, and on Mahatma Gandhi.
"I am not a nationalist. But I am still quite proud of my country," Sen says at one point of his conversation.
It is a defining moment in the discourse that tells us why a mind as sorted as Amartya Sen needs to be stubborn on national issues.
You can only aspire to greatness if you shun mundane roles.
"The Argumentative Indian" is a documentation of a life careening towards immortality. Not to be missed by any Indian.
Let the Truth be known. If you read VB and like VB, please be a VB Supporter and Help us deliver the Truth to one and all.
Single higher education regulator bill tabled in LS; Oppn flags ‘centralisation,' JPC likely
New Delhi: A bill to set up a 13-member body to regulate institutions of higher education was introduced in the Lok Sabha on Monday.
Union Education Minister Dharmendra Pradhan introduced the Viksit Bharat Shiksha Adhishthan Bill, which seeks to establish an overarching higher education commission along with three councils for regulation, accreditation, and ensuring academic standards for universities and higher education institutions in India.
Meanwhile, the move drew strong opposition, with members warning that it could weaken institutional autonomy and result in excessive centralisation of higher education in India.
The Viksit Bharat Shiksha Adhishthan Bill, 2025, earlier known as the Higher Education Council of India (HECI) Bill, has been introduced in line with the National Education Policy (NEP) 2020.
The proposed legislation seeks to merge three existing regulatory bodies, the University Grants Commission (UGC), the All India Council for Technical Education (AICTE), and the National Council for Teacher Education (NCTE), into a single unified body called the Viksit Bharat Shiksha Adhishthan.
At present, the UGC regulates non-technical higher education institutions, the AICTE oversees technical education, and the NCTE governs teacher education in India.
Under the proposed framework, the new commission will function through three separate councils responsible for regulation, accreditation, and the maintenance of academic standards across universities and higher education institutions in the country.
According to the Bill, the present challenges faced by higher educational institutions due to the multiplicity of regulators having non-harmonised regulatory approval protocols will be done away with.
The higher education commission, which will be headed by a chairperson appointed by the President of India, will cover all central universities and colleges under it, institutes of national importance functioning under the administrative purview of the Ministry of Education, including IITs, NITs, IISc, IISERs, IIMs, and IIITs.
At present, IITs and IIMs are not regulated by the University Grants Commission (UGC).
Government to refer bill to JPC; Oppn slams it
The government has expressed its willingness to refer it to a joint committee after several members of the Lok Sabha expressed strong opposition to the Bill, stating that they were not given time to study its provisions.
Responding to the opposition, Parliamentary Affairs Minister Kiren Rijiju said the government intends to refer the Bill to a Joint Parliamentary Committee (JPC) for detailed examination.
Congress Lok Sabha MP Manish Tewari warned that the Bill could result in “excessive centralisation” of higher education. He argued that the proposed law violates the constitutional division of legislative powers between the Union and the states.
According to him, the Bill goes beyond setting academic standards and intrudes into areas such as administration, affiliation, and the establishment and closure of university campuses. These matters, he said, fall under Entry 25 of the Concurrent List and Entry 32 of the State List, which cover the incorporation and regulation of state universities.
Tewari further stated that the Bill suffers from “excessive delegation of legislative power” to the proposed commission. He pointed out that crucial aspects such as accreditation frameworks, degree-granting powers, penalties, institutional autonomy, and even the supersession of institutions are left to be decided through rules, regulations, and executive directions. He argued that this amounts to a violation of established constitutional principles governing delegated legislation.
Under the Bill, the regulatory council will have the power to impose heavy penalties on higher education institutions for violating provisions of the Act or related rules. Penalties range from ₹10 lakh to ₹75 lakh for repeated violations, while establishing an institution without approval from the commission or the state government could attract a fine of up to ₹2 crore.
Concerns were also raised by members from southern states over the Hindi nomenclature of the Bill. N.K. Premachandran, an MP from the Revolutionary Socialist Party representing Kollam in Kerala, said even the name of the Bill was difficult to pronounce.
He pointed out that under Article 348 of the Constitution, the text of any Bill introduced in Parliament must be in English unless Parliament decides otherwise.
DMK MP T.M. Selvaganapathy also criticised the government for naming laws and schemes only in Hindi. He said the Constitution clearly mandates that the nomenclature of a Bill should be in English so that citizens across the country can understand its intent.
Congress MP S. Jothimani from Tamil Nadu’s Karur constituency described the Bill as another attempt to impose Hindi and termed it “an attack on federalism.”
_vb_22.jpeg)
