top of page

By:

Anil D. Salve

21 March 2026 at 8:11:09 pm

A Drought of Wisdom in an Ocean of Information

We live in an age where information is everywhere. With a single click, we can access news from across the world, thousands of opinions, countless videos and endless claims. Knowledge has never been so accessible. Yet, in this overwhelming flow of information, something increasingly scarce is discernment-the ability to distinguish what deserves our belief from what deserves our doubt. Information and knowledge are not the same. Reading, watching or hearing something does not automatically...

A Drought of Wisdom in an Ocean of Information

We live in an age where information is everywhere. With a single click, we can access news from across the world, thousands of opinions, countless videos and endless claims. Knowledge has never been so accessible. Yet, in this overwhelming flow of information, something increasingly scarce is discernment-the ability to distinguish what deserves our belief from what deserves our doubt. Information and knowledge are not the same. Reading, watching or hearing something does not automatically make it true. We need the ability to verify information, understand its context, recognise its purpose and only then form an opinion. In the digital age, this ability has become one of the most important forms of wisdom. Social media has transformed the way information travels. WhatsApp, Instagram, Facebook and other platforms have made communication faster, wider and more accessible. But the same speed that connects society can also overwhelm it. Information often reaches us before facts do. A headline is read before the full story. A short video is watched without knowing what happened before or after it. A photograph is circulated without its original context. A message arrives with the familiar words, “Forwarded as received,” and within minutes it may reach thousands of people. By the time the truth catches up, the rumour may already have done its work. The problem becomes even more serious when misinformation is deliberately created and circulated. Rumours may be planted not merely to mislead individuals but to divert public attention from an important issue, create suspicion, damage someone's reputation or push society towards a particular narrative. A distraction does not always need to be completely false. Sometimes a small piece of truth is mixed with exaggeration, selective facts or emotional language. The result can be more powerful than an outright lie because it appears believable. This is how narratives are manufactured. Social media platforms can become powerful tools in this process. A repeated claim begins to look familiar, and familiarity is often mistaken for truth. A provocative post attracts attention. Thousands of reactions create the impression that “everyone” believes it. One emotional video triggers another, comments intensify the mood, and before facts have an opportunity to speak, public sentiment may have already shifted. This is where mob psychology enters the picture. A society can move from calm to anger, suspicion to trust, or optimism to fear with surprising speed. People who would ordinarily think carefully may react differently when they see thousands of others expressing outrage, fear or hostility. The individual begins to follow the crowd, and the crowd begins to reinforce the individual. The danger is not limited to negative emotions. The same mechanism can also be used positively-to mobilise people for social causes, humanitarian assistance, disaster relief, public awareness and community action. Technology itself is neither wise nor foolish. Its impact depends on how information is created, amplified and consumed. The greatest danger, therefore, is not that we have too much information. It is that we may lose the habit of thinking while consuming it. We are increasingly becoming consumers of information rather than creators of thought. Everyone has access to information today, but access does not necessarily mean understanding. The boundaries between a rumour and a report, an opinion and a fact, popularity and truth are becoming increasingly blurred. A post does not become true because thousands of people have liked it. A video does not become evidence merely because it has gone viral. An opinion does not become a fact because it is expressed confidently. An idea does not become correct simply because it confirms what we already believe. This last point deserves particular attention. We often accept information not because it is accurate, but because it is comfortable. We are naturally attracted to information that confirms our existing beliefs and suspicious of information that challenges them. In the digital world, this tendency can be amplified by algorithms that repeatedly expose us to content similar to what we have already watched, liked or shared. Gradually, we may find ourselves living inside an information bubble where we hear many voices-but mostly voices that agree with us. That is not diversity of information. It is an illusion of certainty. Discernment does not mean doubting everything. It means thinking before believing. It means asking simple but powerful questions: Who is saying this? What is the evidence? What is the context? What may be missing? Who benefits if I believe it? And have I heard the other side? These questions may take only a few seconds, but they can prevent hours, days or even years of misunderstanding. This responsibility is particularly important for the younger generation. Children today are growing up in an environment of unprecedented information exposure. They can encounter more information in a few hours than earlier generations might have encountered in weeks. Therefore, education cannot merely teach students how to collect, remember and reproduce information. It must teach them how to question, verify, analyse and interpret it. A student who can write the correct answer in an examination may be academically successful. But a student who knows how to ask the right question is better prepared for life. The classroom of the future must therefore produce not merely informed students, but thinking citizens. They must learn that forwarding a message is also a form of responsibility. Sharing a post is not an innocent act when it can affect someone's reputation, create public fear or influence social behaviour. The challenge becomes even greater in the age of Artificial Intelligence. AI can generate information, images, audio and video with extraordinary speed and sophistication. The distinction between what is real and what merely appears real may become increasingly difficult. In such a world, human judgment becomes more valuable, not less. Technology can produce an answer in seconds. It cannot automatically tell us whether that answer deserves our trust. Some answers require experience. Some require context. Many require the ability to think independently. We have more information, more technology and more connectivity than any previous generation. Yet our real challenge is to preserve something technology cannot manufacture for us: the capacity to think for ourselves. The ocean of information will only become larger. The question will no longer be, “How much information do we have?” The more important questions will be: What should we accept? What should we question? What should we verify? And what should we reject? No technology can completely answer these questions for us. No number of likes can substitute for evidence. No viral trend can replace judgment. No majority can turn misinformation into truth. That responsibility belongs to human beings. Information can tell us what happened. Discernment helps us understand what it means, why it happened, what may be missing from the story and how we should respond. Perhaps, therefore, the greatest educational challenge of our time is not to teach people how to find more information. They already know how to do that. The greater challenge is to teach them how to pause-to pause before believing, to pause before reacting, to pause before forwarding and to pause before joining the crowd. Because sometimes the most intelligent response to information is not an immediate reaction, but a moment of reflection. The ocean is already around us. It is growing deeper every day. What we need now is not more information to swim through it-but the wisdom to know which direction to take. (The writer is the Principal of Podar International School, Ausa, Latur. Views personal.)

Damming the Deluge

Correspondent
Jan 13, 2025
3 min read

As China races ahead with the world’s largest hydropower dam on the YarlungTsangpo, India counters with its own ambitious Siang project in Arunachal Pradesh.

YarlungTsangpo
Arunachal Pradesh

In the remote but geopolitically sensitive corners of Arunachal Pradesh, the quiet flow of the Siang River has become the backdrop to a turbulent contest of national security and ecological stakes. The state’s decision to pursue the 11,000 MW Siang hydropower project is seen as a riposte to the hydrological and geopolitical crisis instigated by China’s gargantuan 60,000 MW dam on the YarlungTsangpo in Tibet.


This looming Chinese project has been described as a potential ‘hydro bomb’ capable of triggering flash floods or crippling water shortages downstream in India and Bangladesh, causing water to become a weapon in future Sino-Indian tensions. By constructing the Siang dam, India aims to mitigate these risks while asserting its sovereignty over the river’s flow.


The 2,900-kilometer Brahmaputra—known as the YarlungTsangpo in Tibet and the Jamuna in Bangladesh—supports millions across three nations, yet is a fault line for conflict. Historically, rivers in South Asia have been central to disputes, from the Indus Waters Treaty of 1960 between India and Pakistan to skirmishes over the Teesta River between India and Bangladesh.


China’s recent approval of the Tsangpo dam marks a new phase of hydraulic hegemony. With a proposed capacity to generate 300 billion kilowatt-hours annually, this dam would overshadow even the Three Gorges Dam, the current global leader. Positioned near the ‘Great Bend,’ where the river takes a sharp southward turn into India, the project amplifies downstream nations’ vulnerability to China’s control over water resources.


India’s Siang dam project, though significantly smaller in scale, is envisioned as a strategic countermeasure. However, indigenous communities, organized under the Siang Indigenous Farmers Forum (SIFF), have vociferously opposed the dam, citing concerns of mass displacement and ecological devastation.


The Siang region is a biodiversity hotspot, with fragile ecosystems already under strain from deforestation and climate change. Critics argue that constructing a mega-dam here could trigger landslides and disrupt the region’s seismic stability. Notably, the recent earthquake in Tibet, which claimed over 120 lives, underscores the geological fragility of the Himalayan belt. Environmentalists warn that tampering with this terrain could unleash catastrophic consequences for millions downstream.


China’s dam, too, has drawn environmental scrutiny. Though Beijing has touted it as a cornerstone of its carbon-neutral ambitions, experts point to the peril of altering water flows in such a volatile region. Bangladesh, the Brahmaputra’s final downstream recipient, stands particularly exposed to the double jeopardy of reduced water availability and increased flood risks.


For India, the Siang project, more than an engineering challenge, is a geopolitical necessity. China has consistently weaponized infrastructure projects to assert dominance, from its Belt and Road Initiative to its construction of border roads in disputed territories. The YarlungTsangpo dam fits this pattern, doubling as a tool of soft power and hard leverage.


For India’s part, the Siang dam would not only generate electricity but also serve as a bulwark against sudden water releases by China, whether intentional or accidental.


The battle over the Brahmaputra and its tributaries is emblematic of a 21st-century reality: water, once considered an inexhaustible resource, is now a flashpoint for conflict. As climate change exacerbates water scarcity, the competition over transboundary rivers will intensify. For India, the Siang dam is a bold though fraught attempt to secure its hydrological future.


The question, however, remains if can megaprojects like these ever truly address the complexities of geopolitics and ecology, or do they merely shift the risk downstream? As New Delhi and Beijing escalate their hydropower race, millions who depend on these rivers may find themselves swept up in a deluge of unintended consequences.

Comments

bottom of page