Re-Imagining Pakistan

Manto mian,

In my limited experience, most professors were no good at all except for giving notes which were 20 years old. I am not much of a scholar but do most Profs write ground breaking research.

Regards

Majumdar,

Somebody ought to tell this to the good professor. He thinks he is averroes... but your post is too late for me to comment.

In deference to the feelings and wishes of the great persuaders on this website...

I, hereby, admit that I was wrong and that the following is accepted unconditionally:

1. Dr. Farhat Hashmi is a true Islamic scholar, who would have been a prophetess if not for the eternal ban on that office.. (because she has so many citations and TV syndications and papers and research) and should be given the Nobel Peace Prize

2. Dr. Pervez Hoodbhoy ought to be given the Nobel Prize in Physics(because he, like aforementioned, has so many citations and TV syndications and papers and research) as well as the Nobel Peace Prize for being such a great statesman and philosopher.

3. Dr. Abdul Qadeer Khan is a true Nuclear Scientist (and not the Materials one that facts show he is) and should be awarded the Nobel Peace Prize (for writing so many papers and serving humanity by proliferating like a pig)


Furthermore... the government of Pakistan should hire all these three great personalities as science advisors.... to bring balance to the force.

Pakistan Zindabad
Hoodbhoy Paindabad
AQ Khan for President.

Re: # 158

ylh,

...... stop making a fool out of yourself! ......... hoodbhoy`s achievements as a `scientist` are about as significant as chomsky`s achievements as a `linguist` or said`s achievments as a `literary theorist`........... people like them chose to be social activists and a pain in the keester of the establishment instead of focusing on their academic fields .........and all three come across as a gadflys to people who disagree with them - for example i think that chomsky should have been commited to a mental asylum years ago ! ............. hoodbhoy`s sixty odd papers in physical review and annals of physics prove that he is/was in the top tier of his profession .......... remember not everyone in the nfl becomes a star and many a heisman winner has fizzled out, but the very fact that you made it to the nfl puts you heads and shoulders above the millions of others who entered the gridiron .............

........... two years ago, after my father passed away, jinnah`s moth eaten potrait which had presided over our household for as long as i can remember finally came down and was replaced by a clock .............. `unity, faith and discipline` is a fine slogan, but truth, diversity and creativity are better values ............


ylh zindabad!
hoodbhoy zindabad !

truth, diversity and creativity !

#163 Hamidm2

[ylh...... stop making a fool out of yourself! ]

Good Lord, mian! You wish Manto to stop doing the ONLY thing he is good at!

Re: # 164

bj,

it is a pity that youth is wasted on the young :)

Hamidm,

I didn`t raise the issue of Hoodbhoy`s credentials. I just don`t find his approach very scientific ... You guys claimed he was a great scientist. There has been no proof and now you say he is not.

BJKumar,

Just because I am having a disagreement with a few good people on chowk, does not in anyway take away from the fact that Gandhi is a proven racist casteist Hindu fascist bigot who believed black people were subhuman and you

Re: # 158

Manto,



Dr Salam like geniuses are not born very often... The popular lecture series on the achievements of Einstein and Salam is easy as they shake the basics of physics. But such great scientists are not more than a few in an era. Consider them the revolutionaries in science.

Then there are the scientists who help in evolution of science. Their discoveries consolidate the theories of science and take them a little bit further than where it was before them. But it is difficult to popularize their work in popular lecture series and documentaries as it is not related to the basics of science and hence not understandable by everyone.

Now, it becomes a difficult task to compare two scientists and their achievements if they are not among the revolutionaries but are at the top of evolutionaries. That`s where citations and similar stuff comes into scene (Although citations and citations/paper itself is very rough idea of that.) Roughly speaking, Any paper having many citations means that the scientists working on the same topic has based their work on the work of the paper being cited. More citations means more work being done in the direction proposed in the base paper etc... If you agree with me on this point, you will have to agree tha citation record of Hoodbhoy is quite decent and he is a good scientist.

Charlie,

Lets say hypothetically I agree. Please go back and see #40 and see how this entire discussion plays out. I am done here. I am not going to be called a fool and abused for expressing my opinion.

Dr Hoodbhoy

You might want to re-imagine your approach. Chowk should be your easiest forum.

Now that the matter has been debated at some length, let us have votes:

Those in favor of replacing ``unity, faith, discipline`` with ``truth, diversity, and creativity`` say Aye. Let me cast the first vote: Aye.

Re: # 170

Even though nobody cares, I vote for

unity, faith, discipline, truth, diversity, and creativity

Re: # 166

ylh,

..... i never said hoodbhoy was a `great scientist` but, as charlie points out, he is a `good scientist - a very rare commodity in pakistan .......... in any case, i don`t think this paper has anything to do with science because he wrote as a social/political activist, which seems to be his primary occupation nowdays ..........

..... ylh mian, there is noting wrong in admitting that your pavolvian response was misplaced ...........

manto:

``All I had said in 40 was that he ought not to be called a professor of science because he is as much a professor of science as Dr. Farhat Hashmi is a scholar ofI slam... (Farhat Hashmi has as many similar ``impressive`` credentials and ``papers`` and TV syndications as Dr. Hoodbhoy. )

The remaining discussion is in response to your posts 40-44 in which you claimed that Hoodbhoy`s credentials were sterling...

But the fact of the matter is that Hoodbhoy does not have any groundbreaking achievements in his field.... and I have asked you fellows to name one. You guys have been putting up papers and citations and abusing me and telling me that I have no right to comment because I don`t have a Physics degree (forget the mockery a certain self proclaimed physicist/mathematician who calls himself Alephnull but should be called A`null made of himself on unplugged when I raised some very elementary questions vis a vis like Lie Algebra and Lie Group Models which he had no clue about ...)

Instead of abusing me and attacking me personally feel free to produce this ground breaking achievement that you (IronMask) claimed the great ``Professor of Science`` had under his belt.``

First of all I`d say that Hoodbhoy speech was long-winded. It could have been shortened. But I love the gist of the speech, because it runs against the conformist grain of ours ociety. But I don`t have time to do that behes right now.

I`d just say this:
Hoodbhoy is quite a competent Physicist, and manages to have a fairly decent research output, (as evidenced by a pretty steady stream of publications) despite his other activities. He is not a hack, as you keep insisting that he is. Very few people break ground in any science, and the title ``Professor`` is not and should not be restricted to ``ground breakers`` only. By that measure, in Americanu niversities, 95% of the professors are hacks. Only 5% are true professors of physics.

Second: since when did Manto become the judge of what is ground breaking and what is not? Manto gadhay you keep calling yourself an economist. What ground-breaking work ine conomics or law have you done? You came to a second tier undergrad school with your baap ka paisa, (Hoodbhoy went to MIT for basically free, by the way) and then went back home to teach at a school where you`d be considered khuda by 15 year olds. In any place worth its salt, your stupid bakvaas would have been shred to pieces and thrown in the garbage bin a long time ago.

Third: I am fairly certain that you don`t know your elbow from your ass in Group Theory. (I don`t know either, but did in a previous lifetime.) You picked up the term ``LieG roup``, and ``Lie Group Model`` from some website and decided to quiz people on it. By the way, I wouldn`t ask people about Lie groups if I wanted to test their ``rudimentary`` knowledge. There are many things that come before that. Buto oops..the website didn`t talk about those!!! And thus Manto got caught with his pants down.

Stick to criticizing Hoodbhoy`s opinions like Faisal did. You have a bad habit of attacking people`s credentials and achievements every time you get into an argument. And what boils my blood is the chutzpah of all this: a dimwitted mediocrity questioning the achievements of far far superior people.

shishapa

You know what they do with votes with multiple thappas... :)

hamidm2 #:..... i never said hoodbhoy was a `great scientist` but, as charlie points out, he is a `good scientist - a very rare commodity in pakistan ..........

........could you explain the difference between a good scientist and a great one.......for example, i studied comp. sci..........am i a good scientist or a great one, or a terrible one........what is the criteria, beyond what charlie has stated?.........surely it must be more than papers...........i published a paper on a field i entered, which i didn`t even think should have been published; but it did get published.......myself and another pakistani guy worked on a software product, which received four patents.......we regularly sit and laugh about how ridiculous the patent process........

surely, publishing papers and getting patents is not what makes a good scientist.........

I care, shishapa. add some more words and instead of a motto you will have a dictionary. :-)