[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]
Re: ARTICLE : Biased Reuters news reporting again ! .. is it any surprise ?
-
To: soc-religion-hindu@uunet.uu.net
-
Subject: Re: ARTICLE : Biased Reuters news reporting again ! .. is it any surprise ?
-
From: "H. Krishna Susarla" <susarla.krishna@tumora.swmed.edu>
-
Date: Thu, 05 Sep 1996 22:28:36 +0000 (GMT)
-
Newsgroups: soc.religion.hindu
-
Organization: U.T. Southwestern Medical Center
-
References: <ghenDwqLwI.BKK@netcom.com> <ghenDwt2DL.MG9@netcom.com> <5077j0$rd0@news.ececs.uc.edu> <ghenDx64F4.19H@netcom.com> <ghenDx7vpM.5DJ@netcom.com> <ghenDx9t0L.Bp1@netcom.com>
Jaldhar H. Vyas <jaldhar@braincells.com> wrote in article
<ghenDx9t0L.Bp1@netcom.com>...
> dchakrav@netserv.unmc.edu (Dhruba Chakravarti) wrote in article
> <ghenDx7vpM.5DJ@netcom.com>...
> attack it. If those more learned than I saw no reason to read him than
> neither do I. We are not in favor of novelty. To call something "new
and
> improved" is no compliment to us. The test of a philosophy is its
> commitment to age-old principles.
Well said. If a philosophy needed to be improved, then that would suggest
that there was something wrong with it in the first place. Consequently, it
never seems to surprise me that those in favor of these "new and improved"
interpretations always seem to be the same ones who posess some kind of
post-colonialist inferiority complex.
-- K
