Savarkar’s Philosophy & Worldview, Part 9; Savarkar’s Five Philosophical Dimensions, Part (2/6)
In this second installment of our exploration into Vinayak Damodar (Veer) Savarkar’s philosophical thought, we turn to his profound commitment to rationalism and positivism. These principles were not abstract ideals for him but the very foundation of his social and political philosophy, shaping his worldview and guiding his vision of a progressive society. Grounded in logic, science, and observable facts, Savarkar stood out as a distinctive figure in the intellectual landscape of his time.
Rationalism as a Touchstone
For Savarkar, rationality was the cornerstone of all thought and action. He approached social and political questions with skepticism toward religious and metaphysical claims, excluding them from logical reasoning. In his view, all arguments and conclusions had to arise from observable facts and clear deductions. Rationalism, for him, was not merely a matter of intellectual rigor—it was a practical instrument of social transformation.
His passion for science, technology, and modernization was integral to this outlook. He believed in the power of a scientific attitude and method as essential engines of progress. His embrace of positivism—or what might be called “rational-scientific materialism”—reflected both his admiration for Western scientific achievements and his conviction that material progress was inseparable from social reform. As Jyotirmaya Sharma has observed, Savarkar understood materialism as dynamic: a “theory of time, change, and progress.”
Nature, Progress, and Human Agency
Savarkar saw nature as inherently oriented toward progress but rejected passive submission to it. Phenomena such as earthquakes, floods, or famines were often seen as mysteries or divine punishments, yet he insisted they could be explained through observation, experience, and experiment. What was once “mysterious” could, in his view, always be demystified by science.
This conviction led him to advocate for a society that placed logic and science as the ultimate arbiters of truth. For him, the validity of any claim lay in its ability to withstand empirical verification. He urged his countrymen to abandon blind faith and to trust instead in reason and evidence.
The Limits of Rationalism
Yet Savarkar was no absolutist. He recognized the dangers of unrestricted rationalism, which he criticized as a kind of narrow-mindedness. In his essay What a Reformer Should Remember, he argued for balance. Reformers, he suggested, must harness society’s potential for the greater good—even if that meant tolerating traditions rooted in blind faith, provided they served to unify rather than divide.
This reveals Savarkar’s pragmatic streak. He urged reformers not to alienate the masses by rejecting every custom wholesale but to focus instead on eliminating practices that clearly harmed the nation. His reformism was thus pragmatic rather than utopian: he sought to lead people away from superstition without isolating himself—or them—from the broader community.
Final Thoughts: Rationalism and Pragmatism as Legacy
Savarkar’s rationalism and positivism were never abstract doctrines. They were tools for the transformation of society, positioning him as a modernizer who sought to bring India into step with the scientific age. Yet his recognition of rationalism’s limits—and his insistence on pragmatism—demonstrates a nuanced understanding of social complexity.
In today’s world, shaped so profoundly by science and technology, his call for a rational and scientific outlook tempered by pragmatism remains strikingly relevant. Savarkar challenges us to think critically, embrace progress, and yet remain grounded in the realities of human nature and society.
💭 What do you think? What are your thoughts on Savarkar’s rationalist and positivist philosophy? Do you think rationalism should guide all aspects of life, or are there areas where faith and tradition still play an important role? Savarkar argued that society should trust science and logic over blind faith. How do you see this tension playing out in today’s world? Savarkar believed reformers should balance rationalism with pragmatism to avoid alienating the masses. Do you agree that compromise is sometimes necessary for social change? Where do you think rationalism reaches its limits? Can everything be explained through logic and science? In our age of rapid technological change, what lessons from Savarkar’s rationalist philosophy feel most relevant today?
👉 Share your thoughts in the comments below!
Sources:
GODBOLE, Vasudev Shankar. 2004. Rationalism of Veer Savarkar. Itihas Patrika Prashan: Thane/Mumbai.
KEER, Dhananjay. 1988. Veer Savarkar. Third Edition. (Second Edition: 1966). Popular Prakashan: Bombay (Mumbai).
PHADTARE, T. C. 1975. Social and Political Thought of Shri V.D. Savarkar. A Thesis submitted to the Marathwada University for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy. Unpublished: Aurangabad.
SAMPATH, Vikram. 2019. Savarkar (Part 1). Echoes from a forgotten past. 1883-1924.Penguin Random House India: Gurgaon.
SHANKAR, Ravi. 1924. “Savarkar in Europe from 1906 to 1910: A Reappraisal.” Contemporary Social Sciences, vol. 33, no. 2, June 30.
SHARMA, Jyotirmaya. 2003. Hindutva. Exploring the Idea of Hindu Nationalism. Viking/Penguin Books: New Delhi.
Wolf, Siegfried O. 2010. Vinayak Damodar Savarkar’s ‘Strategic Agnosticism’:
A Compilation of his Socio-Political Philosophy and Worldview. Heidelberg Papers in South Asian and Comparative Politics, Working Paper No. 58, South Asia Institute, University of Heidelberg, 2011.
https://archiv.ub.uni-heidelberg.de/volltextserver/10414/1/HPSACP_Wolf.pdf
Leave a Reply