Comments on: Islam: It’s the Intolerance That’s Scary

By: Daniel Miessler

Daniel Miessler — Mon, 30 Nov 2009 23:26:20 +0000

Agreed. We actually consider this a good time. :)

By: Daniel Miessler

Daniel Miessler — Mon, 30 Nov 2009 23:25:48 +0000

Hi Scooter, thanks for the support here, but Carl and I are friends and he is simply trying to help me make tighter arguments. It's all in good fun for us. :)

By: CarlM

CarlM — Mon, 30 Nov 2009 19:43:37 +0000

Scooter: I'm trying to help a friend frame his arguments better (even
when I disagree with him on things I want him to frame his arguments
in a more convincing manner). If I didn't respond with my
observations (positive or negative), there's no point in my reading
what he writes. It's a conversation. He knows there is no malice in
anything I say .. and it's directed only at his argument. Relax.

By: scooter

scooter — Mon, 30 Nov 2009 19:35:30 +0000

Yikes. Stop trying to teach/force the world your point of view, your argument for/against religion, your ability to debate and let the guy write about what he feels. Not everything in the world needs to be a debate. It's just a blog dude.

By: Daniel Miessler

Daniel Miessler — Mon, 30 Nov 2009 19:26:20 +0000

Agreed. We actually consider this a good time. :)

By: Daniel Miessler

Daniel Miessler — Mon, 30 Nov 2009 19:25:48 +0000

Hi Scooter, thanks for the support here, but Carl and I are friends and he is simply trying to help me make tighter arguments. It's all in good fun for us. :)

By: CarlM

CarlM — Mon, 30 Nov 2009 15:43:37 +0000

By: scooter

scooter — Mon, 30 Nov 2009 15:35:30 +0000

By: scooter

scooter — Mon, 30 Nov 2009 15:34:11 +0000

Yikes. Stop trying to teach/force the world your point of view, your argument for/against religion, your point of view, your ability to debate and let the guy write about what he feels. Not everything in the world needs to be a debate. It's just a blog dude.

By: CarlM

CarlM — Sun, 29 Nov 2009 03:03:43 +0000

Indeed.

By: Maxo

Maxo — Sat, 28 Nov 2009 21:58:38 +0000

I think the problem here is the very existence of a government taking a stand on what is fact and what is not fact, and then enforcing it in any official capacity. It is the free exchange of speech and ideas that discover truths, and if governments should take any stance, it should be the stance that we must encourage the freedom of speech and ideas to be opened up to the marketplace.
Governments should focus on ensuring that individuals have the opportunity to make good for themselves and their families without others maliciously trying to prevent their well being.

By: CarlM

CarlM — Sat, 28 Nov 2009 20:31:57 +0000

I don't know the emoticon for "throwing up ones hands in resignation that the other person refuses to stick to the point under discussion" but if I did, I'd use it here.

By: Daniel Miessler

Daniel Miessler — Sat, 28 Nov 2009 20:07:37 +0000

If religion isn't responsible for death, then neither are guns. The
only difference is that religion is a reason to kill, and guns are
merely a means.

By: CarlM

CarlM — Sat, 28 Nov 2009 18:13:44 +0000

No no no no no no no! That's not my point. I swear, Daniel, there is almost no point in debating with you on some topics. You don't seem to pay any attention to what I've written.

If you had stuck to your point that the intolerance is scary, I'd have been with you, because I agree with that point completely.

If you had wished to make the point that it is evil when people create repressive governments out of some fanatical devotion to their narrow interpretation of their particular branch or their particular religion, I'd have been with you, because I agree with that point completely.

I do not think that governments should be religion-based. There are repressive governments that claim that their repressive nature is required by their narrow interpretation of their religion. Not being able to read the minds of the founders of these governments (or their current leadership), I can't be sure that the repression really stems from their religious beliefs. Perhaps they prefer a repressive form of government for some other reason. (It doesn't really matter .. it's evil either way .. but history contains examples of governments that were repressive for reasons other than the ones they stated publicly.)

In any case, the reason I posted a reply was that you didn't stick to those things. Please read this carefully because you seemed to have missed my point thus far. I'll put it between little markers to make it easier for you to find.

----------

Religion (and in particular Islam) is not incompatible with scientific progress.

----------

That is my ENTIRE point.

By: CarlM

CarlM — Sat, 28 Nov 2009 18:00:43 +0000

Wow .. there's a bug in this software. I just wrote a reply and it was replaced with my earlier reply when I tried to edit a typo. Very bizarre. I'll try to reconstruct it.

By: CarlM

CarlM — Sat, 28 Nov 2009 17:43:32 +0000

Let me put this another way:

Your headline is: "Islam: It’s the Intolerance That’s Scary"

Why not stick to that theme (especially since that is what you've given evidence for)? Don't pretend that the evidence also supports the assertion that Islam is incompatible with scientific progress.

I am STILL trying to teach you this basic principle of argument: Present evidence and use that evidence to make a point. Don't try to make the evidence say more than it does.

By: Daniel Miessler

Daniel Miessler — Sat, 28 Nov 2009 17:37:49 +0000

But it is representative of how religious people behave WHO CREATE
POLICY--and that's what matters.

These people are telling you, right to your face, that they have
created these policies DIRECLY BECAUSE of their religion. But when
that policy takes effect, people like you do everything possible to
say religion is not the problem.

Despite what you think, religion has no equal when it comes to setving
as a reason to be evil. You like to argue that people can do bad
things in the name of anything, and religion is just one of them.

This is ridiculous.

The promise of an eternal afterlife of pleasure, or of suffering,
metered out by the creator of the universe, is NOT the same as other
motivators.

By: CarlM

CarlM — Sat, 28 Nov 2009 17:37:17 +0000

He thinks that there is an absolute truth, that it is knowable, and that he knows it.

By: CarlM

CarlM — Sat, 28 Nov 2009 17:34:30 +0000

It should have been clear that my reference to “Mathematics in medieval Islam” was not intended to be anything but a quick and easy (for me) to find reference that showed that religion (and Islam in particular) is not incompatible with scientific progress. It wasn't meant to be a complete history of scientific progress made by believers in Islam. I had neither desire nor need for such a sweeping presentation. I had a very narrow point.

By: CarlM

CarlM — Sat, 28 Nov 2009 17:26:42 +0000

Daniel, don't twist what I was saying.

My ONLY point was that religion (and in particular Islam) is not incompatible with scientific progress. This isn't the same thing as saying that a repressive government is not incompatible with scientific progress. I was making the point that you may have been pointing your finger in the wrong direction. I agree entirely that when a country tries to craft its laws from a single very narrow interpretation of a single religion, it can interfere with scientific exploration. But I suspect that this has less to do with the fact that it is a religion-based government than that it is a government that restricts freedoms of many kinds. Freedom of thought is rather important to scientific progress (and I'd argue that it is rather important for most kinds of progress). Governments (religious or not) that repress freedom of thought are going to diminish the contributions of its citizens to scientific discovery. Put the blame where it lies .. on the repressive government.

Here is part of the quote you took from the clip: "Non-Muslims are the experts at science and technology, and we invite them from the U.S. and Europe to teach us those things." This is not evidence of what you call an overt rejection of progress.

The video is a snapshot of a religious bigot who is so blinded by his religious belief that he doesn't even recognize that he is a bigot. I don't think that there is any question that the world would be better off without this sort of attitude, but (though I've learned that it's pointless to tell you this) it is NOT a representative snapshot of how religious people behave.