When Henri Poincare said,
“Doubt everything or believe everything: these are two equally convenient strategies. With either we dispense with the need for reflection.”
It is reasonable to suppose that Poincare did not have subject of ‘ancient Indian history’ in mind or various positions taken by researchers while discussing ‘ancient Indian history’ research.
How should a High chronology enthusiast look at works of ‘traditional chronology enthusiasts’, to use the term employed by Dr. Elst. I presume he may consider himself among the ‘rationalists’ or among ‘reasonable few’ researchers. And then there is ‘AIT’ camp.
One can learn a lot from the research of those who one may not agree with at all. Obvious benefit is to know what not to do. But there is more. Many of these researchers have explored scenario that were worth testing. Posterity has the benefit of learning from such experiments.
Posterity can learn to watch for special interest groups.
As long as Galileo retained the Ptolemaic view (he was professor of the Ptolemaic view of the earth as the center) and kept his telescope away from the heavens, he was applauded with lifetime tenure by the Venetian senate. As soon as he pointed his telescope to the heavens and described what he saw, the special interest groups were offended.
Why the special interest groups were offended?
They were offended because they perceived their interests as irreconcilable with Galileo’s findings. THE CHURCH HAS SAID WE ARE THE CENTER OF THE UNIVERSE. IT IS BLASHPHEMY TO…..
It is not important that Galileo was eventually deemed correct.
Researchers are human beings too. Each human being peers at objective phenomena through a different telescope. And some human beings refuse to see through a telescope for a fear of being proved wrong. We view the world through the filter of our special interests.
Here is what we can do at a minimum.
Not prevent ourselves from trying each other’s telescopes out of fear it will hurt our special interests.
The church and heliocentric way of looking at the world can co-exist.
It is called ‘rational criticism’.