14

SUBMISSION

Posted by Herb7734 7 years, 11 months ago to Philosophy
164 comments | Share | Best of... | Flag

Fifteen years ago, I was introduced to a young man who had escaped from Paris. Paris? Yes, Paris. He was the oldest son of a father who was an orthodox Muslim. They were quite well off. He was not too sure of his father's business. He was 20, had excellent grades and was a top athlete. After he graduated, his father informed him it was now time for him to go back to his town of origin and study to become an Imam. However, he was raised as a Parisian, speaking perfect French as well as Arabic. He studied the Koran but as he grew up he contrasted his world of Christian sophistication with his duties and attitudes of a Muslim cleric. No comparison, Unknown to his father, he took increments of "spending" money from the ATM card his father gave him and instead of living expenses he had saved the money until when he was to return to his Arabic roots, he traded in his plane ticket for one to London. I won't detail how he changed his identity and wound up in NYC, and eventually the heartland. Here is his view of Islam:
(I have edied it for brevity). "Islam is based on virtue; the very word means 'submission.'' It is truly not a religion, nor is it merely a set of beliefs but it is an entire way of life. The Koran doesn't simply govern everyone's conduct it is extended to all aspects of society. It regulates law, war, peace, education, economics, sexual conduct, trade and family. Sharia governs everything. It mitigates what it considers the rot of all other beliefs."

Between the Koran and Sharia, if one is to believe, there is no possible way that any Muslim true believer can ever be at peace with any other philosophy or way of life. All of those seeking peace will inevitably be frustrated because they are dealing with shadows. A charade being put on by Muslims for the benefit, eventually of themselves. All those Western peacemakers know that, yet they continue to participate in a game where the rules all favor their opponents. Everyone, Obama, Trump, Bush, Clinton, knows this, yet they continue to go through the motions -- and my question is, why on earth do they continue to do it.?


All Comments


Previous comments...   You are currently on page 2.
  • Posted by ewv 7 years, 10 months ago in reply to this comment.
    Is that music? New Orleans drummers, yes, the rest may be dubious. Aristotle never had to contend with a percussion band.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by ewv 7 years, 10 months ago in reply to this comment.
    Some have more capacity and potential than others. Who needs 10x Einstein: Can you imagine how much better it would be if everyone lived up to his own potential?
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by 7 years, 10 months ago in reply to this comment.
    No one uses everything they have to its full potential. Can you imagine everyone with bodies like Dwayne Johnson and brains like Einstein's X 10?
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by 7 years, 10 months ago in reply to this comment.
    All true.
    But all good and evil are not subjective. For humans, there exists objective good and evil. Animals are not either good or evil unless they are trained to be one or the other and for them it it is obedience = reward.Only a high degree of volition allows for making decisions. As to good & evil being subjective and situational I'll bet you or I could name 50 or a hundred actions that are objectively evil. Some of them so horrible that we feel dirty just thinking of them. But, frankly, I don't care whether Muslims are raised in such a way that they don't understand the difference. Their religion, what they are taught, if it is a danger to me and mine, I'm not going to try to teach them right from wrong when while they are attacking me. They are adherents to an evil philosophy, which our leaders are afraid to articulate. As to instinct, it is strictly a self protective mechanism. It allows for no volition, it exists only to protect the mechanism. As to "glory and curse" I was waxing poetic. Good writers do that now and then, (except Hemingway).
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by ewv 7 years, 10 months ago in reply to this comment.
    Man the "rational animal" means he capacity and requirement to be rational to live. It doesn't mean that everyone uses his full capability or uses it properly.

    Abstraction isn't a higher level of development than concepts, concepts require abstraction -- abstraction means selective focus, which is required in identifying essentials to form concepts. But there is a hierarchy of concepts that are abstractions from abstractions, and the ability to do that is more advanced than first level concepts based on direct perception. That is part of being rational, too. Many people treat concepts as if they were percepts and are very poor at dealing with higher level concepts. But every human has the capacity.

    Thinking objectively versus following emotions is related, but is about the choice of how to use and apply concepts.

    Every human has the capacity to think like a rational human being, so it's not a matter of a state of evolutionary biological development, but is a matter of philosophical evolution, which is what you are describing.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by ewv 7 years, 10 months ago in reply to this comment.
    The role of volition is the choice to focus and think. For humans thinking means rational, conceptual thought. Others can choose to pay attention but can't do that. That is why Aristotle defined man as the rational animal. I do grant that the musician subspecies is human. Aristotle probably did, too. Check his biology.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ puzzlelady 7 years, 10 months ago in reply to this comment.
    Humans are in various stages of evolutionary advance. Volition = free will. Conceptual thinking is a higher stage of development. Abstract thinking is even higher. Not every human practices these. Most are still driven by their emotions and their accepted indoctrinations. So they can shift and even invert the meanings of good and evil.

    Without objectively checking their premises, most people willingly accept definitions of the good (what God, their parents and teachers and culture tell them) and evil (whatever does not agree with their conditioning). So some cultures consider honor killings honorable and murder of designated foes as noble. Peace-makers are written off as traitors and cowards. Those who are not for me are against me. Those who refuse to be expropriated are condemned as greedy. Etc.

    In most people's lives good and evil are subjective and situational. They clamor for what pleases them and will sacrifice others sanctimoniously when their authorities assure them it's right to do so. Yes, they understand that there is a difference between the polar opposites of good and evil, but without an objectively defined set of values, there is no way to know which is which, and anything goes.

    By the way, every living thing has an instinctive sense of what is good for it and what is bad, and will evolve features to aid its survival, or perish. Mankind has the potential to know those conditions conceptually and has created a technological world to support its survival, mixed in with the remnants of murderous aberrations.

    Are those the two extreme products of the mind you would call their glory and their curse? Those sound rather mystical. I would like to see us evolve to a point where Galt’s Oath (a more explicit restatement of the golden rule) is the premise of human relationships. The highest good embraced by highly evolved minds, freely chosen and not simply submitted to.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by ewv 7 years, 10 months ago in reply to this comment.
    There is a lot available now to read on that development and others in science that I wish I had had when I was first learning it. They delve into different aspects of the conceptual development. You would really like the Forbes & Mahon book even though you are already familiar with some of the history.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by 7 years, 10 months ago in reply to this comment.
    Much to my regret, you've pretty much nailed it. The attitude seems to be that what's good for "us" is good for the nation, and if some get hurt along the way, well then -- it's just collateral damage.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by Dobrien 7 years, 10 months ago
    Hi Herb,
    You have been busy with this post. Here is my
    2 cents worth." Why on earth do they continue to do. It?" Your title is the one word answer Submission.
    The presidents that you named (besides the first Bush, he is the part of the deep state )were all controlled by the deep state except maybe Trump.
    The DS wants to have chaos they don't care about death , destruction or families. Their motto is "out of chaos comes control". They make huge amounts of money from war and conflict. They also take away our liberty and freedom in the name of security. The connections between the "bad guys" and the intelligence groups are mind blowing. Both sides sacrifice individuals for their own purpose. Like Freedomforall said they are first and foremost traitors and looters. The real enemy has infiltrated and has destroyed the checks and balances of our constitutional republic.
    Warm regards,
    DOB
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by 7 years, 10 months ago in reply to this comment.
    As to following two "Masters" certain sects of certain religions manage it quite successfully. The reason? There is no reason. In Judaism, the rabbis proclaim that it is OK to no understand. Repeat the prayers and song and dances. Just keep it up. You'll get it eventually/ If you don't, you will be elucidated by God, personally. Time, after all, means nothing to God. He can spend hours with you without any time passing t all.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by 7 years, 10 months ago in reply to this comment.
    Even musicians? When did musicians become a sub-species? The key is what is done with volition. Up or down? Left or right? Good or bad.Humans can run into a burning building to save a child. Dogs cannot. Only in Rin Tin Tin movies.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by 7 years, 10 months ago in reply to this comment.
    Or,.....No master at all.
    Relying on the truth of the philosophy, based on the evidence of sense input.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by ewv 7 years, 10 months ago in reply to this comment.
    This is about understanding bad philosophies, not "true discipleship" of the religious or their "true poetry" and alleged "brilliance". This is an Ayn Rand forum. We do not "serve masters" or "walk their paths". Emotional immersion in fantasy is not rational understanding.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ blarman 7 years, 10 months ago in reply to this comment.
    In my mind, there are two facets: comprehending the moral arguments and then actually practicing the morality. Both comprise and are elements to complete understanding. I comprehend the moral arguments of Islam and have spent hours talking with Muslims frankly about their faith and the results of it as well as reading the Qu'ran (in English - recognizing that many claim the true poetry and brilliance can only be revealed if read in the original Arabic) but I do not wish to live that lifestyle (and neither does my wife) so as to fully understand it. I can say the same for Wiccans and several flavors of Christianity while I have had passing conversations (regarding philosophy) with Buddhists, Sikhs, and a few others. I do not pretend to have the same understanding of those ideologies I have of my own, because understanding what one believes is only the first step. True discipleship only comes when one is willing to walk the path of the master. We each have to choose which master to follow and no one can serve two at the same time.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by ewv 7 years, 10 months ago in reply to this comment.
    This essence was his recognition of the field as something real, which explained the relations between electricity and magnetism that had been discovered and helped Faraday to discover more. Without Faraday's experiments and his conceptual descriptions of them, Maxwell would have had no base from which to develop his mathematical theory. That theoretical discovery of Maxwell's made him, as the title of one of his biography's put it "the man who changed everything" -- all based on Faraday's persistence in decades of experiments and the basic concepts he developed. They were amazing individuals (and the diametric opposite of submission to Islam).
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by ewv 7 years, 10 months ago in reply to this comment.
    The distinguishing characteristic is man's rational faculty, which requires volition to function. Dog's have volition -- they choose to focus on something -- but they have no conceptual faculty. Even musicians have volition :-)
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by ewv 7 years, 10 months ago in reply to this comment.
    That doesn't make their religious enemies, the medieval Christians, the good.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by ewv 7 years, 10 months ago in reply to this comment.
    You said "trying to understand it will only lead to contradiction because of the misguided belief of elitism and "it can't happen to me" that forms the basis for Progressivism."

    That a philosophy has some contradictions does not mean that one cannot understand what it is, including the nature of the contradictions.
    Reply | Permalink  

  • Comment hidden. Undo