Muslims losing faith

[TSwizzle]

Most Muslims don't speak English; many read Arabic, because reading the Quran in Arabic is one of the silly rules of their religion. It doesn't matter how much 'mastery' of technology you have, you still won't be able to read an English webpage if you can't read English.

The "internet" is available to muslims in lots of languages.

 

[bilby]

Most Muslims don't speak English; many read Arabic, because reading the Quran in Arabic is one of the silly rules of their religion. It doesn't matter how much 'mastery' of technology you have, you still won't be able to read an English webpage if you can't read English.

The "internet" is available to muslims in lots of languages.

Yes. But the VAST majority of the Internet today is in English.

How many people who can read only Malay and Arabic do you imagine are ever going to read this thread?

Until an easy, reliable and accurate translation service exists to translate this into Malay or Arabic, the answer is 'none'.

Google Translate is fairly good - if you speak a European language. It is so bad with other languages that its humorous errors are a source of entertainment in themselves, to which many websites are dedicated.

 

[TSwizzle]

The "internet" is available to muslims in lots of languages.

Yes. But the VAST majority of the Internet today is in English.

I doubt it matters to an Iranian sh'ite muslim who has access to plenty web content written in Farsi, etc. etc. etc.

 

[bilby]

Yes. But the VAST majority of the Internet today is in English.

I doubt it matters to an Iranian sh'ite muslim who has access to plenty web content written in Farsi, etc. etc. etc.

For fucks sake, are you dense or what?

How much non-Islamic information do you think is available on the net in Farsi? Do you really think that that Iranian has access to the kind of sceptical commentary and scientific information that is available in English?

Are you really as moronic as you appear, or are you just playing dumb for a laugh?

 

[TSwizzle]

I doubt it matters to an Iranian sh'ite muslim who has access to plenty web content written in Farsi, etc. etc. etc.

Do you really think that that Iranian has access to the kind of sceptical commentary and scientific information that is available in English?

Yes. muslims have access to a lot web content in a lot of languages other than Arabic and English.

 

[Underseer]

Even in that sense, Muslims would not be using that word more often unless they were becoming increasingly distressed about atheists.

While this does not prove that atheism is growing in the Middle East, it certainly is circumstantial evidence suggesting that is what is happening. Combine that with the other pieces of evidence, and it sounds like ex-Muslim atheists are starting to have an impact, and the religious leaders are worried.

I suppose that is one way to interpret it. However, it could just as equally be that Islam is becoming more fundamentalist. Sorta like Christianity before the middle ages hardly ever mentioned heretics and witches but, as the church became more fundamentalist, they saw heretics and witches everywhere.

It's also possible that Muslims are abandoning Islam in favor of salmon-worship, but when you look at all the evidence together, the simplest explanation is that Muslims are starting to deconvert.

 

[bilby]

Do you really think that that Iranian has access to the kind of sceptical commentary and scientific information that is available in English?

Yes.

Then you are either fucking insane, or you have no grasp at all of the difference in the amount of content available in different languages.

You do know that lots of people don't speak English, right? That they live in countries that are not the USA? Where things are different from what they are where you live?

Jesus fucking Christ.

 

[TSwizzle]

Perhaps we are talking at cross purposes here ? It's hard to tell but you seem to be saying that muslims are unable to access web content unless it's in English or they live in the USA ? Or that no muslims understand English or something ? If that is what you are saying then you are mistaken. The WORLD WIDE WEB is available world wide, I.e practically anywhere. Even Bin Laden had access to the Internet. And there is a lot of web content available in other languages.

 

[bilby]

Perhaps we are talking at cross purposes here ? It's hard to tell but you seem to be saying that muslims are unable to access web content unless it's in English or they live in the USA ? Or that no muslims understand English or something ? If that is what you are saying then you are mistaken. The WORLD WIDE WEB is available world wide, I.e practically anywhere. Even Bin Laden had access to the Internet. And there is a lot of web content available in other languages.

I am saying that, as MOST Muslims don't speak English, the availability of the web in their location is irrelevant. The web content available in other languages is

This is one reason why Muslims living in the west, most of whom do speak English, are more moderate than those in Arabia, the 'stans, Indonesia, Malaysia, Bangladesh, etc.

My point is in response to Barbos's statement "14'th century Christianity had an excuse - there were no internet, space satellites and most people could not read."

Plenty of Muslims, and particularly those Muslims not living in the West, also have an excuse - the information is available, but not in a form that they are able to read, so it may as well not be there at all.

There is not really 'plenty of web content in other languages'; what there is is a tiny fraction of what is available in English, and the non-English stuff leans heavily towards the local culture. Every nation contributes to the English language portion of the 'net; Almost all the really technical stuff is in English; and almost nobody outside Persia contributes to Farsi web pages - the few contributors in Farsi outside Persia are expatriates and propagandists. And the same applies to Pashto webpages with respect to Afghanistan; and to Indonesian wrt Indonesia.

 

[TSwizzle]

So you agree, muslims do have access to the Internet and there is web content available in many different languages. The quantity and what is available in what language is difficult to determine but in any event, lots of muslims understand English too. So there's not much of an excuse as far as I'm concerned. Particularly when it comes to the muslims that actually exploit the Internet for various nefarious reasons. The muslims living in mud huts in rural locations excepted of course.

 

[DBT]

The problem is, would Muslims who are immersed in their own culture and beliefs, Arabia, Iran or wherever (yet have access to the internet), even be motivated to look at alternative information...or would they tend to confirm their own world view through their choice of reading material because of their culture and their set of beliefs?

 

[DrZoidberg]

Islam is the way it is, in comparison to Christianity because it's further along on that time access toward more social control. But in practice, let's say 14'th century Christianity was just as oppressive as 14'th century Islam. If not more (because they were more affluent in the Islamic world).

14'th century Christianity had an excuse - there were no internet, space satellites and most people could not read.

It hasn't got to do with that. To generalise extremely. The current young and professional generation are educated and want techy jobs. Their parents generation were farmers or at least had pretty basic jobs. Their parents were farmers. Each generation has no clear rules of conduct. Nobody knows how to behave to be successful in life. This breeds insecurity. Insecurity breeds extreme religion. Europe and USA went though exactly the same phases and had to deal with extreme religion. 19'th century Christianity was a hell of a lot more extreme than 18'th century Christianity.

It's got nothing to do with the ability to read. It has to do with living in a world were everything feels alien to you. That's when you grab at what gives you a feeling of stability and continuity, religion.

If we look at the western trajectory of our religious Christian extremism, we'll see Islamic militancy suddenly and rapidly collapsing, just when it looks at it's worst and most extreme. And it'll happen within the next 20 years. After that Islam will be just as liberal as Christianity. That's what I think will happen.

 

[DrZoidberg]

Yes.

Then you are either fucking insane, or you have no grasp at all of the difference in the amount of content available in different languages.

You do know that lots of people don't speak English, right? That they live in countries that are not the USA? Where things are different from what they are where you live?

Jesus fucking Christ.

View attachment 4284

I happen to know plenty of Iranians and one of my best friends works as a telecom consultant in the country. Iranians have exactly the same access to Internet as we do. All they have to do is use some app or another that let's them go via a proxy. There's zero effort or risk involved.

Virtually all Iranians speak and read English. So many of them do that many of their street signs are in Persian and English. Being able to speak English in Iran is considered a requirement to function in the world, and to not be able to is frowned upon by everybody.

 

[barbos]

14th century Christians had an excuse. 21st century Muslims don't have an excuse. Islam reformation is long overdue.

 

[DrZoidberg]

14th century Christians had an excuse. 21st century Muslims don't have an excuse. Islam reformation is long overdue.

What do you mean? Why did 14th century Christians have an excuse while 21st century Muslims don't? What's your argument?

 

[TSwizzle]

Virtually all Iranians speak and read English. So many of them do that many of their street signs are in Persian and English. Being able to speak English in Iran is considered a requirement to function in the world, and to not be able to is frowned upon by everybody.

Maybe you have come across this too but all the Iranians I know reasonably well refer to themselves as Persian rather than Iranian. None of the Iranian/Persians I know are muslim. They are from families that fled the islamic revolution.

 

[Tom Sawyer]

14th century Christians had an excuse. 21st century Muslims don't have an excuse. Islam reformation is long overdue.

What do you mean? Why did 14th century Christians have an excuse while 21st century Muslims don't? What's your argument?

Is his argument somehow unclear or vague? He's saying that people today have a much better ability to access information then people 700 years ago did. That they don't have the excuse for ignorance on the subject which ye olde tyme folks had.

 

[DBT]

The question is, are they willing to access material that goes against their beliefs. How many even want to consider alternative views...

 

[DrZoidberg]

Virtually all Iranians speak and read English. So many of them do that many of their street signs are in Persian and English. Being able to speak English in Iran is considered a requirement to function in the world, and to not be able to is frowned upon by everybody.

Maybe you have come across this too but all the Iranians I know reasonably well refer to themselves as Persian rather than Iranian. None of the Iranian/Persians I know are muslim. They are from families that fled the islamic revolution.

Persia is the culture. Iran is the country. Which one is used depends on what they're talking about. I know plenty of Muslim Iranians. But the most militant atheists I know are also Iranian. All of the Iranians I know fled the Islamic revolution.

- - - Updated - - -

What do you mean? Why did 14th century Christians have an excuse while 21st century Muslims don't? What's your argument?

Is his argument somehow unclear or vague? He's saying that people today have a much better ability to access information then people 700 years ago did. That they don't have the excuse for ignorance on the subject which ye olde tyme folks had.

People are primarily driven by emotional needs. We're not robots. Barbos argument assumes people are robots devoid of emotions. Hence, not valid IMHO.

 

[barbos]

Is his argument somehow unclear or vague? He's saying that people today have a much better ability to access information then people 700 years ago did. That they don't have the excuse for ignorance on the subject which ye olde tyme folks had.

People are primarily driven by emotional needs. We're not robots. Barbos argument assumes people are robots devoid of emotions. Hence, not valid IMHO.

So if police stops you for speeding your excuse will be "I am not a robot"?
I am sorry but your counter-argument seems pretty random and meaningless. If anything muslims are in fact robots incapable to reason.