We all know now that Sam Harris has Muslim friends.
I’m proud to say I have humanist friends.
It is true that fear, hatred, and hostility of some Western people toward Islam and Muslims help made Muslims all over the world more religious, more fundamentalists, and more terrorists. We who were born in Muslim family but became an atheists and fighting Muslim fundamentalists know very well how difficult this fight has become.
We know there is a conflict. But the conflict is not between the West and Islam. Or West and East, or Christianity/Judaism/Hinduism and Islam. The conflict is between secularism and fundamentalism, between rational logical minds and irrational blind faith, between innovation and tradition, between humanism and barbarism, between the future and the past, between the people who value freedom and the people who do not.
Alas, Sam Harris thinks all religions are equally ridiculous, but some are more equally ridiculous than others. He has a hang-up about Islam, which distorts his thinking and affects his credibility, I’m afraid.
BTW I didn’t trouble to join the comment storms on previous threads about this, but Harris doesn’t understand Bayes Theorem — the same problem that causes people to put too much trust in screening tests in the medical context, for example. Bayes Theorem is extremely important in all sorts of contexts, an essential key to critical thinking. It needs to get a lot more attention.
About Bayes: agreed.
That’s a good quote.
cervantes:
I suppose in Harris’s case one could say that his strong prior is overwhelming the data.
Sam showed what side of that fight he was on with the 911 Mosque.
Christ on a fucking crutch:
From now on, I’m not an atheist. I don’t want to be tarred with the same brush as Sam Harris and fuckbrains like this douchehole.
I like Ms Nasreen’s post.
That being said, I’m torn about Harris apparent position (at least as it is framed by Cervantes above, that some religions are more equally ridiculous than others).
I married into a Persian family (I’m a standard atheist “WASPy” mongrel). They fled from Iran when things got too insane there (post-Shah, beginning of the theocracy, etc). Many of their family remained. I’ve been immersed in Persian history, culture, pride – and the horror of Iran’s current flavor of Islam. I have heard what has happened to my in-laws’ family post-Revolution – the oppression, violence, persecution, fear. If the current climate continues, my children will never be able to visit the country of one set of their grandparents.
In a funny way, I’ve seen a fear (from Persians!) of a rampant Iran trump their fear of a rampant TSA…
For the sake of intellectual consistency, I disagree with Harris. For the sake of the pragmatic reality of my in-laws (and their deceased – dare I say murdered? – family members back home), I’m not entirely sure.
Scriabin — I agree that some particular manifestations of whatever given religion are more destructive than others. But I would say that all religious traditions are diverse, yet any religion has the potential to mutate into a particularly destructive from because if you believe one thing on faith, you can believe anything. What I would not do is single out Islam as being uniquely dangerous. If you want to get into the horrors perpetrated in the name of Christianity, look no further than George W. Bush.
@scriabin
Sam Harris position? He wants your in-laws’ family nuked for his safety, and he wants your spouse to be profiled and treated as a terrorist until proof in contrary.
There, is it easier to choose now?
We note that fundamentalists of most religions are more immediately dangerous than their moderate counterparts all the time.
Cervantes – I absolutely agree. And obviously the bias of my in-laws is that – even in a George W. Bush America (eeesh) – they can feel “more safe” than they can in their own homeland. It’s a relativist position, I guess, based on their subjective reality. It certainly doesn’t make a Bush America a good thing!
FI.
Torture, the suppression of human rights based on the belonging to certain ethnic and religious groups…
Sam probably doesn’t disagree. It’s just like so many other white guys, he’s pretty sure he can tell who’s for freedom and who isn’t just by looking at them. That’s essentially his argument in the first place, but he’s sloppily using someone being Muslim as a stand in for someone who hates freedom.
well isn’t that just adorably naive.
Humans are deeply irrational; rationality or “sensibility” needs to be practiced and trained, and none of us are rational or sensible all the time. people aren’t generally even “harmless” in the strict sense of the word, but pretty much by definition, most people are averagely harmless. which, if you’re a straight white western dude, is pretty fucking harmless (and if you’re, say, a black trans woman, then pretty much everybody is pretty fucking dangerous to you, pretty much regardless of whether they believe in magical beings or not).
To paraphrase Swift, humans ate decidedly NOT sensible creatures, they are creatures capable of sensibility.
And why should we assume anything without evidence, are you suggesting that “every human is sensible” is a parsimonious null hypothesis? If so, it is one which evidence had already falsified.
Just because you say it is, doesn’t make it so. The proof of this argument can only come from assertion.
I found this article regarding screening in PNAS that may be of interest to this discussion. The cover story from This Week In PNAS reads:
Here’s the paper title and abstract:
Strong profiling is not mathematically optimal for discovering rare malfeasors, PNAS February 10, 2009 vol. 106 no. 6 1716-1719:
Backlash Effect?
Cervantes @1 wrote;
Interesting. I’m curious about this. In what ways are you using Bayes Theorem here and how is Harris not understanding it? I have an interest in this because we use Bayesian probability estimates in our models of causal eQTL analysis of transcriptomes. Sorry, that’s jargon… we use Bayesian techniques (among others) to try to predict how each genes expression controls other genes expression traits and/or clinical traits.
I don’t want to derail the, um, conversation on this thread so I will, as they say on PBS, take your answer off the air.
woah, Brownian. Thanks for the link to that paper. Holy crap. Wish I’d seen that before. Pretty much blows my position out of the water.
Good to see someone actually looked at this from a statistical POV. It was published in 2009. I wonder if any further work has been done. If I’ve time I’ll browse PubMed.
Gonna go out on a limb here and say that muslims are much more likely to experience fear, hatred and hostility from other muslims than from westerners. How does this affect their religiosity?
Cheer up. Regime change is reasonably to be expected in the next 5-10 years.
Some effort was made to discover the real results of the 2009 elections. It is thought that there was 56-57% support for Achmedinajad/the regime i.e. Khamenei and the reactionary form of Islamic Revolution. On a theory of essentially generationally based support and reasonable calculations of population turnover, the majority support tipping point in the Iranian population could be around 2013 or 2014.
This doesn’t manifest into political form immediately, of course, let alone control of government. But tacit majority opposition that continues to grow does generate a widespread skepticism about the regime. A social sense forms that the regime is living on borrowed time and benefit of the doubt.
The 2009 election results were quite possibly falsified by the regime precisely because the real numbers would reveal a tipping point a lot closer than most expected.
The internet gives rise to such nasty people, and their comments. I am sure every person has had unpopular opinions before throughout their life.
I don’t agree with Sam, I think commenting on TSA saves less lives, then doing scientific research on neurological diseases for example, Alzheimer’s disease.
Researchers showing that brain functionality is responsible for consciousness would do more for Atheism, than to comment about airport security.
Sam Harris is only a human being; as hitch would say we have under developed primate brains.
Dear god the stupid
From the 1st comment:
I wonder why? Could it be the 9/11 atrocities? The daily suicide bombings? The beheadings? The death penalties for blasphemy? The religious indoctrination? The fact that if a Muslim grows up and becomes an atheist he risks being murdered it he talks about it?
I bet those 9/11 victims, after jumping to avoid the flames, and while looking forward to exploding into a red mist, had a hang-up about Islam. And then there’s their relatives. Thousands of them. Children without parents, wives and husbands without spouses, best friends lost, all thanks to Islam.
And cervantes seems to think there’s something wrong with having “a hang-up about Islam”. I don’t get that logic. I really don’t understand. What makes some people here so incredibly wimpy?
Make it stop.
humanape, let me spell it out for you.
Islam is a shitty religion. So are all the others.
You are a shitty human. So are all the other zealots.
I’m so fucking sick of this useless, libertarian piece of shit.
…between authoritarians and not authoritarians.
I wonder if humanape is JamesEvans sockpuppet.
I bet those 9/11 victims, after jumping to avoid the flames, and while looking forward to exploding into a red mist
hey, vaporization has got to be better than burning.
besides, you leave a lasting impression.
oh, wait, you don’t think you’re funny, do you?
sorry.
What makes some people here so incredibly wimpy?
what makes some people so unable to see the point?
what makes some people spin strawmen?
I could answer those questions, but then I would have to kill you.
This paranoia about criticism of Islam just makes atheists appear like hypocrites and cowards. No one here ever wails about ‘prejudice’ when Catholicism is under attack, even though a huge portion, if not the majority, of practising Catholics are currently non-white.
One needs only see the open hostility on much of the left towards ex-Muslim critics of Islam like Hirsi Ali, Taslima Nasrin, Salman Rushdie, Ibn Warraq, Ehsan Jami, Wafa Sultan and recently Mona Eltahawy to see the corruption of secular principle by the political.
When such ex-Muslim of colour are attacked as “Islamophobes”, “Orientalists” and even more laughably, “racists”, then it just places such attacks on Sam Harris in perspective.
Here is a brilliant passage from a recent open letter from Maryam Namazie and several other Muslim-born critics of Islam:
That is what many of the people who post here do on a regular basis.
Don’t you fucking dare.
No one gave you the right to use other people’s suffering to advance your own hateful, bigoted agenda, asshole.
Here’s what I bet about the 9/11 victims’ families: I bet their viewpoints are just as diverse as any other random group of people. I’ll also bet that there were a good number of Muslims who were victims that day, who didn’t deserve to die any more than the non-Muslims.
I am so sick of this fucking shit.
Sam Harris is only a human being; as hitch would say we have under developed primate brains.
though I also wouldn’t put it past Hitch to end up basically agreeing with Harris, thus supporting what you quoted him as saying.
This paranoia about criticism of Islam just makes atheists appear like hypocrites and cowards. No one here ever wails about ‘prejudice’ when Catholicism is under attack, even though a huge portion, if not the majority, of practising Catholics are currently non-white.
more ridiculous strawmen, based on projected ignorance.
WHAT paranoia? the stuff you manufacture to fill your strawman?
Keep going with this theme, PZ, it sure is dredging up the cockroaches. At least it’s more interesting than the standard creationist trolls.
You know, if you fucking bigots would do us all a favour and shoot yourselves in your underground bunkers, we wouldn’t have to worry about you pieces of shit jamming your fucking bigotry in with criticisms of Islam.
Just like we can’t fucking talk about reproductive rights without the sexist fucks chiming in, and we can’t discuss issues of ethnic minorities without the racists hedging in their shit.
People like you are the problem, you fucking blight on humanity. You!
Bayes with shitty priors is GIGO.
Ichthy:
They weren’t allowed to play dodgeball when they were growing up. Sad, really.
But seriously…
Because Islam is no more a monolith than any of the other major religions. Because they don’t all believe the exact same shit, and some really do practice it as a “religion of peace.” Because some Muslims come to America for the same reason my ancestors did–it sucked where they were. Because they don’t want to live under imposed theocratic rules any more than liberal Christians want to live in Rick Santorum’s America. Because some are every bit the victims that those who died when the twin towers went down were.
And you wander in and tar them with the same brush as you do the perpetrators of the atrocities.
Do you understand yet?
(Whoa. I doubled up on the blockquote fail, there. Go me!)
Be fair, Islam is an incredibly shit religion, and I think Harris’ point is being misunderstood anyway.
When he says someone ‘who could conceivably be Muslim’, he doesn’t just mean brown people or people with beards; indeed his criteria for it is so wide that it seems more likely he’s merely saying who should not be profiled.
He’s saying small old ladies and small old men shouldn’t be profiled because, c’mon, they’re fine, really.
He also says at the beginning that he finds the whole facade a joke, but he just thinks this will make it better.
None of the other terrorists that have been mentioned in opposition to Harris have not fit his criteria.
Every bit as frustrating, though.
“If we took the bones out, it wouldn’t be crunchy, would it?“
So his suggestion isn’t practical.
Until terrorists note that small old ladies and small old men are considerably underscreened and use them to smuggle aboard contraband.
So his suggestion is dangerous.
So his suggestion is poorly thought out and facetious.
So his suggestion is useless.
Thanks, ryanwilkinson.
Fair enough, Brownian, his suggestion isn’t the best of ideas and I’m not saying it is, but he is being branded as some kind of evil wanker when in reality, he just doesn’t want poor old people to be harassed.
Having read his article, he’s much more articulate and well-thought out than he’s being characterised as; he does link to an article describing Israel’s profiling; which has, as far as I can tell, not been mentioned whatsoever.
Disagree with him fine, I’m not a huge fan of airport security, I don’t think anyone is; but don’t make him out to be a bigoted racist when he just isn’t.
I am pretty sure it has been brought up a number of times in relation to Harris’ article, just not in this thread.
Then my error.
That’s good, because it’s a fucking terrible idea.
You think this is the first shit of Harris’ anybody’s read?
Yeah, you’re not the only to have read it.
You and I differ on what well-thought out means. If it were well-thought out, he would have anticipated the immediate criticisms of how a known profiling system can be gamed rather than fucking whining about PC.
Have you read any of the other threads on which this has been discussed? Israel comes up every time.
He just isn’t? Where the hell do you people come from? This is not the first thing Harris has said that can be construed as particularly anti-Muslim, (as opposed to, say, any number of other terrorist groups). Along with his defence of torture, this is just one more item in Harris’ bag of “Let’s get tough on Islam” that’s more wanking than thinking.
Right, he just wants poor old Muslims to be harassed, which is totally not what an evil wanker would do.
Using articulate or persuasive rhetoric doesn’t make one’s arguments cogent or ethical. If you think it’s well thought-out, you could do a bit of thinking and explain what these thoughts are which we aren’t appreciating.
So? Who says we need to profile like Israel?
Oh, I see. He just isn’t a bigoted racist? Would you say he’s a non-bigoted racist or a bigoted non-racist?
Is there some rule which states that poor old people, or people who appear poor and old, cannot be terrorists?
Have you fuckers ever read anything that Harris has written? Am I the only fucking person to actually read The End of Faith??
I had to put that shit down because Harris’ argument boiled down to: Israel = Teh Awesum!! Muslims = the the most violent and savage people EVAR!
Have we covered the propensity for terrorists to be engineers already? Or, to use Sam Harris logic, “It’s ridiculous to let this tyranny of political correctness go unchecked when we already know that a large proportion of terrorists are engineers. I cannot stand to see another Comp Lit major unjustly hassled, so we should profile Muslims. Yeah, you heard me. Plus, what if Central Park had a bomb in it? Therefore torture. Buy my books!”
I’ve always noticed this about people on this thread; I have said nothing outrageous, I have said nothing directly offensive to any of you, and you instantly start delving into just mockery and not particularly interesting responses. I’m sure you’ll come up with some clever tearing-down of this paragraph. ‘Whiny’ or ‘baby’ or perhaps something about me not knowing the dangers of the horrifically scary pharyngula thread, but yeah, bear that in mind. I understand with Human Ape, but I have literally just disagreed with you and I get some average to below mockery? No need!
But fine. No, I don’t think this is the first ‘shit of Harris” anybody’s ever read, but thank you for asking.
Am I not the only one to have read it? Again, Brownian, your wit astounds.
‘How a known profile system can be gamed.’ Yeah fine; so can a non-known one. Harris’ might not be any better but it’s not like if it’s implemented OMG OLD PEOPLE WITH BOMBS but okay fine, if you want.
I have read the other threads, sadly I’ve not read every single comment, Brownian. Clearly you have the time to do nothing else but I have better things to do than read countless threads defending one minor article. OH OH I CAN DO IT TOO.
I’m anti-Muslim, I’m anti-Christian, I’m anti-Sikh, I’m anti-Buddhist, I’m anti-fat-people-who-complain-about-being-fat. So him being anti-Muslim, I’m afraid, is not going to upset me.
Where the hell do I come from? Clearly a tightly woven knit of racists and horrifying people whose entire existence is to disagree with you Brownian. Horrifying.
I disagree with Sam Harris on torture, yeah, but the correct response is to say ‘Hey Sam, you’re wrong about torture, here’s a look at a few things that might change your mind’ then if he doesn’t proceed to get angry. NOT OMG SAM SUPPORTS TORTURE HE’S THE MOST EVIL OF THE EVILLEST OMG WHAT A FUCKING MORON LOOL.
Yeah, I don’t see why he’s whining about PC when you lot clearly have access to some shocking, shocking rhetoric. ‘Shits of’, I’m impressed.
Consciousness Razor’s ‘So, who says we need to profile like Israel’ has however irritated me, as he’s not disagreeing with the precedent (which would be fine, if how I’m aware Israel is doing it is an incorrect awareness, inform me), but to accept that what Israel does works and then not emulate it is madness.
I’m lucky I typed this through the tears, who knows what Brownian will throw at me next; maybe he’ll call me a ‘fuckbrain’ or a ‘douchehole’. I’m frightened.
maybe that’s because since about the end of WWII, there is no significant prejudice and discrimination against Catholics and the ethnic groups with which that religion has been associated?
nah, can’t be it. must be because being pro-Islam is fashionable or something.
That’s the way it works around these parts…. Destroy Sam Harris and promote Taslima Nasreen even though it makes no sense.
Villify TheAmazingAtheist because he wasn’t on Rebecca Watson’s side.
First make your dehumanize your enemy and then everyone forgets what the argument was really about.
Whip up a froth with the zombie followers and sell merchandise.
ryanwilkinson
My reason for asking about old people, in relation to Harris not wanting them to be hassled, was the seeming tacit assumption that being old magically makes one less likely to have a cause one is willing to die/commit atrocities in the name of.
This does not add up, as you so eloquently put it, to “OMG OLD PEOPLE WITH BOMBS”.
Perhaps, when you’ve finished bloviating, you could tell me why old people are magically more trustworthy and therefore need not be hassled in the course of security procedures?
Oh and ConsciousnessRazor, I forgot to applaud you for saying the stuff about bigoted non-racist or non-bigoted racist. You got me there, they’re obviously exact synonyms.
It’s not like ‘bigoted’ can relate to religious and cultural stuff, whereas ‘racist’ sometimes! tends to be more skin colour and cultural, you truly have slain me. Alas.
Okay, Daz, you’re right; the only conceivable solution is to profile everyone.
Or maybe it’s because it’s just that old people are less likely to commit terrorism, maybe it’s because most terrorists ever have been extremely young and yes okay maybe most terrorists ever have been engineers but I don’t know how to spot an engineer on sight, sadly.
I like the word bloviating though, filled with boasts mine was. Hey, remember that sentence where I said I was the best? That was a good sentence.
Missing the point. Have you EVEN READ any of these threads?
Strike one.
Missing the point. TheAmazingAtheist was vilifed, and rightly so, for the MISOGYNY HE DIRECTLY DISPLAYED. Watson was peripheral to the whole thing. At most the trigger that revealed the ugliness inside.
Strike two.
If you are going to make a charge like this, PROVIDE HARD EVIDENCE IN SUPPORT OF IT RIGHT NOW OR ADMIT YOU ARE LYING.
Strike three.
You’re out.
Goodbye.
Buy my books!
yeah, that’s what the whole thing smells like to me.
‘Sam Harris position? He wants your in-laws’ family nuked for his safety, and he wants your spouse to be profiled and treated as a terrorist until proof in contrary.’
Vilifying Sam Harris and saying he’s said things he’s explicitly said he’s not for, happy enough for proof Amphiox?
The baseball metaphor had me on my toes though. Would you get to three, would you not? Would he make it, would he not? Absolute madness.
Indeed. Hey, if we’re profiling everyone, maybe it would be easier to drop the profiling and just take a random sample of ‘everyone’. That way no one, of any outwardly-apparent age, sex, religion or race, could be sure of passing through security unchecked.
Oh, wait…
And your whole fucking comment added up to a boast of ‘I know best, now shut up, mere mortals’.
That’s the way it works around these parts….
*pictures a strawman with the label: “These Parts” strung about its neck*
I’m guessing all this irrational diatribe is being projected HERE, from somewhere else?
Are there rejects from another blog somwhere coming here to whinge that nobody listened to them there, either?
wtf?
saying he’s said things he’s explicitly said
*headdesk*
OK, I’ve had enough of this insanity.
off to do something productive.
Oh waaaaaah, Ryan. We’ve been seeing this same shit for, what? Three or four threads now and the knee-jerk defense of Harris and his bigotry is fucking old.
Thanks. We try.
Well, we’ve got two options: You’re either so bigoted yourself that you can’t see Harris for what he is or you haven’t actually read anything substantial of his. Which is it, Ryan?
(I guess there’s a third possibility that you’re not actually smart enough to comprehend what Harris is arguing in his books. But pointing that out would just be offensive.
Whoops.)
Do you want a fucking cookie or something?
Also, if that’s the case, why don’t you want Christians to be profiled? Depending on where you are (for example: the US), they pose a much bigger thread than Muslim terrorists.
Aaaaaaah, one of those. Keep on fat-shaming, you crazy free thinker, you! It’s edgy and cool to make fat jokes, amIright?
God, you’re dumb.
There is a difference in criticizing Islam (or Judaism or Buddhism) without making hateful, divisive statements about every person who practices said religion.
Here’s a fun exercise: Take any statement about Muslims and apply it to Jews. Does it trip your antisemitism meter? Then it’s a fucking bigoted statement.
(God, I am so close to Godwinning this argument.)
If you’re not repulsed by the endorsement of torture, then you are a despicable piece of filth.
But, we’ve already figured out that you’re not a terribly compassionate or thoughtful person.
Oh! Sarcasm! Here, have a gold star!
“I’m not prejudiced. Some of my best friends are
NegroesSinister Swarthy Oriental Terrorists”I do know best. And you should shut up, I’m kinda the god of the winds.
Anyway, I did originally say I thought the whole thing was shit. I don’t think there is a good way of going about it. I’m just saying Harris’ isn’t some kind of horrible maniac, and it’s unfair to treat him as such.
I don’t know the statistics to be able to tell you if old people are a significant threat, but *completely* random profiling to me just seems silly.
Sorry, it just dawned on me what ryanwilkinson was chuntering on about, boast-wise.
To bloviate is to speak pompously and/or boastfully.
You are not entitled to be the sole arbiter of this.
Nor this. Your sense of entitlement regarding having the sole right to decide what is approporiate for OTHER PEOPLE MAY FEEL is in itself rather offensive.
Then don’t presume that you have some special entitlement to make COMMENTS ABOUT THE CONTENTS OF THOSE THREADS which you do not have the time to read. Strange that you seem to have plenty of time to come and whine on this part of the thread.
What the hell are you defining as mockery? I see nothing but aggressive disagreement with your statements. Some of these disagreements use the rhetorical ploy of reductio ad absurdum, but OF THE POSITION. In fact, mostly they are of HARRIS’ POSITION, without hardly a direct reference to you AT ALL.
If this level of frankly GENTLE disagreement is too much for you to handle, you don’t belong on this thread, or this blog, for your own psychology safety.
You asserted that he’s not a “bigoted racist.” Though you might think no one can dispute your assertions, I gave you two other options, which you’ve now misinterpreted as implying they’re the same thing. So I’ll drag this out much further than it needs to be: is he neither bigoted nor racist?
The ACCUSATION was DEHUMANIZATION.
Vilification DOES NOT EQUAL dehumanization.
No, it is not proof. Not even evidence. Not even circumstantial evidence.
One wonders if you even understand what the word “evidence” means.
Strike one for you.
Ryan:
Citation and definition of “old” needed.
Francis Gerald Grady, who was arrested for bombing a Planned Parenthood in April, is 50. Is that “old”? (It’s certainly middle aged.) Or, hell, do you even consider that terrorism?
Yeah, I know some Muslims. and some Sikhs, and some Christians. In my day I’ve met representative samples of just about every religion under the sun.
They’re all wrong. Every blasted one of them. none of their fundamental assumptions about the nature of life is correct.
All of them believe in an imaginary deity, whether it’s Yaweh or Yog-Sothoth. And nearly all of them include a subset of believers who also believe that not only is it acceptable but that it brings the favor of their deity to murder those who disagree with their religious dogma. I do not care which imaginary thing they claim ordered them to murder. I further do not care if they’re brown, blue, pink or green with yellow spots. I’ve said it before — we need a certain level of airport security (and ports in general.) But it can be done without all the nonsense we see now.
Random stops coupled with behavioral profiling should be the best plan. Not perfect — no such security scheme will ever be perfect — but good enough to stop or wrongfoot most of them.
Then forget the profiling as the red herring it is, and try completely random security checks.
I don’t like torture, no, and I’m confident from what I’ve read it doesn’t work, but I can see, I suppose, why, someone would think it would work. And I don’t think it’s a malicious thing, I think it is a paranoid thing, and the best way to get someone out of paranoia isn’t to yell at them and call them stupid, it’s to calmly explain to them they’re wrong.
No yes fat jokes make me cool, I’ve got nothing else going for me (except being god of the winds) so I have to make them. Go fat people, really. I’m all for it.
I will take a statement about Muslims and apply it to Jews.
‘They all believe in stupid shit.’ I’m fine with this one.
‘They oppress women,’ fine with this one too.
‘A fair amount of them tend to practise hate-speech against the west and often call to overthrow it.’ Doesn’t really apply to the Jews, so I don’t know what to do with this one.
A cookie would be nice. The gold star, too.
And yes, I’m not a huge fan of Islam ergo I have no compassion. Will you be my psychiatrist? I’ve been looking for an internet busybody for a while now.
Then you are a bigot. Hint: “Muslim” describes a group of PEOPLE. Being anti-[group of people] is bigotry.
Islam is the religion. If you are against the religion and its teachings, then you are anti-Islam. Being anti-Islam does not make you a bigot.
Being anti-Muslim does.
Then you are a bigot. Christian is for the group of people. The religion is Christianity.
Then you are a bigot.
The religion is Sikhism.
Strike three again. Looks like your inning will soon be over.
I agree with DLC.
Amphiox, saying someone wants to nuke entire countries kinda dehumanises them a bit but if such minor semantical issues bother you then fine, I’m sorry.
But if it helps dehumanise means to take away being human. ‘Being Human’ doesn’t mean what it literally says, it also means something about being part of the human condition and being compassionate which nuking entire countries isn’t.
So either carry on being you or take away my strike, I like baseball, I don’t want to go out.
I did say I don’t know the statistics well enough about being old, but I don’t know enough about the connections of planned parenthood to the government or precise definitions of terrorism to define it for you, but if it’s a government organisation then yes terrorism.
I think Harris means people who are like 70, 80, +.
The obvious problem with profiling a specific group of people is that once people wise up to it they will try to get around it by using people that do not fit the profile.
As for the performance of profiling vs. random sampling, just take a look at post #17 in this very thread where there is a paper that discusses this. If the summary is accurate it seems to indicate that
So we’ve established that at some age <70 years, people suddenly become more trustworthy and less likely to be terrorists?
How, and what is this magical age?
I didn’t get a strike two, this seems unfair, but fine, that was an egregious error on my part, I apologise. I’m anti-Islam, Sikhism, and Christianity.
And no, I’m not suggesting we kill them all, before anyone jumps in with that. Just keep doing what’s being done.
[meta]
ryanwilkinson:
You’ve got nothing but your opinion, and so you repeat it ad nauseam.
Yes, you’ve made more than abundantly clear that you think others’ opinions of Harris are wrong, that you think Harris is being demonised and that so are you.
It is very very tedious, since you don’t know how to argue and your case is… nothing but your shitty opinion.
(Bah!)
I like Travis.
And I’m not saying there’s a magical age, but it seems very unlikely that people who can barely walk are going to be hiding bombs and no I’m not saying everyone over 70 can barely walk.
I already said I agreed with DLC and he said random stops and behavioural profiling, that’s better.
I just don’t think Harris is getting a fair deal, here.
I’m confident that homeopathy doesn’t work. I can also see why people would think that homeopathy is a good idea.
Yet I don’t go around complaining when other criticize homeopaths because of this. Because homeopathy is a scam. And scams hurt people.
And I’m pretty sure torture does more harm than homeopathy does. Why do you expect us to treat advocates of torture so much more gently than we would advocate of homeopathy?
I don’t think most evil actions are done out of malice. I suspect that most of the people who do terrible things did not have bad intentions.
But that doesn’t mean that we should ignore the actual harm done by their actions. That doesn’t mean that we should stop yelling about how wrong those actions are.
Shouting and calm explanations both have their place. Harris has received both.
You have some weird ideas about what constitutes “destroying” somebody, I’m afraid; if you have some reason why you think the criticism of the bigotry evident in Harris’ writings is off-base, please explain rather than use loaded terms that aren’t really accurate.
Taslima, I seem to recall, has come in for some criticism “around these parts” as well.
And TheAmazingAtheist was vilified mostly for making rape threats against a rape victim. Do you wish to defend that?
No it does not. Not even a little bit. It actually REINFORCES the target’s humanity, but in a humans are EVIL BASTARDS sort of association. But it is NOT DEHUMANIZING. The act of nuking something is an act that ONLY HUMANS CAN DO, at least on this planet.
It is you who is dishonestly twisting semantics to make the words fit, screaming in agony, to fit your deluded and erroneous argument. And in doing so you are actually trivializing real dehumanization.
That’s another strike. You’re on your last out.
I’ve literally said I agree with DLC, who doesn’t agree with Harris. But people here tend to be very, very aggressive and then accuse others of aggression. But no yes it’s just ‘my own opinion’ despite directly agreeing with someone else. And Daz said something I was going to agree with too, about profiling being a red herring.
I’m just saying the best response to Sam Harris isn’t ASHUSIDARACIST. It’s almost certainly racial profiling doesn’t work, here’s why, etc.
I still like Travis.
That was one at-bat, three strikes.
You were still at strike one on the other at-bat. (On strike two now.)
I find it very hard to imagine that anyone would kill themselves and up to several thousand other people to make a political and/or religious point. Having been sadly disabused of such naïvité I can’t, for the life of me, see why age or a lack of some mobility should be a barrier to such behaviour. If they can get on a plane and have the ability to carry hand-luggage, they’re as much a threat as the next radical.
But ryanwilkinson apparently wanted to, by proxy, jumping in like he did to defend Porco Dio from the criticism I directed specifically at it.
I never said don’t criticise people who like torture, I’m not saying don’t tell Sam Harris torture is wrong, I never said that. They should be told calmly and then aggressively, I think I said that.
Sigh, Amphiox, here’s the definition:
“Mankind; human beings as a group.
The human condition or nature.
The quality of being benevolent.”
‘The quality of being benevolent.’ Come on now, Amphiox, I’m sure you’re not so childish to think ‘dehumanising’ and ‘making like an animal’ are the same? It can be seen as dehumanising, there’s your evidence.
Your baseball metaphor is tiring, now.
Fair enough Daz. I’ll rescind the point that old people are less likely to be terrorists. But it just seems that way :(
Ryan:
It doesn’t fucking matter if the person who advocates torture is paranoid or not, what matters is that they’re advocating for fucking war crimes. (Also, you’re not qualified to give a psychological diagnosis over the ‘tubes, idiot.)
Jesus Christ, you do realize that real, living people are being maimed and murdered because of the disastrous US policy toward “enemy combatants”, don’t you? Where the fuck is your compassion for the people that are being harmed?
Sam Harris’ feelings don’t count in this discussion, but making torture unacceptable is. You don’t get any-fucking-where by coddling people. No one has ever achieved change by being polite.
And this issue is a societal issue– every piece of scum who’s position is in line with Harris’ needs to be loudly called out. It is not acceptable, no matter who has said it.
Is this English?
Instead of your trite answers, try this: Instead of insisting that any Muslim is a potential threat to our security*, let’s say that any Jew is a potential threat to our security.
Hmmm, that doesn’t sound too good, does it? It’s starting to sound a little… no, I won’t say it.
*Shorter Harris and all that.
Well, that’s settled. You 1) can’t read for comprehension and 2) don’t know the difference between Islam (the group of varying religious practices) and Muslims (individual, diverse people).
Dude, you’re the one who insisted on having a whiny fucking wankfest about how absolutely mean we all are to poor, poor defenseless Sam Harris, not me.
I never said I supported torture! I am really against torture!
I’m not fussed about Harris’ feelings, I’m fussed at this mischaracterisation of him! And don’t tell me the only thing in the world I can possibly be fussed about is torture.
Jews haven’t demonstrated themselves to be as violent as Muslims, lets be realistic, so the sentence just doesn’t make sense.
It is English. Ironic that that dig came right after you said ‘who’s’ when you meant ‘whose’. Oh, the shame.
ryanwilkinson
So, Harris ‘just wanting to not see poor old people hassled’ is now defenestrated as a reason for profiling. Care to pick another group Harris might be in favour of giving an easy ride through security? Or shall we just take it as a given that all groups, as far as airline security services are concerned, are an equal threat?
(“It just seems that way” is never a good thing to base policy on. It so often turns out that [X] is not as it seems, when investigated.)
Yes, it’s incorrect. Fine, I did say a while ago that I agreed with DLC about random security checks and behavioural profiling.
But I still don’t think this is something to vilify Harris over, it seems like a genuine mistake.
Ryan:
Terrorism can only be perpetrated against a government? Since when? If you don’t know what terrorism is, maybe you should bow out of this conversation and educate yourself.
(Also, I’d like to point the World Trade Centers Association is not a government entity.)
You think? That’s the best defense that you’ve got?
This chew toy is getting old.
And he has asked that expert to tell him what’s what, so he’s not against-learning.
I’d put this down more to a misunderstanding of airport security than a massive racist thing.
Ryan, how would you define the word “racist”? Because you seem to be insisting that Harris isn’t a racist, he’s simply misunderstood the situation. And I don’t know when misunderstanding a situation and advocating racist policies became mutually exclusive.
Audley, I did say I didn’t know the precise definitions of terrorism, but I know enough to know Harris in this context is talking about blowing up planes and shit.
Sorry, but the fact you call yourself ‘darkheart’ is just irritating.
And yes, I think. You however have assumed the worst in him, and since he’s not said ‘brown people’ or defined age himself, it’s a fair estimation I’d say. I don’t think by old he means fully capable fifty year olds, the example he gives is of a very old lady, so yeah, I think.
Yeah I’m a chewtoy, great well done, you’re a dog.
Do you think advocating what amounts to racial profiling (it’s impossible to profile religion by appearance alone) is a relatively minor mistake to make?
Well maybe he should have asked a relevant expert before advocating a system of institutionalised racism. People listen to him. He therefore has a duty to get the facts before spouting off.
I don’t think he’s racist because he’s not specified colour as a basis.
I don’t think he’s racist because, at worst, he is anti-Islam; anti-Muslim, but I don’t think he’s anti-Middle Eastern/South Asian.
*head, meat desk. Desk, meet head.*
The vilification, if that’s what it is, is resulting from a number of mistakes that all seem to be in the same direction. Acceptance of torture, coming out against the Ground Zero “Mosque,” and now advocating singling out people who “look Muslim,” suggest some sort of systemic error.
For many here, he has used up his “benefit of the doubt.”
Yes, I do think it’s minor.
Harris’ audience isn’t a bunch of idiots, as you lot have proved by your vehement disagreement, so I don’t think it’s fair to say that he alone could cause a problem.
But I appreciate that lack of influence isn’t a good reason to defend something. I think it’s minor because I don’t think it’s *completely* irrational to be afraid of Islam.
And I still don’t think it’s racism, I don’t think his criteria were small enough for it to be racist. Yes race can help you guess what religion someone is, but I don’t think that’s racist in and of itself; Harris seems more to be anti-searching-old-people than pro-searching-brown people. If anything he’s ‘ageist’.
ryanwilkinson,
I am really curious about this. What criteria do you think Harris might have meant when it comes to developing a profile?
Ryan:
Don’t care.
You’re too busy hero-worshiping to actually speak out against it.
What characterization of him?
You never actually answered if you’ve read and understood any of his published writings. Harris made it clear that he was an anti-Muslim, torture supporting bigot years ago.
lolwut?
I suppose Israel is a happy place full of peace-loving unicorns who shit grilled cheese sandwiches and belch Dr Pepper, huh? Oh wait, all of the violence is the Palestinian’s fault, right? The Israeli government isn’t culpable at all, are they?
My point wasn’t whether or not you think Jews were capable of violence (lolwut?), but if that statement sounded bigoted. For fuck’s sake, you don’t even see Jewish people as real people, do you?
There’s another example of you failing to read for comprehension.
*Yawn* I’ve been insulted by far better and more eloquent people that you, sweetheart. Try again.
Yeah okay his anti-mosque thing was pretty horrific but, you know, oh it wasn’t even a mosque.
Oh Sam Harris.
@ RyanWilkinson
But the thing is, Harris said that we should be profiling “Muslim looking” people.
I can’t tell whether or not someone is a Muslim simply by looking at them. However, the stereotypical Muslim is Arab.
Unless you have another explanation for what Harris meant by “Muslim looking”, I think it’s reasonable to conclude that Harris meant that we should be profiling Arabs.
How do you recognise a Muslim? You’re a member of airport security, remember, seeing this person for the first time. We’re not talking about the security forces, who might well have prior knowledge of the person in question.
There’s a queue of people in front of you, of mixed ethnicity, none dressed in overtly Muslim-ey clothes. Pick me out the probable Muslims, without relying on racial features.
I really cannot believe we are having this discussion again…at least there are fewer people involved in this thread but really this is just rehashing what was said in the previous threads. It is getting rather tiresome.
It’s not racist to say ‘You’re an Arab therefore you’re more likely to be Muslim than this Japanese fellow’ but yes bullying Arabs could be a bit harsh.
Okay Sam Harris has said some horrible shit, I just looked at a few of the worst things he’s ever said and I withdraw any and all defence.
I’ll apologise and blame my baseless optimism for this crass misjudgement.
In reply to Audley, yes I have, I guess I must have selectively forgotten the worst bits.
But I’ll maintain that Islam is a big pile of shit. And to answer your question about the Israel-Palestine conflict, I’ve not made my mind up but I lean towards Israel.
And also Audley, I maintain that saying ‘Islam is a violent religion’ and ‘Judaism is a violent religion’ are entirely different. I also think there’s the issue that Jew is both a cultural and religious term, whereas it’s Muslim/Middle Eastern. You seem to be equivocating the religion of Islam with the culture of Judaism, or the heritage or whatever word, which is unfair.
But no yeah sorry; I was wrong. Support withdrawn.
You might try a little thing I like to call “doing other stuff.”
Your comment would be pointless on any thread.
Well done on withdrawing. Takes guts to admit one is wrong.
One thing. It may or may not be racist to say that most Muslims are middle-eastern looking. It is, however, naïve to think that terrorist organisations won’t realise that sending a non-middle-eastern-looking operative might be a smart idea, if they know racial profiling is being used. Profiling actually aids the terrorist in such a situation.
Ryan:
Why don’t you go find out what the adults are talking about before you make a spectacle of yourself?
Oops, too late.
(Private airplanes, such as the ones used on 9/11, are not government property. Where the fuck did you get that definition from?)
Yeah, and?
I find people who link to their own facebook profiles to be irritating, but you don’t see me complaining about your stupid ass.
Wrong answer, dude. You need to back your thoughts up.
Considering that I’ve read quite a bit of what he’s written, I’m not assuming anything. If Harris wasn’t a bigot, he wouldn’t be writing bigoted books, now would he?
1) Who “looks Muslim”?
2) Where does your estimation of age come from? Any place besides your ass?
Not knowing this shit isn’t a valid defense of your position. Tsk.
Dude, you’re an evening’s diversion for me, since I’ve got no other games to play. But keep up trying to insult me, your attempts are totes cute!
What does a Muslim person look like, then?
Based on what, exactly? Feel free to link and/or quote to anything Harris has written on the matter.
Everyone! Listen up! We don’t need to worry ourselves about solving the problems of racism and bigotry because racist and bigoted opinions are just minor little things!
Who knew?
Sing along now: Who looks like they’re Muslim?
What? Seeing a brown person and thinking “potential terrorist” is practically the fucking definition of racism!
Seriously, what of Harris’ have you read? He’s very pro-searching brown people– the problem is that he is indeed smart and he knows he can sway suckers like you to his side of the argument by tossing a throw away example about Granny in his poorly-thought out argument.
How’s it feel to be hoodwinked?
Bit late.
Ryan:
You mean pretty much all of it?
No, I don’t mean pretty much all of it. He does say a lot of good stuff.
Good, you’ve stopped supporting Harris. But this still needs addressing:
How are they different? Why do Jews get a pass when Muslims don’t?
Okay, do you actually know any Muslims or Jewish people? Muslims also have cultural practices that vary region to region, just like Jewish people do.
For instance, did you know that the cultural practices of Indian Muslims differ from the cultural practices of Hindus from India? Shocking, I know!
Judaism is a religion. All of the cultural practices are deeply rooted in the religious practice, whether or not they are observed by secular or religious Jews.
And I’m still not really sure why you think Jewish cultural practices means that their violent acts don’t count.
What I mean is, when I say ‘Jew’ I’m not necessarily talking about someone who follows the Jewish tenets.
I wouldn’t call someone an ‘atheistic Muslim’, but a good friend of mine is an ‘atheistic Jew’, that’s the difference I’m making.
ryan,
I still don’t see how the excuses violence.
Then you’re giving unfair weight to the Jewish religion by including non-religious people. “Atheistic Muslim” my not be a common phrase, but there’s plenty of ex-Muslim atheists. Either include both sets of non-religionists or neither.
It doesn’t.
I’m happy to say ‘The Jewish religion is a violent religion and it sucks’.
Daz:
Ryan still seems to be unable to grasp that Muslims (just like anyone else from any other faith) aren’t all fundamentalists– they’re all over the belief spectrum.
So you’re retracting this:
then?
Audley
I’ve noticed that a lot when Muslims are discussed. Yer local C of E vicar would never be accused of siding with rabid fundamentalists, but any Muslim is a suspect terrorist.
….WELP.
Daz:
And that’s what’s so fucking frustrating! You just can’t get through to these people that Muslims are people, not fucking stereotypes!
*sigh* We see it here all the time, though, in all different situations. Casual racism (and homophobia and misogyny and any other bigotry you can think of) is just so fucking hard to fight.
No! Look, sigh: ‘The Jews (Hebrew: יְהוּדִים ISO 259-3 Yhudim Israeli pronunciation [jehuˈdim]), also known as the Jewish people, are a nation and an *ethnoreligious* group’.
I’m not saying there are no ex-Muslims but there are no ‘atheistic muslims’ but there are ‘atheistic jews’!!
And no I’m not retracting it, ‘violent’ is probably a stupid word for me to have picked ‘sexist, homophobic, etc’ is better.
Ryan,
What exactly is your point? Spell it out real slow.
Also, you do realize that there’s difference flavors of Judaism, right? It’s not a monolith.
Right.
Saying ‘Islam is a shitty religion’ is okay, Islam is a shitty religion.
Similarly, saying ‘Judaism is a shitty religion’ is okay, Judaism is a shitty religion.
Saying ‘Muslims believe in silly things’ is okay, Muslims do believe in silly things, even if some Muslims now no longer do.
Saying ‘Jews believe in silly things’ is silly, because not all Jews believe in silly things, because Jewish is both a term of religion and a term of heritage.
An atheistic Jew is still a Jew: an ‘atheistic Christian’ is not a Christian.
Oops, so my point was in essence that swapping Muslim for Jew is unfair; as they are not equal terms.
Ryan,
I should explain my “flavors of Judaism” statement: There are Sephardic and Ashkenazi Jews that have different cultural traditions. Do you realize this?
I’m not contesting that.
I’m just saying a Jew is a Jew whether or not he or she believes in the Judaic teachings.
If you desist believing in the teachings of Islam, you are not a Muslim.
So Muslim = Christian, they’re religions.
But Muslim =/= Jew, because it means more than a religion.
It’s possible to be ‘culturally Christian’ yet not believe in gods. (Most of here us are, I suspect, to some degree: it’s pervaded our culture for 1600 years or so. We could hardly avoid being.)
It’s possible to be culturally Jewish, yet not believe in gods. Yep, certainly.
Why do you assume that it’s impossible to be culturally Muslim, yet not believe in gods?
It’s not the same being culturally Christian and ‘culturally’ Jewish. My Jewish friend says he’s Jewish because his mum’s Jewish; that’s just not the case with Christianity or Islam.
@Me
“most of here us are”??
Not even Yoda…
Hey, ryan managed to get a couple hits in before the inning ran out, instead of striking out completely.
Not bad. Not many in his position make it that far.
Ryan:
Okay, I think I know where you’re confused.
Someone who is an ex-Christian may very well be someone who is still “culturally Christian”. I know ex-Christians that still give stuff up for Lent, for crap’s sake! Having a culture tied to religion is not the exclusive right of Jewish people, nor is it practiced exclusively by Jews.
I’m not sure why you’re still insisting on making a distinction between cultural Jews and religious Jews. Plus, you’re over thinking my test: an easy way to tell if something is hateful or bigoted is to swap one group for another and see how it sounds. You could have traded Muslims for African Americans (or any group that’s discriminated against) if you can’t wrap your head around my example.
I see Ryan hasn’t figured out the only thing that will save him. It’s called silence (fading into the bandwidth). Try it, you’ll like it.
I’d suspect that, on a forum concerned with religion, when one religion is being compared to another, that the word ‘Jew’ should be taken to mean ‘A follower of the Judean religion’ unless otherwise stated. It might not be linguistically precise but, given the context, not inexcusable.
Because Muslims adhere to a code. And no I know they’re not *all* fundamentalists, but it’s not racist to say ‘All Muslims believe Allah is the one true creator’.
It would be racist to say ‘All black people…’
As I believe it would be racist to say ‘All Jews are…’
Because the term Jew doesn’t necessarily mean ‘non-atheist’, whereas the term ‘Muslim’ or ‘Christian’ does.
I don’t identify myself as a Christian just because my parents are, but a Jew is a Jew. Unless I’m completely misunderstanding. Maybe it’s just a semantics issue, but I wouldn’t use Jew and Muslim as the same thing. And my Jewish friend doesn’t either and I do trust him.
I could say ‘Judaism is shit because it advocates homophobia.’
But I couldn’t say ‘Arabs are shit because they advocate homophobia’.
Cos that’s weird.
ryan:
It would depend on each individual, one would think.
Judaism isn’t a evangelical religion, so what? (Also, pro-tip: Your mother doesn’t have to be Jewish for you to be Jewish.) Most Christian and Muslims are also that religion because their parents are.
What it sounds like you’re saying is that only Jews have culture wrapped around their religion and that’s just not true.
But ryan does seem to be struggling a bit in the second inning. Will he make it out of the whole game? He’s got a chance, but….
My point saying ‘All Jews’ sounds anti-Semitic (whether you mean specifically the religion or not) because Jew doesn’t mean religious, it means Jew.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Secular_Jewish_culture
It is a big thing, I’m not making this up.
Nobody would ever say ‘Yeah I’m an atheist Muslim’, cos, what is that?
And I’m not saying being a Jew is only to do with cultural things, it’s heritage.
And the general thing is that if your mother is a Jew than you are a Jew, though yes there is a debate about whether your father being a Jew makes you a Jew.
But all this aside, am I happy to equate Judaism and Islam? Yeah. They’re both shit. Islam’s worse, though that might just be a case of overall numbers.
But Ryan, you originally used the word ‘Judeaism’, unless I’ve missed a post.
‘Take any statement about Muslims and apply it to Jews.’ – Audley said this. And no, I won’t.
But I’ll take any statement about Islam and apply it to Judaism, that’s fairer.
Ryan:
And Christians and Jewish people don’t?? What about those pesky commandment thingies?
No. Bigoted, yes. Antisemitic, yes. But Jewish is not a race.
(You know who else thought the Jews were a race…?)
*sigh* Like everything else, this is best left up to the individual.
You’re basing this opinion on one Jewish dude?
Judaism is a religion, no matter what Wikipedia has told you. That’s where it’s roots lie, that’s its foundation. It’s okay to criticize the religion (and even the cultural practices), but it would be bigoted to say, “Jewish people are shit because they advocate homophobia.” It’s the difference between a teaching and a person.
Judaism IS a religion, but Jews are a people, not followers of a religion (even if the majority do).
Oh, both his parents are Rabbis, so not quite ‘one Jewish dude’.
*sigh*
As an example to test whether or not your statement (or Harris’ statement) was bigoted. How are you not getting this?
Once again: “Muslims are a threat to our security” vs “Jews are a threat to our security”. I’m not saying either group is. I’m saying does the second statement sound antisemitic? If so, then there’s a really good fucking chance that the first statement is also pretty fucking bigoted.
Like I said, exchange Jewish people with any discriminated group of your choice and the test still works.
Excuse me if I’m amused at the guy who has one Jewish friend and Wikipedia to back him up. Out of curiosity: do you know any Muslims, religious or otherwise?
Still not sure why you insist on dragging culture into this.
Okay, how about the statement, “Take any statement about Muslims and apply it to followers of Judeaism”? That gets around your quibble over the word applied, I should think.
And I have said because JEWS ARE A PEOPLE NOT A RELIGION whereas MUSLIMS ARE A RELIGION so the demand is UNFAIR.
Take any statement about ISLAM and apply it to JUDAISM and it’s FINE.
Muslims = Religion.
Jews = people.
And yeah it’d be more accurate to say ‘fundamentalist Muslims’ or ‘extremist Muslims’ but you’re equating a religion with a people and I think you’re being deliberately obtuse and I have school in four hours and yes I know a few Muslims personally.
To say Jews aren’t a people is culturally ignorant, but fine.
Replace Muslims with Christians or Tea Partiers or some other group ONLY unified by some particular set of ideology and it’s not bigoted.
‘Tea partiers are a major threat to national security.’
‘Islam is a major threat to national security.’
‘Judaism (NOT FUCKING JEWS) is a major threat to national security.’
‘Christians are a major threat to national security.’
No No No No
Muslims ≠ Religion.
Islam = religion.
Judeaism = religion
Muslims = people
Observant jews = people
I’m happy to equate observant Jews and Muslims, fine.
(I’d also like to note that I think none of the groups are a threat to national security)
Hal eh frickin’ luja!
Look, it’s Elevatorgate, now with added racists !
By the way, where is Sam Harris ? Pharyngula is good enough for Dawkins, so I’m a bit surprised that Harris hasn’t shown up to explain to us all how we have misunderstood him.
FTFY.
Ryan:
That’s what I thought. Teen?
There isn’t just one set of Jewish cultural practices, though! You’re treating Judaism as some sort of monolith when it isn’t. Which you claimed that you knew, but obviously, you don’t.
And you’re still missing the point of the exercise. It wasn’t about making a statement about Jewish people, it was about whether or not the statement sounded antisemitic. That’s it. Your waffling about culture has fuck all to do with my point.
Plus, one can still act antisemitic towards a secular Jew.
Would it sell any books?
I’m not saying Jews are monolithic.
My one point is this, and has always been this.
To say someone is a JEW is not to say someone is RELIGIOUS.
Ryan, it is totally possible to be culturally Jewish but an atheist. You know that, I know that, everyone here knows that.
It is also equally possible to be culturally Christian but an atheist. I am one, for example. What does that mean? For starters:
1) I give and expect to receive Christmas gifts
2) Many of my cultural markers (my name, the kind of stuff I own, how I spend my day, my clothes, etc) are derived from Christianity.
Those are two, right off the bat.
Hell, take our friendly bloglord. He is an atheist. His given name is Paul. Pretty fucking Christian! Why does he have that name? Maybe his parents decided to name him after a grandfather/uncle/forefather. Maybe they just liked the name. Maybe they wanted to make a religious statement. I don’t know. But, if you saw “Paul Z. Myers” written down and didn’t recognize it as belonging to an atheist who teaches biology and blogs, would you be completely justified as labeling it “Christian”? YES.
Likewise, it is possible to be culturally Muslim and be an atheist.
Islam = Christianity = Judaism.
Muslim = Christian = Jew.
atheist Muslim = atheist Christian = atheist Jew.
Muslims are people, asshole.
You’ve completely lost the plot. This was apparent way the fuck up there (before all this idiotic bullshit) when you said “ergo I have no compassion.” Who the fuck says shit like that?
Context? We were talking about comparing religions. We’d hardly have meant Jewish atheists, Muslim atheists or Christian atheists.
Would you call yourself a Christian? Would PZ call himself a Christian, as Harris would call himself a Jew?
And no, CR, I’m saying that to say someone is a Muslim is to say someone is religious.
To say someone is a Christian is to say someone is religious.
I’m just simply saying that I’m happy to equate Islam and Judaism and Christianity, but I’m not going to equate Muslims with Jews, nor am I going to equate Muslims with black people.
Which doesn’t matter to my overall point. That never mattered to my overall point.
The only thing I can come up with is that you don’t actually know what “antisemitic” means and that’s why you’re waffling.
Christ, I’d have more luck arguing with my turtle.
But I’ve answered your question directly using the term Islam and Judaism.
Okay, but if you want.
‘Muslims are a threat to national security.’
‘Religious Jews are a threat to national security.’
That sounds wrong and vastly hyperbolic in both cases, but the latter doesn’t sound anti-Semitic to me, just a bit stupid.
You know, plenty of secular Jews do make the distinction that they’re culturally Jewish and not religious.
But what the hell do I know? I’m obviously arguing with an expert with one Jewish friend! I am so outmatched!
Jeebus! See my #135.
And, as Audley says, if the subject is anti-semitism, the distinction doesn’t even matter.
So you don’t equate them. They’re not equal. Muslims are less than, not equal — sub-human, one might venture to say.
Wrap it up with whatever pretty language you like. Then go fuck yourself.
Would you call yourself a Christian?
I am a Christian atheist. Because (1) I came to atheism from Christianity and (2) I am, culturally, Christian. As I said above.
Does “Christian” have an explicit ethnic meaning like “Jew” does? No, but it’s not like “Jew” really does either. “Jew” is as meaningless, ethnically speaking, as “Christian.”
What does have meaning, however, are things like “Ashkenazi Orthodox Jew,” “Northwestern European Protestant,” and “Persian Shi’ite.” Why? Because that (1) explicitly takes a slice of a large, floppy, non-ethnic specific religion and (2) qualifies it further by ethnicity.
What? No!
I wouldn’t equate Christians with black people either, you know full well that’s not what I meant.
Well I’ve answered the question anyway, I just don’t like using the word Jew to talk about religious Jews, that’s literally all I was saying.
Christ, I’ve forgotten what the bloody point even was. The rut around this mulberry bush is looking distinctly ditch-like.
We destroyed Sam Harris? Really?
Damn. I’ve got to recalibrate the cyberpistol. I was pretty sure I just had it set on stun.
I’m completely baffled, as well. He doesn’t like using the word “Jew” to describe religious Jewish people? WTF?
You fail at communication.
Because to me, using the word Jew has more than religious connotations, whereas using the word Muslim, or Christian, does not.
I’d call myself culturally Christian, certainly. My whole society has been shaped, for good or bad, by Christianity for 1600 years. Good ol’ Victorian prudery only lasted, officially, for 60-odd and we’re still shaking that off. Christian influence is likely to take a tad longer.
Daz:
As far as I can tell:
Jews are supermen and -women ‘cos Ryan’s Jewish friend said so. Also, Jewish = a race. Also, no one else has any culture tied around their religion and Muslims aren’t worthy of consideration.
Or something.
I was just trying to make a point about judging bigotry, but apparently, I failed. :(
I’ve not said anything that could be misconstrued as anything close to that.
I even answered your question quite happily with the qualifier ‘religious Jew’, I don’t understand your problem.
And now there are two different sort of routes you’re all going about this, the first is that the Jews aren’t a race and the second is that the Jews are a race but no moreso than other religions, and, sigh.
Ryan,
My problem? You’re an idiot, that’s all.
… the Jews are a race but no moreso than other religions, and, sigh.
No one has said that. You’re confusing cultural practices with race. Learn to read for comprehension, please.
Ryan, let me ask you a question. Did my comment @164 make any sense? Did the idea that I – and others – can simultaneously reject the religion of Christianity and observe some secular elements of it (naming conventions, holidays) register with you?
Do you not see that this is directly analogous to a Jewish person (for example) deciding that they’re not going to attend synagogue anymore, but they are going to eat gefilte fish and latkes?
Fucking blockquotes.
Ryan,
My problem? You’re an idiot, that’s all.
No one has said that. You’re confusing cultural practices with race. Learn to read for comprehension, please.
You’re obsessed with the word comprehension, it seems to eat at you.
I answered your question. Change ‘Jew’ to ‘Religious Jew’ and it doesn’t seem anti-Semitic.
‘Jews tend to be homophobic.’
‘Religious Jews tend to be homophobic.’
One of these, obviously. Again, where do these people come from?
You have no idea what antisemitism is. Gah!
They’re both fucking bigoted!
The majority of people I know consider themselves to be christian. Yet 90% never go to church other than for weddings, christenings and funerals. They don’t pray, they may get their children christened, but primarily so they can send them to a religous school that they consider will give them a better education and social standing. When queried they will be very agnostic about god and jesus.
Are they christian? They are certainly culturally christian. But they call themselves christians so that works for me.
Ryan’s problem it seems, is lexicographical. ‘Jew’ is one word and encompasses secular and observant, whereas there’s no easy way of writing “cultural Christian/Muslim and religious Christian/Muslim” so the latter can’t exist.
[meta]
Ryan is just ignorant and confused about the concepts of ethnicity, race, culture and religion.
You appear to be oblivious to it.
I got told off for citing Wikipedia! But fair point.
Unverifiable, you’re right, poor example on my behalf.
‘Jews believe stupid shit and nonsense.’
‘Religious Jews believe stupid shit and nonsense.’
On a whim, I decided to give myself a test:
(1) Can I explain the core tenants of Christianity? Yes.
(2) Can I recite the Lord’s Prayer from memory? Yes.
(3) Can I quote sections of the Bible from memory? Yes.
(4) Can I reasonably guess what part of the Bible a given verse is from? Yes.
(5) Do I know the words and tune of several (non-Christmas) hymns? Yes.
Now, why is this true? Am I a religious Christian? Nope.
Was I raised Christian and thus exposed to this stuff in my formative years? Yes.
Do I live in a majority-Christian society and thus immersed in the stuff? YES.
Daz:
Good point. It can be tough to grasp concepts that don’t have precise wording, but it can still be fucking understood! Especially when it’s be explained OVER AND OVER AGAIN.
I can do all that too, wouldn’t identify myself as Christian. But I suppose this is all subjective.
‘The Jews (Hebrew: יְהוּדִים ISO 259-3 Yhudim Israeli pronunciation [jehuˈdim]), also known as the Jewish people, are a nation and an ethnoreligious group’
Ethnoreligious, come on, someoneeeee
That wasn’t even my fucking point.
For fuck’s sake.
Still not a race.
The way I’ve lived, saying ‘Christian’ meant ‘someone who follows the Christian faith’ and ‘Jew’ meant ‘part of the Jewish people’
So yes, I think it sounds anti-Semitic to say the Jews are this or the Jews are that.
If we go and say that by Jew which mean an adherent to the Judaic law as by Muslim we mean an adherent to the Islamic law then I am quite happy to say like and like things.
I have however said repeated times that I don’t believe that Islam is a great threat to national security or anything of the sort! I think Islam is shit! I think Judaism is shit! I think people that follow Islam are in some way deluded and I refer to them as Muslims, I think that people that follow Judaism are in some way deluded and I refer to them as religious Jews!
Esteleth
I have an easier test than that. Even though I was dragged up faithless, and though I realise intellectually that the Bible is as inherently silly as any other holy book, I still find ‘foreign’ religions sillier at an emotional level, ’cause I wasn’t steeped in the symbology and stories as I grew up. Jonah made a fun kids’ tale, but a four-armed elephant? That’s daft…
Oh oh oh! I got it! I know how we can solve this impasse.
Ryan, your opinion on Judaism (and cultural Christianity and cultural Islam) doesn’t amount to anything.
There, is that better?
Right, so when PZ says he thinks Christians are deluded, how many of you pop up in the comments section shouting ‘Well, PZ, actually, I’m a cultural Christian so you might want to change your statement to ‘religious Christians’ because otherwise it’s unfair.’
Do you, Audley? Do you?
Whereas if he said Jews are deluded, I would hope someone would feel compelled to say that not all Jews are religious.
For instance when the title was this ‘Christians teach me to despise Christianity’
Did you, Audley, point out PZ’s lack of distinction between religious Christians and cultural Christians; or is it only relevant now because I have said that there is a difference between saying ‘Jew’ and ‘Religious Jew’?
Guuuys, I think I figured it out. I clicked on ryan’s nym, and up popped his FB page! I poked around it.
He lives in Europe! France and Spain, specifically.
He just might subscribe to the fallacy that says that all those Christianity-derived things that people just sort of do are totally secular and don’t make you Christian. But if a Jewish person who isn’t observant does something that is Judaism-derived, it is toes Jewish. And Other.
Ryan, cupcake, if the majority culture of an area subscribes to a given religion, even nominally, then that culture can, with some accuracy, be described to have elements of the religion. France is Catholic – not because the average French person goes to Mass weekly, but because the Catholic holidays are state holidays, because Christian symbols permeate French culture and architecture, and because lots of French names refer to Christian theology.
Oh bloody hell, the dawn chorus just started. Another sleepless night. (This is why I don’t comment on Pharyngula very often.)
Toodle-pip, all.
If I said Christians believe stupid shit, not one person would comment on the difference between cultural and religious Christianity, not one.
I don’t live in France or Spain haha, just there are places called ‘Poo’ and ‘Lol’ and I was young and it serves to remind me that young people are idiots.
Esteleth:
Absolutely ridiculous. Being “Christian” does NOT mean you’re part of a culture, nor does it mean you’re part of an ethnic group. Being Christian simply means you believe in Christianity (the religion). That’s it!
On the other hand, the term “Jew” throughout history has incorporated all of the above meanings (religion, culture, people). Yes it’s possible to say someone is a “Christian Jew”, but never a “Christian who practices Judaism”. Labeling yourself a “Christian atheist” is equally absurd.
A FRIEND!
Hahahahahahahaha. Hahaha. Hahahahahaha
It’s funny because it’s called ‘Poo.’
Joey,
Because when I rejected religion I rejected every single Christian-derived aspect of American culture? I rejected many, to be sure, but not all. Christianity is way to fucking intertwined with American culture for that to be even remotely possible.
The reason why “Jew” is held to have a religious/cultural/ethnic triple-meaning is because of history – Jews, historically, have been minorities, and oppressed minorities at that. They kept apart and were forced to stand apart from the rest of society. So the differences got magnified. Don’t think for a second that a group of Christians (for example) who live in a majority-Muslim country aren’t tagged with the same religious/cultural/ethnic triple-meaning as well. The established Christian communities are.
Oh, and for the record: “Christian who practices Judaism” is totally a thing. Mostly fringe. They call themselves “Torah-observant Christians” and tend to be very strage god-bots.
Ryan:
I have no problem with PZ saying that any religious practice is deluded, because in the confines of the blog, it’s assumed that he’s talking about religious practice. That’s how it has worked all of the years that I’ve been reading here, anyway.
Besides, I can’t recall a time that PZ has said “XXX is deluded” without a clear-cut example of why he thought that. He has never (in my experience) dropped a bomb like “Jews are deluded” with no explanation.
Why do you assume I’m a cultural Christian?
Did you bother to read what followed? Do you understand the point of a title?
What the fuck is your hangup about this? I never said anything pro- or con- about Judaism, I was using antisemitism as an example. I don’t know how to get it through to you any better.
If PZ criticized Judaism, fine. It’s not some untouchable thing that we’ve all got to tip toe around.
Also, to the point that Jadehawk made waaaaaaay upthread: there isn’t the history of Christians being discriminated (harassed, profiled, unlawfully imprisoned, whatever) against in the US. All things are not equal here, especially since Christians hold all of the power.
My hangup is that if I said CHRISTIAN you’d know I meant PRACTISING CHRISTIAN, but the way I’ve always been taught and always viewed is that JEW DOES NOT MEAN PRACTISING JEW.
My god.
And the reason why you can get away with that distinction, Ryan, is because you live in a majority Christian society.
You meet someone, they say they’re an atheist. You can safely assume that their background is Christianity – either they rejected it, or their parents/guardians did and they were brought up faithless. An atheist with a non-Christian background must say so.
ryan,
Why bother to bring it up? Cultural Jews had nothing to do with the argument.
Eh, don’t bother. I’m going to bed. I’m done arguing with the idiot with one Jewish friend (and access to Wikipedia!) who is still in his teens.
And I keep mentioning it because it keeps being mentioned!
If you’re happy to say that when I say Jew you understand I mean practising Jew, then I’m happy to say anything about Jews I would about Muslims.
Jews believe stupid shit.
Jews tend to be more homophobic and sexist than the average atheist.
Jews believe in evil doctrines.
Jews commit a horrific form of body mutilation.
Jews are silly.
Ryan, you’re a moron.
What we want is for you to extend the same duality – believer and non-believer – you extend to Jewish people to Muslims.
Dawkins, a cultural Christian, would disagree. And then there’s that church in the Netherlands, full of atheist Christians, as well as a certain dude named Spong.
All religions seem to be able to evolve into ethnic/cultural markers. When I was growing up in Germany, “Catholic” already really just meant “not from northern Germany”.
But I wouldn’t refer to a non-practising Muslim as a Muslim, but if you’d like me to, if it’s genuinely you want me to say ‘People who are atheists in Muslim countries are fine’, if that was genuinely impossible to divine, then fine.
‘Atheist Muslims’ or ‘Cultural Muslims’ are as a group, fine.
Did we achieve breakthrough?
Hooray!
My hopes for ryan making out of the second inning are dimming.
ryan seems to either fail to understand, or refuse to accept, that ALL THREE of muslim, christian, and jew have cultural as well as religious connotations. The degree varies, it probably goes jew-muslim-christian in terms of which has the strongest purely cultural connotation, and while is most strongly a religious connotation.
But ryan seems to think that ONLY the term Jew has cultural connotation while both muslim and christian are solely religious (or he seems to think that only the cultural connotations associated with “Jew” matter).
The fact of the matter is, in muslim majority nations, the term “muslim” as VERY POWERFUL cultural connotations that date back centuries.
But I never said they weren’t! I never said anything hinting to the contrary!
And just when I almost give up hope, ryan gets a hit!
Will he survive the game? Stay tuned…..
*facepalm*
ryan’s choice of language seems to be a major stumbling block.
Time and again he is posting “I didn’t say that! I didn’t mean that!” but look at his words at you can clearly see that the interpretation he denies is a perfectly reasonable one to draw (granted also, as is the interpretation that he says he actually means).
More careful choice of words (on the internet, no one can see your nonverbal cues that hint at your precise meaning) should go a long way here….
My impression of the last couple hours:
Ryan: [something moronic]
Others: You realize that’s wrong, right? [Evidence]
Ryan: I never said [moronic thing]!
Anyway, I’m tired. I’m off.
Hopefully Ryan will get a clue.
Just for the sake of irony, my Spotify shuffle just gave me the Hallelujah chorus.
wut. how is judaism not homophobic and sexist? how is jewish fundamentalism not as homophobic and sexist as islamic fundamentalism?
lol
nah, it’s not even that. it’s that ryan is a literal-minded idiot with very limited ability to think abstractly. just imagine the drama if you’d said “substitute atheist for muslim” to make your point!
ROTFLMAO
will it completely ruin your day if I told you none of the cultural Jews (or cultural pagans, for that matter) says that when PZ says “Jews are deluded” (or “pagans are deluded”)?
it was very entertaining for me to see ryan try to explain to audley what a jew is. :-p
[meta]
Audley:
My emphasis should suffice, I hope.
(But to make it dead clear: tsk)
We would say stop being a fucking bigot!
FFS.
So if someone says Jews are deluded, you just quibble over “not all Jews are religious” instead of calling out the bigot?
he doesn’t think saying (religious) jews are deluded is bigotry
and incidentally, i really should have proofread #230, since as it is, it looks like PZ is calling groups of people deluded for no reason, when usually it only happens in context of religion making people do stupid things/believe stupid things.
To think that a guy who thinks claiming he comes from ‘Poo, Spain’ on his facebook profile is witty managed to get people to argue with him for roughly six hours online…
Not that it didn’t need to be done, I’ve just been watching with somewhat horrified amusement as this goes on and on… every time I was about to chime in, someone else had already said it better than me, so yeah.
“Poo”, spain. teeheehee
OHHHH.
Wait, What?
I’m so confused right now. The little rat is going in circles and I’m getting dizzy.
I was thinking along the lines, since Daisy made the suggestion to show the parallel between antisemitism…
Maybe we need to so simplified, like Yo, is this racist?
Yo, it’s racist.
If you are an atheist, if you believe there is no god, how can you not believe that people who do believe in a god are deluded? Is it just saying it that is bigotry?
And I did say, laughing coyote, that it reminded me that ‘young people are stupid’ but well forgot.
And Jadehawk, that’s why I said ‘homophobic, sexist is probably better’, because Jewish fundamentalism is as homophobic and sexist.
I’d also like someone to point out where I said that there exists no Muslim who used to be a Muslim. I said there was no ‘Muslim atheist’, but that’s just the whole semantical issue that’s been going on.
I am so happy! I am so deeply honored to be one of your humanist friends. A million thanks to you. :)
[meta]
ryanwilkinson:
Synchronicity manifest, when the very next comment is by Taslima. ;)
Ryanwilkinson:
This seems like a bit of a generalization.
You are (apparently) young.
You say shit that is stupid.
It does not necessarily follow that ‘young people are stupid.’
Also, if you think Poo, Spain is funny, then you’ll really love this:
Pull my finger.
Is Ryan Wilkinson aware that Richard Dawkins identifies himself as a cultural Christian, and more specifically a cultural Anglican ? For that matter so do I.
Because delusion connotes mental disorder, rather than being wrong? So yes, actually, under basically any circumstances, it perpetuates a form of bigotry (That against the non-neurotypical)
I mean, you’re missing that Christians are traditionally, and typically, the dominant group where we could even have this discussion, so although inaccurate, “delusional christians” is not going to carry the weight of decades or centuries of oppression (of Christians), and thus causes fewer problems. In the west, muslims (and Jews) are disempowered, however, and they’re not just called ‘delusional’ inaccurately; it’s done to discredit their religion specifically (and I don’t just mean by atheists. Yes, most atheists specially target them as a matter of practice*, but just as much, Christians do it, and Christians are a much bigger force). Saying it about them, thanks to society at large (as well as atheism in particular) discriminating against them actually is worse, because it contributes to a climate of discrimination against muslims.
Were we situated in Egypt, and primarily dealt with matters relating to Egyptians, as Egyptians this course of affairs would be reversed. Most of us aren’t.
*facepalm*
Cultural Jew:Jew::Muslim:Cultural Muslim
How friggin’ hard is this?
*Hence the last 4 posts on profiling. There are plenty of assholes who either outright state that Islam is somehow more dangerous than Christianity, or who in effect only oppose things when Muslims do them, even if they will pay lipservice and say that Christians should not either.
Jadehawk:
I know, right?
John Morales:
*hangs head in shame* You are so right. I’m tsking myself right now.
You know, this whole conversation about cultural Jews/religious Jews vs Muslims/cultural Muslims (or Christians/cultural Christians) has bothered me all fucking night.
I touched on something in 143, where I said:
Certain flavors of Christianity and Islam actively try to convert people, but Judaism does not*. For the most part, Judaism is passed through families**. Which probably explains why Christianity and Islam have so many more adherents and why ethno-religious comes up when talking about Judaism.
But! Christianity and Islam are also passed down through the generations– families teach their children about their faith, just like Jewish families do! They also teach their children about their specific cultural practices, just like Jewish families do! And those teachings vary region-to-region and depending on what sect the family belongs to… just like Judaism.
Is that where your hangup is, Ryan? The fact that traditionally, Judaism is passed through families, instead of proselytized to non-believers? Trust me on this, it makes no difference, especially in the context of this conversation.
*That doesn’t mean that one can’t convert to Judaism, it just means that a couple of Jewish people aren’t not going to knock on your door on a Sunday morning and give you a magazine about their beliefs.
**Once again, not necessarily matrilineally.
Matt:
I’m curious, but what exactly compels you (or anyone here) to label yourself as a “cultural Christian”? Is it simply because you hang up a Christmas tree or exchange presents during Christmas?
In part. It is also because we get the Christian religious references in art, music and literature, and probably would know what was happening in a Christian religious service. In short, the culture we are most familiar with, and feel most comfortable in, has been influenced by Christianity.
I’m a Norwegian. Norway is a pretty secular country, but our vey flag consists of a huge fucking Christian cross. We’ve got an oficial state church (Protestant), which means than when atheist me pay taxes, part of it goes to the church. Norway’s constitution is “anchored in Christianity” (and it shows).
In my first school years, we had a class called “Christianity”.
Half of the profanity (along with a lot of other expressions) in the Norwegian language are based on the Christian mythos. (Satan (used rougly like “Fuck”), Helvete (Hell, also used like “fuck”), Forbanna (Cursed, used like “fucking”) Jævla (~Satan’s, used like “fucking”, oh American English is a poor languange when it comes to swearing) Herregud (Lord God, used like “FFS”) etc.)
I could continue, but I believe (at least I hope) I’ve made my point. To sum it up: I’m an anti-religious atheist, but my Norwegian culture is permeated by Protestantism, and there’s almost nothing I can do about it.
Ignoring Ryan, talking about Harris
While I disagree with Harris on profiling, I do think Islam is getting more fundamental than it was and that its shittier than all the shitty religions.
Many muslims I know are wonderful people and I don’t want them harassed at airports for looking ‘muslim’, they are definitely harmless but at least in India, (which is a good example of a multi-theocracy) Islam has more fangs than the others.
Why ? In the streets of India a burqa was a rarity, now its common place. There definitely is a shift towards fundamentalism, I do no know what the reason is. Muslims demand special laws in India which allow them to have multiple wives legally, (people of other religions don’t get to do this). and make the lives of women legally miserable. Why do I prefer a hindu community over an islamic one though I despise both ? Cos even the most orthodox hindus dont dress up their women head to toe in black and hindus lack the structure to enforce their shittier beliefs formally. I don’t see why its wrong to see a gradient in the deep dark valley of religious insanity.
Harris is wrong about profiling and right about Islam being shittier. This doesn’t mean a muslim is worse than a believer of any other religion. I draw a clear line between muslim and islam. There is a lot of difference between a person who claims to believe something and what is being done globally in the name of that belief.
Matt:
Would you say your present morals and value system have been “influenced” by Christianity?
madbull:
So in other words a muslim isn’t necessarily someone who follows the Islam religion?
joey:
No, in other words, one is a person and the other is an ideology.
Not especially.
Is joey still trying to draw a (completely unnecessary) distinction between cultural Jews and cultural Christians?
Look, joey, many secular Jews don’t draw their morals/values from Judaism, either. They don’t eat kosher, they don’t buy into the “unclean” bullshit, they don’t follow the Commandments, whatever.
delusion (plural delusions)
A false belief that is resistant to confrontation with actual facts.
The state of being deluded or misled.
That which is falsely or delusively believed or propagated; false belief; error in belief.
Sorry, I don’t see mental illness anywhere there.
I also don’t realise why we ignore the fact that Dawkins book is called the God DELUSION when harping on so incessantly about how he calls himself a cultural Anglican.
And I sincerely doubt that when any of you hear the word ‘Muslim’ you think ‘Oh, someone who grew up in or around Muslim culture; and not necessarily an adherent to the faith.’
Jerry Coyne is a such a person. He is clear in stating he regards himself as a secular, cultural Jew.
What, is this fight still going on?
Ryan, rejecting religious belief and holding it to be delusional does not negate your knowledge of it, or erase all of its effects on you.
I described myself as a “cultural Christian.” To be more specific, I could be described, culturally, as an “American Calvinist.” Does this mean that I personally subscribe to Calvinist theology or that I agree with it?
Fuck no! Calvinism is majorly fucked up.
But: does being raised Calvinist affect me today? Yes. If I meet someone who was also raised Calvinist (whatever their current beliefs or lack thereof) do we speak the same language? Can we talk about TULIP and crack jokes about the General Assembly? Yep.
My family is varying varieties of Christian, with varying levels of devoutness. We trade gifts on Christmas, new children may or may not be baptized – but they will be given names like “John” or “Elizabeth,” both of which are Christian, and we may or may not go to church.
By contrast, my knowledge of Judaism comes from (1) going to 2 bar mitzvahs, (2) pop culture, (3) talking with a few Jewish people now and then and (4) Wikipedia. I’ve never been to a seder, I’ve never seen a bris, I’ve never been to a Jewish wedding. I don’t have any close Jewish friends. I am profoundly ignorant of Judaism and Jewish culture. Calling me “culturally Jewish” would be nonsensical.
This is often the case when dealing with academics.
Why are you determined to sound so stoopid?
I do. Given the way most strains of Islam view apostasy, would it really surprise you to discover that in many parts of the world there are unbelievers who find it safer to conform?
ryan:
Nice assumption, ass.
Since I personally know quite a few Muslims who do not practice, I don’t assume that any and all Muslims are necessarily people of faith.
Here’s the semantic difference that you’re refusing to understand, I think: To be “Christian” you must accept Jesus Christ as your savior, yeah? Similarly, to be “Muslim”, you must acknowledge that Mohammed is Allah’s prophet. There is no such caveat in Judaism. Which is why cultural Muslims and cultural Christians, won’t (necessarily) label themselves as simply “Christians” or “Muslims”, but Jews will keep that label for themselves. However, this does not negate the fact that Christians and Muslims have culture tied around the religion that they practice(d), nor does it assume that they rejected the cultural aspect at any point in time. It just explains why the wording is different.
I sometimes see “Islamic” used to denote cultural stuff that is tangental to Islam, i.e. the cultural practices of people who have Islam in their background. A museum might have an exhibit on Islamic Art, for example.
But, I’ve never heard a person described as “Islamic.” A cultural practice might be Islamic, but the person is Muslim.
Likewise, I’ve seen “Judaic.”
FFS there ARE atheist muslims for the same reason there are atheist jews…its cultural. And yes they exist…in the mideast. Politics culture and religion are blurred in parts of the world. I have on good authority that yes atheist muslims exist, at home they don’t take it seriously…but if police or government officals ask they most definitly are devout muslims.
If Jews as a people are seperate from Judism and its teachings why do they want that specific territory.
Absolutely, Ing!
I’m going to bet that if you hopped in a time machine and emerged in Europe in the 1400s, you’d be very hard-pressed to find anyone who would be willing to describe themself as an atheist.
Why? Because being an atheist would get you killed.
So of course you professed to being a good Christian!
1440s? What about 1940s? Oe 40 minutes ago in Hog County West Virgina?
Not disagreeing, Ing.
The only possible difference is that nowadays – somewhat in the ’40s – an atheist has potentially a place to move to be openly atheist. Not saying it’s easy or feasible, but it is at least theoretically possible in a way that it was not back in the Middle Ages.
Dr. Audley:
And I have already mentioned that the term “Jew” is different and has come to encompass much more than simply a follower of a particular religion. “Jew” can be used to describe a certain ethnic people. The same can’t be said for the term “Christian”.
Would you personally be offended by the remark that all Christians are idiots?
Ing:
Didn’t you hear, Ing? Upthread we discussed how wonderful and peaceful Israel is! Of course all Jews want to live there! (Pro-tip: Not all Jewish people support Israel.)
And, when speaking of the modern history of Israel, at first (just before the turn of the 20th century) most Jews didn’t want it. Or, more specifically, they just didn’t give a crap about establishing a Jewish state in the Middle East and the idea took a long time to gain any traction. It was an idea created by a very few Jewish separatists and encouraged by antisemitic European governments, but no one really listened.
Of course, that all changed because of WWII.
Also, let’s not forget that much of the support for Israel comes from Conservative Christians– they don’t care about the people living there, oh heavens no! They need a stable Jewish state so it can be destroyed at the beginning of the End Times.
Why does everyone assume that I’m culturally Christian? Seriously.
And I’ve already explained the semantics issue (why “Jewish” can be used religiously or culturally, but “Christian” needs a caveat if one no longer practices) already. It might do you some good to go ahead and read it.
This argument still has fuck all to do with anything.
Dr. Audley, I thought you were arguing on the side of the people who label themselves as “secular Christians”. My comments go to them then.
According to the Muslim/Arab veiw of the issue the Jews were offered land in South America but no…it HAD to be Isreal because of the Bible and thus the whole issue from day one is a religious invasion that they seeIsreal starting.
I say Arab because it seems that ME christians who I know have that veiw to…they see it as a regional thing with the foundation of Isreal as a faith based act that introduced a lot more faith based acts into the area. They’re not anti-semetic per say but Isreal has bombed there home and killed family and from their POV its because Isreal thinks it has a god given authority to disregard the lives of their neighbors.
^ Oops, I meant “culturally Christian”.
I am. Why would you think that I wasn’t?
joey:
Two things:
(1) Jewish people are not ethnically homogenous. Like, at all.
(2) If there is any ethnic homogeneity within Judaism, it can be directly ascribed to what has already been said: Judaism is non-evangelical, which means the rate of conversion to Judaism is now and has been historically quite low; and Jewish people, until very recently have been a minority group within larger non-Jewish nations, an oppressed and highly Othered minority group at that. Both of those factors will lead to low outmarriage, high self-selection, and augmentation of differing cultural factors.
Your abuse of the common period notwithstanding, the same can be said for the term “Christian.”
Fuck, here’s an exercise for you! Go to, say, India. Majority Hindu. Find a Christian who is ethnically Indian and not descended from immigrants to India. They exist. Now, determine the following:
(1) do they live in separate neighborhoods, send their children to different schools, and/or practice different professions than Hindus in the area they live in?
(2) do they have cultural practices apart from the whole “being professing Christians” thing that separate them from the rest of Indian society?
(3) are there some ethnic differences between them and other Indians in the area they live in, however slight?
I’m going to go out on a limb and say that the answer to all three questions is YES.
No, but I would be amused by it.
E:
Thank you!
I’m baffled by the insistence that a Jewish person from Poland is exactly the same as a Jewish person from Lebanon.
One more time, everybody! Judaism and Jewish people are not monoliths!
About 24 million of them.
But aren’t you a Christian? I mean, you do label yourself as a Christian atheist.
Who suggested that? I surely didn’t.
joey,
Just get to your fucking point.
Joey have you ever heard the term lasped caholic?
Speaking of Wikipedia, there are lots of interesting articles about Jews, for example:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/African_Jews
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indian_Jews
The point is that we should kill babies!
Y’know, I have a trio of friends from college. All three are what you would describe as “culturally Jewish.” One is observant, one is observant in the “I go to the temple on Yom Kippur” kind of way, one is an avowed atheist raised by avowed atheists and who never had a bat mitzvah.
One is of Ashkenazi (Polish) descent and has a name that reflects that. One is of Sephardic (Portugese) descent and has a name that reflects that. One is an immigrant from Ethiopia. Like, first generation, came over as a baby.
They look nothing alike. Ask them to ethnically classify themselves, and you’ll get “Eastern European,” “Hispanic,” and “West African” as answers. Cultural similarities can mostly be ascribed to all being raised as middle-class at-least-nominally Jewish Americans. Oh, and they all three know way to many rabbi jokes, most of which I don’t get.
joey:
I’d be amused by it because (1) it is a random non sequitur and (2) it is absurd. I find absurd non sequiturs to be amusing.
All Christians are idiots!
All blondes are idiots!
Only an idiot would study biology!
I am nominally insulted by all three statements, but my response to all three would be laughter. Because all three “insults” are just stupid.
Dr. Audley:
My point was already made in my first post of this thread (#208).
——–
ING:
Of course. The term means “was once Catholic but no longer”.
Oh, right. 208.
Anyway, like I said, I’ve already addressed the semantics issue.
One more time: Jewish people are not a monolith! Seriously, why is this so hard to understand? Click on chigau’s links or something! Please!
Esteleth:
Obviously the point is not whether the insult is a non sequitur or not (I could have easily said “all Christians should be killed”), but rather if you qualify yourself as a member of the insulted party.
joey:
I gotta ask, why do you even care whether or not someone identifies as culturally _________?
Did you even notice what sparked this entire tangent? It was something I said that had fuck all to do with religious vs cultural Jews and Ryan’s apparent misunderstanding of what “antisemitism” means.
Yet the person will still be familiar with the Catholic Mass, and the teaching of the Catholic Church. They will not suddenly forget all that when they cease being a Catholic. They will get Catholic jokes. So in that respect they will remain culturally Catholic.
This is really not that hard to grasp but for some reason you seem unable to do so. Or maybe unwilling.
And yet the word “Catholic” is still used to describe them. Go figure!
Being a lapsed virgin doesn’t mean that I can still use the word “virgin” to describe me.
Anyway, we’ve gone off an a tangent way too long and this really has been simply an argument in semantics. So I’m bowing out now.
You are intent on missing the point aren’t you ?
If you are wanting to save face and not look like an idiot you are way too late.
Ecery conversation with Joey relies on semantis and him not being smart enough to tell inside from outside
actually, as a former Catholic, I’d like to point out that that’s not really what “lapsed Catholic” means. it’s used in the sense of “once a catholic, always a catholic”, no matter a person’s beliefs/behavior (because there’s no such thing as a de-christening). so a lapsed Catholic is still seen as an actual Catholic, just one that is really shitty at being Catholic (but it’s surely “just a phase”, and at the latest at their deathbeds they’ll return where they belong)
Catholicism is a wee bit possessive of everyone they’ve managed to get their hooks into once.
So true. They count me as one, because I was baptised Catholic even though I was confirmed an Anglican and am now an atheist.
Thor dammit, this derail is boring.
Let’s get back to the meat of the argument.
“Muslims” are a diverse bunch of people, who can be black, white, Swarthy Sinister Middle-Eastern Types(tm), South Asian and many more.
One can’t “look Muslim”, therefore when Sam Harris, a person with a history of saying bigoted things about people from the Middle East, says we should profile people who “look Muslim”, the most probable interpretation is that he thinks we should profile people who “look Arab”.
He sits on his comfortable couch of privilege, never actually having to EXPERIENCE the fear that comes from being suspect just for the way he looks, and say he would be totes okay with being seen as a terrorist until proof in contrary, so those honest Muslims should just shut up and take it.
Also, they should be totally comfortable with the Civilized Western Civilization(tm) waging war of genocide against their families back home because the majority religion there is The Most Evilest There Is(tm). It’s all in his book.
After all, if only all those poor people died everyone would be rich/if all black people died there would be no racial conflict/if all non-Christians died there would be harmony/etc. ad nauseam.
Let me just confirm every word of comment 294.
East. Ethiopia is almost at the eastern end of Africa.
Anyone willing to tear my post apart?
Dr Audley has summed it up and you’ve all argued against things I never said
David Marjanović:
East. Yes.
I don’t know how to read an atlas. *embarrassed*
Nah. But did you see Bruce Schneier’s reply to Harris?
It’s funny because it’s pronounced “Poe-oe”.
Also, it’s in Cabrales, where they make the best blue cheese ever.
That statement wasn’t meant to be funny, just interesting.
What a maroon:
I did not know that. Now I do.
Ain’t life grand?
And if it hadn’t been for Ryan’s contributions here, you might never have learned that. So it wasn’t a total waste.
Now I suggest you celebrate with a feast of cabrales and sidra.
I prefer stilton.
Not me. I argued right on fucking point, and so you resorted to whining about tone.
Maroon: Cheese and cider? Sounds good.
You paying?
Here’s some 5-day-old grog. It should improve your tone. ;)
Sure, if you’ll spring for the airfare.