Overall Rating and Opinion of The No-Nonsense Guide to Islam

Discuss the April 2015 philosophy book of the month, "The No-Nonsense Guide to Islam" by Ziauddin Sardar

How do you rate The No-Nonsense Guide to Islam?

1 star - poor, recommend against reading it
1
33%
2 stars - fair, okay
1
33%
3 stars - good, recommend it
1
33%
4 stars - excellent, amazing
0
No votes
 
Total votes : 3

Re: Overall Rating and Opinion of The No-Nonsense Guide to I

Post Number:#61  Postby ScottieX » April 25th, 2015, 3:30 am

Spectrum wrote:So we have to find ways to neutralize those evil grounds that the terrorist used to commit their violence. There are ways to do it, but it is long story.


Seems your argument rests in part on the effectiveness and cost of your unstated strategy. I doubt it will be particularly effective but maybe you have a secret.

My long term vision is humanity must wean off [very gradually] religions and religiosity in the future when we can find imperative foolproof replacements for religions. We cannot wean off religion without effective replacement with deal with the existential dilemma.


Does this mean countries like New Zealand (where a person who publicly indicates they are guided by god would probably loose any election) have a solution to the existential dilemma but the USA (where anyone who was publicly agnostic or atheist would probably loose any election) does not?

That aside - I'm not sure how one can get people to quit religion other than maybe Richard Dawkins writing another book or darkmatter releasing another cartoon on youtube. That and buying Chinese made I suppose.

Smashing them with weapons just seems to make them more religious.
ScottieX
 
Posts: 220 (View: All / In topic)

Joined: September 6th, 2014, 4:33 pm

Re: Overall Rating and Opinion of The No-Nonsense Guide to I



Become a member for less ads

Already a member? Login
 

Re: Overall Rating and Opinion of The No-Nonsense Guide to I

Post Number:#62  Postby Belinda » April 25th, 2015, 5:14 am

Scottiex wrote:


I don't know why we would try so hard too see much goodness in the Quran (except pragmatically as a way to convince Muslims to be good). I suppose you can see goodness in anything but it seems largely just a matter of luck in this case. We might as well look in the lord of the Rings for guidance on goodness.


Pragmatically, yes, as Scottie suggests.

Some novels are sources of goodness, for instance " To Kill A Mockingbird". Much of literary criticism is about the moral purport of a novel. I am not so sure about "The Lord of the Rings" as a source of goodness. LOTR is perhaps overloaded with colourful magic that unrealistically helps the protagonists. The moral aspect and social influence of some novel and indeed that of any work of art is interesting.

Also worth discussing is the beauty of the language of any work of literature The King James Bible gets a lot of praise for its use of English. The Quran is praised by Arabic speakers for its melodic beauty. Prose graduates into poetry through rhythmic quality, assonance and imagery.

However the Quran is especially worth attending to as a deliberately composed set of rules for living, it is pared down to precepts and devotional material and lacks the chronological quality of The Bible. Worth noting here is that Muhammad claimed that Islam is not a new idea but is a natural extension of Judaism which itself is based upon the Old Testament. I guess that my best justification for an infidel and non-Arabic speaker to study the Quran , apart from the pragmatic one Scottie mentioned, is that the Quran is , as Spectrum says, the basis of Islam; just as the lived life of Jesus is the basis of Christianity.

What Spectrum continually ignores is that the Quran was intended for Meccans in 610 AD. Muhammad knew nothing of early modern and modern history. Meccans in 610 AD had problems of their time and place. Like Judaism and Christianity the religion begun by Muhammad carried the essential message of The Golden Rule, which is a universalisable message. It is the universal quality of The Golden Rule, not local Meccan problems, which transforms Muhammad from a local political leader into a world class prophet. This is why Spectrum is wrong to ignore the implicitly local quality of Muhammad's adjurations to Violence.


The Golden Rule is more explicit in the Quran, and slightly less explicit in The Bible, than it is in , say, " To Kill A Mockingbird". However "To Kill A Mockingbird" has the advantage of being set in modern times and against a historical background the details of which are common knowledge.
Socialist
Belinda
Contributor
 
Posts: 13760 (View: All / In topic)

Joined: July 10th, 2008, 7:02 pm
Location: UK

Re: Overall Rating and Opinion of The No-Nonsense Guide to I

Post Number:#63  Postby Spectrum » April 25th, 2015, 5:31 am

ScottieX wrote:
Spectrum wrote:So we have to find ways to neutralize those evil grounds that the terrorist used to commit their violence. There are ways to do it, but it is long story.


Seems your argument rests in part on the effectiveness and cost of your unstated strategy. I doubt it will be particularly effective but maybe you have a secret.

My long term vision is humanity must wean off [very gradually] religions and religiosity in the future when we can find imperative foolproof replacements for religions. We cannot wean off religion without effective replacement with deal with the existential dilemma.


Does this mean countries like New Zealand (where a person who publicly indicates they are guided by god would probably loose any election) have a solution to the existential dilemma but the USA (where anyone who was publicly agnostic or atheist would probably loose any election) does not?

That aside - I'm not sure how one can get people to quit religion other than maybe Richard Dawkins writing another book or darkmatter releasing another cartoon on youtube. That and buying Chinese made I suppose.

Smashing them with weapons just seems to make them more religious.

The proximate root causes of religious related evils can be reducible to some complex and basic neural connectivity. There will a day when humanity can deal and resolve issue on individual and group of specific neurons. Of course this must be foolproof and ethical, not producing frankensteins.

Even at present the following are possible to cure the problem of Islamic terror 100%.
1. Convert all Muslims to Buddhism, Jainism and other benign religions to deal with the inherent unavoidable existential dilemma. Viola, there will no [100%] religious based ( evil in the name of the religion or its God) at all. This is a possibility but not tenable in a practical basis due to hardcore resistant.

2. If we can get everyone on Earth to take psilocybin and other non-harmful natural hallucinogens, DMT, etc. in controlled no side effect doses, there is a possibility the degree of religious related violence will be reduced tremendously. At present there is no way Islamic authorities will allow this. But this is nevertheless a possibility.

3. Amydalatomy - dissection of a certain portion of the amydala that is linked with the existential dilemma. This is not possible at present and not advisable due to potential side effects.

4. Many other possibilities.

The above list of possibilities will pave the way for humanity [in the future, 50, 75, 100 or > years] to find one or a few approaches to deal with religious related evils that are not dangerous, is foolproof, scientifically verifiable, safe and will take effect naturally just like humans are drinking tea and coffee.
Note the Connectome Project:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Connectome

Btw, I am not dreaming up the above possibilities but have read VERY extensively [reasonable justifiable basis] on ideas and knowledge related to the point.
Not-a-theist. Religion is a critical necessity for humanity now, but not the FUTURE.
Spectrum
 
Posts: 4186 (View: All / In topic)

Joined: December 21st, 2010, 1:25 am
Favorite Philosopher: Eclectic -Various

Re: Overall Rating and Opinion of The No-Nonsense Guide to I

Post Number:#64  Postby Londoner » April 25th, 2015, 5:33 am

Spectrum

1. The many instances, e.g. Bin Laden, and other Islamists who commit those terrible violence and evil accompanied by they listing the relevant verses they relied upon to commit their evil acts. Here is Bin Laden's message to America, read it ... theguardian.com/world/2002/nov/24/theob ... heobserver


Do you ever read any of the links you post? Bin Laden opens his letter saying that Muslims are allowed to fight back if they are wronged. He then gives a list of the actions by which he thinks they are wronged; they are entirely conventional ones.

As for the first question: Why are we fighting and opposing you? The answer is very simple:

(1) Because you attacked us and continue to attack us.
and he then gives examples.

2. As for Buddhists who commit evils, they are not doing in the name of Buddhism or Buddha. And they do not quote any Buddhist texts when they commit any act of violence. There may one or a few verses in Buddhist texts that indicate some element of violence but they are the few drops in an ocean and no Buddhists has ever quoted them to commit evil.


They use the notion of 'least harm'. You can kill one in order that many might live. For example, you can invade China and kill maybe 200,000 Chinese at Nanking because establishing a Japanese Empire is a benevolent act.

3. The OT may contain violent laden verses but Jews do not relied upon them to commit extensive violence like the Muslims are doing and besides the number of Jews around the world is very small in contrast to the 1.5 billions of Muslims. In any case, whatever violence originating from texts relating to Judaism, they should be condemned.


So which is it? That they don't rely on them? Or that they do, but only some? I think the notion that God has given them Israel features fairly strongly as a justification for their actions in the middle-east.

4. The Christians may have committed terrible evils in the past but these evils acts are against the teachings of Jesus who command Christians to love their enemies not to kill their enemies. In such a case, it the Christians who take upon themselves to commit violence and not as condoned by their religion per se.


Christian churches bless their soldiers, priests accompany armies, pray for victory. The US Christian right is far from pacifist.

You are still playing the same game. If a Muslim does something it is because they are a Muslim. If a Buddhist or Jew or Christian does exactly the same - or worse - thing then it has nothing to do with their religion.

There is a correlation between asbestos and cancer. Asbestos is one useful and cheap material and many has to use it to build houses. However, not every who is exposed to asbestos get cancer. Therefore we cannot be conclusive that asbestos will cause cancer. Nevertheless, tests do show that asbestos is highly malignant and it is recommended to be banned.


Suppose it was the case that people who were exposed to asbestos got the same, or less cancer than the rest? Because that is the case here. Muslims are not more 'evil' than anyone else.

It is just as well you are not in medical research. You would observe that Muslims get cancer and that Muslims read the Koran, and conclude the Koran causes cancer. Perhaps you do!

Of course you have the right to present whatever the argument, but yours diversions [bringing in Hitler, Stalin, communism and the likes as comparatives]are merely straw man and off topic.


So in Dr Spectrum's medical research lab, when somebody objects to your theory that the Koran causes cancer by pointing out that Christians also got the same, if not more cancers, or that there was a real correlation between smoking and cancer, you would insist that this was off-topic - in Dr Spectrum's lab we are only allowed to discuss cancerous Muslims.
Londoner
 
Posts: 1543 (View: All / In topic)

Joined: March 8th, 2013, 12:46 pm

Re: Overall Rating and Opinion of The No-Nonsense Guide to I

Post Number:#65  Postby Spectrum » April 25th, 2015, 5:52 am

Here is a point on how verses in the Quran and expounded and stretched in the Hadiths rhetorically to give Muslims an exacerbated and exaggerated of the point and thus cultivated fervor and zeal and driving SOME Muslims mob into frenzy:

Re Virgins in the Quran;

In the Quran:
This word 'houri' appears in the Quran 44:54; 52:20; 78:33 and in different form in 55:56 & 78:33; It describes beautiful females with wide and stunning eyes; bashful virgins. They are exquisite creatures provided for the sexual pleasures of believing 'Muslim' men in Muhammad's version of Paradise.

Muhammad promised his followers - whom he sent to fight and die for Allah's cause - an incredibly beautiful after life with unlimited pleasures: Sexual, Visual and Sensual; the same pleasures that Muhammad prohibited them from having on earth, and more.

Neither the word nor the concept are Arabian since they were plagiarized - as usual with Muhammad - from the Pesian Zoroasterian concept of their Paradise (Firdawz). [br]/br]
It is important to point out first, that there is no mention anywhere in the Quran of the actual number of virgins available in paradise, and second, the dark-eyed damsels are available for all believing Muhamadans, not just martyrs.

In the Hadiths:
Here is the Hadiths, individuals take the opportunity to stretch [add addition juice by themselves] the point to entice believers.

It is in the Ahadith that we find the 72 virgins in heaven specified: in a Hadith (Islamic Tradition) collected by Al-Tirmidhi (c. died 892 CE) in the Book of Sunan (volume IV, chapters on The Features of Paradise as described by Muhammad, chapter 21, About the Smallest Reward for the People of Paradise, (Hadith 2687). The same hadith is also quoted by Ibn Kathir (died 1373 CE ) in his Quranic commentary (Tafsir) of Sura Al-Rahman 55:72:-

"The Prophet Muhammad was heard saying: 'The smallest reward for the people of paradise is an abode where there are 80,000 servants and 72 wives, over which stands a dome decorated with pearls, aquamarine, and ruby, as wide as the distance from Al-Jabiyyah [a Damascus suburb] to Sana'a [Yemen]'."

Modern apologists of 'Islam' try to downplay the evident materialism and sexual implications of such descriptions, but, as the Encyclopaedia of Islam says, even orthodox Muslim theologians such as al Ghazali (died 1111 CE) and Al-Ash'ari (died 935 CE) have
"admitted sensual pleasures into paradise".

In fact, the sensual pleasures are graphically described in detail by Imam Al-Suyuti (died 1505 ), Quranic commentator and polymath. He wrote:

"Each time we sleep with a houri we find her virgin. Besides, the penis of the Elected never softens. The erection is eternal; the sensation that you feel each time you make love is utterly delicious and out of this world and were you to experience it in this world you would faint. Each chosen one [ie Muslim] will marry seventy [sic] houris, besides the women he married on earth, and all will have appetising vaginas."

If a learned and important Muhammadan exegete such as was the Suyuti, came out with such incerdible drivel and utter stupidity, then it should not come as a great surprise to ordinary, intelligent and decent people in the twenty first century, that there are thousands of Muhammadan men who are willing to commit the most horrible, reprehensible and inhumane acts against any and all UNBELIEVRS because they have been brainwashed into believing that in death, they will get all the pleasures that they are forbidden from in life, for Eternity.

The Point:
The above is to show how the verses in the Quran are exacerbated and exaggerated in the Hadiths as heard [this is false] by close companions of Muhammad and compiled 200 years after M's death.
They are expounded charismatically to influence zeal in the believers towards Islam and many believers are taken by it.

What is dangerous are those pumped up verses in killing and oppression of believers. These in basic principle are correct and condoned in the Quran but in the Hadiths which religious expert relay to believers, they are highly charged emotionally and psychologically. This is why Jews, Christians and non-Muslims are swatted like flies. Note the Armenian Genocide in the recent news.

Note: the above are not all mine but are extracted from other sources
Not-a-theist. Religion is a critical necessity for humanity now, but not the FUTURE.
Spectrum
 
Posts: 4186 (View: All / In topic)

Joined: December 21st, 2010, 1:25 am
Favorite Philosopher: Eclectic -Various

Re: Overall Rating and Opinion of The No-Nonsense Guide to I

Post Number:#66  Postby Belinda » April 25th, 2015, 6:17 am

Spectrum wrote and quoted:

"The Prophet Muhammad was heard saying: 'The smallest reward for the people of paradise is an abode where there are 80,000 servants and 72 wives, over which stands a dome decorated with pearls, aquamarine, and ruby, as wide as the distance from Al-Jabiyyah [a Damascus suburb] to Sana'a [Yemen]'."

Modern apologists of 'Islam' try to downplay the evident materialism and sexual implications of such descriptions, but, as the Encyclopaedia of Islam says, even orthodox Muslim theologians such as al Ghazali (died 1111 CE) and Al-Ash'ari (died 935 CE) have "admitted sensual pleasures into paradise".


The above is evidence that Muhammad and medieval theologians promoted belief in a life after death with precious gems, beautiful women, and plenty of good sex. There is no need to be surprised that " evident materialism and sexual implications " were implicated in life after death beliefs. Muhammad and the others were men of their times and places. Spectrum lacks the insight of historical relativity.
Socialist
Belinda
Contributor
 
Posts: 13760 (View: All / In topic)

Joined: July 10th, 2008, 7:02 pm
Location: UK

Re: Overall Rating and Opinion of The No-Nonsense Guide to I

Post Number:#67  Postby Spectrum » April 25th, 2015, 6:44 am

Belinda wrote:Spectrum wrote and quoted:

"The Prophet Muhammad was heard saying: 'The smallest reward for the people of paradise is an abode where there are 80,000 servants and 72 wives, over which stands a dome decorated with pearls, aquamarine, and ruby, as wide as the distance from Al-Jabiyyah [a Damascus suburb] to Sana'a [Yemen]'."

Modern apologists of 'Islam' try to downplay the evident materialism and sexual implications of such descriptions, but, as the Encyclopaedia of Islam says, even orthodox Muslim theologians such as al Ghazali (died 1111 CE) and Al-Ash'ari (died 935 CE) have "admitted sensual pleasures into paradise".


The above is evidence that Muhammad and medieval theologians promoted belief in a life after death with precious gems, beautiful women, and plenty of good sex. There is no need to be surprised that " evident materialism and sexual implications " were implicated in life after death beliefs. Muhammad and the others were men of their times and places. Spectrum lacks the insight of historical relativity.

I did not state I believe in the above literally.
You are ignorant of what many Muslims of our times believed?
Many fundamentalist Muslims take the above literally and as incentive are motivated in reality to kill non-Muslims or martyred themselves to get the above rewards which is real in their mind.

You did not get my point.
My point is by including the above in an immutable holy text, Islam is defective. The resultant is thousands and millions are killed when SOME Muslims leverage on the above beliefs of rewards of virgins as an incentive to themselves. As long as there are Muslims, you will never get the majority of them to believe otherwise. To these Muslims these are promises made by God and there is no way a omnipotent god made false promises.

Did you note the quoted point in your post?;
even orthodox Muslim theologians such as al Ghazali (died 1111 CE) and Al-Ash'ari (died 935 CE) have "admitted sensual pleasures into paradise".

If these two credible [the Muslims' views] scholars can believe that, what more can you expect from the layman Muslims, especially the males?
Not-a-theist. Religion is a critical necessity for humanity now, but not the FUTURE.
Spectrum
 
Posts: 4186 (View: All / In topic)

Joined: December 21st, 2010, 1:25 am
Favorite Philosopher: Eclectic -Various

Re: Overall Rating and Opinion of The No-Nonsense Guide to I

Post Number:#68  Postby Belinda » April 25th, 2015, 8:42 am

Spectrum wrote:

My point is by including the above in an immutable holy text, Islam is defective. The resultant is thousands and millions are killed when SOME Muslims leverage on the above beliefs of rewards of virgins as an incentive to themselves. As long as there are Muslims, you will never get the majority of them to believe otherwise. To these Muslims these are promises made by God and there is no way a omnipotent god made false promises.

Did you note the quoted point in your post?;

even orthodox Muslim theologians such as al Ghazali (died 1111 CE) and Al-Ash'ari (died 935 CE) have "admitted sensual pleasures into paradise".

If these two credible [the Muslims' views] scholars can believe that, what more can you expect from the layman Muslims, especially the males?


I don't know about "the majority" , and "believe otherwise".

However there is a problem with all credal religions that some devotees will be literal believers and even fundamentalists. Muslims and Jews might be less likely than Christians to include a great many literal believers and fundamentalists because Islam and Judaism stress practical devotions more than beliefs (Quran provides a lot of evidence for this) whilst Christianity holds that belief in ideas matters the most.

I repeat that the "credible scholars" whom Spectrum quoted were like the rest of us immersed in time and place. No philosopher is immune from the influence of their social milieu. Spinoza was well aware of this and he resorted to a retiring and private occupation instead of taking up the offer of a university appointment, so that he might be uninfluenced by social pressures.
Socialist
Belinda
Contributor
 
Posts: 13760 (View: All / In topic)

Joined: July 10th, 2008, 7:02 pm
Location: UK

Re: Overall Rating and Opinion of The No-Nonsense Guide to I

Post Number:#69  Postby Londoner » April 25th, 2015, 10:08 am

Belinda wrote:
The above is evidence that Muhammad and medieval theologians promoted belief in a life after death with precious gems, beautiful women, and plenty of good sex. There is no need to be surprised that " evident materialism and sexual implications " were implicated in life after death beliefs. Muhammad and the others were men of their times and places. Spectrum lacks the insight of historical relativity.


Quite. Paradise is supposed to be a pleasurable place, so Muslims think that means the same sort of pleasures we enjoy on earth, although without any of the drawbacks. What is mysterious is the Christian heaven, which is supposed to be nice, but not in the same way that material pleasures are nice. Nobody has ever made sense of that.
Londoner
 
Posts: 1543 (View: All / In topic)

Joined: March 8th, 2013, 12:46 pm

Re: Overall Rating and Opinion of The No-Nonsense Guide to I

Post Number:#70  Postby ScottieX » April 25th, 2015, 3:27 pm

Spectrum wrote:The proximate root causes of religious related evils can be reducible to some complex and basic neural connectivity. There will a day when humanity can deal and resolve issue on individual and group of specific neurons. Of course this must be foolproof and ethical, not producing frankensteins.


Well yes that will be effective - but we can be 99% sure it wont be done ethically. So we can judge whether having unethical people programming our minds is better or worse than having terrorists running around.

Even at present the following are possible to cure the problem of Islamic terror 100%.
1. Convert all Muslims to Buddhism, Jainism and other benign religions to deal with the inherent unavoidable existential dilemma.


That isn't a method of resolving the problem it is a final solution. If we (the west) knew how to do that all the Muslims would already be Christians. And as soon as you apply a methodology you will teach the Muslims that methodology.

All your options seem similar in that they are both far beyond our power to action and also likely to have considerable side effects that could be worse than the problem...

Btw, I am not dreaming up the above possibilities but have read VERY extensively [reasonable justifiable basis] on ideas and knowledge related to the point.


No the problem isn't that you might just be on the fly dreaming them up.
ScottieX
 
Posts: 220 (View: All / In topic)

Joined: September 6th, 2014, 4:33 pm

Re: Overall Rating and Opinion of The No-Nonsense Guide to I

Post Number:#71  Postby Spectrum » April 26th, 2015, 1:56 am

ScottieX wrote:
Spectrum wrote:The proximate root causes of religious related evils can be reducible to some complex and basic neural connectivity. There will a day when humanity can deal and resolve issue on individual and group of specific neurons. Of course this must be foolproof and ethical, not producing frankensteins.


Well yes that will be effective - but we can be 99% sure it wont be done ethically. So we can judge whether having unethical people programming our minds is better or worse than having terrorists running around.



I have that covered. Whatever is to be done will not be imposed but rather it will be a self-improvement thing that everyone voluntary adopt to optimize their own well-being. IMO, the most effective Moral/Ethical System would be that of the Kantian System and in future humanity will adopt such a system.

Even at present the following are possible to cure the problem of Islamic terror 100%.
1. Convert all Muslims to Buddhism, Jainism and other benign religions to deal with the inherent unavoidable existential dilemma.





That isn't a method of resolving the problem it is a final solution. If we (the west) knew how to do that all the Muslims would already be Christians. And as soon as you apply a methodology you will teach the Muslims that methodology.

All your options seem similar in that they are both far beyond our power to action and also likely to have considerable side effects that could be worse than the problem...



I am not recommending any action to be taken based on the possibilities I mentioned earlier. My point is there are possibilities and humanities in the future will find similar possible ways that are palatable to all to promote self-development in the intended direction, i.e. voluntarily weaning oneself off religions and religiosity for net-positive spiritual approaches.

-- Sun Apr 26, 2015 1:08 am --

Islam is Nazism with a God.
In fact, Islam [in part, not the whole] is worst than Nazism as its evil virus infect any Muslims around the world whilst Nazism is restricted to Germans of Aryan origins.



Any counters to the above items in the video?
Not-a-theist. Religion is a critical necessity for humanity now, but not the FUTURE.
Spectrum
 
Posts: 4186 (View: All / In topic)

Joined: December 21st, 2010, 1:25 am
Favorite Philosopher: Eclectic -Various

Re: Overall Rating and Opinion of The No-Nonsense Guide to I

Post Number:#72  Postby ScottieX » April 26th, 2015, 3:47 am

Spectrum wrote:I have that covered. Whatever is to be done will not be imposed but rather it will be a self-improvement thing that everyone voluntary adopt to optimize their own well-being.


Well I think a lot of this will happen as part of what one might term the singularity. Although I think that collectivism will overcome individualism until we are effectively just one making Kantian ethics a bit academic.

I imagine a period where we have greater and greater integration with the internet and other data sources, until so much of our processing occurs on the data sources that we could reasonably be considered to be on them and since we all share the same ones we could be reasonably considered to be much the same and of course noone can even conceive of blowing up the world without being detected (making no judgement about whether this is utopian or distopian).

My point is there are possibilities and humanities in the future will find similar possible ways that are palatable to all to promote self-development in the intended direction.


You seem so pessimistic about the Islamic issue but so optimistic otherwise.
ScottieX
 
Posts: 220 (View: All / In topic)

Joined: September 6th, 2014, 4:33 pm

Re: Overall Rating and Opinion of The No-Nonsense Guide to I

Post Number:#73  Postby Spectrum » April 26th, 2015, 10:30 pm

ScottieX wrote:
Spectrum wrote:I have that covered. Whatever is to be done will not be imposed but rather it will be a self-improvement thing that everyone voluntary adopt to optimize their own well-being.


Well I think a lot of this will happen as part of what one might term the singularity. Although I think that collectivism will overcome individualism until we are effectively just one making Kantian ethics a bit academic.

I imagine a period where we have greater and greater integration with the internet and other data sources, until so much of our processing occurs on the data sources that we could reasonably be considered to be on them and since we all share the same ones we could be reasonably considered to be much the same and of course noone can even conceive of blowing up the world without being detected (making no judgement about whether this is utopian or distopian).

Kantian Moral/Ethical system is ultimately about collectivism not individualism, albeit there is a focus on development at the individual level towards team consciousness and awareness.
The Kantian Moral/Ethical system will provide a systematic framework to expedite the process of unity of all humans as Team-Human based on sound moral and ethical principles.

My point is there are possibilities and humanities in the future will find similar possible ways that are palatable to all to promote self-development in the intended direction.

You seem so pessimistic about the Islamic issue but so optimistic otherwise.

Isn't that obvious and necessary.
Note how Islamic evil is morphing from small timers (Al Qaeda and the likes) to a complex expanding 'strangler fig' (ISIS and its advancing network) that will be choking the secular world to death and human extinction (when WMDs are easily available). We in the developed world has to be pessimistic about it.
However I am very optimistic that the Islamic issue can be mitigated given the trend of the exponential expansion of knowledge that is going on at present. It is just a matter of more advances and converging all the diversified knowledge we have at present.
One of the real hindrances is due to Islamist apologists and deniers who are driven by blind empathy and cannot see the wood for the trees.
Not-a-theist. Religion is a critical necessity for humanity now, but not the FUTURE.
Spectrum
 
Posts: 4186 (View: All / In topic)

Joined: December 21st, 2010, 1:25 am
Favorite Philosopher: Eclectic -Various

Re: Overall Rating and Opinion of The No-Nonsense Guide to I

Post Number:#74  Postby Wayne92587 » August 29th, 2015, 4:34 pm

The problem is that we do not know how to fight and to win the Battle for the Survival of the most fit between Fundamentalist Islam and the West, Civilized Man.

We should declare War on Fundamentalist Islam and all that support them.

We should fight that proclaim themselves to be Terrorists, and their supporters World wide where ever we find them.

We should confiscate all properties of those that support Terrorism, meaning that we take away their Right to own property; a Right being a privilege guaranteed by Law.

We should not protect the right to be a Terrorist or the supporter of Terrorism.

The Fundamentalist Male is a Beast, is a Pig; the Prime example being the Fundamentalist Muslim (you do know what fundament don't you?).

The Myth of, the Beast, the Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse is coming true, the Man Beast being Sick in the Head, sic, sic, sic; being the Fundamentalist Muslim Male.

Jihad, the Battle between Good and Evil.

Machismo; a strong or exaggerated sense of manliness having the right to dominate; an assumptive attitude that virility, courage, strength, and entitlement to dominate are attributes or concomitants of masculinity; the concept associated with a strong sense of masculine pride, the supreme valuation of characteristics culturally associated with the masculine and a denigration of characteristics associated with the feminine, Women.

Fundamentally speaking Macho Man (I prefer the use of Machismo, Spanish) has a perverted, distorted sense of Manliness.

The Fundamentalist Muslim being a Male Chauvinistic Pig, carrying his perverted, distorted, sense of manliness into every aspect of his World of Reality.

The interpretation of the Four-Horsemen in the Bible is incorrect.

If you think that color does not have certain connotation you are sorely wrong; The Fundamentalist Muslim male wearing white. the female black.

The Four-Horsemen represent the competitive Spirits of Fundamentalist man.

And I saw when the Lamb opened one of the seals, and I heard, as it were the noise of thunder, one of the four beasts saying, come and see.

And I saw, and behold a white horse: and he that sat on him had a bow; and a crown was given unto him: and he went forth conquering, and to conquer.

The Spirit, the nature of Man having a perverted, distorted sense of Manliness, Machismo.

The Four-Horsemen represent the four aspects of Fundamentalist Man's competitive nature, spirit, based upon the need to fight the Battle for the survival of the most fit.

The Red Horse represents the Angry Spirit of Machismo, the second of four aspects to the Nature of the Man Beast, the Male Chauvinistic Pig.

Despite the Fact that Allah is proclaimed to be the God of Compassion, Islamic Law, Sharia, is said to not require the Muslim to show compassion to the Enemy!

Compassion is the Savior of Mankind, yes compassion given even to the Enemy.

Machismo, which does not allow for compassion, is worshiped by the Fundamentalist Male.

Not all Men are Humane Beings, some are Beasts, have no compassion, are inhumane.

And someone said come and see, and I saw when the Lamb opened one of the seals, and I heard, as it were the noise of thunder, one of the four beasts saying, come and see.

And I saw, and behold a white horse: and he that sat on him had a bow; and a crown was given unto him: and he went forth conquering, and to conquer.

The Myth of, the Beast, the Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse is coming true, the Man Beast being Sick in the Head, sic, sic, sic, being the Fundamentalist Muslim.

The Red Horse represents the Angry Spirit of Machismo, the second of four aspects to the Nature of the Man Beast, the Male Chauvinistic Pig.

Islam beware, the Enemy, Beast, lays within.

It will take Feminism, the Muslim Female to bring the Male Chauvinistic Pigs of Islam to their Knees.
Wayne92587
 
Posts: 1378 (View: All / In topic)

Joined: January 27th, 2012, 9:32 pm

Previous

Return to Discuss "The No-Nonsense Guide to Islam" by Ziauddin Sardar

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

Philosophy Trophies

Most Active Members
by posts made in lasts 30 days

Avatar Member Name Recent Posts
Greta 162
Fooloso4 116
Renee 107
Ormond 97
Felix 90

Last updated January 6, 2017, 6:28 pm EST

Most Active Book of the Month Participants
by book of the month posts

Avatar Member Name BOTM Posts
Scott 147
Spectrum 23
Belinda 23
whitetrshsoldier 20
Josefina1110 19
Last updated January 6, 2017, 6:28 pm EST