See that was much easier than you thought it was going to be
painless really.
It was also already asked and answered.
The Muslim Black Box: Kaaba
- Thread starter Vega
- Start date
It was also already asked and answered.
Well, maybe, but now I am so exhausted I can't conclude my way out of a wet-paper-bag.Because you have pre-formed ideas of the conclusion before even getting my opinion, i.e. you have already decided what it would mean.
So, on that note, thank you for answering those questions and I am going for a beer maybe... .... ...
Take care,
Michael
PS: Friday I have 6 hours of teaching Med Ss (actually PBL - problem based learning). My last group had a real arse hole that made it a major major major major pain. These two new groups are fantastic!!! I actually almost get a little buzz off it when it goes so well.. .. .. .. just great!
Well, do take care SamIt was also already asked and answered.
I frequently have that effect on people.
If you are teaching PNL, you really should read up on inductive, deductive and abductive reasoning and a little bit on the problems associated with each.
All the best!
I have a system that seems to work OK, but really, I only have so much time and research has to take priority in this case
have a nice weekend,
Michael
(PS: Sorry I meant to type PBL...)
You gotta learn to think before you research!
You have a nice weekend too.
I have a poster presentation tomorrow. So I'm off. Bye!
That is a fair comment. I would have put it in the third person as in: One must learn to think using the Scientific Method to do Scientific based Research.You gotta learn to think before you research!
Surely you do not mean I should believe in fairy creatures, Gods or a flying winged horse-like beast that carry Prophets around hot spots in the ME???
Even so, I find the best research is usually based on good timing, diligence, being at an intersection of multiple disciplines, keeping an open mind - thinking outside of accepted dogma and then just plain getting lucky. I am looking forward to this last experiment I am running. I think that this paper should be very nice. Maybe something I can spend the rest of my career studying.
For PBL I use the Socratic Method. When it works it works very well. When there is a bad apple then it just gives mediocre results. The chain is a strong as it’s weakest link.
Last week Friday. I started two new classes. One student who said they were not happy with the program, at the end of the lesion, said they were, I quote “flying high!” They were very happy. That gives me a buzz and why I like teaching those PBLs. These two groups will do very well.
Anyway, I asked: Is it possible there are five Gods?
You replied:
This was followed by:
Who has the pre-formed ideas?
My concept of God does not allow for .......
I asked is it possible that Mohammad was not a Prophet. You stated that even the possibility can not exist.
Well, I am able to entertain the possibility that Mohammad was a Prophet, that Islam could be correct in all manner and that I could burn in hell for my infidelity, you on the other hand say there is no possibility that Mohammad was not a Prophet. Well, Sam, here are a few ideas. * As there is nothing new, Mohammad could have coped the message. That's one way the possibility exists. * Mohammad could have been told what to say by other people. That's another way the possibility exists. * You may just plain be totally mistaken and there is no wonderful message. That's another way the possibility exists. etc... etc... etc...2. No, because a Prophet is one who carries a message of God which according to me, he did.
If your mind where truly open you'd see there are many ways that the possibility exists.
And by making your statement you of course imply that at some level:
* Buddhists beliefs are inherently flawed.
* Hindu beliefs are inherently flawed.
* Christian beliefs are inherently flawed.
* Jewish beliefs are inherently flawed.
* Shinto beliefs are inherently flawed.
* John Frumian beliefs are inherently flawed.
* Baha’i’ beliefs are inherently flawed.
* Mormon beliefs are inherently flawed…
…etc.................
and this is not a case of you havening a Preformed idea? It really appears that it is your pre-formed idea that Mohammad is a Prophet that has led you to the conclusion that Mohammad is a Prophet.
* I was very explicable in my assertion that aggressive war was wrong. You said it can be justified by the ends. Then you suggested that the Islamic Golden Age (maybe Persian Golden Age would be more apt) was a fine example of these “ends”. That would be like saying the Chinese Golden Age, which followed the Mongolian invasions, justified their wholesale slaughter by the tens of millions? This makes no sense and I morally disagree.
* I stated that any form of Slavery was evil. You said it can be justified by the times and even go so far as to say that institutionalized Slavery is morally just. I will just have to disagree purely on moral grounds – Slavery is ALWAYS in ALL FORMS heinous.
* I stated that Islam, just like Communism, did not achieve any of its lofty goals [Slavery was Institutionalized and rife, Women are not equal, Religious minorities are not treated with equality, demagoguery is rife; this is but to name a few] You said Islam is not at fault but the fault lies at the feet of the people and their leaders. This is the EXACT same line Communist use and makes equally as much sense.
* I asked what was novel and enlightening from Islam. You said nothing.
* You stated that the European Renaissance could not have occurred without Islam, yet when I pressed why, you then suggested the reason why Islamic inspirations were needed was because they persevered pre-Islamic European literature. This makes absolutely no sense. If it could occur before Islam then it could of course occur again without Islam. Why draw any other conclusion?
Again, who has the preformed ideas? I am able to entertain the possibility that there is a God. As an agnostic atheist I do not believe so. But, yes, I may be wrong. You though are a theist, not an agnostic theist, just a theist. You say it is not possible there is no God. Add to that you are a Muslim. You say it is not possible that Mohammad was not a Prophet.
Oh, one of us has preformed ideas, that is for sure.
Michael
Last edited:
So what is the scientific method?
And as for the rest, I recall reading somewhere that you supported the war on Afghanistan. That was a war of aggression.
And for other people's beliefs being inherently flawed, that would assume that we are all puppets, incapable of independent thought. Not even all Muslims think the same way about Islam, so what can one say about people who have other ideas about religion? Whats to say one of them is not more right than another? Like I said, since my beliefs are being built upon, hopefully eventually I shall get it right.
As for God and Mohammed, I could perhaps expand my concepts to include those of other people, but that would be a dishonest interpretation. Regardless of the motives you ascribe to me, I can only define a concept as I see it. One thing you don't seem to understand is that it does not matter whether Muhammed got the message directly or from others. It is still a message, it is still about a way of life that I consider ideal. Others may disagree and are free to make their own choices.
As for your remarks o slavery, etc; as I said before, you have a tendency to inductive speculation, so you only see answers you expect to see. That is not something I can do about.
And isn't the Socratic method better applied to moral philosophy than scientific inquiry? How do you use it? edit: never mind, I see how you use it.
Last edited:
from somewhere on the net:So what is the scientific method?
1. Observation and description of a phenomenon or group of phenomena.
2. Formulation of a hypothesis to explain the phenomena.
3. Use of the hypothesis to predict the existence of other phenomena, or to predict quantitatively the results of new observations.
4. Performance of experimental tests of the predictions by several independent and properly performed experiments.
The people who organized a military attack on the USA were operating within and supported by the Afghanistan government. That war was in retaliation to an unprovoked attack and was sanctioned by the UN. That is, members from all over the World, from places as diverse as China and France agreed that such was the case. A UN member had been illegally attacked and thus had a legal and moral right to retaliate.
Does this mean the USA has a right to occupy Afghanistan. Not in my opinion - no.
That’s fine and perhaps you are 100% correct in your belief.
But you are saying that it is not even a possibility that Mohammad can not be a Prophet. Not even a possibility.
The possibility can not exist.
The logical implications of this line of reasoning are, among others, that there must be a God, that there can only be one God, that there can not be another Prophet, that any belief that in disagreement with this axiom is dead wrong.
Wiki: Socratic method
It is a form of philosophical inquiry. A Socratic Dialogue can happen at any time between [two people] when they seek to answer a question [about something] answerable by their own effort of reflection and thinking [starting] from the concrete [asking] all sorts of questions [until] the details of the example are fleshed out [as] a kind of platform for reaching more general judgments". The practice involves asking a series of questions surrounding a central issue, and answering questions of the others involved. Generally this involves the defense of one point of view against another and is oppositional. The best way to 'win' is to make the opponent contradict themselves in some way that proves the inquirer's own point. Socratic Questioning is used to describe the kind of questioning, with which an original question was responded to as though it were an answer. This in turn forces the first questioner to reformulate a new question in the light of the progress of the discourse.
Seems reasonable enough,
Michael
As for PBL I generally just never give an answer. Perhaps it’s not the same but that’s how I think of it. Because of time constants I do summarize a field briefly and ask students to research it themselves if it is outside of the discussion (ie: medical case). If I don’t know I just say so. EX: in a case on primary hyperthyroidism, depression may be a clinical symptom. I may briefly mention what I know of neurogenesis within the limbic system as a root of clinical depression if the Ss have diverged a little into depression but facilitate the PBL by directing the focus back towards an endocrine cause.
Somehow I think questions and answers are more reflective of opinion than facts. The answers are simple enough but the right questions are difficult to ask. One would do better to look at all the facts and see what hypotheses are generated from them, no?
As for Afghanistan, you do know that the reason the Taliban did not hand over Osama is because he had sought refuge with them and inspite of constant demands, the US provided NO EVIDENCE of his involvement in 9/11? If the situation were reversed, what would the US position be?
http://english.people.com.cn/english/200109/21/eng20010921_80761.html
http://www.tufts.edu/communications/stories/100501ShouldTalibanSeeEvidence.htm
As for Afghanistan, you do know that the reason the Taliban did not hand over Osama is because he had sought refuge with them and inspite of constant demands, the US provided NO EVIDENCE of his involvement in 9/11? If the situation were reversed, what would the US position be?
http://english.people.com.cn/english/200109/21/eng20010921_80761.html
http://www.tufts.edu/communications/stories/100501ShouldTalibanSeeEvidence.htm
I see no reason not to do both? Also, in the case of some things, like Gods, Goblins, Ghosts, Flying Horses and Prophets, where no scientific evidence exists, it makes gathering evidence a little hard.
I wonder if the real reason you don't think it is even possible that Mohammad was not a Prophet is because you are afraid to think those sorts of thoughts? It seems if you were to be reasonable you'd say, yes, it is possible Mohammad was not a Prophet and it is possible that there is no God and while I accept that such may be a possibility I do not think so for these reasons....
So, for me, I asked those questions because they are the right questions to ask. Any questions you are interested in I will answer as best I can.
That may well be the case. But the simplest explanation seems to me, to be that a small group of dedicated people living in Afghanistan were motivated to organize the attack. It really doesn't take much brains to pull off a little stunt like that. So they did. Who knows, as the USA is losing both Wars maybe things are still going exactly according to plan?
Michael
I see you tend to follow the same line of thought that your questions bring to your mind.
So be it.
What's that?I see you tend to follow the same line of thought that your questions bring to your mind.
So be it.
What I think can be changed in an instant. I do not need to keep thinking the same way. For example. If you were to type. Yes, the possibility exists that Mohammad was not a Prophet and yes there may not be a God. Well then, my line of thought would change in a second.
Seems simple enough?
Michael II
Yes, so your answers are dependent on the questions asked. Mine are based on the facts as I see them. Its a different way of thinking I guess.
That may be the case.
However, it seems that we should be able to come to an agreement on what we are thinking.
You are stating in absolute terms that according to your thinking it is not even a possibility that Mohammad was not a Prophet.
Not possible.
Ergo, would you agree, according to your manner of thinking, that as it is not possible that Mohammad was not a Prophet then the logical implications of this line of reasoning are that there must be a God, that there can only be one God, that there can not be another Prophet after Mohammad and that any belief in disagreement with this axiom is dead wrong?
Michael
However, it seems that we should be able to come to an agreement on what we are thinking.
You are stating in absolute terms that according to your thinking it is not even a possibility that Mohammad was not a Prophet.
Not possible.
Ergo, would you agree, according to your manner of thinking, that as it is not possible that Mohammad was not a Prophet then the logical implications of this line of reasoning are that there must be a God, that there can only be one God, that there can not be another Prophet after Mohammad and that any belief in disagreement with this axiom is dead wrong?
Michael
Of course, because you asked me what I thought. My thoughts are based on my analysis of the facts as I see them. I don't take responsibility for how others perceive the same facts.
Your questions are designed for generic answers, so you are dissatisfied with specific answers, but if you are open to all possibilities, why are you so closed to specific points of view? Doesn't that defeat your purpose?
This is what I mean about questions and answers vs "best fit of relevant facts". Inspite of your presumed openmindedness, your generic view makes all other viewpoints redundant, but my specific viewpoint allows for others.
Perhaps I am not explaining clearly?
Yes, I am completely lost here.
Take the question:
Does the possibility exist that Mohammad was not a Prophet?