ChristianSkeptic

LP: However, those posts did not really add anything; they were not connected to anything specific, which disappointed me.

CS: Thanks for your responses LP.

My approach counts the human element as a "specific" element being separate but interconnected with geography. This is understood by way of the sciences I have listed and intergrated.

The principles of Part I & II are most definitely connected to part III.

In part, I layout a rational basis for human action (motives) and its corollary (political economy) and the anthropological basis for war which calls to question Aravindan’s statement that

I have asked Aravindan the question of how does he know the statement is true given, conflicting historical physiological preferences, psychological priorities, competition over scarce resources, Robert Carneiro’s theory of the formation of multicultural societies, the efficacy of violence and simple miscommunication?

His response has been, thus far, that the Vedic literature is tolerate which does not address my point regarding the influence of the use of violence as outlined in Arthashastra and any inferences which can be drawn about human nature is part I.

In part II, I layout principles of geography (i.e. the distance-decay effect, geographic positioning and routes) and make the point that the impact of the forces of geography on ancient history is of such magnitude that it is often said that ancient history is all geography. As a consequence, ancient cultures and “races” developed in isolation.

The consequence of cultural and “racial” isolation is contemporary social fragmentation and not the exploits of Christian missionaries. I cite the work of author and famed economist Tomas Sowell and give examples from around the world of how geography has greatly influenced social development.

In part II, I gave a brief case for the scientific basis for race and the fact of social races and racism. I explain what it all means by way of “Turnean” anthropology the critical role he and most anthropologists attribute to ritual in maintaining the status quo.

I wrote, “The efficacy of ritual in maintaining the status quo is a function of the emotional value of the belief that ritual imparts, by way of conditional association, to the person through ritual acts and symbols that touch in some sense to our most basic physiological and psychological needs.” [Notice how this point connects to part I’s basis for human action]

I made the point that the unique reality that ritual makes reflects underlying notions of purity and pollution and the great importance emotions plays in those notions as the social fabric of a society.

In part III, I applies all the principles of part I and II to India.

I began with, “A geography of India, given the principle of geographic positioning, must begin with a brief sketch of its boundaries with Central Asia (CA) with careful attention to routes and the disposition of its neighbors.”

I support the point regarding geographic positioning and routes with citation from East, W. Gordon, “The Geography Behind History: How Physical Environment Affects Historical Events 1965.

I appealed to common knowledge regarding the disposition of some of the people who travel along the Indian frontier, I wrote, “It is an indisputable fact that the vast sea of the Indian frontier was “sailed” by violent people so much so until India's neighbor the Chinese built a wall around themselves.”

I demonstrate the power of geography with links to mapsofindia.com….

Continuing I wrote, “With the above geographic maps as our background we can sketch a brief history of India’s, which best comports with geography, anthropology [which best explains] “India’s [modern] crisis of governability.”

I support the point with citations from the U.S. Library of Congress Handbook (LOC) India: A Country Study (1996) and Author John Keay’s book India A History (2000).
Also I wrote as a rebuttal, “Aryan Race Theory (the term you used first) is a theory whose value, like all theories, lies in its explanatory and predictive power.

I have demonstrated beyond reasonable doubt that ART corresponds to the geography and anthropology of India as ART, within the larger praxeological context I’ve outlined, best explains India’s history of social fragmentation, and as its source ART would predict, India’s modern crisis of governability.

I have provided a macro-history of India that would involve the invasion/encroachment/incursion of Aryans into India whose patterns of behavior (the sources of status and legitimacy underlying the caste system) [given the emotional import of ritual] would lead to the micro history of bleeding Bihar (political violence).” [notice how this connects to my point regarding symbolic anthropology and competition (over reservations) in political economy.]

I like to think my case is both coherent and corresponds to the facts of India’s social development.

[ November 15, 2001: Message edited by: ChristianSkeptic ]

ChristianSkeptic

LP: How am I supposed to have a "reductionist" approach?

CS: simply stated your approach reduces the issue to details regarding artifacts and leaves out the larger role of the human element.

LP: Actually, the question of horse bones is much more to the point than a lot of generalized methodology with no clear connection to the problem at hand.

CS: Please make your case in response to my post of November 15, 03:52 PM.

CS: Because it has a nice ring to it.

Seriously, because of principles of logic are trans cultural, universal and invariant.

Combine this point with the fact, to my knowledge, that archeological research in the area is still underway.

CS: But it is a very strong one since your point that “much of language tends to be independent of other cultural features” is a confusion of issues of facts with issues relevance because you fail to address my point that language is simply a reflection of patterns of thought which is a component of culture which brings us back again to my point that the larger and greatest issue we are addressing is one of culture.

Therefore, the sciences (psychology, political economy, anthropology) that deal directly with the human element, as a whole, represent the best approach (holism) to the issue at hand

ChristianSkeptic

LP: She's describing one common stereotype of the AIT…

CS: I am not sure I missed her intent. I apologize if I have.

LP:.. The Southern states' leaders made protecting slavery a very high priority…

CS: Confederate flags proponents today, I guess; say the flag preceded the confederacy. I cannot make their case. I am sure you could find a case somewhere on the Internet.

LP: And I am seriously baffled at how the Confederacy is supposed to be worth crying for.

CS: I have not made, or tried to make a case in defense of the [Old] Confederacy.

For the sake of argument, I tried to make an analogy, based on assumptions, of modern proponents of the confederate flag who separate the flag’s initial symbolic representation from racism.

[ November 15, 2001: Message edited by: ChristianSkeptic ]

ChristianSkeptic

hinduwoman: Positive experience --- I am not sure what is meant by that.

CS: The point is conditional association. If someone (a dalit or twice born) experiences enough positive experiences with someone else of another caste they begin to associate that person, and by extension caste with positive feelings.

We all need to be more positive. Granted being positive and kind does carry risks.


hinduwoman: For example, neither my father's nor mother's family feel animus against the caste system because in living memory at least they do not remember any brutal oppression.

CS: This is my point. If they had experienced brutal mistreatment, that experience could have left an indelible emotional scar as it has on so many others, which helps why, understandably, you qualified your point with the words, “in living memory.”

hinduwoman: Even many members of dalit castes who have now risen in society have no qualms oppressing other dalit castes.

CS: Maybe because not all dalits share the same interests and/or the upper dalits have simply adapted the cultural precedent set by the twice borns?

On the other hands, many reform movements had been started by Brahmins.

CS: Ideals matter. Thank God

lpetrich

Here's what I think is a reasonable picture; while the Aryan invaders had some simple castelike system, their settled successors turned it into a full-scale system, complete with a great multitude of castes.

Some detail:

Harappans: social organization uncertain

Aryans: origially Central Asian nomads who shared with other early Indo-European speakers the belief in three divisions of society: command (priests, rulers -> Brahmans), action (soldiers -> Kshatriyas), and nourishment (farmers, artisans, etc. -> Vaisyas). [Dumezil's trifunctional ideology]

When they first settle in northern India, they create another division, most likely from some of the overrun local population: (laborers -> Shudras).

Caste creation then takes a life of its own, with these castes acquiring numerous subcastes, and with those doing really dirty jobs becoming an even lower caste: Untouchables.

Over time, the population partially mixes, from promotions, demotions, and cross-caste marriages; southern Indians create parallel caste systems in imitation of the northern ones, but recruited from the local population.

Some genetic studies (San Francisco Chronicle, 26 May, 1999, for example), show interesting differences in the genetic material that is transmitted only by one sex.

Y chromosomes are male-only, and high-caste Indians have more European-like Y's than low-caste ones, though even the highest-caste ones have some Asian Y's mixed in.

Mitochondria are cell organelles with their own genes; they are inherited maternally. And the Indian population is all Asian-like, meaning that women have tended to marry upward and not downward, ultimately swamping any original European-like mitochondria.

Also, in the 20th cy., if not earlier, the presumption of hierarchy disappears in many cases, making many castes coequal groups in some places.

And where caste hierarchies have existed, one lower-caste response has been to try to make one's caste an upper one.

lpetrich

Now for some other issues:

"Arya" seems to have gone the route that "noble" hs gone in English, designating first an upper class, and later some state of being dignified.

And according to HW, "Incidentally, if Mohenjadaro civilization is Dravidian, then why are typical cities (as with public baths and citadels) absent from the South?"

That is certainly an interesting question; this could be because the southern areas do not have big rivers like the Indus, meaning that they could not support big cities with 1500-BCE technology.

And from CS,

But it is a very strong one since your point that “much of language tends to be independent of other cultural features” is a confusion of issues of facts with issues relevance because you fail to address my point that language is simply a reflection of patterns of thought which is a component of culture which brings us back again to my point that the larger and greatest issue we are addressing is one of culture.

Therefore, the sciences (psychology, political economy, anthropology) that deal directly with the human element, as a whole, represent the best approach (holism) to the issue at hand.

LP: That seems to me to be woozy hand-waving that does not really tell us anything. What well-defined results appear from this methodology?

phaedrus

LP

Some genetic studies (San Francisco Chronicle, 26 May, 1999, for example), show interesting differences in the genetic material that is transmitted only by one sex.

Y chromosomes are male-only, and high-caste Indians have more European-like Y's than low-caste ones, though even the highest-caste ones have some Asian Y's mixed in.

Mitochondria are cell organelles with their own genes; they are inherited maternally. And the Indian population is all Asian-like, meaning that women have tended to marry upward and not downward, ultimately swamping any original European-like mitochondria.

Didnt we go through this in other thread? Talk about skewed samples. In response to DMB quoting the latest version of the study, i had said Any reason why the sample of 265 studied belongs to only one state (Andhra Pradesh) in India? Why didnt the researchers take a much more broad based sample, given the hypothesis that the original inhabitants were pushed towards the southern part of the peninsula (of which andhra pradesh is a part). Didnt such a study warrant the sample being much more representative of India, ie take the samples from all parts of the country???? Since Tamilnadu in India is considered to be more “Dravidian”, shouldn’t the study concentrated on that part too?? Too many questions

Since the findings of the study have been made public recently, it would be interesting to see whether any “specialists” in the field have any comments to make on the study.

lpetrich

LP:
Some genetic studies (San Francisco Chronicle, 26 May, 1999, for example), show interesting differences in the genetic material that is transmitted only by one sex. [...]

Phaedrus:
Didnt we go through this in other thread? Talk about skewed samples. In response to DMB quoting the latest version of the study, i had said [i]Any reason why the sample of 265 studied belongs to only one state (Andhra Pradesh) in India? [...]

LP:
Actually, sampling in only one place is a good way to control for regional variations, since choosing a single place guarantees their absence.

The authors of this study and their colleagues have been broadening their sampling; please be patient.

Also, is it at all likely that there is some island of European-derived genes in Andhra Pradesh?

ChristianSkeptic

LP: That seems to me to be woozy hand-waving...

CS: but woozy hand waving is so much fun

LP: ...that does not really tell us anything.

CS: I'm just trying to engage you on the strengths and weaknesses of our respective approaches.

LP: What well-defined results appear from this methodology?

CS: The value of ART is demonstrated by way of its explanatory and predictive power as I like to think I have established.

Let me take this moment to take off my debaters cap and write my personal feelings about ART.

Personally, I think the theory is weak on the concept of race as the definition I used came from a journal article that debunks the concept.

So what we are really dealing with here are migrations of ethnics whose behavior is all too human. In ancient times, and it's still true today, everyone, at one time or another were violent, blood thirsty savages.

As for the concept of social races, it's really a religious practice that elevates an ideal physical appeance to the status of an object of worship.

In this since, there are no atheists because all humans live by symbols and rituals.

phaedrus

LP

Actually, sampling in only one place is a good way to control for regional variations, since choosing a single place guarantees their absence.

Oh really , you talk about an entire nation and take samples from only one state, that too in the southern part of the country. What do you mean by regional variation ? You are talking about a theory about an entire nation and not a single state.

The authors of this study and their colleagues have been broadening their sampling; please be patient.

Really, could you point me out to articles which say so coz i couldnt...

Also, is it at all likely that there is some island of European-derived genes in Andhra Pradesh?

Why dont you find out and tell moi

If the dravidians were supposed to have been driven towards the southern part of the country, I wonder why the study wants a sample in the same region instead of the northern part where the Aryans are likely to be found.

and in response to HW you said

That is certainly an interesting question; this could be because the southern areas do not have big rivers like the Indus, meaning that they could not support big cities with 1500-BCE technology.

For starters there is Godavari ….