institutional holding increasing icing on the cake
#LAURUSLABS
close abv 708 SL 592 on closing basis for 1769
#Relativestrength #outperformance #investing #india
#AhmedabadNest
More from NISHSHKUMAR JAANI
band walk start quick towards 800! https://t.co/DX5iHPePIC
#GUJGAS
— NISHSHKUMAR JAANI (@NishshkumarJaan) July 20, 2021
batting with 5% Risk for 30% Gains
entry abv 678 sl 647 tgt 894-Gone side ways for month now #Breakouts #relativestrength #outperformance #AhmedabadNest #investing #India pic.twitter.com/QWGSVJqOdK
Boom 💥 5500 to 6500 At ATH heading to 11000 updating chart
#Naukri
— NISHSHKUMAR JAANI (@NishshkumarJaan) August 24, 2021
8 months of consolidation with 25% price range close abv 5500 will confirm breakout keep 10% SL from entry for 25% upmove#AhmedabadNest #investingstrategies #India pic.twitter.com/BYrZf4aTKX
More from Lauruslabs
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