Which was a renowned Jain scholar who greatly honoured by Akbar? ?->(Show Answer!)

1. Which was a renowned Jain scholar who greatly honoured by Akbar?

Answer: Harivijaya

Reply

Comments

Tags

Show Similar Question And Answers

QA->Which was a renowned Jain scholar who greatly honoured by Akbar?....

QA->WHO WAS THE RENOWNED LITERARY FIGURE DURING AKBAR’S REIGN....

QA->WHO WAS THE MOST RENOWNED LITERARY FIGURE OF HINDI DURING AKBAR REIGN....

QA->Rou’sseaus theories greatly contributed to which one of the following?....

QA->Rou’sseaus theories greatly contributed to which one of the following ?....

MCQ-> If translated into English, most of the ways economists talk among themselves would sound plausible enough to poets, journalists, businesspeople, and other thoughtful though non-economical folk. Like serious talk anywhere — among boat desingers and baseball fans, say — the talk is hard to follow when one has not made a habit of listening to it for a while. The culture of the conversation makes the words arcane. But the people in the unfamiliar conversation are not Martians. Underneath it all (the economist’s favourite phrase) conversational habits are similar. Economics uses mathematical models and statistical tests and market arguments, all of which look alien to the literary eye. But looked at closely they are not so alien. They may be seen as figures of speech-metaphors, analogies, and appeals to authority.Figures of speech are not mere frills. They think for us. Someone who thinks of a market as an ‘invisible hand’ and the organization of work as a ‘production function’ and his coefficients as being ‘significant’, as an economist does, is giving the language a lot of responsibility. It seems a good idea to look hard at his language.If the economic conversation were found to depend a lot on its verbal forms, this would not mean that economics would be not a science, or just a matter of opinion, or some sort of confidence game. Good poets, though not scientists, are serious thinkers about symbols; good historians, though not scientists, are serious thinkers about data. Good scientists also use language. What is more (though it remains to be shown) they use the cunning of language, without particularly meaning to. The language used is a social object, and using language is a social act. It requires cunning (or, if you prefer, consideration), attention to the other minds present when one speaks.The paying of attention to one’s audience is called ‘rhetoric’, a word that I later exercise hard. One uses rhetoric, of course, to warn of a fire in a theatre or to arouse the xenophobia of the electorate. This sort of yelling is the vulgar meaning of the word, like the president’s ‘heated rhetoric’ in a press conference or the ‘mere rhetoric’ to which our enemies stoop. Since the Greek flame was lit, though, the word has been used also in a broader and more amiable sense, to mean the study of all the ways of accomplishing things with language: inciting a mob to lynch the accused, to be sure, but also persuading readers of a novel that its characters breathe, or bringing scholars to accept the better argument and reject the worse.The question is whether the scholar- who usually fancies himself an announcer of ‘results’ or a stater of ‘conclusions’ free of rhetoric — speaks rhetorically. Does he try to persuade? It would seem so. Language, I just said, is not a solitary accomplishment. The scholar doesn’t speak into the void, or to himself. He speaks to a community of voices. He desires to be heeded, praised, published, imitated, honoured, en-Nobeled. These are the desires. The devices of language are the means. Rhetoric is the proportioning of means to desires in speech.Rhetoric is an economics of language, the study of how scarce means are allocated to the insatiable desires of people to be heard. It seems on the face of it a reasonable hypothesis that economists are like other people in being talkers, who desire listeners whey they go to the library or the laboratory as much as when they go to the office or the polls. The purpose here is to see if this is true, and to see if it is useful: to study the rhetoric of economic scholarship.The subject is scholarship. It is not the economy, or the adequacy of economic theory as a description of the economy, or even mainly the economist’s role in the economy. The subject is the conversation economists have among themselves, for purposes of persuading each other that the interest elasticity of demand for investment is zero or that the money supply is controlled by the Federal Reserve.Unfortunately, though, the conclusions are of more than academic interest. The conversations of classicists or of astronomers rarely affect the lives of other people. Those of economists do so on a large scale. A well known joke describes a May Day parade through Red Square with the usual mass of soldiers, guided missiles, rocket launchers. At last come rank upon rank of people in gray business suits. A bystander asks, “Who are those?” “Aha!” comes the reply, ”those are economists: you have no idea what damage they can do!” Their conversations do it.According to the passage, which of the following is the best set of reasons for which one needs to ‘look hard’ at an economist’s language?A. Economists accomplish a great deal through their language.B. Economics is an opinion-based subject.C. Economics has a great impact on other’s lives.D. Economics is damaging.
...

MCQ->If two of them wear the same colour, then how many of the following must be false? I. Amar wears blue and Akbar does not wear green II. Amar does not wear blue and Akbar wears blue III. Amar does not wear blue and Akbar does not wear blue IV. Amar wears green, Akbar does not wear red, Anthony does not wear green...

MCQ-> Direction for the following two questions: Answer the questions based on the following information. Amar, Akbar and Anthony are three friends. Only three colours are available for their shirts, viz. red, green and blue. Amar does not wear red shirt. Akbar does not wear green shirt. Anthony does not wear blue shirt.If Akbar and Anthony wear the same colour of shirts, then which of the following is not true?
...

MCQ->Three truck drivers, Amar, Akbar and Anthony stop at a road side eating joint. Amar orders 10 rotis, 4 plates of tadka, and a cup of tea. Akbar orders 7 rotis, 3 plates of tadka, and a cup of tea. Amar pays 80 for the meal and Akbar pays 60. Meanwhile, Anthony orders 5 rotis, 5 plates of tadka and 5 cups of tea. How much (in ) will Anthony pay?...

MCQ->Ms Deepti Jain invests 11% of her monthly salary ie Rs 5,236 in Fixed Deposits Later she invests 19% of her monthly salary on Life Insurance Policies also she invests another 7 % of her monthly salary on Mutual Funds what is the total annual amount invested by Ms Deepti Jain ?...