"Science" in India

[Dominik Wujastyk]

On Fri, 20 Oct 2000, Kumar wrote:

> Indology subscribers should be familiar with the principles of
> netiquettes.  In the past the moderator and a few other active members
> had reacted to much less offensive postings.  Where are they now?  We
> must have a few basic rules of engagements on this list to ensure that
> the discussion remains civil and respectful.  Steve Farmer's posting
> was neither civil nor respectful.

I disagree with your view.  I think Farmer was reasonably civil and
respectful, though he should have realized he would be poking a stick into
a beehive.  I think that many of the objections you raise are actually to
the Outlook article.  Someone who promotes views you disagree with is not,
thereby, necessarily disrespectful.

At base, what Farmer is trying to do is to find for himself some way of
understanding how Rajram, Kak, and others can write history that is so at
variance with the standard model, and is based on poor evidence,
misleading argumentation, and so forth.  How can someone do something so
inexplicable?  Why would a scholar, someone dedicated to truth, write a
book containing untruth?

These are very puzzling matters, and not at all obvious.  I read Farmer's
posting as an attempt to blame bad historiography on poor education.  I
think his argument has some merit, but was rather too simple, and rather
sweeping.  But it certainly deserved an airing.

--
Dominik Wujastyk
Founder, INDOLOGY list.