User Tag List

First 2345 Last

Results 31 to 40 of 43

  1. #31
    Permabanned
    Join Date
    May 2014
    MBTI
    N/A
    Socionics
    EIE Ni
    Posts
    3,380

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ThatsWhatHeSaid View Post
    The Quran being perfect is not the same as saying the Quran can't be altered. Maybe it was perfect for its generation, or its spirit was perfect, or it's perfect, but it's being interpreted or translated incorrectly. There's nothing illogical about that. In fact, you could even argue that God, making man, made him perfect too, and his interpretations, however illogical, are also perfect.
    God is the highest authority. Human decisions don't override divine ones, otherwise they wouldn't be serving him.

    You can't alter divine works - that is blasphemy and explicitly forbidden (it's why Christians consider Mormonism to be a cult). And because every word is perfect, you have to follow all of them...which seeing the commands contradict each other constantly, is proof that they and their gods are just a bunch of cobbled up tales.

    However, "moderate" religion is and always will be a joke to any honest atheist, like me.

  2. #32
    Theta Male Julius_Van_Der_Beak's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    MBTI
    CROW
    Enneagram
    5w6 sp/so
    Socionics
    LII None
    Posts
    9,032

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Kullervo View Post
    Because your POV is popular, it is much easier for you to get away with this than it is for me. So here's another logical fallacy; that because lots of people believe something it must be true. And another, that because someone is in a position of authority they must be right.
    The corollary is this: just because someone is not in a position of authority does not make them right.

    Here's another example: instead of showing me why I am wrong, you just say I am and repeat that until you believe it.
    Curious, I do not recall doing that, and there are a few posts of mine you have not replied to. This suggests that him doing this would not be sufficient.
    [Trump's] rhetoric is not an abuse of power. In the same way that it's also not against the law to do a backflip off of the roof of your house onto your concrete driveway. It's just mind-numbingly stupid and, to say the least, counterproductive. - Bush did 9-11


    This is not going to go the way you think....

    Visit my Johari:
    http://kevan.org/johari?name=Birddude78

  3. #33
    Permabanned
    Join Date
    May 2014
    MBTI
    N/A
    Socionics
    EIE Ni
    Posts
    3,380

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by msg_v2 View Post
    The corollary is this: just because someone is not in a position of authority does not make them right.
    I have never suggested that I am right because I am not an academic. That would be retarded.

    Quote Originally Posted by msg_v2 View Post
    Curious, I do not recall doing that, and there are a few posts of mine you have not replied to. This suggests that him doing this would not be sufficient.
    Well maybe I have something else to do. You are hardly the only guy whose posts I haven't replied to. People ignore mine sometimes as well.

    The difference is, I don't say that means I've won.

  4. #34
    Senior Member Adam's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2014
    MBTI
    DEUS
    Posts
    162

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Kullervo View Post
    Because your POV is popular, it is much easier for you to get away with this than it is for me. So here's another logical fallacy; that because lots of people believe something it must be true. And another, that because someone is in a position of authority they must be right.
    How about assuming all academics "cover up their lack of basic logic"? Someone told you that the academic consensus disagrees with your analysis. Instead of attacking the established thought that is contrary to your PoV, you weasel your way out by appealing to motive. Way to go, champ.

  5. #35
    Nerd King Usurper Edgar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Posts
    4,209

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Kullervo View Post
    Immigration should always be treated with skepticism and not just assumed to be a good thing. Never embrace change for the sake of change.

    Assimilation still leads to the genetic dilution of a country's people, and this would consequently alter the culture. A people bring their culture with them, so as their proportion of the population grows so does their cultural influence.

    You see assimilation when minorities are too small to exercise much political power as it aids their survival to minimise how much they stand out. This state, however, is not permanent.
    I do not believe in immigration for the sake of immigration. Immigration should benefit the host country, and if done properly, it will. Accepting capable people from different countries is no different than hiring qualified employees from your competitors - a smart and practical decision.

    You are working under the assumption that genetics are tied to culture, and that people of certain genetic makeup are incapable of adopting to a certain culture. As far as I know, there isn't any scientific data to back that up.
    Listen to me, baby, you got to understand, you're old enough to learn the makings of a man.

  6. #36
    Analytical Dreamer Coriolis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    5w6 sp/sx
    Posts
    17,522

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Kullervo View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by EffEmDoubleyou View Post
    This is a result of Islam like Fred Phelps is a result of Christianity.
    Both are true.
    So we should get rid of Christians in the U.S. to prevent extremism justified by Christianity? I suppose there is a certain logical consistency in that, but it won't go over too well here.

    Quote Originally Posted by Kullervo View Post
    You either follow an injunction or you don't. It is blatantly obvious language. Also: The Quran actually warns against people who only obey parts of it, again beginning with an injunction, "Do not". You have no idea what you are talking about.
    Quote Originally Posted by Kullervo View Post
    A religion is not like a political ideology, which has a few fundamental tenets but is otherwise flexible and open to change. If you believe in Allah, the Quran is divinely inspired and by definition perfect and unalterable.
    Perhaps you follow religious texts to the letter, but many believers do not. The problem then is not so much the text itself as the inflexibility and even irrationality of its followers. Religions that are not open to change will not survive, though some do seem to evolve on a geologic time scale.

    Quote Originally Posted by Kullervo View Post
    I1. God represents the highest possible ideal (perfection).
    2. Therefore anything that comes from Him is perfect also.
    3. (If you are a Muslim) The Quran is perfect.
    Are you a Muslim? If not, how do you know this is what they believe? How especially do you know this is what they ALL believe? I was raised Christian and have seen a wide variety of interpretation of their sacred writings, and I know enough Jews to have some idea of the variety within that tradition.

    Quote Originally Posted by Nicodemus View Post
    Now take a look at history. Christianity has changed tremendously over the centuries while its foundation, the Bible, like the Quran, has stayed the same ever since its completion. How it is possible? Texts are open to interpretation (there is a whole discipline dedicated to it: hermeneutics), and human beings seldom use logic to justify their decisions in life. You seem oddly unaware of human nature for someone who professes to be interested in history and travelling the world; and believing that your argument proves anything about Muslims (or any other people of the book) shows just that.
    Exactly. One should also remember what Christians were up to ~600 years ago: the Inquisition. Given that's about how much younger Islam is, it would be interesting to see how they evolve in 6 more centuries.

    Quote Originally Posted by Kullervo View Post
    Immigration should always be treated with skepticism and not just assumed to be a good thing. Never embrace change for the sake of change.
    In what situations is immigration a good thing?
    I've been called a criminal, a terrorist, and a threat to the known universe. But everything you were told is a lie. The truth is, they've taken our freedom, our home, and our future. The time has come for all humanity to take a stand...

  7. #37
    & Badger, Ratty and Toad Mole's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    18,524

    Default

    When they publicly and openly say they want to kill you. And then demonstate their intention across the globe, it is wise to defend yourself.

  8. #38

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by EffEmDoubleyou View Post
    This is a result of Islam like Fred Phelps is a result of Christianity.
    Quote Originally Posted by Kullervo View Post
    Both are true.
    Perhaps in the strictest sense. However, your all-or-nothing approach to religion lacks an understanding of how religion is observed in practice. There are any number of anachronistic and patently ridiculous tenets to every religion that 99% of the practitioners accept as such. There are also convenient interpretations of any religious dogma that lack even the most tenuous connection to the dogma itself. In fact, the quotes from the Quran that you yourself posted seem to be a call to terrorist violence only with the most willful and glib misinterpretation.

    Both Islamic terrorists and Fred Phelps have taken advantage of this to use their respective religious texts as Rorschach tests and make the interpretation that justifies their ideology. Simply being the most extreme does not make them the most faithful. To accept their justifications as valid and to consequently blame the religion instead of the individual would require you to make an endless array of patently ridiculous judgments. For instance, would you deport Jodie Foster because John Hinckley used an imaginary relationship with her as justification for shooting President Reagan? He twisted some facts and invented others to make a justification, just as Islamic terrorists and Fred Phelps do. In both cases the overwhelming majority of the general population is inclined to call bullshit. Why aren't you?
    Everybody have fun tonight. Everybody Wang Chung tonight.

    Johari
    /Nohari

  9. #39
    Permabanned
    Join Date
    May 2014
    MBTI
    N/A
    Socionics
    EIE Ni
    Posts
    3,380

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Edgar View Post
    I do not believe in immigration for the sake of immigration. Immigration should benefit the host country, and if done properly, it will. Accepting capable people from different countries is no different than hiring qualified employees from your competitors - a smart and practical decision.

    You are working under the assumption that genetics are tied to culture, and that people of certain genetic makeup are incapable of adopting to a certain culture. As far as I know, there isn't any scientific data to back that up.
    I am working on observations of history and deducing some fundamental lessons from it, which is the most reliable way of approaching this problem. My assumption, with many historical precedents leading to a repetitive, observable pattern - is that an immigrant people only adapt when they lack the power to impose their own way of life. Your view is wishful thinking, and there is substantial evidence against it which I am happy to start sharing if my word is not taken.

    100% rigid empiricists, like you presumably, ignore the fact that experimental science does not,and in fact cannot work in the time frame of centuries. Studies simply don't exist over such a time period. It is impossible for traditional experiments to compare the past to the future, which is what you need in making judgements about immigration. It involves observing trends, looking at history, and with this information, extrapolating where we are likely to be in X number of years.

    Critical issues like this require strong leadership and action rather than more experiments.

  10. #40
    Permabanned
    Join Date
    May 2014
    MBTI
    N/A
    Socionics
    EIE Ni
    Posts
    3,380

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Coriolis View Post
    So we should get rid of Christians in the U.S. to prevent extremism justified by Christianity? I suppose there is a certain logical consistency in that, but it won't go over too well here.
    Yes. About time.

    Quote Originally Posted by Coriolis View Post
    Perhaps you follow religious texts to the letter, but many believers do not. The problem then is not so much the text itself as the inflexibility and even irrationality of its followers. Religions that are not open to change will not survive, though some do seem to evolve on a geologic time scale.

    Are you a Muslim? If not, how do you know this is what they believe? How especially do you know this is what they ALL believe? I was raised Christian and have seen a wide variety of interpretation of their sacred writings, and I know enough Jews to have some idea of the variety within that tradition.
    Logic dictates that if there are multiple different interpretations of a religion, no more than one of them can be right.

    And if you think the Bible is bad (and it is), read the Jewish Talmud.

    Quote Originally Posted by Coriolis View Post
    Exactly. One should also remember what Christians were up to ~600 years ago: the Inquisition. Given that's about how much younger Islam is, it would be interesting to see how they evolve in 6 more centuries.
    If more Muslims stop believing in Islam like most Christians have stopped believing in Christianity, then their behaviour may well change. However; I don't see signs that Islam is weakening, in fact the opposite seems to be the case. It is impossible to predict with any certainty what the world will be like in 600 years. But we have some control over events in our lifetime.

    Granted, this shouldn't change anyone's views on immigration from these countries. But it might make them better neighbors.

    Quote Originally Posted by Coriolis View Post
    In what situations is immigration a good thing?
    If the population absolutely cannot sustain itself, or if there is an entirely new area of land which hasn't been habituated yet (this doesn't apply anymore).

    Re the first: If governments in Western countries provided some incentives (for both men and women) the birth rate would go up within a generation's time, or less. Immigration is just seen as an easy option.

    And if both cases, the immigration should be from closely related ethnic groups.

Similar Threads

  1. I feel like I'm about to blow up in a big way.
    By xisnotx in forum The Bonfire
    Replies: 49
    Last Post: 04-15-2014, 03:15 PM
  2. I want these guys to blow up
    By swordpath in forum Arts & Entertainment
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 04-15-2011, 10:15 PM
  3. If you were to "dress up" as a MBTI type for halloween
    By swordpath in forum The Bonfire
    Replies: 33
    Last Post: 07-11-2008, 07:18 AM
  4. How do people's minds actually seem to divide up?
    By Zergling in forum General Psychology
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 06-11-2007, 11:54 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