User Tag List

First 7891011 Last

Results 81 to 90 of 115

  1. #81
    Ginkgo
    Guest

    Default

    Throughout the ages, men have been exonerated because their ideologies were blamed. Of course, ideologies are quite static, while men are quite mutable. So the perpetrators should be reprimanded because suppressing ideology is unjust; for the vitality of man resides in his ability to express himself by whatever means possible - even by ideology.

    Sometimes ideologies like Islam are seen as oppressive because they influence a sphere of mentality. The mentality is of and by the will of men. Therefore, if a man chooses to exert this ideology as an authoritarian tool of catastrophe, then he should be brought to justice; for mentalities can be twisted and misconstrued by the influence of the idealist - even independent of the idea itself. This is why we have observed the grotesque evolution of the Christian faith from 1st Century Christianity to Orthodoxy and Catholicism to Protestantism and Enlightenment movements. Just because Bill O'Reilly uses his faith to be a flippant dickwad to his guests doesn't mean that we should go burning Bibles. It means that we should burn Bill O'Reilly... er... I mean he should be fired. Yeah, that's what I meant to say.

    Like biological evolution, idealistic evolution entirely depends upon the entropy of the environment. Social environments are often characterized by culture; culture in its turn being characterized by religion and other learned behavior. Altering entropy levels is often tricky business because it often involves persuasion or subversion of the authority. So rise against the fallible authority, seeing that there is no divine earthly authority involved.

    I honestly don't know much about Islam; but unlike most people, I try not to fear the unknown. Like babies in the darkness, we are eased by the cradle of knowing there is light. Lashing out and crying for mommy so soon is rather rash, Victor.

    ps - I think Victor is prideful of something that is out of his control... which, might I add is often dangerous and irrational.

  2. #82
    meh Salomé's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    5w4 sx/sp
    Posts
    10,540

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ergophobe View Post
    Whatever edge of the wedge, you did, in fact, make this comparison above. I responded to the comparison you made.
    Unlike some, I have a habit of being terse and hoping others will pick up on nuance. I give people credit for being capable of non-literal interpretations. Much as you do...

    No, I do not contradict myself. The contradiction you observe is one between the question of choice [which I am suggesting appears on both sides of forcing the wearing of a headdress and banning it and] and the representation of this headdress as necessarily meaning one thing - a regressive cultural practice that continues to repress women and is nothing more than a symbol of centuries of repression. A contradiction for you alone.
    It is a symbol of repression for many - this is why it gives offence. If it was not the case that covering one's head/body was mandated by Islamic teachings, it would simply be a fashion choice. It is disingenuous to examine without the appropriate historical context. That is not to say that I do not accept that some people choose to interpret it as a symbol of religious freedom. People are capable of all kinds of distortions of thinking.

    The point is that culture is a live organism - it is not just a reflection of history from centuries ago, it is forever evolving. When we see the headdress today just as it was seen in the 12th century or even the 19th century then we are not willing to accept that culture changes. In this way, we support a similar argument made by religious fundamentalists who want to keep their religion attached to a literal, conservative and ancient interpretation too!
    Cultures evolve. Islam does not. Or if it does the pace is agonizingly slow. That is Ayaan's contention. Of course there are all sorts of socio-political reasons for that in the Middle East - it doesn't negate the truth of the statement.

    Iran does support my argument - one about the diversity within Islamic countries regarding women's rights which supports the idea that there are in practice many interpretations of womens rights as associated with the Quran and related texts.
    You hold it up as an example of enlightened theocracy - that's damning enough!

    I think I've seen both the programmes you reference. Also other documentaries and films from Iran like Persepolis...

    I don't really know what we are arguing about here. Semantics. An unfortunate reference to an unqualified "Enlightenment" with an implied euro-centricity which misses the point. Separation of religion and State is a desirable thing - on this I think we can all agree. If not, someone can make a case for it.

    /thread.
    Quote Originally Posted by Ivy View Post
    Gosh, the world looks so small from up here on my high horse of menstruation.

  3. #83
    Sniffles
    Guest

    Default

    I decided to delete my other post. I have no intention of being a part of this.

    Let's not forget "Enlightened Despots" like Frederick the Great of Prussia, who had private correspondence with Voltaire:
    [youtube="2Hm_b8vGu_k"]Enlightened Despotism - Prussian style[/youtube]

    Oh btw, he was also allied with England during the Seven Years' War.

  4. #84
    & Badger, Ratty and Toad Mole's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    18,536

    Thumbs down Visceral Hatred

    As we know, the Enlightenment replaced blind belief with evidence and reason.

    MBTI has had no double blind test in seventy years, so MBTI is based on blind belief.

    It is worth your life to criticise Mohammed and the Koran, so Islam is based on blind belief.

    Protestantism is based on Faith not Works and so is also based on blind belief.

    The myriad business cults of the USA are based on blind belief.

    Catholicism is based on Articles of Faith and miracles, and is also based on blind belief.

    Even astrology is based on blind belief.

    Yet the blind are advising us what to do - it is the blind leading the blind.

    The Enlightenment lite a candle in the dark, and here we are blowing it out.

    For the Enlightenment calls up a visceral hatred in believers.

  5. #85
    Senior Member lowtech redneck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    MBTI
    INTP
    Posts
    3,705

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ergophobe View Post
    I absolutely agree with Q that this is not splitting hairs - seeing Sunni Muslims worldwide as all being orthodox where orthodox implies an attachment to Sharia law with its most conservative interpretations is not based on fact.
    All five major schools of Islamic law, which the ulamas of the vast majority of mosques are indoctrinated into, advocate laws against apostasy, blasphemy, and proselytism, and advocate laws in support of the dhimmi system within states with a large Muslim majority-it has never been my contention that orthodox Islam is the same as Wahabbism or the Taliban, merely that the fundamental beliefs of orthodox Muslims are in opposition to freedom of speech, freedom of religion, and equality under secular law as universal values. This is the reason that the OIC countries (democratic and authoritarian alike) explicitly and, in recent years, energetically reject the aspects of the UDHR that conflict with such beliefs.

    I'm also very familiar with the polls you cited, but my interpretation of their implications is much different from yours; 49% support for "strict application of Shariah law" is far from reassuring in a country that is considered (rightly) to have one of the most liberal and pluralistic mainstream forms of Islamic belief in any Muslim country with a large religiously observant population.

  6. #86
    Ginkgo
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Victor View Post
    As we know, the Enlightenment replaced blind belief with evidence and reason.
    Reason drives men mad, as it does not unravel the paradoxes of existence, just as you drive yourself mad with your own existence. Just as you drove me mad with your circular reasoning. Evidence does not sate a man's flesh and blood and mind. You rabble like a parrot, reiterating the same songs every day on this forum, yet you chastise Psalms and Proverbs and Ecclesiastes. You bow to your god, The Wizard of Oz, because he has provided you with "enlightenment". From what state were you enlightened from? You carry a billboard that advertises "Mad man... brought to you by the Enlightenment". What kind of loony salesperson are you? You're like a naked mole rat who propagates Rogain. You are the reason people don't listen to you.

  7. #87
    & Badger, Ratty and Toad Mole's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    18,536

    Thumbs down Whoopee!

    Quote Originally Posted by Mystic Tater View Post
    Reason drives men mad, as it does not unravel the paradoxes of existence, just as you drive yourself mad with your own existence. Just as you drove me mad with your circular reasoning. Evidence does not sate a man's flesh and blood and mind. You rabble like a parrot, reiterating the same songs every day on this forum, yet you chastise Psalms and Proverbs and Ecclesiastes. You bow to your god, The Wizard of Oz, because he has provided you with "enlightenment". From what state were you enlightened from? You carry a billboard that advertises "Mad man... brought to you by the Enlightenment". What kind of loony salesperson are you? You're like a naked mole rat who propagates Rogain.
    Whoopee!

  8. #88
    Ginkgo
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Victor View Post
    Whoopee!
    "A hypocrite despises those whom he deceives, but has no respect for himself. He would make a dupe of himself too, if he could." - William Hazlitt

    "Judge not, that ye be not judged. For with what judgment ye judge, ye shall be judged: and with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you again. And why beholdest thou the mote that is in thy brother's eye, but considerest not the beam that is in thine own eye? Or how wilt thou say to thy brother, Let me pull out the mote out of thine eye; and, behold, a beam is in thine own eye?
    Thou hypocrite, first cast out the beam out of thine own eye; and then shalt thou see clearly to cast out the mote out of thy brother's eye." Matt 7 : 1-5

    Your posts are your artistic creations; thus you define yourself by them. You often use the pretense "we this...", "we that...". This is because you are conversing with your hypocritical dopelgangers. I truly feel sorry for you if this is your real persona as a segmented person.

    You're a riddle that was meant to be solved. I hope you practice self-accountability... if you can find yourself, that is..

  9. #89
    & Badger, Ratty and Toad Mole's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    18,536

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mystic Tater View Post
    You're a riddle that was meant to be solved.
    Rather than a riddle to be solved, I am a pleasure to be enjoyed.

  10. #90
    Senior Member matmos's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    MBTI
    NICE
    Posts
    1,721

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mystic Tater View Post
    Throughout the ages, men have been exonerated because their ideologies were blamed. Of course, ideologies are quite static, while men are quite mutable. So the perpetrators should be reprimanded because suppressing ideology is unjust; for the vitality of man resides in his ability to express himself by whatever means possible - even by ideology.

    Sometimes ideologies like Islam are seen as oppressive because they influence a sphere of mentality. The mentality is of and by the will of men. Therefore, if a man chooses to exert this ideology as an authoritarian tool of catastrophe, then he should be brought to justice; for mentalities can be twisted and misconstrued by the influence of the idealist - even independent of the idea itself. This is why we have observed the grotesque evolution of the Christian faith from 1st Century Christianity to Orthodoxy and Catholicism to Protestantism and Enlightenment movements. Just because Bill O'Reilly uses his faith to be a flippant dickwad to his guests doesn't mean that we should go burning Bibles. It means that we should burn Bill O'Reilly... er... I mean he should be fired. Yeah, that's what I meant to say.

    Like biological evolution, idealistic evolution entirely depends upon the entropy of the environment. Social environments are often characterized by culture; culture in its turn being characterized by religion and other learned behavior. Altering entropy levels is often tricky business because it often involves persuasion or subversion of the authority. So rise against the fallible authority, seeing that there is no divine earthly authority involved.

    I honestly don't know much about Islam; but unlike most people, I try not to fear the unknown. Like babies in the darkness, we are eased by the cradle of knowing there is light. Lashing out and crying for mommy so soon is rather rash, Victor.

    ps - I think Victor is prideful of something that is out of his control... which, might I add is often dangerous and irrational.
    The main Abrahamic religions are spawned from written traditions. Fallability of translation and linguistic ambiguity can leave them prone to exploitation by an extreme agenda.

    It becomes easy to render a faith in overly simplistic terms:
    - Koran+Hadiths=Islam; Old Testament+New Testament=Christianity, etc.

    Not recognising the nuances of authentic religious experience and stripped of cultural and political context it can be tempting to take the actions of a vocal few (while ingoring invisible evidence of the well-behaved many) as representative. This is called confirmation bias.

    Traditions that bend with the wind can seem peculiarly relativistic and unappealing to those who seek an unequivocal version of the truth. After all, what kind of religion would survive if it's motto was: Join Us! We're probably wrong? It's attactive for more zealous adherants to see any questioning as weak without accepting evidence that questions their dogmatism. This is also called confirmation bias.

Similar Threads

  1. The Banned and The Damned
    By Haight in forum Official Decrees
    Replies: 331
    Last Post: 11-30-2017, 07:12 PM
  2. My blog and the ideological course of culture... to be elaborated on in the new year
    By Zangetshumody in forum Philosophy and Spirituality
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 01-09-2017, 08:41 AM
  3. MBTI and the Anti-Enlightenment
    By Mole in forum Politics, History, and Current Events
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: 06-25-2012, 04:31 AM
  4. [Te] The Message and the Messenger
    By proteanmix in forum The NF Idyllic (ENFP, INFP, ENFJ, INFJ)
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: 05-17-2007, 09:39 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO