ABSTRACT
To call Maulana Husain Ahmad Madani, an Islamic scholar active in the
Indian nationalist movement, an ‘argumentative Indian’ is to particularise a
general category ‘the argumentative Indian’ recently articulated by the dis-
tinguished economist, Amartya Sen.1 For Sen, being argumentative is an
enduring characteristic of significant segments of the population of the
Indian Sub-continent. In making this argument about history, Sen is seek-
ing to intervene in India’s contemporary public life against those who
favour homogeneity, ‘fundamentalism’ and uniformity in favour of those who embrace cultural pluralism, debate and engagement with competing
perspectives. Sen – and it is hard not to think of him here as stereotypically
Bengali – argues that Indians like to talk. Thus, in his view, the term is
freed of any obvious negative valence – for example, that an argumentative
person just likes ‘to pick a fight’ or is ‘cantankerous’. It becomes, instead, a
sign of intellectual vitality and a characteristic to celebrate.
