Died: 22 February 1958, Delhi
Education: Al Azhar University Darrasah Campus (1905–1907)
Starting thread from here.. read carefully and share it Maximum. I hope its an eye opener for everyone.
Thread : Indtroducing Abul Kalam Ghulam Muhiyuddin Ahmed bin Khairuddin Al-Hussaini Azad...
was an Indian scholar, Islamic theologian, independence activist, and a senior leader of the Indian National Congress during the Indian independence movement.
Died: 22 February 1958, Delhi
Education: Al Azhar University Darrasah Campus (1905–1907)
Starting thread from here.. read carefully and share it Maximum. I hope its an eye opener for everyone.
5) बाबर से औरंगजेब तक हर बादशाह के लिये अलग अध्याय है जबकि मुगलो के इतिहास से हिंदुस्तान के वर्तमान को ज्यादा प्रभाव नही पड़ता।
12) आंग्ल मराठा युद्ध 1857 की क्रांति से भी बड़े थे इसलिए उनका विवरण पहले होना चाहिए मगर गायब है क्योकि बखान टीपू सुल्तान का करना था।
14) 1962 में भारत चीन से पराजित हुआ मगर 1967 में चीन को हराया भी, वो कौन पढ़ायेगा???
More from All
You May Also Like
I just finished Eric Adler's The Battle of the Classics, and wanted to say something about Joel Christiansen's review linked below. I am not sure what motivates the review (I speculate a bit below), but it gives a very misleading impression of the book. 1/x
The meat of the criticism is that the history Adler gives is insufficiently critical. Adler describes a few figures who had a great influence on how the modern US university was formed. It's certainly critical: it focuses on the social Darwinism of these figures. 2/x
Other insinuations and suggestions in the review seem wildly off the mark, distorted, or inappropriate-- for example, that the book is clickbaity (it is scholarly) or conservative (hardly) or connected to the events at the Capitol (give me a break). 3/x
The core question: in what sense is classics inherently racist? Classics is old. On Adler's account, it begins in ancient Rome and is revived in the Renaissance. Slavery (Christiansen's primary concern) is also very old. Let's say classics is an education for slaveowners. 4/x
It's worth remembering that literacy itself is elite throughout most of this history. Literacy is, then, also the education of slaveowners. We can honor oral and musical traditions without denying that literacy is, generally, good. 5/x
As someone\u2019s who\u2019s read the book, this review strikes me as tremendously unfair. It mostly faults Adler for not writing the book the reviewer wishes he had! https://t.co/pqpt5Ziivj
— Teresa M. Bejan (@tmbejan) January 12, 2021
The meat of the criticism is that the history Adler gives is insufficiently critical. Adler describes a few figures who had a great influence on how the modern US university was formed. It's certainly critical: it focuses on the social Darwinism of these figures. 2/x
Other insinuations and suggestions in the review seem wildly off the mark, distorted, or inappropriate-- for example, that the book is clickbaity (it is scholarly) or conservative (hardly) or connected to the events at the Capitol (give me a break). 3/x
The core question: in what sense is classics inherently racist? Classics is old. On Adler's account, it begins in ancient Rome and is revived in the Renaissance. Slavery (Christiansen's primary concern) is also very old. Let's say classics is an education for slaveowners. 4/x
It's worth remembering that literacy itself is elite throughout most of this history. Literacy is, then, also the education of slaveowners. We can honor oral and musical traditions without denying that literacy is, generally, good. 5/x
