Teaching Science Badly – and Well

darwin`s god and why i believe in flying monkeys

Re: # 191

tehsin, you cheap jew ..........

............ if you weren`t so friggin cheap and would shell out the few bucks for the ny times instead of stealing the local greenwich rag from your corner coffee shop that still sells coffee for 25 cents, you would have read the 15 page article in yesterday`s paper that explains your stupid excuse for believing in god in a much more reasonable manner ............ ``darwins god`` talks in detail about scott atran`s views that belief in god is an evolutionary trait that one finds in four year old`s and mentally handicapped people .......... it is a pretty good article and i plan to finish reading it on my next trip to the bathroom ..........but since you don`t subscribe to the paper you are stuck with your silly superstition without any hope of redemption ...... anyway, here is an excerpt .......... maybe it will convince you to read something other than wikipedia ...........

``So trying to explain the adaptiveness of religion means looking for how it might have helped early humans survive and reproduce. As some adaptationists see it, this could have worked on two levels, individual and group. Religion made people feel better, less tormented by thoughts about death, more focused on the future, more willing to take care of themselves. As William James put it, religion filled people with “a new zest which adds itself like a gift to life . . . an assurance of safety and a temper of peace and, in relation to others, a preponderance of loving affections.”

Such sentiments, some adaptationists say, made the faithful better at finding and storing food, for instance, and helped them attract better mates because of their reputations for morality, obedience and sober living. The advantage might have worked at the group level too, with religious groups outlasting others because they were more cohesive, more likely to contain individuals willing to make sacrifices for the group and more adept at sharing resources and preparing for warfare.``

Re: Tahmed32

Folks, since Tahmed32 has chosen to not respond to #177, I would say that in addition to being disingenuous, he is a HYPOCRITE. Although he talks up his `character` and `being honest` (#151), he does not demonstrate any of these traits by continuing to duck serious questions that cast aspersions on his character.

It is due to these `educated` deluded individuals like Tahmed32 that Pakistan is in such a mess today.

TehsinAbbasi: and follow-up question: Is someone who needs the ``Prod`` to go in the right direction any more Moral than a cow that needs a ``Prod`` to go in the right direction?

Thank in advance for any light you may wish to shed on this question.

TehsinAbbasi: You say you need the ``One`` to ``Prod`` you to follow the ``Moral Compass``. From the rest of your post, the implication is that anyone who does not get this ``Prod`` is Immoral. What makes you so sure that everyone needs the ``Prod`` (in other words, visions of the Eternal Carrot and Stick) in order to be Moral?

#188 by Raw_Dust

MY GOD!!!

Another interlocutor! You almost blindsided me, I didn’t expect such a violent reaction from the left. But let me regroup, and put myself together for your onslaught.

First of all the delusion that I am suffering from is shared by nearly 85% of the people of this planet, and they have suffered it for a few millenniums. As a matter of fact there has yet to be a society on this earth which has survived without God. Communism and socialism which tried to create a society without IT, could not survive a generation. So your kind, which has to be lumped together with agnostics, humanists and other theists, is a tiny minority which is new, has not been tested through time and stands on very thin logic and what you call rationalization.

Now let me address this question in a manner that you were hoping that I would– through rationality. you are absolutely right that I am a rational being. But rationality is just one component of me and it is really not the component which rules me. I am ruled by the other side of me which you can call my true self, this is where my likes and dislikes are. I make my decisions based upon my likes and dislikes (emotionally) and then try to justify them rationally. So where as you may have killed your emotional self and made the determination that your life is nothing more then unending calculations. I have not made any such sacrifice – I embrace my humanity, my love, my passions …. all the things that make life worth living.

So deep within my being I feel the presence of this Goodness. The One who gently prods me to do the right thing. Who is my Moral Compass. Who wants me to stay on the straight and narrow (sirat e mustaqeem). Can I justify it rationally? I think I have. But feel free to rebut and ridicule.

#184 by SR

[Unto each his own. ]

To each his own, eh? No right and wrong, no fact and fiction?

Believe what you want?

You are an educated person. I sometimes wonder, how, confronted by all this, you can still believe what you want to believe. How do you do it?

Maggots and Momins:
It is entirely possible that resident whackjob mr. zeemax have heard theories of how Momins` (the practising muslims) deadbodies remain preserved in their graves until they are called upon by Allah on judgement day. Like, a ``famous`` instance in history when one egyptian or north african warlord Noor ud Din Zangi came over to medina to preserve the sanctity of Mohammad`s cadaver as ``jews`` were supposedly digging a tunnel under medina mosque to take away Mohammad`s body. According to the ``historical`` account, Zangi successfully thwarted that gruesome plot and himself went inside that tunnel that had reached to the grave of Mohammad. Implication being Mohammad`s body lay preserved to this day inside his grave in Medinah as would any Momin`s when he dies.

``This is where it becomes crucial to believe in a benevolent, beneficent and compassionate God, who understands our frailties and forgives our trespasses.``

This is horseshit. A ``GOD`` experience or whatever you have is an entirely personal thing like person suffering from delusions cannot ``communicate`` others the exact nature of his delusions.

Your condition of what is crucial or not is ENTIRELY self-serving, therefore, it CANNOT be communicated let alone be understood by others. Unless, you come out and say that what you are talking about with these three letters G.O.D can be verified or rationalized which will make your assertion open to rebuttal and ridicule.

mr. abbasi & mr. ahmed, quite an interesting discussion here eventho it`s removed from science. Danke

Zeemax #185,

``SR, Jihad is qualified by `when warranted``` - As SR indicated, do I get to decide my
own little Jihad as and when I please, buttressed with some sort of an argument ?

``But still what remains doesn`t really constitute a force motivating and powerful enough
to incite high emotions in anyone over and above, seemingly, their own personal
interests``

I, and surely many others in this forum, are well aware of several chemicals (and
certain indoctrination systems) that could induce a similar state of mind. And your claim
is that THIS is what sets Islam apart from others ?

#184 by SR

SR, Jihad is qualified by `when warranted`. It is not an unending process. It has a beginning and an end and then one can be as moderate as one wants (i.e. the 3%).

Re: # 181 zeemax {``...What really sets apart Islam ...is ... Jihad, ... the `sixth` pillar.
...when you `include` Jihad, the combination becomes extremely potent. ... `true` Muslims are only the Jihadis. Either you`re a Jihadi, or you`re not a Muslim at all ...``}

Hummm... quite a strong opinion... somewhat `extreme` in it`s content.

Since there is no officially sanctioned clergy in Islam that intercededs (between the individual and his deity) or even interprets the doctrine, it is entirely legitimate for each individual to have his personalized, custom-built version. This `democratisation` of religion is one of the appeals of Islam.

Following are two other views on Jihad.

The first one (CLICK THIS) is from a pro-Islam, some would say ``apologist,`` source.

The second one (CLICK HERE) is very anti-Islamic and it is presented in the form of an interview of Bill Wagner. Wagner claims that 97% of Jihad is the violent kind and 3% is the peaceful inner-struggle kind.

Unto each his own.

...SR

#182 by tahmed32

Actually I found Humsab`s comment interesting about my being a `born again Muslim`. I don`t think that I am. It was only after 9/11 that I delved into Islam to see what all the fuss was about, and what I found was amazing. I still do not follow any rituals, but I do believe there`s something very profound to it all. Quite intriguing.

I will again quote a previous post from the same board:

#316 by zeemax on March 29, 2006

Dost_Mittar Saheb says in #205 that `` ...there is no political islam in any of those pillars.``

Sure there is no politics in the 5 pillars, but the `sixth` pillar i.e. Jihad is all about politics.

Was it Somerset Maugham who had said ``Money is like a sixth sense, without which you cannot make much of the other five? It`s just like that. In fact, 99% of Muslims get by easily with just 4 out of 5 i.e. Namaz, Roza, Zakat and Hajj. It is the sixth pillar of Jihad that creates problems, isn`t it?

It is because without the `sixth` pillar, the first pillar of `Tauheed` i.e. oneness of/with God is un-attainable. Never mind the rituals. These are good for nothing. Remember that ONLY `shaheeds` get the first birth in Heaven at the `same` level as none other than prophets, while mere mortal Muslims will be first given a brief sojourn in hell doing chain dragging and pus sipping duties before being granted a third-class seat on heaven express heading to eternity.

Highlighted above is the literal word. Do you believe it literally ? Many do, but I don`t. It is whatever level of understanding it takes to make a point, and that point is Tauheed.

:~)

zeemax: you write Either you`re a Jihadi, or you`re not a Muslim at all in its true letter and spirit.

How long have you had this feeling? Is it accompanied by a sore throat? Any signs of dizziness or swelling around the ankles?

:-)

... contd ... #179

You may also find this earlier post interesting as for your ``This is where it becomes crucial to believe in a benevolent, beneficent and compassionate God.

171 by zeemax on March 28, 2006: Apostasy and Islam

Well. Let`s see what part you can take out as not being relevant any more. Of the 5 pillars of Islam, the first one i.e. declaration of `Tauheed` is Spiritual. Of the remaining four, three are rituals (Namz, Roza, Hajj), while one (Zakaat) is Social. Similarly, in the edicts of day-to-day behavioural life, the virtues to be cherished e.g. cleanliness, generosity, kindness, mercy etc. are all universal values and unremarkable.

Now, what combination of the above with the exclusion of which would you prefer? You can`t take out Tauheed as well as the spiritual &/or the universal social values because it would be silly to do so, and that`s the stuff of Sufis and the mild sects such as Ismailis/khojas etc. You can discard the rituals and keep the others I guess. But still what remains doesn`t really constitute a force motivating and powerful enough to incite high emotions in anyone over and above, seemingly, their own personal interests.

What really sets apart Islam from anything else is that `other` factor i.e. Jihad, which many term as the `sixth` pillar.

Now, If you take `Jihad` out of the Islamic equation, the balance becomes quite ordinary and nothing appealing, but merely a combination of universally accepted spiritual / humanistic values plus some rituals i.e. rather sterile and certainly nothing to transform an entire mindset. However, when you `include` Jihad, the combination becomes extremely potent.

That`s why I maintain that the `true` Muslims are only the Jihadis. Either you`re a Jihadi, or you`re not a Muslim at all in its true letter and spirit.

Rgds