Isn't it self-delusion to think that 6 billion people will grow up simultaneously?
Won't their still be a few million left who want to diddle our daughters and steal our stuff?
The History of humanity tells us we are all badly flawed. We have the capacity for both good and evil and the freedom to choose .. a thousand times a day. Often evil is a lot more profitable and/or enjoyable.
And nobodys lookin' so it's OK
A lot of the physically strong will seek wealth/power by any means necessary. Their definition of "grown up" is a little different than the one posed here. Grown up may mean something as simple as just being in control of your own personal Universe. It only takes one Hitler to convince millions to follow that path .. and a billion "grown ups" die for that very reason. Not because they follow Hitler but because they're to "grown up" to stand up and kill the SOB.
Isn't this what Seculars stand for? .. survival of the fittest .. evolution? Natural Selection? As long as their are two of us left we probably won't "grow up" .. hell, Adam and Eve were concieved grown up and went backwards.
They were warned .. so were we, yet we still are subject to our Natural core belief of basic self-interest .. DESIRE.
Do you think 6 billion of us can all achieve Nirvina at the same time?
Pass the bong.
......................................
Growing up entails learning to take responsibilty for ones actions .. whether it feels good or not. Many, many people live their entire lives in complete self interest and could care less what we think is grown up. They just want to get theirs and have fun and when the bill comes due skip-out to the next State/Country.
Absolutly zero chance that collective humanity will ever grow up.
Originally posted by vistesdThanks, that was interesting.
continued from above...
(The Jizyah is a tax levied on non-Muslims in Muslim societies for protection and other services, since non-Muslims were not required to serve in the military nor pay the zakah.)
Muhammad Asad, in a footnote on this verse, refers to the arguments in the commentary at the top of this post—i.e., that here again, fighting is only ...[text shortened]... e who know more than I do, and have an interest in doing so Sorry for the over-long post...[/b]
But getting back to the topic of the thread .. in spite of their culture and religion, you think that its possible for muslims to co-exist with the western culture. What do you think the west will have to give up for this to happen ?
Originally posted by Rajk999Tough questions, Rajk. And I’m tired tonight. And I can only go by what little I know of the “model” here in the States. There are a lot of Muslims who have learned to live within western culture (perhaps like Orthodox or Hasidic Jews). They are currently grappling with issues raised, not only by the crazies elsewhere in the world, but by the “importation” (as they view it) of extremist philosophy into an Islamic society that has lived under democratic conditions for a long time. I think the only thing western culture can do is allow the space for that to happen, not give up anything. But western democratic society includes argument in the public forum about all sorts of cultural, philosophical, political issues, etc.—that cannot be given up either.
Thanks, that was interesting.
But getting back to the topic of the thread .. in spite of their culture and religion, you think that its possible for muslims to co-exist with the western culture. What do you think the west will have to give up for this to happen ?
Ivanhoe, I think, has some good points about the non-religious issues. My intellectual interest is in the religions. As a citizen, my interests are larger.
Be well.
Originally posted by jammerJudgement based on religion, race or nationality are generalizations that won't cut it in a modern worldview.
Isn't it self-delusion to think that 6 billion people will grow up simultaneously?
Won't their still be a few million left who want to diddle our daughters and steal our stuff?
There will be difference of opinions in every "group" of people such that you cannot hold the entire group responsible for the offenses made by a select few. This is why you're having problems within your own country borders (and of course the same is true for any group of people). Not all americans agree with you on every account, or live by the same rules you do. If an american steps out of line and commit a crime, that person is identified (if possible), localized and arrested. Then (s)he's given a "fair" trial and a chance to defend him/herself.
Within the US (even with all the internal problems you have) I'm sure you'll consider it to be peace. There's no civil war going on and there's not danger lurking around every corner (albeit quite a few if I'm not mistaken).
My point being, world peace does not require every citizen of earth to be "grown up" at once.
Originally posted by ivanhoeSo you're saying that the islamic religion is being used as a tool to manipulate people to fight for a cause, just like christianity is used in america to get people to fight on the other side. The symmetry could be considered beautiful if it wasn't for the disgusting nature of the situation, and the misery it causes on both sides.
The Islamist movement is a political movement masquerading as a religion. This whole religion gobbledeegook spouted by the Jihadists is just a means of being able to mobilise the masses, educated and uneducated, and recrute eager and unexperienced young men and women to die for a political cause, again disguised as a religious one.
Therefore this whole di ...[text shortened]... about Islam is mute. Jihadism is in the first place a new form of Arab-nationalist imperialism.
Originally posted by stocken...but having the only current superpower marching into countries under false pretences and stealing all the resources does put a dampener on it.
Judgement based on religion, race or nationality are generalizations that won't cut it in a modern worldview.
There will be difference of opinions in every "group" of people such that you cannot hold the entire group responsible for the offenses made by a select few. This is why you're having problems within your own country borders (and of course the sa ...[text shortened]... rld peace does not require every citizen of earth to be "grown up" at once.
I heard on a radio program yesterday that they had figured out bi-pedal motion in robots and of most concern to the radio panelists(it was brekky radio) was how that might impact society vis a vis the typical I Robot scenarios that could develop and how that might destabilise existing partnered relationships if they were developed to exploit the sexual needs of people.
Because it is generally accepted that Robots would conform to Asimov's three laws of robotics I thought what if robots were developed and deployed in war zones as peacekeepers, sort of extreme environment police(eep's for short). As there would no longer be a body count impacting the country staging the war that might weaken its resolve to continue fighting that war as it lost the battle of the hearts and minds of taxpayers at home as the body bags returned, war once engaged would be fought until all objectives were reached and in a manner that would not escalate the violence but rather contain it.
These robots could be armed with non lethal restraining technology that could, simply put, remove the bullies of the sand pit.
Their ability to operate(possibly/hopefully) in much the same way as humans, but themselves be impervious to attack would obviate the need for deadly armament( deadly force is only required now by human soldiers, after all, to neutralise the force of the enemy, a capacity that would be unnecesary in indestructible robots).
Thus robots like schoolteachers would eventually exert a positive influence that could detain all those who refuse to play by the rules and with all the recalcitrant delinquents and violence junkies removed from society, I think the world may yet have a slim chance of growing up.
Is'nt it time we recognised that violent protest is not just a physical act.
As long as we in the west reserve the right to be free in our speech yet continually indulge forms of expression that are known through experience to force a provocative reaction, then to what extent can cartoonists etc proclaim innocence in the matter and to what extent are they being the childish petulant party?
If we only measure Islamic responses against our own western ones yet studiously avoid consideration of the peculiar way in which their mindset reacts differently to similar sets of stimuli than we do, then surely our actions are just as ill considered, ill conceived and childish to boot.
If the British can fine a soccer player for making a nazi salute in a match, if world cup fans are on notice that Basil Fawlty impersonations will not be tolerated, then where has the famed European sense of humour gone in these examples and why then should one expect that Islam could grow up any better than Germany on sensitive issues.