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.)

Why India Should Observe Tribal Pride Day

Writer: Sharad Chavan
Sharad Chavan
Aug 7
3 min read

Part 3: Tribal Pride Day provides an opportunity to honour the traditions, culture and valour of India's Adivasi communities.

Having examined the origins of World Indigenous Peoples' Day in Part 1 and its relevance to India in Part 2, we must now consider whether this observance has any place in the Indian context. The question is not whether indigenous peoples deserve respect and recognition—they certainly do—but whether this particular observance reflects India's historical experience and national reality.


Events such as Beef Festival, Love Day, Kiss Day, Indigenous Day, and Boycott India Day have, in my view, been used to foster divisions within the country. Similarly, the observance of World Adivasi Day, declared by the United Nations, has no genuine historical background in India. It cannot be regarded as a traditional day of pride or celebration for our tribal communities.


History records the immense suffering, persecution, and displacement of indigenous peoples across the world. It was to acknowledge these historical injustices that the United Nations initiated this observance. However, many countries, including the United States, have expressed reservations about its present form. Since 2007, August 9 has increasingly been observed internationally as Adivasi Peoples' Rights Day. The purpose is to acknowledge the historical injustices suffered by indigenous communities. India, meanwhile, has chosen to honour its tribal communities through Tribal Pride Day, reflecting its own historical and constitutional approach towards tribal welfare.


Unlike International Yoga Day, which conveys a message of positivity and unity, I do not believe the observance of August 9 serves any constructive national purpose in India. For many Indians, August 9 has long been associated with the Quit India Movement of 1942. It was later commemorated as Kranti Diwas (Revolution Day). Over time, I believe the date was also adopted by socialist and leftist groups to advance their ideological agenda. As a result, the original historical significance of the day has, in my opinion, gradually become blurred.


In my view, organisations promoting this global observance in India are exploiting tribal identity. They are advancing a narrative that encourages divisions based on Adivasi, Aryan, non-Aryan, and caste identities rather than promoting the genuine welfare and rights of tribal communities. Unfortunately, some state governments have also contributed to this process. They have done so by officially supporting such programmes without examining their wider historical and ideological implications.


Promoting these programmes without understanding the ideological framework behind them only strengthens forces that encourage separatism and social division. Such initiatives, however well-intentioned they may appear, can deepen misunderstandings and create unnecessary divisions within society. For this reason, I believe both the Adivasi community and all Indians should remain alert. In my view, this is another attempt to divide the country.


Vanvasi Kalyan Ashram and several organisations working among the Adivasi community have sought to create awareness from a national perspective. They have consistently emphasised national unity while working for the welfare, education, and development of tribal communities. While this observance may continue internationally, I believe it should not succeed as a divisive movement within India.


Responding to the demands of several organisations, including Vanvasi Kalyan Ashram, the Government of India declared November 15, the birth anniversary of Lord Birsa Munda, as Tribal Pride Day. I welcome this decision. It provides an opportunity to understand and appreciate the rich traditions, culture, heritage, and valour of India's tribal communities. It also encourages society to recognise their enduring contribution to the nation. In my view, the declaration of Tribal Pride Day leaves no justification for celebrating International Indigenous Peoples' Day in India.


(The writer is a social worker engaged in tribal welfare. Views personal.)

Comments

bottom of page