On Friday, September 10, 2021 at 5:29:15 AM UTC-4, FBInCIAnNSATerroristSlayer wrote:
> On 9/10/2021 1:12 AM, Manuel wrote:
> > In article <DJB_I.33706$2B4....@fx04.iad>
> > FBInCIAnNSATerroristSlayer <FBInCIAnNSATe...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >
> > Flush.
> >
> WHY HAVE INDIAN MATHEMATICAL WORKS NOT GIVEN RECOGNITION by Ian G Pearce
>
> Answer:
> TO DENIGRATE everything about Non-Whites (in this case Indians) and
> their accomplishments and inventions, INJECT SELF LOATHING and
> SLAVISHNESS in order to SUBJUGATE and STEAL INDIAN (Non-Whites) WEALTH.
>
> Any which way you look at it, WHITES are a PURE EVIL THIEVING RACE whose
> DNA should be FORCIBLY HUMANIZED, REFORMED and CIVILIZED, to make human
> species RESPECTABLE in the Universe.
>
> ===========================================================================
>
> Excerpt:
>
> Indian decimal place value system is undoubtedly the "single greatest
> Indian contribution to the development of mathematics, and its wider
> applications in science, economics (and so on)."
>
>
>
> https://mathshistory.st-andrews.ac.uk/Projects/Pearce/chapter-20/
>
> Indian Mathematics - Redressing the balance
>
> Ian G Pearce
>
> Conclusions
>
>
> I wish to conclude initially by simply saying that the work of Indian
> mathematicians has been severely neglected by western historians,
> although the situation is improving somewhat. What I primarily wished to
> tackle was to answer two questions, firstly, why have Indian works been
> neglected, that is, what appears to have been the motivations and aims
> of scholars who have contributed to the Eurocentric view of mathematical
> history. This leads to the secondary question, why should this neglect
> be considered a great injustice.
>
> I have attempted to answer this by providing a detailed investigation
> (and analysis) of many of the key contributions of the Indian
> subcontinent, and where possible, demonstrate how they pre-date European
> works (whether ancient Greek or later renaissance). I have further
> developed this 'answer' by providing significant evidence that a number
> of Indian works conversely influenced later European works, by way of
> Arabic transmissions. I have also included a discussion of the Indian
> decimal place value system which is undoubtedly the single greatest
> Indian contribution to the development of mathematics, and its wider
> applications in science, economics (and so on).
>
> Discussing my first 'question' is less easy, as within the history of
> mathematics we find a variety of 'stances'. If the most extreme
> Eurocentric model is 'followed' then all mathematics is considered
> European, and even less extreme stances do not give full credit to
> non-European contributions.
>
> Indeed even in the very latest mathematics histories Indian 'sections'
> are still generally fairly brief. Why this attitude exists seems to be a
> cultural issue as much as anything. I feel it important not to be
> controversial or sweeping, but it is likely European scholars are
> resistant due to the way in which the inclusion of non-European,
> including Indian, contributions shakes up views that have been held for
> hundreds of years, and challenges the very foundations of the
> Eurocentric ideology. Perhaps what I am trying to say is that prior to
> discoveries made in technically fairly recent times, and in some cases
> actually recent times (say in the case of Kerala mathematics) it was
> generally believed that all science had been developed in Europe. It is
> almost more in the realms of psychology and culture that we argue about
> the effect the discoveries of non-European science may have had on the
> 'psyche' of European scholars.
>
> However I believe this concept of 'late discoveries' is a relatively
> weak excuse, as there is substantial evidence that many European
> scholars were aware of some Indian works that had been translated into
> Latin. All that aside, there was significant resistance to scientific
> learning in its totality in Europe until at least the 14th/15th c and as
> a result, even though Spain is in Europe, there was little progression
> of Arabic mathematics throughout the rest of Europe during the Arab period.
>
> However, following this period it seems likely Latin translations of
> Indian and Arabic works will have had an influence. It is possible that
> the scholars using them did not know the origin of these works. There
> has also been occasional evidence of European scholars taking results
> from Indian or Arabic works and presenting them as their own. Actions of
> this nature highlight the unscrupulous character of some European scholars.
>
> Along with cultural reasons there are no doubt religious reasons for the
> neglect of Indian mathematics, indeed it was the power of the Christian
> church that contributed to the stagnation of learning, described as the
> dark ages, in Europe.
>
> Above all, and regardless of the arguments, the simple fact is that many
> of the key results of mathematics, some of which are at the very 'core'
> of modern day mathematics, are of Indian origin. The results were almost
> all independently 'rediscovered' by European scholars during and after
> the 'renaissance' and while remarkable, history is something that should
> be complete and to neglect facts is both ignorant and arrogant. Indeed
> the neglect of Indian mathematical developments by many European
> scholars highlights what I can best describe as an idea of European
> "self importance".
>
> In many ways the results of the Indians were even more remarkable
> because they occurred so much earlier, that is, advanced mathematical
> ideas were developed by peoples considered less culturally and
> academically advanced than (late medieval) Europeans. Although this
> comment is controversial it may have been the motivation of several
> authors for neglect of Indian works, however, if this is the case, then
> opinions based on those attitudes should be ignored. Indian culture was
> of the highest standard, and this is reflected in the works that were
> produced.
>
> Indian mathematicians made great strides in developing arithmetic (they
> can generally be credited with perfecting use of the operators), algebra
> (before Arab scholars), geometry (independent of the Greeks), and
> infinite series expansions and calculus (attributed to 17th/18th century
> European scholars). Also Indian works, through a variety of
> translations, have had significant influence throughout the world, from
> China, throughout the Arab Empire, and ultimately Europe.
>
> To summarise, the main reasons for the neglect of Indian mathematics
> seem to be religious, cultural and psychological. Primarily it is
> because of an ideological choice. R Rashed mentions a concept of
> modernism vs. tradition. Furthermore Indian mathematics is criticised
> because it lacks rigour and is only interested in practical aims (which
> we know to be incorrect). Ultimately it is fundamentally important for
> historians to be neutral, (that includes Indian historians who may go
> too far the 'other way') and this has not always been the case, and
> indeed seems to still persist in some quarters.
> In terms of consequences of the Eurocentric stance, it has undoubtedly
> resulted in a cultural divide and 'angered' non-Europeans scholars.
> There is an unhealthy air of European superiority, which is potentially
> quite politically dangerous, and scientifically unproductive. In order
> to maximise our knowledge of mathematics we must recognise many more
> nations as being able to provide valuable input, this statement is also
> relevant to past works. Eurocentrism has led to an historical
> 'imbalance', which basically means scholars are not presenting an
> accurate version of the history of the subject, which I view as
> unacceptable. Furthermore, it is vital to point out that European
> colonisation of India most certainly had an extremely negative effect on
> the progress of indigenous Indian science
>
> At the very least it must be hoped that the history of Indian
> mathematics will, in time become as highly regarded, as I believe it
> should. As D Almeida, J John and A Zadorozhnyy comment:
> ...Awareness is not widespread. [DA/JJ/AZ1, P 78]
>
> R Rashed meanwhile explains the current problem:
> ...The same representation is found time and again: classical science,
> both in modernity and historicity appears in the final count as work of
> European humanity alone...
>
> He continues:
>
> ...It is true that the existence of some scientific activity in other
> cultures is occasionally acknowledged. Nevertheless, it remains outside
> history or is only integrated in so far as it contributed to science,
> which is essentially European. [RR, P 333]
>
> In short, the doctrine of the western essence of classical science does
> not take objective history into account.
> Finally, beyond simply alerting people to the remarkable developments of
> Indian mathematicians between around 3000 BC and 1600 AD, and
> challenging the Eurocentric ideology of the history of the subject, it
> is thought further analysis and research could also have important
> consequences for future developments of the subject.
>
> It is thought analysis of the difference in the epistemologies of 17th
> century European and 15th century Keralese calculus could help to
> provide an answer to the controversial issue of whether mathematics
> should concern itself with proof or calculation. Furthermore, in terms
> of the way mathematics is currently 'taught' D Almeida, J John and A
> Zadorozhnyy elucidate:
> ...The floating point numbers were used by Kerala mathematicians and,
> using this system of numbers, they were able to investigate and
> rationalise about the convergence of series. So we (DA/JJ/AZ) believe
> that a study of Keralese calculus will provide insights into
> computer-assisted teaching strategies. [DA/JJ/AZ, P 96]
> (N.B. computers use a floating-point number system.)
>
> Clearly there is massive scope for further study in the area of the
> history of Indian and other non-European mathematics, and it is still a
> topic on which relatively few works have been written, although slowly
> significantly more attention is being paid to the contributions of
> non-European countries.
> In specific reference to my own project, I would have liked to have been
> able to go into more depth in my discussion of Indian algebra, and given
> many more worked examples, as I consider Indian algebra to be both
> remarkable and severely neglected. Furthermore there is scope for
> significant and important study of the transmission of Indian
> mathematics across the world, especially into Europe, via Arabic and
> later Keralese routes. It is clear that there are many more discoveries
> to be made and much more that can be written, as C Srinivasiengar observes:
> ...The last word on the history of ancient civilisation will never be
> said. [CS, P 1]
>
> As a final note, many question the worth of historical study, beyond
> personal interest, but I hope I have shown in the course of my work some
> of the value and importance of historical study. I will conclude with a
> quote from the scholar G Miller, who commented:
> ...The history of mathematics is the only one of the sciences to possess
> a considerable body of perfect and inspiring results which were proved
> 2000 years ago by the same thought processes as are used today. This
> history is therefore useful for directing attention to the permanent
> value of scientific achievements and the great intellectual heritage,
> which these achievements present, to the world. [AA'D, P 11]