Philosophy Discussion Forums | A Humans-Only Club for Open-Minded Discussion & Debate

[Spectrum]

Do you ever wonder why your empathy and compassion is not stimulated at all?
Note Mirror Neurons in human brains.
One planned and premeditated murder is one too many.

Your comments are absurd and insulting.

MRs are not relevent to statistics and news reports, they function in direct close proximity to the person suffering- or doing whatever. It may make for a fancy way to ad hom someone, but it shows a confusion about what MRs doing or are, really.

Basically it is 'Know Thyself' [Socrates]. It is critical that each person understand the processes and mechanics that are going on within one's physical and mental system. So I don't see what is wrong with me asking one to be more knowledgeable of oneself.

MRs = mirror neurons? I wonder where you get the idea mirror neurons function only in close proximity? References?
As far as I know, as long as one perceived sufferings in others either near or far, those with active mirror neurons will be stirred [consciously or subconsciously].

One planned and premeditated murder is one too many.
Worst this Islamic based murder[s] is based on a lie, i.e. God exists as real.

One has to wonder if you have sympathy for those killed by NeoCon policies, often carried out by non-believers. They also manage to lie and then kill.

I anticipated this typical diversion. Thus note this qualification in my earlier post;

• "Btw, humanity must be concerned for all types of evil but only religious based evil acts are discussed here as confined by this particular section [religion] of the forum."

It is a fact there are a big range of problems and evils within the World and an individual human cannot attend to all of them. Thus an individual can only be involved seriously in one or two issues that they have the proclivity and competence for. I happened to have strong inclinations and ['I' believe] philosophical basics for religious issues, i.e. so I post in this specific forum.

It appear [-I am guessing] you want to shut me up on this issue.
If so, I believe there is a psychological explanation for it.
In general [not ad hom] those who want to shut others up for talking and discussing such an issue is because those issues trigger mental pains [fears] in them subliminally, thus they want to shut others up to avoid those subliminal pains.

The above is happening in so many places around the World and morally worst when it is going on in the US, UK and Europe.
The subliminal message implanted in the subconscious mind of non-Muslims from the explicit terrors by Islamists is 'If you complain about us, we will kill you' with the sanction of God.

Those infected with such a threatening virus [meme] will not dare to discuss the issues too seriously because doing it will trigger subliminal pains and uneasiness.
It is not only for themselves but when others are critiquing the Islamists the 'virus' in them will also trigger pains and uneasiness. This is why they will try to shut others up by all means including imposing Laws or even killing to shut people up.

This is the reason the cowards and cowed of the West are instituting Laws and people like Antifa are using violence to shut people up from talking of specifically Islamic evils. The fact is the emphasis is only on Islam and not other religions is already telling and supporting my explanation of the psychology behind it.

Your counters to the above?

[LuckyR]

The "truth" is less important to the counterterrorism folks than effectiveness. I personally want them to be maximally effective.

The effectiveness based on truth is always more morally sustainable than any effectiveness based on lies.

In the past humanity has been living 'effectively' based necessarily on lies given the various constraints but the trend towards the future is always exposing those lies and leaning toward truth, i.e. living truthfully rather than on lies. note the flat Earth and Geocentric model has now been replaced with truth. Many are still 'lying' to the children re Santa but the trend to the truth is changing.

The greatest lie is 'God exists as real' and the trend towards the truth of non-theism is increasing. This lie of theism is the main cause of the terrible terrorism of this OP and others, i.e. a real God exists who commands believers to kill non-believers.

If we can get the truth to prevail, i.e. there is no real god, Quran containing evil elements is not from a real God, then the Quran will not be a leverage to trigger Islamic based evils and terror.

A set of opinions unencumbered by data. The Covert Ops folks do stuff that is different from what is broadcast publicly routinely. It would be borderline (if not over the line) treasonous to give the enemy a huge advantage as your idea of inflaming Islamic passions by de facto declaring war on Islam, which is the way ISIS would spin your admittedly somewhat differently worded, nuanced message.

[ThomasHobbes]

Your counters to the above?

Yes.Two things
1) Everything, without exception is utterly irrelevant to the thread.
2) And you failed to apologise.

[Spectrum]

The effectiveness based on truth is always more morally sustainable than any effectiveness based on lies.

In the past humanity has been living 'effectively' based necessarily on lies given the various constraints but the trend towards the future is always exposing those lies and leaning toward truth, i.e. living truthfully rather than on lies. note the flat Earth and Geocentric model has now been replaced with truth. Many are still 'lying' to the children re Santa but the trend to the truth is changing.

The greatest lie is 'God exists as real' and the trend towards the truth of non-theism is increasing. This lie of theism is the main cause of the terrible terrorism of this OP and others, i.e. a real God exists who commands believers to kill non-believers.

If we can get the truth to prevail, i.e. there is no real god, Quran containing evil elements is not from a real God, then the Quran will not be a leverage to trigger Islamic based evils and terror.

A set of opinions unencumbered by data.

You do not seem to understand the limitation of posting in a forum like this. At times we can only make general statements without the accompanying 'data'.

Personally I have always strive to maintain intellectual integrity and do not simply make statements from hasty generalization, emotional impulses, and the likes but has always supported my views with arguments and data.

I have raised threads to support my argument why God is an impossibility and why Islam in inherently evil. To date there are no convincing counters to my propositions. Do you have any?

On the other hand, your views and accusations are actually baseless and groundlesss driven more by emotions rather than facts and truths.

The Covert Ops folks do stuff that is different from what is broadcast publicly routinely. It would be borderline (if not over the line) treasonous to give the enemy a huge advantage as your idea of inflaming Islamic passions by de facto declaring war on Islam, which is the way ISIS would spin your admittedly somewhat differently worded, nuanced message.

Whatever your accusation of 'spinning,' note I started with empirical facts regarding the evil elements of Islam, i.e.
https://www.thereligionofpeace.com/TROP.jpg



I have traced the above evil acts and many other evil acts related to Islam per se and have raised threads to argue why Islam is inherently and malignantly evil.
I don't deny Islam as a religion has good elements but the cons of the evil elements are trending toward outweighing the pros.

[Spectrum]

Your counters to the above?

Yes.Two things
1) Everything, without exception is utterly irrelevant to the thread.
2) And you failed to apologise.

What is there to apologize?
My question is similar to asking 'do you know the more refine reasons of why you are hungry?' or the basis of the various impulses of your own body and mind.
My prompt to you to research and be mindful of your own 'mirror neurons' should add knowledge to your own knowledge database. I should be expecting a 'thank' rather than apologizing.

[CIN]

quote="Karpel Tunnel" post_id=311246 time=1526418008 user_id=48062]
However I see something deeper going on and religions used as excuses.
[/quote]

Agreed. It's easy for religious extremists to recruit followers in situations where there is widespread poverty and ignorance. Give people a decent life and a proper education, and they will not want to kill other people. Why would they? What would they gain by it?

[CIN]

Apologies for the 'quote' mistake in my last post. I need coffee.

[ThomasHobbes]

Yes.Two things
1) Everything, without exception is utterly irrelevant to the thread.
2) And you failed to apologise.

What is there to apologize?
My question is similar to asking 'do you know the more refine reasons of why you are hungry?' or the basis of the various impulses of your own body and mind.
My prompt to you to research and be mindful of your own 'mirror neurons' should add knowledge to your own knowledge database. I should be expecting a 'thank' rather than apologizing.

More irrlevance.

[ThomasHobbes]

quote="Karpel Tunnel" post_id=311246 time=1526418008 user_id=48062]
However I see something deeper going on and religions used as excuses.

Agreed. It's easy for religious extremists to recruit followers in situations where there is widespread poverty and ignorance. Give people a decent life and a proper education, and they will not want to kill other people. Why would they? What would they gain by it?
[/quote]

It is also easy to recruit when there is knowledge about the long term abuse of middle eastern politics by the Western powers over the last 100+ years. It's not about ignorance, its about knowledge.
If I were Iraqi, I'd be pissed off that the UK government used chemical weapons on my people in the 1930s, that they funded Saddam Hussein in a useless war against Iran and supported his various human rights abuses, and after the first war left the country in a terrible state.
Knowledge would give me evidence about the ideological war fought against Islam since the end of WW2, aided and abetted by Israel and its supporters.
To know your enemy requires that you understand them, and not simply denigrate them as ignorant, stupid, or impoverished.

[ThomasHobbes]

Whoops. One quote error leads to another.

[Spectrum]

quote="Karpel Tunnel" post_id=311246 time=1526418008 user_id=48062]
However I see something deeper going on and religions used as excuses.

Agreed. It's easy for religious extremists to recruit followers in situations where there is widespread poverty and ignorance. Give people a decent life and a proper education, and they will not want to kill other people. Why would they? What would they gain by it?

Poverty and ignorance are only two secondary factors but they are not the ultimate nor proximate causes that trigger an Islamist to kill non-believers. The main reason why Islamists kill non-believers is not even politics and other social factors.

Actually it you who should deal with your own ignorance regarding the inherent malignant ethos of Islam itself.
Note this from the horses mouth [ISIS] and this is supported by verses in the Holy texts, i.e.

1. Because you are disbelievers
"We hate you, first and foremost, because you are disbelievers; you reject the oneness of Allah – whether you realize it or not – by making partners for Him in worship, you blaspheme against Him, claiming that He has a son, you fabricate lies against His prophets and messengers, and you indulge in all manner of devilish practices."

It reads: "What’s important to understand here is that although some might argue that your foreign policies are the extent of what drives our hatred, this particular reason for hating you is secondary, hence the reason we addressed it at the end of the above list.

"The fact is, even if you were to stop bombing us, imprisoning us, torturing us, vilifying us, and usurping our lands, we would continue to hate you because our primary reason for hating you will not cease to exist until you embrace Islam."

https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/world-new ... ns-8533563

The point is, DNA wise ALL humans has the potential to commit evil acts and a percentile [appx. 20%] has active evil tendencies.
Those with unavoidable active evil tendencies will be vulnerable to succumb to evil elements from various sources to be driven to commit evil acts.
There are tons of evil elements within Islam, i.e. Quran the core texts and other texts that are inspiring SOME believers to kill non-believers as a divine duty to please their Allah.

This is why as a matter of efficient problem solving for this particular case we must address the root cause i.e. the fact of evil elements within Islam.

Your ignorance of the root cause of Islamic related evil acts and diversion to secondary causes, i.e. poverty and 'ignorance' is not an efficient proposal.

[Gertie]

Spectrum

The above is happening in so many places around the World and morally worst when it is going on in the US, UK and Europe.
The subliminal message implanted in the subconscious mind of non-Muslims from the explicit terrors by Islamists is 'If you complain about us, we will kill you' with the sanction of God.

Those infected with such a threatening virus [meme] will not dare to discuss the issues too seriously because doing it will trigger subliminal pains and uneasiness.
It is not only for themselves but when others are critiquing the Islamists the 'virus' in them will also trigger pains and uneasiness. This is why they will try to shut others up by all means including imposing Laws or even killing to shut people up.

This is the reason the cowards and cowed of the West are instituting Laws and people like Antifa are using violence to shut people up from talking of specifically Islamic evils. The fact is the emphasis is only on Islam and not other religions is already telling and supporting my explanation of the psychology behind it.

Your counters to the above?

It's simplistic ********. The most charitable response is that you're naive, but as you're so immune to any other possibility than your own black and white narrative, it's pointless offering you more nuanced and ultimately truthful perspectives to consider.

If you were genuinely asking for my view, I'd explain that I believe religion plays a role in terrorism and the awful mess which currently exists in the Middle East. But so does history, politics, and the bleedin obvious fact - which terrorists themselves point out, that western countries have invaded Islamic countries, killed countless people, and helped set the whole area ablaze. And are still interfering and killing people.

Now, you choose to ignore all that, ignore the psychological impact on people of seeing their friends, family, compatriots butchered. Or view their religous beliefs in the context of how that plays out psychologically for some people. A choice, which as I say, can most charitably be interpreted as naive.

And you point to the psychology of westerners who do think this way, as being cowed and terrorised into... what? Seeing the larger and horribly complex context?

You say trying to understand this larger context is really cowardice. Not condemning an entire religion of millions of people (including innocent people murdered by my government) is cowardice. Not condemning my Muslim friends and neighbours who I know and like, one of whom was spat on the street after a terrorist attack, is cowardice. Because it's that response to innocent people your blanket condemnation breeds, and what we know we have to be careful not to foster - it puts the lives and well-being of my friends and neighbours at risk. And that's exactly why we need to be cautious and nuanced in how we talk about this issue, it has real life consequences for a vulnerable minority in our countries.

It's also counter-productive to emphasise the Us and Them narrative, as has been pointed out it's a recruitment tool for those who see Us as the baddies. We're all people, and we should be looking for peaceful and just solutions. We can at least do that in our own lives, while the people with power escalate and draw us into their global ideological and power games.

[Spectrum]

Spectrum

The above is happening in so many places around the World and morally worst when it is going on in the US, UK and Europe.
The subliminal message implanted in the subconscious mind of non-Muslims from the explicit terrors by Islamists is 'If you complain about us, we will kill you' with the sanction of God.

Those infected with such a threatening virus [meme] will not dare to discuss the issues too seriously because doing it will trigger subliminal pains and uneasiness.
It is not only for themselves but when others are critiquing the Islamists the 'virus' in them will also trigger pains and uneasiness. This is why they will try to shut others up by all means including imposing Laws or even killing to shut people up.

This is the reason the cowards and cowed of the West are instituting Laws and people like Antifa are using violence to shut people up from talking of specifically Islamic evils. The fact is the emphasis is only on Islam and not other religions is already telling and supporting my explanation of the psychology behind it.

Your counters to the above?

It's simplistic ********. The most charitable response is that you're naive, but as you're so immune to any other possibility than your own black and white narrative, it's pointless offering you more nuanced and ultimately truthful perspectives to consider.

I did not ignore to other possibilities. Note I wrote in the above;

• Spectrum: "Poverty and ignorance are only two secondary factors but they are not the ultimate nor proximate causes that trigger an Islamist to kill non-believers. The main reason why Islamists kill non-believers is not even politics and other social factors."

Note I mentioned many times ALL evils acts and potentials must be addressed but to topic this forum is only for religious matters.
Point is, to be effective in problem solving the most critical strategy is to deal with the ultimate and proximate root causes first.
If you deal with the superficial and secondary causes ONLY, that is fire-fighting.
Do you agree with this principle?

Actually you are the one who is naive is the effective techniques of Problem Solving.

If you were genuinely asking for my view, I'd explain that I believe religion plays a role in terrorism and the awful mess which currently exists in the Middle East. But so does history, politics, and the bleedin obvious fact - which terrorists themselves point out, that western countries have invaded Islamic countries, killed countless people, and helped set the whole area ablaze. And are still interfering and killing people.

Did you read my last previous post?
I'll repeat it again for you what ISIS main ethos is regarding Islam;

1. Because you are disbelievers
"We hate you, first and foremost, because you are disbelievers; you reject the oneness of Allah – whether you realize it or not – by making partners for Him in worship, you blaspheme against Him, claiming that He has a son, you fabricate lies against His prophets and messengers, and you indulge in all manner of devilish practices."

It reads: "What’s important to understand here is that although some might argue that your foreign policies are the extent of what drives our hatred, this particular reason for hating you is secondary, hence the reason we addressed it at the end of the above list.

"The fact is, even if you were to stop bombing us, imprisoning us, torturing us, vilifying us, and usurping our lands, we would continue to hate you because our primary reason for hating you will not cease to exist until you embrace Islam."

https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/world-new ... ns-8533563

Read the above again, I suggest 10 times.

What ISIS stated above is the exact ethos [mission and vision] from the core of Islam, i.e. the Quran.
I can guess you have not read to understand the Quran thoroughly thus your views are ultimately groundless on this particular issue relating to SOME Muslims. I have spent loads of time researching the Quran and Islam.

Now, you choose to ignore all that, ignore the psychological impact on people of seeing their friends, family, compatriots butchered. Or view their religious beliefs in the context of how that plays out psychologically for some people. A choice, which as I say, can most charitably be interpreted as naive.

I understand human nature is such that people will react to threats against them and counter attack but this has been going on since humans emerged and animals are also doing that.
But there is a difference when people [Muslims only] quote verses from religious texts to kill in the name of their religion and a God which is fictitious and illusory.

And you point to the psychology of westerners who do think this way, as being cowed and terrorised into... what? Seeing the larger and horribly complex context?

I mentioned westerners specifically but this happen to people from all over the world as well.
If you cannot get my point, I suggest you read up subliminal psychology and brainwashing.

Note the incidents of 1000s of innocent young girls being groomed and raped in UK [Rotherham, etc.] by the majority of Muslims men and the police dare not do anything about it for fear of being branded anti-Islam and fearing retaliation from Muslim mobs.
The same submission [Islam = submission] is happening elsewhere where the authorities will placate the demands from Muslims to avoid being threatened.

You say trying to understand this larger context is really cowardice. Not condemning an entire religion of millions of people (including innocent people murdered by my government) is cowardice. Not condemning my Muslim friends and neighbours who I know and like, one of whom was spat on the street after a terrorist attack, is cowardice. Because it's that response to innocent people your blanket condemnation breeds, and what we know we have to be careful not to foster - it puts the lives and well-being of my friends and neighbours at risk. And that's exactly why we need to be cautious and nuanced in how we talk about this issue, it has real life consequences for a vulnerable minority in our countries.

You are ignorant of my stance re Muslims.
Note I raised this thread;
Do Not Bash Muslims!
My focus is not on the people, i.e. Muslims but rather it is on the ideology.
It is same as condemning Nazism in the 1930-40s and not the German people who were Nazi members.

The truths must be told. I agree while we expose the truth of the evil ethos of Islam the religion, we MUST be careful to avoid blaming the believers, i.e. Muslims. I am confident there are ways to do this.

It's also counter-productive to emphasise the Us and Them narrative, as has been pointed out it's a recruitment tool for those who see Us as the baddies. We're all people, and we should be looking for peaceful and just solutions. We can at least do that in our own lives, while the people with power escalate and draw us into their global ideological and power games.

It is not us versus them [non-Muslims versus Muslim] in this case, note my Do Not Bash Muslims! thread.
How can you resolve the existing Islamic-based terrorism [in fact getting worse and more threatening] if you do not address the ultimate and proximate root causes?

My strategy to deal with the problem of Islamic-based terrorism are as follows;

1. Focus on the truth of the ideology, i.e. its glaring evil ethos against non-believers.
2. the psychology of theism re an illusory God
3. the psychological impact of the inherent terror threats of Islam on non-believers.

I find you are very naive. What you have offered is only blank condemnation without any serious arguments of substance.

[David Cooper]

The problem is not unique to Islam, or even to religion - it applies to any ideology with hate speech in its manifesto or holy texts. This isn't something that can just be ignored though, because that primary hate generates war, conflict, genocide, terrorism and a host of other abuses. A recent genocide of 10,000 Yazidis was driven by ISIS acting directly on a command in the Qur'an. That kind of hate in a political manifesto would lead to complete condemnation of the party responsible for it, and to a ban, but we have different rules about religions which leads to their vicious religious hate being protected.

However, we needn't write off an entire ideology just because some group that supports it goes too far and incorporates hate into the package along with it. The behaviour of Mao, Stalin and Pol Pot doesn't turn communism into something evil - there's nothing in communism that supports the mass-murder that those individuals indulged in. Similarly, nationalism shouldn't be written off because of the behaviour of the Nazis, although any nationalist group that holds racist attitudes where they consider themselves to be racially superior should be condemned. With religions, the same principle applies - when you find hate in their holy texts, it can usually be regarded as interference by man rather than coming from God, so it can be removed and condemned to decontaminate the religion. This could even be done with Islam, because even though all of the Qur'an supposedly comes "direct" from God (via an angel and a prophet), it is perfectly reasonable to think that God have put the hate in there on purpose in order to test people so that they could condemn themselves to hell by failing to condemn it. Islam is for the most part benign, so there would be plenty of it left if all the hate was stripped out. Islam needs a reform with a new Qur'an (and Hadith) being produced with all the hate removed so that good Muslims can switch over to using it and condemn all the hate that's been removed from it. The same applies to any other religion with hate in it - all of them should be forced to reform and to outlaw the removed hate so that it stops generating conflict. The primary hate in religions kills people, as does primary hate in any other kinds of ideology, and all of them need to be stamped on in the same way to render them benign.

All those who defend the primary hate are culpable for all the crimes which it generates, and so are all those who fail to condemn that hate.

By the way, to compare the terrorism generated by ideologies to people dying in road crashes is absurd - people travel by road because it improves their lives and they're prepared to take the risk of dying in an accident because to stay at home in fear is to have no life. We try to engineer out the risk and make it safer over time. Ideological hate is radically different - it leads to no benefit for anyone and merely causes murder. The numbers being quoted are also woefully misleading, because we shouldn't be going by the few murders by terrorists in countries where the ideologies in question are minorities, but by the vast numbers of murders in countries where they are in power. Between one and two million Armenian Christians were killed by the Turks and Kurds in the '30s because of religious hate. When you want to measure the power of the hate in an ideology, you should not be putting single-digit figures on the number of murders by terrorists because you're excluding the actions of terrorist states where the numbers get into seven digits. It isn't beyond possibility that this will hit ten digits in the future if we don't stamp hard on all the primary hate now. No one should be free to roam in any civilised country if they fail to condemn all the primary hate in question, whether it's from Islam, Christianity or any other ideology which they have signed up to. All those who fail to condemn the hate in the manifestos and holy texts of the ideologies which the either endorse or give their approval to in any way have made themselves accessories to terrorism.

[Spectrum]

..
However, we needn't write off an entire ideology just because some group that supports it goes too far and incorporates hate into the package along with it. The behaviour of Mao, Stalin and Pol Pot doesn't turn communism into something evil - there's nothing in communism that supports the mass-murder that those individuals indulged in. Similarly, nationalism shouldn't be written off because of the behaviour of the Nazis, although any nationalist group that holds racist attitudes where they consider themselves to be racially superior should be condemned.

With religions, the same principle applies - when you find hate in their holy texts, it can usually be regarded as interference by man rather than coming from God, so it can be removed and condemned to decontaminate the religion.

This could even be done with Islam, because even though all of the Qur'an supposedly comes "direct" from God (via an angel and a prophet), it is perfectly reasonable to think that God have put the hate in there on purpose in order to test people so that they could condemn themselves to hell by failing to condemn it. Islam is for the most part benign, so there would be plenty of it left if all the hate was stripped out. Islam needs a reform with a new Qur'an (and Hadith) being produced with all the hate removed so that good Muslims can switch over to using it and condemn all the hate that's been removed from it. The same applies to any other religion with hate in it - all of them should be forced to reform and to outlaw the removed hate so that it stops generating conflict. The primary hate in religions kills people, as does primary hate in any other kinds of ideology, and all of them need to be stamped on in the same way to render them benign.

I agree with most your points in general but I believe you got it wrong with your views on Islam-proper. Majority of so-called Muslims are actually pseudo-Muslims.

In the present state, I did not agree we should write off communism and religions in general.

Note in terms of ideology driven via a book, the Mein Kempf is condemned everywhere as suppressed.
Relatively the Quran is WORST than the Mein Kempf in terms of anti-semitism [leading to a real genocide] and hatred against ALL non-Muslims.
http://cspipublishing.com/statistical/T ... _Text.html

One point is the Quran is so messy that it is difficult for most to understand. That the Quran is associated with a 'religion' [supposedly all by default are peaceful] enable its loads of evil elements to be veiled over.

I have spent years researching the Quran and Islam and I have OBJECTIVE evidence the Quran, i.e. the core of Islam is inherent evil against the rest of humanity. In general, >55% of the 6,236 verses of the Quran are laden with hatred towards non-believers and the killer blows are the direct verses that sanction the killing of non-believers merely because they do not believe in Allah and his messenger.

It is not a case of twisting the meaning of the verses. No Muslims would dare to twist the verses commanded by Allah else they will be burnt in Hell.
Therefore those Muslims who had killed or will be killing non-Muslims [merely because they are disbelievers] did it because they sincerely believe it is their divine duty to please Allah to ensure their salvation in Paradise and to avoid going to Hell.

Note I am not imply ALL Muslims will adhere strictly to the commands of the Quran to kill non-Muslims. The critical and real problem is even if 10% of Muslims obey the words of Allah, that is 150 million potential Muslims out there on a ever ready to kill non-Muslims. This is so evident and is a fact, i.e. here is one stats among others;



Get rid of the 55% of evil laden verses?
The problem is the Quran as the perfect words of a perfect God are commanded within the Quran to be immutable, therefore no imperfect humans can change God's words.

Thus the first thing humanity need to do is to expose the truth of what the Quran really is, i.e. reveal all the evil elements within the Quran. From that basis, humanity should do the right thing to ensure there is no more threat from Islam.