Indology and "the disastrous ideology of the 'pure Aryan race'"

[Lars Martin Fosse]

Matthew Kapstein wrote:

> It may be well to recall that Indology is not the only field 
> in which questions of the nazi or far-right ideological 
> background of certain figures has become controversial 
> (Heidegger in Philosophy, Paul de Man in Literary Theory, 
> Eliade in Religion, G. Frege (who of course long preceeded 
> the nazis) in symbolic logic, etc., as well as the many 
> Japanese militarists who resurfaced in prominent academic 
> positions after the war). 

And let us not forget the Leninists, Stalinists, Maoists, Italian and
East-European Fascists etc. etc. The role and behaviour of intellectuals in
dictatorial societies is a highly complex matter. It is interesting both
from a historiographical and biographical point of view. But it is not a
specifically Indological problem unless ideological views colour a scholar's
Indological production to the point where it becomes irrelevant. To claim
that X was a Nazi is less interesting than demonstrating that X's Nazi views
had a clear impact on his scholarship. 

We have to live with the fact that if a great mathematician becomes a
mass-murderer, he does not become a lesser mathematician, only a more
revolting human being. Moral or political deficiencies in a scholar or
artist are not necessarily relevant to the evaluation of their production. 

Lars Martin Fosse
 

From: 
Dr.art. Lars Martin Fosse 
Haugerudvn. 76, Leil. 114, 
0674 Oslo - Norway 
Phone: +47 22 32 12 19 Fax:  +47 850 21 250 
Mobile phone: +47 90 91 91 45 
E-mail: lmfosse at chello.no 
http://www.linguistfinder.com/translators.asp?id=2164



 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Indology [mailto:INDOLOGY at liverpool.ac.uk] On Behalf Of 
> Matthew Kapstein
> Sent: Wednesday, January 10, 2007 5:56 PM
> To: INDOLOGY at liverpool.ac.uk
> Subject: Re: Indology and "the disastrous ideology of the 
> 'pure Aryan race'"
> 
> Please allow me to second this motion as well.
> The issue, if it is to be further aired, should be aired in 
> its own forum. As I recall, this all began as a digression 
> from the topic of justifying the study of Sanskrit in the 
> contemporary academy. Its proliferation pretty well 
> illustrates the parable of the pipal seed -- like karman, it 
> begins small but in the end takes over the neighborhood.
> 
> It may be well to recall that Indology is not the only field 
> in which questions of the nazi or far-right ideological 
> background of certain figures has become controversial 
> (Heidegger in Philosophy, Paul de Man in Literary Theory, 
> Eliade in Religion, G. Frege (who of course long preceeded 
> the nazis) in symbolic logic, etc., as well as the many 
> Japanese militarists who resurfaced in prominent academic 
> positions after the war). There are troubling issues raised 
> by this that certainly deserve to be aired, but they can and 
> should be probed appropriately in the context of 20th century 
> intellectual and political history.
> 
> Matthew Kapstein
> 
> On Wed, 10 Jan 2007, Rosane Rocher wrote:
> 
> > Please allow me to second this motion.
> > Rosane Rocher
> >
> > At 11:01 AM 1/10/2007, you wrote:
> >> I would like to suggest humbly that this subject has been 
> >> sufficiently explored in this list.  In any event, I thought the 
> >> Indology list is concerns issues and ideas pertaining to classical 
> >> Indian studies, whether in Sanskrit or, occasionally, in the other 
> >> classical language of India, Tamil (which is non-Indo-European and 
> >> certainly does not represent the "pure Aryan race," whatever that 
> >> is).  If some members wish to pursue aspects of the history of the 
> >> Third Reich, perhaps they could start another list.  George Hart
> >