Talk:Indology
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Hinduism, an attempt to promote better coordination, content distribution, and cross-referencing between pages dealing with Hinduism. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page.
|
| Start | This article has been rated as start-Class on the quality scale. |
| High | This article has been rated as high-importance for this Project's importance scale. |
 |
This article is within the scope of WikiProject India, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of India-related topics. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page. |
| ??? | This article has not yet received a rating on the quality scale. |
|
More information about this article...
|
|
[edit] Dear Indian friends
People don't like crude propaganda. Please take it back. You are discrediting your own ideology. The 'Bias' section reads like a brainwashing session at some Hindutva rally. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 212.199.22.124 (talk • contribs) 04:27, 24 Jun 2006 (UTC)
-
- All in the modern world know that the Indian culture is far superior than the rest of the world. Thats the reason that even in this centuary Indians holds family and social values high. And some wise westerners are learning more about it and practicing. But the fools still remains in the dark. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 147.252.238.119 (talk) 16:59, 4 January 2007 (UTC).
Are you trying to hint something? Anonymous, realize that Indology is somewhat personal to Indians and Hindu Scholars like Talageri are inherently superior to Witzel because they can truly analyze the Vedas and deduce the messages. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Bakasuprman (talk • contribs) 03:17, 27 Jul 2006 (UTC)
- No, I am not trying to hint, I am saying it directly - the 'criticism' section of the article (that is sadly the largest section) as it stands now (August 4 2006) is mostly shameless propaganda and personal point of view that has no place in Wikipedia. I understand that more and more millions of Hindutva followers are getting Internet connection these days so any attempt to stop them is futile (see, I don't even try to edit the article?). So you can pile this garbage here as you please. The problem is that people that were not conditioned by propaganda will turn away in disgust and will not accept your point of view, so whom exactly are you trying to convince? You have a cause to fight for, good. But what will be the net result of your crude tactics? Zero. No outsiders convinced. 212.199.22.37 19:54, 4 August 2006 (UTC)
- Who exactly cares what outsiders think? The "Indologists" write the textbooks, which (I have used them in school) portray the three C's (by sound) (C)Karma, Cows, and Caste. They talk about Islamic philosophy and Xtian philosophy but nothing about Hindu philosophy. They also nevermention Vedas, Upanishads, Gita or anything that is a hallmark to Hindu culture. Instead they treat it like some bizarre tribal society, instead of teaching that its the world's oldest religion, and talking about the beliefs.Bakaman%% 15:58, 5 August 2006 (UTC)
- --- said the internet propagandists. Care to back this up by any sort of evidence, or indeed evidence that "the Indologists" have a single simplistic opinion (as opposed to constituting a wide field of scholarly debate)? Care to back up the ludicrous claim that "Indologists never mention the Vedas, Upanishads"? (while in reality, there probably wouldn't exist printed editions of these works without academia)? dab (𒁳) 09:49, 22 March 2007 (UTC)
- Who exactly cares what outsiders think? The "Indologists" write the textbooks, which (I have used them in school) portray the three C's (by sound) (C)Karma, Cows, and Caste. They talk about Islamic philosophy and Xtian philosophy but nothing about Hindu philosophy. They also nevermention Vedas, Upanishads, Gita or anything that is a hallmark to Hindu culture. Instead they treat it like some bizarre tribal society, instead of teaching that its the world's oldest religion, and talking about the beliefs.Bakaman%% 15:58, 5 August 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Pseudoscience?
Why is this article in the pseudoscience category? brain 23:33, 11 January 2007 (UTC)
Removed. deeptrivia (talk) 23:49, 11 January 2007 (UTC)
it's just trolling. removed again. dab (𒁳) 09:45, 22 March 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Merge content from Indologist
Indologist is a very short article containing little information. I see no reason why it should be separate from this article. Stebbins 05:28, 13 March 2007 (UTC)
