2/2/22

Atho brahm jigyasa

Socrates and plato- teacher and student.

Various traditions in the world

Socrates - philosopher deeply engaged in philosopyzing

Dialogues- 32 of them recorded by plato

Did plato write abt what Socrates said

Or did he put things in the mouth of Socrates what he wanted to say.

Not clear who has said what

Did plato kill Socrates by writing down his ideas.

Did he kill his philosophy

Socrates in the history- was forced by the city to drink poison and die.

Just because he was asking question. Killed because he was a philosopher.

Socrates

Historical figure.

Athens ancient Greece

Deeply interested in knowing his reality.

Would go to the marketplace and engage with ppl

Not to show off but to know more

What puzzled him was that there are so many ppl who know abt things but they actually don’t.

Did not charge anything for teaching, unlike the others.

Says- philosophy cannot be and should not be done in any closed space where money is charged. All
should do. All should have the capacity.

Marketplace- all kinds of ppl.

Reached fame- could break down any argument

Not to make someone inferior. But to make them aware

Says- do not buy processed truth.

Processed truth- from fathers, god, law, divine sources, books, etc

Debate, ask questions, confront and consult

Only after you are convinced- accept it

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rC0jio_Bibk&t=45s

3/2/22

Pg 4

Nigel- little stories.

Cave allegory-

Why is this disciple a philosophy?

Why is it male oriented

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1RWOpQXTltA

Shankaracharya- reality we think acc to appearances is false

Does philosophers have a special insight into reality?

Is the contingent on textual and gendered understanding is true or false?

Concerns and queries

4/2

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=csIW4W_DYX4

4/2

nigel philosophy book

focuses more on family, polis

nothing beyond.

Argument- all of us do not need

Plato-

Society where knower of ultimate truth- great

Plato

Gives info and we have to take

Aristotle

Focuses on empirical reality.

Asks questions.

In 21st century, can disagree with Aristotle

Concerns of Aristotle- very earthly

You may disagree with aristotle’s way to achieve eudaimonia

Sane person will agree to- live that im living was meaningful or it was on borrowed term(I lived by what I
was told)

Aristotle does not ask you to do smth

He says- you have to give account to yourself

Were there good virtues?

Become aware of the fact that u have to contemplate daily.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AhedIGLdNTA&t=1636s
/Nation 97-101

Sovereignty 90-97

Equality 285- (294)

Citizenship 204-212

Pol sci

6/12/2021

Titwal ka kutta

Background-

India pak fights. Partition. Body’s marked.

Nationalism- marks you.

Today even dogs have to been termed as Indians or Pakistanis

Normalizing violence on both sides

Die for country.

Today’s condition- hindus in pak, muslims in India, sri lankan tamilians in Tamil nadu

1. How would you read this story in context of Assam.

People stripped of their citizenship.
One day line. If u come to India- indian or not-
If manto foresaw what is going to happen.

Boundaries create refugees

2. Concept that you will problematize from this

3. Which form of belonging

Citizenship- identity given by state. Shld only gov give this identity.

4. Routinization of violence.

5. Is it possible to have nationalism without contrasting the other. Is it in the logic of the nation
that when we aspire to become a nation can we claim, if there is no other can we become self. If
there is no other we will invent the other.
 Politics- creating bigger problem while solving the smaller problem.

3-4 issues that story signifies, critically analyze

Discuss nationalize
Discuss dog of titwal
Analyze the story

7/12/21

pg 285

Equality- normative idea.

Cannot be absolute- will be horrific and harmful

Can only be relative

Empirically- we are all unequal

World is unequal in many terms. Individuals, societies, etc

Basic level- sum equality.

Pre modern idea- hierarchy is the norm

Inherently inferior

Consider women as inferioe- greeks

Failed people (women)- Aristotle

Whites and blacks.

Modernity- idea of equality.

At level of idea. Not everyday life.

Equality of what? Moral, sexual,

3 forms of equality

1. Formal
FOUNDATIONAL EQUALITY. (Not visible but very imp)
From 17-18th century, ppl- all talk abt radical equality.
Radical movement-
(Eg of dalit and women in India.)
Biblical- all men are sinners. From sinners to equals. Western society’s foundational idea.
Worked in the west.
India- does not work in bhramin India.

18th century- all men are born equal- American declaration

French declaration-

By logic of being human-

Things available to all because of quo-human
Kant- everyone has equal right to the surface of the earth anywhere. (

John Locke- Two Treaties.

1st liberal philosopher- supports formal legal authority. Equal before the law.
All are equal- same basket of rights and duties. Equal in the eyes of law.
Endorses equality.
However, makes a distinction- only property owning men.
(Framed as a Terrorist- Mohmmed A)
Locke as male philosopher forgets to include women. Women are not accounted for.
Even when equality is the central idea, women are ignored.
Modern state is sexual contract between men- carol pigmen Sexual contracts(book)
Women forgotten but all men are included.
White, black, property owning, not owning, protestants, Catholics. (men)

History of equality
Formal equality- inaugurating point of equality.

Drawbacks
Standing platform where u are not judged.
Same basket of rights and duties.
All are equal but where do you exercise these rights.
Can you use these rights.
Having law and formal equality does not mean you have the platform to use them.
Limited understanding of equality. Does it make sense when the capability to use them is
zero
We do not know the right we have their use.
Formal e- like pen and paper

Marxists- capitalism- skilled is valued regardless of who/what you are.

Pg 288
John stuart mill
Mary woodsworth craft

Both belong to liberal- favor idea of individualization.

 Empirically we are not independent. Vulnerable sice birth.
Ontological individuals.- when u look at me, peal of akk contingencies

8/12/21

pg 288

what do u mean by equality, why equality, what equality

equality of what?

Mill and woldsworth craft-

Idea of gender is unmissable

First wave of feminism- we should be thought as humans

Not through my body, gender, caste, role

Women treated as animals.

Politics

Aristotle-

Dead, white, male

2 divisions

OIKOS POLIS

Management of household human

Hold on women, slaves,

Naturally inferior

Prob of women- in all low payed jobs, caring jobs, women are seen

Myth that only women can care.

Doc male, nurse female

Placed in all low paying jobs. When men take up women jobs, it becomes a great deal.

Radical feminist
Structure of argument- it gives u equality only if it gives u equality

In public space

Not in family- one of the most oppressive institution we have build

Family space left intact

Considered secret and not judged

Argument that women are the home breakers

If family is broken- not because women have become intelligent but because they have a way to go out.

Family as an institution has to be reimagined.

We can and we must reframe the family.

Family is not natural it is legal

Pg 289

Equality of opportunity

Critics- formal equality does not make sense. Whatever u achieve happens by accident of birth

2 accidents

Accident of birth

Get a family

Nature is casual in distributing talent in the population

Range of capabilities distributed is arbitrary.

Equality of r

Everyone should get same chance to excel.

Unequal starting point. 2 natural accidentws. 1. Where u are born. 2. Natural talents. Needs honing.

Give everyone equal chance to excel and decide. Rational chance that makes the difference.

The beginning point has to be taken care of, same things for everyone.

Flaw- only people of a particular class can do well

Even if same level of opportunities, there are some who are already advantaged.

It reproduces social hierarchy.

Equality of opportunity- interesting argument, said by meritocrats. Few already have had the
Family, earning, education, location, school, electricity, library, access to education, physical, mental
makeup…etc should all be considered.

Meritocracy- those who are in power are considered to be intelligent.

Equality of outcome

Should not focus on end line

Focus on end line.

Be bothered about the outcome.

Politics of redistribution

Redistributing of wealth from rich to poor.

9/12/21

Equality

Formal- foundational. Equality established by law.

Opportunity- have to give a basic level

Outcome- the final result

Imagine you are a simple policy maker. Complex society like India. Managing everything is complicated
and difficult. Policies- impact lives of millions. Do u agree with equality. There are social issues. They are
bleak. How will you negotiate these issues. Will u give them rights?

To make policy recommendation- state the problems that exist.

Why merit is important. How will u respond to the injustice.

Equality-

10/12/21

Who belongs? What are the characteristics?

Citizenship- modern idea

Obligation and rights

Earlier only

Obligations- women

Rights- aristocrats

Modernity has a process.

Argument happens and we can ask questions.

History unfolding in the west.

 West becomes the telos(end)

Ideals are yet to be achieved
Individualism, sovereignty, dignity, politics of recognition etc
 Is there smth called multiple modernity
Is it right to assume that Europe is the locus of modern idea?
My relationship with modernity.
Transcendental- smth beyond.

Kabir Kabir- by purushottam Aggarwal.

Multiple modernity’s.
In state, nation, citizenship, capitalism

Those who believed that west is our telos-

If we can say history has many different trajectories- the 4 things will be there in modernity but
the sequence will be different.

Eg: in India, state came first.

What do we want to achieve from citizenship?

Rights? Duties?

In west-

state, nation, rights, duties, citizenship

India- state,…..

Rights+ duties = citizenship

In India it seems there is a division

Elite and population. Rights and duties.

Citizenship means equal treatment.

Are the rights available to the elites or to everyone

Therefore, modernity is a concept that is unfolding.

Some are still waiting for the messiah.

Derida- world should be looked as an event. Cannot program. ]

India is a democratic country for some people in some are under some situations.

Train- waiting list tickets (some people) while the others have a confirmed ticket.

History tells u that we can be citizens in particular situations only.

Rag darbari- Srilal Shukla

When u say you are a citizen of the country- how benefits and burdens of citizenship is divided

Are there certain groups who only have burdens? Programming of reality.

Legitimacy in “we the people”

Right bearing citizen decides to give his rights to people. Nd then he gets both these rights and powers.
Nd then division of power takes a new direction.

1. Who is a citizen
2. Where is this citizen found
3. Are we active or passive citizens
4. How political economic rights come to the citizens