There is a reason why this writer is in the police force and not at an academic institute. This is such a rambling, superficial treatment of the question of the authenticity of Ram that it does damage to possibly legitimate scholars of the subject.
I wrote a paper like this when I was in 9th grade. My high school teacher gave me a C- for its lack of thought and evidence. I was lucky I didn't fail his class. It doesn't matter whether the paper is questioning so-called "Western" ideas or "Indian" ideas, any piece of writing that calls itself evidence and proof must hold itself to certain standards. Singh's article is a painful example of what happens when you have never been schooled or taken the patience to go through the schooling process yourself. Dr. Singh, the standards of good science and by association, good writing are universal. They are not Indian or "Western", because they are based on high standards of what can be accepted as truth.
First you focus on a question or a thesis: in this case, Singh's thesis is that Ram/Rama is based on a real character and not just a fictional character. Or so he claims. The reality is that more than half of this article is just a long diatribe of western treatment of Indian science, religion and mythology. However true these latter arguments may be, how is it relevant at all to Singh's thesis?
Ironically, Singh has adopted a rhetorical technique supported by the very anti-Ramu Sethu politicians he rejects. Instead of proving Ram's existence through direct evidence, Singh begins to discredit every writer who has anything potentially bad to say on Indian religion. This is called mud-slinging in politics. It is how politician regularly debate in Indian politics by highlighting his opponent's faults and not his own strengths. This article isn't even fit to be debated.
Second, you construct a clear, comprehensive line of reasoning: "The human history they know is only 5,000 years old. The ancestor of man was an ape or a chimpanzee." Dr. Singh, how is this relevant at all to the subject at hand? And more importantly, do you seriously think you can overturn decades of meticulously-collected evidence behind the theory of Darwinian evolution in one sentence?
RE:Stay in the police force
by Pavan on Apr 15, 2008 04:13 AM Permalink
Nair, your comment below, "do you seriously think you can overturn decades of meticulously-collected evidence behind the theory of Darwinian evolution in one sentence", is exactly what it is, decades old, and if you know science, nothing is written in stone. I am not against evolution, but have you ever thought why the plants have not evolved ?, the author is trying to instill a notion of confidence in the masses, not trying to perpetuate chirstian propoganda which has been happening since the british were here.
RE:Stay in the police force
by abdulla on Apr 15, 2008 03:22 AM Permalink
Allabisheikh Nayi R Do you have any scientific evidence about your Prophet? if not then STFU and beat it from here, no body wants or asked for your juvenile opinions okay..good night your mullah is waiting for you
RE:Stay in the police force
by abdulla on Apr 15, 2008 03:25 AM Permalink
You are a third class writer, no wonder you got a C grade. If I was your teacher then I would have bundled you out to meet your jehidi g=brethren in Porkistan. Anyway eat pork it is very tasty okay munna
RE:RE:RE:Stay in the police force
by Seenu Subbu on Apr 15, 2008 03:54 AM Permalink
And yours, I suppose, is the final version of the truth because you know all about Scientific writing and apparently you have a C- from your teacher for writing, to prove. And oh, may be you also have a Ph.D.
RE:Stay in the police force
by Tranquility on Apr 18, 2008 10:33 AM Permalink
Never in my life did I get a C minus.... (although that is not the point here)
Teacher jee didnt fail you so you could learn from your mistakes, not repeat them in a public forum to exhibit your stupidity.
RE:Stay in the police force
by Seenu Subbu on Apr 15, 2008 03:19 AM Permalink
You seem to have your intellectual knickers in a knot. All Dr.Satya Pal is trying to wind around is globally pervasive mentions, in historical and mythical writings, of the existence of Ram. Rediff is not a venue to publish "Scientific writings" and the author is not insisting on his article being one. Thanks for letting us know of your abundant knowledge, we don't really have time for all of that. That was not the original point of this exercise, if I may remind you again.
