Australian Politics Forum - Islam stifles basic science

Yadda

Gold Member

Offline

Posts: 21612
A cat with a view

Re: Islam stifles basic science
Reply #120 - Mar 25^th, 2013 at 8:31pm

polite_gandalf wrote on Mar 25^th, 2013 at 2:38pm:

my God you are a bafoon Baron - no offence - you really just need to think your arguments through a little better. Nowhere did I claim he was a muslim. He was however a great thinker living in the islamic world. The fact that there were (apparently) atheists and apostates walking around in the heart of the muslim world freely propagating their blasphemous ideas - and having them challenged and debated in a civilized manner only supports my argument - not yours. Silly billy Tongue

Yes baron,

Why can't you accept it when gandalf tells us that non-moslems [or moslems] who are atheists and apostates could/can walk around in the heart of the moslem world freely propagating their blasphemous ideas ???

I mean baron, even here in Australia we have PROOF that a moslem, living within the Australian moslem community, can reject the tenets and laws of ISLAM and can freely propagate their blasphemous ideas on an Australian online forum - and he/she will still be regarded as a bona fide moslem.

e.g.
gandalf doesn't obey Allah, and as a moslem gandalf refuses to associate himself with the tenets and laws of ISLAM, regarding the relationship that moslems must foster towards disbelievers.

gandalf doesn't obey the Koran, and as a moslem gandalf refuses to associate himself with the tenets and laws of ISLAM, regarding the relationship that moslems must foster towards disbelievers.

gandalf doesn't obey Mohammed, and as a moslem gandalf refuses to associate himself with the tenets and laws of ISLAM, regarding the relationship that moslems must foster towards disbelievers.

So baron, why can't you just accept that every moslem [or even a non-moslem], can be 'a man for all seasons', who can be a tolerant individual who promotes the idea that ISLAM accepts a political environment of pluralism for all of mankind ?

And baron, why can't you just accept that a moslem can ignore the tenets and laws of ISLAM, and still remain a bona fide moslem ?

Hmmm?

So can you see, that gandalf is our proof, that a moslem can hold blasphemous and apostating views, and can still be a moslem, at that very same instant.
/sarc off

Dictionary;
pluralism = =
1 a condition or system in which two or more states, groups, principles, etc., coexist. a political theory or system of power-sharing among a number of political parties.
2 Philosophy a theory or system that recognizes more than one ultimate principle. Compare with monism.i+++

Jahiliyya = = the un-ISLAMIC lifestyle, e.g. a society which embraces political pluralism.

Quote:

"THE RIGHT TO JUDGE"
"It is not the function of Islam to compromise with the concepts of Jahiliyya which are current in the world or to co-exist in the same land together with a jahili system........"

SAYYID QUTB - ISLAMIC scholar
http://www.islamworld.net/justice.html

OR, Google;
"THE RIGHT TO JUDGE" SAYYID QUTB

The 'Jahiliyya' lifestyle is totally incompatible with ISLAM.

And in fact, to devout moslems, the mere *existence* of non-moslem communities is viewed as insulting to the authority of Allah.
...because you see, moslems 'deserve' to have 'authority', to rule the whole world, for Allah.

Jahiliyya is a result of the lack of Sharia...

Quote:

"....Jahiliyya is a result of the lack of Sharia law, without which Islam cannot exist;"
"...true Islam is a complete system with no room for any element of Jahiliyya"
"...all aspects of Jahiliyya...are "evil and corrupt" "

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jahiliyya#Jahiliyya_in_contemporary_societyi+++

IMAGE...

Sydney, 2012, moslem street protests.
"Ignore the placards. We are moslems!!! And we believe in pluralism!"

Back to top

"....And he said unto him, If they hear not Moses and the prophets, neither will they be persuaded, though one rose from the dead."
Luke 16:31

IP Logged

polite_gandalf

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 20027
Canberra
Gender: male

Re: Islam stifles basic science
Reply #121 - Mar 25^th, 2013 at 9:43pm

freediver wrote on Mar 25^th, 2013 at 7:02pm:

I did not pick and choose which ones to look at.

no, really you do. I gave you a list of 17. I didn't say only focus on the two that were put under arrest. In fact I picked out 3 of them - only one of whom was arrested. You obsess about Mr Gibberish simply because he is first in chronological order (not as you originally claim first in importance). I never singled him out as the most important.

freediver wrote on Mar 25^th, 2013 at 7:02pm:

Is that the list you think proves your case?

no, see here's your problem. For you everything is about the individuals in a list. Whereas for me, its about what was achieved by the collective. And there are many: hospitals, medical advances, discoveries in optics, astronomy, mathematics etc etc. Making lists is just random, subjective and ultimately pointless. Even if there was some way of objectively "ranking" scientists in order of influence, and it turned out that islamic scientists only start from 101 down (or whatever), that in no way proves that islamic science contributed nothing - let alone that islam actively stifles science. Hospitals are a good example - which were developed not as the result of a single brilliant individual, but came about as a result of having a culture of interest and concern for medical science and human anatomy.

freediver wrote on Mar 25^th, 2013 at 7:02pm:

Except of course for the bit where they put the scientists under house arrest, made them feel like their only option was to feign madness

Yes - all two instances of them in a 600 year period Roll Eyes

I mean really. I could pick out any number of western scientists whose work actually were challenged and impeded by fierce religious attacks - Galileo and Darwin spring to mind. Note - these were actual cases of religion (at least attempting) to thwart science - not cases of an engineer being imprisoned for promising something and then bailing out of the deal, or being imprisoned for getting on the wrong side of royal feuds. Lets be reasonable here FD - the church establishment fought tooth and nail against scientific advancement in the middle ages and early renaissance, yet I would never claim that christianity per se stifles science. Why on earth would you attempt to argue that islam stifles science on the back of two examples (in an entire 600 year period) of scientists being imprisoned and feigning madness for things that had nothing to do with religion?? You are just being absurdly unreasonable on so many levels.

freediver wrote on Mar 25^th, 2013 at 7:02pm:

Do you want the entire history, or will a shortened version suffice?

Whatever you like. I just want some semblance of a case showing how islam marched around and actively stifled science during the golden age. (~700-1300AD). Because the evidence that we know of suggests the exact opposite - such as the documented tolerance for non-islamic views (refer to previously quoted Guardian article), and the examples provided by Baron of atheists freely propagating blasphemous ideas.

freediver wrote on Mar 25^th, 2013 at 7:02pm:

Who do you think is the best example of Islam not stifling science?

Gee whiz, I think I have a few. How about the establishment of the greatest scientific learning centres the world had ever seen? How about the caliphs who became patrons of learning - including the Egyptian one who imprisoned Al Haytham? Or the Abbasids who welcomed and encouraged exchanges of learning from Persia and other non-islamic areas?

freediver wrote on Mar 25^th, 2013 at 7:02pm:

It is not just that these societies tolerated non-believers tinkering away with ideas.

Like Galileo who was summoned to Rome, put on trial, threatened with torture and forced to recant his belief that the earth rotated around the sun - and then put under (wait for it) *HOUSE ARREST* - horror of horrors!!. Or how about the Scottish philosopher David Hume who published his first work anonymously for fear of being arrested on blasphemy charges - and whose second publication cost him his job at his university - for his perceived blasphemy. In fact the pressure to conform to the religious orthodoxy caused him to abandon philosophy altogether at the peak of his career.

freediver wrote on Mar 25^th, 2013 at 7:02pm:

as oppose to say, fasting, walking round magic rocks, praying five times a day, trying to gather 4 wives, slaughtering the infidel etc

Way to make yourself sound like a bigot and lose any credibility you might have had. Anyway, the things you say about scientific pursuit being the expression of religious devotion - pretty accurately describes the islamic philosophy during the golden age - if you bothered to actually read anything about the history and philosophy of the time.

Back to top

« Last Edit: Mar 25^th, 2013 at 9:54pm by polite_gandalf »

A resident Islam critic who claims to represent western values said:
Quote:

Outlawing the enemy's uniform - hijab, islamic beard - is not depriving one's own people of their freedoms.

IP Logged

freediver

Gold Member

Offline

www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 48834
At my desk.

Re: Islam stifles basic science
Reply #122 - Mar 25^th, 2013 at 10:54pm

Quote:

no, really you do. I gave you a list of 17. I didn't say only focus on the two that were put under arrest.

I didn't know they were put under house arrest until I read up on them. They were the first ones on the list. Your list. Given that the rest were described mostly as translators I thought that would be a good place to start. It is not like I have gone through the entire list and picked out the bad examples.

This is really quite simple gandalf. If you think there are some examples that don't make Islam look bad, tell us. Start with whoever you think is the best example. If you haven't bothered to look at the others either, don't expect me to.

Quote:

I never singled him out as the most important.

You refuse to single any of them out. Why? Is there not one good example? If I offered you a list of examples to demonstrate how Christianity did not stifle science that had Galileo on the top of the list, you would assume I had no idea what I was talking about, wouldn't you? And if I followed this up with endless excuses for why I cannot suggest a better example, what would you think? Yet this is exactly what you have done.

Quote:

For you everything is about the individuals in a list. Whereas for me, its about what was achieved by the collective.

That's convenient, given that many of them are given credit for the work of others. Can you suggest a way to compare this with non-Muslim societies, or does this also conveniently get you out of any possible comparison?

Quote:

And there are many: hospitals

Just taking the first example from your list, a hospital is not a development in basic science. Like your houses of learning, it should help to facilitate basic science, yet for some reason the results don't measure up.

Quote:

Making lists is just random, subjective and ultimately pointless.

You have managed to make it pointless.

Quote:

Even if there was some way of objectively "ranking" scientists in order of influence, and it turned out that islamic scientists only start from 101 down (or whatever), that in no way proves that islamic science contributed nothing

Luckily that is not anyone's position.

Quote:

Why on earth would you attempt to argue that islam stifles science on the back of two examples

That is not what I am doing Gandalf. Those were your two examples that you brought up after I made the claim. They just happen to reinforce my position, not yours. My original evidence was a list of 100 scientists and Abu's vain attempt to prop up midgets. (Have you decided which magical flying machine story you are going to stick with?)

Quote:

Whatever you like. I just want some semblance of a case showing how islam marched around and actively stifled science during the golden age.

Not just then. It still does.

Quote:

Like Galileo who was summoned to Rome, put on trial, threatened with torture and forced to recant his belief that the earth rotated around the sun - and then put under (wait for it) *HOUSE ARREST* - horror of horrors!!. Or how about the Scottish philosopher David Hume who published his first work anonymously for fear of being arrested on blasphemy charges - and whose second publication cost him his job at his university - for his perceived blasphemy.

Well done Gandalf. If you look around you can find examples of the same thing happening elsewhere. The difference is that I did not have to look around. You provided those examples. And you are still afraid to offer up who you think is the best example. I can only assume that you know as little about these scientists as I do, but are clinging to some hope that if I go through all of them it might change my mind.

Back to top

People who can't distinguish between etymology and entomology bug me in ways I cannot put into words.

IP Logged

polite_gandalf

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 20027
Canberra
Gender: male

Re: Islam stifles basic science
Reply #123 - Mar 26^th, 2013 at 5:48am

Quote:

Not just then. It still does.

We're not talking about now - science is stifled now in the islamic world, that was never disputed.

However you made the stupid claim that science was stifled during the golden age, and I have not seen one shred of evidence supporting this. Just two guys who were imrpisoned due to non-religious reasons.

Lets cut the crap FD - put up or shut up - show me some evidence that supports your claim that islam stifled science during the golden age (~700-1300AD).

Or is this going in the same basket as the camel urine bullshit claim - which you clearly know you were wrong but are too gutless to admit?

Back to top

A resident Islam critic who claims to represent western values said:
Quote:

Outlawing the enemy's uniform - hijab, islamic beard - is not depriving one's own people of their freedoms.

IP Logged

freediver

Gold Member

Offline

www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 48834
At my desk.

Re: Islam stifles basic science
Reply #124 - Mar 26^th, 2013 at 10:59am

Quote:

We're not talking about now

I am making a generalisation about Islam that includes now.

Quote:

science is stifled now in the islamic world, that was never disputed

How and why is it stifled now?

Quote:

Just two guys who were imrpisoned due to non-religious reasons.

I believe those two scientists, who you brought up by the way, provided many examples of how Islam stifles basic science, beyond the fact that both were placed under house arrest by the Caliph. I have listed them for you plenty of times.

Back to top

People who can't distinguish between etymology and entomology bug me in ways I cannot put into words.

IP Logged

polite_gandalf

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 20027
Canberra
Gender: male

Re: Islam stifles basic science
Reply #125 - Mar 26^th, 2013 at 11:42am

freediver wrote on Mar 26^th, 2013 at 10:59am:

I believe those two scientists, who you brought up by the way, provided many examples of how Islam stifles basic science, beyond the fact that both were placed under house arrest by the Caliph. I have listed them for you plenty of times.

not even close. Simply laughable. None of those things even mentions, nor has any plausible link to islam. That and the fact that its a whole 2 examples in an entire 600 year period.

So I have two examples - Galileo and Thomas Hobbs who actually were intimidated by religion into abandoning or recanting their scientific pursuits. Can I now say that christianity stifles science? In FD world I surely can - but I won't. Because its a stupid line of argument - even though the case is infinitely stronger in regards to the christian world.

Why is this so hard for you FD? Why are you so bitter that you have to trip over yourself in attempting, so horribly, to maintain this absurd line of yours? If islam trully "stifled" science during the golden age, I would expect to see some more convincing evidence than two guys imprisoned and feigning madness - or actually being mad - over things that have no discernable link to islam whatsoever. I would expect to see evidence of ideas being suppressed - not the great cultural (and non-islamic) exchanges and pursuit of ideas we saw under the Abbasids, or atheists walking around freely propagating their blasphemous ideas. I would expect to see rulers dismantling learning centres and libraries - not building them. You simply don't have a leg to stand on - and I'm frankly demeaning myself by engaging you in this absurd argument.

I mean you can even continue to indulge your anti-islamic bigotry by pointing at the stifling of science in today's islamic world. Surely thats more relevant than what happened a thousand years ago right? I don't have a problem with that. In fact it is a stinging indictment on the islamic world that they were so enlightened and rich in culture and knowledge back then, but so stagnant today.

Back to top

A resident Islam critic who claims to represent western values said:
Quote:

Outlawing the enemy's uniform - hijab, islamic beard - is not depriving one's own people of their freedoms.

IP Logged

freediver

Gold Member

Offline

www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 48834
At my desk.

Re: Islam stifles basic science
Reply #126 - Mar 26^th, 2013 at 12:06pm

Quote:

not even close. Simply laughable. None of those things even mentions, nor has any plausible link to islam.

Does a Caliph have a plausible link to Islam? Does a Muslim trying to restrict the spread of knowledge to those 'favoured by God' have a plausible link to Islam? Does feigning insanity have a plausible link to islam?

Quote:

That and the fact that its a whole 2 examples in an entire 600 year period.

But they are not the only two bad examples are they? Do you honestly expect us to believe that the first two examples you provided just happened to backfire and undermine your case, but every other example in the 600 year history will support your case, even though you are unwilling to provide one good example?

Quote:

So I have two examples - Galileo and Thomas Hobbs who actually were intimidated by religion into abandoning or recanting their scientific pursuits. Can I now say that christianity stifles science?

Like I keep pointing out, they are your examples, not mine. I am merely pointing out that your own examples contradict you. Yet you have somehow managed to delude yourself into thinking that they are examples that I provided and that this is the only evidence I have provided. I have provided plenty of other evidence, which you appear to keep forgetting, despite me constantly having to remind you. I am giving you the chance to pick and choose the best example to back up your case. Instead you inadvertently support my case.

Quote:

I would expect to see evidence of ideas being suppressed

Do you think that deliberately trying to prevent people gaining access to knowledge counts as suppressing ideas? Remember, this is from your own example of how Islam does not stifle basic science.

Quote:

I mean you can even continue to indulge your anti-islamic bigotry by pointing at the stifling of science in today's islamic world. Surely thats more relevant than what happened a thousand years ago right?

How does the modern Islamic world stifle science?

Back to top

People who can't distinguish between etymology and entomology bug me in ways I cannot put into words.

IP Logged

Yadda

Gold Member

Offline

Posts: 21612
A cat with a view

Re: Islam stifles basic science
Reply #127 - Mar 26^th, 2013 at 12:36pm

polite_gandalf wrote on Mar 26^th, 2013 at 5:48am:

We're not talking about now - science is stifled now in the islamic world, that was never disputed.

However you made the stupid claim that science was stifled during the golden age, and I have not seen one shred of evidence supporting this. Just two guys who were imrpisoned due to non-religious reasons.

Lets cut the crap FD - put up or shut up - show me some evidence that supports your claim that islam stifled science during the golden age (~700-1300AD).

An ISLAMIC 'golden age',

exists in the imagination of all moslems today, because the invention of ISLAM's 'golden age' [and its supposed existence], helps to mitigate the TRUTH of the clear barbarity of ISLAM which all reasonable and rational people cannot deny, today.
i.e.
"Don't you know, that there was a wondrous ISLAMIC 'golden age' ?
When we moslems achieved so much, and at a time when ISLAM was such a benevolent pluralistic philosophy.
HONEST!!!!!
Yes, ISLAM was such a benevolent philosophy - then.
Even though we cannot deny, that today, it is clear that REAL moslems, are all a bunch of Neanderthal head kickers [....hey! why can't we have some fun, after beheading the disbeliever ? ].
But hey!!!!!
....We did have a golden age.
[yes, that was back in (~700-1300AD), when Allah didn't have any authority over moslems. HONEST!!!!!
And the memory of Mohammed was as a benevolent administrator. HONEST!!!!!
And the Koran was a true testament to the human kindness that was being spread by ISLAM. HONEST!!!!!]"

Once again, just to be clear......
An ISLAMIC 'golden age' has only ever existed in the furtive imagination of the moslem, who has a REDUNDANT philosophical barrow to push - a philosophical barrow lacking even a wheel [of reasonableness] at the front of it.

+++

+++

polite_gandalf wrote on Mar 26^th, 2013 at 11:42am:

I mean you can even continue to indulge your anti-islamic bigotry by pointing at the stifling of science in today's islamic world. Surely thats more relevant than what happened a thousand years ago right? I don't have a problem with that. In fact it is a stinging indictment on the islamic world that they were so enlightened and rich in culture and knowledge back then, but so stagnant today.

Yadda translates;

The act of speaking any unflattering truth about ISLAM and/or the vicious and violent conduct of moslems = = "anti-islamic bigotry"

+++

"O ye who believe! Fight those of the disbelievers who are near to you, and let them find harshness in you, and know that Allah is with those who keep their duty (unto Him)."
Koran 9.123

"Allah hath purchased of the believers their persons and their goods; for theirs (in return) is the garden (of Paradise): they fight in His cause, and slay and are slain:...."
Koran 9.111

"Fight those who believe not in Allah nor the Last Day, nor hold that forbidden which hath been forbidden by Allah and His Messenger, nor acknowledge the religion of Truth, (even if they are) of the People of the Book, until they pay the Jizya with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued. "
Koran 9.29

Back to top

"....And he said unto him, If they hear not Moses and the prophets, neither will they be persuaded, though one rose from the dead."
Luke 16:31

IP Logged

polite_gandalf

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 20027
Canberra
Gender: male

Re: Islam stifles basic science
Reply #128 - Mar 26^th, 2013 at 1:01pm

freediver wrote on Mar 26^th, 2013 at 12:06pm:

Do you think that deliberately trying to prevent people gaining access to knowledge counts as suppressing ideas?

I suppose so. One individual who by your own contention had gone mad, wrote some jibberish about only the chosen ones should have access to his knowledge - and that is supposed to be reflective of how the entire muslim world stifled science.

Is your argument that all islamic scientists were mad? Or is it that all islamic scientists refused to allow anyone but God's chosen from accessing their work? You've sort of found two examples of this - why not make the totally logical jump and say all islamic scientists did this? Makes sense right?

freediver wrote on Mar 26^th, 2013 at 12:06pm:

But they are not the only two bad examples are they?

Um yeah... Tongue

Of course the vast majority of islamic scientists were either stark raving mad and refused to share their knowledge and/or were imprisoned by knowledge-hating caliphs (who also paradoxically built great learning centres).

freediver wrote on Mar 26^th, 2013 at 12:06pm:

I am merely pointing out that your own examples contradict you

Of course. Two people getting imprisoned for things that had nothing to do with islam - which somehow actually had everything to do with islam - totally trumps the building of the greatest learning centres the world had ever seen, and the scientific achievements in areas like medicine and astronomy that helped inspire the great European thinkers.

Ah f*ck this, I'm done with this joke.

Back to top

A resident Islam critic who claims to represent western values said:
Quote:

Outlawing the enemy's uniform - hijab, islamic beard - is not depriving one's own people of their freedoms.

IP Logged

freediver

Gold Member

Offline

www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 48834
At my desk.

Re: Islam stifles basic science
Reply #129 - Mar 26^th, 2013 at 1:54pm

Quote:

One individual who by your own contention had gone mad

It is my understanding that he felt forced to feign madness. I do not think I have ever claimed he was actually mad.

Quote:

wrote some jibberish about only the chosen ones should have access to his knowledge

Gandalf these are two different individuals. Alhazen feigned madness. Hayyan is the gibberish one. He did not write "jibberish about only the chosen ones should have access to his knowledge". He turned nearly all of his work into gibberish for this reason. That is why the term gibberish is actually based on his name (Gerber). His name literally came to mean gibberish.

From the wikipedia article:

Jābir states in his Book of Stones (4:12) that "The purpose is to baffle and lead into error everyone except those whom God loves and provides for". His works seem to have been deliberately written in highly esoteric code (see steganography), so that only those who had been initiated into his alchemical school could understand them. It is therefore difficult at best for the modern reader to discern which aspects of Jābir's work are to be read as symbols (and what those symbols mean), and what is to be taken literally. Because his works rarely made overt sense, the term gibberish is believed to have originally referred to his writings (Hauck, p. 19).

Remember, Mr Gibberish was one of your examples of how Islam does not stifle basic science.

Quote:

Is your argument that all islamic scientists were mad?

Are you feigning confusion?

Quote:

You've sort of found two examples of this - why not make the totally logical jump and say all islamic scientists did this? Makes sense right?

I am waiting for you to suggest the best example. You have already accused me of picking and choosing the evidence, so there is not much point me wading through all the other examples for more evidence to throw back at you.

Quote:

Of course. Two people getting imprisoned for things that had nothing to do with islam

Why do you keep insisting that the Caliph has nothing to do with Islam?

Quote:

- which somehow actually had everything to do with islam - totally trumps the building of the greatest learning centres the world had ever seen

Gandalf I have never denied the building of these learning centres. I have used them to reinforce my argument. They are the superficially fertile ground for advancements in basic science which put the relatively dismal outcomes into context.

If you cannot suggest the best example because you do not know anything about the other scientists either I understand. There is good reason why the remain in such obscurity.

Back to top

People who can't distinguish between etymology and entomology bug me in ways I cannot put into words.

IP Logged

polite_gandalf

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 20027
Canberra
Gender: male

Re: Islam stifles basic science
Reply #130 - Mar 26^th, 2013 at 1:57pm

This is perhaps a timely juncture to recap on FDs argument. From the top:

FD: Islam stifles basic science!
- what do you mean by that FD?

FD: er um... islam props up midgets
- who are the midgets that are being propped up FD - and how does that equate to "stifling" science?

FD: um I'll ignore the second question - but the midgets are whoever promoted camel urine drinking as the best scientific discovery evaaa - as well as the guy who stuck feathers to his arms and tried to fly
- Who claimed camel urine drinking was the best thing evaa - and wasn't the flying guy Ibn Firnas, who actually *DID* perform a successful flight - according to all the historical accounts?

FD: "some muslims" said that about camel urine, and Firnas was totally fabricated - no question - there is not enough evidence - even though I'll blindly accept most of western history that has far less evidence...
- ok FD, mind elaborating on what "some muslims" actually said about camel urine?

FD: *SILENCE*
- hmm ok FD, moving right along... what about the islamic golden age - would you concede that science was not stifled - and indeed was promoted during that time?

FD: totally not! See I saw this random book written by an intellectual nobody that lists 100 "best scientists" - and, get this, not one of them is muslim!!
- ok FD, would you concede this is a subjective exercise, and that in fact the record of islamic achievement speaks for itself?

FD: Totally not on both counts! the random top 100 list is gospel truth - no one can dispute it! Also islamic science achieved nothing - see two of the great scientists were imprisoned!
- just two? Were they imprisoned because of islam-related charges? Is two instances representative of the entire 600 year period of islamic science?

FD: YES you dummy! they were imprisoned by muslims - muslims do islam - therefore islam stifles science duh. Also how stupid do you think I am - I found two examples without even looking you think there aren't more?

and so on and so on...

Back to top

A resident Islam critic who claims to represent western values said:
Quote:

Outlawing the enemy's uniform - hijab, islamic beard - is not depriving one's own people of their freedoms.

IP Logged

freediver Gold Member Offline www.ozpolitic.com Posts: 48834 At my desk.	Re: Islam stifles basic science Reply #131 - Mar 26^th, 2013 at 2:03pm Gandalf I invite you to rejoin the real debate at any time. Otherwise I might start to think that Gerber's approach is more widespread than it first appears.
Back to top	People who can't distinguish between etymology and entomology bug me in ways I cannot put into words. IP Logged

Karnal

Gold Member

Online

Australian Politics

Posts: 95297
Gender: male

Re: Islam stifles basic science
Reply #132 - Mar 26^th, 2013 at 4:30pm

polite_gandalf wrote on Mar 26^th, 2013 at 1:57pm:

This is perhaps a timely juncture to recap on FDs argument. From the top:

FD: Islam stifles basic science!
- what do you mean by that FD?

FD: er um... islam props up midgets
- who are the midgets that are being propped up FD - and how does that equate to "stifling" science?

FD: um I'll ignore the second question - but the midgets are whoever promoted camel urine drinking as the best scientific discovery evaaa - as well as the guy who stuck feathers to his arms and tried to fly
- Who claimed camel urine drinking was the best thing evaa - and wasn't the flying guy Ibn Firnas, who actually *DID* perform a successful flight - according to all the historical accounts?

FD: "some muslims" said that about camel urine, and Firnas was totally fabricated - no question - there is not enough evidence - even though I'll blindly accept most of western history that has far less evidence...
- ok FD, mind elaborating on what "some muslims" actually said about camel urine?

FD: *SILENCE*
- hmm ok FD, moving right along... what about the islamic golden age - would you concede that science was not stifled - and indeed was promoted during that time?

FD: totally not! See I saw this random book written by an intellectual nobody that lists 100 "best scientists" - and, get this, not one of them is muslim!!
- ok FD, would you concede this is a subjective exercise, and that in fact the record of islamic achievement speaks for itself?

FD: Totally not on both counts! the random top 100 list is gospel truth - no one can dispute it! Also islamic science achieved nothing - see two of the great scientists were imprisoned!
- just two? Were they imprisoned because of islam-related charges? Is two instances representative of the entire 600 year period of islamic science?

FD: YES you dummy! they were imprisoned by muslims - muslims do islam - therefore islam stifles science duh. Also how stupid do you think I am - I found two examples without even looking you think there aren't more?

and so on and so on...

Yes, Gandalf, but Yadda is the better debater. He says Muslims are all polluted because Islam is a toxic religion, so it's not possible for Muslims to be scientists - not one.

Back to top

IP Logged

polite_gandalf

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 20027
Canberra
Gender: male

Re: Islam stifles basic science
Reply #133 - Mar 26^th, 2013 at 5:19pm

freediver wrote on Mar 26^th, 2013 at 1:54pm:

You have already accused me of picking and choosing the evidence, so there is not much point me wading through all the other examples for more evidence to throw back at you.

Indeed. Why bother to actually find things out for yourself - and thereby run the grave risk of finding some actual positive things about islam - when you can just sit back in the safety of ignorance and just assume everything was schit.

freediver wrote on Mar 26^th, 2013 at 1:54pm:

Why do you keep insisting that the Caliph has nothing to do with Islam?

The caliph represented islam in the same way as the King of England represented christianity during the middle ages. So by your logic whenever the King of England arrests someone for, say, refusing to build a bridge or castle after they had previously committed to do so - then thats christianity "stifling" science. Thats in FD world. In the real world, the guy was simply arrested for letting the king down - and religion had nothing to do with it. And using such an example as one of only two pieces of evidence to prove that christianity stifled science over an entire 600 years would be rightly laughed out of court.

freediver wrote on Mar 26^th, 2013 at 1:54pm:

Gandalf I have never denied the building of these learning centres. I have used them to reinforce my argument.

Hmm make sense - islam was so oppressive towards science that it built the greatest scientific learning centres the world had ever seen. Totally logical FD.

You certainly are reinforcing something - but it sure aint your argument.

freediver wrote on Mar 26^th, 2013 at 1:54pm:

They are the superficially fertile ground for advancements in basic science which put the relatively dismal outcomes into context.

Pointing out the bleeding obvious - but did it ever occur to you as you wrote this that you are directly contradicting yourself? A scientific-stifling civilization doesn't build a "fertile ground for advancements in basic science".

from the wiki article on Cordoba:

Quote:

Córdoba was the intellectual centre of al-Andalus, with translations of ancient Greek texts to Arabic, Latin and Hebrew. The 10th-century library of Al-Ḥakam II was one of the largest libraries in the world, housing at least 400,000 volumes. Throughout the period of al-Andalus civilization, Jews and Arabs lived in harmony: Jewish stonemasons have left their marks incised into many columns of the great Mosque at Córdoba. It was not until the fall of al-Andalus in 1492 that the incoming Christians banished the Jews from Spain.

Appreciable advances in science, history, geography, philosophy and grammar occurred during the Caliphate.[13] Al-Andalus became susceptible to eastern cultural influences as well.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caliphate_of_C%C3%B3rdoba#Culture

and this on Baghdad:
Quote:

Within a generation of its founding, Baghdad became a hub of learning and commerce. The House of Wisdom was an establishment dedicated to the translation of Greek, Middle Persian and Syriac works. Scholars headed to Baghdad from all over the Abbasid empire, facilitating the introduction of Persian, Greek and Indian science into the Arabic and Islamic world at that time. Baghdad was likely the largest city in the world from shortly after its foundation until the 930s, when it was tied by Córdoba.[30] Several estimates suggest that the city contained over a million inhabitants at its peak.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baghdad#A_centre_of_learning_.288th_to_13th_centuries.29

Strange that such a science-stifling civilization would go to the bother of building these don't you think? It may be just me, but my idea of a science-stifling civilization is one that, you know, would go around destroying such centres - not build them. Do you think someone missed a memo? When word got around that they were building the greatest cultural and learning centres the world had seen, did the caliph go "oh f*ck! - why the hell are we doing that!! We're supposed to destroy these places, not build them!!" Must have been some colossal breakdown in communication I'm guessing. Undecided

Back to top

« Last Edit: Mar 26^th, 2013 at 5:25pm by polite_gandalf »

A resident Islam critic who claims to represent western values said:
Quote:

Outlawing the enemy's uniform - hijab, islamic beard - is not depriving one's own people of their freedoms.

IP Logged

freediver

Gold Member

Offline

www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 48834
At my desk.

Re: Islam stifles basic science
Reply #134 - Mar 26^th, 2013 at 6:39pm

Quote:

The caliph represented islam in the same way as the King of England represented christianity during the middle ages.

The only thing that comes close in Christianity is the Pope, and even his mandate is tenuous compared to Islam. You only have to compare the examples set by Muhammed and Jesus to see the different mandates for political rule that each created.

Quote:

after they had previously committed to do so

This is getting awefully repetitive Gandalf. You make claims like this. I point out that they are wrong. You make them again. I point out again that they are wrong. And so on it goes. Nothing you have presented so says that he committed to anything.

Quote:

Pointing out the bleeding obvious - but did it ever occur to you as you wrote this that you are directly contradicting yourself? A scientific-stifling civilization doesn't build a "fertile ground for advancements in basic science".

That is why I said superficially fertile. I notice you left that word out. Again. I have made this point dozens of times already. Surely you must have figured out what I am telling you by now? Learning and benefiting from the advancements made by previous societies is not the same as developing science further. None of the top 100 scientists in the list I presented are noted for being translators. The majority of your list were. Do you see the difference?

Back to top

People who can't distinguish between etymology and entomology bug me in ways I cannot put into words.

IP Logged