copernicus

LP, I like the metaphor of eel-wriggling (Amara-vikheppika) or "sophistry" in Western terms. It fits Phaedrus perfectly. We are all familiar with children who learn at an early age that they can drive adults crazy by constantly following every explanation with the question "Why?", depending on the adult's penchant for indulging children's questions to keep the game going. Phaedrus's style of argumentation is not much different. He never actually argues against any viewpoints or positions, since that would open him up to the same technique. Any statement can be questioned, but real debates are between opposing positions. Phaedrus refuses to acknowledge any position at all in this discussion, although anyone can tell his real viewpoints by the statements that he questions. Eel-wriggling--a very apt metaphor for his concept of how to conduct a formal debate.

lpetrich

LP:

That's postmodernist gos'akrit (listed at online Sanskrit dictionary http://www.uni-koeln.de/phil-fak/ind...ap_search.html as gozakRt [Harvard-Kyoto transliteration]). Why is that supposed to be impossible? It's done all the time by historians of ideas.

Ph:
He he, for kupastha Mandukas’ that is what it will look like ...

LP: kupastha Mandukas' ??? Also, I used the word I used because I was not sure what the usual Sanskrit word for "bull" was -- and because I wanted a "listed" word. However, I could have called that viewpoint as'vas'skrit [azvazakRt]

I had given it that label because it reminds me of the postmodernists' seeming view that there is no such thng as objective truth. However, "pomo" philosophy is often murky and obscure, and Alan Sokal had successfully tricked some of its advocates with his _Social Text_ hoax, which mimicked their style remarkably closely.

Interpreting others' conceptual worlds is done all the time by those who study the history of ideas; kvetching about how successful such efforts are is beside the point. I am personally acquainted by someone who has made a career out of that, a certain Vassiliki Betty Smocovitis of the University of Florida who studies the history of science.

[me on the Latin-Romance literary gap...]

Phaedrus:
Sigh, talk about solipsism, do you even remember or understand, why this particular point came up??? And how can a human being with even a modicum of logical sense use the phrase "thats exactly what has happened" while trying to substantiate his statement with an example which occurred at a geographical distance, as if the example has been able to prove his stance incontrovertibly?? Its speculative ground

LP:
More eel-wriggling and dragging in of irrelevancies. Multiple examples of some social phenomenon will likely occur at different geographical locations. And so far, we have three literacy gaps:

Greece: Mycenaean to Classical
Roman Empire: Roman-Republic Latin to medieval Romance
India: early Prakrits

Phaedrus:
.... It means there is no archeological evidence and once found (if at all found) will explain the gap perceived currently.

LP:
Arguments from silence must be used carefully. Is the silence to be expected from some other cause, such as writing on materials that easily decompose? But the lack of writing on durable materials from 1500 BCE to 500 BCE must be significant. Also, there is no sign of awareness of writing in the Vedas; I don't recall seeing any hymns celebrating it as one of the Gods' great gifts. The Vedas were transmitted orally before they were written down, which only strengthens the case for the lack of writing in that period.

Phaedrus:
... I said writing would not spread especially among an established civilization without a central decree. ...

LP:
Writing has not needed the decree of a central authority to spread, at least in most cases.

HindooHeathen

LP :

As for as your remarks about the absence of refernces to writing in Vedas again you are wrong.
Refrences to writing is in abundance in Vedas:

Atharva Veda 19:72:1 "after having been recited, the Veda is put back in a chest"

Rg Veda 10:62:7 talks about a cow with mark of eight on its ear. (See: A.A. MacDonnell and A.B. Keith: Vedic Index Vol I)

Rig Veda (1-164-39) " In the letters of the verses of the Veda..."

Aitareya Aranyaka 5:3:3 refers to the distinction between vowels and consonants The Chandogya Upanishad (2:10:1-4) mentions syllable counts.

The Yujurvedic Taittiriya Samhita and also the Atharvaveda utilize the word "likha (to write)"

Though the last examples are later Vedic texts compared to Rig Veda they are surely not as later as,say, 500 BCE.


How did the Harappan deity arrive with the Celtic people? I still think OIT can explain it. I know I have not made adequately clear my position with respect to this but a lengthy post shall follow soon. I am also aware I have not yet furnished you the astronmony evidence.

[ September 03, 2001: Message edited by: HindooHeathen ]

lpetrich

HH:
As for as your remarks about the absence of refernces to writing in Vedas again you are wrong. Refrences to writing is in abundance in Vedas:

Atharva Veda 19:72:1 "after having been recited, the Veda is put back in a chest"

LP:
I will concede that that looks like a reference to writing.

HH:
Rg Veda 10:62:7 talks about a cow with mark of eight on its ear. (See: A.A. MacDonnell and A.B. Keith: Vedic Index Vol I)

LP:
Seems rather ambiguous

HH:
Rig Veda (1-164-39) " In the letters of the verses of the Veda..."

LP:
The Griffith translation states: "Upon what syllable of holy praise-song..." And syllables are a feature of SPOKEN language.

HH:
Aitareya Aranyaka 5:3:3 refers to the distinction between vowels and consonants The Chandogya Upanishad (2:10:1-4) mentions syllable counts.

LP:
Vowels, consonants, and syllables are all features of spoken language.

HH:
The Yujurvedic Taittiriya Samhita and also the Atharvaveda utilize the word "likha (to write)"

LP:
I will concede that references to writing start appearing in the later Vedas -- if that translation is correct. But where are the hymns to writing as a gift of the Gods? There are hymns in honor of horses and fire, but writing?

HH:
Though the last examples are later Vedic texts compared to Rig Veda they are surely not as later as,say, 500 BCE.

LP:
Maybe.

HH:
How did the Harappan deity arrive with the Celtic people? ...

LP:
That's an interesting curiosity, but I suspect that it is a simple matter of convergence -- a man wearing a deer's antlers.

phaedrus

This corner of the world things dont seem to change at all

LP

kupastha Mandukas' ??? Also, I used the word I used because I was not sure what the usual Sanskrit word for "bull" was -- and because I wanted a "listed" word. However, I could have called that viewpoint as'vas'skrit [azvazakRt]

Frog-in-the-well my friend Your efforts to find the right words in sanskrit for expressing your feelings point to the case of an interpretation of an interpretation of an interpretation and so on an so forth.

I had given it that label because it reminds me of the postmodernists' seeming view that there is no such thng as objective truth. However, "pomo" philosophy is often murky and obscure, and Alan Sokal had successfully tricked some of its advocates with his _Social Text_ hoax, which mimicked their style remarkably closely.

Sokal? Is that were your knowledge of pomo starts and ends? As i mentioned you feel so strongly about pomo and want to aruge your case, do land up at the philosophy forum and start a topic. that will be fun....

Interpreting others' conceptual worlds is done all the time by those who study the history of ideas; kvetching about how successful such efforts are is beside the point. I am personally acquainted by someone who has made a career out of that, a certain Vassiliki Betty Smocovitis of the University of Florida who studies the history of science.

Err...something becomes right because that is what people have been doing all the time? If that was the case the book of bull shit with all those messiahs would have been the sources of our knowledge to date. And how do you judge a method? by its success or its failure or by how many people subscribe to it? If you are referring to the later, religion wins hands down.

And how does you being an acquaintance of Mr.X be of any use to my interpretation of you or your arguements?

More eel-wriggling and dragging in of irrelevancies. Multiple examples of some social phenomenon will likely occur at different geographical locations. And so far, we have three literacy gaps:

Greece: Mycenaean to Classical
Roman Empire: Roman-Republic Latin to medieval Romance
India: early Prakrits

*Sigh* you amaze. Read what i said .... And how can a human being with even a modicum of logical sense use the phrase "thats exactly what has happened" while trying to substantiate his statement with an example which occurred at a geographical distance, as if the example has been able to prove his stance incontrovertibly?? Its speculative ground

What has happened in one part of the world does not have to happen the same way in someother part of the world.

Arguments from silence must be used carefully. Is the silence to be expected from some other cause, such as writing on materials that easily decompose? But the lack of writing on durable materials from 1500 BCE to 500 BCE must be significant. Also, there is no sign of awareness of writing in the Vedas; I don't recall seeing any hymns celebrating it as one of the Gods' great gifts. The Vedas were transmitted orally before they were written down, which only strengthens the case for the lack of writing in that period.

Exactly, the gap should not be used for making a case for either camp. As i said It means there is no archeological evidence and once found (if at all found) will explain the gap perceived currently

And i have read your response to HH and realised that you conceded some ground on the issue.

Writing has not needed the decree of a central authority to spread, at least in most cases.

Generalizations dont help....