Demeaning the Degrees

There is no replacement for the human brain and its genius. Whatever scientific advancements are present in the world; these are the outcomes of human innovation. Evolution is the process that is guaranteed by the exploration of the tendencies of the human might over the passage of time. Advancement in all spheres of human activity is the gradual exploration of the hidden secrets in nature. It is not without reason that the Indic philosophy and knowledge system emphasises on mastering the phenomenon that represents nature for a healthy and peaceful life. This system is replete with examples that advise us to master the natural phenomenon and never advocate that humans become slaves of nature. But the myopic realisation of the natural phenomenon and the meagre understanding of the purpose of human life on earth have led the humans to become slaves of their own creation. The point of discussion here is that instead of allowing the human brain to innovate and process its functioning in a normal way, a new class  has emerged that believes that humans should be slaves of their own creation, leave aside the  nature. They want to denigrate and side-line the natural utility of the human genius and prompt the new generation to compete with the machines. Even the policy makers have assumed that development means to compete with Artificial Intelligence (AI) and make their Natural Intelligence (NI) subservient to it. This is indeed ridiculous. They have forgotten that softwares and other programmes that function on the basis of algorithms are devoid of human emotions and real life problems. The name Artificial Intelligence(AI) itself is self-evident to tell us that it is “artificial” meaning that it lacks real life genuine purpose. It may help to solve certain issues for the time being but in the long run it may fail. To ask the humans to behave like AI and term it as development and being in tune with the updated knowledge means that there is fundamentally wrong with those who feel that humans can become machines. Dr.Anil Sahasrabudhe, chairman of the National Education Technology Forum(NETF) while speaking  in a programme organised by a Hindi Daily spoke on  various issues that included education, employment ,technology ,NEP, Indian education system and other issues. He made an unusual analogy by comparing the medicines with degrees. He said that there is a need to fix the expiry date of the educational degrees. We all know that once medicines are manufactured, expiry date is fixed to them. He was saying that over the period of time educational degrees also get expired. This is something ridiculous. Education acquired by a person during his/her lifetime is an asset through which he internalises his expertise in the field he chooses. Even in the Indian Knowledge System, the knowledge acquired through rigorous training is a lifelong asset. One cannot disagree with him that from time to time there is a need to update the knowledge. So that one does not lag behind in updating knowledge. But to suggest that degrees must be fixed with an expiry date is not acceptable. By that logic he must also understand that policy makers have failed to devise  a mechanism to provide timely employment to the educated people . Successive Governments have failed to accommodate the educated class. People who are eligible for seeking jobs are without livelihood. Does he mean to say the people who remain unemployed due to the non-availability of jobs in the market, their degrees become redundant? If he is really concerned about the validity of the degrees then he must advise the policy makers to devise a policy that does not leave anyone unemployed. Many questions can be  on the education policy then. Why are the people who are graduated or those who acquire higher education left unemployed when they have recognised degrees? Why do the policy makers offer different courses professional and non-professional till the previous batches are not adjusted? The question is not to fix the expiry date of the degrees but to meet the supply and demand when it comes providing jobs to the people with duly recognised degrees. There is a serious flaw in the policy making. This suggestion of Dr. Sahasrabuddhe is anomalous. He must revisit his argument and instead suggest ways to provide jobs and livelihood to the educated youth in the nation who come out in large numbers from the various educational institutions of the nation. Neither degrees nor the educated youth are at flaw. The policy making is dysfunctional.