3 ms·

You maybe an Indian, but you are no Historian. As such the same logic can be applied to the term "West" or "Western Civilization". While no single civilization,

You maybe an Indian, but you are no Historian. As such the same logic can be applied to the term "West" or "Western Civilization". While no single civilization, or people create anything original, there are definitely histories of a people, and therefore the accusation of borrowing, using, or obtaining some outside source of inspiration doesn't preclude that people from their own history. While you are Indian, I often feel that many Indians also tend to lack also unfortunately basic understanding of Indian history, perhaps it's the incessant cultural demand to pursue other subject, so far as to even claim that there's no such thing as "Indian" history, but rather merely the history of different people in a region arbitrarily created by the British. I'm not accusing you of that, but simply pointing that being Indian doesn't shield you from the accusation of either being "anti-India" or lack of knowledge.

Ar-Curunir 8y ago
In this case, I'm not supporting any particular ideology; merely stating a hypothesis that is currently under contention: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brahmi_script#Semitic_model_hypothesis https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brahmi_script#Semitic_model_hy...
- thevardanian 8y ago
  Again, I'm not refuting your claim, merely saying that doesn't preclude, or deny the claim you're responding to. History, while complex, and civilizations more points on a spectrum, than a closed system, doesn't prevent or deny the claim of a civilization claiming a unique, distinct, and separate identity that is used to claim the products of a society. Nothing is original. If that's you're claim then it's not a valid argument, and doesn't really address the situation other introduce some existentially reductive platitudes.