Killing Darwin

If religion were just a private club for loonies and the misguided and those being taken advantage of, carrying on its practices behind closed doors with its incense and its candles and its dressing up and its peculiar rituals and its collections, that would be okay, more or less.

But it isn`t just a private club. It has taken custody of ``good``. Religion claims the right to determine what is good, and what is bad/evil, and it appropriates unto itself the right to tell the rest of us what to think and how to think on various subjects, and what `being bad` is.

We are put in this club or that (Muslim, Christian, Protestant, Church of the Yellow Rabbit) before we can think for ourselves. There, often, we tend to stay, even once we can think for ourselves. The music may be rather nice. The social gatherings may be rather nice. What being religious (and therefore righteous?) says about us may be rather nice. Too nice to leave, whatever we believe.

If religion can`t say, hand on heart, ``this is definitely what a god thinks, he told us so``, then they should shut up and stop making it up.

The problem with debates on religion is that they turn into an ``us-versus-them`` affair with all secularists branded as unreconstructed atheists and enemies of the faith, and all believers as irrational and fanatical.

Will the world ever manage to get rid of religion? Probably not. We are stuck with it.
I am always shocked when those who consider themselves to be `intelligent` (I am thinking of Bush and Blair, among others) continue to believe that their lives are controlled by a man who lives in the sky.

If an alien landed from another planet and was told `I have never seen God, I just know he`s there, and he can see what everyone is doing at the same time, and I go into a building and sing songs to Him..` they would faint with incredulity.

Not to mention `when I am dead, I will carry on living, if I behave myself now`...

Unfortunately people who believe this sort of stuff have the ear and maybe heart (if not brain) of the world`s only remaining super-power. Christianity doesn`t have the monopoly on religious bigots. Religion and its obsession with genitalia may be mildly amusing at first glance....but sadly I don`t think it`s harmless and I don`t think it`s going away.

nadeem, once again a great article. If I come to Pakistan, I would like to smoke a big fat bowl of ganja with you man. You seem like one of the chillest pakistanis.

btw -- Pracha sahib Darwinism and Communism are not synonymous -- one is for the survival of the fittest -- the other is for the survival of the unfittest.....quite a difference don`t you think?

sick and tired of the bhajans and artees before the incredulously frowning Ganesh -- and the bejwelled putteeburtaa Indian naarees crying their hearts out at the drop the hat in the dismal soap operas on the Zee TV with eye-hurting ear splitting sound effects -- I got for a short while a couple of Pakistani channels and Geo TV for a change of taste in desi entertainment.

oh my God what a dreadful mistake -- the curse that has befallen Pakistan TV is the not only Islam but the Alzeimer`s Islam -- today they learn all day and night about Islam and the exposition of its finer points for the trillionth time -- tomorrow morning they forget everything -- have to restart studying Islam anew for the zillionth time.

even though they are born with Azaan in their ears -- they grow up in madarassas and they die in madarassas -- studying Islam over and over again -- every weekend -- and every day five times -- and still they don’t feel they remember anything -- they have to bring it on Pakistan TV as well -- all day all night!

now where do you think Pracha sahib is the time -- and where is the space -- for Darwinism or for Evolution in the Islam-forgetting minds and hearts of our Pakistani almomineens -- as Zafar would say: ``etnee jagah kahaN hai dil-e dagh daar meiN``...

and contrary to the Bhajans .....they don’t even sing good – so I had to get rid of the channels fast rather reluctantly....with apology to my Pakistani brethren......:)

Paracha sahib, it is sad to see both the commies and the fundoos share the same vision when it comes to economy. Both of them want the big-Moma government. The same big-Moma that can feed her milk to little fundoos and little commies.

Yes the communists of Russia are dead. Does that mean all those card-carrying communist Pakistanis are dead too? Heck no! These neo-commies are different. They now carry little chavez or little-Nejat idols in their hearts.

In the end our Des is full of fundoos and commies, may be the only losers are those Darwinists.

The local Communist Party leader claims the Islamists have been courteous to the commies as their goals have become one - the defeat of American capitalist pigs. Unlike say fifteen or so years ago when the Islamist fuks and were lap dogs of the American capitalist pigs sent out to do the dirty work.

Re: # 3

Hasan,

Ur post reminded me of some hypocritical believers in Gujarat. Once I was travelling by an early morning train to Baroda from Ahmedabad. Somewhere after Nadiad I was disturbed by bhajan dickheads in train. They are daily commuters. They are singing: .....kashta kaapo....sanmati aapo... (in Gujarati it means Oh Devi/demolish all my problems/give me good mind).

The guy who`s leading the song himself occupied two-persons sitting area. There were old women standing but this dickhead was singing....sanmati aapo (give me wisdom/good mind). How hypocritical?

This hypocricy continues everyday coz they are daily commuters.

hey mr nadeem you think darwin`s theory throws the baby of religion away,you are right but with the bath water.such oversimplified philosophical thinking can only be grabed by those who are activist practicaly but lazy intellectualy.the matter is not as simple as this.compatability or incompatability of religion and darwinism is an irrelevent question.the real is mind-body relationship which is as controversial a philosophical issue as any.the question of physical devolopment of humans is irrelevent at least Quran doesnt speak about the creation of adam anywhere.whenever it says anything about adam ,it refers to human beings not adam as an individual.no where does the Quran says that statue was made of adam.that`s why the word `eve`is not their in the Quran.the Quran speaks about adam as a symbol for `human mind`and it relation with the ultimate mind.its a symbolic represntation of theory of knowledge or the epistemology of the Quran.regardless of what the ultimate scientific fate of this darwanian theory ,we have to face a very serious paradox even if we accept it.that is the problem of `reduction`which is perhaps the most important philosophical issue in the 20th century philosophical movements.if we accept this theory we will have to reduce all mental acts to biological causes and physiological factors.it would necessarilly be `ontological reduction`not `theoretical[in the philosophical sense of the term]thus we will have to reduce the numbers of all ontological primitives.it is an extremly dangerous situation .it would destroy the whole structure of mathematics and its `a priori `[in the philosophical sense]nature.even the whole structure of language becomes meaningless.it would eleminate the independent `self` or `i`as a constatnt factor which will further destroy the entire structure of epistemology including empiricism which is the base of scientific methods.and last but not the least its[darwanism]own creditability becomes questionable.if there is no constant `self`or mind and bilology is the ultimate destiny than it itself is the product of biological causes which has[in the case of ontological reduction]no constant tool to judge its creditability.this is not to say that biologist is wrong but the point is that even if we accept its thesis these are the paradoxes that we have to face.these are the ultimate problems of philosophy.they dont stem from the pessimistic atittude of philosophers.nor do they raise these issue because they are having constipation and out of sheer frustration they start talking nonsense.they highly philosophical and technical issues.no domain of knowledge can be reduced to other nor can one domain provide the ultimate tool to judge other domains.knowledge is a contineous and probable process based on conjecture and refutation.if one can come out of the delusion of granduer and imperialist consiparicy theories he will find that philosophers[who can never accept marxism which has such a philosophical basis and grave philosophical shortcomings]are not doing `jhak`.theory of evolution[on which marxism is based]itself not compatiable with a very important features of marx i.e sociology of knowledge.they rather contradict each other[plz dont tell me there is dialectical relation between both these contradictories ,i wont be able to restraint my laghter and its effect ejaculation.there is a problem with philosophy every body considers himself a philosopoher and logician.if a person is not doctor he will never he is a doctor but every body considers himself a great philosopher.he understand philosophy untill he is asked.

Re: # 7

so here we go again -- the answer is not in Marxism nor in Darwinism -- it is in the Holy Quran.....!

Philospher, it will be helpful to your interested readers if your `train of thought` takes an occasional station-stop and change of line
:)

You`re absolutely right about the `constant` self/mind and the reduction principle.
This same idea was known to the ancients.

The hindu texts for example, say the first thing that gets created is `aham-kar` (What a beautiful word!). The sound of `Me`. Me-ness. Self-awareness - the very essence of life, intelligence.

Aham-kar creates the mind and everything else. Those ancient dudes did think deep.

---

Does darwinism contradict religion?

Off course darwinism does contrdict the medieval religions (Islam, Christianity), which say God made everything in a flash (ok, 7 days).
And God being God, there can be no possibility of `improvement` on His creation.

The Hindu texts are a little more elaborate. Here`s from the SuryaSiddhnta:
``One hundred times four hundred and seventy four divine years passed while the all-wise was employed in creating the animate and inanimate creation, plants, stars, gods, demons and the rest``

1 divine year (year of the gods) = 360 human years.

So Brahma took about 17 million human years to create everything.
He certainly took his time!

In essense however, the Hindu belief is the same as Islam and Christianity.
Humans, animals, plants, etc were `created`, not evolved.
And this Darwinism appears to contradict.

Re: # 8

dont draw conclusion out of sheer stupidity.i have never said that all answers are in the Quran.just read my intreracts again[though its not well organised]i m saying that no domian of knowledge can be reduced to other domains.every domian has its certain methodologies.mixing them with each other is doing violence to them.i have said that whatever is mentioned in the Quran dealing transcendental universe of discourse its verses are symbolic not literal.this distinction has been made by the Quran itself.the distinction b/w mutshabihaat[metaphorical or symbolicl]and muhakmaat[categorical].language and all religious assertions dealing with transcendental univesrse of discourse are allegorical.they are not factual statements in the strict sense,they are existential truths.there significance is phenomenonlogical not formal[in the philosophical sense].Quran is not concerned with any lifeless formal consistency or for that matter factual[epistemologicaly].i have not said anything in that #7 reply that is based on Quran or tried to reject anything coz Quran doesnt agree with it,i have just pointed out some of the philosophical problems which stem from the theory of evolution.read it again but read any introductry book on philosophy so that u may be able to `misunderstand`#7 in its right perspective n can be able to comprehend the complexity of the matter.

Re: # 3 Nasah

Hasan saheb, don`t you get Star One on your cable/DTH? You can watch the The Comedy Show Ha Ha Ha (the best) and The Great Indian Laughter Challenge (second best) for a change. Why watch those stupid saas-bahu serials?

NFP
How come that obnoxious lady was ``so Darwanian`` when all she wanted to do was dump you and break her fast? :)
Another great piece of satire, though. Reminded me of that Sissy Facists article you did a few months ago.

``dont draw conclusion out of sheer stupidity``(Philosopher sahib)

then why bring Holy Quran into the sheer stupidity....:)

Re: # 1 ParthaAB

My understanding is that any religion is a set of ideas that challenges an older, rigidly established, regimented and retrograde set of ideas during its infancy, builds up a following of like-minded people and later it develops into a similarly rigid, regimented and retrograde system itself. In this respect communism is also as good or bad as any other religion, although it professes to be against religion as such.

Its also not correct to say that all believers are prudes and intolerant towards debate and doubts. It depends upon the environment one is brought up in (I don`t mean family background exactly). Those who branded their opponents ``enemy of the people`` at the drop of a hat were as closed-minded as the worst religious fanatic around.

Someone believing that his life is controlled by Gods in the skies shocks you, but how can you be sure that under more favorable circumstances, Communists wouldn`t have conferred the same status upon Marx or Lenin, say 200 years on?

NFP, it doesn`t really make sense.
i think so i agree with PHILOSOPHER here. he is right when he says that everyone think they know philosophy. In reality it is not as simple as that.

#15
NFP makes good sense. The question he is asking is simple: Why are these channels showing progs attacking Marxism and Darwinism in a day and age and country where Marxism is no more a threat to Islam (if it ever was). The second question he asks is pretty senseable too: Are these channels telling young people to dump secular sciences in favour of Islamic creationist myths?