Q1 of 12 Page 187

What is a Sen’s interpretation of the positions taken by Krishna and Arjuna in the debate between them?

Note Sen’s comment: ‘Arjuna’s contrary arguments are not really vanquished... There remains a powerful case for ‘faring well’ and not just ‘faring forward’.

Sen feels that Arjuna’s position of ‘faring well’ should not completely be overlooked, irrespective of the message that Bhagavad Gita coveys. He feels that Krishna’s position of ‘faring forward’ irrespective of the consequences cannot be justified in the contemporary world of wars and violence. He also supports this argument by stating J.R. Oppenheimer (the physicist who led the American team that developed the nuclear weapon) as an example.


More from this chapter

All 12 →
1

Maitreyi’s remark— ‘what should I do with that by which I do not become immortal’—is a rhetorical question cited to illustrate both the nature of the human predicament and the limitations of the material world. What is the connection that Sen draws between this and his concept of economic development?

 2

It is important to see that the Indian argumentative tradition has frequently crossed the barriers of gender, caste, class, and community. List the examples cited by Sen to highlight this.

 2

What are the three major issues Sen discusses here in relation to India’s dialogic tradition?

 3

Sen has sought here to dispel some misconceptions about democracy in India. What are these misconceptions?