A Galileian muttering!

AS the legend goes, at the end of his inquisition in the wake of the publication of his treatise titled Dialogue Concerning the Two Chief World Systems, Galileo Galilei was forced to "confess" that it was a mistake to say that the earth was not the centre of the universe or that it moves. Both the ideas — Copernican in nature and origin — were against the belief system of the time. Galileo did not want to do that at first, but when it was explained to him that he would be saving his life, he quickly agreed to confess. As he was being escorted out of the courtroom, however, Galileo could not resist muttering under his breath, e pur si muove, or "but the Earth does move". This, alongside Archimedes floating in his bath and Newton watching the fall of an apple, has remained the stuff of legends even though some biographers, especially in the case of Galileo, have questioned the authenticity of the quote. This week, one has to make a rather Galileian confession of "guilt" and "wrongdoing" about what was written in this space last week about the net worth of HEC-led improvements in Pakistan. Galileo did it to save his life, but all that is at stake here is mental peace. Reactions to one's writings are always welcome regardless of them being rose petals or brickbats. And sharing them with public is not among the priorities of any columnist. But there are times when one has to. This is one of those times. Forget the petals, let's have a taste of a brickbat and it is rather irritating because the gentleman in question, who happens to be an academician as well, seems to have some problem with the basic notion of people having an honest difference of opinion. His first mail read: "Being associated with HEC on some projects, I feel that your article is not fair, based on few drawing room conversations. You needed to have more across the board sampling", and then went on to suggest that one should go through some of his articles to have "a solid background on the status of education". After it was explained to him that people can (should?) live with varying viewpoints, he wrote back, saying: "Sorry, but your clarification is not satisfactory." He further sought explanation of the fragment that was used last week to the effect that university degrees were not worth the paper on which they were printed. Though with a bit of irritation that is common while dealing with mindless rigidity, it was explained that there were no "clarifications" involved and he was free to live with his views and assumptions. If only life could be that simple! The inbox next morning had this gem: "Kindly try to back up the following quotes of your article of April 10, otherwise apologise to me and the HEC …" Aah! How really sweet of this never-say-die loyalist who says he has a few things to do with education, the HEC and presently lives in the US doing God knows what. Just to spare you the trouble of going through his entire mail, here below are a few points it raised and sought clarifications of: On the issue of increased enrollment — 200 per cent — claimed by the HEC and what was said last week, he asked: "200 per cent from when to when? What is a sizeable portion? Which sub-sector universities? How many students are foul-mouthing? All the 200 per cent?" Picking up on another quote — "As things stand, anybody who gets enrolled in a university ends up receiving the degree" — he asked: "Cent per cent pass percentage? No dropouts? No failed students?" The suggestion that mindless spending on higher education had been done at the cost of primary education and that it was regrettable, the gentleman wondered: "What has happened at the cost of primary education?" On the basis of these earth-shattering, hair-splitting queries, he is seeking an apology, "failing which, I reserve the right to protest". Silence was then practised in the hope that it will help him calm down, but two days later came this suggestion: "A gentle reminder. Please try to respond. The best would be to own your mistakes." So you can see that the whole of last week was spent dealing with what. And since there is a limit to everything and also because one is shivering in one's pants out of fear of the threat of "protest", it is prudent to offer an unconditional apology and that too in public instead of the email circuit that has been used thus far. So, here are the most sincere and honest apologies to the gentleman and his beloved HEC for whatever was said last week … e pur si muove … but the earth does move … and, indeed, there are problems with, within and surrounding the HEC. humair_iq@hotmail.com