× Register Login What's New! Contact us

View Poll Results: Do you favor liberalism or illiberalism, and what of mainstream Islam?

Voters
0. Login to vote on this poll
  • I favor secular liberalism, and mainstream Islam generally does too.

    0 0%
  • I favor secular liberalism, but mainstream Islam is generally illiberal.

    0 0%
  • I suppose I am illiberal, but mainstream Islam tends to be in favor of liberalism.

    0 0%
  • I oppose secular liberalism as you've described it, and mainstream Islam is illiberal as well.

    0 0%
  • I am not Muslim but I have some other comments to make.

    0 0%
Results 1 to 10 of 10 visibility 2169

Liberal or illiberal, you and mainstream Islam

  1. #1
    cooterhein's Avatar
    brightness_1
    Account Disabled
    star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate
    Join Date
    Jun 2016
    Gender
    Male
    Religion
    Christianity
    Posts
    378
    Threads
    22
    Rep Power
    0
    Rep Ratio
    14
    Likes Ratio
    24

    Liberal or illiberal, you and mainstream Islam

    Report bad ads?

    A question, if I may. You personally, do you support secular liberalism? And in your estimation, does mainstream Islam generally support secular liberalism? If not, then would you be willing to self-identify (or to identify mainstream Islam as) illiberal?

    Here is what I mean by liberalism, and this works especially well for those of you who are in the UK. First, there's this on John Stuart Mill, the father of modern secular liberalism and the most influential person in its modern application.
    http://www.liberal-international.org....asp?ia_id=685

    Lifted from this source are a couple of things that I will note. He was kept out of public education and raised in a rigorous, restrictive, utilitarian type of mindset that was exactly the opposite of what he would later come to support. As a very young man, this was the cause of a sort of mental break, and he emerged from this with an appetite for diversity, dissent, originality, spontaneity- everything that had been excluded from his formative experience. Additionally, he was in favor of democracy but extremely wary of potential pitfalls like the "tyranny of the majority" and so forth. In general, he did not much like what was happening in Victorian England, he felt that individuality was threatened, he was an early feminist and this was not a characteristic of his own society and culture, and he had much occasion to seek the end of various types of censorship. And he was pretty successful in most of what he tried to do; he was incredibly influential in changing British society and his influence is still felt everywhere in the West most particularly in the English speaking world.

    Here is another source, less biographical and more scholarly. http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/liberalism/#LibEth
    There's kind of a lot going on here, dig in all the way if you really like. Liberalism in general and even secular liberalism in particular has a lot to it, and only select aspects of it can be solidly pinned down and defined with precision. For the purpose of what I seek to emphasize though, this is the part that I am focusing on.

    "This is not just a theory about politics: it is a substantive, perfectionist, moral theory about the good. And, on this view, the right thing to do is to promote development or perfection, and only a regime securing extensive liberty for each person can accomplish this (Wall, 1998). This moral ideal of human perfection and development dominated liberal thinking in the latter part of the nineteenth, and for most of the twentieth, century: not only Mill, but T.H. Green, L.T. Hobhouse, Bernard Bosanquet, John Dewey and even Rawls show allegiance to variants of this perfectionist ethic and the claim that it provides a foundation for endorsing a regime of liberal rights (Gaus, 1983a). And it is fundamental to the proponents of liberal autonomy discussed above, as well as ‘liberal virtue’ theorists such as William Galston (1980). That the good life is necessarily a freely chosen one in which a person develops his unique capacities as part of a plan of life is probably the dominant liberal ethic of the past century."

    So my question to you is this. Setting the general principles of secular liberalism against any other kind of illiberalism (which is not a precisely defined movement unto itself, it is quite simply a tendency to oppose and disagree with liberalism), would you consider yourself to personally be a proponent of liberalism or illiberalism?

    And, as a separate question, do you believe mainstream Islam (as far as you're able to say) is liberal or illiberal? Of course there is plenty of diversity to Islam in the UK and everywhere else, but in the main- where Muslims are not Muslim in name only, where Muslims are properly connected to a religious community, and where that religious community amasses large crowds of people that can legitimately call themselves the mainstream of Islam- as you're aware, does this mainstream of Islam tend to be supportive of secular liberalism a la John Stuart Mill, or does the mainstream of Islam typically oppose such principles in favor of a more illiberal approach?
    Last edited by cooterhein; 09-13-2016 at 09:42 PM.
    chat Quote

  2. Report bad ads?
  3. #2
    kritikvernunft's Avatar Full Member
    brightness_1
    IB Senior Member
    star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate
    Join Date
    Jun 2016
    Gender
    Male
    Religion
    Other
    Posts
    590
    Threads
    35
    Rep Power
    48
    Rep Ratio
    18
    Likes Ratio
    31

    Re: Liberal or illiberal, you and mainstream Islam

    format_quote Originally Posted by cooterhein View Post
    A question, if I may. You personally, do you support secular liberalism? And in your estimation, does mainstream Islam generally support secular liberalism? If not, then would you be willing to self-identify (or to identify mainstream Islam as) illiberal?
    The essential stand behind liberalism is moral contractualism: Contractualism appeals to the idea of a social contract. It attempts to derive the content of morality (and, in some versions, also the justification for holding that we are obligated to follow morality) from the notion of an agreement between all those in the moral domain.

    This view is contrary to religion, and not only to Islam.

    According to religion, morality is not the result of a social contract between people in the community, but the result of revealed rules. In that sense, morality in Islam is the list of behaviours that are forbidden onto the believer and that were revealed in the Quran. A social contract cannot overrule the will of the singular God. A social contract cannot even extend the will of the singular God. A social contract cannot abrogate the will of the singular God. Mankind's moral interdicts are part of its fundamental blueprint. The origin of this blueprint must obviously exist before humanity did. Hence, whoever may be the origin of this blueprint, we know one thing for sure: it wasn't humanity itself. That is enough of an argument to reject the idea that humanity would be qualified to modify this blueprint by using social contracts. Furthermore, the idea of a social contract for morality leads to the idea that morality would be the result of politicking and other corrupt political processes. This outcome is always worse than any possible alternative. Deriving morality from political views is undoubtedly the worst possible approach to the issue of what constitutes permitted or forbidden behaviour.

    Hence, from a religious point of view, moral contractualism, social contracts defining morality, and liberalism in addition or in replacement of the revealed will of the singular God are to be rejected by the believers.
    | Likes Snel liked this post
    chat Quote

  4. #3
    cooterhein's Avatar
    brightness_1
    Account Disabled
    star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate
    Join Date
    Jun 2016
    Gender
    Male
    Religion
    Christianity
    Posts
    378
    Threads
    22
    Rep Power
    0
    Rep Ratio
    14
    Likes Ratio
    24

    Re: Liberal or illiberal, you and mainstream Islam

    format_quote Originally Posted by kritikvernunft View Post
    The essential stand behind liberalism is moral contractualism: Contractualism appeals to the idea of a social contract. It attempts to derive the content of morality (and, in some versions, also the justification for holding that we are obligated to follow morality) from the notion of an agreement between all those in the moral domain.

    This view is contrary to religion, and not only to Islam.

    According to religion, morality is not the result of a social contract between people in the community, but the result of revealed rules. In that sense, morality in Islam is the list of behaviours that are forbidden onto the believer and that were revealed in the Quran. A social contract cannot overrule the will of the singular God. A social contract cannot even extend the will of the singular God. A social contract cannot abrogate the will of the singular God. Mankind's moral interdicts are part of its fundamental blueprint. The origin of this blueprint must obviously exist before humanity did. Hence, whoever may be the origin of this blueprint, we know one thing for sure: it wasn't humanity itself. That is enough of an argument to reject the idea that humanity would be qualified to modify this blueprint by using social contracts. Furthermore, the idea of a social contract for morality leads to the idea that morality would be the result of politicking and other corrupt political processes. This outcome is always worse than any possible alternative. Deriving morality from political views is undoubtedly the worst possible approach to the issue of what constitutes permitted or forbidden behaviour.

    Hence, from a religious point of view, moral contractualism, social contracts defining morality, and liberalism in addition or in replacement of the revealed will of the singular God are to be rejected by the believers.
    Let's be clear about this. Does this mean you reject secular liberalism, and that you're okay with identifying as illiberal?
    chat Quote

  5. #4
    kritikvernunft's Avatar Full Member
    brightness_1
    IB Senior Member
    star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate
    Join Date
    Jun 2016
    Gender
    Male
    Religion
    Other
    Posts
    590
    Threads
    35
    Rep Power
    48
    Rep Ratio
    18
    Likes Ratio
    31

    Re: Liberal or illiberal, you and mainstream Islam

    format_quote Originally Posted by cooterhein View Post
    Let's be clear about this. Does this mean you reject secular liberalism, and that you're okay with identifying as illiberal?
    Since I reject the idea of moral contractualism and social contracts defining morality, I obviously reject secular liberalism. So, yes, you can say that I am "illiberal". I am in favour of maximalizing freedom ("liberty"), though. Every behaviour not forbidden by the Quranic revelation is permitted, no matter how many social contracts may exist against it. Therefore, even though I do not seek the freedom to overrule the will of the singular God, I certainly take great pleasure in overruling "social contracts" that attempt to extend, modify, or abrogate the will of the singular God. I consider obedience to divine law to be an act of faith, but the act of overruling a man-made "social contract" even a greater act of faith.
    | Likes Snel liked this post
    chat Quote

  6. Report bad ads?
  7. #5
    cooterhein's Avatar
    brightness_1
    Account Disabled
    star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate
    Join Date
    Jun 2016
    Gender
    Male
    Religion
    Christianity
    Posts
    378
    Threads
    22
    Rep Power
    0
    Rep Ratio
    14
    Likes Ratio
    24

    Re: Liberal or illiberal, you and mainstream Islam

    format_quote Originally Posted by kritikvernunft View Post
    Since I reject the idea of moral contractualism and social contracts defining morality, I obviously reject secular liberalism. So, yes, you can say that I am "illiberal".
    Very nice! That was clear, thank you.

    I am in favour of maximalizing freedom ("liberty"), though.
    And by freedom and liberty, may I assume that you mean freedom from coercion, and generally the freedom to act according to one's conscience rather than something along the lines of externally imposed (and enforced) religious doctrine that people are compelled to follow even if they don't believe in that religion? I'm sure that's what you mean, right?

    Every behaviour not forbidden by the Quranic revelation is permitted,
    Yeah, that's not the same thing as freedom. Not at all.

    I consider obedience to divine law to be an act of faith,
    Sound more like you consider it a matter of compulsion.
    chat Quote

  8. #6
    kritikvernunft's Avatar Full Member
    brightness_1
    IB Senior Member
    star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate
    Join Date
    Jun 2016
    Gender
    Male
    Religion
    Other
    Posts
    590
    Threads
    35
    Rep Power
    48
    Rep Ratio
    18
    Likes Ratio
    31

    Re: Liberal or illiberal, you and mainstream Islam

    format_quote Originally Posted by cooterhein View Post
    Yeah, that's not the same thing as freedom. Not at all.
    I define freedom as the right to do everything not forbidden by the Quran or its interpretation in the Sunnah. You may have another definition for freedom. I certainly did not say that this would be the only definition for freedom in widespread circulation.
    chat Quote

  9. #7
    cooterhein's Avatar
    brightness_1
    Account Disabled
    star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate
    Join Date
    Jun 2016
    Gender
    Male
    Religion
    Christianity
    Posts
    378
    Threads
    22
    Rep Power
    0
    Rep Ratio
    14
    Likes Ratio
    24

    Re: Liberal or illiberal, you and mainstream Islam

    format_quote Originally Posted by kritikvernunft View Post
    I define freedom as the right to do everything not forbidden by the Quran or its interpretation in the Sunnah. You may have another definition for freedom. I certainly did not say that this would be the only definition for freedom in widespread circulation.
    Your definition fails, because it's terrible, and it's also fairly useless, since you're not even a Muslim. Now go ahead and select the option in the poll that says "I am not Muslim but I still have comments to make." If you were defending this sort of thing as an actual Muslim, it would make a bit of sense. But for one thing, you aren't any good at explaining....anything really, and for another, you're kind of all over the place, you enjoy having an unpredictable and subversive persona, and you're such an odd duck that Muslims just barely want you to formally join their religion, if they really want you at all.

    Anyway. One of those inescapable things about "freedom" is that it has to work for everyone, not just for you. It's a bit like traveling to a slave state, asking the slaveholders and only the slaveholders about how the quality of life is for them and only them, and then you walk away from it thinking "Their definition of freedom sure does work out great for them." This is a completely selfish mindset that you're clinging to here, and it's no wonder you crave the destruction of the national state and obsess over it every minute of every day and with every single comment you make. You don't want there to be anyone left to stop you from taking advantage of everyone else, and then calling it free and fair because it all sounds good to you and just you.

    By the way, when there is no more national state how exactly do you plan to enforce Sharia law?
    Last edited by cooterhein; 09-14-2016 at 11:34 AM.
    chat Quote

  10. #8
    kritikvernunft's Avatar Full Member
    brightness_1
    IB Senior Member
    star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate
    Join Date
    Jun 2016
    Gender
    Male
    Religion
    Other
    Posts
    590
    Threads
    35
    Rep Power
    48
    Rep Ratio
    18
    Likes Ratio
    31

    Re: Liberal or illiberal, you and mainstream Islam

    format_quote Originally Posted by cooterhein View Post
    Your definition fails, because it's terrible ...
    The only valid objection is that my definition would be inconsistent. That would mean that it would be possible to derive a statement from it but also the opposite of that statement. Terribleness is a non-issue and a non-consideration. Things do not fail because they would be terrible. They fail because they are inconsistent. They fail because they are rife with contradictions.
    format_quote Originally Posted by cooterhein View Post
    ... since you're not even a Muslim ...
    It is of no use to me to make that claim or to make its opposite.
    format_quote Originally Posted by cooterhein View Post
    ...you enjoy having an unpredictable and subversive persona ...
    A contradiction is a bug. An ambiguity is also a bug. So, when you work in my field, you automatically end up thinking in a particular way. My field is also indeed very subversive. Cryptocurrencies are possibly the epitome of subversiveness. Our goal is to destroy the banking system and as a side effect to make lots of money. It is going absolutely fine. The money is raining out of the sky and the banks are getting increasingly nervous. The banks are trying to copy the "blockchain" from us now. Won't help, of course. ;-)
    format_quote Originally Posted by cooterhein View Post
    One of those inescapable things about "freedom" is that it has to work for everyone, not just for you.
    Not true. The masses don't matter. They are just being misled and told what to do. We have never given a damn about what the masses think, so why would we begin now? As they say in Islam: Only the will of the singular God truly matters. Everybody else will just have to adjust to that.
    format_quote Originally Posted by cooterhein View Post
    This is a completely selfish mindset that you're clinging to here, and it's no wonder you crave the destruction of the national state and obsess over it every minute of every day and with every single comment you make.
    Yes, I make good money by doing exactly that. Am I supposed to join the ranks all those destitute people who don't get it, and who are struggling? What for? Don't we have enough poor people on the planet already?
    format_quote Originally Posted by cooterhein View Post
    You don't want there to be anyone left to stop you from taking advantage of everyone else, and then calling it free and fair because it all sounds good to you and just you.
    Ha ah ha! You are too simplistic. We'd better voluntarily obey to our Beloved Master, the singular God, because otherwise, things will go wrong, not just in this life but also in the next.
    format_quote Originally Posted by cooterhein View Post
    By the way, when there is no more national state how exactly do you plan to enforce Sharia law?
    I don't want to enforce anything. Who will be printing bitcoins when there is no more national state? That is pretty much the same question. Of course, people like you don't believe that it can work, and that you could achieve all of that without national state. Well, I will lavishly keep spending my inexistent and imaginary bitcoins, because all of that could not possibly work! ;-)
    chat Quote

  11. #9
    cooterhein's Avatar
    brightness_1
    Account Disabled
    star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate
    Join Date
    Jun 2016
    Gender
    Male
    Religion
    Christianity
    Posts
    378
    Threads
    22
    Rep Power
    0
    Rep Ratio
    14
    Likes Ratio
    24

    Re: Liberal or illiberal, you and mainstream Islam

    format_quote Originally Posted by kritikvernunft View Post
    We have never given a damn about what the masses think, so why would we begin now? As they say in Islam: Only the will of the singular God truly matters. Everybody else will just have to adjust to that.
    This is really all I need to be looking at. You are willing to call yourself illiberal, and that is well and good. That checks out. But don't even try to dress this up as freedom. Freedom is and always will be the polar opposite of "everybody else will just have to adjust to that." Freedom is the power to speak, act, or think as one wants without hindrance or restraint. Now, I can understand if you believe the singular will of God is the only thing that truly matters, yet you'll grant people the freedom to do some other things. But this is where you contradict yourself. One more time,

    "Everybody else will just have to adjust to that."

    Oh really. They'll Have To? Is that what they're going to Have To do? Meaning, they won't have any other choice, even if they want to do something different? Saying there is a singular good is one thing, and it's actually quite defensible. Saying that "the masses" will "just have to adjust to that" is quite another, that's completely the opposite of freedom.

    So yeah, that's terribly inconsistent, and you fail.
    chat Quote

  12. Report bad ads?
  13. #10
    kritikvernunft's Avatar Full Member
    brightness_1
    IB Senior Member
    star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate
    Join Date
    Jun 2016
    Gender
    Male
    Religion
    Other
    Posts
    590
    Threads
    35
    Rep Power
    48
    Rep Ratio
    18
    Likes Ratio
    31

    Re: Liberal or illiberal, you and mainstream Islam

    format_quote Originally Posted by cooterhein View Post
    But don't even try to dress this up as freedom.
    Where is your alternative definition for freedom?
    format_quote Originally Posted by cooterhein View Post
    Freedom is and always will be the polar opposite of "everybody else will just have to adjust to that."
    Everybody adjusts to the laws of gravity. Where is the problem with that? My definition amounts to saying that constraints to freedom may not be man-made. They must be external.
    format_quote Originally Posted by cooterhein View Post
    Freedom is the power to speak, act, or think as one wants without hindrance or restraint.
    While freedom cannot be absolute, and while there will be restrictions, you are not clarifying what legitimate sources there would be for freedom restrictions. Hence, what you are proposing is not a valid alternative.
    format_quote Originally Posted by cooterhein View Post
    So yeah, that's terribly inconsistent, and you fail.
    Inconsistency requires a contradiction. Where is the contradiction in my definition? What's more, where is your alternative definition?
    chat Quote


  14. Hide
Hey there! Liberal or illiberal, you and mainstream Islam Looks like you're enjoying the discussion, but you're not signed up for an account.

When you create an account, we remember exactly what you've read, so you always come right back where you left off. You also get notifications, here and via email, whenever new posts are made. And you can like posts and share your thoughts. Liberal or illiberal, you and mainstream Islam
Sign Up

Similar Threads

  1. The mainstream media does not report this
    By GuestFellow in forum General
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 10-16-2012, 07:05 PM
  2. what are the most liberal sects in Islam
    By FollowerOfChrist in forum Aqeedah
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 06-21-2012, 02:36 PM
  3. Liberal muslims !
    By Getoffmyback in forum General
    Replies: 15
    Last Post: 01-16-2010, 12:27 AM
  4. Mainstream Bias against Islam
    By MasterChiefAlla in forum Clarifications about Islam
    Replies: 15
    Last Post: 09-20-2007, 12:47 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
create