Understanding Indian History with Advocate J. Sai Deepak

[Raven_Rayes]

another self aggrandizing asshole who wrote such books in the past - Arun Shourie, Sita Ram Goel.

pure unadulterated trash whatever they wrote. not fit to even read.

[telugu_fan]

56 minutes ago, Raven_Rayes said:

I didn't ask you to take her seriuosly. I just said that this guy has even less credibility compared to her. she's a history professor of a leading university, no?

who's this guy? some bored chartered accountant, or lawyer with too much time in his hands.

She is a tenured professor for Rutgers University.

If she is a history professor then is she an authority on history all over the world ? Did she come to India and do any factual research? or are you giving her a pass because she is white skinned or is it because she is blindly bashing Hindus and gaslighting or is it all the three.

If historians had done proper research then people like him would not publish books or receive patronage.

[telugu_fan]

1 hour ago, Raven_Rayes said:

you can say whatever you want. but 'well spoken' and 'well researched' are just empty claims that mean nothing. Knowledge is gained by sharing methods and data, not by making bombastic claims of being sole arbiter of truth. whether its Audrey or anyone else will be consigned to dustbin if they keep centering the discussion around themselves.

nice joke. was ASI claim that Ram Mandir lay below the destroyed mosque even published in a reputed magazine? its just bs. historians don't make claims like that. that's the nature of politicians

IIT doesn't impress me. sorrrry. unless the guy came up with a fusion engine or something. Its clear he sucked at science, and took up the easy way to make money out of gullible people by pushing politcally motivated crap that sells.

Then do enlighten us what are the methods and data that you are looking for, for he also has references in his book, not just simply writing what ever comes into his mind.

ASI job is to not publish reports that can be critiqued by all and sundry, they have given their detailed reports to the court about the same. And your favorite historians who were busy writing opeds and journals in the papers and and magazines were doing this in the court under oath.

ASI worked after the govt and court orders to excavate the site, know the situations and the order that made them excavate and give their report.

https://www.firstpost.com/india/babri-demolition-how-hc-verdict-discredited-eminent-historians-547549.html

this is in 2012, when allahabad court made these observations. No sanghi govt in state or Center. People fought a long time in court and brought all their evidences and your so called self anointed world renowned  historians slunk away.

Because he is doing some law work he must have sucked at science, you sure a lot of assumptions about people that you haven't read, seen, talked to.

[telugu_fan]

1 hour ago, Raven_Rayes said:

a lot of IIT types have no respect for humanities, and refuse to apply the same principles that they applied in Science in the study of Humanities. They treat history like its some story the grandmom reads to you at bedtime. @telugu_fan

 

Do the current generation of humanities follow any set of principles, or do they just feel and tell what ever comes into their fertile brains.

[bhaigan]

14 hours ago, ZoomNaidu said:

Central Minister multiple times and VP ni chesaaru - evaru evarini vaadukunnaru ? 
 

Ram Madhav - he went to RSS as they asked him to come back, he only revealed himself. 
 

And vaadukotam gurinchi mee Slaverism batch ye cheppaali ani Peddhayana PVnR hurted !!

po ra rey lafoot slaverism gurinchi evadu ethadu ikkada

peddayana hurted anta nuvvu edo thongi chsuinatlu

[Raven_Rayes]

4 hours ago, telugu_fan said:

She is a tenured professor for Rutgers University.

If she is a history professor then is she an authority on history all over the world ? Did she come to India and do any factual research? or are you giving her a pass because she is white skinned or is it because she is blindly bashing Hindus and gaslighting or is it all the three.

If historians had done proper research then people like him would not publish books or receive patronage.

did you understand what I said about Audrey, or are you trolling me?

regardless of what Audrey did, Sai Deepak is not worth wasting time on. If he is really serious about history, he should publish academically and prove his credientials there, instead of acting like a propagandist.

[Raven_Rayes]

4 hours ago, telugu_fan said:

Then do enlighten us what are the methods and data that you are looking for, for he also has references in his book, not just simply writing what ever comes into his mind.

How do you except me to enlighten you on the scientific method in the field of history? you should ask a historian. Not Audrey type historian, but a serious historian.

anyone can write a book with a lot of references. it doesn't matter. Ultimately the debate should be had among the experts, with the information flowing to the public over many years later when a particular thesis is proven. No respect for any historians who use the public arena to make grand pronouncements across a variety of areas they don't even have an expertise on

4 hours ago, telugu_fan said:

ASI job is to not publish reports that can be critiqued by all and sundry, they have given their detailed reports to the court about the same. And your favorite historians who were busy writing opeds and journals in the papers and and magazines were doing this in the court under oath.

ASI worked after the govt and court orders to excavate the site, know the situations and the order that made them excavate and give their report.

https://www.firstpost.com/india/babri-demolition-how-hc-verdict-discredited-eminent-historians-547549.html

so basically ASI did a hatchet job at the behest of the govt in power. their 'reports' are irrelevant if they are not peer reviewed. I know its not the ASI's job to publish reports, then its also not their job to make pronouncements on historical issues too.

4 hours ago, telugu_fan said:

this is in 2012, when allahabad court made these observations. No sanghi govt in state or Center. People fought a long time in court and brought all their evidences and your so called self anointed world renowned  historians slunk away.

because historians don't indulge in this kind of 3rd rate battles on the street, duh! only ideologically mad dogs indulge in this. Pretty sure historians don't even care if a Ram Temple existed in that place. Its likely not an interesting question for them to investigate. Its a purely political fight. So don't get historians mixed up with this sh1t.

4 hours ago, telugu_fan said:

Because he is doing some law work he must have sucked at science, you sure a lot of assumptions about people that you haven't read, seen, talked to.

yeah lots of assumptions. but mostly fair ones.

[Raven_Rayes]

4 hours ago, telugu_fan said:

Do the current generation of humanities follow any set of principles, or do they just feel and tell what ever comes into their fertile brains.

are you saying that there's another generation of humanities studies people that you agree with?

there are no sets of principles, but the scientific method is common across all fields. You propose a hypothesis, and set out to prove or disprove it, and give your conclusions based on your research. The books these people write is only an overdrawn summary of all their research in a given area of interest, that can be consumed by lay public. But most of the actual work is done with the discourse while writing papers.

humanities is no different.  humanities papers may contain a lot of crap, bad methodology, bad data, very poor citation index etc, but still better than books written by literal nobodies like Deepak.

sai deepak type of grifters, are just looking to make quick money by peddling bs that will never pass the smell test in academia.

 

[galiraju]

18 minutes ago, Raven_Rayes said:

did you understand what I said about Audrey, or are you trolling me?

regardless of what Audrey did, Sai Deepak is not worth wasting time on. If he is really serious about history, he should publish academically and prove his credientials there, instead of acting like a propagandist.

Why only journals? You can always present a review monograph too. If there is a factual error, one can always point it out, right? 

[galiraju]

6 minutes ago, Raven_Rayes said:

are you saying that there's another generation of humanities studies people that you agree with?

there are no sets of principles, but the scientific method is common across all fields. You propose a hypothesis, and set out to prove or disprove it, and give your conclusions based on your research. The books these people write is only an overdrawn summary of all their research in a given area of interest, that can be consumed by lay public. But most of the actual work is done with the discourse while writing papers.

humanities is no different.  humanities papers may contain a lot of crap, bad methodology, bad data, very poor citation index etc, but still better than books written by literal nobodies like Deepak.

sai deepak type of grifters, are just looking to make quick money by peddling bs that will never pass the smell test in academia.

 

LOL. Probably, it will. You can't say that for sure, yeah?

 

The books these people write is only an overdrawn summary of all their research in a given area of interest, that can be consumed by lay public. But most of the actual work is done with the discourse while writing papers.

A monograph!

[Raven_Rayes]

1 hour ago, galiraju said:

LOL. Probably, it will. You can't say that for sure, yeah?

I can say that for sure even without reading his book.

 

1 hour ago, galiraju said:

Why only journals? You can always present a review monograph too. If there is a factual error, one can always point it out, right? 

so did he present a review of his research? are you actually serious that this clown who talks about 'rising Jihad' is a serious historian? a serious scientist will examine conditions under which this 'jihad' is rising and present that too.. Has he documented rise of Hindu nationalism in parallel to wahabbi jihadism in India?

[Raven_Rayes]

1 hour ago, galiraju said:

If there is a factual error, one can always point it out, right? 

has he presented a review? do you expect serious historians go through this propagandist drivel over how many pages to to point out the crap her wrote there?

Its like expecting serious scientists to acknowledge Raman's petrol through herbs, fantasy that rocked the nation back in 80s/90s. Its simply not worth their time to respond to people like sai deepak

 

[ZoomNaidu]

7 hours ago, bhaigan said:

po ra rey lafoot slaverism gurinchi evadu ethadu ikkada

peddayana hurted anta nuvvu edo thongi chsuinatlu

Mari Venkaiah Naidu ni thokkesinatlu née chevilo cheppinaada ra fuka 😂😂 

[telugu_fan]

On 1/24/2023 at 1:55 AM, Raven_Rayes said:

did you understand what I said about Audrey, or are you trolling me?

regardless of what Audrey did, Sai Deepak is not worth wasting time on. If he is really serious about history, he should publish academically and prove his credientials there, instead of acting like a propagandist.

I am telling that Audrey is considered a serious historian even though she does is hatchet jobs with very little research and she is not countered by any historian from JNU either, because it serves their cause.

Here Audrey's title is giving her immunity even though she fails the basic test of a history researcher.

Sai deepak is not a certified academician or a teacher where they will just publish his book academically and critique it in NCERT halls. he is publishing his book as any other normal person does. The so called researchers will not want to engage him because he will prove them wrong on many issues. The ball is in their court not his in terms of disproving him.

They don't want to critique his book, only quote each others book and pass the time away in their academic circles.

the

[telugu_fan]

On 1/24/2023 at 2:05 AM, Raven_Rayes said:

How do you except me to enlighten you on the scientific method in the field of history? you should ask a historian. Not Audrey type historian, but a serious historian.

anyone can write a book with a lot of references. it doesn't matter. Ultimately the debate should be had among the experts, with the information flowing to the public over many years later when a particular thesis is proven. No respect for any historians who use the public arena to make grand pronouncements across a variety of areas they don't even have an expertise on

There is a professor/historian/researcher Meenakshi Jain who also works in Delhi University.

She points out that general history professors always want a one sided version of history and anyone who is challenging that generally never graduates or gets his PHD. So people who are career oriented who need to get a job don't do any new research and there is a lot of re-quoting existing books, SO nothing new comes out starting with max mueller thesis where it was felt that earth started at around 5000 BC and so aryans came to India at 1500 BC and everything flows from there.

She makes it a point that nobody is going to debate or discuss with you as a history professor or research student in the field outside of what they believe is the truth and unless you are very very strong willed you will not graduate. Quite illuminating. So ultimately what you have will be an echo chamber pushing the same ideas.

J Sai Deepak and many more like him are challenging the narrative turning over records of mughals themselves as most of the established researchers/historians don't study the original writings, everybody is quoting from a book which quotes some book which quotes another which had the english compilation of the supposedly original work (and we all know things get lost or changed in translation).