Do Not Bash Muslims!

Discuss philosophical questions regarding theism (and atheism), and discuss religion as it relates to philosophy. This includes any philosophical discussions that happen to be about god, gods, or a 'higher power' or the belief of them. This also generally includes philosophical topics about organized or ritualistic mysticism or about organized, common or ritualistic beliefs in the existence of supernatural phenomenon.
Spectrum
Posts: 4882
Joined: December 21st, 2010, 1:25 am
Favorite Philosopher: Eclectic -Various

Re: Do Not Bash Muslims!

Post by Spectrum » February 23rd, 2018, 5:14 am

Judaka wrote:
February 23rd, 2018, 4:51 am
I have to say your knowledge of Islam is VERY lacking.

What is 'Islam' is defined precisely within the Quran.
Spectrum given that I know you are not here to have real debates I won't go further but there are dozens of Islam sects, Islamic Scholars and in general Muslims who believe very different things. You are arguing against common sense and the observable truth, but I'll leave you and your ignorance alone.
It is your discretion to debate or not to debate.

As far as real debate is concern I was trying to make it as real as possible by reference to the authorized source of the topic, i.e. the immutable Quran from Allah to Muhammad and supposed is unchanged from then 1,400 years ago to the present.
Not-a-theist. Religion is a critical necessity for humanity now, but not the FUTURE.

Judaka
Posts: 223
Joined: May 2nd, 2017, 10:10 am

Re: Do Not Bash Muslims!

Post by Judaka » February 23rd, 2018, 8:10 am

Have you even heard of the concept "Death of the Author"? Do you understand there are multiple ways to interpret things, multiple ideas behind a thing's importance and so on? Anyway I feel you are immune to reason, I don't want to debate you about it so im out.

User avatar
Fanman
Posts: 2935
Joined: December 14th, 2011, 9:42 am

Re: Do Not Bash Muslims!

Post by Fanman » February 23rd, 2018, 9:25 am

I think that if people subscribe to an ideology and do harm as a result of adherence to that ideology, then they should by all means expect to be bashed. Aside from (very young) children and the mentally ill, people are responsible for their actions and should be held accountable for them. If being held accountable results in them being bashed, they have no one to blame for that other than themselves, as they don't have to adhere to an ancient belief system.

The ideology of Islam cannot be changed any more than Christianity can, and we have to accept that fundamentalists will interpret their holy texts literally. If subset of people are going to have such a non-progressive attitude towards others, such that they think it is ok to harm nonconformists, why shouldn't they be bashed? If (“DNA wise”) all human-beings are born with the potential for evil, unless there are mitigating circumstances of nurture, that IMV isn't grounds for empathy towards those who commit evil acts. As there are people with that same inherent potential for evil who are altruistic and/or don't harm anyone.

I'm sure that there are Muslims who conduct their beliefs in peace and respect the beliefs and rights of others, and those types shouldn't be bashed or classified in the same category as those who commit evil/harmful acts, but it is inevitable that some people will bash such peaceful people for simply being affiliated with Islam.
Once a theist, now agnostic.

Dark Matter
Posts: 1185
Joined: August 18th, 2016, 11:29 am
Favorite Philosopher: Paul Tillich

Re: Do Not Bash Muslims!

Post by Dark Matter » February 23rd, 2018, 1:48 pm

Spectrum, ever hear of Al-Kindi?

Spectrum
Posts: 4882
Joined: December 21st, 2010, 1:25 am
Favorite Philosopher: Eclectic -Various

Re: Do Not Bash Muslims!

Post by Spectrum » February 23rd, 2018, 10:19 pm

Fanman wrote:
February 23rd, 2018, 9:25 am
I think that if people subscribe to an ideology and do harm as a result of adherence to that ideology, then they should by all means expect to be bashed. Aside from (very young) children and the mentally ill, people are responsible for their actions and should be held accountable for them. If being held accountable results in them being bashed, they have no one to blame for that other than themselves, as they don't have to adhere to an ancient belief system.
I understand it is very normal to bash the culprits. At times this will work but in reality we are not addressing the critical proximate root causes.
We need to focus on the proximate root cause rather than addressing the superficial symptoms only.

As I had mentioned the culprits must be held accountable within the Laws of the land for any crime they have committed . There is no escape for this. But this is firefighting. If we do not address the proximate root causes, the problems will keep arising and the jails will be full.
Note "prevention is always be better than cure" and this is most applicable to Islamic-related evils and violence.

I believe Islamic-related evils and violence must be a special case because the potential pool of evil prone is too large to be dealt on an individual basis.

I had stated DNA wise ALL human has the potential to commit evil acts and 20% are naturally and unfortunately born with an active evil tendency.
In the case of Islam and 1.5 billion Muslims there is a potential pool of 20% = 300 million evil prone Muslims. :shock: :shock:
Worst this pool of Muslims can be extended to 500 million at the margins.

OTOH the proximate cause i.e. the Quran is only ONE variable to deal with rather than 300-500 individual Muslims.
So which do you think is more effective, i.e. to tackle ONE Quran or 300-500 individual Muslims to change their thinking?

So my point is we should not waste time bashing Muslims [respect their basic human dignity] and focus on the more critical proximate root cause, i.e. the evil elements in the Quran that triggers the potential evil prone Muslims to commit terrible evils and violence.

If you want to bash the Muslims, the effort should be distributed as;
  • 1. Bash Muslims = 5%
    2. Focus on Quran & ideology = 95%
The problem at present is the authorities everywhere are doing the worst, i.e.
  • 1. Bash evil prone Muslims = 90%
    2. Blame the non-Muslims = 10%
    3. Focus on Quran & ideology = %0
I don't see you focusing more on the Quran % ideology?
The ideology of Islam cannot be changed any more than Christianity can, and we have to accept that fundamentalists will interpret their holy texts literally. If subset of people are going to have such a non-progressive attitude towards others, such that they think it is ok to harm nonconformists, why shouldn't they be bashed? If (“DNA wise”) all human-beings are born with the potential for evil, unless there are mitigating circumstances of nurture, that IMV isn't grounds for empathy towards those who commit evil acts. As there are people with that same inherent potential for evil who are altruistic and/or don't harm anyone.
The Islamic ideology and the Quran is based on the direct words from Allah and had remained unchanged since it was first delivered to Muhammad. Thus it has to be literal.
OTOH, the Christians relied on the NT for its general divine principles rather that take it word for word. There is no command from Jesus to take the Bible word for word.

I had stated the Muslims culprits should be dealt with legally but wisdom-wise we should not bash them because they were unfortunately born with an active evil tendency. It is not their fault and they did not ask to be born with an evil tendency.
However as Muslims they are straight-jacketed by the immutable ideology of Islam within an existential threat and thus compelled [subliminally] to commit evil acts of various range.

I'm sure that there are Muslims who conduct their beliefs in peace and respect the beliefs and rights of others, and those types shouldn't be bashed or classified in the same category as those who commit evil/harmful acts, but it is inevitable that some people will bash such peaceful people for simply being affiliated with Islam.
Agree, those Muslims [by affiliation] who are moderate should not be bashed at all but as I had stated those Muslims who are culprits should also not be bashed because it the fault of the evil elements within the ideology and not fundamentally their fault.

The ultimate objective is to resolve the continual problem of Islamic-related [since 1400 years ago] and the threat is getting more critical in the future.
To resolve a problem effectively we must identify the critical proximate root cause and prioritize our limited resources to the problem.
In the case of Islamic-related evil acts we must address the proximate root cause, i.e. the ONE and only Quran, not fire fighting the potential of 300-500 Muslims on an individual basis [or at most small groups].
Not-a-theist. Religion is a critical necessity for humanity now, but not the FUTURE.

Spectrum
Posts: 4882
Joined: December 21st, 2010, 1:25 am
Favorite Philosopher: Eclectic -Various

Re: Do Not Bash Muslims!

Post by Spectrum » February 23rd, 2018, 10:42 pm

Dark Matter wrote:
February 23rd, 2018, 1:48 pm
Spectrum, ever hear of Al-Kindi?
Al-Kindi's Islam is not the mainstream and 'real' Islam in accordance with the immutable words of Allah in the Quran.
Wiki wrote:While al-Kindi appreciated the usefulness of philosophy in answering questions of a religious nature, there would be many Islamic thinkers who were not as enthusiastic about its potential.
But it would be incorrect to assume that they opposed philosophy simply because it was a "foreign science". Oliver Leaman, an expert on Islamic philosophy, points out that the objections of notable theologians are rarely directed at philosophy itself, but rather at the conclusions the philosophers arrived at. Even al-Ghazali, who is famous for his critique of the philosophers, was himself an expert in philosophy and logic. And his criticism was that they arrived at theologically erroneous conclusions.
The three most serious of these, in his view, were believing in the co-eternity of the universe with God, denying the bodily resurrection, and asserting that God only has knowledge of abstract universals, not of particular things (not all philosophers subscribed to these same views).[61]

During his life, al-Kindi was fortunate enough to enjoy the patronage of the pro-Mutazilite Caliphs al-Ma'mun and al-Mu'tasim, which meant he could carry out his philosophical speculations with relative ease.

In his own time, al-Kindi would be criticized for extolling the "intellect" as being the most immanent creation in proximity to God, which was commonly held to be the position of the angels.[62]

He also engaged in disputations with the Mutazilites, whom he attacked for their belief in atoms.[63]

But the real role of al-Kindi in the conflict between philosophers and theologians would be to prepare the ground for debate. His works, says Deborah Black, contained all the seeds of future controversy that would be fully realized in al-Ghazali's Incoherence of the Philosophers.
Al-Kindi was fortunate to arise within the midst of the Mutazilites [see below] who were considered deviants by the mainstream Islamists.
If he had been active within 'real' Quranic-Islam, he would have been slaughtered immediately after he is known with his personal belief of deviated Islam.
Wiki wrote:The movement [Muʿtazilites] emerged during the Umayyad caliphate and reached its height during the Abbasid caliphate. After the 10th century, the movement declined. It is viewed as heretical by some scholars in modern mainstream Islamic theology for its tendency to deny the Qur'an being eternal.
Not-a-theist. Religion is a critical necessity for humanity now, but not the FUTURE.

User avatar
Fanman
Posts: 2935
Joined: December 14th, 2011, 9:42 am

Re: Do Not Bash Muslims!

Post by Fanman » February 24th, 2018, 7:20 am

Spectrum:
I understand it is very normal to bash the culprits. At times this will work but in reality we are not addressing the critical proximate root causes.
We need to focus on the proximate root cause rather than addressing the superficial symptoms only.
In terms of Islamic beliefs being a cause of evil acts, it seems that bashing the perpetrators is quite pointless, because it doesn't solve anything, but it does allow people to air their views. There are policing measures in place to prevent people from committing terrorist acts - so I agree that bashing is not a solution to the situation. The problem is that the texts themselves are immutable, so even if a person or group doesn't actually believe in the ideology, they can use the texts as a vehicle to inspire hate and claim that their actions are religiously inspired and justified. So there's not much that can be done about one of the main causes of problem, as the texts cannot be altered so as to destabilise the religious methodology that those committing the evil acts are using. In this case we have no choice but to address the symptoms.
As I had mentioned the culprits must be held accountable within the Laws of the land for any crime they have committed . There is no escape for this. But this is firefighting. If we do not address the proximate root causes, the problems will keep arising and the jails will be full.
Note "prevention is always be better than cure" and this is most applicable to Islamic-related evils and violence.
Assuming that the texts are the root cause of the problem, addressing/solving the issue holistically would require a massive leap in the Islamic belief system, which I would think have to happen internally or within Islam itself. The westernised world doesn't seem to have an effect upon Islamic dogma. They, much like Christians, live within an ancient mindset of pleasing an immutable, all powerful “God”. So if the texts are the root cause of Islamic evil/terror, it is difficult to see how we could prevent or even cure the problem. Even if by some miracle the texts were changed or de-fanged, Islamist who hate the West would still want to do it harm, and may continue to in spite of the texts changing the Ideology of Islam.
I had stated DNA wise ALL human has the potential to commit evil acts and 20% are naturally and unfortunately born with an active evil tendency.
In the case of Islam and 1.5 billion Muslims there is a potential pool of 20% = 300 million evil prone Muslims.   
Worst this pool of Muslims can be extended to 500 million at the margins.
Where did you extrapolate your figures re: “DNA wise” from?
OTOH the proximate cause i.e. the Quran is only ONE variable to deal with rather than 300-500 individual Muslims.
So which do you think is more effective, i.e. to tackle ONE Quran or 300-500 individual Muslims to change their thinking?
You're suggesting “tackling” the Koran, but how can you change the ideology of Islam, if Muslims believe that the holy text is immutable? You're suggesting altering the foundation of their belief system, how could that possibly/realistically be achieved?
So my point is we should not waste time bashing Muslims [respect their basic human dignity] and focus on the more critical proximate root cause, i.e. the evil elements in the Quran that triggers the potential evil prone Muslims to commit terrible evils and violence.


I think that we all understand that solving a problem at it's root is the best possible solution, but I don't see anything wrong with bashing the perpetrators of terror attacks. It may not solve anything, but it is normal for them to be bashed. In terms of solving the problem it may be a waste of time, but it is something that people generally do, because there's a valid reason to do it.
If you want to bash the Muslims, the effort should be distributed as;
1. Bash Muslims = 5%
2. Focus on Quran & ideology = 95%
The problem at present is the authorities everywhere are doing the worst, i.e.
1. Bash evil prone Muslims = 90%
2. Blame the non-Muslims = 10%
3. Focus on Quran & ideology = %0
Should be? That is very arbitrary. If the authorities don't focus on the Koran and the ideology of Islam, can't you see the reason why that is the case?
I had stated the Muslims culprits should be dealt with legally but wisdom-wise we should not bash them because they were unfortunately born with an active evil tendency. It is not their fault and they did not ask to be born with an evil tendency.
I disagree. Why should we have empathy for terrorists? Whilst you're arguing that they should be blamed legally, you're also absolving them of blame, based upon what I can only describe as your pet theory. IMV, it is their fault as the choice to harm others is theirs, based upon their beliefs and political views. If we extend your argument/theory to all evil acts, then we shouldn't be attributing fault to any one, as the ideologies relating to the harmful acts doesn't have to be religious – how can we then reconcile them being punished by the law? In terms of ethics, we cannot both blame them and not blame them.
However as Muslims they are straight-jacketed by the immutable ideology of Islam within an existential threat and thus compelled [subliminally] to commit evil acts of various range.
And if this was true, would it somehow justify their actions to a degree? If it's not a justification what does this imply? That we should empathise with terrorists? I don't agree that adults can be covered by this as a mitigating circumstance, as they are not being forced to harm others against their will.
Agree, those Muslims [by affiliation] who are moderate should not be bashed at all but as I had stated those Muslims who are culprits should also not be bashed because it the fault of the evil elements within the ideology and not fundamentally their fault.


I cannot agree with your “blame the ideology, not the person” philosophy. For reason's that I've already stated in my last post.
Once a theist, now agnostic.

Karpel Tunnel
Posts: 146
Joined: February 16th, 2018, 11:28 am

Re: Do Not Bash Muslims!

Post by Karpel Tunnel » February 24th, 2018, 7:23 am

Fanman wrote:
February 24th, 2018, 7:20 am
I cannot agree with your “blame the ideology, not the person” philosophy. For reason's that I've already stated in my last post.
And he does not apply that approach universally. He blames authorities for being stupid, but not Muslims for their actions and beliefs.

User avatar
Fanman
Posts: 2935
Joined: December 14th, 2011, 9:42 am

Re: Do Not Bash Muslims!

Post by Fanman » February 24th, 2018, 2:27 pm

Karpel Tunnel,
And he does not apply that approach universally. He blames authorities for being stupid, but not Muslims for their actions and beliefs.
Noted. At least it will be interesting to see how he argues, bearing that incongruence in mind. He cannot eschew bashing (of any type or degree), whilst bashing the authorities, as doing so clearly makes him logically inconsistent. Maybe he doesn't see it that way? We'll have to wait for his explanation.
Once a theist, now agnostic.

Dark Matter
Posts: 1185
Joined: August 18th, 2016, 11:29 am
Favorite Philosopher: Paul Tillich

Re: Do Not Bash Muslims!

Post by Dark Matter » February 24th, 2018, 4:00 pm

Spectrum has yet to explain why Islam has “evil” tendencies or even what evil is (other that act he disapproves of).

Spectrum
Posts: 4882
Joined: December 21st, 2010, 1:25 am
Favorite Philosopher: Eclectic -Various

Re: Do Not Bash Muslims!

Post by Spectrum » February 25th, 2018, 1:27 am

Fanman wrote:
February 24th, 2018, 7:20 am
Spectrum:
I understand it is very normal to bash the culprits. At times this will work but in reality we are not addressing the critical proximate root causes.
We need to focus on the proximate root cause rather than addressing the superficial symptoms only.
In terms of Islamic beliefs being a cause of evil acts, it seems that bashing the perpetrators is quite pointless, because it doesn't solve anything, but it does allow people to air their views. There are policing measures in place to prevent people from committing terrorist acts - so I agree that bashing is not a solution to the situation. The problem is that the texts themselves are immutable, so even if a person or group doesn't actually believe in the ideology, they can use the texts as a vehicle to inspire hate and claim that their actions are religiously inspired and justified. So there's not much that can be done about one of the main causes of problem, as the texts cannot be altered so as to destabilise the religious methodology that those committing the evil acts are using. In this case we have no choice but to address the symptoms.
The general rule of problem solving is to focus on the root causes rather than the symptoms.
We have identified the evil elements are as part and parcel of the immutable religion thus cannot be changed.

How come you have not considered the getting rid of the religion altogether in progressive stages?
This is obviously a very complex and difficult task.
But it is not an impossible task to gradually wean off the religion and replaced with fool proof self development programs in the future - given the current trend of an exponential expansion of knowledge and technology.

Note my signature below, all religions [priority Islam] are to be weaned off in the future and be replaced by self development programs to deal with the inherent unavoidable existential crisis.
As I had mentioned the culprits must be held accountable within the Laws of the land for any crime they have committed . There is no escape for this. But this is firefighting. If we do not address the proximate root causes, the problems will keep arising and the jails will be full.
Note "prevention is always be better than cure" and this is most applicable to Islamic-related evils and violence.
Assuming that the texts are the root cause of the problem, addressing/solving the issue holistically would require a massive leap in the Islamic belief system, which I would think have to happen internally or within Islam itself. The westernised world doesn't seem to have an effect upon Islamic dogma. They, much like Christians, live within an ancient mindset of pleasing an immutable, all powerful “God”. So if the texts are the root cause of Islamic evil/terror, it is difficult to see how we could prevent or even cure the problem. Even if by some miracle the texts were changed or de-fanged, Islamist who hate the West would still want to do it harm, and may continue to in spite of the texts changing the Ideology of Islam.
Note my solution, wean off and replace Islam and all religions in the future.
I had stated DNA wise ALL human has the potential to commit evil acts and 20% are naturally and unfortunately born with an active evil tendency.
In the case of Islam and 1.5 billion Muslims there is a potential pool of 20% = 300 million evil prone Muslims.   
Worst this pool of Muslims can be extended to 500 million at the margins.
Where did you extrapolate your figures re: “DNA wise” from?
I have explained in details [tedious] elsewhere in this forum.
Generally the evil tendency in human is within a continuum from high [e.g genocides] to low [petty evil act, lying, stealing, corruption, fighting]. I predict 80% of people will commit the low evil act of lying of some kind or the other. Therefore to predict 20% will commit a more serious evil acts [kill, violence, rapes, oppress, bully and the likes] is very conservative.
OTOH the proximate cause i.e. the Quran is only ONE variable to deal with rather than 300-500 individual Muslims.
So which do you think is more effective, i.e. to tackle ONE Quran or 300-500 individual Muslims to change their thinking?
You're suggesting “tackling” the Koran, but how can you change the ideology of Islam, if Muslims believe that the holy text is immutable? You're suggesting altering the foundation of their belief system, how could that possibly/realistically be achieved?
Note my suggestion above of progressively weaning off the religion totally in the future.
So my point is we should not waste time bashing Muslims [respect their basic human dignity] and focus on the more critical proximate root cause, i.e. the evil elements in the Quran that triggers the potential evil prone Muslims to commit terrible evils and violence.


I think that we all understand that solving a problem at it's root is the best possible solution, but I don't see anything wrong with bashing the perpetrators of terror attacks. It may not solve anything, but it is normal for them to be bashed. In terms of solving the problem it may be a waste of time, but it is something that people generally do, because there's a valid reason to do it.
As I had stated, in this PARTICULAR and special case involving Islam, it would be more optimal to avoid bashing the culprits/perpetrators.

It is a fact the bashing of the culprits/perpetrators had diverted and deflected the majority in seeing the root causes [Islam as a whole] of the Islamic-based evils.
If you want to bash the Muslims, the effort should be distributed as;
1. Bash Muslims = 5%
2. Focus on Quran & ideology = 95%
The problem at present is the authorities everywhere are doing the worst, i.e.
1. Bash evil prone Muslims = 90%
2. Blame the non-Muslims = 10%
3. Focus on Quran & ideology = %0
Should be? That is very arbitrary. If the authorities don't focus on the Koran and the ideology of Islam, can't you see the reason why that is the case?
I understand the reasons why the authorities do not want to focus on the Quran and the ideology of Islam. It is because of ignorance, being cowed and threatened by terror, to avoid attacks on innocent Muslims due to hasty generalizations.

As you have agreed;
"I think that we all understand that solving a problem at it's root is the best possible solution"
As responsible citizens of humanity, we must strive to deal with the roots in the most optimal way and not ignoring them with head in the sand.
I had stated the Muslims culprits should be dealt with legally but wisdom-wise we should not bash them because they were unfortunately born with an active evil tendency. It is not their fault and they did not ask to be born with an evil tendency.
I disagree. Why should we have empathy for terrorists? Whilst you're arguing that they should be blamed legally, you're also absolving them of blame, based upon what I can only describe as your pet theory. IMV, it is their fault as the choice to harm others is theirs, based upon their beliefs and political views. If we extend your argument/theory to all evil acts, then we shouldn't be attributing fault to any one, as the ideologies relating to the harmful acts doesn't have to be religious – how can we then reconcile them being punished by the law? In terms of ethics, we cannot both blame them and not blame them.
Religious evils is a very special case. Note Steven Weinberg's
Religion is an insult to human dignity. With or without it you would have good people doing good things and evil people doing evil things. But for good people to do evil things, that takes religion.
The above imply religion [in this case Islam] is the critical cause and it trigger even good and evil [more so] people to commit evil and violence.

As I had stated above, the issue of Islamic evils is a specific case where we need to focus in the ideology and not on bashing the perpetrators.

As for secular evils, the perpetrators must be accountable to the Laws but at the same time we should also direct attention to the root causes why these people commit evil. A lot of research has been done in this area and those diagnosed as mentally ill are not blamed directly for the crime and the penalties they faced are adjusted for psychiatric factors.
However as Muslims they are straight-jacketed by the immutable ideology of Islam within an existential threat and thus compelled [subliminally] to commit evil acts of various range.
And if this was true, would it somehow justify their actions to a degree? If it's not a justification what does this imply? That we should empathise with terrorists? I don't agree that adults can be covered by this as a mitigating circumstance, as they are not being forced to harm others against their will.
I have stated 20% are unfortunately born with an active evil tendency and they are compelled subliminally to comply with religious commands that reflect their inherent evil tendencies.
From their perspective their evil actions are definitely justified as they had merely carried out what is supposedly their divine duty to please God so they can go to Paradise with eternal life -otherwise it could be HELL for them.

We don't empathize with them as terrorists [the terrorist act is to be condemned] but as a moral obligation to respect their basic human dignity.
Note we are only exercising a moral duty but we are not fighting to absolve them from legal accountability and to face the relevant charges.
Agree, those Muslims [by affiliation] who are moderate should not be bashed at all but as I had stated those Muslims who are culprits should also not be bashed because it the fault of the evil elements within the ideology and not fundamentally their fault.

I cannot agree with your “blame the ideology, not the person” philosophy. For reason's that I've already stated in my last post.
If you take into account 'optimality' in the present circumstances and consequences, it is optimal not to bash the Muslims but rather to focus attention of the root cause, i.e. the ideology of Islam.
Not-a-theist. Religion is a critical necessity for humanity now, but not the FUTURE.

Spectrum
Posts: 4882
Joined: December 21st, 2010, 1:25 am
Favorite Philosopher: Eclectic -Various

Re: Do Not Bash Muslims!

Post by Spectrum » February 25th, 2018, 1:34 am

Fanman wrote:
February 24th, 2018, 2:27 pm
Karpel Tunnel,
And he does not apply that approach universally. He blames authorities for being stupid, but not Muslims for their actions and beliefs.
Noted. At least it will be interesting to see how he argues, bearing that incongruence in mind. He cannot eschew bashing (of any type or degree), whilst bashing the authorities, as doing so clearly makes him logically inconsistent. Maybe he doesn't see it that way? We'll have to wait for his explanation.
This is a question of optimality to achieve the expected results within difference circumstances.
It is not optimal to be consistent when the conditions are different.

We avoid bashing the perpetrators to get to the root causes to effect optimal results.
We have to bash the authorities and other 'ostriches' to get to the same root causes to get the same optimal results.
If we do not vary the above accordingly we will not achieve the same optimal results, i.e. prevent, reduce and eliminate Islamic-based evils.
Not-a-theist. Religion is a critical necessity for humanity now, but not the FUTURE.

User avatar
Fanman
Posts: 2935
Joined: December 14th, 2011, 9:42 am

Re: Do Not Bash Muslims!

Post by Fanman » February 25th, 2018, 2:21 am

Spectrum:


I respect you, but it is difficult for me to take you seriously with these views of yours.
The general rule of problem solving is to focus on the root causes rather than the symptoms.
We have identified the evil elements are as part and parcel of the immutable religion thus cannot be changed.


We've established that, but because the Koran cannot be altered, we're unable to address one of the main causes of the problem.
How come you have not considered the getting rid of the religion altogether in progressive stages?
This is obviously a very complex and difficult task.
But it is not an impossible task to gradually wean off the religion and replaced with fool proof self development programs in the future - given the current trend of an exponential expansion of knowledge and technology.
Getting rid of religion doesn't seem like a viable solution to me, so I'm not inclined to speculate about such a possibility.
Note my signature below, all religions [priority Islam] are to be weaned off in the future and be replaced by self development programs to deal with the inherent unavoidable existential crisis.
To me, this just seems like a non-starter.
I have explained in details [tedious] elsewhere in this forum.
Generally the evil tendency in human is within a continuum from high [e.g genocides] to low [petty evil act, lying, stealing, corruption, fighting]. I predict 80% of people will commit the low evil act of lying of some kind or the other. Therefore to predict 20% will commit a more serious evil acts [kill, violence, rapes, oppress, bully and the likes] is very conservative.
Without being substantively supported, how can you expect me to take this seriously? You might as well be arguing that there's an even number of stars in the universe.
As I had stated, in this PARTICULAR and special case involving Islam, it would be more optimal to avoid bashing the culprits/perpetrators.


What do you mean “optimal”? I can bash if there are sufficient grounds to.
It is a fact the bashing of the culprits/perpetrators had diverted and deflected the majority in seeing the root causes [Islam as a whole] of the Islamic-based evils.
Which is supported by?
I understand the reasons why the authorities do not want to focus on the Quran and the ideology of Islam. It is because of ignorance, being cowed and threatened by terror, to avoid attacks on innocent Muslims due to hasty generalizations.
… Yet, after eschewing bashing, you are bashing? So you arbitrarily decide for us who should and should not be bashed? Also, those are not the reasons I see for why the authorities aren't focusing on Islamic ideology. IMV, it is because the authorities know it is an area that they cannot affect any change in.
As responsible citizens of humanity, we must strive to deal with the roots in the most optimal way and not ignoring them with head in the sand.
No true Scotsman, again.
Religious evils is a very special case. Note Steven Weinberg's
Religion is an insult to human dignity. With or without it you would have good people doing good things and evil people doing evil things. But for good people to do evil things, that takes religion.
Do I have to agree with his maxim? I find it bias.
The above imply religion [in this case Islam] is the critical cause and it trigger even good and evil [more so] people to commit evil and violence.
Appeal to authority.
I have stated 20% are unfortunately born with an active evil tendency and they are compelled subliminally to comply with religious commands that reflect their inherent evil tendencies.
From their perspective their evil actions are definitely justified as they had merely carried out what is supposedly their divine duty to please God so they can go to Paradise with eternal life -otherwise it could be HELL for them.


I don't agree, this is just speculation – based upon what you believe is the theist's frame of mind. You speak as though it represents any and all cases.
We don't empathize with them as terrorists [the terrorist act is to be condemned] but as a moral obligation to respect their basic human dignity.
Note we are only exercising a moral duty but we are not fighting to absolve them from legal accountability and to face the relevant charges.
Moral duty? Why should I respect the dignity of those who would kill me simply because I think differently? It seems you think that bashing is disrespectful of basic human dignity?
If you take into account 'optimality' in the present circumstances and consequences, it is optimal not to bash the Muslims but rather to focus attention of the root cause, i.e. the ideology of Islam.
I don't understand your application of the term “optimally”? I don't have a need to focus on anything regarding Islam, but I will engage in bashing when claimed Islamists commit acts of terror.
Once a theist, now agnostic.

Spectrum
Posts: 4882
Joined: December 21st, 2010, 1:25 am
Favorite Philosopher: Eclectic -Various

Re: Do Not Bash Muslims!

Post by Spectrum » February 25th, 2018, 5:48 am

Fanman wrote:
February 25th, 2018, 2:21 am
The general rule of problem solving is to focus on the root causes rather than the symptoms.
We have identified the evil elements are as part and parcel of the immutable religion thus cannot be changed.

We've established that, but because the Koran cannot be altered, we're unable to address one of the main causes of the problem.
Now at least we have identified the proximate root cause of the problem.
A major problem at present is the majority have not understood and accept the immutable Quran is the proximate root cause of the problem of Islamic-related evils.

Thus our main task is to communicate this fact to the masses.
In addition, I have proposed many other strategies to counter the leverage of religions.
Note my OP, God is an Impossibility, The Idea of God is Psychological, etc.
Once this fact is accepted by the masses, the religion of Islam will be slowly defanged and many Muslims will leave the religion or convert to alternative religion.
I believe if we strive hard, we will be able to defang Islam progressively.
How come you have not considered the getting rid of the religion altogether in progressive stages?
This is obviously a very complex and difficult task.
But it is not an impossible task to gradually wean off the religion and replaced with fool proof self development programs in the future - given the current trend of an exponential expansion of knowledge and technology.
Getting rid of religion doesn't seem like a viable solution to me, so I'm not inclined to speculate about such a possibility.
Note the strategies I proposed above.
Once we have convinced a critical mass, the grip by the religion will loosen up.
As I had mentioned often, 200 years ago, no one could have predicted the end of "chattel slavery" by legal laws in all Nations in the world. But it happened.
I have explained in details [tedious] elsewhere in this forum.
Generally the evil tendency in human is within a continuum from high [e.g genocides] to low [petty evil act, lying, stealing, corruption, fighting].
I predict 80% of people will commit the low evil act of lying of some kind or the other. Therefore to predict 20% will commit a more serious evil acts [kill, violence, rapes, oppress, bully and the likes] is very conservative.
Without being substantively supported, how can you expect me to take this seriously? You might as well be arguing that there's an even number of stars in the universe.
I have presented and argued my case in detail in some earlier post. I believed you would have read it. I am confident of where I stand.
Since I am lazy to search and represent my case, I don't expect you to take what I said here seriously. (I'll try to search for the posts).
As I had stated, in this PARTICULAR and special case involving Islam, it would be more optimal to avoid bashing the culprits/perpetrators.

What do you mean “optimal”? I can bash if there are sufficient grounds to.
It is a fact the bashing of the culprits/perpetrators had diverted and deflected the majority in seeing the root causes [Islam as a whole] of the Islamic-based evils.
Which is supported by?
It is so common, the authorities are always proclaiming to the World, "Islam is a Religion of Peace" whenever there is a terrorist attack.
At other times the authorities are not giving attention find out the real root cause, i.e. the evil elements in the Quran.

You can bash the perpetrators to vent your anger or frustrations but as you had understood such bashing will have no effect to such statistics of Islamic-related evil acts like this;

Image
https://www.thereligionofpeace.com/TROP.jpg

I bet the above numbers will keep increasing in the future regardless of how much you bash the perpetrators.
I understand the reasons why the authorities do not want to focus on the Quran and the ideology of Islam. It is because of ignorance, being cowed and threatened by terror, to avoid attacks on innocent Muslims due to hasty generalizations.
… Yet, after eschewing bashing, you are bashing? So you arbitrarily decide for us who should and should not be bashed? Also, those are not the reasons I see for why the authorities aren't focusing on Islamic ideology. IMV, it is because the authorities know it is an area that they cannot affect any change in.
I have already stated we need to take the right action [bashing] depending on the condition and contexts.
I noted the authorities has treated the symptoms, e.g. getting rid of I-S-I-S in Iraq and Syria but because they are not addressing the root causes, it is regrouping and emerging all over other places to kill non-believers.
What is critical is the authorities must direct their attention to the root causes.
Religious evils is a very special case. Note Steven Weinberg's
Religion is an insult to human dignity. With or without it you would have good people doing good things and evil people doing evil things. But for good people to do evil things, that takes religion.
Do I have to agree with his maxim? I find it bias.
What bias?
This is a fact.
There has been so many shocks within families and friends who suddenly read of their goody-two-shoes child or friend appearing in the TV or News as a terrorist. Many of the jihadists are typically nice people without criminal records.
We don't empathize with them as terrorists [the terrorist act is to be condemned] but as a moral obligation to respect their basic human dignity.
Note we are only exercising a moral duty but we are not fighting to absolve them from legal accountability and to face the relevant charges.
Moral duty? Why should I respect the dignity of those who would kill me simply because I think differently? It seems you think that bashing is disrespectful of basic human dignity?
Yes, it is a moral obligation of ALL humans to respect the basic human dignity of another human being. There is a logical moral argument for it, as otherwise if you don't you are kicking your own ass. This is argued within the Philosophy of Morality. I won't do it here.
If you take into account 'optimality' in the present circumstances and consequences, it is optimal not to bash the Muslims but rather to focus attention of the root cause, i.e. the ideology of Islam.
I don't understand your application of the term “optimally”? I don't have a need to focus on anything regarding Islam, but I will engage in bashing when claimed Islamists commit acts of terror.
As I had stated, bashing is like crying over spilt milk. The most is for you to vent your anger, frustrations and achieving nothing for humanity.

Optimality:
You have a choice of two actions, i.e. to bash or to focus on the root causes. Since humans has limited resources, effort and time, it would be more productive [optimal] on prevention to a problem rather than making noises about it.
It would be wiser to redirect your effort to focus in preventive measures.

At present your view is merely that of an empty vessel rather than contributing something positive.
Not-a-theist. Religion is a critical necessity for humanity now, but not the FUTURE.

User avatar
Fanman
Posts: 2935
Joined: December 14th, 2011, 9:42 am

Re: Do Not Bash Muslims!

Post by Fanman » February 25th, 2018, 7:46 am

Spectrum:
Now at least we have identified the proximate root cause of the problem.
A major problem at present is the majority have not understood and accept the immutable Quran is the proximate root cause of the problem of Islamic-related evils.
If by “proximate root cause” you mean one of the main reasons then I agree. If you mean the root cause then I disagree. There are many factors to consider, such that isolating the root cause could just be an arbitrary speculation. I think that you underestimate and perhaps falsely categorise “the majority”. You seem to think that because majority don't share your insights, that they don't perceive things in the correct way. I don't think you can justify that viewpoint, because you're claiming that the majority don't understand, because they don't see things in the same way as you do. There can be many different views and perspectives without there being a prevailing one.
Thus our main task is to communicate this fact to the masses.
In addition, I have proposed many other strategies to counter the leverage of religions.
Note my OP, God is an Impossibility, The Idea of God is Psychological, etc. 
Once this fact is accepted by the masses, the religion of Islam will be slowly defanged and many Muslims will leave the religion or convert to alternative religion.
I believe if we strive hard, we will be able to defang Islam progressively.
Don't take this personally, but you can't expect me to take this seriously. Even if your ideas could be verified as being 100% right, absolutely perfect ( :D ) you aren't going to affect the kind of change that you envision - some people's beliefs are rooted deeper than empirical evidence can reach. Your arguments have even been rejected by atheists, be realistic dude.
Note the strategies I proposed above.
Once we have convinced a critical mass, the grip by the religion will loosen up.
As I had mentioned often, 200 years ago, no one could have predicted the end of "chattel slavery" by legal laws in all Nations in the world. But it happened.
There's difference between religion and slavery. Arguably slavery still exists in different forms. One of the main aspects of religion is belief in God. So for that aspect of religion to end there must be substantive proof that God doesn't exist. And even in the face of such proof, there's no guarantee that some people will not hold onto their beliefs. Also, bear in mind that some people believe that there are proofs of God's existence, how would you convince them otherwise? There are many other reasons why I think that religion will not end, and I'm sure that others can put forward their own ideas.
It is so common, the authorities are always proclaiming to the World, "Islam is a Religion of Peace" whenever there is a terrorist attack.
At other times the authorities are not giving attention find out the real root cause, i.e. the evil elements in the Quran.
You're pointlessly bashing here... How do you know what the authorities are and are not doing? Are you privy to that information? Do you expect the authorities to confront the Ideology of Islam? In the interests of political relationships, the authorities respect people's rights to belief.
What bias?
This is a fact.


IMV, it assumes that religion is a special case in causes of evil, and that religion is a special case in causes of corruption. Whilst religion can be a cause of both, it is not the only cause of evil and corruption as the author implies. It is the authors bias to conclude that religion is a special case, not a fact. There are any number of things that can cause good people to do evil by corrupting their sense of ethics - that religion is one of those things does not as a fact, make it a special case.
Yes, it is a moral obligation of ALL humans to respect the basic human dignity of another human being. There is a logical moral argument for it, as otherwise if you don't you are kicking your own ass. This is argued within the Philosophy of Morality. I won't do it here.
Therefore any human who doesn't conform to this "moral obligation" isn't a true Scotsman? :)
As I had stated, bashing is like crying over spilt milk. The most is for you to vent your anger, frustrations and achieving nothing for humanity.
I don't think that when people bash they expect to make a difference. There are political ways and means of affecting change.
You have a choice of two actions, i.e. to bash or to focus on the root causes. Since humans has limited resources, effort and time, it would be more productive [optimal] on prevention to a problem rather than making noises about it.
It would be wiser to redirect your effort to focus in preventive measures.
That is a false dichotomy, and it also depends on what you perceive as being "optimal". Change can occur naturally over time, even without outside intervention things can become outdated/anachronistic. You need to have a little faith.
At present your view is merely that of an empty vessel rather than contributing something positive.


Coming from you, I'll take that as a compliment.
Once a theist, now agnostic.

Post Reply