Does Hinduism SE promote a reductionist approach to answering questions?

Question

I am a new user and I have been reading through many questions and answers and observing the moderation process.

It appears to me that this site encourages or enforces a reductionist approach to answering questions. What I mean is basically a cut-and-dry approach of rigid scripture-quoting, without any wiggle room for some meta-analysis and bringing out deeper insights. The feeling that comes to mind is that of dissecting a dead body rather than interacting with a living person (lol).

Hinduism is a living, breathing tradition of spiritual seeking, and it cannot be reduced to some purely academic and pedantic book-based study. In this respect it is diametrically opposite of Abrahamic religions for whom their Bible or Quran is the one and only authority, and if the book doesn't say anything, then that thought is itself forbidden. Hinduism is an open-architecture system. Although scripture provides a fundamental basis, Hinduism is greater than the sum of its parts. There are many different sources of information. A vast portion of knowledge is also gained from listening to lectures of scholars, who quote only contextually from various scriptures, and for me, as someone who gathers a lot of diverse information from various sources, it may not always be possible to find a single line in a single book to reference in my answers.

As Adi Shankara himself says in his poem Bhaja Govindam, "na hi na hi rakṣati ḍukṛñkaraṇe" :-)

What is the general opinion of others in this respect?

Answer 1

What is the general opinion of others in this respect?

I was not around when this site was formed but after reading the following meta posts, it became evident that people who are not happy with Yahoo Answers, Quora, Wikipedia articles and blog posts on Hinduism where "my grandma told me so" is considered a valid answer could come here and get a clear answer from Hindu scriptures. Since not all topics related to Hinduism, especially questions with tags history, culture, etc., are covered in scriptures, various kinds of references are allowed.

• Can we enforce quotations of scripture references?

• The copy-paste issue, Hinduism version

• Guidelines for new users answering questions

Hinduism is greater than the sum of its parts. There are many different sources of information. A vast portion of knowledge is also gained from listening to lectures of scholars, who quote only contextually from various scriptures

Which is why the site allows quoting from works of scholars, gurus, acharyas, etc. E.g., one could quote from The Complete Works of Swami Vivekananda.

it may not always be possible to find a single line in a single book to reference in my answers

If you don't recollect where you read or heard a certain line you want to cite, you could leave a comment under the question saying so. There is no urgency to write an answer. Also, not everything stated in an answer needs to be backed up; it's usually the part that addresses the central question that needs references.

Hinduism is a living, breathing tradition of spiritual seeking, and it cannot be reduced to some purely academic and pedantic book-based study.

Please keep in mind that this Stack Exchange site is about Hinduism. It's a knowledge base. It doesn't need to imitate Hinduism in how it functions. While it's true that current site rules are different from how the majority of Hindus perceive or practice Hinduism, the rules are in place for a good reason: to deter low-quality answers. Imagine a scholar writing a paper on a certain aspect of Hinduism but with no citations or bibliography of sources consulted. Will you take the paper seriously?

Answer 2

Have you ever observed this advisory notice, on the TOP right side, when you enter into main site?

Like any library, Hinduism Stack Exchange shares great information, but does not offer personalized advice, and does not take the place of seeking such advice from any Acharya, Pundit, astrologer, Guru or other trustworthy Counselor.

---

This particular word Library, is a myth/mirage, as far as this site is concerned. This particular notice, often misleads many a novice member into thinking that the site is really offers great information.

As I stated above, it is a MYTH/MIRAGE.

---

What will a library offer?

It will offer access to all types of ideas on different subjects from various authors, without demeaning any idea.

For example take the subject Ramayana:

There are many books on this single subject. The Library will contain the original version of Valmiki Ramayana, Tulasidas Ramayana, Jain Ramayana, etc.

It can also contain books authored in an eccentric way by people like Devadut Patnaik or by Western writers or people under the influence of Marxism.

Whether the opinions expressed by different authors have basis in scriptures? I don't think so.

So members have wide choice of selecting books of their choice, reading and forming opinions.

---

Here, in this site, the majority of the members belong to one particular sect or believe in a limited literature from Hinduism as authentic. :-).

Naturally, they will not allow ideas of other sects/way of thinking to flourish here. Be it a question posted in Main site or here in this Meta site, they will see that it has been discouraged by downvoting or closed.

I am giving reference my own Meta post - Why don't we start a sect-wise SEs in Hinduism?, which was downvoted by 12 members.

Why should a Meta post be downvoted? Is not a Meta post for discussion purpose?

Remember Moderators are dormant here.

I am giving reference to my answer for this question Do Vedas mention that Vedas ALONE are to be followed and Itihasa/Purana should be discarded?, which received 5 downvotes.

---

If the post, be it a question or an answer, is promoting violence or instigating other sects or projecting obscene or vulgar ideas, etc, then it can be removed altogether.

However, when the moderators are claiming that this site will act as a Library for Hinduism, that idea should have been materialised in real sense.

That is not happening here. That is why neither this site is able to attract new members with varied ideas or nor is it retaining earlier members.

This site is shrinking.

---

Edit 8-7-2020

2 members accused me of the following, in the comments section:

• Carmen sandiego stated - I don't understand your obsession with the sect

• ram stated - that is just mud-slinging. Exactly what part of "backup your answer with references" is sectarian ?

I would like to answer point-wise.

---

1. I don't have any obsession with the sect. I stated in my answer as follows:

.. the majority of the members belong to one particular sect or believe in a limited literature from Hinduism as authentic. :-).

Naturally, they will not allow ideas of other sects/way of thinking to flourish here.

I had sufficient grounds for stating so. In fact, the rules framed by members, who were in the initial stages or a little later, have obsession with the literature pertaining to particular sect. This is my experience in this site in 2015 and from May 2019 onwards.

These members will see that answers/questions that go against their valued literature will either be removed/deleted or downvoted.

• My question Was Vishnu Sahasranama, not a part of Anusasana Parva of Mahabharata, but a later day addition? was closed on flimsy grounds by a group of members, just because it is questioning their literature.

• Another question of mine Why Gautama, the Buddha said about 3 Vedas only? marking it as a duplicate, though I had stated that my question is different, again because it is questioning their literature.

• This question Is Gautama Buddha an avatar of Lord Vishnu? still allowed to remain, though it pertains to Buddhism, because it is favourable to the particular sect.

• My answer under this question was downvoted, though proper references were provided, just because it is speaking against the beliefs of a particular sect.

• my answer under my own meta question, will throw light on some other aspects also.

---

So it is the obsession of members pertaining to one sect, causing irreparable damage to this site.

Edit 20-7-2020

Basically, the core area of Sanatana Dharma aka Hinduism is Spirituality but not ritual practices, as commonly misunderstood by many in this site.

Rig Veda encourages probing deep into one's own self, which is the prerequisite for Spirituality.

it is necessary to impose certain restrictions with respect to ritualistic questions so as to make many answers authentic.

Spirituality is an ABSTRACT thing.

Can we give references to LOVE, HATRED, HAPPINESS, etc, which emotions and ABSTRACT? We can only experience them.

It is too childish to expect answers to questions on Spirituality to be backed with reference. And, closing questions with respect to Spirituality, on the pretext of opinion based, is much more childish.

---

Many of the members in this site refer to Bhagavad Gita.

What does BG 4.34 say?

तद्विद्धि प्रणिपातेन परिप्रश्नेन सेवया।

उपदेक्ष्यन्ति ते ज्ञानं ज्ञानिनस्तत्त्वदर्शिनः।।4.34।।

This you should learn [from those, endowed with knowledge], by prostration, by iniry and by service [all offered to them]; those who are endowed with knowledge and are capable of showing the truth will give you the truth nearby;

Why should a Realised soul like Sri Krishna say परिप्रश्नेन instead of प्रश्नेन? Why should Sri Krishna use the word the Wise, indicating many wise people?

---

A sage explained once that परिप्रश्नेन indicates not mere questioning for the sake of questioning, but questioning with an intention of clearing doubts and getting wisdom.

He used the word the wise, to indicate that wisdom can be obtained from many people and including inanimate things, as was mentioned in Avadhutopaakhyanam of Bhagavatam.

---

So SPIRITUALITY does not always offer references from scriptures. Wisdom that emanate from deep pondering cannot be substantiated with scriptural references.

I repeat, expecting answers on SPIRITUALITY to be always backed with scriptural references, is mere childishness.

And, closing questions on SPIRITUALITY, on the pretext of opinion based, is much more childishness.

---

Answer 3

I think that there are actually two separate issues here, reductionism referred to in the title, and the requirement to base answers on scriptural reference or other authoritative references from sages, which is forms the core of the body of your question. I shall make an attempt to address both these concerns.

---

Firstly, regarding the apparent promotion of a reductionist approach on the site. You elaborate upon this aspect here:

What I mean is basically a cut-and-dry approach of rigid scripture-quoting, without any wiggle room for some meta-analysis and bringing out deeper insights. The feeling that comes to mind is that of dissecting a dead body rather than interacting with a living person

I think that you'might be confusing reductionism with excessive reliance on authority. Your actual complaint seems to be with the referencing requirments which you feel are excessive.

Regardless of the validity (or lack thereof) of that complaint, reductionism per se should not be a problem for the site. After all, reductionism is nothing other than the method of trying to explain complicated problems or questions in terms of simpler or more general things. It might seem slightly strange to some to accept it on a site on Hinduism, because reductionism is an integral principle of, and therefore generally associated with science.

However, who is to say that Hindus cannot accept scientific methods of thinking? And even if one rejects science, there is no reason why he or she cannot use a reductionist approach in other areas, independent of its application in science!

My point is that, reductionism is not inherently harmful, and therefore its mere presence on the site is not something bad in and of itself. Therefore, since it doesn't seem to be your actual compliant, you might even consider editing this term out of your post to avoid confusion.

---

Coming to the main issue highlighted by you, which is that of the requirement of answers being based on scriptural or otherwise authoritative references, there are some good reasons why such a requirement is not necessarily bad, but in fact a good thing for a site like this one:

• One thing that we can all agree on is that despite the validity of individual opinions and traditions, respected sages/ gurus and holy texts hold much more weight than something only opined by you, me or some random person. There may possibly be some exceptions, but this certainly holds as a general rule in almost all situations. Thus, relying on the authority of say, the Vedas, makes any answer much more reliable and useful.

• Requiring that answers be based on scriptural sources also helps in reducing spam and other deliberately useless/ incorrect answers. When there is no such requirement people might be tempted to make up answers based on their own imagination, or put up something incorrect based on half-remembered things as if it were the absolute truth. It is easy for even well-meaning people to make serious errors this way. The expectation of backing from respected authority serves as a strong moderating force. As it is said in Bhagvat Gita 6.16, Ati sarvatra varjayet!

• The fact that there are a wise variety of schools and opinions based on various texts and gurus, all respected on their own and allowed to disagree, makes this an even better solution! Instead of relying on a single book that is be-all, there is scope for presenting varied viewpoints from many wise people. This reduces the problems caused by the citation restriction.