Horse & BMAC & much more
ucgadkw at UCL.AC.UK
Thu Mar 23 01:16:57 UTC 2000
On Fri, 17 Mar 2000, Claude Setzer wrote:
> Since you and Dominik seem so insistent that "Humanists" are superior in
> their care about getting the facts straight,
Claude! This isn't at all what I have been arguing so painstakingly.
Many scientists are very good at getting their facts straight. I have
been trying to say that people who express serious sweeping opinions on
humanistic topics should be trained in that subject; the same exactly goes
for people who want to make claims about this or that aspect of science.
The problem I am addressing is that there is a sort of glamour about
science and scientists in some circles today that makes it appear that a
Nuclear Physicist (say) must be worth listening to on the subject of the
date of the vedas (say), just by virtue of his scientific standing. I
disagree. If this NP has studied Sanskrit and the veda, then fine, but
his opinions will then be based on his humanistic studies, not on his
knowledge of nuclear science.
It really isn't a particularly controversial point I'm making.
Founder, INDOLOGY list.
More information about the INDOLOGY