Criticism and archives must be judged by universal evidentiary standards, not authorial identity

Evidence

There are innumerable things to be learned from them, but as regards the positions that have been given such credence by Edward Said and rhe subsequent Colonial Discourse Analysis groups, at least two general principles which govern the principal historiographic traditions in Indiaessentially humanist, rationalist and universalist principlesmay be emphasized. One is that the right ro criticize is a universal right, which must be conceded ro everyone, European and Asian alike; what is objectionable is not the European’s right ro criticize Asians, past or present, but those particular exercises of this right which are manifest and arbitrary exercises of colonial or racial or any other kind of prejudice. In other words, criticism itself must be evaluated from some objective criterion of validity and evidence. The accompanying principle, necessarily conjoined to the first, is that the archive which we have inherited from our colonial past is, like any substantial historical archive, a vast mixture of fantastic constructs, time-bound errors and invaluable empirical information. This, roo, must be subjected to the same kind of discrimination that we require for any other kind of historical investigation, whether the writer in question is European or non-European. — Aijaz Ahmad, In Theory, 1046

Categorization

• XREF: Directly rebuts Saidian discourse-determinism that Ahmad elsewhere critiques; connects to Marx’s ‘double mission’ debate and Spivak’s strategic essentialism as discourse-first moves. — connects to: Criticism must be judged by objective validity, not the critic’s identity. — Aijaz Ahmad, In Theory: Nations, Classes, Literatures, 460; Well-intentioned historical revisionism still fails rigorous evidentiary standards — Gil Anidjar, The Jew, the Arab: A History of the…, 937; Academic evidentiary standards can dismiss descendants’ ancestral oral accounts — Tamara Lanier, From These Roots: My Fight with Harvard…, 266 (+6 more)
• SEED: Article angle: two Indian historiography principles as a materialist alternative to Colonial Discourse Analysis’s identity-based epistemic gatekeeping.

Broader Connections

• Criticism must be judged by objective validity, not the critic’s identity. #expands (0.95) — Aijaz Ahmad, In Theory, 460
• A scholar’s bad faith need not invalidate the accuracy of their findings. #corroborates (0.90) — Robert Irwin, For Lust of Knowing, 460
• Scholarly errors are correctable through evidence, not dismissed as discursive positions #corroborates (0.85) — Aijaz Ahmad, In Theory, 1079
• Academic evidentiary standards can dismiss descendants’ ancestral oral accounts #complicates (0.82) — Tamara Lanier, From These Roots, 266
• Scholarly evidentiary standards could annul an ancestor’s living testimony #complicates (0.80) — Tamara Lanier, From These Roots, 266
• Well-intentioned historical revisionism still fails rigorous evidentiary standards #exemplifies (0.78) — Gil Anidjar, The Jew, the Arab, 937
• Labeling criticism in advance with political names contradicts genuine critical inquiry #expands (0.75) — Aijaz Ahmad, In Theory, 277
• Impossible perfect objectivity does not justify abandoning scholarly standards. #qualifies (0.74)
• Citing sources rhetorically when they lack dispositive effect constitutes an appeal to authority #exemplifies (0.72) — Ruggero J. Aldisert, Agatha D. Aldisert, Logic for Lawyers- A Guide to Clear…, 1045