The religion of science.

[Heracles 417]

I didn't bring up arabs, Hecraoleos. I responded to a poster who used the term "arab/islamic" and then replied to the poster who reponded to me with the same term. Islam is a religious designation, arab is not. Regardless of the original topic, The nobel prize committee has not admitted to having religious bias, just a geographic one.

I had no reponse to the validity of the original topic. Religion is dogmatic, science is not. The prosperity of any religion has historically been at the detriment of science. It's not unique to a single religion.

I based it on the premise of if Islam was the one and true religion, then surely Islamic countries would not all be in such a terrible plight. Surely God would have blessed them, rather than use infidels.

Science was considered a detriment in medieval times, when people were clueless; and yes by some misguided people now. Science can and does co-exist with religion. The two really have little in common.

Edited September 16, 2010 by Heracles

[SMR 368]

Oh no? 'Splain me please about other nations that fail to rank in the "success" department, but don't adhere to Islam. There most certainly are other explanations, chief among them poverty and lack of access.

I think theocracies can suck it. But I have way bigger fish to fry in terms of hunger, abject poverty, and educational resources when it comes to explaining failure to excel. The impulse to run to Islam as the culprit is a willful failure of objective investigation, in my opinion.

So, basically you admit that Islam has led to failed countries but attempt to deflect that by saying other countries have failed, too. I realize that there are other countries that are oppressive and not progressing. The point is, Islam has no success stories. It's batting .000. So while there are other systems that lead to failure or may lead to failure, it seems clear that the Islamic system leads unequivocally to failure. Or do you care to provide a counter example (of a free, succeeding, human-rights conscious Islamic nation)?

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

If Islam has no success stories then Muslims in western countries would be an underclass. They are not.

[SMR 368]

If Islam has no success stories then Muslims in western countries would be an underclass. They are not.

No, you seem to be confusing the claim that Islam is a failed system with the claim that people from Islam countries are inferior. (The former I am claiming; the latter I am not. Perhaps I was unclear when I said Islam had no success stories. I meant countries, not people.) Clearly people from Islam countries have what it takes to be successful in a system that allows success as noted by the success of Muslim immigrants to western countries.

That's my point. The people, as a whole, have roughly the same average set of abilities. But the Islam system abuses and oppresses them, stamping out creativity and not allowing people to succeed.

Edited September 16, 2010 by SMR

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

You're confusing theocratic government with religious ideology.

[mawilson 2,133]

You're confusing theocratic government with religious ideology.

Theocratic governments use religious ideologies to perpetuate and legitimize their power.

The only two theocratic states in existence today are Iran and Vatican City.

You decide which one is more dangerous.

Edited September 16, 2010 by mawilson

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

What is that supposed to prove?

It's irrelevant.

[mawilson 2,133]

What is that supposed to prove?

The fact that there are no oppressive Christian theocracies in existence today

proves that Christianity has indeed evolved.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

So what?

[mawilson 2,133]

So there.

[Amby 490]

you two

[twowls 217]

So, basically you admit that Islam has led to failed countries but attempt to deflect that by saying other countries have failed, too. I realize that there are other countries that are oppressive and not progressing. The point is, Islam has no success stories. It's batting .000. So while there are other systems that lead to failure or may lead to failure, it seems clear that the Islamic system leads unequivocally to failure. Or do you care to provide a counter example (of a free, succeeding, human-rights conscious Islamic nation)?

No, I'm "admitting" that the reasons some groups don't show up as often on the excel-o-meter are a lot more complex than what you state. You keep saying "Islam is fail!" That's just really simplistic and it ignores everything else that has gone on in example countries.

I'm "admitting" that Afghanistan, as an example, has had 30 straight years of civil war. That they've been invaded again and again and used as a tug of war rope by much stronger countries. That the majority cannot read. That their health care is practically nonexistent. Hundreds of thousands are walking around limbless and disabled. It's a horror show. You try living in a perpetual war and being used like a cat toy by other nations and see how you do. You try scraping together a life with your one leg and your abject poverty and see how many world class scientific or literary discoveries you make in your spare time.

I don't see why it's so difficult to put things into context and see that maybe, from our perch in a relatively stable and wealthy country, we may not have the full picture. Wait, it's not that difficult.

[Ggreen 12]

I based it on the premise of if Islam was the one and true religion, then surely Islamic countries would not all be in such a terrible plight. Surely God would have blessed them, rather than use infidels.

Science was considered a detriment in medieval times, when people were clueless; and yes by some misguided people now. Science can and does co-exist with religion. The two really have little in common.

Islamic countries are under attack (weapon/media/organizations...) for many years, and those attacks produced terrorists instead of scientists.