Leo Tolstoy’s Anna Karenina begins with a disquieting aphorism on unhappiness: “Happy families are all alike; every unhappy family is unhappy in its own way.” While accepting that there is a uniqueness to each unhappiness, it is possible to grade some misery experiences as greater in intensity and extent than others.
The impact of the Covid-19 pandemic has surpassed the unhappiness caused by the two World Wars. The phrase, World War, in fact, is more symbolic than literal. Although only a few nations were primary participants in these two wars, they are presented as wars of the entire world. In contrast, the novel coronavirus became globally pervasive within the short span of a few months, setting a record. The unhappiness caused by the pandemic is, arguably, greater, making ‘Covid’ the most widely-used word across the continents over the past year.
Unlike the World Wars in which the enemy was a visible presence, the ‘enemy’ during the pandemic is an invisible virus. This has caused much confusion. In some cases, people sanitizing where there is no virus and not protecting themselves adequately where there are significant threats. This has led to immense complications, further compounding the sufferings of people across the world. Just as important cities were targeted by aerial bombing during the war, this virus is concentrated in developed countries and big cities. The area of operation has shifted from the border right to the heart of the cities. In effect, the less developed countries and rural areas have been affected less.
Assuming that we are entering a new era, there is a need to philosophically scrutinize some existing ideas and practices, especially the idea of dependence that emerges from Adam Smith’s division of labour, liberal ideas of individual autonomy and the domain of needs of human beings. One needs to reassess — not necessarily abandon — the path of globalization that involves the dependence of countries on each other for production, distribution, and consumption. No other event has confronted issues arising from globalization, capitalism, and international trade on as large a scale as the pandemic. This forces us to make readjustments to our lifestyles at a micro-level and to global trade at the macro-level.
The pandemic has revealed vulnerabilities in the idea of dependence and exposed weaknesses in its opposite, namely independence and autonomy. The pervasive liberal notion is individual-centred. In its preoccupation or near-obsession with the self, liberalism seems not to have recognized the importance of the other, even though the other is another self. At times, it sees the other as a necessary evil. The pandemic, however, has made us intensely aware of how dependent we are on the other. For instance, one must be healthy and virus-free and ensure that others are virus-free. This creates a strong dependence on others, which calls into question the liberal idea of autonomous individualism. The idea of leaving crucial decisions, such as wearing masks or maintaining social distance, to individual discretion needs critical scrutiny. The decision not to wear a mask as an act of individual choice seems to have accelerated the spread of the virus in some developed nations. There is a need to learn from these experiences and re-examine them, especially for countries like India. Alongside economic equality, health equality has now emerged as an important issue. In this changed scenario, others’ health is as much of a concern for the self as for the community.
It would be interesting to revisit some ideas of Emperor Ashoka without lapsing into preliberal ways of life in this context. He advocated an important idea in his Twelfth Edict about the relationship between our own sect and another’s: “Whoever honours his own sect and disparages another man’s... does his own sect the greatest possible harm.” The underlying message here is that others’ happiness and welfare precede the individual’s happiness and welfare. This reversing of the sequence is a radically different moral principle regarding the relationship between the self and the other. This alternative morality highlights the importance of the other unlike liberalism that is centred on the self. Concern for the other in Ashoka seems more useful in the context of the pandemic.
Another important idea for critical scrutiny and evaluation is M.K. Gandhi’s distinction between need and greed. In his criticism of modern civilization, he disparages its greed-centredness. It may not be viable to follow his rigorous asceticism in our day-to-day life. However, his distinction between need and greed can be useful to determine what is dispensable in life and what is not. In pre-pandemic times, we witnessed a proliferation of desires that largely fall under greed. At a more fundamental level, the younger generation’s basic needs are often seen by the previous generation as greed. Then again, ideas considered radical or modern by one generation are deemed orthodox by the next. The present is largely regarded as modern and past ideas, which have preceded it, as orthodox. Despite the shifting definition of needs, the pandemic lockdown provided an opportunity to discover how much of what we desire is a need and how much is greed, what is indispensable in life and what is not. The lockdown across the world has provided a rare social spectacle to closely watch how people have dealt with what Gandhi would call greed and how much they have suffered due to the non-availability of goods for their needs.
For instance, during the lockdown, the private medical sector that accounts for more than 75 per cent of India’s health facilities was closed down. It will be interesting to explore — with an open mind — how many suffered due to the lack of medical facilities during the lockdown and how many benefited by avoiding the cost of non-essential treatment, including the battery of often unnecessary medical tests that are routinely prescribed, significantly inflating a patient’s medical expenses. This will also help us assess our health preparedness.
In the post-pandemic era, we can critically scrutinize the basic ideas of dependence, autonomy and need. The last idea has a serious consequence for ecology, environment and threat due to global warming that may cause a bigger catastrophe. Vaccination cannot protect human beings from this possible future catastrophe. While each unhappiness may be unique, it is possible to compare one with the previous and the possible future sufferings.
The author teaches philosophy at the Indian Institute of Technology,Tirupati
