Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Explanations by social scientists of the Indian person have emphasized the subordination of the individual to caste and family and the compelling influence of hierarchy for explaining motivations for behavior. They have asserted there is no room for individuation and personal autonomy in Indian society. If correct, personal goals should be rare among Indians, rebellion against family and caste should be unusual, and deviation from the etiquette of hierarchy should be infrequent. Based on 23 life histories, the findings of this article contradict this view. As Indians age, achieving a degree of autonomy is an increasingly important theme in adult life and is closely associated with rebellions against hierarchy and with these Indians' perception of responsibility for how their lives turn out. The article concludes that hierarchy has been given such a dominant role in describing Indian society that the significance of personal explanations of autonomy and motivation has been discounted.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Mattison Mines (1988) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: