islam,, a danger or not

[neon tetra]

Civilized communities dont need a structured religion..look at Burning Man.

Burning Man has pretty much become a religion.

[theCryptofishist]

Islam comes from the Middle East. You know, the place where algebra, the number system we use (indo-arabic numerals vs. roman numerals), number theory, decimals, early geometry & calculus, were invented. Most math that the average person knows originated or filtered through the middle east. There is an entire era of mathematics known as Islamic/Arabic Mathematics.

In another 300 years we could have changed positions again, with ignorant and proud christians and adept and learned Arabs. There is absolutely no way of predicting that we will remain the "rational" ones.

[daratheresa]

@ daratheresa..I will bash organized religion till the day I die. Like I suggested, Ive nothing against personal beliefs. I have a problem, when they become soo loud its hard to think...even Atheists!

oh, i hear that.

i think there should be a way to differentiate when we say "religion" (or "islam" or "christianity" or "science" or whatever) between whether we are talking about the spiritual teachings or the social institutions...

[TomServo]

Civilized communities dont need a structured religion..look at Burning Man.

Burning Man has pretty much become a religion.

has it? and even if it has..its not very organized...I can live with that

[JStep]

to all the people religion-bashing: don't forget that a religion is just a framework to try to understand this great and insane world we live in. don't forget that science and logic and even atheism are the same thing; a framework to try to make make sense of this whirlwind. you learn rules and stories, you apply them to your life, and you try to do what you believe in.

<snip>

let's see who's going to tear it apart first...

I would never tear apart your post, unless by tear apart you meant reply to it!

While I don't share the views of the religious apologists and accomodationists, I also don't leap at every opportunity to point out their errors. However, I do feel I should address your framing of atheism. This is the 2nd post I've seen making this error. And, respectfully, it *is* an error.

Atheism is not a framework or a religion or a world view, it is a lack of belief in a god or gods. That simple. "I contend that we are both atheists. I just believe in one fewer god than you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods, you will understand why I dismiss yours." - Stephen Roberts. Every religious person I've met is an atheist in regards to the other 2,223 possible gods but this is not their worldview, their religion is.

To frame atheism as just another religion, as religious people and their apologists love to do, implies an argument of equivalence that does not hold up. It's like saying believing in Santa and not believing in Santa are but two sides of the same coin, as if either view has equal merit. Or insert any other thing that there is no evidence for; Russels orbiting teapot, The Flying Spaghetti Monster, flying pink unicorns, etc.

Saying atheism is a religion taken on faith is the exact same thing as saying science is a religion. Science and atheism are the opposite to, and the cure for, all mystical belief, superstitions and dogma. Atheism is a word that, in more enlightened times, wont even exist. There's no special word for not believing I can fly. I'm not an aleprechaunist or an afairyist or an astampcollectorist.

And to head off the inevitable "You should respect my beliefs" ... No, I have too much respect for *you* to respect your delusions, no matter how well meaning the intent or benign the outcome.

(This last part is not directed at you in particular, daratheresa, as I have no idea what your beliefs or lack thereof, entail It's just meant as a general declaration of my reasoning for not "tolerating" religion in the sense that tolerating is used as code for indulging, praising and pretending to share, as it is so often used. I tolerate religion like I tolerate children believing in the Easter Bunny, it's cute and quaint but they really should know better.)

Edit: spelling

[TomServo]

Agnostic!

[JStep]

Agnostic!

Atheist lite, for when you need to soften the blow!

[daratheresa]

a bunch of well stated stuff about atheism

i'll give you that. but it is still something that you believe.

i'll often tell people that i am the exact opposite of an atheist. instead of not believing in gods or religions at all i believe in all of them at once. but i'm a strange cookie, even by the standards of the strange.

[TomServo]

Agnostic!

Atheist lite, for when you need to soften the blow!

Not exactly....we hold atheists and christians, muslims, etc... in the same hand. Im not a fence sitter...I simply choose not to make a fool of myself , proclaiming something is or isnt.....when there is no real proof in either case. I just live my life as best I can, and be as nice as I can to others..kind of a lost human trait

[daratheresa]

I'm not a fence sitter...I simply choose not to make a fool of myself , proclaiming something is or isnt.....when there is no real proof in either case. I just live my life as best I can, and be as nice as I can to others..kind of a lost human trait

*applause*

[theCryptofishist]

to all the people religion-bashing: don't forget that a religion is just a framework to try to understand this great and insane world we live in. don't forget that science and logic and even atheism are the same thing; a framework to try to make make sense of this whirlwind. you learn rules and stories, you apply them to your life, and you try to do what you believe in.

<snip>

let's see who's going to tear it apart first... ;)

I would never tear apart your post, unless by tear apart you meant reply to it! :)

While I don't share the views of the religious apologists and accomodationists, I also don't leap at every opportunity to point out their errors. However, I do feel I should address your framing of atheism. This is the 2nd post I've seen making this error. And, respectfully, it *is* an error.

Atheism is not a framework or a religion or a world view, it is a lack of belief in a god or gods. That simple. "I contend that we are both atheists. I just believe in one fewer god than you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods, you will understand why I dismiss yours." - Stephen Roberts. Every religious person I've met is an atheist in regards to the other 2,223 possible gods but this is not their worldview, their religion is.

To frame atheism as just another religion, as religious people and their apologists love to do, implies an argument of equivalence that does not hold up. It's like saying believing in Santa and not believing in Santa are but two sides of the same coin, as if either view has equal merit. Or insert any other thing that there is no evidence for; Russels orbiting teapot, The Flying Spaghetti Monster, flying pink unicorns, etc.

Saying atheism is a religion taken on faith is the exact same thing as saying science is a religion. Science and atheism are the opposite to, and the cure for, all mystical belief, superstitions and dogma. Atheism is a word that, in more enlightened times, wont even exist. There's no special word for not believing I can fly. I'm not an aleprechaunist or an afairyist or an astampcollectorist.

\

Nice.

[JStep]

Agnostic!

Atheist lite, for when you need to soften the blow!

Not exactly....we hold atheists and christians, muslims, etc... in the same hand. Im not a fence sitter...I simply choose not to make a fool of myself , proclaiming something is or isnt.....when there is no real proof in either case. I just live my life as best I can, and be as nice as I can to others..kind of a lost human trait

Actually, this is a popular mistake, but a mistake nonetheless. All atheists are agnostics. Even Richard Dawkins rates himself a 6.9 on the Dawkins scale of belief (1-7). I used to have this misunderstanding myself and it's incredibly popular as the word atheism is misconstrued as the proof positive claim that there is no god. It's pretty much a grey area, as even avowed atheists claim, as I do and believe, that there is no god. I believe there is no god, just as I believe there are no leprechauns. I'll even go so far as to claim there is no god (or leprechauns), but no one who understands science and atheism is going to say they know with 100% certainty that a god absolutely does not exist, although it's a safe bet, it's just not scientifically sound to rule out something as no one can truly prove that negative.

Here's the breakdown: Theism goes to what you believe, Gnosticism goes to what you know. So there are 4 possible combinations:

Gnostic Theist; One who knows there is a god. Impossible as no one can prove it.
Agnostic Theist; One who does not know, but believes there is a god. This is what all religious people are.
Gnostic Atheist; One who knows there is no god. Impossible as no one can prove a negative.
Agnostic Atheist; One who does not know, but believes there is no god. This is what all atheists are.

The mistake lies in misunderstanding what the words gnostic/agnostic and theist/atheist mean in their strict sense.

[Simon of the Playa]

a bunch of well stated stuff about atheism

i'll give you that. but it is still something that you believe.

i'll often tell people that i am the exact opposite of an atheist. instead of not believing in gods or religions at all i believe in all of them at once. but i'm a strange cookie, even by the standards of the strange.

and this is why i like you.

[daratheresa]

and this is why i like you.

oh. i thought it was my delightful body odor...

[JStep]

a bunch of well stated stuff about atheism

i'll give you that. but it is still something that you believe.

Yes, in the same sense that I believe in Australia. I've never been there, I can't rule out %100 that it's not a myth made up to keep me believing in a small continent where there are kangaroos and digereedoos, but the evidence and the odds lean *very* heavily towards my belief in Australia as being correct.

Now if I were to believe in Isis and Ra, this is also a belief, but one without any evidence.

i'll often tell people that i am the exact opposite of an atheist. instead of not believing in gods or religions at all i believe in all of them at once. but i'm a strange cookie, even by the standards of the strange.

That must get very confusing! You have beliefs that are mutually exclusive and dedicated to their mutual destruction... The cognitive dissonance must give you headaches like I wouldn't *believe*!!! (HA! I kill me!)

[TomServo]

Atheist lite, for when you need to soften the blow!

Not exactly....we hold atheists and christians, muslims, etc... in the same hand. Im not a fence sitter...I simply choose not to make a fool of myself , proclaiming something is or isnt.....when there is no real proof in either case. I just live my life as best I can, and be as nice as I can to others..kind of a lost human trait

Actually, this is a popular mistake, but a mistake nonetheless. All atheists are agnostics. Even Richard Dawkins rates himself a 6.9 on the Dawkins scale of belief (1-7). I used to have this misunderstanding myself and it's incredibly popular as the word atheism is misconstrued as the proof positive claim that there is no god. It's pretty much a grey area, as even avowed atheists claim, as I do and believe, that there is no god. I believe there is no god, just as I believe there are no leprechauns. I'll even go so far as to claim there is no god (or leprechauns), but no one who understands science and atheism is going to say they know with 100% certainty that a god absolutely does not exist, although it's a safe bet, it's just not scientifically sound to rule out something as no one can truly prove that negative.

Here's the breakdown: Theism goes to what you believe, Gnosticism goes to what you know. So there are 4 possible combinations:

Gnostic Theist; One who knows there is a god. Impossible as no one can prove it.
Agnostic Theist; One who does not know, but believes there is a god. This is what all religious people are.
Gnostic Atheist; One who knows there is no god. Impossible as no one can prove a negative.
Agnostic Atheist; One who does not know, but believes there is no god. This is what all atheists are.

The mistake lies in misunderstanding what the words gnostic/agnostic and theist/atheist mean in their strict sense.

Im well aware of the word Agnostic, thank you! As I am with crusty punks, emo punks and hardcore punks...If you denounce, your an atheist. If you simply, dont giva a fuck and try to be a good person, your agnostic. at least. in my opinion. I get just as pissed off hearing atheists yell about how there is NO god, as I do hearing Pulpiteers saying well burn in hell if we dont believe.

[TomServo]

Im taking a stand..in NOT taking a stand!

[daratheresa]

Gnostic Theist; One who knows there is a god. Impossible as no one can prove it.
Agnostic Theist; One who does not know, but believes there is a god. This is what all religious people are.
Gnostic Atheist; One who knows there is no god. Impossible as no one can prove a negative.
Agnostic Atheist; One who does not know, but believes there is no god. This is what all atheists are.

framework. for. belief. right here.

and as i said, i know my own beliefs are weird. i don't expect many people to agree with me. i'm okay with this.

[JStep]

Not exactly....we hold atheists and christians, muslims, etc... in the same hand. Im not a fence sitter...I simply choose not to make a fool of myself , proclaiming something is or isnt.....when there is no real proof in either case. I just live my life as best I can, and be as nice as I can to others..kind of a lost human trait

Actually, this is a popular mistake, but a mistake nonetheless. All atheists are agnostics. Even Richard Dawkins rates himself a 6.9 on the Dawkins scale of belief (1-7). I used to have this misunderstanding myself and it's incredibly popular as the word atheism is misconstrued as the proof positive claim that there is no god. It's pretty much a grey area, as even avowed atheists claim, as I do and believe, that there is no god. I believe there is no god, just as I believe there are no leprechauns. I'll even go so far as to claim there is no god (or leprechauns), but no one who understands science and atheism is going to say they know with 100% certainty that a god absolutely does not exist, although it's a safe bet, it's just not scientifically sound to rule out something as no one can truly prove that negative.

Here's the breakdown: Theism goes to what you believe, Gnosticism goes to what you know. So there are 4 possible combinations:

Gnostic Theist; One who knows there is a god. Impossible as no one can prove it.
Agnostic Theist; One who does not know, but believes there is a god. This is what all religious people are.
Gnostic Atheist; One who knows there is no god. Impossible as no one can prove a negative.
Agnostic Atheist; One who does not know, but believes there is no god. This is what all atheists are.

The mistake lies in misunderstanding what the words gnostic/agnostic and theist/atheist mean in their strict sense.

Im well aware of the word Agnostic, thank you! As I am with crusty punks, emo punks and hardcore punks...If you denounce, your an atheist. If you simply, dont giva a fuck and try to be a good person, your agnostic. at least. in my opinion. I get just as pissed off hearing atheists yell about how there is NO god, as I do hearing Pulpiteers saying well burn in hell if we dont believe.

Yeah, that is how the words are (incorrectly) used. That doesn't mean I have to use them that way and the more people who understand what the words mean, the better!

I don't know where you're hearing atheists yell about how there's no god. I detect your aggravation at my reply, and this is not meant to irritate you, but do you view wanting to be understood, treated equally and fairly, and working to promote science and reason as being a dogmatic act? There are all kinds of atheists as there are all kinds of theists. Please don't brush us all off based on the actions of a few.

[neon tetra]

We must question the story logic of having an all-knowing all-powerful God, who creates faulty humans, and then blames them for his own mistakes.

[JStep]

Gnostic Theist; One who knows there is a god. Impossible as no one can prove it.
Agnostic Theist; One who does not know, but believes there is a god. This is what all religious people are.
Gnostic Atheist; One who knows there is no god. Impossible as no one can prove a negative.
Agnostic Atheist; One who does not know, but believes there is no god. This is what all atheists are.

framework. for. belief. right here.

and as i said, i know my own beliefs are weird. i don't expect many people to agree with me. i'm okay with this.

And I'm ok with you too! I really hate how people get worked up over this, and I'm glad you can keep a level head about it. See my earlier reply too, I know the words above are a frame of reference, but a belief without merit is not equal to a belief that is logical and backed by evidence. Not believing in a thing is not a worldview or religion as we (meaning humans)don't define ourselves in this way. That's the error I'm addressing, basically. The argument of equivalence between the logical and the illogical coupled with the misunderstanding of the terminology, leading to the human race needing words like atheist to try to define a person by what he does NOT believe, rather than what he DOES believe. As I pointed out earlier, atheism is unique in this sense and only because the human mind has been assumed to default to a belief in some mystic deity since before we had a language to work all this stuff out.

Edit to make more long and rambling.

[Eric]

Islam comes from the Middle East. You know, the place where algebra, the number system we use (indo-arabic numerals vs. roman numerals), number theory, decimals, early geometry & calculus, were invented. Most math that the average person knows originated or filtered through the middle east. There is an entire era of mathematics known as Islamic/Arabic Mathematics.

So to say

Islam and intelligence are less compatible than intelligence and most other religions.

is I think a statement that is demonstrably provable as untrue.

hhmmmmmm then my question:

What happened?

May I highly recommend "Destiny Disrupted; a history of the world through Islamic eyes" by Tamim Ansary. A very well written look at the history of Islam from an Islamic perspective instead of the usual European one.

Another thing to keep in mind- there is no unified "Islam" any more than there is a single branch of Christianity or Judaism. Just in the main branches you have Sunni, Shia, Kharijite, and Sufism; then you have offshoots and versions and sects.....

Most (not all) of the radicalism you're seeing is based on Wahhabism (also known as Salafi and as Hadith), which is an extremely conservative branch of Sunnism based in Saudi Arabia- the house of Saud came to power through their alignment with the movement, and now export it all over the Islamic world.

[daratheresa]

And I'm ok with you too! I really hate how people get worked up over this, and I'm glad you can keep a level head about it.

w0rd.

See my earlier reply too, I know the words above are a frame of reference, but a belief without merit is not equal to a belief that is logical and backed by evidence. Not believing in a thing is not a worldview or religion as we don't define ourselves in this way. That's the error I'm addressing, basically. The argument of equivalence between the logical and the illogical.

i think that enough belief gives something merit.

i also think that i, or even we as a people, don't know shit and that all knowledge is subject to change at will. i find great freedom in this. what i believe today doesn't necessarily have to be what i believed yesterday or what i will believe tomorrow. i love it when i am proven wrong about something, it opens so many doors to learn more. and my quest for knowledge is unending.

[daratheresa]

Most (not all) of the radicalism you're seeing is based on Wahhabism (also known as Salafi and as Hadith), which is an extremely conservative branch of Sunnism based in Saudi Arabia- the house of Saud came to power through their alignment with the movement, and now export it all over the Islamic world.

yeah, saying "Islam" for all of these is about the same as saying that "Christian" is only repressed Catholicism and/or Fred Phelps...

[JStep]

i think that enough belief gives something merit.

It gives it merit as a persistent idea, but belief alone does not give the idea any factual value. The entire world, literally the ENTIRE PLANET once believed the earth was flat and the sun went around it. That didn't make it so.

[daratheresa]

i think that enough belief gives something merit.

It gives it merit as a persistent idea, but belief alone does not give the idea any factual value. The entire world, literally the ENTIRE PLANET once believed the earth was flat and the sun went around it. That didn't make it so.

see, i think that the earth probably _was_ flat until enough people thought otherwise... just like i think deep space probably didn't exist until we thought to look for it...

man, i really need to shut up. i've totally hijacked this thread. sorry.

[ygmir]

i think that enough belief gives something merit.

It gives it merit as a persistent idea, but belief alone does not give the idea any factual value. The entire world, literally the ENTIRE PLANET once believed the earth was flat and the sun went around it. That didn't make it so.

see, i think that the earth probably _was_ flat until enough people thought otherwise... just like i think deep space probably didn't exist until we thought to look for it...

man, i really need to shut up. i've totally hijacked this thread. sorry.

was your dad's name Schrodinger?


I must say, this has become a fascinating thread.
I sit here, in awe, of great thinkers.
of differing opinions, expressed with respect.

I am learning much, and, finding some thought paradigms changing, slightly, for me.

It is the essence, of what I like about eplaya.
An uneducated soul, such as myself, can sit and learn.....and rub elbows with you all.

Thank you, one and all here.

*stands, tips hat, and applauds, slowly*

[JStep]

i think that enough belief gives something merit.

It gives it merit as a persistent idea, but belief alone does not give the idea any factual value. The entire world, literally the ENTIRE PLANET once believed the earth was flat and the sun went around it. That didn't make it so.

see, i think that the earth probably _was_ flat until enough people thought otherwise... just like i think deep space probably didn't exist until we thought to look for it...

Now that I do not believe, unless you really failed history class in a major way! LOL! People were literally put to death for stating what we now know to be the real nature of our solar system. People risked, and some lost, their lives fighting the church over their insistence that the earth was flat and the center of the universe and all that was revolved around it vs what the evidence showed to be fact. Similar to how people still have to fight the church over their insistence that stem cell dna is not sentient human beings. Albeit, the stakes are lower now, at least in most industrialized nations where we don't routinely stone people for studying and publishing science. The fact remains that belief in unprovable nonsense is still holding back and resisting human progress.

man, i really need to shut up. i've totally hijacked this thread. sorry.

Me too, I just had to make the case for the facts of what atheism is vs what people like to say it is. Now... I'm off to my monthly atheist meetup! Huzzah! Fellowship and charity in the name of secular humanism, science, reason and YES atheism! Weee!

[Liz Estrada]

no no, hijack away....this is actually better than watching kurosawa

[daratheresa]

Me too, I just had to make the case for the facts of what atheism is vs what people like to say it is. Now... I'm off to my monthly atheist meetup! Huzzah! Fellowship and charity in the name of secular humanism, science, reason and YES atheism! Weee!

i'd make some crack about this being like going to church, but i think you get my point, there's no need to beat you about the head with it.

and no, i'm not denying history. not one bit. i'm just attempting, poorly, to make the point that existence (history and future included) could be far more fluid than most people believe.

it's also entirely possible i just did too many psychadelics as a teenager...

in'shah'allah. peace.