Total posts: 3,052
-->
@zedvictor4
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Deb-8-a-bull
Google says only in the southern hemisphere - in the north, horse birthday is Jan 1st.
I'm sorry for the vets - they must be run off their feet those days.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Yassine
When the news of 'blasphemy' came out, the preachers felt the need to talk about it in their Friday sermons as a matter of devotion, which escalated the situation way out of proportion.
If that is so, those preachers probably weren't saying how trivial it was. I think what was going on is that the religious conservtives were sending a clear signal to the government to not cosy up to the west and secularism because 'we own the streets'.
This isn't a spat between acaemics over a fine point of theology. This is a ideological clash between conservatism and progressiveness.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Yassine
countless other innocents suffer even more injustice every day, which you don't seem to care about.
You misunderstand the issue. I accept that by calling a teddy bear Mohammed Gibbons inadvertently committed an offence. I would say a small fine wouldn't be inapporiate. But what happened was thousands of people rioted in the streets and demanded her death! There is a complete loss of perspective here. I don't believe many Muslims - even devout ones - would react by rioting to something so trivial unless something else is going on. At least I hope you agree that it was trivial. If your ideal society is one where the tiniest infraction resuts in a public lynching then I can only wish you get to live in it.
I suspect that those mass protests were not spontaneous but engineered. But I don't know enough about the internal politics of Islam to know by who or why.
Indeed, that's just a fact, liberal Muslims have absolutely no qualification or scholarship whatsoever. None. Zero. I guarantee you they can't even express one correct sentence in Arabic. If you find a single liberal Muslim capable of speaking Arabic correctly, I'll personally send you 1000$ no questions asked (no cheating).
But why would they need Arabic, unless it was for poring over ancient tomes which you said was not the basis of Islamic practice and Sharia.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Stephen
Doesn't take much to shut you up causing you to state such silly and stupid things. I will take that as you have once more run out of argument.
I've only just got up, Stephen! I'm not always in the mood for heavy posting. This is your hobby-horse and my passtime.
What's the argument, anyway? Have I argued Islam is good? Have I argued that Islamism is nothing to worry about? Have I argued current government policy is effective? I've argued Islam is need of reform, but stressed that reform will be very difficult and things will probably get worse rather than better, at least in the short term.
I've pointed out to posters who compare Islam and Christianity that argument doesn't work. Considering how much we agree I wonder what bothers you so much.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Stephen
I think a Martian sociologist would say the left is in denial of the problem and the right exaggerates it!
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Mopac
He seems to have taken a sabbatical because I don't see much peace anywhere.
Created:
-->
@n8nrgmi
i can't prove it, but i suspect humans will never create consciousness
Female humans can create a consciousness in 9 months.
Brains are a collection of atoms, arranged in a particular structure. That would seem to imply an artificial brain is at least a theoretical possibility.
The 'Blue Brain' project has the aim "to build accurate, biologically detailed, digital reconstructions and simulations of the rodent brain and, ultimately the human brain."
It's not clear if you "suspect humans will never create consciousness" because brains are too complicated or because there is somthing beyond 'structured ordinary matter' involved - ie there is some 'ingredient X' that human brain possess which is beyond matter and structure.
If it's the former then Blue Brain might become conscious (making it as complex as a real brain is hard but not impossible). But if it's the latter then presumably Blue Brain must fail.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Mopac
Don't worry about it.
I am - at least temporarily - pessimistic about the prospects for peace.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@3RU7AL
I hope that what I want at the end is that it isn't the end. I hope I never desire death.
There is a great Dylan Thomas poem I must quote:
Do not go gentle into that good night,
Old age should burn and rave at close of day;
Rage, rage against the dying of the light.
Though wise men at their end know dark is right,
Because their words had forked no lightning they
Do not go gentle into that good night.
Good men, the last wave by, crying how bright
Their frail deeds might have danced in a green bay,
Rage, rage against the dying of the light.
Wild men who caught and sang the sun in flight,
And learn, too late, they grieved it on its way,
Do not go gentle into that good night.
Grave men, near death, who see with blinding sight
Blind eyes could blaze like meteors and be gay,
Rage, rage against the dying of the light.
And you, my father, there on the sad height,
Curse, bless, me now with your fierce tears, I pray.
Do not go gentle into that good night.
Rage, rage against the dying of the light.
I want to go 'raging against the dying of the light'. I know death is inevitable and final - but I don't have to like it!
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Mopac
If there is good will then labels don't matter; if good will is absent everything becomes a problem.
It seems good will is in short supply all round.
Of course it's always the other side's fault...
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@3RU7AL
A mechanism of how we do act I can understand, but a mechanism of how we should act sounds odd to me...My primary aim is to expose the underlying mechanisms that inform "how we should act".
It appears that most of the identifiable "winners" of recorded history were primarily motivated by unadulterated self-interest (charismatic sociopaths).
What is a winner? Someone 'ordinary' who dies happy after a humdrum life might not go in the history books but is ending up hanged from a lamp-post like mussolini actually 'winning'? Who gets to say what anyone else must strive for?
“The mind is its own place, and in itself can make a heaven of hell, a hell of heaven..”
(John Milton, Paradise Lost).
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@3RU7AL
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@janesix
Deb is ok... he's like DA's very own court jester!
Deb mocks everthing and everyone but I've never noticed him being vicious or make personal remarks. He merely pricks at our pomposity with inanity.
Poor fool and knave, I have one part in my heart
That's sorry yet for thee.
King Lear, act3, scene2.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Stephen
Let's see where we are.
I hold that Muslims object to the terms 'moderate islam' and 'moderate muslim' because (from their pov) it implies that unless you are a fanatical terrorist you are not a 'Proper Muslim'. A muslim that a westerner would dub 'moderate' does not think of himself as a 'moderate muslim' or any other sort of Muslim, but simply as a Muslim.
As I recall the origin of this, you presented Erdogan's comment as corroboration of your view that all Muslims are fanatics because even Erdogan says 'moderate islam' does not exist; i.e there are no moderate muslims,ergo all muslims are fanatics.
As usual, things are more complicated and messy!
However, I do not dispute that the majority of British Muslims are not liberal and progressive.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@3RU7AL
It's unlikely we will find a Martian to test my theory of their impartiality. But finding an impartial human is not much easier.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Stephen
I think the only person I'd trust to be objective about this stuff is a Martian.I think you just may regret saying that, Keith?
Not unless Martians are all as biased as people! The Royal Society has a motto: 'Nullius in Verba', often loosely translated as 'take no-one's word for it'. I consider it excellent advice.
What people say and write is usually 'the truth', but it's not always or neccessarily the whole truth! At least I don't assume it to be. I assume everyone has a pov and I'm more likely to regret trusting what anyone says uncritically.
Created:
-->
@mustardness
OK, but what is the rule for something to be white?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@3RU7AL
Only authoritative opinions & rulings are acceptable in the religion.
That's bit of a 'well, duh', isn't it? No-one expect un-authoratative opinions to carry weight!
The problem is it doesn't stop people arguing about what is authorative! If you are of one school the writings for your position are authoratative and the ones against your position are heretical, and - of course - vice versa. Yassine says "Then you have the liberal Muslims who have zero scholarship & zero qualification" is that objective or one-sided partisan rhetoric?
If you want to know what Muslims think, try asking one. If you want to know what Scientologists think, try asking one.
I think the only person I'd trust to be objective about this stuff is a Martian.
Created:
-->
@zedvictor4
But what is the rule for something to be white?
If you are correct then it has to exclude polar bears and snow - I wish you luck putting it in to words!
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Deb-8-a-bull
Are soul
I think you are trying to make a joke out of our souls. That's wrong because I think our souls are very important. I think of mine often, but even more often I like to think of other people's, because - in a very real sense - our souls are what we are.
That's right - we are all our souls.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Stephen
I won't argue that some English law maybe did find its roots in biblical law such as the fkn obvious "thou shalt not kill".
I seriously doubt it was lawful to kill people in England before it was Christianised! A better example of bible-rooted laws are the anti-witchcraft statutes passed in Europeand America inspired by Ex 22:18, "Thou shalt not suffer a witch to live', which resulted in thousands of innocent people suffering horrible executions. Theocracy sucks, whatever the religion.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Yassine
As to your question, in Sharia -not that Pakistan or Sudan necessarily abide by it- being a subject of an Islamic state grants you inviolability in the 6 sacred necessities (Religion, Life, Reason, Progeny, Wealth & Honor), either by being Muslim (inviolability of faith) or Dhimmi (inviolability of protection). If a Christian murders a Muslim, they don't get away with it because 'Sharia doesn't apply to them'.
Gillian Gibbons and Asia Bibi were not murderers. What they actually did was not wicked or evil and a thousand things worse than that happen every day and nobody notices. Were there no rapes or murders on the day Gilliam named a stuffed toy 'Mohammed'? No-one was defraued or paid a bribe that day? But it was Gillians trivial case that caused a mob - estimated at 10,000 strong - to gather and bay for blood.
A lesson on the principle of inviolability and the difference between Hanafi and Hanbali jurisprudence doesn't explain why there were days of rioting over a village peasant's alleged passing remark. May be to explain that we need an insight into the 'realpolitics' of the Islamic world, not its theology.
Created:
-->
@janesix
I think today there are lots of irreplaceable organs, but my pure guess is that in 200 years almost every non-brain organ will be replaceable. Heart-lung transplants have been routine for ages.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Mopac
I gotta know- is it now-ss, nowz, noose, no-us, noo, nose, n-ous (as in henhouse)or what?
Created:
-->
@janesix
On a more mundane level, we are very used to prosthetics these days - artificial limbs and many organs are no big deal - except obviously for the brain.
Created:
-->
@janesix
Besides being the "I" or consiousness, the soul is also the vitality of a living being. No soul, no vitality, no living being. That is not to say a soul must inhabit a body.
I'd say that view was more popular 200 years ago than it is now! The very words 'anima' (soul) and 'animate' show how the link between soul and the differnce between animate (life)and inanimate(death) is linguistically ancient. But these days I'd say not many people think of life as a 'vital spark' animating dead matter. Most people now seem ok with the body being a mechanism, but not the mind.
Created:
-->
@Ramshutu
I think you could say the soul is not the immortal ghostly wotsit of certain religions, but is the 'I' in 'I think therefore I am'.
Of course that means 'soul' is very close to 'mind', and/or 'Self.' Whether I use 'soul' that way will depend on whether it annoys any theists- I am that petty.
Created:
-->
@n8nrgmi
how many atheists don't think humans are just robots?
I'd guess about 6.
More seriously, n8 might want to consider the flip-side which implies that one day there will be robots with all the properties of a human, incluing consciousness and free will (whatever that is!)
Which is harder, to imagine a human as a robot, or to imagine a robot as a human?
The sticking point is always 'can a robot be conscious?' i think atheism implies 'yes', and i think I'm fairly typical.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Yassine
The difference is, you impose your values on everybody regardless of their beliefs, while in Islam this extends only to the believers.
If so, something you must clear up is why thousands of Sudanese protested in the street for the execution of Gillian Gibbons for naming a teddy bear 'Mohammed' and why Asia Bibi - a Christian - was convicted of blasphemy in Pakistan.
Further, I do not dispute that there are 'non-extreme' interpretations of the verses trotted out to 'prove' Islam is violent. But it isn't just Islamophobes who prefer simple, violent interpretations is it? It seems that Muslims are increasingly influenced by the simple. literal interpreations and less by subtle, progressive interpretations. Can you comment on that?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Yassine
The church has never indiscriminately massacred pagans nor can the church condone this as it is against our ways.- Historical fantasy.
I am sure we are all enlightened by those two very detailed historical analyses.
Created:
-->
@Mopac
Atheists are 3% of the US population. I wouldn't let that keep you awake nights.We don't dislike communism and atheism for no good reason. The propaganda that soviets used sounds exactly like what atheists in America use as propaganda. If they gained the government, and they are certainly gunning for it, I have no doubt that they will persecute the church. They will paint us as evil and mentally ill. They will think they are doing humanity a service.
Let's be clear that the reason Stalin slaughtered church members was because he was an insane megalomniac. Stalin killed believers because he couldn't countance people who were were not loyal to him personally. As believers were loyal to their church or to God, Stalin killed them. In reality it had nothing to do with communism or atheism - they were just the excuses used to mask the real reason, which was Stalin's paranoid megalomania. Other Stalinesque monsters have adopted the guise of communism to gain power and behaved in the same way.
North Korea is not a communist country - except in name. It is an oligarchy in which the people are kept in serfdom to keep an elite in luxury. That is not the workers paradise Marx and Engels envisaged! Nor did Marx adocate or require persecution of religion. In his theory, religion would wither away because it's false promises would not be required. Stalinists use Marx's distaste for religion as an excuse to get rid of potential opposition.
The idea of an atheist government of the US is bizarre. But if it did happen I doubt religion would be oppressed. I think that churches might lose some of their privileges regarding taxation. I don't know any atheists who favour oppressing individual believers. Atheists think theists are making a mistake in elieving in god, but that isn't a capital offence! Just because some theist societies kill atheists doesn't mean the feeling is mutual!
Of course you, Mopac, will retain your weird notions about atheists. It matters nought, because there is nil chance of athesis taking power in the US inside a century, and by then no-one will notice because religion will be irrelevant. In the UK we don't know or care if our politicisns are believers or atheists, which is how it should be.
Created:
-->
@RoderickSpode
Created:
-->
@Deb-8-a-bull
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Mopac
I got my BSc 40 years ago. I was a technologist rather than a researcher, but I know one end of a test tube from the other.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@3RU7AL
You don't need faith in rational inquiry. The efficacy of rational inquiry is compelling evidence. We all know that rational inquiry is not 100% fool proof, but it is THE MOST RELIABLE METHOD OF GATHERING DATA. It certainly beats the pants off of "pure intuition" and "ancient writings".
You don't need faith to do rational inquiry, but it is faith in rational inquiry that makes us think it is worth doing. if we didn't believe rational inquiry would lead us to the answer we wouldn't do it. We'd scry chicken bones or consult sacred oracles instead. But we do have faith in rational inquiry so we use it. It has served us well!
Perhaps we do know rational inquiry might fail us one day, but no-one expects it to fail right now! If an experiment fails to verify a hypothesis scientists don't question the validity of rational inquiry - we have too much faith in it to do that! They'd check the experiment or change the hypothesis but they don't question the process of rational inquiry itself.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Mopac
For he hath given me certain knowledge of the things that are, namely, to know how the world was made, and the operation of the elements:The beginning, ending, and midst of the times: the alterations of the turning of the sun, and the change of seasons:The circuits of years, and the positions of stars:The natures of living creatures, and the furies of wild beasts: the violence of winds, and the reasonings of men: the diversities of plants and the virtues of roots:And all such things as are either secret or manifest, them I know.
Where is the science in that?? Knowledge was not sought by experiment and rational thought - it came as a gift from God: "he hath given me certain knowledge of the things that are". That is revelation - the very antithesis of science!
And no proper scientist would ever be so arrogant as to claim "And all such things as are either secret or manifest, them I know."
A proper scientist is more likely to say "I don't know", as Brian Cox does in this article
Perhaps you meant "We are sooooo anti-science." to be ironic - but it's not.
Created:
-->
@Deb-8-a-bull
Or when he hears it , he might know its the day the humans call Sunday.
It's pointless praying on sunday... it's his day off.
Created:
-->
@Mopac
@Deb-8-a-bull
I bet they're rockin' in the aisles at your services!
I wrote a choir piece once...https://musescore.com/user/134310/scores/5646661
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Ramshutu
you can’t make 1+1=2 just because you feel like it.I could meditate on that for hours, Sensei.
I have mediatated long and hard to plumb the depths of the message revealed by Sensei Ramshutu. Hard was the journey, for the untutored mind of a sparrow does not rise to the Eagle realm with ease. Sensei's lofty meaning was long hidden from my humble sight but, as a worm can dream of kingship and a spider can gain the forgiveness of the grass seed I, too, gained enlightenment.
It's a typo, right?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@3RU7AL
I agree that is a weak and uninteresting sense of the term.
Created:
-->
@Deb-8-a-bull
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@3RU7AL
I can think of two senses of 'having faith in science' and there may be more!
One sense is that 'scientific facts can be trusted', such as 'water boils at 100 degrees' and 'water is h2o'.
A different sense of 'faith in science' is believing that rational enquiry will continue to reveal truths and eliminate errors. A biologist woking on abiogenesis or cancer research might fail to crack a prolem, but will still have have faith that the problem will be cracked one day.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Ramshutu
I could meditate on that for hours, Sensei.you can’t make 1+1=2 just because you feel like it.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@3RU7AL
I'll never ask you 'Do you think it will rain?'.!
Do you think there is a significant (say >1%) chance of the super-duper time-travelling alien scenario is correct?
It doesn't matter now - I've forgotten what it was all about.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Mopac
As you are a theist, you aren't capable of understanding what is scientific.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@3RU7AL
...But if one has faith in science you don't think that will ever happen.This is a non-sequitur.
Perhaps, if you take it more literally than I intended.
Do you think that we will find a super-duper time travelling alien did it all? I'm not asking if that's possible (anything is possible)- i'm asking if you think we will find one.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Stephen
I really think you should listen to that radio program.
You probably think its a 'lefty-libtard' puff piece about how the 'Muslims are nice, really' but it isn't like that at all. It presents a pretty depressing picture of how the Muslim community in Britain is moving away rather than towards liberal and progressive attitudes.
Regarding 'pulling teeth', I don't know if that was the ideal phrase, but I don't draft and redraft my forum posts! What i mean is that Muslims are going to form a signficant (and growing) fraction of the British population or a long time to come. I think it is not realistic to expect them to abandon Islam completely - although I hope all religion will become a thing of the past one day! So the only course is to discourage adoption of extreme(*) Islam and encourage progessive(*) forms. That might or might not be 'pulling Islams teeth', but its what I meant.
(* or insert preferred terms here)
I think we do have to look very hard at what Muslims - especially young Muslims - are being taught at their mosques and at Islamic schools (such as the one next door but one to my house! I think it is crucial that tolerance doesn't become appeasement. But this is Britain, not a police state and in avoing appeasement we shouldn't swing too much so we become intolerant and oppressive (which would be counter-productive anyway).
Or we could do nothing and hope for the best.... but that isn't working.
Created: