Reece101

I assume you’re talking about decadents from a conservative Islamic lens. 

- Buddy, your culture is so far into the extremes of all Human History, the decadence is manifest through all lenses as the sun is in bright day. 

- Decadence corrupts people, both mentally & spiritually. On one hand, the stability & security which surrounds self-indulgence makes individuals desensitized from the harshness & realities of life, they lose their courage & sense of dignity. The strange things we see today are testament, all that nonsense about PC culture & "safe-spaces" & "triggers' & "mental" problems leading to even suicide for the dumbest of things. On another hand, the self-indulgence entails violation of all boundaries, i.e. hedonism. Individuals lose all self-discipline, hence all self-checks against immoral & oppressive actions.  On yet another, self-gratification leads to selfishness (individualism), therefore loss of social solidarity & cohesion. All that said, with the slightest instability the whole nation collapses into chaos.

Self-gratification, self-indulgence, immodesty are all vague concepts.  

- Don't play dumb with me, everybody knows EXACTLY what those mean. 

Would you consider them more internally detrimental to a civilisation rather than externally?

(Note: after reading your last paragraph I think I know where you stand for the most part.)

- What exactly do you mean by that?

For example public beheadings for witchcraft and other such things. In meany ways public executions are self-gratifying, self-indulgent, and immodest.

- & the earth is flat, & ice-cream is potato, & I'm the queen of England...

- Of course they wouldn't. The great civilized Western nations need to show these other uncivilized people some civility. You people are seriously becoming a joke to the world, not a very funny joke though. 

- Barbarism can also be very successful, though it's unsustainable. It's like criminal organizations, they rise fast & fall even faster. Hence, the West is stagnating, & falling..

- Part of the reason of their collapse is indeed some level of decadence, though majoritarily it's due to Spanish "civilizing" attempts, aka genocide & systematic deception.

- Which part of self-indulgent & self-gratification & degeneracy do you not understand?

Though you will probably think Allah gave them smallpox.

- Allah dominates all the worlds. 

Can you give me estimates after you properly define what you mean by decadence?

- Are you seriously asking, or are you playing dumb.

Okay so mainly due to war and conquest then. Does that make war and conquest justifiable on that count? Do you think it’s justifiable in the modern era? Wouldn’t you also consider the ones conducting said wars are partaking in self-gratification, self-indulgence, and immodesty? In other words, decadence. 

- What the hell are you even talking about?! Do you understand English?

It’s a star beside the target galaxy.

- As I just said: Decadence is a human condition that all civilizations inevitably reach after long periods of prosperity, yet it is their last stop. As Ibn Khaldun explains, Stability leads to saving, which drive consumption, which initiates demand for luxury, which drives innovation, which leads to prosperity, & then further luxury, resulting in indulgence, from there decadence, decadence induces corruption, & corruption leads to oppression, hence death.

- Self-gratification & self-indulgence. Civilizations start with barbaric lifestyles, & end in them too. For instance, immodesty has always been associated with crude uncivilized cultures, commoner/rural/nomadic/barbaric culture, while modesty is associated with the noble & civilized. Civilizations start in immodesty, then modesty, then succumb back to immodesty.

- Self-gratification & self-indulgence. Civilizations start with barbaric lifestyles, & end in them too. For instance, immodesty has always been associated with crude uncivilized cultures, commoner/rural/nomadic/barbaric culture, while modesty is associated with the noble & civilized. Civilizations start in immodesty, then modesty, then succumb back to immodesty.

- You mean, decadence kills nations? Absolutely. It's just math. 

- & those things were the sign that those societies have failed. The West today reached levels of decadence never heard of before, naturally, since they also reached levels of stability, prosperity & wealth never heard of before. Decadence happens at the height of prosperity, it doesn't give the impression that the end is near. On the contrary, the prosperity & success only warrants more of it because the people believe they must be doing something right, otherwise how come they are prosperous. But that doesn't last, for corrupt societies are failed societies. You're no different from Greeks, or Romans, or even the Arabs. In Andalusia, long periods of prosperity & stability made the Muslims of the country indulgent: music, parties, obsession with luxuries...etc, they couldn't hold up against their resolved enemies with it counted. 

- Ouch! You don't seem as optimistic about the future as the others. It is because of the decadence you mentioned in your other post?

Not quite like carbon dating or something, whereby one might say 10000 years, plus or minus a hundred years.

- How do you predict that will play out without the technological, economic, & fiscal advantage? – By 2050, China would've grown to at least twice the size of US economy (it already outputs 3 times its industry & 7 times its agricultural production), that also means at least twice the military budget of the US, while having the technological advantage. 

- Are you a civil war believer?

- I don't disagree about the process, but a 100 years is a very long time. Today's Nigeria's economy is larger than 100 years ago US economy. 

Wait 400 years.....Give or take 100.

One reads these threads.

And certain things just jump out at you.

Plus or minus 25%.......Is that a reasonable margin of error?

Pretty straightforward and logical.

Unlike nailing people to posts to die for my sins, type of stuff.

The  Wisdom of God v the wisdom of humanity. 

Hmmm, I know whose wisdom I prefer. 

- This is already ongoing. Where do you see the US in 2050 & in 2100?

- Why not 100 years or less? Africa's current average income is around $5k, which is about Europe's average post-WWII, & China's income 20 years ago. It will also have the largest & youngest population of any region or race by the end of the century.

Update in de-evolution, the US govt now gives free crack pipes to crack heads.

It baits you into clicking. After that, you are supposed to drop all biases and use logic

- What's 9 + 10 ?

- How come they let you go online in the asylum?

- Are you like... a crazy person?

- We don't know, if we knew we would've known. You can't know something today that you will only discover in the future. Indeed, understanding Creation, Life & the Universe, will never cease to deepen & widen.

- So what are you now?

- The building blocks of Life, like amino acids & lipids & proteins. Maybe it goes way beyond that, things which we have yet to discover.

- That's a square circle. How do are reconcile your atheism with negation of the evolutionary mythology?

- We don't have enough knowledge about the particles of Life to gain any insight into Life, any such attempt is plain conjecture. Similarly, ancient Greeks simply did not have enough knowledge about the particles of the Cosmos to gain any real understanding of it, hence they resorted to conjecture instead, i.e. Astrology.

- Dragons are actual myths. 

- There isn't one. Maybe in a few hundred years, if even.

- Why indeed. You should believe in Allah, not His myth. So you're still an atheist? Earlier you mentioned something about faith, where do you actually stand now?

- I'm confused. Do you or do you not subscribe to the myth that is evolutionation?

- Any reason why you believe this over the mythevolution? Do you believe in God?

- What replaced your belief in Evolution then?

- I was hoping you would tell me. I can't know what you believe!

- Any specific thing about it made you go, "na'ah, this is BS"?

- What are you now?

- LOL! Indeed, Allah designed all things.

- Interesting! I remember having a long conversation with you about that myth. What changed your mind about it?

- Any specifics?

- Same as everybody else, nobody knows. The evolutionationists pretend to know & act like astrologers & tell us about inexistent connections.

- I've been arguing with you lot about faith, mostly Islam, for a while now. I'm curious, have any of you changed your mind or revised your views about the religion or any topic regarding Islam after our exchanges. If so, what topic? Why? Or why not? 

- Also, what other faith related views have you discarded or adopted in general during your time on this Forum? & why? 

- What factors contribute most to your evolving opinions? Emotional? Intellectual? Popular?...

1.I don't like situations that are uncertain

2.I feel uncomfortable when I don't understand the reason why an event occurred in my life

3.When I am confused about an important issue, I feel very upset.

4.In most social conflicts, I can easily see which side is right and which is wrong.

5.I feel uncomfortable when someone's meaning or intention is unclear to me.’

6.I'd rather know bad news than stay in a state of uncertainty.

because our collective feelings about what is important is critical to determining actions.

Absolutely not. If you have defective brain chemistry and you have chemical impulses that lead to your extinction, what you feel isn't important at all.

“Importance” is a human concept that we attribute to things - so it’s based on our feelings (it has no meaning in nature - nature doesn’t care) as is your conclusion that we shouldn’t take any actions - so you’re using your feelings to argue our feelings don’t matter - which is odd, and it’s all completely separate and unrelated to whether something survives.

Regardless Jewish still isn’t a race (the focal point of the whole discussion) it’s an ethnicity and/or culture you fool.

, a xenophobic comment is saying I don’t like Americans, well contrary to many beliefs Americans are composed of many different races of people so your not saying anything pertaining to race just culture and lifestyle. 

Are you sure they’re races and not ethnicities? That was sarcasm by the way. Look at race holistically and you’ll see many positions aren’t mutually exclusive.

Nope that’s you buddy, asking me the same questions over and over again without bringing anything substantive to the discussion warranting it. I’ve refuted every argument you’ve made and all you’ve done is filibuster and contradict yourself. You shouldn’t expect anyone to honestly take you seriously, get over yourself your pathetic.

I agree that Goldberg doesn’t have a substantive point. She’s actually not adding any meaningful info to the discussion (“man’s inhumanity” well, duh!) while also subtracting info (what it ISN’T about).

However, the insightful, informative paragraph you quote first isn’t Tarik but FLRW.

If Venus had an atmosphere with the same heat emissivity as Earth, its average temperature would be about 70 Celsius. This follows pretty easily from the Stefan-Boltzmann law, since Venus gets about twice the solar energy, its temperature would be 2^0.25 times higher. Too hot for life.

Again, Whoopi was wrong. Race as a categorizing term referring to human beings was first used in the English language in the late 16th century. Until the 18th century it had a generalized meaning similar to other classifying terms such as type, sort, or kind. Occasional literature of Shakespeare’s time referred to a “race of saints” or “a race of bishops.” By the 18th century, race was widely used for sorting and ranking the peoples in the English colonies—Europeans who saw themselves as free people, Amerindians who had been conquered, and Africans who were being brought in as slave labour—and this usage continues today.

The peoples conquered and enslaved were physically different from western and northern Europeans, but such differences were not the sole cause for the construction of racial categories. The English had a long history of separating themselves from others and treating foreigners, such as the Irish, as alien “others.” By the 17th century their policies and practices in Ireland had led to an image of the Irish as “savages” who were incapable of being civilized. Proposals to conquer the Irish, take over their lands, and use them as forced labor failed largely because of Irish resistance. It was then that many Englishmen turned to the idea of colonizing the New World. Their attitudes toward the Irish set precedents for how they were to treat the New World Indians and, later, Africans

In this case, “race” is just a catch-all for ethnicity and group identity. The point is the same— Jews were hated, scapegoated, and genocided based upon group identity.

Except it’s not (Ms. Goldberg’s point all along) maybe YOU don’t have the knowledge to pontificate on this subject.

2. doesn’t it make perfect sense to say antisemitism falls under racism? 

No, because Jewish is a religion not a race, that’s like calling Antichrist people racist, the two are non sequiturs. Even if you wanted to argue from a Jewish bloodline perspective that doesn’t negate the fact that race is still a non sequitur, maybe that more falls under the lines of for lack of a better term xenophobia (don’t quote me on that one), it’s important to know the differences between race, ethnicity, and nationality.

You seriously consider what you claim as an argument?

Well that’s what a claim is, an argument

So gender roles, masculinity, femininity, and flamboyancy aren’t relevant terms? You think I just made those concepts up out of thin air? Dude read a book

No, but it’s promoted as such, kinda like how Hitler propagandized Jews as separate from whites, catch my drift yet? If not my point is has no bearing on race or sexuality only society puts those stereotypes in the weak minded peoples heads, don’t be a sucker and fall for it.

I don’t need to provide reason because I’m not arguing for either side but to dismiss these concepts as facts of life is just flat out ignorance.

Seriously? What’s transpired between now and then for you to revisit that question?

Seriously?

Not an argument.

It’s not an opinion it’s a fact, which I proved when I cited the two quotes.

Now it’s my turn to ask seriously (for the utmost time) because as far as I’m concerned your just going around in circles with nothing new to add to the discussion, so please lmk if/when you do.