First of all, those aren't facts, they are claims. And if you want anyone to take your post seriously here, you need to back up your claims with arguments (why do you think your claim is true) and sources (what's the evidence). Wouldn't hurt to define all classifying/qualifying terms, either. This holds true for DavidB, too, though it seems his motivation was not to contribute to the discussion but rather to stick very closely to the thread title, which is admittedly quite unspecific.Miranox said:
-
Welcome to League Of Reason Forums! Please read the rules before posting.
If you are willing and able please consider making a donation to help with site overheads.
Donations can be made via here
What do you think about Islam?
- Thread starter Proteus
- Start date
"As another lecturer pointed out, they were originally Indian numerals." Aww. Too bad. :geek:Gunboat Diplomat said:
...but anyway, none of that is evidence for his claims that "the Islamic nations (which) were the most civilized and educated in the world" (because that is a comparative claim, a vague one at that), that "it was thanks to them they were able to rediscover the knowledge of the Greeks" (which he has not clarified either) or that "their religion hasn't changed much" (ignoring for a second how "a religion" can stay the same while "its interpretation and use" change).
Miranox
New Member
Case said:
No, they are well known facts to all historians but I guess they don't teach these things in schools anymore, especially since 9/11. Here's what wikipedia has to say about it http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamic_Golden_Age.
Miss TacoNinja
New Member
The same as I think of all religion: STUPID, MINDLESS, BOLLOCKS.
Except with added violence and hatred.
Except with added violence and hatred.
I don't really give two shits about any religion, but one thing I have to say about islam is that they are really into the whole "doing the mail man" thing. I thought that muhammed was supposed to be the messanger of allah, but it seems he gets more hand jobs and ass kissing than the guy that was sending the message to begin with. I have never heard one thing about "offending" Allah or seen any muslims going batshit in the defense of allah himself. I only see them get butt hurt when Allah's fucking mailman is insulted.
monitoradiation
New Member
Miranox said:
How about you make a point before you demand us read wikipedia?
Are you coming from a position where people in the 9th century who happened to be muslims developed mathematics, and therefore we should think highly of their religion?
butterbattle
New Member
monitoradiation said:
I do not think that is what he's saying.
HIs first post was a response to the statement that there is no moderate or radical Islam, only Islam. He responded to this by citing that at one time, the Islamic civilizations in the Middle East were among the most forward thinking and enlightened on Earth. That is a fact. During this period, people in those Islamic nations made many valuable contributions to science, art, economics, etc.
I do not see any place where he implied that those Islamic nations made such contributions because they were Muslims. I think the point was that there IS a moderate Islam and a radical Islam, even if the difference is one of degree and even if Islam today is more radical overall than most other religions. The point was that how radical the religion is is largely if not mostly due to societies, culture, and, in general, how people interpret and think about the religion.
I personally consider Islam to currently be the most dangerous religion on the planet, but I don't think Islam is "inherently" more "evil" than any other religion, if that even makes any sense nor is it just due to the Koran and the main tenets of Islam. Again, it is largely due to people. it is people that interpret the religion and people that do the evil.
Considering all the insane crap in the Bible, I do not think we can really say it is better than the Koran in terms of morality or science. So, I can definitely imagine a world where Christians were much crazier than Muslims.
monitoradiation
New Member
butterbattle said:
(emphasis mine)
Neither do I, and I apologize if my post made it sound like I'm saying that. I don't doubt that there are "moderate" and "fundamentalist" interpretations of islam, I don't even need to read wikipedia to know that there are.
My question about his position wasn't very related to his post - it was more of a sidenote regarding his position than anything, since he wasn't very specific about it.
I was wondering is the converse is true, that he's stating that BECAUSE there are important scientific breakthroughs made in the 7th century Middle East that provides any credibility to islam. I'm certainly not saying it is THANKS to islam that their discoveries are made.
Miranox
New Member
I responded to someone who seems to think Islam is inherently evil and always has been. This kind of thinking leads to discrimination and hatred so I try to stop it at the source. I also have a negative opinion of Islam, but I won't make any broad statements since I know little about the religion itself. Uninformed opinions are useless.
Big contradiction with your earlier aspirations.Miranox said:
You still didn't back up any of your claims. Let me make it easier for you to understand:Miranox said:
1) Define what you meant by "Islamic nations", at what point in time
2) define "civilized" and "educated"
3) show that at that time, those "Islamic nations" were "the most civilized" and "educated" according to your definitions; :idea: note: you need to compare them with others here
4) elaborate on the rediscovery claim, define "knowledge of the Greeks" and say when (if possible where and why) it was lost
5) show that those "Islamic nations" were responsible for the 'rediscovery' of that knowledge
6) define "their religion"
7) show that it "hasn't changed much"
8) explain how a religion can "not change much" while its "interpretation and use" change
And no, "Here's what Wikipedia has to say" is not a valid argument.
I know he hasn't backed up his claims yet. I made no statement about whether or not any claim was correct, mostly because I cannot judge, as it's unclear what he's referring to. Do you expect me to go and look for when during those 1400 years Islam's been around any of those vague statements could possibly fit my interpretation of what he meant and when they would hold true? If so, I will have to disappoint you. He needs to show why he made those claims. And if "there's a couple of books on a site I linked which I'm pretty sure back up my claim" is all he's got, he's got nothing.
Miranox
New Member
Case said:
1) Normally you'd assume it refers to countries where most people are Muslims, no?
2) Is the dictionary definition insufficient? Are you also going to ask me which dictionary?
3) It is merely an opinion. You need to learn the facts and form your own opinion. However, even if I did your research for you and gave you all the links, you wouldn't read them anyway so this is a lost cause.
4, 5) Wikipedia alone has plenty of info on these topics. If you want more details, do the research yourself.
6, 7, 8) It sounds like you want to start a game of semantics.
If you actually cared about any of these topics, you would have at least read the Wikipedia article and its sources.
Case said:
Why do I need to back up facts? This is simply a case of you being too lazy to read. In the first sentence of the Wikipedia article it says the "Islamic golden age" is considered to be from the 8th to the 13th century. I simply stated a few facts I vaguely remember from history class or that I read about. If you think that you not reading makes the facts nonexistent, then sure, I have nothing to back me up. When you're trying to troll someone, try to make it a little less obvious.