Fantastic Discussion about Islam and other Religions


Michael Stuart Kelly

Recommended Posts

Fantastic Discussion about Islam and other Religions

Ironically, this discussion is by two atheists, Cenk Uygur and Sam Harris.

It's a three hour discussion. I have only seen the first hour and a half and I have to pause, but I have seen enough to know I have to post this here on OL.

There are times when I agree with Cenk Uygur, other times with Sam Harris, and times when I agree with both or don't agree with either.

What's compelling in this discussion is that both men are polite, well-studied and do not want to appeal to oversimplification, but both are sizzling underneath. They are interested in getting at the truth--oh, it's from their different perspectives and core stories, but still, I believe they are both sincere and almost innocent in their respective approaches. Their passion shows.

At the very least, by watching this video, you can learn a lot about the influence of religions on human affairs during different times and cultures, and the limitations of that influence. Whether you agree or disagree with this point or that, this discussion is a banquet of non-hysterical non-bigoted clashes and differences of conclusions argued with conviction.

In general, I found myself agreeing with Cenk Uygur more than Sam Harris, and, believe me, I am no fan of Unger's leftie orientation (to understate it), but he has seen the issue from inside the Muslim world and outside the USA (like I have) whereas Harris has not.

The philosophical importance to look for is not so much disagreeing with the horrible doctrines in Islam and other religions that excuse barbarous practices (that's easy), but in the epistemology of looking for correct causes in human behavior--how much can be attributed to a religious doctrine and how much to other factors, where observation counts and where speculation is better, where sacred literature prompts behavior and where it is not adopted, and so on.

Absolutely fascinating.

If trying to reason about Islam (not just the religion but also the culture) and understand it rationally is your thing (as opposed to cultivating a prejudice and seeking reasons to validate it), I hope you enjoy this discussion as much as I am currently enjoying it.

Michael

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 142
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

There's just one part I found a little too precious on Harris's part.

When he misrepresents others, he calls it science. When others misrepresent him, it's a smear.

Both of these dudes are big government progressives. If Harris doesn't like the smear culture of progressive journalism, he should have been complaining about it way before it landed on his own hide.

That's why he comes off to my ear as whining too much at the start. Pure double standard.

But after a while, he gets into a more professional stride.

Michael

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks, MSK. I listened to the whole debate and banged out some swift notes. I've been following the whole sprawling mess of discourse that began to erupt following Bill Maher's bigoted thinking about Them.

-- I will take down these rough notes in an hour or so, when I figure out if I have anything else to add to the thread.

I will just say that Sam failed to convince me that some recent criticism of his opinions and stance was unjustified. He gave not one inch in this conversation. Not realizing why people object to particular claims is a clue that Sam is more arrogant than wise.

If you don't want to listen to three hours of Sam Harris, these notes will let you skim through some of the terms and turns of the conversation. Probably most OLers would wonder if there is any benefit in subjecting oneself to any three-hour Youtube conversation (JTS excepted).

Sam Harris says early on in the conversation how he's come to "clean up the mess."

The Mess is the context of several weeks of Internet controversy. It involves a larger cast of characters -- including Reza Aslan, Bill Maher, Ben Afleck, CJ Werleman in the first instance -- and thousands upon thousands of words expended by that same cast in defense of one side or other in the original stark difference.

(CJ Werleman is an author/publisher. He has had a bad week, having had plagiarism discovered and having had his entire Alternet output removed from their site)

Salon ... racist, bigot, Zionist, genocidal maniac. Fraud, liar CJ. Unrebutted. Whyyyyy-ne about CJ.

Reza -- get my views on religion from Fox News. Never ... press you ... you have a responsibility. Salon is the end of journalism where journalist goes to die. Hey Sam ...

Three hours, Sam. What question: just Islam or Muslims. We have quotes ... Islam set of behavioural consequences. Specific ideas. Range cognitive commitments ...

Devout ... adulterers, martyrs ... honest discussion about prevalence of belief. Link between belief and action.

At 22:00 Sam suggests it is unfair to criticize him for 'painting Muslims with a broad brush' and then Cenk goes on to some quotes, from Sam's blog, articles, books, interviews, speeches and Twitter comments.

Generalizing too widely ...

Muslims extremisms are not extreme among Muslim. Permission to generalize? X -- poll, poll, poll. Difference between apostate-killing and ... belief. Euphemism. Extremism ... it is never three percent.

All not specifically names. No papers to cite in front of him, Sam.

Percentages. Combining. Important. Best examples of the faith. ISIS paint by numbers Koran. Plausible, Mohammed did. Not Buddha. Seriously Sex Slave. Fantasy examples. Desert Island.

Bible: "context ..." Jews. Barbaric Old Testament. No Paradise/Hell. God strikes them down. Death cult. God punished him. Messiah ... don't get me going. Difference between jihadists and Orthodox. Paradise/Martyrdom. Death Cult.

Xtianity. Buffet. Convert. Vacuum you into the sky/Armageddon. Xtian honestly worse than Muslim. Stem-cell. Jew/Christian ... souls of cells. Crazy.

When Christians do it, it is complicated. Blame Islam ... Rohynga is not inspired by Buddhism. When Muslims do it, it's not complicated. Muslim robs liquor store. Bacon. All I am asking for is honest conversation ... Hitler doesn't count. God is with us. I am doing the Lord's Work. Shouldn't we take Hitler at his word? Hitler ... Jesus .... Jew Hatred came from ... Christian history. Genocide of Jews in Europe due to Christianity.

Differences ... worry... dogma.... Revelation/End Times ... real burden with Reza/Glenn. People don't believe that people don't believe. Nobody believes. Not true. Evangelicals. One difference is ... Jesus. Rationale to ignore Old Testament. Pacific Jesus. Judgement. Meantime. Ignoramus. Find basis to wait for Rapture. Not Martyrdom.

Quote: Caesar. Koran. Don't impose your religion on others. Races equal. Koran. German/Indonesian. Cherry pick. Islam is irredeemable. Hope not. Atheism, no. Genuine Muslim. What are we waiting for?

Example of Mohammed. Not a hippy. Was a warlord. Alexander, Gengis, not like Jesus. He was not Jesus. Cut heads off. Cherry pick. Bad parts are not as extensive.

Bible. Cherry picking is easy. Forget half of it. Koran is more streamline with central message. A central message is spread the one true faith by conquest. Don't touch the Christians. Infidels. Hindu. Blessed by god.

Iraq Yezidis not being killed by Christians. We do not see Christian suicide bombs ... death cult Zen Buddhism. Blah Tibetan. Self-immolation. Not blowing up buses. Weird brew. Zen was helpful to Kamikaze.

Clear doctrine ... behaviour. Koran would be better/worse. No compulsion. Kill homosexuals is already in there ... honour it. If it weren't there ... doctrine. Don't agree with Reza in re truth. Damaging parts are part of the mix ... in Koran. Christian homosexuals worse. Kill homosexual. More bad in Muslim worse.

When you say, Sam, doctrine is totally off the hook. Sarcasm. Does your texts suck? Yes, each sucks enough to encouraged violence. Religion contributes, but other things also Tamil Tigers.

Differences matter. Barbarism. Because of tiny differences in theology. Huge and long lever. Caesar. Immense work for Christians. No separation of god's law/man's law in Islam.

At same time, can Muslims do great things. Ottoman. Kill all infidels? Nope. Open to religions. Autonomy if pay taxes. Arab empire was more liberal than Christians were at the time. What about the 'good parts' and Islamic history.

Future of humanity depends on becoming less and less convinced of bad doctrines. Crusades. Romantic. Fantasy. Disraeli. Great for Jews. Utopia. Suspicious. Ottomans rescued Jews from Inquisition. Maimomedes. Insanity deranged religiosity of witch-burners. Deranged. Islam was rather good ...

Compare. Muslims were civilized. Crusades response to Jihad.

Israel. Feels like, it's always the Muslims' fault. Muslims made me do it. Muslim fault.

Neither has Holy War. Islam has a straightforward. Holy War. Interpretation. Muhammed. Root causes. Politics. Does doctrine determine? Muslims didn't kill everybody.

Doctrine contains apartheid. Dhimmi. Different from genocide. History shows Islam got here from conquest. Not interfaith dialogue.

What about English Empire? Whenever Christians do it, it's complicated. When Muslims do it, it's because they are driven to conquest.

Catholicism. Doctrine. Behaviour. People behaving badly. Complicated. Political Economic contribution. Mosque radicallized ... not economics/politics. ISIS is not the Bud Light for jihadis. Meme is easy. Martyrdom. Belief. Really believes, becomes rational ...

Islam contributes. Not only reason.

Kurds. Do FGM. Honour killings. Kurds. From Koran? Honour killing support in Islam, but bigger misogyny. Pre-dates religion.

Cultural factors in the mix.

Agree.

Convert. Islam. Yes. Mass Shooters. Vehicle for glory. Driven by personal psychology. Religion a mix of factors.

Hopeful, but not realistic. Depressed, psycho ... Papes. I am qualified. Papes is wrong. Majority national political reasons.

Pape influential in apologist circles. Don't want to believe that other people believes. Pape did analysis. Concerns used against occupying democracies. Religious claim is a cover. If ... look behind.

If neighbour killed. No one will doubt his stated intent. Islam. Hopeless ... hatred mistreated. No one looks ... Islam Virgins. Says never the reason. Pape. Nationalistic. Cockamamie. Theology ...

It's a mixture. Religion has no factor, crazy.

But for religion, you cannot imagine.

Person. Columbine.

Mental problems.

Muslim ... mental problems.

Behaviour is contagious. All these people. Thousands out of billion and half.

Tiny fraction, Sam.

Viewer questions: Sam uses testimony from Muslim terrorists. If it is opinion behind neuroscience.

We can be wrong. Reasonable. Experiment. Word list. Seashore. Detergent. Tide. Not gonna know. Explicit all logically coherent, logical. Ask someone why they did something.

Fifty-fifty.

(no examples)

Take Hitler at his word?

Heretic burning. Straight line from underlying belief. In Hell. Dangerous. Neighbour torturing. Other guy is more dangerous.

Behaviour shows. There at core Heaven/Hell, eternity.

Inquisition. Mixture.

Muslims spectrum. Agree. Fringe is much fringier. Doctrine. Marginal, me, no. Degree of belief.

Consequences? Fundamentalists. Our beliefs. Mixtures of driven to violence. Palestinian suicide terrorists believe right thing to do.

Northern Ireland. Religion. Similar to Myanmar. Tribalism. Political. IDs, not Doctrine.

The problem is Identity. Oppressed. Like the Irish.

Martyrdom. Largest factor? Islam?

Differences by which we weight factors. No factor. Dumb. Disagree. One blind spot of liberalism is (you) default assumptions are going to be the same irrespective of religion. Thus enemies are enemies we made. Wacked the hornet's nest.

Not true with respect to Jihad.

Disagree. ISIS came from Hussein. Apple cart. Kaddafi. Sunnis and Shias, have at it.

Practical implications. Audience question: it's not Muslims, it's doctrines of Islam. What about Profiling? If it's not a race, then how can you profile.

Islam is not a race, so ... security. Serviceable intuitions are good. PC to deny we have intuition. TSA ... obviously not Jihadists. Tucson. Kitsch. Pat-down wasted. Somebody gonna die because PC. I saw a toddler. Microcues. Statistical assumptions. Search her shoes. Advocate anti-profiling. We know what we are looking for: jihadists. Recruit Okinawan women. Blonde octogenerarians.

Okay. I'm in the profile (Sam).

How to profile. (Sam has no answer in this interview). Sweaters. Travel. Clean shaven. Shave. Suspicion. Actions, yes. Objection. If you are right ... second parallel consequence. Blacks. Latinos. Arrests. I wouldn't stop and frisk. Splits. Unfair. Damaging.

Anti-profiling. Security theatre of fairness. Wheelchairs.

Fair ... four year old. Family. Wheelchair. (on plane) Norwegians. Breivik. Not an efficient ...

Take PC out... statistical. Job. Churn rate. Not a high-status job. Pay. Like El Al. No illusions. Ben Gurion. Not polite. Cues and clues. PC myth. Nationality. Religion. Vet you.

-- Sam, vast numbers of numbers connected to their religion ... giving permission to generalize. Avoid those beginnings so we can avoid the endings.

White guys breeze. All Muslims should want. 99.9% agree it is Muslims.

Look for the shifty dude.

Spend ten dollars. Behaviour. Maniac. Whatever that looks like, pay attention.

Other dangerous things. Set the table for 'profiling' ... details. Let's be honest. Who look Muslim. What did Lindh look like?

It applies to me, too. Don't squander ...

Heart of the questions. Torture. Nuclear strikes. Middle Eastern countries. People ask consequently. What do we do with Muslims.

Conversation. Difficult. Like Nick Kristoff. No link. Here we are ... finish conversation. Links. Maginal walsam? Deprogramme radicals. Inspire Reformation to honestly acknowledge link between beliefs and behaviours.

War of ideas in Muslim world.

Cultural war. Fax. Yes. War. Defeat religion. But I think you don't mean it. Bombings. Policy prescriptions. Muslims can't handly democracy, I get it. It's wrong, dangerous. Bush doctrine. Democracy handle?

Despotism kept a lid on sectarianism. It depends. Pull lid off conflict. Watch and see what happens. Unleash. We created ISIS ... by killing the Warden. Prisoners ... conversation. Humanity. North Korea. Lunatic hostage-takers. Master Race. It's quasi-religous. Bizarre psychologically. Nuclear weapons. Can't save from maniac. Not ready for democracy. Benevolent dictator?

World feels bad. If we could we would help. No instititutions.

Not capable? Might need transition. Twenty years. Turkey? Dictator? Can't be done with Muslims?

Fruits of Arab Spring are ambiguous. Benevolent dictator?

Political scientists see problems in transition ... my footnote in End of Faith. Robert Kaplan. War journalist. Transition in Muslim is just ... eighteen-months old capable. Intrude into their lives.

Agree. We did experiment with dictators. Militancy got better under dictators.

Okay, now generalization.

I am just observing. Removing dictator isn't enough. Decade and a half. Most evil man, Iraq. Crazy distraction, against war in Iraq.

Could have justified on humanitarian grounds. But. Remove this guy. Watch us do it. Wicked Witch of the west.

Infidels. On Wednesday/Thursday Islamists.

But what about Kosovo/Bosnia.

Muslim world doesn't give credit.

Iraq ... enormous skepticism.

Downplays tribal solidarity. Muslims sided with other Muslims. Iraq.

Muslims rightly feel subjugated. Looking for answers. Muslims feel humiliated. Religion is the answer.

Fundamentalist. Turkey, Pakistan? Humiliated, yes, Islam, Jihad.

Humiliated seem to be real. All of this is through lens of religion. Doctrinal assumptions of the Islam. Different expectations. A fallen world where the one true faith is not winning. Jews, Christians, Buddhists don't.

Turks aren't doing jihad for several reasons. Economically. Secularism. Don't do jihad.

Gulf States do.

Saudi struck deal with Wahhabis. Deal with devil. Scourge on world.

Wealthy people like ISIS. Cynical. Afraid of radicals. Export. Contain extremists.

It's just a fact jihad is uncoupled.. Engineers are jihadists. PC

Nuclear strike. You did not say should. We should consider it under certain circumstances. Dangerous.

We are in the world we are in with Nuclear Doctrine from Cold War. Not a death cult. Rational actors. Terrestrial. Not we love death.

Two paragraphs of game-theoretic. Belief in Martyrdom unties the MAD. Not chicken. Accept that certain people do what to die to get there Paradise.

Imagine an ISIS with ICBMs. Imagine Taliban with Pakistani bombs./

Iranians? Rational actors. Do first strike?

Belief system we take seriously. You are waiting for the Madhi. Subtly different. Two paragraphs.

Hitting the wall at four hundred ... the hypothetical.

What about your fans, Sam?

Not saying we are in that situation. Long-ranged nuclear weapons. Pakistan doesn't have that.

We have jihadis.

ISIS nuclear first strike. Nope.

Look at history. Firebombing. Tokyo fire-bombing. No more firebombing show of power.

More humane world. Go back to firebombing. Or Marshall plan. We don't do horrible killing of civilians.

Agree. Hold on to progress. Fighting Nazis ... insane by moral standards. Targetting of civilians by the hundred thousands.

We have to find ourselves in a world of civil society .... disarmament is difficult.

First strike possibility if you have these nukes.

Bad actor. First strike on ....

Imagination. SU planning first strike on July fourth on major cities. Only nukes to use first strike (which is fucked and hypothetical).

You are more dangerous. We don't have to think about how bad and awful.

Particular groups.

Eighteen options.

Self-defense. Marshall Plan. Kind of world you inhabit. Firebombs we did it. Fight with current ethical standards. What did we want to do to the Germans. Japan.

What does ISIS want?

ISIS with Muslims? Palestinians. We know what Palestinians would do. Mind-reading. They are telling us.

Hamas. They didn't kill all the Jews in the past.

I explained why: dhimmi.

Hamas democratically elected explicit genocide in documents.

IRA ... kill em all.

Muslims would not kill them all ...

When people tell you they want to commit a genocide, take them on board.

Confluence of factors. What are their factors?

We know. We have wealth of information. Palestinians more generally, talking. Genocide runs through it.

Occupation?

Genocidal applications.

Hell Ya, kill them all. It's not the religion alone. Palestinians. Kill all the Jews? Human beings.

Weighting various factors. Occupation has nothing to do with Sunni in Pakistan deciding to suicide bomb?

Occupation does not explain religious violence elsewhere.

We way underestimate the impact of the Occupation on the whole muslim world. More fundamentalism.

A fundamentalist is a problem. If the fundamentals are the problem.

America does not have suicide bombers. Don't need them. F1s, submarines.

Christians .... with nuclear weapons with evangelical President.

I felt egregious by Sarah Palin reference. Danger. I did more than most people. CJ Werleman.

I believe we are meandering into circumstances where best intentions good people see no alternative, could commit horrendous crimes. World War Two. Enemy did to them. Dresden London

Horrible to grapple with bad ideas, bad circumstances bad incentives can allow good people to behave like monsters .... systems Paradise scary to run on hard drive. Danger.

Conclusion. Liberal policies are a better way to engage Muslims. War of Ideas.

Nuking, bombing, counterproductive.

There is a real fear that Most Muslims can't recognize real badness of ISIS. we are the good guys re ISIS. Muslims can't see straight (we are the good guys) ... not imperialism.

Skeptical.

Let's spell it out. It doesn't say anything bad about us (Military Options). Mosques.

I think ... beaten down enough by reality ... Yezidis can't be helped but by Muslims. We have to wait. We need the Turks.

It is almost impossible for good people to use power (conspiracy theory) [Does not mention Assad dictatorship or the failure of the US to help]

Naive.

Haliburton. Stock prices. 34 million dollars. Starts war.

World Trade Center. Numbers.

We are the good guys, yargh. We are actually the good guys. We never get recognition.

Kosovo/Bosnia.

Scary. Special forces. Why do we own any of this .Deal with ISIS without announcements. Not same liabilities.

Civilized world. Iran. Honest. Assasination. We are the good guys. Occupy Palestine.

Agree. Prop up dictators. Hussein.

Roll back the clock, everybody was a bad guy at some time.

What would Bush have done? Iraq like Nebraska. Things benign. Not Gengis Khan.

Insane person still wants quality of life in Iraq.

Depose the bad guy. Oil contracts. Why coup?

Nice Iran and Iraq.

Not conceding. We have made a lot of moral progress since lynching.

That is why Iraq has seemed so outrageous. Here comes these guys again. Do it the right way. I would rather bomb them with books and porn. Culture. I got seventy-two girls in Vegas that will do better.

I am not as hawkish as you think I am. We check the same boxes.

On the torture bit, my argument is a comparison between torture and collateral damage. Collateral damage is worse. Suddenly torture is on the table. Collateral damage is so much worse.

False choice, torture. Guantanamo.

Unethical torture war crime. Illegal not unethical. Deliberately make uncomfortable.

Waterboarding. Kicking punching death.

My argument about torture. If you can't imagine make someone uncomfortable ... know locked in box. Beat someone up. Not thinking hard enough.

No Sam. Extreme measures. Menstrual blood. We did sadistic horror, abu Ghraib.

Collateral damage is so much worse.

Torture lead to what they think you want to hear. Al Libi. PC myth that torture never works.

Capture Al Qaeda with laptop. You can't just make stuff up. Absolute extremity, if not, prosecution.

No. It is unlikely to work. Terrible consequences to our own morality. Unlikely why? Why did we do WB? hundreds.

Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.

I write and think as a philosopher. It's legitimate to ask why Can't we eat Babies? Bedrock. Ethics ... why is it wrong? Legitimate. Much of my discussion. I don't write down to my readers. Philosophical. What makes it right to kill OBL?

No. It makes sense to prevent what he is aspiring to beliefs. You are bombiing beliefs.

Retribution? No, further harm. Micro-details.

I am paying a massive penalty. Don't want to engage with me. People are confused. How can you be talking about eating babies.

Ethics of torture. Dick Cheney. Rendition.

Good ending. You are not in a philosophy seminar. We have accepted collateral damage. Uncomfortable to Sheik. Compare to collateral damage. Little girls getting their arms worn off.

Sam, you have an effect on the world.

You can't find justification for the Holocaust in the Bible. Practically a science experiment. Communities

Sam/Bill are and were being criticized heavily on several grounds, grounds which derive from their public work to Alert The World.

Early in the affair I thought way too much criticism was expended on Maher's bigotry. Expecting a smug comedian to be expert or even fair on any topic is mistaken. However much I consider him a lesser light, however, he has a large audience. So when he compares Islam to the Mafia, the wheel-screeching and motor-revving only increases.

Reza Aslan's basic point is that

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nothing wrong with cultivating a prejudice; it depends on what prejudice is being cultivated.

Exactly. It also depends on whose ox is being gored. And it depends on the effects of the prejudice. Simply sitting on a porch and spitting out an unfavorable opinion or feeling about Group A or Person B has no effect. If that opinion or feeling formed before or without knowledge, thought, or reason, well that has not much effect beyond the porch. That person who judges without knowledge or reason is, I would argue, harming himself by sloppy cognitions. His basic self-interest is in gaining the most reliable knowledge, using the tools of reason, applying the hard grind of thought -- not being fooled, duped or unduly ignorant. I'd say that his failing to abide by reason leaves him vulnerable to other consequential interests.

In the end, the sloppy thinker is cognitively disabled, and the prime victim of himself -- with reduced ability to navigate the world wisely and honestly.

For example, a great majority of Americans polled on attitudes towards minority groups single out atheists/unbelievers for particular heightened mistrust based on their perceived lack of morality. Atheists are seen as more dangerous even than Muslims. Americans would vote for a Muslim before they would vote for an avowed atheist. What does this prejudice serve, how are the consequences sorted out?

Could this be a (selfishly) healthy prejudice against objective thinkers/atheists, cultivated by most religious groups across the board, for humane reasons and to the benefit of the individuals who hold it? Well, it depends, doesn't it?

Brant, if you are not too busy or sidelined, I am sure you can give multiple further examples of It Depends.

Edited by william.scherk
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here's Maher trying to sneak bigotry into the argument again:

http://youtu.be/1-cEOM2sIYY

Progressives forget that Southern Democrats were the ones who promoted the KKK. That's part of the roots of the modern Progressive mindset. Maher's arguments (and to some extent, Harris's arguments, too) remind me of all the sophisticated garbage I heard while growing up about the shortcomings of black people. I heard them all. All of them. (Kids listen, too.)

This is a collectivist mindset on the deepest level possible. (Conservatives have their own brand of garbage, but I'm ranting against Progressive bigotry disguised as reason right now.)

These people always deny they are promoting bigotry, and they do CYA well, but when you look at their arguments, they always manage to include the entire target group in the most damning stuff.

Here's an example from the video above. Maher agrees that the West arbitrarily carving up the Middle East in the Treaty of Versailles at the end of WWI is part of the radical Islam problem, as is poverty, etc. That's the CYA at then end.

But at the beginning of the discussion, he says that he keeps hearing people say that most Muslims are peaceful. But he wants to know (as a fighter for The One True Truth)... (pause for effect)... are they really?

Then he pulls out the fact that young educated male Tunisians join ISIS as proof that the entire Muslim community is not peaceful. All the while ignoring the behavior of ALL the peaceful Muslims right in front of his eyes. (Until called on it. Then blah blah blah...)

The pattern is always the same. This never gets any better. And it never will with people like that. Tomorrow Maher will do it again as if he did not agree with his CYA today. Back to point zero. Over and over. Drip drip drip... Just keepin' the bigotry alive...

Been there. Seen it way too often. Covered it up like a cat covers shit and moved on with my life...

Michael

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nice switch-a-roo, Michael...

"But at the beginning of the discussion, he says that he keeps hearing people say that most Muslims are peaceful. But he wants to know (as a fighter for The One True Truth)... (pause for effect)... are they really?

"Then he pulls out the fact that young educated male Tunisians join ISIS as proof that the entire Muslim community is not peaceful"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's nice when that switch-a-roo is all out in the open, huh?

That's the way the bigoted mind works. I heard that same kind of crap about blacks all my youth.

I'm going to keep exposing this when I see it.

We can eradicate radical Islam without bigotry. (I'm not sure you understand that.)

And we can help move the world toward a reason-based core story.

In fact, in my view, without bigotry is the only way to win.

I won't fight for a world where one bigotry replaces another. And I won't live in it.

The enemy of my enemy is not my friend. I don't want either of them.

Michael

Link to comment
Share on other sites

MSK

Heh , good question hadn't thought about that way :)

It was more in line with love the sinner , hate the sin kinda thing, and we should be real good and thoughful about defining or accepting someone's definition of sin.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's nice when that switch-a-roo is all out in the open, huh?

That's the way the bigoted mind works. I heard that same kind of crap about blacks all my youth.

I'm going to keep exposing this when I see it.

We can eradicate radical Islam without bigotry. (I'm not sure you understand that.)

And we can help move the world toward a reason-based core story.

In fact, in my view, without bigotry is the only way to win.

I won't fight for a world where one bigotry replaces another. And I won't live in it.

The enemy of my enemy is not my friend. I don't want either of them.

Michael

You cannot eradicate radical Islam for Islam is an ideological feasting ground for so-called radical actors. Fascism, however, is a legit, practical, target. What you do is beat it to a pulp and go after state-sanction such as from Iran and Saudi Arabia. Since ISIL has declared a "Caliphate" it has exposed itself to conventional, military destruction by the country most proficient at that, the United States. Without a state and without money, bad boys in the aggregate tend to start acting nicely. The tribal instinct to attach onto and support a country by young men willing to die for it doesn't work if there is no country. All gross Christian excesses from centuries past were powered by kings, most with the explicit and implicit sanction of sundry Popes in Rome who themselves were dependent on kings for military and political protection. The faith was deep even to the point of the Spanish Inquisition.

What all Jihadists do depends on two legs to stand on. One leg cannot be directly touched so you simply chop off the other. Game, set, match. (A one-legged Jihadist can hop about for a short time.) What is left is the rotten culture, mostly Arab. Persian culture is of a much higher order, in spite of the religion but the religion dominates. Aside from Iran the only country with true potential is Egypt. No Egyptian can escape the fact that their country was the first great super-power and that that was thousands of years before Islam.

--Brant

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Brant,

When I say eradicate, I'm aware that nobody can do that 100% without going into the heads of 100% of humanity and mucking around. Hell, there are still people on earth who worship Zeus, so Zeus-worship has not been eradicated 100%.

I mean something along the lines of relegating radical Islamism to the status of Nazism. A few people will still be attracted to it, but as a force shaping world events, it can essentially be eradicated.

One thing will not work--telling a billion plus people they all practice an inherently evil code and compare that against something like Christianity and call that good (or insinuate it).

On the deepest human level possible, character is chosen, not brainwashed into people. People are influenced by their cultures and philosophies, but ultimately they choose to be bullies or good guys. And they do that whether they are Muslims, Christians, atheists, Zeus-worshipers, Objectivists, whatever.

Collectivists are inherently bullies.

Michael

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's nice when that switch-a-roo is all out in the open, huh?

It wasn't his switch. It was yours. You are unfair to Mr. Maher in your switch, and you misrepresent him.

"Here's an example from the video above. Maher agrees that the West arbitrarily carving up the Middle East in the Treaty of Versailles at the end of WWI is part of the radical Islam problem, as is poverty, etc. That's the CYA at then end."

He did not say that at all. He said he agreed that those things are problems, but don't leave religion out of the mix. Nowhere did he connect those things to radical Islam. In fact, probably the reverse is true given what he said about poverty elsewhere.

"But at the beginning of the discussion, he says that he keeps hearing people say that most Muslims are peaceful. But he wants to know (as a fighter for The One True Truth)... (pause for effect)... are they really?"

Which, given the way things are headed, is a perfectly legitimate question to ask. You turn the mere asking of this question into a bigoted act.

"Then he pulls out the fact that young educated male Tunisians join ISIS as proof that the entire Muslim community is not peaceful. All the while ignoring the behavior of ALL the peaceful Muslims right in front of his eyes. (Until called on it. Then blah blah blah...)"

This is where you make your switch. Maher has apparently gone from most to entire. He hasn't of course, it's merely the switch you have made, in fact need to make, in order to caste him as a bigot.

"The pattern is always the same. This never gets any better. And it never will with people like that."

Having mangled what he said into a complete misrepresentation you are now free to say "people like that". That's the kind of expression that is common to bigots.

Now, it could be that you have misunderstood Mr. Maher, or it could be that you have deliberately misrepresented him. That is an option you don't give to Mr. Maher himself. He is simply dismissed as a bigot who is beyond reason and not worth reasoning with.

"This never gets any better. And it never will with people like that. "

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I mean something along the lines of relegating radical Islamism to the status of Nazism. A few people will still be attracted to it, but as a force shaping world events, it can essentially be eradicated.

The trouble being that Muhammad himself commanded these things from his followers. Those who take Muhammad seriously, which is all of the jihad groups, and all who support the jihad groups, and all who support the idea that the world belongs to Allah and is no place for man-made law, are proud of following the example of their prophet. To relegate Mohammedanism to Nazism is to equate Muhammad with Hitler. That is fine, because it is an apt comparison, but I don't think it will be something that will make the attractiveness of a global Caliphate and the supremacy of Islam go away.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Brant,

When I say eradicate, I'm aware that nobody can do that 100% without going into the heads of 100% of humanity and mucking around. Hell, there are still people on earth who worship Zeus, so Zeus-worship has not been eradicated 100%.

I mean something along the lines of relegating radical Islamism to the status of Nazism. A few people will still be attracted to it, but as a force shaping world events, it can essentially be eradicated.

One thing will not work--telling a billion plus people they all practice an inherently evil code and compare that against something like Christianity and call that good (or insinuate it).

On the deepest human level possible, character is chosen, not brainwashed into people. People are influenced by their cultures and philosophies, but ultimately they choose to be bullies or good guys. And they do that whether they are Muslims, Christians, atheists, Zeus-worshipers, Objectivists, whatever.

Collectivists are inherently bullies.

Michael

I didn't realize how much we agree. I thought you were going all mushy or impractical. The only virtue of Naziism is how it focuses the moral mind with a clear call to action.

--Brant

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It wasn't his switch. It was yours. You are unfair to Mr. Maher in your switch, and you misrepresent him.

Actually I don't.

I throw the light on Maher's bigotry just like I throw light on yours.

And I don't let you guys wiggle out of it using double-speak and CYA lies.

As for the rest of what you say, like I said, I grew up listening to this kind of crap about blacks. It never changes and it never gets any better. The intent is always bigotry in the end.

Blah blah blah...

Michael

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The saddest aspect of this show is that we consistently lose arguments to these three (3) clowns in the public forums:

1) Cornell "notice my sweater which tells you I am an intellectual and a 'professor'" West;

2) Bill Maher; and

3) John Avlon[not sure about this guy, Guliani staffer, "moderate" centrist].

A...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Adam,

I think Maher's bigotry is a little more subtle than just anti-Islam.

He is an anti-religion bigot, not just an ideological opponent. He's on a crusade. (The ironic thing is bigots are actually religious people underneath with their own belief systems.)

If Maher can get an anti-Islam crusade agenda accepted by his audience and get it to grow, he can use that as leverage for the rest of religions. The thing is to draw first blood (especially since he constantly fizzles--see his documentary, Religulous, for example) and Islam looks like a good target from where he sits because of the vileness of the Islamist radicals.

The ultimate idea behind bigots is not to encourage reason and bring up everyone to the light of day. It is to mock and destroy a target group of humans. (And tsk tsk tsk about "collateral damage" from collectivist actions, but secretly rejoice in it. Sometimes not so secretly.)

I wish I could reason with bigots and God knows I have tried for years. But they have abandoned reason far too early in life. An us-against-them core story of hatred runs where their reason should reside.

Nowadays, I just expose them when I feel like it and dismiss them.

Michael

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nowadays, I just expose them when I feel like it and dismiss them.

Michael

Michael:

Workable plan and you execute it well.

I am more prone to argue just because I enjoy argument and do not take it personally.

However, I prefer ridicule and humor because I also enjoy that.

Between the two of us we can pick off a few here and there.

I enjoy your work.

A...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Without me you guys are hopeless and helpless.

--Brant

Good point.

When are you joining?

A...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

After the Eagles - Arizona game.

--Brant

go Eagles!

Damn good game. Now that was a great move and a great throw! Arizona 24 Eaglets 20

So you do not root root root for the home team ...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I root for Nick Foles who used to QB for the University of AZ. That's my only interest in the NFL. No interest in baseball since some stupid strike. No interest in the NBA. A little interest in UA football and basketball.

--Brant

I don't understand why anyone goes watch sports live--boring

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now