Qualifications for entering into a debate

[Dileep Karanth]

Dear Mr Deshpande,

I do not need to read a few thousand pages to be sure that a mail which 
says that somebody believes that "anything goes" without actually giving 
us his argument is not acceptable. 

I am glad you at least took the trouble to read my posting, if only to 
criticise it on some trivial grounds. I will let you get back to reading 
the few thousand pages which (and not an open mind) are the 
qualifications recognised by the Dominik-fan club. 

You have not yet grasped the point that I am only criticising the 
attitude of using authority to settle disputes. Or perhaps you have, but 
you use the same strategies yourself (and so have been initiated into the 
inner circle of indologists) 

Again, the fact that you have no arguments to defend your supercilious 
behaviour is clearly brought out by the fact Jiten Sharma's polite and 
sincere questions (which ignore your impolite behaviour) are as yet not 
answered. 

Maybe I should not even expect sane arguments in a discussion group where 
a person who criticises a purely private discussion in public is called a 
gentleman. 

"Ushtranam hi vivasheshu mantran gayanti gardabhah,
Parasparam Prashansanti aho roopamaho dhvanih"

Please go back to scratching each others backs, ushtras and gardabhas.

Dileep

On Tue, 20 Sep 1994 madhav.deshpande at um.cc.umich.edu wrote:

>      I was struck by the following sentence in Mr. Dileep Karanth's recent
> note:  "I have myself not read any book on this subject -- only articles by
> writers of various pursuasions.  I am apt to be convinced by each article I
> read."  While I cannot speak for others on Indology, I can speak for myself
> that I have not only read a lot of books on this subject, but have written
> a few hundred pages on it in books and articles, and I cannot say that I am
> convinced by each article I read.  This situation only brings out the 
> imbalances in the current dialogue going on Indology.  Mr. Karanth's
> above quoted statement is clear enough.  Unless, for example, he reads
> intelligently the few thousand pages worth quality research which is out
> there in the libraries, I am not sure who can have a meaningful dialogue
> with him.  If a student in my class comes to me to discuss a topic without
> having read any of the required assignments, I normally ask him to go back
> and read those assignments first.  Here, somehow, there is an expectation
> on the part of some at least, that one would enter into a worthwhile 
> discussion to convince someone who has"not read any book on this subject."
> I hope that we agree to think realistically that meaningful debate is
> possible only when both parties have prepared well for it.  However, when
> I read comments like "the publications in America are too academic", I
> am really offended.  Indology is supposed to be a network of people who are
> dedicated to being "academic" in the best ways known to us.  However, a
> person, who tells us with all honesty that he/she has "not read any book
> on this subject", has to do a good deal of the required reading of a few
> thousand pages before being vocal on this network.
>      Madhav Deshpande
>  
>