Australian Politics Forum - aboriginal muslim scholars of the 1600's

Soren

Gold Member

Offline

Posts: 25654
Gender: male

Re: aboriginal muslim scholars of the 1600's
Reply #15 - Jul 9^th, 2012 at 3:19pm

Karnal wrote on Jul 9^th, 2012 at 1:22pm:

My point is that if you create a historical diatribe - a set of history wars - peope stop listening. They merely retreat into their own ideological fortresses.

That you do this is unsuprising.

To hear this:

Quote:

The 'competition of stories' about the past is not a competition of equals. Treating oral history going back 300+ years as if it was of the same weight as written or material evidence is not competition but slant.
Falah talks it up because he wishes to present an Islamic slant, Islam as beneficient for aboriginese, against British and European deleteriousness. So Falah is not presenting scholarship but propaganda, built around a weak, constantly talked-up kernel of scholarship (there was contact betwteen Aboriginese and Indonesians).
That you don't see it is unsurprising.

as a "historical diatribe - a set of history wars" requires an unsually cloth-eared Paki bvgger.

Step forward.

Back to top

IP Logged

Karnal

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 96460

Re: aboriginal muslim scholars of the 1600's
Reply #16 - Jul 9^th, 2012 at 3:31pm

longweekend58 wrote on Jul 9^th, 2012 at 3:08pm:

Karnal wrote on Jul 9^th, 2012 at 3:01pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Jul 9^th, 2012 at 2:49pm:

Karnal wrote on Jul 9^th, 2012 at 1:42pm:

freediver wrote on Jul 9^th, 2012 at 12:48pm:

Quote:

Freediver, this is a really interesting historical issue. I'm not sure why you feel compelled to attack. I understand that you've come to hate all things Islamic, but I don't really see how this is an Islamic issue - it's an historical one. It's good to see you put Falah's thesis under the microscope, but why the overt hostility?

I'm sorry you feel that way. Can you explain which bit of my question came across as hostile? Regarding Islam, in the thread I quoted from Falah attributed all contact to Islamic traders and claimed the converted many aborigines. I assumed the aboriginal Universities and embassies were something to do with that influence.

A lot of it is probably down to me losing patience with getting Falah to acknowledge the reality of the farming potential of the area.

This I understand. You actually raise good points - it's the relentless attempts to corner your prey that make this seem less like a discussion, and more like an ideological war.

We expect this from posters like Sprinty and the old boy. They wouldn't even read the op before they demonstrated their unique insight on the stick. They see this as a strength - they believe they know all the answers and anyone stupid enought to read something places themselves at risk of being ideologically tinted.

Such righteousness is self indulgent. It merely preaches to the choir. If you wanted to make someone change their mind, you use different tactics to needling and bludgeoning. No one is persuaded if they feel cornered.

for all you want to indulge this nonsense, it sounds more ridiculous the more you read. aboriginal UNIVERSITIES??? SCHOLARS??? studying what? they are already on record as being the single most prehistopric race on earth having invented nothing more than a stick and haveing no technology or literature to speak of.

I think you'll find archaeological evidence of a number of Aboriginal universities around this country - many of them with faculties of the stick.

True, evidence of any faculties of Pakistani Studies has not yet been discovered, but Falah is currently working on this.

"Prehistoric" refers to cultures without written histories. Outside Greeco-Roman, Semitic, Egyptian, Chinese, Vedic and a couple of American empires, everyone else is classed as prehistoric.

The history Falah is referring to - Australia prior to European settlement - could best be described as prehistoric.

That's what this debate is all about.

i read that suite101 reference to aboriginal history. Surely you dont subscribe to any of that patent nonsense. It is pretty hard to take ANY of it seriously.

Macassans came and traded a bit of tobacco and tamarind. This argument is hardly going to bring down real estate values, is it?

Back to top

« Last Edit: Jul 9^th, 2012 at 3:36pm by Karnal »

IP Logged

longweekend58

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 45675
Gender: male

Re: aboriginal muslim scholars of the 1600's
Reply #17 - Jul 9^th, 2012 at 3:47pm

Karnal wrote on Jul 9^th, 2012 at 3:31pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Jul 9^th, 2012 at 3:08pm:

Karnal wrote on Jul 9^th, 2012 at 3:01pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Jul 9^th, 2012 at 2:49pm:

Karnal wrote on Jul 9^th, 2012 at 1:42pm:

freediver wrote on Jul 9^th, 2012 at 12:48pm:

Quote:

Freediver, this is a really interesting historical issue. I'm not sure why you feel compelled to attack. I understand that you've come to hate all things Islamic, but I don't really see how this is an Islamic issue - it's an historical one. It's good to see you put Falah's thesis under the microscope, but why the overt hostility?

I'm sorry you feel that way. Can you explain which bit of my question came across as hostile? Regarding Islam, in the thread I quoted from Falah attributed all contact to Islamic traders and claimed the converted many aborigines. I assumed the aboriginal Universities and embassies were something to do with that influence.

A lot of it is probably down to me losing patience with getting Falah to acknowledge the reality of the farming potential of the area.

This I understand. You actually raise good points - it's the relentless attempts to corner your prey that make this seem less like a discussion, and more like an ideological war.

We expect this from posters like Sprinty and the old boy. They wouldn't even read the op before they demonstrated their unique insight on the stick. They see this as a strength - they believe they know all the answers and anyone stupid enought to read something places themselves at risk of being ideologically tinted.

Such righteousness is self indulgent. It merely preaches to the choir. If you wanted to make someone change their mind, you use different tactics to needling and bludgeoning. No one is persuaded if they feel cornered.

for all you want to indulge this nonsense, it sounds more ridiculous the more you read. aboriginal UNIVERSITIES??? SCHOLARS??? studying what? they are already on record as being the single most prehistopric race on earth having invented nothing more than a stick and haveing no technology or literature to speak of.

I think you'll find archaeological evidence of a number of Aboriginal universities around this country - many of them with faculties of the stick.

True, evidence of any faculties of Pakistani Studies has not yet been discovered, but Falah is currently working on this.

"Prehistoric" refers to cultures without written histories. Outside Greeco-Roman, Semitic, Egyptian, Chinese, Vedic and a couple of American empires, everyone else is classed as prehistoric.

The history Falah is referring to - Australia prior to European settlement - could best be described as prehistoric.

That's what this debate is all about.

i read that suite101 reference to aboriginal history. Surely you dont subscribe to any of that patent nonsense. It is pretty hard to take ANY of it seriously.

Macassans came and traded a bit of tobacco and tamarind. This argument is hardly going to bring down real estate values, is it?

the claim of aboriginal scholars and universities and all the rest of the drivel is what I was referring to. Do you seriously think there were SCHOLARS by any meaningful undestanding of the term?

Back to top

AUSSIE: "Speaking for myself, I could not care less about 298 human beings having their life snuffed out in a nano-second, or what impact that loss has on Members of their family, their parents..."

IP Logged

Karnal

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 96460

Re: aboriginal muslim scholars of the 1600's
Reply #18 - Jul 9^th, 2012 at 4:08pm

No - probably more like "medicine men". But the argument - that tobacco was not "abused" (i.e, smoked daily) sounds right. American natives also used tobacco in rituals and social events.

I agree that Yolngu universities is stretching things to the absolute limit. Who writes these things? Nanette Croce is referred to down the bottom of the page. She appears to be American or Canadian.

Back to top

IP Logged

Sir Spot of Borg

Gold Member

Offline

WE ARE BORG

Posts: 26513
Australia

Re: aboriginal muslim scholars of the 1600's
Reply #19 - Jul 9^th, 2012 at 4:21pm

longweekend58 wrote on Jul 9^th, 2012 at 3:47pm: