Yes, the science developed in Europe during the 17th century was obviously superior to anything earlier. It is a shame that Indians, who do have much to be proud of, deflect attention from their achievements through exaggeration. While others ridicule the absurd claims of OP, I think it’s worthwhile to give credit to ancient Indians.
Bhaskara (whose many mathematical achievements included elementary calculus) and Panini have already been mentioned. There were other important ancient Indian geniuses, e.g. Aryabhata who inspired much of Al-Khowarizmi’s work.
The transition between India’s Harrapan and Vedic cultures is a mystery. The Harappans were, in many ways, the most advanced culture of their time and needed mathematics for their architecture and accounting. I’ve wondered if the Vedic people somehow adopted the mathematical knowledge of the Harappans.
This sensible and moderate view is the best. A hell of a lot of Americans (me, for instance) are direly ignorant about Indian history. I only barely know the grossest outline of it, and that mostly from a military-history stance.
Indian history and culture are remarkable, and need to be understood and valued more highly in the west than they are now. They don’t need to be artificially inflated; the truth is wonderful enough.
There’s something about the phrase “Western Science” that just rubs me wrong.
There’s no “Western” science nowadays - science is the heritage of all humankind.
Even if the enitire Western world disappears tomorrow, the rest of the humanity would still practice science with contemporary paradigm - scientific rigor, necessity of data verification, etc.
It’s true that most of it originated in Europe - and there were (and are) practices of nature observing from different cultural backgrounds; but calling them strictly “science” in a contemporary sense is a bit of a stretch, IMHO.
On the other hand, the history of science should certainly give more credit to the Arabian, Indian, Chinese, Mesoamerican etc. scientists of the yesteryear.
I would argue that there is no more dominant “Western” civilization nowadays as it has morphed into “Modern” civilization with a number of civilizations underpinning and adding to it: Western, Chinese, Indian, Islamic, etc…
On the other hand, it’s completely a-historical to argue that the much of the structure of our modern world wasn’t created by “Western” Europeans (and their off-shoot colonies, including the US, Australia, Canada, etc) in the period from 1400-1945.
It’s not Indians per se who spin this BS, it’s a particular subculture of right-wing Hindu nationalists. I doubt the average Indian has much of an opinion on the ‘Vedic mathematics’ scam or on Aryabhata or Panini.
OTOH, there are several Indian professors of linguistics who insist that the Indo-European language family originated in India (“It must have since there was never an Aryan invasion”) – something most European linguists consider impossible. Similarly there are genetics papers by Indians claiming to demonstrate that the R1a Y-chromosome haplogroup must have originated in India, despite that, IMO, genetic data demonstrate the opposite.
Are these scientists all “right-wing Hindu nationalists” ?
Languages as diverse as English, Russian and Hindi can trace their roots back more than 8,000 years to Anatolia — now in modern-day Turkey.
That’s the conclusion of a study that assessed 103 ancient and contemporary languages using a technique normally used to study the evolution and spread of disease. The researchers hope that their findings can settle a long-running debate about the origins of the Indo-European language group.
I will thank you to stop making such false and foul accusations! We didn’t have a clue about hygiene for several centuries after the Black Death. Get your history right!
I will say that the entire subject of Indian/Hindu political/cultural history is a politically contentious subject, and not just because of a “subsection of right-wing Hindu nationalists.”
While the barbaric Islamic conquests of India are extremely well-documented, there are “eminent historians” who deny it altogether. The British had an anti-Hindu agenda from the get-go, but it is un-PC to talk about it. Western studies of Sanskrit, Hinduism and ancient history are often motivated and tainted with cultural bias.
Given this general climate, it is not surprising that there are hyper-defensive groups who lean the other way, glorifying a real or perceived Indian achievement more than might be justifiable. It is incorrect to say the “average Indian” thinks Vedic Math is a scam or does not care about Panini. There is great pride in Indian and Hindu culture, but we are not very vocal about it. (The vocal sub-section has long been labeled “Hindu fundamentalists”.)
While the OP’s question is asinine, the very fact that someone needs to invoke “Hindu nationalists” to explain something shows the unnatural level of cultural bias that has crept into this subject.
That article is just a rehash of Gray-Atkinson 2003. (I emailed Atkinson at the time and explained a flaw in his modeling.)
Most serious thinkers still agree that the Indo-European Homeland is located where Marija Gimbutas theorized:
Comparing Gimbutas’ and alternative theories might be an interesting debate, but prehistorical linguistics discussions have not gone well here.
