Can non-West countries excel or even be at par with the West when it comes to knowledge and progress?

Ultimately, knowledge is power. In the domain of knowledge, the non-West has been on the back foot since the epistemic revolution - the West’s Renaissance occurred in roughly the 17th century. It is not that the catch-up in the domain of knowledge has not occurred. It has. But the terms, dissemination of the method and methodology and creation of new knowledge have been set by the West. The real beauty or tour de force of the West’s epistemic dominance lies in the critical method and pushing the frontiers of knowledge in a way that allows the West to ‘trek the stars.’ Others can and do copy this (often badly). But this is an imitation. Given this, can the non-West ever catch up? Can the non-West excel and attain dominance in this critical and absolutely crucial domain of power? Does the non-West have it in itself? Or is it condemned to a mere catch-up, or only fiddle in the pool of knowledge created in and by the West?

These questions assume great salience in a world where power and competition between and among states have become intense. But the implication here is not that the non-West merely de-colonises its mind and sets itself on the knowledge quest in a zero-sum adversarial contest for epistemic dominance. No, that would be reactionary and self-defeating. We must take a cue from the West here: the ideational West (not the geographic one) actually studied the wellsprings of our epistemic pool and wealth and then not only went miles further but also created new knowledge paradigms. We must do the same. There is, at times, merit in ‘treading the beaten path to craft new paths and thereby destinies. If we do this, we will not be ‘mimic men (women)’ who lap up everything that the West dishes out and then indigenise it, losing our originality and authenticity in the process but we will engineer and craft a destiny that is bold, beautiful and redounds to the efflorescence of civilisation.

The question is why and how?

I will dwell on the how of it first. One clichéd and pathetically trite answer would lie in ‘creating learning institutions of excellence.’ But this is boring. It has management connotations to it. The last thing we need to break the silos of our closed minds is a management paradigm. What is required then? The starting point has to be shattering assumptions- epistemic- that define us. The journey then begins or should begin in the mind. Do I mean expanding the vistas and horizons of our minds? Yes and no. No, because it is again a cliché that can mean anything and it can also mean a starting point that is pre-defined. Yes, because only when we think beyond the stars or even beyond the cosmos can our horizons be expanded. But this calls for assumption(s) smattering paradigm shifts that, for example, there are universes beyond the known universe and we have to explore these! How can this orientation and attitude be crystallised?

There are multiple prongs to this answer: one, the ‘lusty quest for learning has to be engendered among the young. Two, the nature of this learning has to be the creation of new knowledge. Three, while the ultimate quest should be to induce certainty, the starting point of the knowledge quest and creation of the same must be uncertainty. Four, the critical method must underpin the knowledge quest. (There is, it must be noted, that the critical method does not mean contrarianism). Five, the quest and its denouement must be defined by humility. These are just some of the prescriptive features that are the sine qua non of the knowledge quest. But these will come to nought unless these are institutionalised.
Institutionalisation in this context can mean creating institutions and pathways that absorb knowledge from the West in a two-way direction and then apply critiques to it, immersion in a given knowledge and philosophical tradition of the non-West and then applying further critiques to it, to finally culminate in a method- a fresh new one that smacks of originality and authenticity. 

ALSO READ| World disorder: Can the Global South define itself?

The corollary to this approach can be collaborations with foreign universities of excellence. These can be the Ivy League institutions of the United States. I am singling out the country here because its institutions of learning are the best in the world. Europe has lost its edge and the Oxford and Cambridge universities of the world are just brand names that milk their historical brand equity. Oxford, for example, is a moribund university that, at best, has a name to offer on the degree. It is far away from academic or pedagogic vigour. 
(Even the name for the initiated and aware might be problematic. Oxford historically has been an ally and handmaiden of colonialism and imperialism).

Collaborations with Ivy League institutions, underpinned by the approach delineated in this essay would go far in attaining ‘epistemic equality’ with the West. Note here I am using the word equality not dominance. The reasons are that the knowledge quest, as suggested in the introduction, must be a non-zero sum, non-adversarial quest- all aimed at the efflorescence and dynamism of civilisation- not just civilisations. 
There are two other corollaries to this: one is psychological and the other political. Psychologically, no matter what is said, the non-West feels in awe of the West - something that is best reflected in the temperament and disposition of our elite who after getting some western education and exposure become V S Naipaul’s ‘mimic men’. They not only in terms of effect, imitate (poorly) their western patrons lock, stock and barrel but at times sneer in contempt at their own cultural and philosophical traditions. 

There then is an inferiority complex that defines them. Two, a two-way dialogic, epistemic quest is essential for a world that needs a dialogue between civilisations. But by its very nature dialogue necessitates power parity. There can be no dialogue between the powerful and the not-so-powerful. Dialogue can only happen between equals. And only those who are equal are free. The starting point of freedom has then to be in the mind and only real and robust knowledge can make the mind free. It is an absolute necessity for the non-West to attain catharsis, closure and equality with the West to not only achieve freedom in the real sense of the term but engage in real, substantive dialogue (of and between equals) with the West. At the risk of repetition, only knowledge or an epistemic revolution can do this!

(Disclaimer: The views of the writer do not represent the views of WION or ZMCL. Nor does WION or ZMCL endorse the views of the writer.)

 
WATCH WION LIVE