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.)

Empowering Indian Science: From Red Tape to Real Impact

Writer: Dr. Kishore Paknikar
Dr. Kishore Paknikar
Jun 12, 2025
4 min read

Indian science is going through an important change. Recent government decisions are making the country’s research environment more supportive, flexible, and focused on national needs. These steps reflect a stronger recognition of science as a national priority in moving beyond procedural bottlenecks and acknowledging its central role in building a strong and self-reliant India.


One of the most impactful changes is the complete overhaul of procurement procedures for scientific research. Until now, buying research instruments and lab equipment involved multiple approvals, quotations, and mandatory use of government platforms, often leading to long delays. The new rules are a game-changer.


The direct purchase limit for scientific instruments and consumables has been raised from Rs.1 lakh to Rs.2 lakh, allowing quicker purchases without needing quotations. The purchase committee limit (through Limited Tender Enquiry) has been increased from Rs.10 lakh to Rs.25 lakh. The Advertised Tender Enquiry limit has been raised from Rs.50 lakh to Rs.1 crore. For large-scale procurements, Vice Chancellors and Directors of institutions can now approve Global Tender Enquiries up to Rs. 200 crore, giving research institutions far greater flexibility than ever before.


In another bold step, the government has allowed scientific goods to be purchased outside the Government e-Marketplace (GeM). Earlier, GeM was the only route for procurement, but this often did not meet the specific needs of laboratories or offered limited suppliers. Now, researchers can directly access better products and vendors, save precious time and ensure the quality of scientific work is not compromised. These simplified procedures significantly reduce red tape and speed up procurement across India’s research labs.


At the same time, another key reform focuses on reducing the administrative burden on Principal Investigators (PIs). Until now, PIs were expected to handle both science and paperwork by tracking expenses, filing reports and managing grant-related documents. These tasks took away valuable time from research. Shifting these responsibilities to trained staff in institutions is a much-needed change. It allows scientists to focus on what really matters: thinking, discovering, and mentoring.


Together, these reforms show a deeper understanding: that science must be allowed to grow without unnecessary roadblocks. But freedom also comes with responsibility. As India aims to become a developed country by 2047, science must help solve real problems like providing clean water, affordable healthcare, sustainable farming, reliable energy and safe cities. Research must not only advance knowledge, but also improve people’s lives.


To achieve this, the way we measure success in science also needs to change. Rather than just counting the number of papers or patents, we should ask: What impact did this research have? Did it solve a real problem? Did it lead to a useful product, policy, or technology? Funding agencies can support this shift by linking grants to clear goals, regular reviews, and mentorship—making sure that independence leads to meaningful results.


At the same time, science is being reshaped by artificial intelligence. AI tools are now used to analyse data, review literature, suggest ideas, and even write papers. These tools can be helpful if used carefully. But there is a risk: relying too much on AI can make science shallow. A paper that sounds polished but lacks original thinking adds little value.


That’s why scientific integrity today means more than just avoiding fraud. It also means being thoughtful, honest, and creative. AI should support human thinking, not replace it. Research institutions must set clear rules on how AI should be used, encourage transparency, and make sure that the peer review process looks for depth, not just fluency.


Another ongoing problem is the delay in releasing project funds and fellowships. For many young researchers, these delays cause frustration, uncertainty, and slow down progress. Fixing this is essential. Predictable and timely funding is as important as autonomy as it helps scientists plan and work effectively.


In addition, research institutions must build stronger internal systems. Good science depends not just on smart researchers but also on skilled administrators, grant managers, and lab technicians. These support roles must be recognized and strengthened. A successful research system needs both talent and teamwork.


India must now create its own model for scientific growth that matches its challenges and strengths. Simply copying what other countries do will not work. India needs a system that blends basic research with real-world problem-solving, cutting-edge tools with cost-effective solutions, and global ideas with local action.


To make this happen, stronger collaboration is needed. Scientists must work more closely with industry, government and civil society. Research hubs, startup incubators and joint projects can help convert ideas into useful applications. Community participation can also help ensure that innovations are practical and accepted.


Science must also connect better with the public. People should understand and care about science. Including topics like environment, sustainability, and critical thinking in education will help build a generation that supports evidence-based decisions. Outreach through digital tools, schools, and local programs will make science more inclusive.


These recent reforms have set the stage. But it is now up to scientists, institutions, and policy-makers to use this opportunity well. Will the system encourage creativity? Will it support those who take bold steps? Will it stay focused on national progress? If approached with clarity and commitment, this moment can become a turning point. Indian science can break free from old limits, grow with purpose, and play a central role in building a confident, capable and developed India.

(The author is the former Director, Agharkar Research Institute, Pune and Visiting Professor, IIT Bombay. Views personal)

Comments

bottom of page