Total Posts:114|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

Why the West Cannot Understand Islam

Skepsikyma
Posts: 8,285
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/27/2016 5:10:31 AM
Posted: 4 months ago
When it comes to Western history, we dive into it with a certain cultural background. Joan of Arc on her pyre, the ascension of the Virgin Queen, Martin Luther nailing his note to a church door, the persecution of Galileo, the execution of Saint Thomas More, the rising of conspiratorial daggers on the Senate floor, the Crusaders scaling the walls of Jerusalem, and Marco Polo setting off from Venice are more than history to us. We are invested in them, they are iconic, and are tied with essential human themes in our minds. They have an element of the mythic to them, and make our history come alive.

One of the greatest challenges in diving into another culture's history is that this element is lacking. Growing up in the West, revisiting our history is like fleshing out a great story which we are attuned to. For a Westerner diving into Middle Eastern history, there is no sense of this mythic element. The players are strange. The names seem at first to be interchangeable. There is no great passion or drama associated with the dry facts. It is only, for example, after we read enough of the history leading up to the rise and fall of the Umayyad dynasty that we gain a sense of personal familiarity with Muawiyah I and Abd al-Rahman. Their stories are fascinating; in ways they parallel those of Little Finger and Daenerys (respectively) in the popular ASOIAF series. Muawiyah was an incredibly cautious, astute man who manipulated his way into absolute power and established a great empire. Abd al-Rahman was his last living descendent, who survived the slaughter of his entire family in Syria to flee across all of North Africa while pursued by assassins. After avoiding many attempts to manipulate him for personal gain, he arrived in Iberia and united the frontier province under his rule. His line would serve as Emirs patiently until they could one day fully rebel against the men who murdered his family. These men were interesting, intelligent, inspiring. They also killed, lied, and cut corners. They were, when all was said and done, profoundly human.

Once you 'know' historical figures at his level, the feuds and historical details which seem bled of color without that insight show their all-too-human vitality. To quote Herbert Butterfield:

'Real historical understanding is not achieved by the subordination of the past to the present, but rather by our making the past our present and attempting to see life with the eyes of another century than our own. It is not reached by assuming that our own age is the absolute to which Luther and Calvin and their generation are only relative; it is only reached by fully accepting the fact that their generation was as valid as our generation, their issues as momentous as our issues and their day as full and vital to them as our day is to us. The twentieth century which has its own hairs to split may have little patience with Arius and Athanasius who burdened the world with a quarrel about a diphthong, but the historian has not achieved historical understanding, has not reached that kind of understanding in which the mind can find rest, until he has seen that that diphthong was bound to be the most urgent matter in the universe to those people... instead of being moved to indignation by something in the past which at first seems alien and perhaps even wicked to our own day, instead of leaving it in the outer darkness, he makes the effort to bring this thing into the context where it is natural, and he elucidates the matter by showing its relation to other things which we do understand.'

When we understand history at this level, we have a full, nuanced picture, and a closer understanding. So what happens when we dive into history without this background? The result is that we dehumanize the players, and this is what is happening regarding Islam right now. Well-meaning people (usually liberals), who would find the reality of the historical Islamic world 'wicked' by our standards, whitewash it instead of trying to understand it as a complex human endeavor. As a result, an entire cottage industry has sprung up dedicated to 'debunking' liberal lies about Islam. This cottage industry, to put it lightly, employs dubious scholarship. When you compare the great Orientalists of the last two centuries to many modern commentators on Islamic history, the difference is appalling. But young people today don't read the great Orientalists, who focus on the human elements of Middle Eastern history in a nuanced, scholarly manner. They're either reading simplistic material which casts Muslims as devils, or simplistic material which casts them as angels. Whichever one they disagree with makes them intensely angry, and whichever one they agree with offers the false security of consensus. And the reason that this spell isn't broken is because only the inhuman can be fully good or fully evil, and the vast majority of Westerner have a more human understanding of fictional characters than they do any real people from Middle Eastern history. If I tried to tell someone that Christianity was a bloodthirsty religion, most people in the West could bring up St. Thomas of Aquinas, St. Francis of Assisi, George Fox, and many other examples which contravene that simplistic narrative. If they were told that Christianity was a perfectly peaceful religion, they could come up with the Spanish Inquisition, many of the Crusades, the persecution of astronomers, the murder of Hypatia, and the Salem witch trials. But if they are told that Islam is violent, will they know to mention Attar of Nishapur, Rumi, and Rabia Basri? If they are told that it is peaceful, will they know to mention Tamerlane, as-Saffah, or Aurangzeb?

So long as this status quo continues, we won't have any useful dialogue about Islam. More than anything, this conversation needs a heavy dose of intellectual humility, and a chastening realization of the intricacy of the subject matter.
"The Collectivist experiment is thoroughly suited (in appearance at least) to the Capitalist society which it proposes to replace. It works with the existing machinery of Capitalism, talks and thinks in the existing terms of Capitalism, appeals to just those appetites which Capitalism has aroused, and ridicules as fantastic and unheard-of just those things in society the memory of which Capitalism has killed among men wherever the blight of it has spread."
- Hilaire Belloc -
someloser
Posts: 1,377
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/27/2016 5:24:37 AM
Posted: 4 months ago
At 7/27/2016 5:10:31 AM, Skepsikyma wrote:
But young people today don't read the great Orientalists, who focus on the human elements of Middle Eastern history in a nuanced, scholarly manner. They're either reading simplistic material which casts Muslims as devils, or simplistic material which casts them as angels. Whichever one they disagree with makes them intensely angry, and whichever one they agree with offers the false security of consensus.
^^^
It's always annoying to see someone misquoting and treating the Quran as some kind of magical, evil mind-virus. Or making a stupid thread about it.
Ego sum qui sum. Deus lo vult.

"America is ungovernable; those who served the revolution have plowed the sea." - Simon Bolivar

"A healthy nation is as unconscious of its nationality as a healthy man of his bones. But if you break a nation's nationality it will think of nothing else but getting it set again." - George Bernard Shaw
tejretics
Posts: 6,089
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/27/2016 1:37:07 PM
Posted: 4 months ago
Excellent post.
"Where justice is denied, where poverty is enforced, where ignorance prevails, and where any one class is made to feel that society is an organized conspiracy to oppress, rob and degrade them, neither persons nor property will be safe." - Frederick Douglass
Beisht_Kione
Posts: 233
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/27/2016 4:05:15 PM
Posted: 4 months ago
Do you believe it is possible for one culture, based on it's values, to be superior to another culture?
HeavenlyPanda
Posts: 819
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/27/2016 4:14:53 PM
Posted: 4 months ago
America itself tells its own people that Islam is violent when Islam is violent only becuase of America.
HeavenlyPanda. The most heavenly of all heavenly creatures.
Beisht_Kione
Posts: 233
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/27/2016 9:35:33 PM
Posted: 4 months ago
At 7/27/2016 4:14:53 PM, HeavenlyPanda wrote:
America itself tells its own people that Islam is violent when Islam is violent only becuase of America.

So you agree with Islam's treatment of women?
Islam's treatment of gays?
Islam's treatment of people of other faiths?
Islam's treatment of people who leave Islam?
Islam's lack of free speech?
Islam's lack of due process?
etc, etc, etc
HeavenlyPanda
Posts: 819
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/27/2016 9:40:45 PM
Posted: 4 months ago
At 7/27/2016 9:35:33 PM, Beisht_Kione wrote:
At 7/27/2016 4:14:53 PM, HeavenlyPanda wrote:
America itself tells its own people that Islam is violent when Islam is violent only becuase of America.

So you agree with Islam's treatment of women?
Islam's treatment of gays?
Islam's treatment of people of other faiths?
Islam's treatment of people who leave Islam?
Islam's lack of free speech?
Islam's lack of due process?
etc, etc, etc

Considering that America practically gave birth to Al Qaeda/ISIS I don't think that you should ask me who's morales are greater. I thought you were going to pick apart my points in America Is the biggest Terrist regime forum. Guess not. Too scared that I'm right? ;)
HeavenlyPanda. The most heavenly of all heavenly creatures.
Torton
Posts: 988
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/27/2016 9:47:53 PM
Posted: 4 months ago
At 7/27/2016 9:40:45 PM, HeavenlyPanda wrote:
At 7/27/2016 9:35:33 PM, Beisht_Kione wrote:
At 7/27/2016 4:14:53 PM, HeavenlyPanda wrote:
America itself tells its own people that Islam is violent when Islam is violent only becuase of America.

So you agree with Islam's treatment of women?
Islam's treatment of gays?
Islam's treatment of people of other faiths?
Islam's treatment of people who leave Islam?
Islam's lack of free speech?
Islam's lack of due process?
etc, etc, etc

Considering that America practically gave birth to Al Qaeda/ISIS I don't think that you should ask me who's morales are greater. I thought you were going to pick apart my points in America Is the biggest Terrist regime forum. Guess not. Too scared that I'm right? ;)
You know Al Qaeda and ISIS aren't the same thing, right?
HeavenlyPanda
Posts: 819
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/27/2016 9:52:49 PM
Posted: 4 months ago
At 7/27/2016 9:47:53 PM, Torton wrote:
At 7/27/2016 9:40:45 PM, HeavenlyPanda wrote:
At 7/27/2016 9:35:33 PM, Beisht_Kione wrote:
At 7/27/2016 4:14:53 PM, HeavenlyPanda wrote:
America itself tells its own people that Islam is violent when Islam is violent only becuase of America.

So you agree with Islam's treatment of women?
Islam's treatment of gays?
Islam's treatment of people of other faiths?
Islam's treatment of people who leave Islam?
Islam's lack of free speech?
Islam's lack of due process?
etc, etc, etc

Considering that America practically gave birth to Al Qaeda/ISIS I don't think that you should ask me who's morales are greater. I thought you were going to pick apart my points in America Is the biggest Terrist regime forum. Guess not. Too scared that I'm right? ;)
You know Al Qaeda and ISIS aren't the same thing, right?

The Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS) used to have a different name: Al Qaeda in Iraq. After 2010 the group rebranded and refocused its efforts on Syria.
Ideologically they are not different at all.
HeavenlyPanda. The most heavenly of all heavenly creatures.
Beisht_Kione
Posts: 233
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/27/2016 10:00:29 PM
Posted: 4 months ago
At 7/27/2016 9:40:45 PM, HeavenlyPanda wrote:
At 7/27/2016 9:35:33 PM, Beisht_Kione wrote:
At 7/27/2016 4:14:53 PM, HeavenlyPanda wrote:
America itself tells its own people that Islam is violent when Islam is violent only becuase of America.

So you agree with Islam's treatment of women?
Islam's treatment of gays?
Islam's treatment of people of other faiths?
Islam's treatment of people who leave Islam?
Islam's lack of free speech?
Islam's lack of due process?
etc, etc, etc

Considering that America practically gave birth to Al Qaeda/ISIS I don't think that you should ask me who's morales are greater. I thought you were going to pick apart my points in America Is the biggest Terrist regime forum. Guess not. Too scared that I'm right? ;)

I've decided not to get into your other post. Way too many points and topics to cover. I find issue with just about every sentence. It would just turn into a messy quagmire of a thread. For both of our ease of communication, we can cover the points as we go.

As for this thread, I'm not talking about ISIS or Al'Qaeda. I'm talking about Islam. I'm talking about the fundamental principles behind the faith that are practiced as the law of the land in counties around the world.
So, do you agree with Islam on any of the points I've provided?
HeavenlyPanda
Posts: 819
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/27/2016 10:03:00 PM
Posted: 4 months ago
At 7/27/2016 10:00:29 PM, Beisht_Kione wrote:
At 7/27/2016 9:40:45 PM, HeavenlyPanda wrote:
At 7/27/2016 9:35:33 PM, Beisht_Kione wrote:
At 7/27/2016 4:14:53 PM, HeavenlyPanda wrote:
America itself tells its own people that Islam is violent when Islam is violent only becuase of America.

So you agree with Islam's treatment of women?
Islam's treatment of gays?
Islam's treatment of people of other faiths?
Islam's treatment of people who leave Islam?
Islam's lack of free speech?
Islam's lack of due process?
etc, etc, etc

Considering that America practically gave birth to Al Qaeda/ISIS I don't think that you should ask me who's morales are greater. I thought you were going to pick apart my points in America Is the biggest Terrist regime forum. Guess not. Too scared that I'm right? ;)

I've decided not to get into your other post. Way too many points and topics to cover. I find issue with just about every sentence. It would just turn into a messy quagmire of a thread. For both of our ease of communication, we can cover the points as we go.

As for this thread, I'm not talking about ISIS or Al'Qaeda. I'm talking about Islam. I'm talking about the fundamental principles behind the faith that are practiced as the law of the land in counties around the world.
So, do you agree with Islam on any of the points I've provided?

Right. The classic "you're right but I don't want I admit it point." Got it.
Why do I have to believe in Islam religion? What if I don't want to?
HeavenlyPanda. The most heavenly of all heavenly creatures.
Skepsikyma
Posts: 8,285
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/27/2016 10:47:03 PM
Posted: 4 months ago
At 7/27/2016 4:05:15 PM, Beisht_Kione wrote:
Do you believe it is possible for one culture, based on it's values, to be superior to another culture?

I think that the entire concept of 'superiority' doesn't apply to cultures, because there is no universally agreed upon common goal to human societies. It's the same sort of facile thinking which says that one animal is 'more evolved' than another. All animals are evolved to suit their respective environments, just as all cultures have evolved to suit their respective environments. Those who fail won't fail because some human with delusions of grandeur decided that they were 'inferior', they will fail because they failed to adapt, or they will fail because they were out-competed.
"The Collectivist experiment is thoroughly suited (in appearance at least) to the Capitalist society which it proposes to replace. It works with the existing machinery of Capitalism, talks and thinks in the existing terms of Capitalism, appeals to just those appetites which Capitalism has aroused, and ridicules as fantastic and unheard-of just those things in society the memory of which Capitalism has killed among men wherever the blight of it has spread."
- Hilaire Belloc -
Skepsikyma
Posts: 8,285
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/27/2016 10:48:05 PM
Posted: 4 months ago
At 7/27/2016 5:24:37 AM, someloser wrote:
At 7/27/2016 5:10:31 AM, Skepsikyma wrote:
But young people today don't read the great Orientalists, who focus on the human elements of Middle Eastern history in a nuanced, scholarly manner. They're either reading simplistic material which casts Muslims as devils, or simplistic material which casts them as angels. Whichever one they disagree with makes them intensely angry, and whichever one they agree with offers the false security of consensus.
^^^
It's always annoying to see someone misquoting and treating the Quran as some kind of magical, evil mind-virus. Or making a stupid thread about it.

Yeah. The Borg are a fictional race from Star Trek, not a religion situated primarily in the Middle East.
"The Collectivist experiment is thoroughly suited (in appearance at least) to the Capitalist society which it proposes to replace. It works with the existing machinery of Capitalism, talks and thinks in the existing terms of Capitalism, appeals to just those appetites which Capitalism has aroused, and ridicules as fantastic and unheard-of just those things in society the memory of which Capitalism has killed among men wherever the blight of it has spread."
- Hilaire Belloc -
Beisht_Kione
Posts: 233
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/27/2016 11:45:01 PM
Posted: 4 months ago
At 7/27/2016 10:03:00 PM, HeavenlyPanda wrote:
At 7/27/2016 10:00:29 PM, Beisht_Kione wrote:
At 7/27/2016 9:40:45 PM, HeavenlyPanda wrote:
At 7/27/2016 9:35:33 PM, Beisht_Kione wrote:
At 7/27/2016 4:14:53 PM, HeavenlyPanda wrote:
America itself tells its own people that Islam is violent when Islam is violent only becuase of America.

So you agree with Islam's treatment of women?
Islam's treatment of gays?
Islam's treatment of people of other faiths?
Islam's treatment of people who leave Islam?
Islam's lack of free speech?
Islam's lack of due process?
etc, etc, etc

Considering that America practically gave birth to Al Qaeda/ISIS I don't think that you should ask me who's morales are greater. I thought you were going to pick apart my points in America Is the biggest Terrist regime forum. Guess not. Too scared that I'm right? ;)

I've decided not to get into your other post. Way too many points and topics to cover. I find issue with just about every sentence. It would just turn into a messy quagmire of a thread. For both of our ease of communication, we can cover the points as we go.

As for this thread, I'm not talking about ISIS or Al'Qaeda. I'm talking about Islam. I'm talking about the fundamental principles behind the faith that are practiced as the law of the land in counties around the world.
So, do you agree with Islam on any of the points I've provided?

Right. The classic "you're right but I don't want I admit it point." Got it.
Why do I have to believe in Islam religion? What if I don't want to?

I was trying not to be rude, but your two large rants on that post sound like the rambling of a madman. It's very incoherent. You are comparing events across hundreds of years, that have very little to do with each other to begin with.
Honestly, I would have to reteach you history and how to remove your modern moral lens. The latter has proved impossible for me in the past. I'm not a good enough teacher to rewire your brain out of it's complete and utter ignorance of history.

Point and case of why I don't want to get into it with you on the other thread:

So you agree with Islam's treatment of women?
Islam's treatment of gays?
Islam's treatment of people of other faiths?
Islam's treatment of people who leave Islam?
Islam's lack of free speech?
Islam's lack of due process?

Why do I have to believe in Islam religion? What if I don't want to?

How is that answer? That's not even answering a question with another question. That's just random words that seem to have fell out of your head, considering they have no relation to what I asked, other than the over arching theme of Islam.
Fatihah
Posts: 7,742
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/27/2016 11:50:51 PM
Posted: 4 months ago
At 7/27/2016 9:35:33 PM, Beisht_Kione wrote:

So you agree with Islam's treatment of women?
Islam's treatment of gays?
Islam's treatment of people of other faiths?
Islam's treatment of people who leave Islam?
Islam's lack of free speech?
Islam's lack of due process?
etc, etc, etc

Response: Islam cannot treat a person in any way, as Islam is only a teaching. Only people cam treat other people a certain way and apply Islam and when you apply the actual teachings of Islam, Islam is perfect in treating women, gays, people who leave Islam and other faiths, has free speech and makes great process.
Beisht_Kione
Posts: 233
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/28/2016 12:11:53 AM
Posted: 4 months ago
At 7/27/2016 10:47:03 PM, Skepsikyma wrote:
At 7/27/2016 4:05:15 PM, Beisht_Kione wrote:
Do you believe it is possible for one culture, based on it's values, to be superior to another culture?

I think that the entire concept of 'superiority' doesn't apply to cultures, because there is no universally agreed upon common goal to human societies. It's the same sort of facile thinking which says that one animal is 'more evolved' than another. All animals are evolved to suit their respective environments, just as all cultures have evolved to suit their respective environments. Those who fail won't fail because some human with delusions of grandeur decided that they were 'inferior', they will fail because they failed to adapt, or they will fail because they were out-competed.

Superiority absolutely applies to cultures and can absolutely.
Western culture treats women batter than Islamic culture does.
Western culture treats gays batter than Islamic culture does.
Western culture does not allow for there to be state sanctioned repercussions for apostasy. Islam demands it.
Western culture embraces freedom of speech(for the most part). Islam does not.
Western culture believes in due process(for the most part). Islam does not.

From that short list I feel that I can safely come to the conclusion that Western culture is superior to Islamic culture.
Beisht_Kione
Posts: 233
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/28/2016 12:26:07 AM
Posted: 4 months ago
At 7/27/2016 11:50:51 PM, Fatihah wrote:
At 7/27/2016 9:35:33 PM, Beisht_Kione wrote:

So you agree with Islam's treatment of women?
Islam's treatment of gays?
Islam's treatment of people of other faiths?
Islam's treatment of people who leave Islam?
Islam's lack of free speech?
Islam's lack of due process?
etc, etc, etc

Response: Islam cannot treat a person in any way, as Islam is only a teaching. Only people cam treat other people a certain way and apply Islam and when you apply the actual teachings of Islam, Islam is perfect in treating women, gays, people who leave Islam and other faiths, has free speech and makes great process.

You failed to mention though, that in every single Muslim majority country and even are, there are, what we in the West would call, major human right violations. What you suppose, does not exist anywhere on this planet, save for maybe in some Western countries, where Sharia is outlawed.
Hiu
Posts: 1,015
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/28/2016 12:38:09 AM
Posted: 4 months ago
At 7/27/2016 5:10:31 AM, Skepsikyma wrote:
When it comes to Western history, we dive into it with a certain cultural background. Joan of Arc on her pyre, the ascension of the Virgin Queen, Martin Luther nailing his note to a church door, the persecution of Galileo, the execution of Saint Thomas More, the rising of conspiratorial daggers on the Senate floor, the Crusaders scaling the walls of Jerusalem, and Marco Polo setting off from Venice are more than history to us. We are invested in them, they are iconic, and are tied with essential human themes in our minds. They have an element of the mythic to them, and make our history come alive.

One of the greatest challenges in diving into another culture's history is that this element is lacking. Growing up in the West, revisiting our history is like fleshing out a great story which we are attuned to. For a Westerner diving into Middle Eastern history, there is no sense of this mythic element. The players are strange. The names seem at first to be interchangeable. There is no great passion or drama associated with the dry facts. It is only, for example, after we read enough of the history leading up to the rise and fall of the Umayyad dynasty that we gain a sense of personal familiarity with Muawiyah I and Abd al-Rahman. Their stories are fascinating; in ways they parallel those of Little Finger and Daenerys (respectively) in the popular ASOIAF series. Muawiyah was an incredibly cautious, astute man who manipulated his way into absolute power and established a great empire. Abd al-Rahman was his last living descendent, who survived the slaughter of his entire family in Syria to flee across all of North Africa while pursued by assassins. After avoiding many attempts to manipulate him for personal gain, he arrived in Iberia and united the frontier province under his rule. His line would serve as Emirs patiently until they could one day fully rebel against the men who murdered his family. These men were interesting, intelligent, inspiring. They also killed, lied, and cut corners. They were, when all was said and done, profoundly human.

Once you 'know' historical figures at his level, the feuds and historical details which seem bled of color without that insight show their all-too-human vitality. To quote Herbert Butterfield:

'Real historical understanding is not achieved by the subordination of the past to the present, but rather by our making the past our present and attempting to see life with the eyes of another century than our own. It is not reached by assuming that our own age is the absolute to which Luther and Calvin and their generation are only relative; it is only reached by fully accepting the fact that their generation was as valid as our generation, their issues as momentous as our issues and their day as full and vital to them as our day is to us. The twentieth century which has its own hairs to split may have little patience with Arius and Athanasius who burdened the world with a quarrel about a diphthong, but the historian has not achieved historical understanding, has not reached that kind of understanding in which the mind can find rest, until he has seen that that diphthong was bound to be the most urgent matter in the universe to those people... instead of being moved to indignation by something in the past which at first seems alien and perhaps even wicked to our own day, instead of leaving it in the outer darkness, he makes the effort to bring this thing into the context where it is natural, and he elucidates the matter by showing its relation to other things which we do understand.'

When we understand history at this level, we have a full, nuanced picture, and a closer understanding. So what happens when we dive into history without this background? The result is that we dehumanize the players, and this is what is happening regarding Islam right now. Well-meaning people (usually liberals), who would find the reality of the historical Islamic world 'wicked' by our standards, whitewash it instead of trying to understand it as a complex human endeavor. As a result, an entire cottage industry has sprung up dedicated to 'debunking' liberal lies about Islam. This cottage industry, to put it lightly, employs dubious scholarship. When you compare the great Orientalists of the last two centuries to many modern commentators on Islamic history, the difference is appalling. But young people today don't read the great Orientalists, who focus on the human elements of Middle Eastern history in a nuanced, scholarly manner. They're either reading simplistic material which casts Muslims as devils, or simplistic material which casts them as angels. Whichever one they disagree with makes them intensely angry, and whichever one they agree with offers the false security of consensus. And the reason that this spell isn't broken is because only the inhuman can be fully good or fully evil, and the vast majority of Westerner have a more human understanding of fictional characters than they do any real people from Middle Eastern history. If I tried to tell someone that Christianity was a bloodthirsty religion, most people in the West could bring up St. Thomas of Aquinas, St. Francis of Assisi, George Fox, and many other examples which contravene that simplistic narrative. If they were told that Christianity was a perfectly peaceful religion, they could come up with the Spanish Inquisition, many of the Crusades, the persecution of astronomers, the murder of Hypatia, and the Salem witch trials. But if they are told that Islam is violent, will they know to mention Attar of Nishapur, Rumi, and Rabia Basri? If they are told that it is peaceful, will they know to mention Tamerlane, as-Saffah, or Aurangzeb?

So long as this status quo continues, we won't have any useful dialogue about Islam. More than anything, this conversation needs a heavy dose of intellectual humility, and a chastening realization of the intricacy of the subject matter.

+1 excellent post
bballcrook21
Posts: 4,468
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/28/2016 12:49:00 AM
Posted: 4 months ago
At 7/27/2016 11:50:51 PM, Fatihah wrote:
At 7/27/2016 9:35:33 PM, Beisht_Kione wrote:

So you agree with Islam's treatment of women?
Islam's treatment of gays?
Islam's treatment of people of other faiths?
Islam's treatment of people who leave Islam?
Islam's lack of free speech?
Islam's lack of due process?
etc, etc, etc

Response: Islam cannot treat a person in any way, as Islam is only a teaching. Only people cam treat other people a certain way and apply Islam and when you apply the actual teachings of Islam, Islam is perfect in treating women, gays, people who leave Islam and other faiths, has free speech and makes great process.

The punishment for apostasy is death under Islam. I don't see how that's a good thing.
If you put the federal government in charge of the Sahara Desert, in 5 years there'd be a shortage of sand. - Friedman

Underlying most arguments against the free market is a lack of belief in freedom itself. -Friedman

Nothing is so permanent as a temporary government program. - Friedman

Society will never be free until the last Democrat is strangled with the entrails of the last Communist.
Skepsikyma
Posts: 8,285
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/28/2016 1:44:02 AM
Posted: 4 months ago
At 7/28/2016 12:11:53 AM, Beisht_Kione wrote:
At 7/27/2016 10:47:03 PM, Skepsikyma wrote:
At 7/27/2016 4:05:15 PM, Beisht_Kione wrote:
Do you believe it is possible for one culture, based on it's values, to be superior to another culture?

I think that the entire concept of 'superiority' doesn't apply to cultures, because there is no universally agreed upon common goal to human societies. It's the same sort of facile thinking which says that one animal is 'more evolved' than another. All animals are evolved to suit their respective environments, just as all cultures have evolved to suit their respective environments. Those who fail won't fail because some human with delusions of grandeur decided that they were 'inferior', they will fail because they failed to adapt, or they will fail because they were out-competed.

Superiority absolutely applies to cultures and can absolutely.
Western culture treats women batter than Islamic culture does.
Western culture treats gays batter than Islamic culture does.
Western culture does not allow for there to be state sanctioned repercussions for apostasy. Islam demands it.
Western culture embraces freedom of speech(for the most part). Islam does not.
Western culture believes in due process(for the most part). Islam does not.

From that short list I feel that I can safely come to the conclusion that Western culture is superior to Islamic culture.

You didn't address my argument in the slightest. You adopted a set of metrics without defending the merit of your 'superiority' standard, and then blithely applied them to the situation with no rational backing whatsoever.
"The Collectivist experiment is thoroughly suited (in appearance at least) to the Capitalist society which it proposes to replace. It works with the existing machinery of Capitalism, talks and thinks in the existing terms of Capitalism, appeals to just those appetites which Capitalism has aroused, and ridicules as fantastic and unheard-of just those things in society the memory of which Capitalism has killed among men wherever the blight of it has spread."
- Hilaire Belloc -
HeavenlyPanda
Posts: 819
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/28/2016 2:42:41 AM
Posted: 4 months ago
At 7/27/2016 11:45:01 PM, Beisht_Kione wrote:
At 7/27/2016 10:03:00 PM, HeavenlyPanda wrote:
At 7/27/2016 10:00:29 PM, Beisht_Kione wrote:
At 7/27/2016 9:40:45 PM, HeavenlyPanda wrote:
At 7/27/2016 9:35:33 PM, Beisht_Kione wrote:
At 7/27/2016 4:14:53 PM, HeavenlyPanda wrote:
America itself tells its own people that Islam is violent when Islam is violent only becuase of America.

So you agree with Islam's treatment of women?
Islam's treatment of gays?
Islam's treatment of people of other faiths?
Islam's treatment of people who leave Islam?
Islam's lack of free speech?
Islam's lack of due process?
etc, etc, etc

Considering that America practically gave birth to Al Qaeda/ISIS I don't think that you should ask me who's morales are greater. I thought you were going to pick apart my points in America Is the biggest Terrist regime forum. Guess not. Too scared that I'm right? ;)

I've decided not to get into your other post. Way too many points and topics to cover. I find issue with just about every sentence. It would just turn into a messy quagmire of a thread. For both of our ease of communication, we can cover the points as we go.

As for this thread, I'm not talking about ISIS or Al'Qaeda. I'm talking about Islam. I'm talking about the fundamental principles behind the faith that are practiced as the law of the land in counties around the world.
So, do you agree with Islam on any of the points I've provided?

Right. The classic "you're right but I don't want I admit it point." Got it.
Why do I have to believe in Islam religion? What if I don't want to?

I was trying not to be rude, but your two large rants on that post sound like the rambling of a madman. It's very incoherent. You are comparing events across hundreds of years, that have very little to do with each other to begin with.
Honestly, I would have to reteach you history and how to remove your modern moral lens. The latter has proved impossible for me in the past. I'm not a good enough teacher to rewire your brain out of it's complete and utter ignorance of history.
Still on about that? We all know that I'm right. You just don't know how to refute my points becuase you're too ignorant and you lack knowledge. Don't bother. I've run into people like you on this website and when they try to talk about things they have no clue about, they end up sounding like an idiot. So if you don't want to sound like an ignorant fool, don't bother refuting my other forum post about America becuase you obviously lack knowledge.

Point and case of why I don't want to get into it with you on the other thread:

So you agree with Islam's treatment of women?
Islam's treatment of gays?
Islam's treatment of people of other faiths?
Islam's treatment of people who leave Islam?
Islam's lack of free speech?
Islam's lack of due process?

Why do I have to believe in Islam religion? What if I don't want to?

How is that answer? That's not even answering a question with another question. That's just random words that seem to have fell out of your head, considering they have no relation to what I asked, other than the over arching theme of Islam.

Wow, random words huh? Random words fell out of my head and magically arranged themselves into sentences. What are the chances of that?
HeavenlyPanda. The most heavenly of all heavenly creatures.
Torton
Posts: 988
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/28/2016 2:48:14 AM
Posted: 4 months ago
At 7/28/2016 2:42:41 AM, HeavenlyPanda wrote:
At 7/27/2016 11:45:01 PM, Beisht_Kione wrote:
At 7/27/2016 10:03:00 PM, HeavenlyPanda wrote:
At 7/27/2016 10:00:29 PM, Beisht_Kione wrote:
At 7/27/2016 9:40:45 PM, HeavenlyPanda wrote:
At 7/27/2016 9:35:33 PM, Beisht_Kione wrote:
At 7/27/2016 4:14:53 PM, HeavenlyPanda wrote:
America itself tells its own people that Islam is violent when Islam is violent only becuase of America.

So you agree with Islam's treatment of women?
Islam's treatment of gays?
Islam's treatment of people of other faiths?
Islam's treatment of people who leave Islam?
Islam's lack of free speech?
Islam's lack of due process?
etc, etc, etc

Considering that America practically gave birth to Al Qaeda/ISIS I don't think that you should ask me who's morales are greater. I thought you were going to pick apart my points in America Is the biggest Terrist regime forum. Guess not. Too scared that I'm right? ;)

I've decided not to get into your other post. Way too many points and topics to cover. I find issue with just about every sentence. It would just turn into a messy quagmire of a thread. For both of our ease of communication, we can cover the points as we go.

As for this thread, I'm not talking about ISIS or Al'Qaeda. I'm talking about Islam. I'm talking about the fundamental principles behind the faith that are practiced as the law of the land in counties around the world.
So, do you agree with Islam on any of the points I've provided?

Right. The classic "you're right but I don't want I admit it point." Got it.
Why do I have to believe in Islam religion? What if I don't want to?

I was trying not to be rude, but your two large rants on that post sound like the rambling of a madman. It's very incoherent. You are comparing events across hundreds of years, that have very little to do with each other to begin with.
Honestly, I would have to reteach you history and how to remove your modern moral lens. The latter has proved impossible for me in the past. I'm not a good enough teacher to rewire your brain out of it's complete and utter ignorance of history.
Still on about that? We all know that I'm right. You just don't know how to refute my points becuase you're too ignorant and you lack knowledge. Don't bother. I've run into people like you on this website and when they try to talk about things they have no clue about, they end up sounding like an idiot. So if you don't want to sound like an ignorant fool, don't bother refuting my other forum post about America becuase you obviously lack knowledge.
Irony levels at critical mass. Abort. Repeat: abort.
keithprosser
Posts: 2,028
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/28/2016 3:18:22 AM
Posted: 4 months ago
+1 excellent post
I'd like to agreee and +1 it, because it has got a nice prose style. But I can't because after reading it I still don't know 'why the west cannot understand Islam'. It seems to be saying the reason people can't understand 9-11 or Charlie Hebdo is that they haven't heard of Attar of Nishapur, or that in order to understand Islam it is a very good idea to actually study it a bit.

I would suggest to skep that the reason the west cannot understand Islam is few in the west want to understand it. The one thing almost every westerner knows about Mohammed is that he 'was a pedophile', and even that is only known because islamophobes repeat it like fixated parrots at every opportunity.

It is sad that human nature is to prefer simple stereotyping to proper understanding - but that does seem to be the case.
Nivek
Posts: 242
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/28/2016 4:32:06 AM
Posted: 4 months ago
This is useful. I live and grew up with people of different faith and it was difficult to get along with them. It's almost impossible at some point. I suppose I should just read more to get a concrete understanding of their world. I'm gonna save this as a reminder.
Beisht_Kione
Posts: 233
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/28/2016 5:28:55 AM
Posted: 4 months ago
At 7/28/2016 1:44:02 AM, Skepsikyma wrote:
At 7/28/2016 12:11:53 AM, Beisht_Kione wrote:
At 7/27/2016 10:47:03 PM, Skepsikyma wrote:
At 7/27/2016 4:05:15 PM, Beisht_Kione wrote:
Do you believe it is possible for one culture, based on it's values, to be superior to another culture?

I think that the entire concept of 'superiority' doesn't apply to cultures, because there is no universally agreed upon common goal to human societies. It's the same sort of facile thinking which says that one animal is 'more evolved' than another. All animals are evolved to suit their respective environments, just as all cultures have evolved to suit their respective environments. Those who fail won't fail because some human with delusions of grandeur decided that they were 'inferior', they will fail because they failed to adapt, or they will fail because they were out-competed.

Superiority absolutely applies to cultures and can absolutely.
Western culture treats women batter than Islamic culture does.
Western culture treats gays batter than Islamic culture does.
Western culture does not allow for there to be state sanctioned repercussions for apostasy. Islam demands it.
Western culture embraces freedom of speech(for the most part). Islam does not.
Western culture believes in due process(for the most part). Islam does not.

From that short list I feel that I can safely come to the conclusion that Western culture is superior to Islamic culture.

You didn't address my argument in the slightest. You adopted a set of metrics without defending the merit of your 'superiority' standard, and then blithely applied them to the situation with no rational backing whatsoever.

You can go about this with a holy than thou, psycho babble bullsh*t tone of yours, but do you not agree that the West, in these categories, is the superior?
They can live life the way they want to in their horrific hell holes, but we have no obligation to condone, apologize, or justify their abhorrent and regressive behavior.
Fatihah
Posts: 7,742
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/28/2016 5:53:38 AM
Posted: 4 months ago
At 7/28/2016 12:26:07 AM, Beisht_Kione wrote:

You failed to mention though, that in every single Muslim majority country and even are, there are, what we in the West would call, major human right violations. What you suppose, does not exist anywhere on this planet, save for maybe in some Western countries, where Sharia is outlawed.

Response: To the contrary, you failed to mention that no one has met every single Muslim in the world or in a Muslim majority country. So the notion that what I propose does not exist on the planet except maybe in Western countries is backed by absolutely nothing, while the fact that many Muslims and non-Muslims live freely together in Muslim majority countries and continue to choose to live in those countries, and Muslims themselves living their will say that what I stated does exist.

Meanwhile, we can turn on our TVs in the west and see atrocities and human rights violations as well within those countries daily.
Fatihah
Posts: 7,742
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/28/2016 5:54:51 AM
Posted: 4 months ago
At 7/28/2016 12:49:00 AM, bballcrook21 wrote:
At 7/27/2016 11:50:51 PM, Fatihah wrote:
At 7/27/2016 9:35:33 PM, Beisht_Kione wrote:

So you agree with Islam's treatment of women?
Islam's treatment of gays?
Islam's treatment of people of other faiths?
Islam's treatment of people who leave Islam?
Islam's lack of free speech?
Islam's lack of due process?
etc, etc, etc

Response: Islam cannot treat a person in any way, as Islam is only a teaching. Only people cam treat other people a certain way and apply Islam and when you apply the actual teachings of Islam, Islam is perfect in treating women, gays, people who leave Islam and other faiths, has free speech and makes great process.

The punishment for apostasy is death under Islam. I don't see how that's a good thing.

Response: The punishment for apostasy in Islam is not death.
Fatihah
Posts: 7,742
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/28/2016 6:03:35 AM
Posted: 4 months ago
At 7/28/2016 3:18:22 AM, keithprosser wrote:
+1 excellent post
I'd like to agreee and +1 it, because it has got a nice prose style. But I can't because after reading it I still don't know 'why the west cannot understand Islam'. It seems to be saying the reason people can't understand 9-11 or Charlie Hebdo is that they haven't heard of Attar of Nishapur, or that in order to understand Islam it is a very good idea to actually study it a bit.

I would suggest to skep that the reason the west cannot understand Islam is few in the west want to understand it. The one thing almost every westerner knows about Mohammed is that he 'was a pedophile', and even that is only known because islamophobes repeat it like fixated parrots at every opportunity.

It is sad that human nature is to prefer simple stereotyping to proper understanding - but that does seem to be the case.

Response: Almost every Westerner does not know Muhammad (saw) is a pedophile. Only those who wish to propose their own ideology or religion suggest so, despite the sources showing otherwise. Furthermore, the claim Muhammad was a pedophile is from the same sources that say Aisha (ra) was loved and treated kindly, and she grew to be a leader and scholar. So according to those westerners logic, that makes pedophilia a great thing. That only exposes such Westerners, not Muhammad or Islam.
lawlypants
Posts: 378
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/28/2016 7:00:26 AM
Posted: 4 months ago
At 7/28/2016 12:49:00 AM, bballcrook21 wrote:
At 7/27/2016 11:50:51 PM, Fatihah wrote:
At 7/27/2016 9:35:33 PM, Beisht_Kione wrote:

So you agree with Islam's treatment of women?
Islam's treatment of gays?
Islam's treatment of people of other faiths?
Islam's treatment of people who leave Islam?
Islam's lack of free speech?
Islam's lack of due process?
etc, etc, etc

Response: Islam cannot treat a person in any way, as Islam is only a teaching. Only people cam treat other people a certain way and apply Islam and when you apply the actual teachings of Islam, Islam is perfect in treating women, gays, people who leave Islam and other faiths, has free speech and makes great process.

The punishment for apostasy is death under Islam. I don't see how that's a good thing.

It is funny and sad at the same time how people want to get their information on religion from their tv screen instead of more legit and credible sources. I can easily find information in ANY book, including a math book or a medical book, and use it to justify and advocate violence, easily. And I already know what would happen afterwards too, it's not rocket science lol. All the Christians (Bible), mathematicians (math book), doctors (medical book) will start yelling about how I need to read it in context and study it more and study it properly, but God-forbid you apply the same logic and scrutiny to other books that you read. Nice and juicy hypocrisy/double-standards lol.

By the way, it takes 10-20+ years of hardcore studying and practice to be able to apply and execute the laws of the US constitution correctly as a judge, or to apply medical concepts correctly as doctor, or to apply science correctly as an engineer, etc. So apply the same hardcore amount of real studying and scholarly understanding to Islam...but no... the random joe-shmoe wants to watch fox news or some other media outlet every night and then prance around acting like now they're an expert on Islamic jurisprudence. That's not how it works buddy, sorry lol.
keithprosser
Posts: 2,028
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/28/2016 7:01:15 AM
Posted: 4 months ago
At 7/28/2016 6:03:35 AM, Fatihah wrote:

Response: Almost every Westerner does not know Muhammad (saw) is a pedophile. Only those who wish to propose their own ideology or religion suggest so, despite the sources showing otherwise. Furthermore, the claim Muhammad was a pedophile is from the same sources that say Aisha (ra) was loved and treated kindly, and she grew to be a leader and scholar. So according to those westerners logic, that makes pedophilia a great thing. That only exposes such Westerners, not Muhammad or Islam.

My allusion to Aisha was intended to highlight the level of ignorance and simplistic misrepresentation of Islam in the west, not as a criticism of Mohammed. I should have made that clearer.

However I do not agree that "Only those who wish to propose their own ideology or religion suggest so" because the the only 'ideology' behind it is an intent to demonise Muslims and foment strife.