Scholarly errors are correctable through evidence, not dismissed as discursive positions

Evidence

The basic thrust of Namboodripad’s argument is unassailable, even though he makes at least two sizeable errors: in exaggerating the ‘selfsufficiency’ and ‘natural economy’ of the pre-colonial Indian village, and in assigning roo one-sided a role in the democratization of language and literature to the missionaries and the colonial educational apparatus. We shall touch upon the latter issue at .slightly greater length in the next chapter, but it is worth emphasizing that neither error is a matter of ‘Orienralist’ or any other a priori discursive position. They can be seen as errors thanks to the historical research which has become available especially over the past thirty years, and the same criteria of validation and evidence apply in Namboodripad’s case as in any other. — Aijaz Ahmad, In Theory, 1079

Categorization

• XREF: This is the load-bearing methodological move for the reader’s research: Ahmad refuses to bracket Namboodripad’s claims as mere positioned discourse — insisting ordinary criteria of validation and evidence apply — which is precisely the anti-discourse-determinist materialist stance the reader is tracking. — connects to: Criticism and archives must be judged by universal evidentiary standards, not authorial identity — Aijaz Ahmad, In Theory: Classes, Nations, Literatures, 1046; Materialist errors are correctable by evidence, not reducible to discursive position; A scholar’s bad faith need not invalidate the accuracy of their findings. — Robert Irwin, For Lust of Knowing: The Orientalists…, 460 (+6 more)

Broader Connections

• Materialist errors are correctable by evidence, not reducible to discursive position #expands (0.88)
• A scientist’s bias does not invalidate the evidence produced #corroborates (0.82) — Cailin O’Connor and James Owen Weatherall, The Misinformation Age, 122
• A scholar’s ideological agenda does not invalidate the findings of their research #corroborates (0.80) — Robert Irwin, For Lust of Knowing, 536
• Misinformation researchers should avoid equating disagreement with falsehood #expands (0.78) — Joseph Uscinski, Shane Littrell, and Casey Klofstad, The Importance of Epistemology for the…, 166
• Disconfirming evidence can strengthen rather than weaken committed beliefs. #complicates (0.75) — Philip Mirowski, Never Let a Serious Crisis Go to Waste, 97
• Scholarly work is never neutral but can still stay open to contrary evidence #corroborates (0.74)
• A scholar’s bad faith need not invalidate the accuracy of their findings. #complicates (0.72) — Robert Irwin, For Lust of Knowing, 460
• Desired conclusions retroactively validate whatever evidence seems to support them #complicates (0.72)