/lit/ - Literature

>>5700352

He should shut the fuck up and move to some Islamic country to preach his bullshit.

>>5700356
Why should he do that?

>>5700356

/thread

>>5700352

>>5700356
>Butthurt Christian coming through

>>5700356
>>5700356
>move to some Islamic country

They would decapitate him for being an infidel and liberal.

>>5700376

not a problem.

>>5700376
Would they do that in one of the countries he says are good Muslim countries

>>5700356

>>5700352
He's a hypocrite in that he tells people that Islamic countries largely don't hold the attitudes of Saudi Arabia, Iran, etc. then uses Malaysia as an example. He does the same broad generalizations he causes others of doing.

He ignores that although Malaysia's and the other "modern" populations countries are not Islamic but secular. Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Afghanistan, and the other backward countries clearly state in their constitutions that they are based on Sharia and go into detail about in the Islamic faith and customs. Malaysia, Indonesia, etc are based on The Rule of Law and all peoples are equal and religions respected.

As much as a prick as Bill Maher is, Maher was largely right

tl;dr Rasa's full of shit and knows it

He's pretty based. He shits of Sam Harris

>>5701612
Nope you are blineded by your fagotness thus you are u massive diked who's opinions are thus negated and all you preach

>>5701612
>Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Afghanistan, and the other backward countries clearly state in their constitutions that they are based on Sharia

Saudi Arabia doesn't actually have a constitution and didn't promulgate a "basic law" until 20 years ago. Egypt's nod to Islam in its constitution means little and is transparently an attempt to shore up the government's legitimacy.

Islam is recognized as the state religion of Malaysia.

I don't think you know what you're talking about at all

>>5700376

>People actually believe shit like this

He oversimplifies and sometimes glosses over inconvenient facts, but at least he has some inkling of what he's talking about. He's a necessary antidote to the total retards he argues with.

>>5700375
It's becoming an epidemic and I would appreciate some feedback.


http://strawpoll.me/2960137

>>5701936
Saudi Arabia constitution
http://www.servat.unibe.ch/icl/sa00000_.html

" The Kingdom of Saudi Arabia is a sovereign Arab Islamic state with Islam as its religion; God's Book and the Sunnah of His Prophet, God's prayers and peace be upon him, are its constitution, "

" Government in Saudi Arabia derives power from the Holy Koran and the Prophet's tradition."

" The family is the kernel of Saudi society, and its members shall be brought up on the basis of the Islamic faith, and loyalty and obedience to God, "

" The state protects Islam; it implements its Shari'ah; it orders people to do right and shun evil; it fulfills the duty regarding God's call."

>>5701936
Malaysia
http://www1.umn.edu/humanrts/research/malaysia-constitution.pdf

" (1) Islam is the religion of the Federation; but other religions may be practised in peace and harmony in any part of the Federation. "

" ● (1) All persons are equal before the law and entitled to the equal protection of the law. (2) Except as expressly authorized by this Constitution, there shall be no discrimination against citizens on the ground only of religion, race, descent or place of birth in any law relating to the acquisition, holding or disposition of property or the establishing or carrying on of any trade, business, profession, vocation or employment. "

" (1)Every person has the right to profess and practice his religion and, subject to Clause (4), to propagate it. "

" the constitution, organisation and procedure of Syariah courts, which shall have jurisdiction only over person professing the religion of Islam"

>>5702034
>http://www.servat.unibe.ch/icl/sa00000_.html

This is the Basic Law that I referred to, declared in 1992.

>Qur'an is our constitution *tips imamah* @:^)>>>

This means very little in practical terms considering how variously this scripture has been interpreted over the last 1400 years. Saudi law is worked out through conflict and compromise between royal elites and and Salafi religious elites (with the former having the upper hand.)

>>5702099
>Islam is the religion of the Federation

So you agree that I'm correct.

>>5701936
Egypt's 1971 constitution is far before the current government and their attempts to legitimize...
http://comparativeconstitutionsproject.org/comparing-the-egyptian-constitution/

" Islam is the religion of the state and Arabic its official language. Principles of Islamic law (Shari’a) are the principal source of legislation"

>>5702137
I didn't disagree because I never raised the point. Your other point were wrong.

I said they really behave secularly and act bon a rule of law and not sharia for everyone like Saudi Arabia, etc

>>5702139
>Egypt's 1971 constitution is far before the current government and their attempts to legitimize...

Egypt in 1971 faced its own set of challenges. Nasser (a thoroughly secular ruler with a record of persecuting Islamists) had just died. His Pan-Arabist ideology fell out of favor after Israel's victory in 1967, jeopardizing Egyptian power and influence across the region. Saudi Arabia, which had been a rival, was trying to establish its own regional hegemony by spending its new oil money and flexing its religious credentials. Sadat made overtures toward political Islam to shore up his legitimacy at home and abroad.

>>5702157
>Your other point were wrong.

What have I said that isn't correct?

> I said they really behave secularly and act bon a rule of law and not sharia for everyone like Saudi Arabia, etc

Separate legal systems for disputes between non-Muslims has been the norm throughout Islamic history, going back to the earliest Muslim polities. How does this specific difference make Malaysia 'less Islamic'?

>>5701612

Islamic countries are countries that infuse Islam into its political system. Aslan is talking about countries with Muslim majorities.

>tfw you can't tell the difference between Muslim majority and Islamic

>>5700356

>/pol/ butthurt

>>5701612
>malaysia
>secular

I looked into moving to malaysia and I think you need to be muslim (i.e. a member of the church of islam) in order to have certain rights in that country.

Maybe I'm wrong, though?

>>5702736
>>5701612
I just looked it up again and it seems that you're denied certain privileges in Malaysia if you don't practice Islam.

Totally disgusting that these people reference Malaysia as an example of 'good' Islam.

I'm not saying that Islam is inherently bad, but I just don't *know* of any good Islam. That doesn't necessarily say anything about Muslims, just the state of the religion.

I don't think Mormonism is good either, but I have Mormon family members and I don't have a problem with them. I actually think there are good *aspects* of Islam and Mormonism.

Reza's main premise is that all religion is benign and that no one's actions are at all influenced by their beliefs. It's so laughably and demonstrably false that it took an interview on Fox News to make him look even remotely credible by placing him on a panel of idiots.

>>5701624
You mean pretty regularly gets embarrassed by Sam Harris?

>>5703194
>Harrisroids actually think this

>>5703180
>Reza's main premise is that all religion is benign and that no one's actions are at all influenced by their beliefs.[[citation needed]]

>>5702860
>I just don't *know* of any good Islam. That doesn't necessarily say anything about Muslims, just the state of the religion.

No, all it says is you're not educated enough to discuss the topic at hand.

>>5702736
>a member of the church of islam

literally what

>>5702860
>I just looked it up again and it seems that you're denied certain privileges in Malaysia if you don't practice Islam.

My understanding is that you're given economic and other privileges if you're an ethnic Malay (and one must be a Muslim to be considered Malay by the government.)

>but I just don't *know* of any good Islam.

Meaning what?

>>5703194
This. Reza can't think. No discernible thinking talent.

>>5703252
>Meaning what?
Meaning he lives in white bread America/Europe and listens to mainstream news.

>>5703257

That doesn't necessarily mean that Sam Harris can outsmart him

>>5703287

I agree with this. Harris never offers anything which is particularly interesting, or even particularly relevant to what Reza is saying. At the very least, though, Harris is such an autist that like an Elf he can't lie, whereas Reza is either deliberately misleading people or straight out lying.

Reza says things about "the scriptures are inundated with conflicting sentiments about almost every subject" (New Yorker Magazine), while he knows full well that the Qu'ran has a doctrine of abrogation attached to it and using that a coherent message can be built from the contradictions.

>>5703257
Harris gets BTFO as soon as Aslan says "go do neuroscience and stop doing shit you're not qualified in", and Harris goes "but but but muh science. muh reason. muh critique of religion"

>>5703309
>Reza says things about "the scriptures are inundated with conflicting sentiments about almost every subject" (New Yorker Magazine), while he knows full well that the Qu'ran has a doctrine of abrogation attached to it and using that a coherent message can be built from the contradictions.

There is no definitive list of Qur'anic verses that Muslims consider to be abrograted. Numerous such lists have been proposed over the centuries, and exegetes have even disagreed over what it means for a verse to be abrogated (i.e., is a ruling nullified entirely, or does it continue to be applicable in certain contexts?) Beyond the religion's essentials of belief there's not a single 'coherent message' you could build that wouldn't be challenged by some pious Muslim somewhere. Some interpretations would be challenged less than others, certainly, but what Aslan said isn't wrong or misleading.

>>5703337
>Aslan says "go do neuroscience and stop doing shit you're not qualified in"

>Aslan: there are moderate and nice Islamic countries :3

>Harris: you mean these one's that approve of killing apostates and anyone who critiques islam gets charged with blaspheme laws, goes to prison, etc?

>Aslan : ugguuuuu~~~ senpai

>>5703252
>My understanding is that you're given economic and other privileges if you're an ethnic Malay (and one must be a Muslim to be considered Malay by the government.)
Are you here to parrot exactly what I just said?

>Meaning what?
meaning exactly what I said

>>a member of the church of islam
>literally what
literally a follower of the Islam faith...

Am I being obtuse, here? I don't understand what's happening... I feel so alone.

>>5703285
What news sources should I be listening to? I'm more than willing to champion some enlightened sects of Islam.

>>5703226
What are some good sects of Islam?

>>5703851
>Are you here to parrot exactly what I just said?

I was pointing out that discrimination in Malaysia seems to be motivated more by ethnicity than by strictly Islamic considerations.

>meaning exactly what I said

What is "good Islam" to you?

>literally a follower of the Islam faith...

Wouldn't it have made more sense to just say that?

>Am I being obtuse, here?

I'm afraid so...

>>5703880
Nothing you said made any sense. It seems like you're just trying to get into a shitfight in order to make it seem like I'm as dense as you are.

I'm totally willing to consider some of the positive sects of Islam. I'm personally friends with a Malaysian woman who is totally great. Hopefully the level of discourse here will someday be elevated by someone.

>>5703935
>Nothing you said made any sense. It seems like you're just trying to get into a shitfight in order to make it seem like I'm as dense as you are.

I honestly can't tell if you're being serious or not. What have I said to confuse or anger you? Is English a foreign language for you? This discussion is becoming surreal.

>I'm totally willing to consider some of the positive sects of Islam.

Positive in what way? I've tried to ask this question several times, so I'll do my best to phrase it clearly. You have referred to 'good Islam' and 'positive sects of Islam', but nobody knows what these words mean to you. Can you help me understand what you mean by 'good Islam'? What does it mean for it to be 'good'?

He's disingenuous and an elitist. Even if you agree with what he argues, he's such a bitch about it. For instance he criticizes Sam Harris because "isnt a scholar of religion" and because Harris hasn't studied it ad nauseam the way he has. So he cites that as reasoning behind why Harris shouldn't speak about Islam.

Yet then Reza makes claims on beliefs and how they influence actions, which is EXACTLY what Harris wrote his doctoral thesis on in Neuroscience. So how come Reza can make claims about things he hasn't studied and Harris can't?


I agree with some things he says like there's multiple interpretations and you should look for the most reasonable interpretation, but i'm not sure Harris and most of the people Aslan argues with disagree on that point anyways. Either way he's just slimy the way he manipulates the conversation and uses ad hominem like "Harris gets his views from Fox news".

It seems like this is a broken subject. Everyone agrees that Islam needs to be reformed, but no one can say how.

>>5704171
>everyone agrees Islam needs to be reformed

Aslan doesn't, there is nothing wrong with ISIS' interpretation of Islam, its just different but supposedly that says nothing of whats wrong with Islam.

>>5704178
Okay, everyone but ISIS agrees.

>>5704205
Maybe I didn't word it correctly, but Aslan(and people of his ilk) don't think its a problem of reforming because everyone just has different interpretations. This is the problem with Aslan, we can't agree that islam needs to be reformed because Aslan argues that all these interpretations are equally valid.

>>5704235
Yeah, that's kind of what I meant. It seems like there's some kind of subjectivist philosophy at the heart of the discussion which renders everything meaningless.

>>5704251
Yeah exactly, so i'm not sure how he can differentiate which interpretations are more "reasonable" if they're equally valid. It seems incongruent but i'm sure he has some mental gymnastics in order to make it all "okay"

>>5704178
>>5704235
>>5704257
>hasn't read even one word written by Aslan
Just kill yourself, why even bother posting when you're so triggered?

>>5704324
>can't show where someone else is wrong and resorts to "kill yourself"

when did /b/ and /pol/ get here?

>>5704065
But Aslan is right about Harris regurgitating Pox News prop, as he [Harris] is an open neoconservative and repeats that ideology's foreign relations beliefs (anti-communism, anti-Islam, liberal cultural and political hegemony) with only the exception of replacing Fundamentalist Christianity with Pop-Buddhism.

>>5704346
>Pop-Buddhism.
If only this was a discussion of 'the scourge of buddhism'.

>>5704346
>anti-communism

go ahead and show me ANYWHERE where Harris is critical of marxism or communism. Note this is not the same as being critical of Soviet Russia. Harris argued multiple times on his blog that we need to raise taxes on the wealthy/spread the wealth etc. much to the dismay of many of his followers who actually are neo conservatives.

Agreeing with neoconservatives on one aspect(that islam is bad) does not make you a neoconservative.

>>5704346
Please read "killing the buddha" and realize how little you know what you're talking about.

>>5704342
>can't show where someone else is wrong
If you had read even the fucking wiki page on him you'd know that Aslan has repeatedly said he is a reformist and that reactionary Islamism is at the very least a wrong interpretation of Islam, but instead you ride in here from /pol/ (or similar waters) and drop your shit on our door-step, as your kind is want to do, but no one is buying it, kid. Notice you didn't exactly quote Aslan saying the things you charge him of saying.

>>5704372
what are some quotes you wish he had mentioned?

>>5704356
>go ahead and show me ANYWHERE where Harris is critical of marxism or communism.
"The problem with fascism and communism, however, is not that they are too critical of religion the problem is that they are too much like religions. Such regimes are dogmatic to the core. Auschwitz, the gulag and the killing fields were not examples of what happens when human beings reject religious dogma they are examples of political, racial and nationalistic dogma run amok. There is no society in human history that ever suffered because its people became too reasonable."
>http://www.inspirationalstories.com/quotes/t/sam-harris-on-communism-marxism/

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u9UZSJ8eVSk
>You can lump [Nazism, Communism] together.

Beyond embarassing, you can see and hear in his voice he has no idea what he's talking about, yet he feels compared to share his opinion.

>Harris argued multiple times on his blog that we need to raise taxes on the wealthy/spread the wealth etc.
He's still on-line with the Mid-East Destabilization war.

>>5704364
Like I said, pop-Buddhist.

>>5704383
Did you follow the conversation? How about something that proves what he said Aslan says?

>>5701978
Explain? I've only read Zealot from him.

>>5704395
>that communism video

Holy shit, he is fucking retarded.

>>5704395
>compared
*compelled

Time for bed.

>>5704372
http://www.cambio.com/videos/cambio-on-aol/reza-aslan-on-isis-and-islam-all-interpretations-are-valid--518406021/

So you say that Aslan argues that ISIS is at the very least a wrong interpretation. Aslan HIMSELF says that "all interpretations are valid interpretations", meaning that ISIS and wahhabism and whatever else are all valid. So why do you think you know what Aslan argues better than he does?

>>5704398
I just thought you might want to highlight some of aslan's best quotes as to what is good islam or bad...

I'm not against you, but I thought I might provide you with some type of opportunity to respond.

>>5704395
He's talking about the soviet, and chinese regimes. Not actually criticizing certain aspects of marxism. The question that was posed to him was about the soviet regimes. Not about the cores of communism. Like I said earlier, a criticism of communism is not the same as a criticism of Soviet Russia.

>he's still on line with the mid-east destabilization war

And was totally against the war in iraq. Very neoconservative ehh? I think you have a problem where you want to loop everyone into fierce party lines and here are neocons on one side, and secular liberals on the other and there's no cross over on the spectrum which is really retarded. Yeah Harris has some views that some neocons would agree with, but that doesn't make him a neocon.

>muh pop-buddhism

First i'm not even sure how this is a criticism or in any way negative, but if you've read Killing the Buddha he argues for throwing away everying about buddhism besides what is beneficial(which could be said of almost every religion). He's clearly not arguing "hey lets become buddhists now". Whats irrational or wrong with that?

>>5704413
Literally all he said was that ISIS are Muslims, not that there was "nothing wrong with ISIS' interpretation". He states very clearly that he's making a general claim about religion in particular that people "take whatever [they] want" from texts especially. When he says "valid" he doesn't mean, and he says this in that video, that it's "reasonable, nor historically accurate," and doesn't say that ISIS' brand of Islamism IS "a right interpretation".

>>5704430
>He's talking about the soviet, and chinese regimes
He specifically says "communism in general".

>>5704433
But that's exactly the problem. There is no right or wrong interpretation, because they're all valid. You can't logically have a valid wrong interpretation. Otherwise its not valid.

>when he says "valid" he doesn't mean

Yeah when he says what he says, he doesn't mean what he says. Totally man.

>>5704437
There's a difference between communism as a political movement, and the problems within that and the philosophical ideals behind communism which is what I was getting at. But I concede that point that he did criticize that part of communism. This doesn't make him a neoconservative in the slightest anyways, liberals denounce communism, anarchists denounce communism. Criticizing communism isn't exclusive to neocons at all.

>>5704430
>And was totally against the war in iraq
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pCofmZlC72g&list=PLC31A0BBACD2F5763&index=53&feature=plpp_video#t=44m15s

And of course there's his position on torture (>muh time bomb) and pre-emptive strike.

>>5704395
I just wonder what happens in the end. I believe in science, and statistics, etc... but I don't want those things to rule my life.

Frankly, in this day and age, I just wish people would slow down. Take some time and let new ideas come to the surface. I just don't want anyone to do anything drastic.

>>5704439
>Yeah when he says what he says, he doesn't mean what he says. Totally man.
>There is no right or wrong interpretation
This is called an inference and it's your error, not his. :)

>>5704459
That video is longer than most hollywood movies, and meme spouting doesn't make you right.

>>5704459
>if you think that Uday Hussein should've been killed, that means you support the war in iraq

jesus christ please tell me you're not this retarded. There were thousands of americans who opposed our involvement in WWII, yet none of them would argue that killing Hitler was a bad move.

No position on torture can logically entail support of the war of iraq. At the very best you could argue that he supports the torture in the war on iraq(which as well doesn't entail support of the war). His hypothetical situation(which obviously isn't the Iraq situation) also doesn't entail support of the iraq war.

But the fact that you came up with that quote so quick means you've obviously studied Harris to some extent which is more than could be said of his usual criticism so I applaud that you're not just parroting shit.

ITT muslims try to make it seem like they have any arguments at all.

>>5704465
Its a logical inference, there's no way two valid viewpoints can exist with one of them being wrong. Like, i'm baffled I even have to argue this, like just think about it. How could a valid viewpoint possibly be wrong. At the very best you could argue one is more valid but that wouldn't make the other wrong.

>>5704482
He says that ISIS' interpretation is "valid" because "they are Muslims," and "[anyone] can interpret [a text] however [they] want to, /whether it's a right interpretation or not/."
"whether it's a right interpretation or not."
"WHETHER IT'S A RIGHT INTERPRETATION OR NOT."

>>5704525
Sounds like religion to me.

>>5704525
And who could decide whether its a right interpretation or not? This is where Aslan trips over his mental gymnastics. He can't logically argue that its a wrong interpretation if its valid. It literally digresses into a "no you're wrong!" "No YOU'RE wrong!" since both are valid.

>>5704171
>Everyone agrees that Islam needs to be reformed, but no one can say how.

They can't explain how because they've framed the problem incorrectly. They are aware that some Muslims are doing things that they don't like. They attempt to locate the problem in the religion itself, as if all of the current turmoil in the Middle East can be traced to some troublesome core tenet of Islam. Lots of people, undeterred by their ignorance of the subject, become utterly convinced that this must be the case. This leads to all sorts of ham-fisted explanations of "Islamic violence" and the like that completely miss the crux of the issue.

The question we that should be trying to answer is "what aspects of ISIS' environment allowed it to come into existence—and power—in the first place?" Doing this requires a more sophisticated view of politics and religion than most folks are willing to muster, apparently.

>>5704399

I'm really talking about his media presence (his arguments with Maher, Harris, etc.) more than his written work. Sorry, should have clarified that. ss

>>5704475

What do you get out of shitposting?

>>5704542

>And who could decide whether its a right interpretation or not?

How would you?

>>5704574
I differ from Aslan in that I don't think all interpretations are valid. So its much easier for me to decide because you just figure out which ones aren't valid. But aslan doesn't think this way and as such that option isn't available to him.

>>5704560
see >>5704475

>>5704628

No, really. What?

>>5704648
see >>5704475

bump

>>5700352
Oh look it's that one guy you know about because some viral shit posted video on facebook.

>>5703508
I like you.

>>5704951
He was interviewed on mainstream news stations more than once.

It's telling that the most successful Muslim apologist in the west is one that claims that no one really believes in Islam.

Seems like a crypto-takfir.

>>5702736
I lived in malaysia and I'm pretty sure everyone received pretty much the same rights.

>>5705972
Did you have your head in the sand while you lived there? There are no equal rights under Sharia Law.

http://www.bigstory.ap.org/article/9a13cf2d11fc463b8f62a05d02d3ffed/malaysias-sharia-law-costs-non-muslims-their-kids

>>5701936
This guy knows what he is talking about. Islam is a source of law to different extents in Muslim countries. It helps legitamacy. The Malaysians and Indonesians, for example, refused to execute apostates despite far right calls for it. Colonial law is also very important sources of law in Muslim states.

Reza Aslan is pretty cool. The interview with Fox was a hoot and Shabir Ally does a good job about showing his work's non-orthodox nature. Aslan's book on Jesus was pretty good too. What are some other scholarly books about Jesus? One that disagrees or are in contact with Reza's views would be nice.

>>5706018
Only muslims use sharia courts, the rest use a civil court.

I agree that the government tends to give preferential treatment to ethnic malays but from my experience living in malaysia, it seemed like the chinese and indians received whatever the malays received. In fact, they did better in the free market economy despite the bias.

To be honest I don't know what the situation is right now considering I left malaysia in the late 90's but it was definitely not a saudi style state.

>>5706018
Malaysia does not have Shariah law although Islamic law is considered a source of law by the government along with British colonial law (they have a parliament) and common law (cultural law that developed indigenously).

I do remember hearing they do have some positive discrimination (affirmative action) because the Indian and Chinese immigrants had some benefits during the colonial times. It is based on race though although that de facto means religious affiliation is a factor. I cannot remember what they do specifically though

>>5706090
>Only muslims use sharia courts

So there are equal rights for everyone. Unless it involves a Muslim. Then they get to use Muslim courts that give them more rights than you do.

Do you understand what the term "equal rights" means?

Why did every post after >>5706070
get deleted? They were talking about whether or not Muslim courts in Malaysia used Sharia Law.

>>5706433
Looks like a mod went a little nuts. At least 7 posts were deleted, with no clear pattern as to why.

>>5706483
I did some research and it seems that the entire Malaysian legal and financial system is very closely tied with fundamentalist Islam.

Judicial caning in Malaysia: http://www.corpun.com/vidju.htm

>>5706660

Judicial caning was introduced to Malaysia by the British, you silly twat. You'll discover that it's also used in neighboring Singapore, which isn't exactly a "fundamentalist Islamic state."

>>5706878
Caning wasn't the only thing I found, just the most succinct example. I'm not here to argue ad nauseum and lend credence to your pro-Islamic viewpoint. Anybody who wants to research the Malaysian legal system can find out what it's like for themselves.

>>5707187
>Caning wasn't the only thing I found, just the most succinct example.

An example that happens to discredit the point you were trying to make.

>I'm not here to argue ad nauseum and lend credence to your pro-Islamic viewpoint.

Is it 'pro-Islamic' not to discern Islam behind every objectionable thing done by Muslim people or their governments? I recognize that religious belief isn't a sufficient condition for any specific kind of political program. Acknowledging this won't make you want to sprout a beard and bow down to Allah—I promise.

If you're afraid that arguing with me will lend credence to my viewpoint, you must not have a lot of confidence in yours.

>>5707333
People that are curious about Malaysian politics can simple go to the google and find out in about 5 minutes whether I'm right or wrong. I don't need to argue with you over something that is plain as day.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uNf0DHjx1kU

Is there any clip where Aslan comes off as not only intelligent, but as correct?

The Fox News clip was funny, but didn't have a lot of substance...

>>5708623
There's another interview that's on... I think it was MSNBC, where he's criticizing Harris for saying all Muslim countries are woman-hating shit-holes.

Anyway, it's funny/painful in the same way the Fox News one is (they seem to consciously refuse to understand), but he's making an actual argument, even if it's not particularly complicated one.

>>5704470
>if you think that Uday Hussein should've been killed, that means you support the war in iraq.
It goes further than that. The collective history of Harris' own words damns him when he tries to make the claim (post-conflict) that he wasn't supportive of the war since he never said such /explicitly/. This may be technically true, and he certainly makes /great/ effort now to distance himself from the invasion, yet there is simply no sign of him criticizing the war before it becomes a popular notion that the invasion was wrong, or even just dubious.

The fact of the matter is that we see him quite readily explain the /necessity/ of the not just invasion of Iraq, Afghanistan, but the destabilization of the whole of the Muslim sphere (especially Iran) during and after the Iraq invasion. He made this clearest in The End of Faith when he makes the case for complete, pre-emptive nuclear holocaust of the Middle-East[*1]. Even after the War on Terror's loss of popular support, Harris has not stopped criticizing (American terminology) liberals for being "soft on terrorism"[*2] in light of the "barbarism" of Muslims as a whole population (in his own words "the enemies of civilization"[*3]). Don't just pick out one or two essays or debates, take a step back and look at how Harris writes and things: first he says what he really believes right away to titillate, and the last thing he says is some qualification for his bombastic rhetoric that is intended to make it seem benign or reasonable. When he talks about Islam and Muslims he always makes a blanket statement only to later pepper in something like "of course not ALL Muslims are like that." It's appropriate that one of Harris' paranoid obsessions with Muslims (and other theists/religious) is that they're secretly lying to us (ie: him) when it's clear he makes contradictory statements about his own beliefs (which is the only thing he talks about) that simply can't be reconciled reasonably. If we take his word for it (as he says we should do for "them") he clearly states there is no Islam that isn't evil and there are no Muslims that don't at least tacitly support terrorism, etc.[*4] He hits all the classic /pol/ack notes: imaginary events of political correctness and cowardice from liberal governments, the immanent immigrant overthrow of Europe, they all secretly want to kill him and rob him of his precious bodily fluids, etc.

cont.

>>5708905
You may want to accuse me of some foul doing here but the skeleton keys to Harris' mind are in fact found in his own words (all of them). This article about Race Profiling[*5], and his statement on Pre-Emptive Nuclear Strike[*1] in particualr. The former especially is quite amazing when Harris makes the conflation that 1) the only terrorists are Muslims, and 2) Muslims have an 'appearance', even though he disproves these by explaining how he and his wife (who, by his account, "don't look like terrorists) smuggle ammunition and a firearm through security, as if that wasn't /exactly/ why race profiling is nothing but racist /and/ inefficient.


1) “The End of Faith,” pages 128-129
"It should be of particular concern to us that the beliefs of Muslims pose a special problem for nuclear deterrence. There is little possibility of our having a cold war with an Islamist regime armed with long-range nuclear weapons. A cold war requires that the parties be mutually deterred by the threat of death. Notions of martyrdom and jihad run roughshod over the logic that allowed the United States and the Soviet Union to pass half a century perched, more or less stably, on the brink of Armageddon. What will we do if an Islamist regime, which grows dewy-eyed at the mere mention of paradise, ever acquires long-range nuclear weaponry? If history is any guide, we will not be sure about where the offending warheads are or what their state of readiness is, and so we will be unable to rely on targeted, conventional weapons to destroy them. In such a situation, the only thing likely to ensure our survival may be a nuclear first strike of our own. Needless to say, this would be an unthinkable crime—as it would kill tens of millions of innocent civilians in a single day—but it may be the only course of action available to us, given what Islamists believe. "
2) http://www.samharris.org/site/full_text/the-end-of-liberalism/
>"This may seem like frank acquiescence to the charge that “liberals are soft on terrorism.” It is, and they are"
>"Unless liberals realize that there are tens of millions of people in the Muslim world who are far scarier than Dick Cheney, they will be unable to protect civilization from its genuine enemies."

>>5708916
3) http://www.samharris.org/site/full_text/holy-terror
>"The social policy that can be derived from the Koran currently poses even greater dangers. According to this text, it is the duty of every Muslim man to make war on unbelievers..."
>"It is true that many Muslims seem inclined to ignore the Koran’s solicitations to martyrdom and jihad, but we cannot overlook the fact that many are not so inclined, and they now regularly murder innocent noncombatants for religious reasons. The phrase “the war on terrorism” is a dangerous euphemism that obscures the true cause of our troubles in the world, because we are currently at war with precisely the vision of life prescribed to all Muslims in the Koran."
>"How can we possibly expect devout Muslims to happily share power with “the friends of Satan”?"
>"While there are many charges that can be fairly leveled at men like Osama bin Laden, perverting the teachings of the Koran is not among them."
>"Now that our elected leaders have grown entranced by pseudo-problems like gay marriage, even while the genuine enemies of civilization hurl themselves at our gates, perhaps it is time we subjected our religious beliefs to the same standards of evidence we require in every other sphere of our lives. Perhaps it is time for us to realize, at the dawn of this perilous century, that we are paying too high a price to maintain the iconography of our ignorance."
4) http://www.samharris.org/site/full_text/the-reality-of-islam
>"It is time we recognized—and obliged the Muslim world to recognize—that “Muslim extremism” is not extreme among Muslims. Mainstream Islam itself represents an extremist rejection of intellectual honesty, gender equality, secular politics and genuine pluralism. The truth about Islam is as politically incorrect as it is terrifying: Islam is all fringe and no center. In Islam, we confront a civilization with an arrested history. It is as though a portal in time has opened, and the Christians of the 14th century are pouring into our world."
5) http://www.samharris.org/blog/item/in-defense-of-profiling
>"I have noticed such incongruities before. In fact, my wife and I once accidentally used a bag for carry-on in which I had once stored a handgun—and passed through three airport checkpoints with nearly 75 rounds of 9 mm ammunition. While we were inadvertently smuggling bullets, one TSA screener had the presence of mind to escort a terrified three-year-old away from her parents so that he could remove her sandals (sandals!). Presumably, a scanner that had just missed 2.5 pounds of ammunition would determine whether these objects were the most clever bombs ever wrought. Needless to say, a glance at the girl’s family was all one needed to know that they hadn’t rigged her to explode."

>>5708926
TL;DR
He may not have ever said "I support the Iraq war" but only had problems with its particulars (its "mishandling by Bush" as he says it) but he's 100% for the War on Terror (the War Against the Middle-East).

>>5708939
>>5708926
Instead of copypastaing a bunch of quotes, maybe it would be better if you copypasta'd some facts which prove the quotes are wrong.

also
>'he and his wife ... smuggle[d] ammunition and a firearm through security'
The quote you referenced makes no mention of a firearm. I don't think that fact is really central to your argument, but it's an obvious error or some kind.

>>5708939
>>5708926
Instead of copypastaing a bunch of quotes, maybe it would be better if you copypasta'd some facts which prove the quotes are wrong.

also
>'he and his wife ... smuggle[d] ammunition and a firearm through security'
The quote you referenced makes no mention of a firearm. I don't think that fact is really central to your argument, but it's an obvious error of some kind.

>>5709061
Maybe /v/ is more your speed, kid.

>>5709151
You try to lump me in with gamergaters, but I am really just trying to help you improve your copypasta... I'm actually on your side.

I've noticed that aslan often criticizes others as being 'unsophisticated' in terms of their study of their islamic faith.

Has he written a text that I might read that could serve as a 'catch up' for the dialogue he wants to have?

I've noticed that aslan often criticizes others as being 'unsophisticated' in terms of their study of the islamic faith.

Is there a text that I might read that could serve as a 'catch up' for the dialogue he wants to have?

i've noticed that aslan often criticizes others as being 'unsophisticated' in terms of their study of the islamic faith.

is there a text that I might read that could serve as a 'catch up' for the dialogue he wants to have?

>>5708926
>"Now that our elected leaders have grown entranced by pseudo-problems like gay marriage, even while the genuine enemies of civilization hurl themselves at our gates, perhaps it is time we subjected our religious beliefs to the same standards of evidence we require in every other sphere of our lives. Perhaps it is time for us to realize, at the dawn of this perilous century, that we are paying too high a price to maintain the iconography of our ignorance."

Thank you for turning me on to one of the few people actually making sense these days. Also, to call someone a racist over their critique of religion merely belies your own personal beliefs about the dirty, violent mud people in question.

>>5709575
>is there a text that I might read that could serve as a 'catch up' for the dialogue he wants to have?

I don't know if Aslan has anything particular in mind, but IMO Hodgson's "Venture of Islam" is required reading for anyone who hopes to speak intelligently on the topic.

>>5709578

>Thank you for turning me on to one of the few people actually making sense these days.

kek.

>>5709648
You're right, gay marriage is the most important obstacle we face and it's not unsettling that vast swathes of humanity are actually encouraged into ancient desert cults.

>>5709648
>meme spouting makes me right
kek kek kek kek kek

>>5709662
*tips feijoa*

>>5709666
nice memes, bro

>>5709668
yours are better like 'ancient desert cult' hella epic

>>5704552
Ironically you're approaching this in a hamfisted way too. You're saying that cultural environment is entirely to blame for ISIS et. al, and ignoring the fact that elements of Islam (treatment of non-believers as 'other,' deity-sanctioned historical violence, etc) foster this type of behavior as a response to that environment.

*note that none of this is unique to Islam. swap with Christianity and you'd probably see similar results.

>>5709688
I'm not him/her.

>>5704951
Dude, he's been all over the news before this. Even so, how is that relevant to the conversation?

>>5709694
epic non-bias, feijoa

>>5709696
this has almost crossed the point where it's insulting to me to respond to you. Can you take it one step further? Let's see.

>>5709699
you just described what we here on 4chan call 'getting trolled'

>>5709703
Not really. You're not getting trolled just because you respond. You're getting trolled if you lend the person you're replying to some sort of credence of a rational argument.

>>5709713
i like how you're still replying. shows spunk

>>5709715
what do you mean?

>>5709719
>>5709715
>>5709713
>>5709703
>>5709699
>>5709696
You two need to fuck off. No one else in this thread cares.

>>5709726
I agree.

>>5709726
simply epic response

>>5709688
That's not a meme, it's literally what they are. Stay objectively mad.

>>5709648

damn /lit/ is really getting out of hand the smug "religion is always right" shit

>>5709774

>laughing at someone for thinking that Sam Harris's clash of civilizations doomsday prophecy "makes sense"

Clearly, I mean to imply that religion is always right.

>>5709788

what you mean to imply is that everybody who has a problem with religion or a specific religion is some kind of ignorant warmonger

we can all read the thread bro, no need for this posturing

>>5709812
>what you mean to imply is that everybody who has a problem with religion or a specific religion is some kind of ignorant warmonger

Where was this implied my man?

Is that the guy who was caught kneeling by his bed and talking to an imaginary sky wizard? That guy is bat shit insane. I like him.

>>5709812
>posturing
I prefer to call it being in favor of all religions being equal...

>>5709892
>I sure am proud to entertain all delusions equally

non-memetically kill yourself.

>>5708926
>dat unilateral cultural evolutionism
Harris is apparently bad at anthropology as well as philosophy.

>>5710233
As well as history and everything else he says... supposedly he could speak intelligently about neuroscience but given how eagerly he loves to speak about other subjects he doesn't have the first clue about, and how everything he says is an emotionalist extremism padded with neurotic niceties ("Tens of millions of Muslims are trying to destroy civilization!!! ... but of course not ALL Muslims are bad... as long as they aren't REALLY Muslims") I doubt his credentials with neuroscience as well. Does he even publish papers on neuroscience, or does he just go straight to the pop-science bestseller section of B&N?