I beg to differ from your view that only academicians can run university well and we don’t need MBA’s.

The difference between the post of dean and Vice-Chancellor(VC) should be understood to get to the point why we need MBA’s in the chair of VC’s.

Normally an university consists of many faculties. But an academician can be of only one field. So unconsciously he will end up promoting or helping only one faculty.

The role of VC is more of promoting the university as a whole. An MBA may be better for the post of VC as he can do more in getting more funds, more placements, more novel way of promoting the university and by that students.

This is exactly my point, a mere MBA has no understanding or love for learning having studied a subject which is at best mercenary and filled with the shallow offal from other serious subjects. Like an MBA can hardly be expected to understand the true nature of Game Theory or the intricacies of Lacan’s psychology. So is served Human Resource and Accounting courses. For example, Foucault says how these types of learning create a sense of knowledge in a depthless mind.
Those academics who are tired of higher academic of which most understand nothing of, can opt to do an MBA and sit to rule the roost. The fact of your disagreement nicely agrees with my logic. thanks.
Only a guy who has burnt the night lamp over serious scholarly pursuits can know of what i am talking about. Like is studied Davidson’s book on Medicine, for example, you will understand what i am talking of...not by reading the Welches on Management...

I really don’t understand how I am supporting your point, except that there are chances that MBA’s may end up promoting faculty of management more than other faculties.
We have to acquiesce this much, but MBA’s or other administrators are normally more unbiased as administration is their full time job.

Also I really have problem thinking great academicians like Foucault as a VC of a university; having policies banning sexual education as it may be made to control thoughts of students, or banning clinics in university as they are their to spread the fear or respect for some authority,or banning every kind of regulations or banning even the MNC’s as they may promoting mono-culture which is against their own policies. Similarly for Lacan who may tell the parents that their son wishes to see his mother naked! Or Lyotard banning computers as it is killing originality or Jean Baudrillard telling students that Gulf War never happened. It will be really tough for a fresher to hear from his VC that there is no truth!

As I said earlier we need to understand difference between Dean and VC to understand that administrators are best for VC post. We want people who knows how to promote the students, how to get funds, how to move with times or how to allow differences be there without them getting out of hands. Just imagine a Leftist-intellectual-academician saying that all the MNC’s product be banned in university, or Post-modernist saying that all education is their to make students a puppets in the hands of state.

I hope any person who has studied postmodernism can understand what I am saying not somebody who has just studied Medicine in midnight. It is postmodernism only which wants us to be open for new things telling us that no word is final, why not from how great academician it is.Also, we really lack original research and we don’t want great academicians to waste their precious time administering unruly kids. So let their more administrators in the post of VC than academicians who know how to research but don’t know how to get them published.

Also, why should we assume that an MBA has not burnt midnight’ s oil or has no passion for management?

Well to answer your last comment first, an MBA may have indeed burnt the midnight oil for studying all the wrong things in a mish-mash.
Now you have in answer to me quoted Baudrillard. He is WRONGLY thought of saying that the Gulf War did not happen. I suggest that book of his be read in its entirety. Lacan, by the way, proves wrong Freud’s sexual fixation and does not emphasis it as per your post...
I am not talking of nutty professors who go raising hell about silly things but am talking of those academics who have the sense to understand that an MBA PhD, for example as given by the XLRI, say, is not the same thing as having a PhD in Solid State Physics.
I do not understand what Postmodernity is about...in fact none has reached a consensus about it...for example, what is the difference regarding religion in Modernity and Postmodernity? Like the critics you quoted, especially Baudrillard goes back to Plato (You won’t find that on the net)...in fact if anyone cares to really critique the terms modernity and postmodernity, one finds something like this:
Nietzsche read the Bible.
Freud reads Nietzsche.
Lacan reads Freud.
Baudrillard reads Lacan and Derrida.
St Paul reads Greek.
So everything is a transvaluation of values. So postmodernism is the lost Derridean LOGOS reinvented...
So Modernism and Postmodernism do not exist vide... Vico...if this does not make any sense online, I suggest serious time in the libraries. May be a few comparative studies on PhDs on MBA stuff and say, the phase change metabolism of Alpha Omega Fatty acids in atherosclerotic veins will make light dawn. I mean to compare MBA with anything serious…oops, oxymoronic…

Now answering your administrative stuff... a college or a university is a temple. This is a fact which cannot be understood by those who do not love learning. Again I am only talking of that learning which impels a Marie Curie to run to her lab in the dead of night. And later when she occupied administrative chairs, she was never known to falter. True scholars are far better administrators for their innate intellect than someone who has to learn the skills from some books. Books do help but only to a certain extent. Like I can point to the moon and one can instinctively write a note on my finger...

Now about research and publication, a true academic cares not for the latter. Heard about Ramanujan? So this clincher sort of proves my point that it is not possible for non-academics to comment on academics. As I said, only those failed academics who can hear the song that sirens sing each to each ( look this up on the net b4 commenting ;-) ) , will be able to run a university. True scholars cannot care less for running institutes. If I had my own way (& thanx be to God that I do not), I’d have lesser people studying in Higher Ed. they are better off as vocationally trained folks. B.Com and MBA are there to placate the masses (see Plato’s Republic offline). Those who cannot take the pressure of say, economics, can nonetheless be made to feel happy and powerfully knowledgeable. After all, who can doubt the depths of a CA? I wonder why if ten people decide to rob me; it never seems right…that is for public opinion and mass movements like opinion polls….

Now about the medicine book reference, I think the non academic mind is unable to deal with generalities, it is attracted to particulars and gets stuck with it...that is why paperbacks and journalism are in vogue...Arnold’s barbarians are at the gate...ha-ha :-)

I await for a rejoinder culled from the net...oh, did I forget to tell you that for all my talk I might be an MBA too...in which case my talks are not to be taken seriously for by my own account MBAs have nothing deep to talk about...

Hey I really don’t know that whether you have shifted your stance or still fighting it like a lost cause. Cause the way you yourself say that you are an MBA and still think that the academician are the best suited for the post of VC, it means that you as an MBA support that they know more than you about controlling a university but by saying this, whether directly or indirectly, you have proved that you know more than them. Remember Socrates!

Your point that Lacan proved Freud wrong is itself wrong as Lacan has himself admitted that he is Freudian than a postmodernist. I still think that administrators are better suited for the post of VC than an academician.
You still have not answered my point about the difference between the post of VC and Dean.

Hey man I know Baudillard said that Gulf War never happened as to convey the meaning that know the Gulf war was fought on TV and communication means more, but he did say that Gulf war never happened. You can check it even in his book, even after reading it not in entirety.
Lacan does emphasize about all that, even more than I have done. Please do read his Erictus, as he has not written any book.

And please don’t call these great people to be nutty professors raising hell about nothing. They have changed the course of literature, sociology, philosophy, culture studies, criminology, and almost every field.

And please, there is a hell lot of difference between modernity and post modernity. Modernity discards religion saying that there is no God, while post-modernism allows people to have any view whatsoever they wish to have about God, till the point they don’t start assuming dominant position. A simple consensus about post-modernism is incredulous about every meta-narrative, check Lyotard or anybody.

By saying that Neitzsche read the Bible, are you saying that Neitzche was a believer? God must be really Dead!

”So postmodernism is the lost Derridean LOGOS reinvented..” When did LOGOS got lost, or Derridean LOGOS can be invented what to talk about reinvention, or post-modernism is same as post-structuralism? If it does make sense I really suggest some time offline in libraries with no PHD and MBA stuff but with the books asking you to become more open about new things especially about your rigid notions.

”a college or a university is a temple”.. that is the problem, an academician don’t leave a place for atheists and end up discriminating. We don’t want universities with rigid viewpoints, we want places where students can become good citizens and human beings, at least I want so.

”Marie Curie to run to her lab in the dead of night. And later when she occupied administrative chairs, she was never known to falter” She had a name big enough to get anybody running, do you really think that she would have spent times asking companies to give her appointment so that she can discuss placements with them? Or have you checked that who was the administrative officer and who was the dean of the institute of which she was incharge, and how many different faculties were there in that institute?


“Now about research and publication, a true academic cares not for the latter”, I agree with you and that is the point. A VC needs to care about PUBLICATION, can’t say it more simply.

“B.Com and MBA are there to placate the masses”, maybe you have read Plato Republic too deeply and have start believing that academician is in gold class, making them Prince material and by that should also teach them a lot about music, culture and fighting, and B.com MBA in bronze. And why do you quote references for your point, cause when you quote them you say that you believe them in entirety by which you also support slavery or platonic style of family, state raising every child and discarding an invalid one, these are not my words, and hope that also not yours.

And yeah I still can get your point about medicine thing, may be I can’t get my mind particularised on that point, you know a lot about non-academic minds.

I await for a rejoinder culled from the net...oh, did I forget to tell you that for all my talk I might be an academician too...in which case my talks are not to be taken seriously for by my own account academicians have nothing wide to talk about...

wow the rejoined is superb and really proves everything I have to say...including Lacan’s being anti-fruedian...X might say he belongs to the school of Y, but Z might figure out that X contradicts Y. Now this is only one thing...
Why do common people ridicule scholars? The grapes are sour...
Why is MBA hollow? Because M is for Money, B for Boating A for Academics. So moneyed chaps want to taste academics they pay to take a trip there...LOL

I have nothing more to say on this issue , only that all your comments step by step prove my original article.
Let others comment on my and ur views and let us see what they have to say.
And then again remember the dacoit bit I said somewhere.
Who said temples have to have Gods? The great post-modernist has not read dear Nietzscy boy...gods are dead long ago...I shall not argue more on this...too plebeian. And if you are an academic , good luck to the students...;-)

@arjunm
leave all theories, let’s look at facts for a while...
Surely you have heard of the historical Nalanda university;it was run by highly educated Buddhist monks.
Also, during the Renaissance in Europe, educational institutions were headed by prominent scholars,thinkers,philosophers etc.And from those institutions came brilliant academicians,poets,writers,painters and so on.Progress of education was the natural outcome.This proves that academicians are not necessarily bookworms who know nothing of administration,but are wise and aware of all worldly and money matters too.Indeed they are best suited to look after any educational center.
On the other hand with MBAs running our educational institutions, education will become more of a business than proper study(which is the situation today).What will the MBAs do?
They will run the colleges,schools etc in the most profitable manner regardless of the fact whether the students learn anything or not.Obviously that is what the political leaders want;the more learned people are , the harder will it be to brainwash them.
So in the end ’Money will win; adios Higher Education.’...thanks to people like you,the ’highly-learned’ MBAs and ofcourse our political leaders.