>
>
> On May 22, 2006, at 2:47 PM, authfriend wrote:
>
> > The point is that she doesn't seem to have the
> > requisite credentials to trash Vedic science.
>
> She's a scientist and someone raised in that culture--I'd certainly
> say she does.
Being raised in the culture doesn't automatically
give one expertise in Vedic science, which requires
a thorough understanding of the Vedic literature.
Nor does being a scientist, of course, give one
such expertise.
> esp. given her masterful overview of the development of
> this trend.
Nor would this give her expertise in Vedic thought.
> Really the only thing necessary is the minimum insight
> necessary to expose the fraud...otherwise you're merely appealing to
> authority and using faulty logic.
Well, the last part here makes no sense. Having more
than minimum insight into Vedic science would involve
appealing to authority and using faulty logic?? How
would that work, exactly? Would you say the same about
having minimum insight into Western science with regard
to a critique of its principles?
In any case, from what I gather from the reviews and
her essay you posted, her critique (really, her polemic)
is primarily focused on the political aspects and on
philosophy of science. For those, you may be right that
she doesn't need much expertise in Vedic thought. And
certainly the essay is very light indeed on specifics,
dealing for the most part in vague generalities.
Apparently Part 2 of her book goes into more detail,
however. If the reviewers on Amazon are correct that
she doesn't know her onions in this area, perhaps she
should just have left it out entirely rather than
attempt to critique Vedic science on its own terms.
Amusingly, the review I read says:
"The sacred Hindu texts, which include the Vedas and
the Upanishads, are often regarded as scientific texts
in that they allegedly contain all the findings of
modern science from physics and biology to mathematics,
as well as the methods of science. Such claims are
hardly credible since 'Vedic Science' needs its legions
of decoders and interpreters before any connection can
be made to any real science."
In other words, because the texts are difficult to
understand, they can be dismissed on that basis.
(That's the reviewer's perspective; whether it reflects
Nanda's approach isn't clear.)
To subscribe, send a message to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Or go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/
and click 'Join This Group!'
YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS
- Visit your group "FairfieldLife" on the web.
- To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
- Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
