Analogies,valid and invalid (was Re: Scenario of language replacement)

[Bjarte Kaldhol]

Dear listmembers,

I do not understand a word of what is being discussed here. Does somebody
assert that the Aryan invasion/migration into India is so unique that no
parallels exist elsewhere? History IS migration, invasion and
acculturation, and all known peoples on this earth have been invaders. But
I agree that we should avoid using words like "chauvinist". Let us describe
our views clearly and succinctly and refrain from using emotionally loaded
words as well as abstruse philosophical terms.

Best wishes,
Bjarte Kaldhol

----------
> From: Vidyasankar Sundaresan <vsundaresan at HOTMAIL.COM>
> To: INDOLOGY at LISTSERV.LIV.AC.UK
> Subject: Analogies,valid and invalid (was Re: Scenario of language
replacement)
> Date: 8. november 2000 22:29
>
> >I've heard counterarguments like Arun Gupta's repeatedly, but
> >they always overlook a glaring problem. Indo-European languages
> .....
> >Anatolia, Greece, and the Italian peninsula. The Indian problem
> >is not as unique as chauvinistic writers make it out to be.
>
> Alas, here we go again. I daresay Arun Gupta can respond to this himself,
> but I need to make certain points here, as the points he raised struck me
as
> curious too. This post is addressed to all those who agree with Steve
> Farmer's comments quoted above.
>
> 1. Just as "Western Indologists" do not all want to be clubbed together
into
> one stereotypical category, "Indian amateurs" do not want to be
stereotyped
> either. To make a comment about the analogies used by Parpola (and by
most
> everybody else in "mainstream" academia) is not to be chauvinistic about
> India. Every once in a while, can we just discuss issues, instead of
> attitudes?
>
> 2. Those list members who are interested in Indian philosophical thought
may
> appreciate the following. Some schools of thought accept perception
> (pratyaksha), inference (anumAna), analogy (upamAna), postulation
> (arthApatti), non-being/non-availability (abhAva/anupalabdhi) and
testimony
> (Sabda) as valid sources of gaining knowledge. Other schools, e.g. the
nyAya
> school of logic, accept only three, perception, inference and testimony,
> taking the others to be special cases of inferential argument. In the
nyAya
> structure of valid logical argument, analogy does find a role, through
the
> example (d.r.s.tAnta) that needs to be cited to make the argument
complete.
> If the example does not satisfy the conditions of the propostion sought
to
> be proved, the argument is invalid.
>
> 3. In modern science, analogy plays an important role. When people first
> discovered that electricity can flow, they tried to understand it through
> analogy with fluid flow. It succeeded quite well, at least with respect
to
> Newtonian fluids and current through a simple ohmic resistor. Electric
> current was analogous to flow rate and voltage was analogous to pressure
> drop. It succeeded so well that today students first learn about
electricity
> and when they come to learn about fluid flow, they are taught to first
think
> of it in terms of electric flow. When we model new things based on our
> knowledge of previously known things, we look for at least a few points
of
> similarity. If we can't find them, we reject the proposed model and look
for
> better models. All this is simply to say that although Aristotleian logic
> does not put much emphasis on the validity of analogy, human beings look
for
> existing examples of something similar when trying to understand a new
> phenomenon. If the analogy fails on certain counts, our understanding of
the
> new phenomenon correspondingly fails or remains faulty, till something
else
> happens to improve the state of knowledge.
>
> 4. From the perspective of standard patterns of Indian thought, and from
the
> perspective of modern patterns of scientific thought, the analogies cited
by
> Prof. Parpola fail on all the counts cited by Arun Gupta. The reason they
> fail is that one cannot substitute the word "migration" for "invasion"
and
> then proceed to cite examples where linguistic change took place because
of
> naked aggression. If the idea is to retain the model of linguistic change
> implied by the Spanish and Portuguese presence in south America or the
> English presence in India, then call a spade a spade and assert boldly
that
> there was an Aryan invasion of the Indian subcontinent. Indian scientists
> and traditionalists may not agree with you, but at least they will grant
> that you are being consistent in your effort to understand the problem.
If
> the word "invasion" is being replaced by "migration" in order to placate
the
> chauvinists, then that is just a silly and useless compromise. If the
word
> "invasion" is being replaced by the word "migration" for solid
linguistic,
> textual and/or archaeological reasons, then please put your heads
together
> and cite examples that do not involve European aggression and violence
upon
> the rest of the world. If you can't do that, then don't label everyone
who
> points to the flaw in the analogy as a chauvinist. Some of us think with
our
> heads too, not just with our hearts.
>
> Vidyasankar
>
> _________________________________________________________________________
> Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.
>
> Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at
> http://profiles.msn.com.