Debates amid diversity can foster an innovative India

Dorothy Martin headed a small religious group in Chicago called the Seekers, who believed in an imminent apocalypse. Martin claimed to be receiving messages from superior beings on a planet she referred to as Clarion. The messages included a prophecy that large portions of the US, Canada and Europe would be destroyed by a flood before dawn of 21 December 1954. That some believers took significant action indicated a high degree of commitment to the prophecy. Some of them left their jobs, quit their studies, ended relationships with non-believers, gave away money and/or disposed of possessions to prepare for their departure on a flying saucer, which they believed would rescue them in advance of the flood. The research team infiltrated Martin’s group in order to collect data from Seekers before, during and after the time that the prophecy would be refuted.

When the prophecy did not materialize, Martin informed the group that she had received a “message” saying that the group “had spread so much light that God had saved the world from destruction.” What was most intriguing about this incident was that those in the group who had the highest belief and had shown the most commitment to the prophecy became even more committed to their beliefs and developed further rationalizations for the absence of a flood. They began proselytizing the group’s beliefs with renewed vigour.

Based on these observations, Festinger went on to develop Cognitive Dissonance Theory, one of the strongest theories about human behaviour. The theory reminds us that in situations involving conflicting attitudes, beliefs or behaviours, individuals experience negatively arousing cognitive conflict (called dissonance). Individuals will try to reduce their dissonance by changing one or the other beliefs or behaviour. But overall, almost always, these individuals will try to retain consistency by conforming with their status quo beliefs and behaviours.

The evening debates on Indian television channels are a place where Cognitive Dissonance Theory is on full display. Any idea that is even slightly different from one’s own is vigorously discarded. There is orchestrated fury, with participants more or less baying for the blood of those with opposing views. Inasmuch as each person is vigorously defending one’s own views, the endeavour is also to prove that the opposite side is always wrong. The story is no different in social media debates. There too, some of the most obnoxious language is used to insult those with views opposed to one’s own. Such debates generate animosity and can debilitate any organization or society.

But this was not the way the world was. Debating was an integral part of education in ancient India. References to tarka vidya, the science and art of logic and debate, and vaasa vidya, the art of discussion, are found in numerous ancient Indian texts. Debate was an activity always done in the presence of scholars. While arguing, dignity was never to be discarded. Any use of disrespectful language towards those in the opposition was to be avoided.

A debate was a reminder that there is always more than one way of looking at an issue. There is discreet acceptance at the beginning of any debate that we are all like the blind men who touched an elephant for the first time. Only by accepting the views of others as valid can we get a complete picture of the elephant, a perfect picture of the whole. Accepting another’s point of view was never seen as a compromise. A good debate is about graciously receiving new knowledge from others.

Steven Johnson in his book, Where Good Ideas Come From: The Natural History of Innovation, reminds us that in olden times, the world’s port cities were the epicentre of innovation. The variety of people that descended on a port city was the obvious source of those innovations. But one can also assume that when people heard thoughts that were different from what they were used to hearing, it would not have been easy for listeners to accept them. There would have been an inherent human tendency to hold on to the status quo and reject those new ideas. Debates would have surely ensued in those port cities. But the debates of those times could have been attempts to clarify one’s own position and also raise questions about other points of view, so as to understand them better. That innovations flowered in those cities is a clear indication that their residents excelled in the ability to hold intelligent debates.

To foster innovation within modern organizations, much like a port city, leaders should strive to attract a heterogeneous population. Also, a healthy disrespect for the status quo should be the norm that prevails in the organization. To keep organizations in a constant state of intellectual disharmony, there should be several forums on the organizational calendar for gladiatorial, intellectually intense debates.

The same could be done for the whole nation too. With the arrival of smartphones and social media, one can create virtual ‘port cities’ of the digital age, platforms for the vast diversity of this nation to be turned into an asset. All we need to learn are the old rules of debating with an open mind.

Biju Dominic is chief evangelist, Fractal Analytics, and chairman, FinalMile Consulting.

Updated: 23 Aug 2023, 11:40 PM IST