Lifestyle > Train of Thought
Israel's Impunity
The Overfiend:
--- Quote from: Infinite... the cognitive dissonance theory on August 24, 2009, 12:31:39 AM ---
--- Quote from: Illuminati Clique on August 23, 2009, 05:23:44 PM ---
--- Quote from: IslamInevitable on August 23, 2009, 03:25:24 PM ---ITS A PARADOX THEY CALL REALITY
NON RELIGION IS A RELIGION AS LONG AS YOU CONGREGATE AND ASSOCIATE WITH EACH OTHER ON THIS ESPOUSED BASIS
--- End quote ---
Which not many people actually do mind you. Rather, people who don't profess to any established religion get together for all manner of reasons that involve the actual living of life.
The issue is not someone's belief, rather their degree of objectivity, tolerance and humility in the face of actually knowing nothing.
Most religions, including Islam, believe God is knowable, but also vastly unknown.
Nothing. Everything.
In this sense, maybe you can understand something of aethism and secularism.
--- End quote ---
Very interesting exchange between the two of you right here.
I agree with brother Islaminevitable that the world has a very limited view of what constitutes "religion". Because in Islam we translate religion to mean "way of life". Therefore, the average American who works and watches football with his buddies and goes drinking at a bar every weekend is practicing his own religion. The bar is like the alter upon which he worships, the local football team he projects his hopes, frustrations, judgments, the coach is like a Preacher or Imam... local team good/ far away team bad.. national anthem before every game, local country good, far away country bad... and he does his work to maintain this lifestyle. There are many parallels that can be made. So in this way I agree with my dear brother Islaminevitable.
However, I also agree with Illuminati Clique and I think he makes an excellent point, in focusing on not the religion, but rather the role of subjectivity which leads to intolerance and potentially genocide of an opposing religion or race.
--- End quote ---
The point I'm trying to convey with that Saladin video (Nothing. Everything) and with that last post, is that, most religions or paths of spirituality cite God as being both knowable, but also vastly unknown. Zen is all about being totally ungraspable through explanation. Also I'm sure it says something about this in Koran aswell, I was read the Koran as a kid, but I can't remember verses or anything. But I remember it was something like there are 99 names of Allah that are known to man, but there is also Gods true name, which is only known to God. Therefore the Koran too acknowledges that God is knowable but also vastly unknowable. To me, as I see it: that footballer dude you were using as an example and aethists for that matter, are simply people who cope quite well with this unknowable facet of God. In simply living life and not knowing God, and knowing that they know nothing of God they are incrediblly spiritual and religious by not being spiritual or religious. Because God can only comprehend and understand God, only God knows God's true name; all the other names are imperfect and this is why secularism, aethism and objectivity for that matter are essential in this world. Essential. Essential. Essential. *echo fades out*
And none of y'all will ever know God's real name
-'A Bullet Never Lies' (off Ill Bill's Moment of Reprisal, Vinnie Paz's verse)
The Overfiend:
--- Quote from: IslamInevitable on August 23, 2009, 10:06:28 PM ---yo illuminati, we gotta have this conversation face to face, cuz you convolute your words way too much for me to understand what you mean...
--- End quote ---
Islam is also a moral code. So is Islam also destined to "implode"?
To say America is dysfunctional implies it dosn't function. It functions.
TraceOneInfinite:
--- Quote from: Illuminati Clique on August 24, 2009, 01:46:35 AM ---
Sure we can simpy say, "lets just punish people for the wrong they commit to others" but then of course you have to define what is a wrong! Whats the point in punishing that person if the wrong wasn't defined or if he had no knowledge that such a wrong was a wrong. The world is much more complicated than just assualt, murder, battery, etc There are really two types of law: Natural law (informed by religious and spiritual values) and the law of the State.
Slavery became a crime, when the State (aka the Leviathan) made it legally a crime.
--- End quote ---
This is drifting off into another subject, but since you don't seem to mind, I can explain further what I meant above. The reason I said that the law should simply be "harm done to other people" is because I believe that any real crime should have a victim; first and foremost. All victimless crimes, crimes against the state, such as selling ganja or being homosexual; should never be considered offenses punishable by law.
Any crime punishable by law should have a victim. Otherwise, somebody the likes of George Bush, Sadaam Hussien, Ariel Sharon, Vladamir Putin is going to be deciding for us how we should live our life.
--- Quote from: Illuminati Clique on August 24, 2009, 01:46:35 AM ---
Theres a reason for affirmative action aka positive discrimination, because lets say we make the law equal. That is, make the law non-discriminatory, because remember back in ye old times it was, let say if we make it equal, it does nothing but preserve the status-quo. Because just simply practising equality, will not necessarily result in equality. If two people start off in incomparable situations, treating them similarly will merely perpetuate this, , furthure accentuating the differences.
--- End quote ---
Inequalities will always exist in society. What you said is that we need "positive discrimination" laws to equal the playing field. And I think that an "equal playing field" is something that is not a reality in nature or in human interaction. No two human beings are alike, and resources are always limited for everyone. Some people may have more resources than others, but this only creates an opportunity for exchange between two people. Because if we all were TRULY 100% equal then it would no longer be possible for me to exchange with you personally or economically because I already have everything you have, and you have everything that I have. So there is nothing wrong with in-equality, it is a fact of life we can never avoid.
Let me give you real world examples. Let's say oil never came, and the Indian subcontinent was more "equal" to the Arabian peninsula financially. Well then exchange could not take place between the two. Because the Bangali's, Indians, Pakistani's would not see the benefit in immigrating to the Arab lands for higher wages and opportunities, and likewise the Arabs would not see the benefit in having these people provide them with cutting edge technology, hard construction labor, etc. The part that I don't agree with is how citizenship is a law that is used to discriminate against others. In the way you see Indian immigrants being stripped of passports, and incidents such as that.
Another example, and the most obvious one is the case of black people in America. Let's say you want to equal the playing field. So you make all these affirmative action laws aka "positive discrimination". There are a few problems with this....
-are you saying blacks aren't capable of rising up on their own in the way other minorities such as Asians, Arabs, and Jews have in America?
-you've now created reverse racism in that whites will resent blacks as a threat to them, and they will now cry out that there is unfair play at hand, so you have now intensified the debate and hatred amongst whites and blacks
-If there is a large population of blacks who can not find work and get ahead or get "more equal" to whites then all you have done is created a HUGE potential market for black owned businesses. Black people, recognizing their position in America can then pool their conscience and their resources towards their advancement, and support black owned businesses and projects in the free market... without the George Bush's of the world enforcing "positive discrimination" laws for them.
--- Quote from: Illuminati Clique on August 24, 2009, 01:46:35 AM ---
Anyway, word, this is getting into a different topic, but the reason I raised it was that, IslamInevitable said that we can never have total objectivity, and we can never be totally separated from our prejudices, I agreed, but cited anti-discrimination law as an example of where objectivity (and the law is supposed to be objective) can take us so far.
--- End quote ---
The solution is not anti-discriminatory laws (which actually do more harm than good), the solution is to open up a free market, in which people can exchange freely to their advantage. Therefore if blacks are being discriminated against by white owned businesses they can simply open up their own businesses or support white businesses who do not employ discriminatory policies. But don't make the George Bush's of the world responsible for their advancement because they will always screw it up worse.
I would be more supportive of reparations for blacks then I would affirmative action and "positive discrimination" laws. Because those businesses (some of which are still around today) should be punished for the harm they did to other people; as in the case of slavery or Jim Crow laws, etc.
Even if a law is implemented that you think is a good one, it will not be executed properly. Government is destined for failure every time because government relies on force. So it can only last as long as you can hold your foot over somebodies head, because as soon as you turn the other way they will go right back to what they were doing. That's why as soon as you give black people affirmative action, the white man goes and gets the Mexican to do his cheap labor and uses the label of "illegal alien" as an excuse for using them in the same way they would previously use black people. Or they will find cheap labor overseas in Thialand or Indonesia outsourcing businesses to where cheap labor is available. Who knows, maybe then even black people advance and start using Mexican's or other foreigners in the same way they were previously exploited. So I'm sorry but you can not wave a magic wand over the world and create "equality".
Diary: How to Improve the World (You will only make matters
worse).
— John Cage
TraceOneInfinite:
--- Quote from: Illuminati Clique on August 24, 2009, 02:19:49 AM ---
The point I'm trying to convey with that Saladin video (Nothing. Everything) and with that last post, is that, most religions or paths of spirituality cite God as being both knowable, but also vastly unknown. Zen is all about being totally ungraspable through explanation. Also I'm sure it says something about this in Koran aswell, I was read the Koran as a kid, but I can't remember verses or anything. But I remember it was something like there are 99 names of Allah that are known to man, but there is also Gods true name, which is only known to God. Therefore the Koran too acknowledges that God is knowable but also vastly unknowable. To me, as I see it: that footballer dude you were using as an example and aethists for that matter, are simply people who cope quite well with this unknowable facet of God. In simply living life and not knowing God, and knowing that they know nothing of God they are incrediblly spiritual and religious by not being spiritual or religious. Because God can only comprehend and understand God, only God knows God's true name; all the other names are imperfect and this is why secularism, aethism and objectivity for that matter are essential in this world. Essential. Essential. Essential. *echo fades out*
And none of y'all will ever know God's real name
-'A Bullet Never Lies' (off Ill Bill's Moment of Reprisal, Vinnie Paz's verse)
--- End quote ---
Beautiful post from beginning to end (nice finish with the Vinnie Paz verse).
Yes, Islam does go to great lengths to explain that Allah is both knowable and unknowable. The Qu'ran doesn't say anything about "not knowing Allah's real name". I'm not aware of anything like that exactly... but what the Qu'ran does do is it explains that Allah can only be known through his attributes. For example, he is the most high, the knowing, the loving, the biulder, the destroyer, the eternal, the absolute, and so on. In one verse it says that Allah is "closer to us than our jugular vien"... that "Allah is always near to those who call on him"... that Allah's knowledge is omnipresent and so on.....
....while on the other hand the Qu'ran then stresses just how "unknowable" Allah is. How he is "unlike anything". That he can't be contained in anything, that he can is Infinite, that our minds can never conjure up an image for Allah, and so on.
Nothing.... EVERYTHING!
That Sallahudin line from the movie is ether!!
The Overfiend:
Thanks Infinite.
Before you made a huge post, I agree with alot of it, but I must admit I don't know much about US social issues or affirmative action in the US. Positive discrimination dosn't have to be racially based however, its just another word, for instance, here in Australia you have to meet certain requirements to be eligable for welfare (such as only earn a small amount of money, no job, etc) so in this sense welfare here discriminates between rich and poor and targets the poor and needy, hence the term 'positive discrimination'. I was talking more from a legal perspective, on what the law should be and justifying it for what it is. The law may say one thing, and I believe it is essential to have laws first, so that society can have something to build upon, but I never argued that the law is a 'magic wand'. Afterall, most countries (including the US and Australia) are bound by the UN International Convenant on Economic, Cultural and Social Rights, and according to this document nobody is suppose to be homeless without shelter, without food, without adequate drinking water, etc. Its all excellent in principle, however it is far from the actual reality.
Concerning affirmative action however, in Australia it is kind of a different story. Black people here are indigenous, native to the country, right now, Australia has actually derogated from the UN International Convention on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination and has temporarily put aside its anti-discrimination laws so that it can positively discriminate against indigenous Australians, so this country is engaging in a level of positive discrimination that Conservative Americans would probablly find ridiculous. Now its not an easy issue, indigenous Australians have never really had a motivation to create wealth and such for themselves, which is also fine. Really, before the European settlers came, they lived a very nomadic lifestyle. The government has tried all types of policies including doing nothing, however, many tragic issues within Aboriginal society like petrol sniffing, child abuse, alcoholism, have always drawn back the intervention of the government. Its a sad issue for Australia.
Peace
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version