WHY HAVE INDIAN MATHEMATICAL WORKS NOT GIVEN RECOGNITION by Ian G Pearce

[FBInCIAnNSATerroristSlayer]

WHY HAVE INDIAN MATHEMATICAL WORKS NOT GIVEN RECOGNITION by Ian G Pearce

Answer:

TO DENIGRATE everything about Non-Whites (in this case Indians), INJECT
SELF LOATHING and SLAVISHNESS in order to SUBJUGATE and STEAL INDIAN
(Non-Whites) WEALTH.

Any which way you look at it, WHITES are a PURE EVIL THIEVING RACE whose
DNA should be FORCIBLY HUMANIZED, REFORMED and CIVILIZED, to make human
species RESPECTABLE in the Universe.

===========================================================================

Excerpt:

Indian decimal place value system is undoubtedly the "single greatest
Indian contribution to the development of mathematics, and its wider
applications in science, economics (and so on)."



https://mathshistory.st-andrews.ac.uk/Projects/Pearce/chapter-20/

Indian Mathematics - Redressing the balance

Ian G Pearce

Conclusions


I wish to conclude initially by simply saying that the work of Indian
mathematicians has been severely neglected by western historians,
although the situation is improving somewhat. What I primarily wished to
tackle was to answer two questions, firstly, why have Indian works been
neglected, that is, what appears to have been the motivations and aims
of scholars who have contributed to the Eurocentric view of mathematical
history. This leads to the secondary question, why should this neglect
be considered a great injustice.

I have attempted to answer this by providing a detailed investigation
(and analysis) of many of the key contributions of the Indian
subcontinent, and where possible, demonstrate how they pre-date European
works (whether ancient Greek or later renaissance). I have further
developed this 'answer' by providing significant evidence that a number
of Indian works conversely influenced later European works, by way of
Arabic transmissions. I have also included a discussion of the Indian
decimal place value system which is undoubtedly the single greatest
Indian contribution to the development of mathematics, and its wider
applications in science, economics (and so on).

Discussing my first 'question' is less easy, as within the history of
mathematics we find a variety of 'stances'. If the most extreme
Eurocentric model is 'followed' then all mathematics is considered
European, and even less extreme stances do not give full credit to
non-European contributions.

Indeed even in the very latest mathematics histories Indian 'sections'
are still generally fairly brief. Why this attitude exists seems to be a
cultural issue as much as anything. I feel it important not to be
controversial or sweeping, but it is likely European scholars are
resistant due to the way in which the inclusion of non-European,
including Indian, contributions shakes up views that have been held for
hundreds of years, and challenges the very foundations of the
Eurocentric ideology. Perhaps what I am trying to say is that prior to
discoveries made in technically fairly recent times, and in some cases
actually recent times (say in the case of Kerala mathematics) it was
generally believed that all science had been developed in Europe. It is
almost more in the realms of psychology and culture that we argue about
the effect the discoveries of non-European science may have had on the
'psyche' of European scholars.

However I believe this concept of 'late discoveries' is a relatively
weak excuse, as there is substantial evidence that many European
scholars were aware of some Indian works that had been translated into
Latin. All that aside, there was significant resistance to scientific
learning in its totality in Europe until at least the 14th/15th c and as
a result, even though Spain is in Europe, there was little progression
of Arabic mathematics throughout the rest of Europe during the Arab period.

However, following this period it seems likely Latin translations of
Indian and Arabic works will have had an influence. It is possible that
the scholars using them did not know the origin of these works. There
has also been occasional evidence of European scholars taking results
from Indian or Arabic works and presenting them as their own. Actions of
this nature highlight the unscrupulous character of some European scholars.

Along with cultural reasons there are no doubt religious reasons for the
neglect of Indian mathematics, indeed it was the power of the Christian
church that contributed to the stagnation of learning, described as the
dark ages, in Europe.

Above all, and regardless of the arguments, the simple fact is that many
of the key results of mathematics, some of which are at the very 'core'
of modern day mathematics, are of Indian origin. The results were almost
all independently 'rediscovered' by European scholars during and after
the 'renaissance' and while remarkable, history is something that should
be complete and to neglect facts is both ignorant and arrogant. Indeed
the neglect of Indian mathematical developments by many European
scholars highlights what I can best describe as an idea of European
"self importance".

In many ways the results of the Indians were even more remarkable
because they occurred so much earlier, that is, advanced mathematical
ideas were developed by peoples considered less culturally and
academically advanced than (late medieval) Europeans. Although this
comment is controversial it may have been the motivation of several
authors for neglect of Indian works, however, if this is the case, then
opinions based on those attitudes should be ignored. Indian culture was
of the highest standard, and this is reflected in the works that were
produced.

Indian mathematicians made great strides in developing arithmetic (they
can generally be credited with perfecting use of the operators), algebra
(before Arab scholars), geometry (independent of the Greeks), and
infinite series expansions and calculus (attributed to 17th/18th century
European scholars). Also Indian works, through a variety of
translations, have had significant influence throughout the world, from
China, throughout the Arab Empire, and ultimately Europe.

To summarise, the main reasons for the neglect of Indian mathematics
seem to be religious, cultural and psychological. Primarily it is
because of an ideological choice. R Rashed mentions a concept of
modernism vs. tradition. Furthermore Indian mathematics is criticised
because it lacks rigour and is only interested in practical aims (which
we know to be incorrect). Ultimately it is fundamentally important for
historians to be neutral, (that includes Indian historians who may go
too far the 'other way') and this has not always been the case, and
indeed seems to still persist in some quarters.
In terms of consequences of the Eurocentric stance, it has undoubtedly
resulted in a cultural divide and 'angered' non-Europeans scholars.
There is an unhealthy air of European superiority, which is potentially
quite politically dangerous, and scientifically unproductive. In order
to maximise our knowledge of mathematics we must recognise many more
nations as being able to provide valuable input, this statement is also
relevant to past works. Eurocentrism has led to an historical
'imbalance', which basically means scholars are not presenting an
accurate version of the history of the subject, which I view as
unacceptable. Furthermore, it is vital to point out that European
colonisation of India most certainly had an extremely negative effect on
the progress of indigenous Indian science

At the very least it must be hoped that the history of Indian
mathematics will, in time become as highly regarded, as I believe it
should. As D Almeida, J John and A Zadorozhnyy comment:
...Awareness is not widespread. [DA/JJ/AZ1, P 78]

R Rashed meanwhile explains the current problem:
...The same representation is found time and again: classical science,
both in modernity and historicity appears in the final count as work of
European humanity alone...

He continues:

...It is true that the existence of some scientific activity in other
cultures is occasionally acknowledged. Nevertheless, it remains outside
history or is only integrated in so far as it contributed to science,
which is essentially European. [RR, P 333]

In short, the doctrine of the western essence of classical science does
not take objective history into account.
Finally, beyond simply alerting people to the remarkable developments of
Indian mathematicians between around 3000 BC and 1600 AD, and
challenging the Eurocentric ideology of the history of the subject, it
is thought further analysis and research could also have important
consequences for future developments of the subject.

It is thought analysis of the difference in the epistemologies of 17th
century European and 15th century Keralese calculus could help to
provide an answer to the controversial issue of whether mathematics
should concern itself with proof or calculation. Furthermore, in terms
of the way mathematics is currently 'taught' D Almeida, J John and A
Zadorozhnyy elucidate:
...The floating point numbers were used by Kerala mathematicians and,
using this system of numbers, they were able to investigate and
rationalise about the convergence of series. So we (DA/JJ/AZ) believe
that a study of Keralese calculus will provide insights into
computer-assisted teaching strategies. [DA/JJ/AZ, P 96]
(N.B. computers use a floating-point number system.)

Clearly there is massive scope for further study in the area of the
history of Indian and other non-European mathematics, and it is still a
topic on which relatively few works have been written, although slowly
significantly more attention is being paid to the contributions of
non-European countries.
In specific reference to my own project, I would have liked to have been
able to go into more depth in my discussion of Indian algebra, and given
many more worked examples, as I consider Indian algebra to be both
remarkable and severely neglected. Furthermore there is scope for
significant and important study of the transmission of Indian
mathematics across the world, especially into Europe, via Arabic and
later Keralese routes. It is clear that there are many more discoveries
to be made and much more that can be written, as C Srinivasiengar observes:
...The last word on the history of ancient civilisation will never be
said. [CS, P 1]

As a final note, many question the worth of historical study, beyond
personal interest, but I hope I have shown in the course of my work some
of the value and importance of historical study. I will conclude with a
quote from the scholar G Miller, who commented:
...The history of mathematics is the only one of the sciences to possess
a considerable body of perfect and inspiring results which were proved
2000 years ago by the same thought processes as are used today. This
history is therefore useful for directing attention to the permanent
value of scientific achievements and the great intellectual heritage,
which these achievements present, to the world. [AA'D, P 11]

[Manuel]

In article <DJB_I.33706$2B4....@fx04.iad>
FBInCIAnNSATerroristSlayer <FBInCIAnNSATe...@yahoo.com> wrote:

Flush.

[FBInCIAnNSATerroristSlayer]

WHY HAVE INDIAN MATHEMATICAL WORKS NOT GIVEN RECOGNITION by Ian G Pearce

Answer:

TO DENIGRATE everything about Non-Whites (in this case Indians) and
their accomplishments and inventions, INJECT SELF LOATHING and