Of course Sam Harris is in favor of torture. And not just things like waterboarding, but the heavy stuff. The End of Faith makes this clear.
An athiest world = a better world.
- Thread starter answers
- Start date
anyhow, getting back to the topic of the OP and the specific matter i would like you ((Q)) to address--
let's ignore all the flaws of the OP and address this particular issue from the "enlightening" article:
and:
how is one to accurately gauge "belief in God" and "certain(ty) that God exists"? i asked you for a formulation that could yield fruitful results, and would not be mired in ambiguity. your previous attempts (one re: delusions and re: "supernatural" "which controls human destinies") were woefully inadequate, and i clearly specified why they were inadequate.
moreover, we all know that what one professes to believe (assuming we've resolved the ambiguity) is often in discordance with what one actually believes, i.e. there are many who claim to be, say, "christian," but they are such only on the surface and they simply go through the motions; and there are many professed "atheist" who pray for salvation on their deathbeds.
let's ignore all the flaws of the OP and address this particular issue from the "enlightening" article:
and:
how is one to accurately gauge "belief in God" and "certain(ty) that God exists"? i asked you for a formulation that could yield fruitful results, and would not be mired in ambiguity. your previous attempts (one re: delusions and re: "supernatural" "which controls human destinies") were woefully inadequate, and i clearly specified why they were inadequate.
moreover, we all know that what one professes to believe (assuming we've resolved the ambiguity) is often in discordance with what one actually believes, i.e. there are many who claim to be, say, "christian," but they are such only on the surface and they simply go through the motions; and there are many professed "atheist" who pray for salvation on their deathbeds.
This may be true, however, they are becoming atheists. They just don't care about religion one way or another - certainly not enough to do actually think about itYou'll find that even less of them think that the solutions to the world's problems lies in falling in line with the neo-atheist attitude
thank you.
while i realize that probably about half of those were my own posts, i was simply responding to an antagonistic reluctance to respond to, what i perceive as, fairly straightforward questions.
That's a good theory, but then, it can be almost guaranteed that religious fervor will build up again eventually. People have an inborn desire to turn to faith when things are down.
Here's an excerpt from an article which really has you painted in a boxThis may be true, however, they are becoming atheists. They just don't care about religion one way or another - certainly not enough to do actually think about it
The attempt to stage a war between religion and science - whether fuelled by religious or scientific fundamentalists - is part of the problem and not part of the solution with regard to the times we are living in. If we seek to preserve our liberal western values, then we need to resist the spirit of aggression and confrontation which is becoming increasingly characteristic of public debate - in Britain and the United States especially - concerning the role of religion in society.
With regard to debates about Islam, we must recognise how the portrayal of Muslims as violent fundamentalists still resonates with those 19th-century beliefs that white westerners are inherently superior to their savage and barbaric counterparts in other cultures and religions. Also lurking within the media treatment of religion today is a masked anti-Catholicism, for that too has been a feature of modern societies such as Britain and America whose values have been largely shaped by Protestantism. Unless we are attentive to these subtexts, our discussions about religion risk being vehicles for unacknowledged prejudices and historical animosities which can only serve to fuel conflict in these uncertain times.
IOW despite whatever lip service one might or might not give for god, the values (ie the values that shape for a horrid rendition of theism or secularism) remain practically unblemished.
Is it possible that some fundamental Islamic norms are never going to resonate well with most Western peoples? Polygamy comes to mind. When Muslims scream God is Great! God is Great! while cutting the throat of some poor idiot, is this shudder in revulsion we Westerners share, somehow connected to our own barbaric past? I often wonder if Islam isn't really serving as a window into a past we're all happy we progressed ... past
Why is it, do you suppose, we still see Fundamental Islam (a monotheism similar to Mormonism - which we do accept, somewhat) as back-ass-backwards and incompatible with Western society while something much more foreign, say Buddhism, is considered enlightened and progressive? Why are Muslim portrayed as violent fundamentalists while Japanese (who we actually nuked... twice) are peaceful - cool even? Why is it possible the Japanese, who have a very different culture, are still regarded much much much better than Muslims?
What role does Islam play in this?
What exactly does "Islam" bring to the table that betters Western society? Anything? Let me guess: Momo was the Last Puppet?
who's for and who's against this?
together against who?
:m:
"fundemental"? you know what that's supposed to mean?
what is the ratio of muslims who practiced polygamy to those who don't?
what is thought of the majority who don't practice polygamy by the rest?
i hate you michael.
what if they'll always be different? islam and the west? they can't live together in peace? islam has to be removed because some of the former culture marry more than one women instead of most people of the latter sleeping with more than one women just without calling it marriage?
"muslims" scream?? who are you to determine their objective religion as islam?
is it only muslims who slice off throats?
"we Westerners share"? so we don't share it too?:bugeye: we jump happy for it?
do you westerners share the same shudder of revulsion when you see arms and smitheriens of children in palestine and iraq? do you feel the revultion then too? do you share it?
because buddahists didn't have to defend their homes from your troops?
they didn't have to fight you for their land?
they didn't kill you and get killed by you in their own streets?
because they didn't nuke you back?
becasue of their technology and industry?
because nobody would pay tax money to save people who aren't "violent fundamentalists"?
i really hate you michael.:shrug:
Why is it possible the Japanese, who have a very different culture, are still regarded much much much better than Muslims?
What role does Islam play in this?
a previously asked question which has been answered needs not be asked.
an answered question needs not be guessed upon. especially with your stupid guesses.
heh heh heh
that, is why i really really hate you michael.
Only when you take that as a sufficient example of a fundamental Islamic norm.
which makes others wonder why you draw on such specific examples in order to paint your picture of progressI often wonder if Islam isn't really serving as a window into a past we're all happy we progressed ... past
Possibly the protestant value system that has underpinned much of western culture for the past 200 years
err ... at a rough guess, current politics, particularly as they are portrayed through the media. I had a great uncle who, due to his personal experiences during the 40's, was still unable to professionally interact with japanese (in the real estate business) several decades later.
or alternative way to phrase the question, why is it possible for westerners to have a high regard for japanese people 50 years after being in a state of nationalistic animosity towards them?
indeed
or even better, what is the requirement for something to better western society in order to be deemed valid?
Yes, I started a thread on this once. What does it mean to you?
I didn't say Muslims I said Islam. As in an Islamic tenant. In time it may not be Islamic anymore. When that happens it is called progress. This happened in regards to the ex-Islamic tenant of Slavery. It was Islamic. Now it isn't.
Don't you think? Or was it wrong of the "West" to pressure Muslims to stop selling Slaves?
OK. You can put me on ignore and then my posts will not be shown? At least I think that's how it works.
No, just parts of it modified when practiced in the West.
Good point. The sad thing is MANY Muslims are happy to be complacent - why I don't know? But MANY refuse to take a stand and say this is wrong. Why?
Do you think that the Islamic crusades against the Persians was wrong?
It's very rare to see a Buddhist cut off a man's head while screaming Buddha is Great. Yes, Buddhist cut off men's heads. Not in the name of Buddha. Or at least so rarely you couldn't hardly find a reference to it. That's really the big difference. Muslims perpetuate violence in the name of Allah ALL THE TIME. Westerners also perpetuate violence. Usually in the name of the State. Which is why I said American Exceptionalism may be the root cause and need to be addressed.
Of course.
No, that's probably not it. Westerners have killed Buddhists. Japanese are Buddhists.
scifes,
Islamic banking is going to save London? Do you KNOW where that money is coming from? Oil.
Oil scifes.
Who buys that Oil? Oh, the West.
Please!!!
Islam had 1400 years scifes. Sorry, but history shows it just didn't work. And may have even stunted middle eastern progress. Who knows. If it weren't for Islam it may have been Arabs or Persians landing on the moon - 500 years ago.
Something to think about.
I did say some.
Chinese and Japanese have a similar opinion of Islam. This is true and suggests the feeling that there's something amiss in "Islam" is much more universal than "The Evil West".
To be fair most Japanese could give two craps about Islam and only little more for Xianity.
Good point. However, I think you'll find Westerners liked Japan way before WWII. Japanese prints revolutionized the art world in Europe. Europeans were shocked at the sophistication of Japanese. At the time they only thought Xians could reach such levels of civilization. So this really predates WWII.
Hmmm this sounds like a good question - but, I'm not sure what it means
you know, after all this time i'm still not sure if you've pre determined your goal of unearthing islam and blackening it's picture with every possible and not possible way, or you're simply the most confused and misguided and ill-informed person on earth about islam, and what you're saying reflects the natural position one would take of islam given your conditions..
though i'd love to believe it's the latter, 10000+ posts, mostly in the religion subforum, plus what you show of knowing pieces of information about islam which most average people don't, seem to suggest it's the former..
also always demanding a piece of information which you claim doesn't exist, daring other members to show it, and not keeping quite when they get lazy and don't show it..then all of a sudden drop the subject when one moves his lazy ass in research and finds the thing you claimed didn't exist, and when you're presented with the thing you asked, we don't get as much as a "oh i was wrong"..it's as if, as i said, your destination is predetermined, it's not like as if you're searching for something..
what's make replying to you of all others annoying, is that you base your arguments on wrong assertions, and while they're falsifiable, it's hard to do so, it can't be done without heavy research and citations and maybe even translation..while with other members it's usually much easier.
so..:shrug:
first of all, you omitted replying to bits of my post, the natural reason would be that they're irrelavent, can you show me how?
polygamy isn't necessary for one to be muslim, not even close.
the comeback of slavery is actually one of the predicted signs of the end of time(yeah i know)..besides, the last batch of slaves weren't freed from their owners, but rather bought from them then set free, when the UN rules came around.
slavery still exists in the islamic culture, but in a form unapplicable to modern day slaves(human trafficking), nor is it applicable in the way it was in the old days due to the treaties and rules muslims have agreed to oblige to..
it's very complex, and way out of my league..let alone yours.
besides, your points are kinda different, kinda "dangerous", on a different level than most posts. though the usefulness to replying to them is also on a different level.
what if i say no?
it is irrelavent.
what does what I think mean anything? i could be sick minded?
if muslims rightfully invaded the persians, does that make christians invading muslims ok? aren't there differences between crusades? or are all crusades the same to you?
didn't persia invade others?
do all invasions get carried out in the same way?
do all kinds of crusades warrant an invasion on the initial crusades, and make paint the ethical or righteous?
as i said, irrelative, but i'm sure if i kept it at that you'd pound on me as if i'm avoiding the question..
you say this:
before they were invaded how and where and when did they do it?
when was the firs recorded beheading? at what event? what war?
"ALL THE TIME"????????????????????
if you'll bring up the crusades, well that's how it was for all crusades and religions, not only islam as you claim.
see, posts like these, what do they say?
they don't reflect your level of knowledge i'm sure, you know of islam's achievements.. if not go to the thread about the greatest nation in the history subforum, half the posters said the otmanians the other said jenkies khan's lot.. how could you say this:
spite?
though i'd love to believe it's the latter, 10000+ posts, mostly in the religion subforum, plus what you show of knowing pieces of information about islam which most average people don't, seem to suggest it's the former..
also always demanding a piece of information which you claim doesn't exist, daring other members to show it, and not keeping quite when they get lazy and don't show it..then all of a sudden drop the subject when one moves his lazy ass in research and finds the thing you claimed didn't exist, and when you're presented with the thing you asked, we don't get as much as a "oh i was wrong"..it's as if, as i said, your destination is predetermined, it's not like as if you're searching for something..
what's make replying to you of all others annoying, is that you base your arguments on wrong assertions, and while they're falsifiable, it's hard to do so, it can't be done without heavy research and citations and maybe even translation..while with other members it's usually much easier.
so..:shrug:
first of all, you omitted replying to bits of my post, the natural reason would be that they're irrelavent, can you show me how?
it's simple really, what's fundamental in islam is what islam can't exist without.like believing in god or the day of judgment or god's fairness or the prophet's complete transportation of what he was told to with no mistakes or neglect...islam can't stand without one of those for example.
polygamy isn't necessary for one to be muslim, not even close.
islamic tenants persist through time in status(allowed or not), maybe not in practice.
the comeback of slavery is actually one of the predicted signs of the end of time(yeah i know)..besides, the last batch of slaves weren't freed from their owners, but rather bought from them then set free, when the UN rules came around.
slavery still exists in the islamic culture, but in a form unapplicable to modern day slaves(human trafficking), nor is it applicable in the way it was in the old days due to the treaties and rules muslims have agreed to oblige to..
it's very complex, and way out of my league..let alone yours.
the ignore button for me doesn't exist except for people who don't exist.
besides, your points are kinda different, kinda "dangerous", on a different level than most posts. though the usefulness to replying to them is also on a different level.
can't say i don't understand their position, you should too.
what if i say yes?
what if i say no?
it is irrelavent.
what does what I think mean anything? i could be sick minded?
if muslims rightfully invaded the persians, does that make christians invading muslims ok? aren't there differences between crusades? or are all crusades the same to you?
didn't persia invade others?
do all invasions get carried out in the same way?
do all kinds of crusades warrant an invasion on the initial crusades, and make paint the ethical or righteous?
as i said, irrelative, but i'm sure if i kept it at that you'd pound on me as if i'm avoiding the question..
you say this:
because you haven't lived this:
what is? japanese not screaming "budha is great" while burning a US soldier in the trenches of WWII?
all the time?
before they were invaded how and where and when did they do it?
when was the firs recorded beheading? at what event? what war?
"ALL THE TIME"????????????????????
if you'll bring up the crusades, well that's how it was for all crusades and religions, not only islam as you claim.
you asked a question, i answered, i'm no economics expert, that's why i referred to specialists.
if islam didn't work you wouldn't have the zeros to put in that fourteen hundred.
see, posts like these, what do they say?
they don't reflect your level of knowledge i'm sure, you know of islam's achievements.. if not go to the thread about the greatest nation in the history subforum, half the posters said the otmanians the other said jenkies khan's lot.. how could you say this:
?
spite?
not really, since you are still persisting on using some acts as fundamental Islamic norms and trying to pass these off as sufficient
Nevertheless they have refrained from invading them or establishing islam as the diametric opposite to whatever social values they hold
To be fair, they are like that on many issues. There are even bars that publicly post that they reserve the right to refuse entry to foreigners.
Revolutionized?
Occupied a stylish niche category within avante garde graphic design perhaps ....
Its not clear what body of work you are referencing to make these wild assertions about western attitudes and foreign policy pre WW2
If something is not (currently) compatible with (current) western norms, why is it deemed as obsolete or something?Hmmm this sounds like a good question - but, I'm not sure what it means
What is it about western culture that makes it the apex of civilization, the yardstick to determine the value of all others?
scifes,
As to your first jab. I did take some time to look into who wrote the Qur'an.
History of the Qur'an
In summary, no one agrees when the Qur'an was written, who wrote it, which parts thew ones they think wrote some of it where's written by whom! Most scholars agree the Qur'an was written by multiple authors at different times strongly biased by Christianity. Which, unless you believe in Magic, makes good sense. But, it's like talking to a Xian about why Mathew and Luke are the same person - what's the point? :shrug:
Many MANY many people have been murdered because of these three intolerant ideologies. Which one would think you could appreciate concidering many Americans support the very wars killing Muslims because they want to bring the "True" message to the Muslim Infidel. That being Mohammad was tricked by Satan, the Qur'an is the brainchild of Satan and Allah is Satan - accept Baby Jabeesus and receive his salvation.
You don't get it do you? Parallel memes to the very ones your just said are "Fundamental" to being a Muslims are killing Muslims!
But, whatever, you stick to your One God, One Book, One Prophet and don't bitch when Christians keep killing Muslims. And when it's Communist and One Mao - don't bitch about that either.
Is it possible there a God? Yes, it is possible.
Is it possible Mohammad was the Last Prophet? Yes, it is possible.
Is it possible that the Qur'an is the direct words of God? Yes, it is possible.
Is it possible there are no Gods? Yes, it is possible.
Is it possible Mohammad was not a Prophet? Yes, it is possible.
Is it possible that the Qur'an is a book of fables? Yes, it is possible.
Is it possible that Xenu is an Intergalactic Warlord? Yes, it is possible.
Is it possible the Xenu is a literary creation? Yes, it is possible.
See how many you can agree with me on scifes. Then we can decide, on who, between you and I, is the more intolerant or if we are both equally tolerant of various beliefs.
Were the Islamic Crusades against the Persians wrong?
Or is it OK to pretend your "defending" yourself and then attack someone and steal their shit? Not only steal their shit, but colonize their lands and set yourself up as their rulers. Oh, and wipe out half the language and most of their religion while you're there. Well? Which is it? Because if you don't think it's wrong, then you can also stop whining about the USA invading Muslims - because guess what, many Americans also think this is a just war and they are just defending themselves. It's no different.
Again, IMO you just don't get it.
Not that this matters, it's just a simple fact that many aspects of "Islam" are no longer acceptable to Western peoples. Sure 1000 years ago, you'd be right at home in the West. Not now.
Again, do you get it?
PLEASE don't tell me you think Muslims invented zero.
800 years of Golden Age Islam
- Where's the Orchestras?
- Where's the Operas?
- Where's the Ballets?
- Where's the Human form in sculpture (something pre-Islam they were the best at).
- Have you seen the pictures of Mohammad in Persian art? Geesh....
- Where's the ceramics like porcelain?
- Where's the playwrights like Shakespeare?
- Where's the gunpowder?
We're talking almost 1000 YEARS here. Geesh, a bit of algebra, some advancements in optic and a couple good novels. Yes, some small advancement for humanity - but comparably few given the length of time. A so-called 800 year long "Golden" Age!
The Japanese went from horse back to Toyota in a few decades. See the difference?
As to your first jab. I did take some time to look into who wrote the Qur'an.
History of the Qur'an
In summary, no one agrees when the Qur'an was written, who wrote it, which parts thew ones they think wrote some of it where's written by whom! Most scholars agree the Qur'an was written by multiple authors at different times strongly biased by Christianity. Which, unless you believe in Magic, makes good sense. But, it's like talking to a Xian about why Mathew and Luke are the same person - what's the point? :shrug:
In short: There is One God, Mohammad was the Last Prophet and the Qur'an is perfect.
Many MANY many people have been murdered because of these three intolerant ideologies. Which one would think you could appreciate concidering many Americans support the very wars killing Muslims because they want to bring the "True" message to the Muslim Infidel. That being Mohammad was tricked by Satan, the Qur'an is the brainchild of Satan and Allah is Satan - accept Baby Jabeesus and receive his salvation.
You don't get it do you? Parallel memes to the very ones your just said are "Fundamental" to being a Muslims are killing Muslims!
But, whatever, you stick to your One God, One Book, One Prophet and don't bitch when Christians keep killing Muslims. And when it's Communist and One Mao - don't bitch about that either.
Is it possible there a God? Yes, it is possible.
Is it possible Mohammad was the Last Prophet? Yes, it is possible.
Is it possible that the Qur'an is the direct words of God? Yes, it is possible.
Is it possible there are no Gods? Yes, it is possible.
Is it possible Mohammad was not a Prophet? Yes, it is possible.
Is it possible that the Qur'an is a book of fables? Yes, it is possible.
Is it possible that Xenu is an Intergalactic Warlord? Yes, it is possible.
Is it possible the Xenu is a literary creation? Yes, it is possible.
See how many you can agree with me on scifes. Then we can decide, on who, between you and I, is the more intolerant or if we are both equally tolerant of various beliefs.
It's not irrelevant.
Were the Islamic Crusades against the Persians wrong?
Or is it OK to pretend your "defending" yourself and then attack someone and steal their shit? Not only steal their shit, but colonize their lands and set yourself up as their rulers. Oh, and wipe out half the language and most of their religion while you're there. Well? Which is it? Because if you don't think it's wrong, then you can also stop whining about the USA invading Muslims - because guess what, many Americans also think this is a just war and they are just defending themselves. It's no different.
Again, IMO you just don't get it.
I didn't say it was, I said polygamy is an aspect of Islam that is intolerable by much of the civilized world. That same world who gave you the PC you type into, the electricity you use to run it and the architecture for the building that houses it.
Not that this matters, it's just a simple fact that many aspects of "Islam" are no longer acceptable to Western peoples. Sure 1000 years ago, you'd be right at home in the West. Not now.
Again, do you get it?
:bugeye:
PLEASE don't tell me you think Muslims invented zero.
800 years of Golden Age Islam
- Where's the Orchestras?
- Where's the Operas?
- Where's the Ballets?
- Where's the Human form in sculpture (something pre-Islam they were the best at).
- Have you seen the pictures of Mohammad in Persian art? Geesh....
- Where's the ceramics like porcelain?
- Where's the playwrights like Shakespeare?
- Where's the gunpowder?
We're talking almost 1000 YEARS here. Geesh, a bit of algebra, some advancements in optic and a couple good novels. Yes, some small advancement for humanity - but comparably few given the length of time. A so-called 800 year long "Golden" Age!
The Japanese went from horse back to Toyota in a few decades. See the difference?
Last edited:
Are these even relevant? So if the world is in WWIII and you are sitting in your home listening to music and watching dramas and opera- that is Golden Age? :shrug:
Peace be unto you
Maybe I'm missing something - which Islamic norms do you think could enhance Western Society? What about Buddhist norms? Shinto norms?
Buddhism appears to have this whole "peace thing" going on that may be appreciated by a Western audience?
Shinto appears to have a whole repect the "environment thing" going on that may be appreciated by a Western audience?
Islam appears to have this "Our God is the Only True God, Our Religious Book is the only True Book, Our Prophet is the Only Last Prophet" thing going on that is pissing off more than just Western Audiences.
I suppose that depends on who you ask. Israelis, Hindu, Chinese, Thai, Philippians, Russians, Greeks, Spanish, etc.. all of these people are presently being accused of invading Muslims lands.
But invade Persia or Constantinople - THAT'S different. :shurg:
The paintings of Vincent Van Gogh weren't revolutionary? :shrug:
Last edited:
The difference is between the Islamic propaganda we always hear compared to the practice of Islam. Observation of the practice does not make one misguided or ill-informed.
Hardly complex at all, quite simple in fact. Slavery is slavery, no matter how much you want to sugar coat it. And, if it exists in Islamic culture, it is a serious detriment and embarrasment to the human condition. Just one more reason it should be eradicated from the world.
It appears that you are missing what goes into distinguishing something as a norm.
For instance would you categorize self immolation as a buddhist norm?
why/why not?
Sure.
Current civilization is so degraded that even reintroducing elements of animism/paganism would make for a more uplifting scenario.
nevertheless they have refrained from dressing them up as diametrically opposed ... or at least not much more diametrically opposed than what they dress up any other ethnicity you care to mention
ditto above
In terms of revolutionizing an appreciation of Japanese aesthetics, no. Avante garde graphic design on the other hand ... (try googling toulouse lautrec)
Let me put it this way. Most WASP neo-Nazi skin heads don't kill non-Whites. However, of those that do, many do so through inspiration of WASP ideology. We can see a line from intolerant ideology to violent action.
If it serves no good purpose - why keep it?
Does this make sense?