Meritocracy and Quotas

[kunjuppu]

Share:

Facebook X (Twitter) LinkedIn WhatsApp Email Share Link

white-definitions-merit-and-admissions-change-when-they-think-about-asian-americans

no this is not about india and reservations. nor is it about singapore, where in their universities, students are admitted based on their national population percentages (this was done with a good intention - to ensure representation of malay and tamil (pre tamil brahmin immigration in large numbers past 20 years) in national institutions.

this is in that mecca of meritocracy - usa.

i have had relatives in texas complain, that indians have unofficial quotas in the texas medical schools (quotas to restrict not increase).

till 1950s, harvard had quota for the jews. now most universities, in the name of fair representation,have quotas for blacks and latinos.

but asians (read chinese & koreans) and indians - do much better than whites in getting marks. so there are now creative measurements imposed on admitting criteria...like personality interviewskills and what not. eh eh!!

university of toront too practises such criteria in medical schools. apparently an indian girl has much better chance to get in - she satisfies two minority criteria - female and nonwhite!!

oh well! thought some folks here would be interested in knowing.

 

[sangom]

white-definitions-merit-and-admissions-change-when-they-think-about-asian-americans

no this is not about india and reservations. nor is it about singapore, where in their universities, students are admitted based on their national population percentages (this was done with a good intention - to ensure representation of malay and tamil (pre tamil brahmin immigration in large numbers past 20 years) in national institutions.

this is in that mecca of meritocracy - usa.

i have had relatives in texas complain, that indians have unofficial quotas in the texas medical schools (quotas to restrict not increase).

till 1950s, harvard had quota for the jews. now most universities, in the name of fair representation,have quotas for blacks and latinos.

but asians (read chinese & koreans) and indians - do much better than whites in getting marks. so there are now creative measurements imposed on admitting criteria...like personality interviewskills and what not. eh eh!!

university of toront too practises such criteria in medical schools. apparently an indian girl has much better chance to get in - she satisfies two minority criteria - female and nonwhite!!

oh well! thought some folks here would be interested in knowing.

If only the ancient hindu society understood these social mechanics and prescribed reservations and quotas for Shudras, Panchamas, etc., in all walks of life!!

 

[sravna]

I think time is the main factor that decides what is valued. In ancient times knowledge was valued and so those who were skilled in acquiring and imparting knowledge had a say in the affairs of the society. But now money and political power are the most important factors in judging a person's worth. But are the brahmins begrudging it now? The only complaint is when you bring in the past as a pretext to commit or endorse the injustice in the present. Time naturally takes care of that and if any group has the ability to move along with the times, it is good for them. Why artificially stifle them?

 

[sangom]

I think time is the main factor that decides what is valued. In ancient times knowledge was valued and so those who were skilled in acquiring and imparting knowledge had a say in the affairs of the society. But now money and political power are the most important factors in judging a person's worth. But are the brahmins begrudging it now? The only complaint is when you bring in the past as a pretext to commit or endorse the injustice in the present. Time naturally takes care of that and if any group has the ability to move along with the times, it is good for them. Why artificially stifle them?

Dear Sravna,

I feel from various threads/posts in this forum, that brahmins grudge the reservation system, which is the topic here. Money and political power do not figure in the OP.

 

[sravna]

Dear Shri sangom,

Exactly. The reservation systen is an injustice in the present I am referring to in my post. The government could have thought of better solutions to the problem than reservation system. If because of the present system if brahmins of the future feel they were denied money in the past, would it be acceptable solution to you if they wanted a share of the wealth of the others because of the injustice. This could just go on if we don't figure out the right solution.

Brahmins who were at the helm of the society whether rightly or wrongly denied knowledge to a certain section. But that ceratin section could have fought back or adapted and not suffer injustice.

Now many members of the same section possess what society values today which is money and political power. The influence of brahmins is considerably much less but it is still there because knowledge is still valued but subsevient to money and power. I think more of the other sections of the society has what the society values more today than brahmins.

But because of the resilience of the brahmins, they could not be totally pushed back. Brahmins have bounced back by finding places where knowledge is valued more or by adpating to the times. I am sure whatever may be the situation the ability to adapt will come to their rescue. They will definitely not rely on any artificial means in the present to set right any injustice committed to them in the past. and that is what make brahmins unique.

 

[C RAVI]

Dear Shri sangom,

Exactly. The reservation systen is an injustice in the present I am referring to in my post. The government could have thought of better solutions to the problem than reservation system. If because of the present system if brahmins of the future feel they were denied money in the past, would it be acceptable solution to you if they wanted a share of the wealth of the others because of the injustice. This could just go on if we don't figure out the right solution.

Brahmins who were at the helm of the society whether rightly or wrongly denied knowledge to a certain section. But that ceratin section could have fought back or adapted and not suffer injustice.

Now many members of the same section possess what society values today which is money and political power. The influence of brahmins is considerably much less but it is still there because knowledge is still valued but subsevient to money and power. I think more of the other sections of the society has what the society values more today than brahmins.

But because of the resilience of the brahmins, they could not be totally pushed back. Brahmins have bounced back by finding places where knowledge is valued more or by adpating to the times. I am sure whatever may be the situation the ability to adapt will come to their rescue. They will definitely not rely on any artificial means in the present to set right any injustice committed to them in the past. and that is what make brahmins unique.

:thumb:

 

[Vaagmi]

post #2:

If only the ancient hindu society understood these social mechanics and prescribed reservations and quotas for Shudras, Panchamas, etc., in all walks of life!!

If that had happened, the middle castes would have gone to war with Shudras and panchamas and would have won it. They would have appropriated all the benefits to themselves and would have said brahmins were very cunning and have taken away everything!!!

 

[ShivKC]

Dear Shri sangom,

Exactly. The reservation systen is an injustice in the present I am referring to in my post. .

interestingly, if the reservation system in railway ticketing gets abolished, guess which group would be bulldozing to occupy all the seats?

 

[rishikesan]

Mr Sravna, your last Para ----says it all in a Nut- shell. Kudos ?

Rishikesan

 

[palindrome]

post #2:



If that had happened, the middle castes would have gone to war with Shudras and panchamas and would have won it. They would have appropriated all the benefits to themselves and would have said brahmins were very cunning and have taken away everything!!!

Hello Vagmi,

Before i cud reply to your post in the other thread, it was closed. Sorry am still travelling and may not be regularly posting until nov 2nd week.

You have time and again posted the claim about middle-castes. It is true the current middle-castes are casteist. Do note they are following what in the ancient world was a struggle to the higher hierarchy.

If you take a look at the history of chitpavans, mohyals, niyogis, bhumihars and such like, you find they had a military past or a trading past. These were once commoners or middle-castes who obviously practised brahmanism. That is, they legitimized their social position after gaining positions of wealth or social power.

None of these have ethnohistories dating back before the medieval times. In the case of niyogis, they were durgadandanayaks (fort administrators) in the vijayanagar period. With such a high social position, wud they have liked to call themselves merely kshatriyas? I can well start a thread to prove a section of niyogis arose from boyas. Infact even in ancient times, chieftains on coming to power claimed brahminhood.

This "climbing into brahminhood" goes all the way back probably to the immediate aftermath of the vedic period; as documented by historians such as Frits Staal (priests to legitimize the rule of a risen king would create a long genealogy and ordain him into dvija status). Hence the case of pallavas, cholas, pandyas, who rose from commoners and claimed brahminhood thru puranic literature.

In most recent times, chitpavans are stark example of folks who entered brahminhood during the peshwa period. They practised grotesque social evils, quite likely to simply to safeguard their newly gained birth position. Such violence is unfortunately sanctioned by dharmashastras. It is my sufficiently researched view that writers / followers of dharmashastras arose from commoners; and to legitimize their claim to brahminhood created dimwitted laws.

Not all can be associated with violence though. An example is that of Sourashtrians (pattunoolkarans) who were declared brahmins by Rani Mangammal. The move was very likely to appease a powerful trade lobby; considering cloth was an important trade (doling out such a position is quite similar to sops offered to partners in coalition politics of today's times).

The powerful middle castes of medieval period are brahmins today. Do note, the term "brahmin" is a very generic one. If you follow pancharatra culture, you obviously have nothing in common to self-claimed brahmins as described above. Those who do not like "brahmanism" to be associated with "casteism" should first ask these military/trader origin folks to give up their claims of brahminhood. Ask them to revert back to shudra or scheduled tribe positions. But then it may get complicated in groups such as madhavas, who very likely have amongst them descendents of the vijayanagar empire.

Today, the term brahmin is used as though it is a homogenous group. The sufferer in the end is the poor agamic priest.

Thanks.
Btw, you asked in the previous thread if am a geneticist. My academic background is in gene expression studies. I can state with full authority that your interpretation of genes-culture is a totally twisted one. They are your own views -- you are merely attempting to pass them off as though they exist in the field of genetics.

 

[Vaagmi]

interestingly, if the reservation system in railway ticketing gets abolished, guess which group would be bulldozing to occupy all the seats?

Who else but the ticketless travellers with a lot of muscle power!!

 

[zebra16]

post #2:



If that had happened, the middle castes would have gone to war with Shudras and panchamas and would have won it. They would have appropriated all the benefits to themselves and would have said brahmins were very cunning and have taken away everything!!!

Do not fully agree. The following things could also have happened:

1. The non vedic Gods would have learnt Sanskrit because some stotra malas to them would have been composed in sanskrit just as the vedic Gods learnt tamizh when they were being worshipped by dravidian supremacists.

2. The fourth varNa and panchamas who had their profession as 'vAdhyars" and priests would still be impoverished.

3. There would have been a priestly community (both brahmins and non brahmins) with reducing number of females due to IC/IR marriages and they (the priestly families of Bs and NBs) would have been advised to broaden their outlook and look for brides from the tribal population of Andamans and even some african tribes.

4. If it was a custom among such tribes to serve the flesh of the bride's father to the guests participating in the marriage ceremony the fathers' would be advised to submit willingly for the cause of happiness of their children.

5. There would have been a flourishing market for used and worn out chappals ("kAdhu aRundha chappals") as there would be many many more (may be in millions) vedic and non vedic Gods to be garlanded with these chappals on the birth day, death day, remembrance day, memorial day, revolution day etc of the social reformers who set up this practice.

 

[Vaagmi]

It is true the current middle-castes are casteist. Do note they are following what in the ancient world was a struggle to the higher hierarchy.
If you take a look at the history of chitpavans, mohyals, niyogis, bhumihars and such like, you find they had a military past or a trading past. These were once commoners or middle-castes who obviously practised brahmanism. That is, they legitimized their social position after gaining positions of wealth or social power.
None of these have ethnohistories dating back before the medieval times. In the case of niyogis, they were durgadandanayaks (fort administrators) in the vijayanagar period. With such a high social position, wud they have liked to call themselves merely kshatriyas? I can well start a thread to prove a section of niyogis arose from boyas. Infact even in ancient times, chieftains on coming to power claimed brahminhood.
This "climbing into brahminhood" goes all the way back probably to the immediate aftermath of the vedic period; as documented by historians such as Frits Staal (priests to legitimize the rule of a risen king would create a long genealogy and ordain him into dvija status). Hence the case of pallavas, cholas, pandyas, who rose from commoners and claimed brahminhood thru puranic literature.
In most recent times, chitpavans are stark example of folks who entered brahminhood during the peshwa period. They practised grotesque social evils, quite likely to simply to safeguard their newly gained birth position. Such violence is unfortunately sanctioned by dharmashastras. It is my sufficiently researched view that writers / followers of dharmashastras arose from commoners; and to legitimize their claim to brahminhood created dimwitted laws.
Not all can be associated with violence though. An example is that of Sourashtrians (pattunoolkarans) who were declared brahmins by Rani Mangammal. The move was very likely to appease a powerful trade lobby; considering cloth was an important trade (doling out such a position is quite similar to sops offered to partners in coalition politics of today's times).
The powerful middle castes of medieval period are brahmins today. Do note, the term "brahmin" is a very generic one. If you follow pancharatra culture, you obviously have nothing in common to self-claimed brahmins as described above.

I look at this from a common sense point of view. Please tell me what was there in brahminhood – the so called pinnacle of caste hierarchy, the top most notch in the caste totem pole - to aspire for. Those were not days when you were paid a salary on the basis of your degree or diploma. A kshatriya had every thing a human being can aspire for-money, land, properties, palaces, fear and respect among the members of the society, muscle power in the form of a large retinue of servants and a huge army, an enviable harem in which the most beautiful and accomplished women were waiting for them 24x7 etc., Then why should a kshatriya work hard to become a Brahmin? None of the Vaishyas, Shudras or panchamans ever would refuse to respect and submit to a kshatriya because they knew what the result would be. So your and the European historians theory that kshatriyas became Brahmins has got a big hole in it. Brahmins were by choice, rule as well as by circumstances always beggars and teachers. They were glorified beggars as that glorification suited the kshatriyas. I would venture to suggest that it was rather the Brahmins who became kshatriyas whenever an opportunity presented itself. We have many such cases in our Itihasas. With your facilities for research you may work on this to find the truth after unlearning what Fritt Staals and his friends have taught. I have no time for that. So it is clear that the powerful middle castes are pure middle castes with a good number of vaishyas and shudras joining in-they were not keen to become Brahmins as there was no attraction in that. What we have now , the middle caste lump, is the kshatriyas (original) and the others from the vaishya and shudra class who gradutated or kicked themselves up to that position and perhaps those Brahmins who converted to kshatriyahood (what you call frequently as kshatropeta Brahmins). Pattunoolkaran story is a different one. They came not only to weave clothes but also to populate the harems of the Nayak kings. It is natural that the kings did not want to admit them into their exclusive preserve of kshatriyahood and gave them the double promotion and made them Brahmins. Ultimately whatever happens to others it is the dog that gets kicked!!

You have said “If you follow pancharatra culture, you obviously have nothing in common to self-claimed brahmins as described above.” It is not clear what you are saying here. If you are referring to the objection raised by Sankara in his Brahmasutra bhashya to the Sankarsana concept, please note that Vaishnavas do not subscribe to Sankara’s views on this and vaishnavas are also Brahmins.

Those who do not like "brahmanism" to be associated with "casteism" should first ask these military/trader origin folks to give up their claims of brahminhood

. Ask them to revert back to shudra or scheduled tribe positions.

The question that begs an answer is “who should do this?”

Today, the term brahmin is used as though it is a homogenous group. The sufferer in the end is the poor agamic priest.

The point that is to be noted is that if any one in this country is getting kicked by every one that person can only be a Brahmin. Agamic priests are just one among such people getting kicked.

Btw, you asked in the previous thread if am a geneticist. My academic background is in gene expression studies. I can state with full authority that your interpretation of genes-culture is a totally twisted one. They are your own views -- you are merely attempting to pass them off as though they exist in the field of genetics.

Thank you for the info. But I never knew that when a geneticist has an issue to settle with an anthropologist he/she should choose ordinary folks or a generalist as the audience to lecture. Robert Boyd is an anthropologist. I am able to understand what he says and that is enough for me. If you have something to repudiate Boyd please bring that to the table here. We can take a look at it. Thanks.

 

[Naina_Marbus]

Dear Sravna,

I feel from various threads/posts in this forum, that brahmins grudge the reservation system, which is the topic here. Money and political power do not figure in the OP.

As one closely familiar with admissions and appointments based on the reservation system in Tamilnadu, I can say that there are no longer any TBs to begrudge the issue -most have already found alternatives and moved away. The people who now grudge the reservation system are the other members of the forward-castes ( chettiars, mudaliars, pillaisetc) and some BC communities who begrudge the fact that the MBC and SC/ST groups frequently block appointments of the BCs ! Believe me, I have witnessed it personally.

 

[Nara]

Do not fully agree. The following things could also have happened:

1. The non vedic Gods would have learnt Sanskrit because some stotra malas to them would have been composed in sanskrit just as the vedic Gods learnt tamizh when they were being worshipped by dravidian supremacists.

2. The fourth varNa and panchamas who had their profession as 'vAdhyars" and priests would still be impoverished.

3. There would have been a priestly community (both brahmins and non brahmins) with reducing number of females due to IC/IR marriages and they (the priestly families of Bs and NBs) would have been advised to broaden their outlook and look for brides from the tribal population of Andamans and even some african tribes.

4. If it was a custom among such tribes to serve the flesh of the bride's father to the guests participating in the marriage ceremony the fathers' would be advised to submit willingly for the cause of happiness of their children.

5. There would have been a flourishing market for used and worn out chappals ("kAdhu aRundha chappals") as there would be many many more (may be in millions) vedic and non vedic Gods to be garlanded with these chappals on the birth day, death day, remembrance day, memorial day, revolution day etc of the social reformers who set up this practice.

Dear Narayan, if you have so much anger and conviction that what we are saying is all baloney, why do you always make comments like these only from the sidelines and never get into serious discussion? Such speculative mocking does't become you my friend....

 

[palindrome]

I look at this from a common sense point of view. Please tell me what was there in brahminhood – the so called pinnacle of caste hierarchy, the top most notch in the caste totem pole - to aspire for. Those were not days when you were paid a salary on the basis of your degree or diploma. A kshatriya had every thing a human being can aspire for-money, land, properties, palaces, fear and respect among the members of the society, muscle power in the form of a large retinue of servants and a huge army, an enviable harem in which the most beautiful and accomplished women were waiting for them 24x7 etc., Then why should a kshatriya work hard to become a Brahmin? None of the Vaishyas, Shudras or panchamans ever would refuse to respect and submit to a kshatriya because they knew what the result would be. So your and the European historians theory that kshatriyas became Brahmins has got a big hole in it. Brahmins were by choice, rule as well as by circumstances always beggars and teachers. They were glorified beggars as that glorification suited the kshatriyas. I would venture to suggest that it was rather the Brahmins who became kshatriyas whenever an opportunity presented itself. We have many such cases in our Itihasas. With your facilities for research you may work on this to find the truth after unlearning what Fritt Staals and his friends have taught. I have no time for that. So it is clear that the powerful middle castes are pure middle castes with a good number of vaishyas and shudras joining in-they were not keen to become Brahmins as there was no attraction in that. What we have now , the middle caste lump, is the kshatriyas (original) and the others from the vaishya and shudra class who gradutated or kicked themselves up to that position and perhaps those Brahmins who converted to kshatriyahood (what you call frequently as kshatropeta Brahmins). Pattunoolkaran story is a different one. They came not only to weave clothes but also to populate the harems of the Nayak kings. It is natural that the kings did not want to admit them into their exclusive preserve of kshatriyahood and gave them the double promotion and made them Brahmins. Ultimately whatever happens to others it is the dog that gets kicked!!

The highest ritual status is that of a brahmin. Why would one choose to be second best (kshatriya) when he can have all of it and be on top of the hierarchy pole (as a brahmin)? Thus even in puranic literature you have kshatropeta brahmanas - that is, kshatriyas claiming to be brahmins. This happened all the way thru history. All thru medieval history. Chitpavans are the most recent example of a military power unit claiming brahmin status.

If you have anything to back up your claims of pattunoolkaran women populating nayak harems, produce proof from historical sources. Also produce proof that nayak kings claimed kshatriya varna? AFAIK, they left no such claim in the form of inscriptions, epigraphies... Contrary to your claims, there is ample evidence the pattunoolkarans were an important trading unit during that time, probably the only ones dealing in silk.

You have said “If you follow pancharatra culture, you obviously have nothing in common to self-claimed brahmins as described above.” It is not clear what you are saying here. If you are referring to the objection raised by Sankara in his Brahmasutra bhashya to the Sankarsana concept, please note that Vaishnavas do not subscribe to Sankara’s views on this and vaishnavas are also Brahmins.

Pancharatra does not believe in caste. It gives every individual the right to get initiated into samashrayanam.

The question that begs an answer is “who should do this?”

Already mentioned some examples -- chitpavans, mohyals, niyogis, bhumihars, pattunoolkarans..

Thank you for the info. But I never knew that when a geneticist has an issue to settle with an anthropologist he/she should choose ordinary folks or a generalist as the audience to lecture. Robert Boyd is an anthropologist. I am able to understand what he says and that is enough for me. If you have something to repudiate Boyd please bring that to the table here. We can take a look at it. Thanks.

Oh please, you don't have to be sarcastic. You asked me if am a geneticist so i merely replied to it. Who am i to "lecture" you. Now that you have brought out your 'expected' response, am all ready to take it on. Yes, i challenge you to present Robert Boyd's work in the context of your wild speculative inferences about genes-culture.

 

[Vaagmi]

palindrome #16:

Oh please, you don't have to be sarcastic. You asked me if am a geneticist so i merely replied to it. Who am i to "lecture" you. Now that you have brought out your 'expected' response, am all ready to take it on. Yes, i challenge you to present Robert Boyd's work in the context of your wild speculative inferences about genes-culture.

Oh God. No. Not again. Please read all my relevant posts in this forum where I have given all that Boyd had said and I have understood. Also read what others have replied to in that. (I thought you would have done that and are ready to challenge Boyd).That should give you an idea of what Boyd said. Or else please Google the name of the scientist and read what he has to say about cultures impact on genes. I am fed up rewriting again and again the same stuff. Please spare me the ordeal. You can read what Boyd has said and then challenge him directly(instead of challenging me-I am just a derivative) to prove your point. Please come here again after proving that Boyd is wrong to give us a gist (only gist) of your correspondence with him on the impact of culture on genes. Thanks.

 

[Nara]

....
Oh please, you don't have to be sarcastic. You asked me if am a geneticist so i merely replied to it. Who am i to "lecture" you. Now that you have brought out your 'expected' response, am all ready to take it on. Yes, i challenge you to present Robert Boyd's work in the context of your wild speculative inferences about genes-culture.

Dear palindrome, if I may be so bold as to make a suggestion, please proceed with caution when dealing with people who start out with an agenda and then look to find anything that they can even remotely or tangentially be connected to their pet theory. Normal logic and scientific evidence have no appeal to them. For instance, it does not matter that Robert Boyd's work is only about the possibility of culture playing a role in natural selection. There is nothing in his work to make the sort of definitive claims made here. But none of that matters of course, to them Boyd's work is proof positive that their culture is hard coded into their genes. If you dare to challenge their view don't expect reasonable and civil debate, but do expect to be tarred and feathered.

take care ....

 

[Vaagmi]

Dear palindrome, if I may be so bold as to make a suggestion, please proceed with caution when dealing with people who start out with an agenda and then look to find anything that they can even remotely or tangentially be connected to their pet theory. Normal logic and scientific evidence have no appeal to them. For instance, it does not matter that Robert Boyd's work is only about the possibility of culture playing a role in natural selection. There is nothing in his work to make the sort of definitive claims made here. But none of that matters of course, to them Boyd's work is proof positive that their culture is hard coded into their genes. If you dare to challenge their view don't expect reasonable and civil debate, but do expect to be tarred and feathered.

take care ....

palindrome,

Now that your friendly professor has voluntarily given his understanding (or is it misunderstanding?) of Boyd's work, you can take it as the starting point for your search for truth. Taking a cue from our member professor,you can prove that Boyd is speculative on the negative side. You can also prove that the possibility which appeared to him to be there and which our professor here has taken to be not there are all wrong. You can prove that it is neither there nor here. One thing is sure. You will have a very rewarding 'civil' debate at the end of which you will find yourself to be where you started it all. That is, if you call taking pot shots from the sidelines (pet theory, abnormal unscientific logic, uncivil debating,will tar and feather you etc.,)is very civil. Thank you.

 

[rishikesan]

Dear Mr praveen, Please read # 14 which gives the position of Reservatio in T. N. Vs T.N. Bahmins . I want to stress that we, Tamil brahmins older & in particular present young men & women are very well off ,because they have come up in Education & attained ranks , despite the reservations We are proud of our children who are intelligent & know the route for higher education in the U.S & their friends in U.S help them achieve higher scores, do MS & get into wonderful companies & earn fantastic salaries & make the Parents also rich by way of buying new flats/ cars or make them travel only be Call Taxis , no one goes even by Auto, let alone Buses/ What a change ? God is on our side. Let us stop lamenting on this subject, which is out of date now.
While on the subject, I fervently appeal to you Sir, not to encourage frivolous topics/ discussions 7 waste time of the remaining members. I request you once again to call for a meeting of say 5 to 10 members & work-out TOPICS in the larger interest & welfare of the less privileged in our midst, & make out time bound actions on a Useful , practically implementable Agenda.
Please decide soon, so that interested men/ women can take part/ contribute/ get involved in a proposal to be formulated by you & endeavour to implement also

 

[palindrome]

palindrome,

Now that your friendly professor has voluntarily given his understanding (or is it misunderstanding?) of Boyd's work, you can take it as the starting point for your search for truth. Taking a cue from our member professor,you can prove that Boyd is speculative on the negative side. You can also prove that the possibility which appeared to him to be there and which our professor here has taken to be not there are all wrong. You can prove that it is neither there nor here. One thing is sure. You will have a very rewarding 'civil' debate at the end of which you will find yourself to be where you started it all. That is, if you call taking pot shots from the sidelines (pet theory, abnormal unscientific logic, uncivil debating,will tar and feather you etc.,)is very civil. Thank you.

It is you making up all sorts of claims and attributing it to Robert Boyd.

If you dare to, present all your points in a pointwise format. Since you do not want to hear it from me, I shall email it to Robert Boyd.

If you are a man of science at all, you should know genetics and anthropology are not mutually exclusive, they work in together.

I also challenge you to prove (1) your canard on pattunoolkaran women (2) that nayaks claimed kshatriya status. Provide a historical record to back up both your claims. Anything will do - nayak period compositions, epigraphies, copper plate records in temples, inscriptions. Since trade was so extensive (and imperative to the economy), there are a good many records of that period available. It was not so far off in time either.

 

[palindrome]

Dear palindrome, if I may be so bold as to make a suggestion, please proceed with caution when dealing with people who start out with an agenda and then look to find anything that they can even remotely or tangentially be connected to their pet theory. Normal logic and scientific evidence have no appeal to them. For instance, it does not matter that Robert Boyd's work is only about the possibility of culture playing a role in natural selection. There is nothing in his work to make the sort of definitive claims made here. But none of that matters of course, to them Boyd's work is proof positive that their culture is hard coded into their genes. If you dare to challenge their view don't expect reasonable and civil debate, but do expect to be tarred and feathered.

take care ....

Previously, i made an offer to Ravi. To test his y-dna, mt-dna and autosomal-dna for free (and something so comprehensive is expensive). He backed off citing excuses. My offer to him still stands. Now am challenging Vagmi. Am aware what will ensue. Yet, you know me, am not the sort of back off. Being deluded with a lot of assumptions on a evolved brahmin genepool with certain values, ideas of satvik genes and such like is laughable in educated circles. The best part is he attributes such stuff to Robert Boyd. One should normally dismiss such silly jokes. Unfortunately, such ideas are part of the society we live in amongst a certain set of people (its obviously plain ego about themselves). But unless the same gusto is used to challenge them, such ideas go on polluting the society we live in.

 

[Vaagmi]

palindrome,

post #21 and 22:

All that you have asked for in your post #21 are already there. You have to only read up. I know what is anthropology and what is genetics and I do not have to take lessons from you on this. You have a tendency to repeatedly ask for proof for this and that(without bothering to read the references given) like your friend asking for chapter and verse of everything said here. It is as if you are too busy to look up the references provided here. Please note I am as busy as you. You are well known here in this forum for such antics when you were in your earlier avatar HH. I thought you would have matured. However it appears that it has not happened. I am not going to continue the conversation with you any more. You can derive any conclusion from this and vent your spleen here. I won't reply. I have no time for such mediocrity.

 

[Nara]

Previously, i made an offer to Ravi. To test his y-dna, mt-dna and autosomal-dna for free (and something so comprehensive is expensive). He backed off citing excuses. .

palindrome, if my experience is any guide, then I think you are probably going to get the same reaction this time also. I have seen this pattern too many times.

take care ....

 

[Nara]

.... I am not going to continue the conversation with you any more. You can derive any conclusion from this and vent your spleen here. I won't reply. I have no time for such mediocrity.

As predicted when challenged they walk away, though not quietly but spewing insults. For the arrogantly mendacious those who dare to disagree are ipso facto mediocre.