#LTTS-4947
Near to objective 4.618%(4966)
#Probability
#LTTS-4530
— Waves_Perception(Dinesh Patel) Stock Market FARMER (@idineshptl) September 14, 2021
Near to
4.236%(4637)
And
4.618%(4966)#Probability https://t.co/HucHFRRI3B pic.twitter.com/6Ete7iKlbM
More from Waves_Perception(Dinesh Patel) Stock Market FARMER
#LTI -4614
Probability towards 4.618% and beyond..
#Possibility
Probability towards 4.618% and beyond..
#Possibility
#LTI -4145
— MaRkET WaVES (DINESH PATEL ) Stock Market FARMER (@idineshptl) July 14, 2021
Near term base Case (4024)
Look for 4.618% and 6.857%
Long term perspective Fibonacci extension shown in chart. #Perspective pic.twitter.com/Pyl0aGYIuS
More from Ltts
#LTTS
#LLTS Weekly chart shows the stock is recovering from 61.8% fibonacci pullback of last major rise
— Techno Prince (@Trader_souradep) July 24, 2022
Daily chart shows a a rounding bottom , daily RSI bullish
If it sustains above 3500 it can move towards 3900+ levels and later towards 200 DMA 4480#Nifty pic.twitter.com/6ebtfLMJZd
You May Also Like
I just finished Eric Adler's The Battle of the Classics, and wanted to say something about Joel Christiansen's review linked below. I am not sure what motivates the review (I speculate a bit below), but it gives a very misleading impression of the book. 1/x
The meat of the criticism is that the history Adler gives is insufficiently critical. Adler describes a few figures who had a great influence on how the modern US university was formed. It's certainly critical: it focuses on the social Darwinism of these figures. 2/x
Other insinuations and suggestions in the review seem wildly off the mark, distorted, or inappropriate-- for example, that the book is clickbaity (it is scholarly) or conservative (hardly) or connected to the events at the Capitol (give me a break). 3/x
The core question: in what sense is classics inherently racist? Classics is old. On Adler's account, it begins in ancient Rome and is revived in the Renaissance. Slavery (Christiansen's primary concern) is also very old. Let's say classics is an education for slaveowners. 4/x
It's worth remembering that literacy itself is elite throughout most of this history. Literacy is, then, also the education of slaveowners. We can honor oral and musical traditions without denying that literacy is, generally, good. 5/x
As someone\u2019s who\u2019s read the book, this review strikes me as tremendously unfair. It mostly faults Adler for not writing the book the reviewer wishes he had! https://t.co/pqpt5Ziivj
— Teresa M. Bejan (@tmbejan) January 12, 2021
The meat of the criticism is that the history Adler gives is insufficiently critical. Adler describes a few figures who had a great influence on how the modern US university was formed. It's certainly critical: it focuses on the social Darwinism of these figures. 2/x
Other insinuations and suggestions in the review seem wildly off the mark, distorted, or inappropriate-- for example, that the book is clickbaity (it is scholarly) or conservative (hardly) or connected to the events at the Capitol (give me a break). 3/x
The core question: in what sense is classics inherently racist? Classics is old. On Adler's account, it begins in ancient Rome and is revived in the Renaissance. Slavery (Christiansen's primary concern) is also very old. Let's say classics is an education for slaveowners. 4/x
It's worth remembering that literacy itself is elite throughout most of this history. Literacy is, then, also the education of slaveowners. We can honor oral and musical traditions without denying that literacy is, generally, good. 5/x