4 ms·

> Same logic applies for the Arabic/ Islamic Golden age astronomers who were dependent on previous Indian Yes, but bookstores are not filled with books written

by Cyph0n 11y ago

> Same logic applies for the Arabic/ Islamic Golden age astronomers who were dependent on previous Indian Yes, but bookstores are not filled with books written by Muslim historians. There is only side to the story being presented, and that's what annoys me.

thrawy4567 11y ago
> Yes, but bookstores are not filled with books written by Muslim historians. There is only side to the story being presented, and that's what annoys me. When you are annoyed that modern historians/ authors omitted - Islamic Golden Age (IGA) - in the history of Mathematics and directly jump from Greek -> Renaissance[0], you are only singling out IGA and not calling out the omission of Indian (Aryabhatta, Bhaskara et al - pls refer to [2]) or Chinese (The Nine Chapters on the Mathematical Art,Pascal's Triangle[3]) contributions. You might yourself be doing a non-willful omission and adding to the biases further. ("Greek -> IGA -> Renaissance" vs "Greek -> Chinese -> Indian -> IGA -> Renaissance") [0] which may have been true earlier but I don't think it's true anymore - as one comment confirms that US schools have it in their curriculum, also Indian schools have in their curriculum. As another commenter said, it's time to move on. In wikipedia, modern text books and elsewhere, this discrepancy is being/ has been set right and credit is given where credit is due. [2] Baudhayana - Śulba Sūtras- 800 BCE Pāṇini (c. 520–460 BCE) Aryabhata 476-550 CE Varahamihira 505-587 CE BrahmaGupta 598 CE Bhaskara 600-680 CE [3] Jia Xian - Pascal's Triangle - 1010 CE Zhoubi Suanjing c. 1000 BCE-100 CE -Astronomical theories, and computation techniques -Proof of the Pythagorean theorem etc.,
- Cyph0n 11y ago
  I'm a Muslim, so that's why I brought only the Islamic contributions up. However, I agree with you 100% that any region, religion, or entity that contributed to some field deserves recognition. Historical omission and/or rewriting is unacceptable in all cases.

by Cyph0n 11y ago

thrawy4567 11y ago

> Yes, but bookstores are not filled with books written by Muslim historians. There is only side to the story being presented, and that's what annoys me. When you are annoyed that modern historians/ authors omitted - Islamic Golden Age (IGA) - in the history of Mathematics and directly jump from Greek -> Renaissance[0], you are only singling out IGA and not calling out the omission of Indian (Aryabhatta, Bhaskara et al - pls refer to [2]) or Chinese (The Nine Chapters on the Mathematical Art,Pascal's Triangle[3]) contributions. You might yourself be doing a non-willful omission and adding to the biases further. ("Greek -> IGA -> Renaissance" vs "Greek -> Chinese -> Indian -> IGA -> Renaissance") [0] which may have been true earlier but I don't think it's true anymore - as one comment confirms that US schools have it in their curriculum, also Indian schools have in their curriculum. As another commenter said, it's time to move on. In wikipedia, modern text books and elsewhere, this discrepancy is being/ has been set right and credit is given where credit is due. [2] Baudhayana - Śulba Sūtras- 800 BCE Pāṇini (c. 520–460 BCE) Aryabhata 476-550 CE Varahamihira 505-587 CE BrahmaGupta 598 CE Bhaskara 600-680 CE [3] Jia Xian - Pascal's Triangle - 1010 CE Zhoubi Suanjing c. 1000 BCE-100 CE -Astronomical theories, and computation techniques -Proof of the Pythagorean theorem etc.,

Cyph0n 11y ago
I'm a Muslim, so that's why I brought only the Islamic contributions up. However, I agree with you 100% that any region, religion, or entity that contributed to some field deserves recognition. Historical omission and/or rewriting is unacceptable in all cases.