Shooting in Munich, let me guess who is responsoible

[laughing dog]

Exactly. Which means that the claim that Islam is inherently evil or good is wrong. Which means the claim that Islam drives people to ___________ is not really valid.

But that's like saying that you can't blame Christianity for witch trials, evolution denial or people giving to charity. While there are reasons for those unrelated to the religion, if the religion is the motivation for their doing it, then that's what drove those people to the actions.

If the terrorists' interpretation of Islam is what motivates them to act, then their religion is to responsible, the same way that a person acting decently and honestly because he feels that this is what Allah wants him to do has his religion responsible for his actions. While there's nothing "inherent" in any ideology, that doesn't mean that people's ideologies aren't what drives their actions.

A person's ideology is different than the ideas contained in a specific religion or philosophy. To say that Islam is evil because it helps to shapes a terrorist's ideology and action is bogus because it also helps to shape a peaceful person's ideology and actions.

 

[Trausti]

But you're not trying to understand them. When a terrorist says he commits an act of terror because of Islam, why don't you believe him? We seem to have no problem accepting when Tim McVeigh, Dlyann Roof, or Ted Kaczynski say what motivated them to do what they did. But when a Muslim terrorist cites the Koran, the western liberal brays that this life-long Muslim misunderstands his religion. But it is the western liberal who misunderstands it. It is this western liberal who is small minded.

Let's apply that reasoning. When peaceful Muslim who lives in peace say that Islam is a religion of peace, why don't you believe him? But when a peaceful Muslim cites the Koran, the western bigot brays that this life-long Muslim misunderstands his religion. But it is the western bigot who misunderstands it. It is the western liberal who is small minded.

Do you still think it is valid?

Plus what Tom Sawyer wrote. Why so many Islamophiles on an atheist board?

 

[GenesisNemesis]

Let's apply that reasoning. When peaceful Muslim who lives in peace say that Islam is a religion of peace, why don't you believe him? But when a peaceful Muslim cites the Koran, the western bigot brays that this life-long Muslim misunderstands his religion. But it is the western bigot who misunderstands it. It is the western liberal who is small minded.

Do you still think it is valid?

Plus what Tom Sawyer wrote. Why so many Islamophiles on an atheist board?

It's not about being an "Islamophile", it's about attempting to bring more understanding and less bigotry. I may not necessarily agree with people who defend Islam, but I can at least understand their motives.

 

[Bomb#20]

Well, neither of those are misunderstandings of Islam. They're simply different interpretations of Islam. When a terrorist cites Islam as the rationale for his actions, he's not making a mistake about what Islam teaches, he's just emphasizing certain teachings and downplaying others. When a peaceful accountant cites Islam as a rationale for living a decent and honest life, he's not making a mistake about what Islam teaches, he's just emphasizing certain teachings and downplaying others. When a small-minded Western liberal bigot cites either of those as an example of what Islam teaches its followers, he's right in both cases.

Islam isn't any more or less than what the followers of Islam say that it is.

Exactly. Which means that the claim that Islam is inherently evil or good is wrong. Which means the claim that Islam drives people to ___________ is not really valid.

That doesn't follow at all. Islam is driving both the terrorist and the accountant to do exactly the same thing: treat "God wants you to." as a good reason to believe something and a good reason to do something. How do you figure that isn't inherently evil? "It is wrong, always, everywhere, for anyone to believe anything on insufficient evidence."

 

[Tom Sawyer]

But that's like saying that you can't blame Christianity for witch trials, evolution denial or people giving to charity. While there are reasons for those unrelated to the religion, if the religion is the motivation for their doing it, then that's what drove those people to the actions.

If the terrorists' interpretation of Islam is what motivates them to act, then their religion is to responsible, the same way that a person acting decently and honestly because he feels that this is what Allah wants him to do has his religion responsible for his actions. While there's nothing "inherent" in any ideology, that doesn't mean that people's ideologies aren't what drives their actions.

A person's ideology is different than the ideas contained in a specific religion or philosophy. To say that Islam is evil because it helps to shapes a terrorist's ideology and action is bogus because it also helps to shape a peaceful person's ideology and actions.

Well, that sounds like you're saying that a person's philosophies never shape his actions. I don't mean to misquote you and please correct me if I am, but that's how I'm reading your statement.

I disagree with that. When a parent lets their child die painfully because they tried to pray away the meningitis instead of taking him to the doctor, Christianity is to blame, even though the vast majority of Christians would never consider doing something like that. Their interpretation of Christian beliefs is what led to their child's death and absent that Christian belief, the child would have been fine. The ideas in the Christian philosophy which formed their belief system are what led to the result.

If a person becomes a vegan and his interpretation of how a vegan is supposed to eat causes him to lose 50 pounds of fat and drop his cholesterol levels, then veganism is responsible for the resulting health benefits, regardless of whether or not most other vegans would agree with his interpretations.

It's the same with actions stemming from Islamic beliefs. If a terrorist shoots up a crowd of civilians because his interpretation of Islamic faith is that all non-Muslims should be enslaved or executed under a Global Islamic Caliphate, then it is Islamic philosophy which led to that result, regardless of whether or not the accountant who lives down the road from him has an Islamic philosophy that he should just be a generally decent person who respects others' beliefs. Absent his belief in Islam, nobody would have died because that belief was the motivating factor in his behavior.

 

[Jarhyn]

A person's ideology is different than the ideas contained in a specific religion or philosophy. To say that Islam is evil because it helps to shapes a terrorist's ideology and action is bogus because it also helps to shape a peaceful person's ideology and actions.

Well, that sounds like you're saying that a person's philosophies never shape his actions. I don't mean to misquote you and please correct me if I am, but that's how I'm reading your statement.

I disagree with that. When a parent lets their child die painfully because they tried to pray away the meningitis instead of taking him to the doctor, Christianity is to blame, even though the vast majority of Christians would never consider doing something like that. Their interpretation of Christian beliefs is what led to their child's death and absent that Christian belief, the child would have been fine. The ideas in the Christian philosophy which formed their belief system are what led to the result.

If a person becomes a vegan and his interpretation of how a vegan is supposed to eat causes him to lose 50 pounds of fat and drop his cholesterol levels, then veganism is responsible for the resulting health benefits, regardless of whether or not most other vegans would agree with his interpretations.

It's the same with actions stemming from Islamic beliefs. If a terrorist shoots up a crowd of civilians because his interpretation of Islamic faith is that all non-Muslims should be enslaved or executed under a Global Islamic Caliphate, then it is Islamic philosophy which led to that result, regardless of whether or not the accountant who lives down the road from him has an Islamic philosophy that he should just be a generally decent person who respects others' beliefs. Absent his belief in Islam, nobody would have died because that belief was the motivating factor in his behavior.

Or, maybe his belief is a symptom of his desire to control ananhurt others, particularly in the absence of any way of looking at the world and understanding his future which would proscribe such behavior.

In other words, his ignorance of why harming others is bad allows him to pick up an Islamic text and use that to justify his awfulness in the same way that Adolf Hitler and many Germans picked up Darwin's Origin of the Species and used it to justify eugenics and genocide.

People would have died because a significant portion of humans want to harm, control, and oppress each other because doing so is beneficial to their DNA in some way that is poorly understood, and so they seek any justification they can find, and if they can't find one, they make one up.

Sure, islam offers a great off-the-shelf justification for being awful, bit it doesn't deserve particular scorn.

 

[dismal]

Sure, islam offers a great off-the-shelf justification for being awful, bit it doesn't deserve particular scorn.

Why wouldn't a "great off-the-shelf justification for being awful" deserve scorn?

 

[Tom Sawyer]

Or, maybe his belief is a symptom of his desire to control ananhurt others, particularly in the absence of any way of looking at the world and understanding his future which would proscribe such behavior.

In other words, his ignorance of why harming others is bad allows him to pick up an Islamic text and use that to justify his awfulness in the same way that Adolf Hitler and many Germans picked up Darwin's Origin of the Species and used it to justify eugenics and genocide.

People would have died because a significant portion of humans want to harm, control, and oppress each other because doing so is beneficial to their DNA in some way that is poorly understood, and so they seek any justification they can find, and if they can't find one, they make one up.

Sure, islam offers a great off-the-shelf justification for being awful, bit it doesn't deserve particular scorn.

Yes, that's very possible. Having that additional motivation does not, however, make Islam less of a motivation. If someone's goal is to lose weight and he finds that a vegan lifestyle is a good way to go about that then the principles of the vegan philosophy are what led to his weight loss, even though his move to veganism was prompted by a completely different motivation and not concern about the suffering of animals or any of the other mainstays of veganism.

Similarly, if someone wants to hurt and dominate people and aspects of Islamic or Nazi teachings offer him a platform to use in order to fulfill his primary motivation, then those teachings which he used to do so are still part of what shaped his actions.

 

[Tristan Scott]

I've always thought the world would be a better place without religion. But I'm very dubious that would make it a world without assholes who hate their lives enough to go out and kill a bunch of people. They'd just find other reasons to justify their assholery.

Yes, people use religion to get others to do horrible things. But recognize that all they are doing is giving that person a means of justifying his actions. Without religion other means would be found.

 

[dismal]

I've always thought the world would be a better place without religion. But I'm very dubious that would make it a world without assholes who hate their lives enough to go out and kill a bunch of people. They'd just find other reasons to justify their assholery.

Yes, people use religion to get others to do horrible things. But recognize that all they are doing is giving that person a means of justifying his actions. Without religion other means would be found.

You don't think religion affects behavior?

Then it's mysterious to me why you would have anything against religion.

 

[laughing dog]

A person's ideology is different than the ideas contained in a specific religion or philosophy. To say that Islam is evil because it helps to shapes a terrorist's ideology and action is bogus because it also helps to shape a peaceful person's ideology and actions.

Well, that sounds like you're saying that a person's philosophies never shape his actions. ...

Nothing in your response addressed "To say that Islam is evil because it helps to shapes a terrorist's ideology and action is bogus because it also helps to shape a peaceful person's ideology and actions." We have a fair number of people who use the notion that Islam is "evil" because some people use it to justify their terrorist as a springboard to deny Muslims their freedom of religion or entry into a country. Their kneejerk bigoted reaction that "Islam is evil" (or should not be permitted in their country) is based on poor reasoning (as I have shown).

 

[laughing dog]

Exactly. Which means that the claim that Islam is inherently evil or good is wrong. Which means the claim that Islam drives people to ___________ is not really valid.

That doesn't follow at all.

Nope.

Islam is driving both the terrorist and the accountant to do exactly the same thing: treat "God wants you to." as a good reason to believe something and a good reason to do something. How do you figure that isn't inherently evil? "It is wrong, always, everywhere, for anyone to believe anything on insufficient evidence."

Your argument is wrong because it is based on a number of flaws. 1st, it assumes Islam is driving their actions rather than simply one of many factors.

2nd, it conflates "wrong" with "evil". For example. your argument is wrong but it is not evil.

3rd, belief (as opposed to knowledge) requires some element of faith which means there is insufficient evidence. People act all the time based on belief. Most human interaction between strangers of all types is based on the belief of trust. There is nothing inherently wrong acting on belief when there is insufficient evidence.

 

[Tom Sawyer]

Well, that sounds like you're saying that a person's philosophies never shape his actions. ...

Nothing in your response addressed "To say that Islam is evil because it helps to shapes a terrorist's ideology and action is bogus because it also helps to shape a peaceful person's ideology and actions." We have a fair number of people who use the notion that Islam is "evil" because some people use it to justify their terrorist as a springboard to deny Muslims their freedom of religion or entry into a country. Their kneejerk bigoted reaction that "Islam is evil" (or should not be permitted in their country) is based on poor reasoning (as I have shown).

Ya, I agree with you on that so I didn't bother addressing it in my response because it's not a point of contention between us.

What I disagree with you about is that you seem to be saying that Islamic philosophy is not a motivating factor for the terrorists' actions. I am saying that it is.

 

[Tristan Scott]

I've always thought the world would be a better place without religion. But I'm very dubious that would make it a world without assholes who hate their lives enough to go out and kill a bunch of people. They'd just find other reasons to justify their assholery.

Yes, people use religion to get others to do horrible things. But recognize that all they are doing is giving that person a means of justifying his actions. Without religion other means would be found.

You don't think religion affects behavior?

Then it's mysterious to me why you would have anything against religion.

Of course our beliefs affect our behavior. Never said they didn't. If a person didn't believe in a religion there would be no way that person or anyone else could use that as a reason to do horrible things. I'm just saying that being rid of religion will not solve this sort of behavior. People will find other reasons to be dicks, like heterophobia or xenophobia. You know.

 

[Jarhyn]

Or, maybe his belief is a symptom of his desire to control ananhurt others, particularly in the absence of any way of looking at the world and understanding his future which would proscribe such behavior.

In other words, his ignorance of why harming others is bad allows him to pick up an Islamic text and use that to justify his awfulness in the same way that Adolf Hitler and many Germans picked up Darwin's Origin of the Species and used it to justify eugenics and genocide.

People would have died because a significant portion of humans want to harm, control, and oppress each other because doing so is beneficial to their DNA in some way that is poorly understood, and so they seek any justification they can find, and if they can't find one, they make one up.

Sure, islam offers a great off-the-shelf justification for being awful, bit it doesn't deserve particular scorn.

Yes, that's very possible. Having that additional motivation does not, however, make Islam less of a motivation. If someone's goal is to lose weight and he finds that a vegan lifestyle is a good way to go about that then the principles of the vegan philosophy are what led to his weight loss, even though his move to veganism was prompted by a completely different motivation and not concern about the suffering of animals or any of the other mainstays of veganism.

Similarly, if someone wants to hurt and dominate people and aspects of Islamic or Nazi teachings offer him a platform to use in order to fulfill his primary motivation, then those teachings which he used to do so are still part of what shaped his actions.

Except as I pointed out, someone with a strong motivationto be an asshole can and will find some justification to do so, whether it is Origin of the Species or The Holy Bible or The Constitution of the United States. All have been used to justify atrocities and tribalism.

It doesn't matter that it is Islam. What matters is that there was someone who was born ignorant of ethics (as we all are) and they have never been taught solid reasons to not be an asshole, or they have been tricked by accidental probabilistic events to think that being a good person is not worth their time.

People focus too much on the particular solipsism and Darwinism to be attacked rather than on the fact that it's a solipsism or darwinistic urge that is unchecked and which needs correction.

 

[laughing dog]

What I disagree with you about is that you seem to be saying that Islamic philosophy is not a motivating factor for the terrorists' actions. I am saying that it is.

Unless the terrorist is captured alive and is questioned, or if the terrorist leaves a clearcut trail, we really cannot know what motivates a terrorist. For example, the shooter in Munich - was he motivated by Islamic philosophy? Was the terrorist in Nice motivated by Islamic philosophy or was it simply a convenient excuse for his rage? In both instances, people jumped to the "Islam is evil" without any shred of actual evidence. Even now, it is not clear what motivated either killer.

 

[Tom Sawyer]

Except as I pointed out, someone with a strong motivationto be an asshole can and will find some justification to do so, whether it is Origin of the Species or The Holy Bible or The Constitution of the United States. All have been used to justify atrocities and tribalism.

It doesn't matter that it is Islam. What matters is that there was someone who was born ignorant of ethics (as we all are) and they have never been taught solid reasons to not be an asshole, or they have been tricked by accidental probabilistic events to think that being a good person is not worth their time.

People focus too much on the particular solipsism and Darwinism to be attacked rather than on the fact that it's a solipsism or darwinistic urge that is unchecked and which needs correction.

Except that the people doing these actions aren't necessarily doing it to be assholes. They think that they're the good guys.

When an US soldier fires a drone from a missile into a house, he's not doing it because he gets a thrill from killing people. He's doing it because he thinks that this action will help protect the safety and security of America and the collateral damage of any innocent civilians in that house is unfortunate, but a price that sometimes has to be paid for the greater good. His patriotism is the motivation and while the result of his actions may be evil, he has entirely positive rationales for taking those actions.

When a parent sits by while his child dies screaming, he's not doing that because he's got anything against his child, he's doing it because he trusts that God will do what is best and if that best means that God takes his baby up to Heaven, it's all part of the greater good. His Christianity is the motivation and while the result of his actions may be evil, he has entirely positive rationales for taking those actions.

It's the same with Islamic terrorists. They don't necessarily have any more of a "fuck you" attitude than the people above. They see themselves as fighting for the greater good, not as looking for excuses to be dicks.

You're right that it doesn't matter that it's Islam. There's nothing special about the ideology which makes it significantly different than any of the rest. That doesn't, however, mean that it gets a pass on bearing the responsibility for the actions done in its name.

 

[dismal]

You don't think religion affects behavior?

Then it's mysterious to me why you would have anything against religion.

Of course our beliefs affect our behavior. Never said they didn't. If a person didn't believe in a religion there would be no way that person or anyone else could use that as a reason to do horrible things. I'm just saying that being rid of religion will not solve this sort of behavior. People will find other reasons to be dicks, like heterophobia or xenophobia. You know.

Some amount of people would be violent dicks with or without religion, just like some amount would not eat bacon with or without religion.

I'm not sure why we would expect it to be the same amount.

 

[Tom Sawyer]

What I disagree with you about is that you seem to be saying that Islamic philosophy is not a motivating factor for the terrorists' actions. I am saying that it is.

Unless the terrorist is captured alive and is questioned, or if the terrorist leaves a clearcut trail, we really cannot know what motivates a terrorist. For example, the shooter in Munich - was he motivated by Islamic philosophy? Was the terrorist in Nice motivated by Islamic philosophy or was it simply a convenient excuse for his rage? In both instances, people jumped to the "Islam is evil" without any shred of actual evidence. Even now, it is not clear what motivated either killer.

ISIS is killing an awful lot of people and they're being very open and straightforward about what their motivations for doing so are. While each individual member of the organization and lone wolf inspired by the organization have their own particular set of rationales in addition to this, the Islamic aspect is not some kind of tertiary motivation which only merits half a sentence worth of mention in an appendix to their manifesto. It's kind of the main thing for the vast majority of the group.

Ignoring that is sort of like ignoring the whole "Animal lives matter" aspect of PETA membership and focusing on how some people join because they figure it's a good way to pick up chicks.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

What I disagree with you about is that you seem to be saying that Islamic philosophy is not a motivating factor for the terrorists' actions. I am saying that it is.

Unless the terrorist is captured alive and is questioned, or if the terrorist leaves a clearcut trail, we really cannot know what motivates a terrorist. For example, the shooter in Munich - was he motivated by Islamic philosophy? Was the terrorist in Nice motivated by Islamic philosophy or was it simply a convenient excuse for his rage? In both instances, people jumped to the "Islam is evil" without any shred of actual evidence. Even now, it is not clear what motivated either killer.

The thing is the Islamists use Islam as a tool to get these people to act in a violent fashion.