Atheists and vegetarianism

[Justufy]

I take issue with defining morals based on how I feel about a subject. I shouldn't have to feel good about something for it to be right. I don't know how many people define morals in stoic manner, but I suspect it's very few.

Indeed.

Are we capable of rewiring our minds after a childhood spent learning particular normative values, or do we accept that although it is difficult we have to bypass any automatic thinking and spend a few extra moments deciding what is right or wrong?

To change completely and ''rewire ones mind'' would have to be one of the hardest things to do in my oppinion, this is why there is no objective morality, all the choices we make, what we deem right or wrong is influenced by our own nature, by our experience and society, It’s like viewing things trough glasses, and everyone has a different kind of glasses, religious moral can try to narrow the scope and attempt to center peoples morals towards certain points and make them more uniform and homogenous, however this does not mean that these morals are in any way better than the morals of a simple individual, If religious morals condemn something, it does not ought to be that way either. Again, in psychology there is an important moral dilemma that was put forth in Kohlberg's stages of moral development. il post it here.


<<In Europe, a woman was near death from a special kind of cancer. There was one drug that the doctors thought might save her. It was a form of radium that a druggist in the same town had recently discovered. The drug was expensive to make, but the druggist was charging ten times what the drug cost him to make. He paid $200 for the radium and charged $2,000 for a small dose of the drug. The sick woman's husband, Heinz, went to everyone he knew to borrow the money, but he could only get together about $ 1,000 which is half of what it cost. He told the druggist that his wife was dying and asked him to sell it cheaper or let him pay later. But the druggist said: "No, I discovered the drug and I'm going to make money from it."

So Heinz got desperate and broke into the man's store to steal the drug-for his wife. Should the husband have done that? (Kohlberg, 1963).>>


Depending on the answers here Kohlberg could classify them according to a measuring scale.
Its an interesting to make, for instance if someone would not steal the medicine for simple fear of punishment of Hell, he or her would be at the pre-conventionnal stage of morals, which is one the the least sophisticated moral level.

 

[tetsujin]

Its an interesting to make, for instance if someone would not steal the medicine for simple fear of punishment of Hell, he or her would be at the pre-conventionnal stage of morals, which is one the the least sophisticated moral level.

Not related to food specifically, but I find Dr. Andy Thomson' s lectures on morality helpful.

About 45 minutes for the lecture. You can skip the first 2:20.


All the best,


Faysal

 

[Skavau]

what is that, you don't have something to show me? like to whine over concocted nonsense?
Being immoral isn't an insult it is a natural observation based on your writing here.. certainly someone who doesn't for instance view incestuous relationships as immoral is in fact immoral.. If it doesn't reflect well on the forum then don't be a member of the forum for the umpttenth time, no one is sticking a gun to your head to be here!

I can't reference some of your more vile insults because you and I both know the moderators removed them. I already called you out on a specific one in a different thread that was eventually closed.

I did indeed. There is nothing fair about life.. as for objectivity whose standards are we going by here?

...no-one's. Objectivity cannot refer to someone's standards.. that would be subjective.

You haven't shown me where my posts and the rules are at odds.. you have simply mouthed off your personal grievances with me. I fear that doesn't constitute going against the rules of an Islamic board!

As I said, I'm not going to go back through your posts and individually cut and paste every insult. The fact that you're denying to have ever actually insulted people is really quite comical.

I have no idea what this means!

Perhaps you should read what you write then. You said: "You appear to have a both comprehension and reading impediment I see nothing in my posts that would indicate any of what you have just quoted!" in response to me pointing out that you are the only one who appears to be under the apprehension that I am a troll. I then asked how you seem to think that your posts demonstrated what other people think.

two vacuous statements. Scientology is neither a religion nor a political system it doesn't apply here

Atheism is neither a religion nor a political system - it doesn't apply here. Bazinga!

and quite the other reason why folks have no interest in engaging an atheist, they pull any crap out of a hat and think it a viable analogy and turn every page to a 20 byway tirade!

How is it not a viable analogy? Do you know anything about Scientology?

How is it fair when a Muslim woman is stabbed to death in court and the rest are asked to strip naked? lol.. funny funny!

It isn't. A good job then, that such a course of action doesn't follow directly and from each other.

As is, atheists are the only ones to point out the ills of religion, and are only concerned with their own personal interests!

Correct. Many atheists are prejudiced against religion. I have never denied that. A lot are also apathetic, or antipathic as well.

And I am not only concerned with my personal interests.

How so?

Insinuating that someone is mentally weak, even in passive terms is an insult.

I never used the word obedience go ahead quote me!

Now to answer your original Q. 'Good' is what Allah swt declares to be good and bad is all that Allah swt. prohibited. If you are not sure then it is best to avoid it rather than render your own interpretation!

You did not use the terms obedience, correct. However, in actuality it is and amounts to the same thing. Only what Allah deems as good is good and only what Allah deemsn to be bad is bad. It is based on obeying the words of Allah. It is in no uncertain terms, if you are to be consistent - a system of obedience.

I said that jurisprudence is a judicial matter and not a matter left to lay persons least of which to be left to a person like you!

Fair enough. So how is it fair for you to then stereotype atheists after complaining about others stereotyping Muslims?

I don't care to enlighten you.. again I ask, who are you that anyone should take notice or confer some dignity on you with a response when half of each post is spent to coax your ego back to good health?

So no evidence. Okay. Don't complain when I can't be bothered to produce any either. You're like a kid in a playground that has information, or has evidence but then hides it being abusive and mocking to other people in the process.

use your imagination!

Alright, so you've abandoned your point about things not coming ex nihilo. I thought you were going to eventually return with the teleological argument.

 

[Skavau]

Not related to food specifically, but I find Dr. Andy Thomson' s lectures on morality helpful.

About 45 minutes for the lecture. You can skip the first 2:20.


All the best,


Faysal

I watched a clip of this guy on dprjones channel. I will watch all of it now I have the link. Thank you for sharing.

 

[جوري]

I can't reference some of your more vile insults because you and I both know the moderators removed them. I already called you out on a specific one in a different thread that was eventually closed.

Really? I had nothing deleted, so unless you can back up your claims I suggest you button up?

...no-one's. Objectivity cannot refer to someone's standards.. that would be subjective.

so long as you have a sense of self then there will be no such thing as objectivity!

As I said, I'm not going to go back through your posts and individually cut and paste every insult. The fact that you're denying to have ever actually insulted people is really quite comical.

see comment number one!

Perhaps you should read what you write then. You said: "You appear to have a both comprehension and reading impediment I see nothing in my posts that would indicate any of what you have just quoted!" in response to me pointing out that you are the only one who appears to be under the apprehension that I am a troll. I then asked how you seem to think that your posts demonstrated what other people think.

No, you reading and comprehension impediment is a well deserved observation to misconstruing my remarks to be tailored to your needs.

Atheism is neither a religion nor a political system - it doesn't apply here. Bazinga!

It is an immoral way of life what is your point?

How is it not a viable analogy? Do you know anything about Scientology?

I do.. question is do you?

Correct. Many atheists are prejudiced against religion. I have never denied that. A lot are also apathetic, or antipathic as well.

to what do we owe this sudden burst of honesty? I feel about atheism the same way you many atheists feel about theism!

And I am not only concerned with my personal interests.

what you are concerned with doesn't concern me so long as it isn't a threat to the public in any shape form or fashion!

Insinuating that someone is mentally weak, even in passive terms is an insult.

No it isn't.. we have entire books dedicated to levels and gradation of mental weakness and the types of vocations and activities that are best suited for them based on such gradation!

You did not use the terms obedience, correct. However, in actuality it is and amounts to the same thing. Only what Allah deems as good is good and only what Allah deemsn to be bad is bad. It is based on obeying the words of Allah. It is in no uncertain terms, if you are to be consistent - a system of obedience.

No, it doesn't mount to the same thing. You merely want views to fit into your sophomoric creations and I frankly refuse to descend down to word-play with someone such as yourself!

Fair enough. So how is it fair for you to then stereotype atheists after complaining about others stereotyping Muslims?

Show me where I have complained that Muslims are being stereotyped and then come and ask me this question again!

So no evidence. Okay. Don't complain when I can't be bothered to produce any either. You're like a kid in a playground that has information, or has evidence but then hides it being abusive and mocking to other people in the process.

Evidence for what? I haven't complained that you have produced no evidence in fact repeatedly I have told you that I have no expectations from you and the one analogy I have used to demonstrate that certain esoterics aren't calculable and it bewilders me at all how non-materialism fits into the dynamics of being an atheist. But certainly not enough to lose sleep over!

Alright, so you've abandoned your point about things not coming ex nihilo. I thought you were going to eventually return with the teleological argument

I haven't abandoned it, you have no suitable reply and I don't like to whittle away the day on worthless banter!

all the best

 

[CosmicPathos]

Somewhat back to the original topic, I'll share an experience I had.

Around the age of 11, I experienced my first Eid-ul-Adha in Pakistan. I've never been a picky eater, so up to this point in my life, and I assume others my age as well, had not associated the source of meat, and the eventual meal you have prepared in front of you.

On Eid-ul-Adha, for those who are able to afford the cost, you take your most prized livestock or cattle, and sacrifice it. Since most people don't keep livestock, you would go to a market and buy the best you could afford or find. Most families bring them home a few days earlier for logistical reasons, and the kids usually get involved in the transport and care taking of the of the animals.

A day or two before eid itself, one of the goats was set aside, and my father called out to me. At this point I'm oblivious to what is going to happen. We proceed to give the goat some water and isolate it from the others by taking it to the front lawn. I am given a sharp knife and while someone else holds down the goat I am asked to cut the throat in the prescribed manner to make the sacrifice.

I did not grow up in Pakistan, so I was not familiar with this scene. Once they realized I simply wasn't going to do it myself. My father stood behind me, and with his hand over my hand, we performed the sacrifice. I was still stunned by the initial request and in retrospect I should probably have closed my eyes.

Was there a lesson in it for me? I didn't feel any empathy towards the animal, and in the back of my mind I knew that the food we ate that day and the following days would come from the animals we slaughtered on our lawn and driveway. However, that didn't change my view of the purpose of slaughtering, and I didn't decide whether it was morally justified, and I didn't see it as a necessity of life. I suppose those are not discussions you have with 11 year old boys. It was done to feed us, and to offer food to others less fortunate.


All the best,


Faysal

I am not sure why your father would hand you the knife to do the honors for sacrificing the animal while you were "just" 11? Maybe you were too "innocent" at that age to see the blood? Many people are fearful of blood even when they reach their 20s and if asked why did not you become a doctor despite liking the profession, the answer usually is "I cant see blood." A girl fainted in my lab just because we were dissecting a grasshopper for neurophysiological measurements! Surprise, surprise.

I never sacrificed an animal at the age of 11 but I witnessed the sacrifices for couple of years or house's roof-top as a child and witnessed all that gore and blood fountain oozing into the air but I wonder why I did not feel the pain with the intensity you did? Also got to see public beheading as a child and found it just for the murderer to be murdered.

 

[جوري]

I think most people on this thread need to spend a couple of days in L&D or SF general trauma center!
guaranteed to desensitize you in two hours!

 

[Skavau]

Really? I had nothing deleted, so unless you can back up your claims I suggest you button up?

I can't. They've been deleted. I could reference the threads they happened in, but that would be to memory. I know that in an old thread now started by you, in your opening post a moderator edited out the insult and made a comment regarding it but that now appears to have been changed or removed.

so long as you have a sense of self then there will be no such thing as objectivity!

Uh, okay. So this means that objective morality is impossible then?

It is an immoral way of life what is your point?

You do not seem to understand atheism. Atheism is not a coherent, or self-consistent ideology - it is merely a position. All every atheist has in common is simply that they do not believe that a God exists. There is no social, ethical, political or moral system involved with atheism or coherent set of beliefs outlined in some obscure manifesto - it is just a descriptive term used to refer to those who hold no belief in a deity. It literally means "without God".

Yes, I cut and paste but I'd just be repeating myself if I typed it out again manually. I need to start saving this stuff and put it into documents for future use.

I do.. question is do you?

Yes, very much so.

to what do we owe this sudden burst of honesty? I feel about atheism the same way you many atheists feel about theism!

It has always been true that many atheists feel contempt towards religion - usually due to personal issues. I certainly don't have any of the vitrolity that you have towards atheists to theists.

what you are concerned with doesn't concern me so long as it isn't a threat to the public in any shape form or fashion!

Isn't this the same for everyone? You see, I don't get this with you - you make a claim about me, or about something and I state that no, it is not correct what you claim and then immediately I get some strange "I don't care" response. Do you ever follow anything through?

No, it doesn't mount to the same thing. You merely want views to fit into your sophomoric creations and I frankly refuse to descend down to word-play with someone such as yourself!

Descending down to word-play would be to dispute my usage over obedience in this context... In any case however, are you actually suggesting that there is a time where you would not obey Allah on matters of what is right and wrong?

 

[جوري]

I can't. They've been deleted. I could reference the threads they happened in, but that would be to memory. I know that in an old thread now started by you, in your opening post a moderator edited out the insult and made a comment regarding it but that now appears to have been changed or removed.

lol.. yeah I know you can't.. and I had personally nothing deleted from that thread for insults save for off topic posts due to other off topic posts!

Uh, okay. So this means that objective morality is impossible then?

the topic you brought wasn't of 'objective morality' it was of your gratitude that I have declined the mod position because of my personal lack of objectivity. Perhaps now you can see a sliver of why it is an utter waste to engage you in any topic!

You do not seem to understand atheism. Atheism is not a coherent, or self-consistent ideology - it is merely a position. All every atheist has in common is simply that they do not believe that a God exists. There is no social, ethical, political or moral system involved with atheism or coherent set of beliefs outlined in some obscure manifesto - it is just a descriptive term used to refer to those who hold no belief in a deity. It literally means "without God".

I understand that you no social, ethical or moral system, yes anything goes, why do you keep hammering in a point already established?

Yes, I cut and paste but I'd just be repeating myself if I typed it out again manually. I need to start saving this stuff and put it into documents for future use.

you do that!

Yes, very much so.

a one time pleasure indeed!

It has always been true that many atheists feel contempt towards religion - usually due to personal issues. I certainly don't have any of the vitrolity that you have towards atheists to theists.

well that is good for you!

Isn't this the same for everyone? You see, I don't get this with you - you make a claim about me, or about something and I state that no, it is not correct what you claim and then immediately I get some strange "I don't care" response. Do you ever follow anything through?

No, and I suspect that if you had something of substance to impart on a different topic and in a cohesive manner I might engage you in a positive fashion but I know that you are after wasting your time and much worse mine I have had about all the tolerance I can have for you!

Descending down to word-play would be to dispute my usage over obedience in this context... In any case however, are you actually suggesting that there is a time where you would not obey Allah on matters of what is right and wrong?

lol.. I like leading questions with implicit assumptions as much as the next guy..

all the best

 

[Trumble]

I understand that you no social, ethical or moral system, yes anything goes, why do you keep hammering in a point already established?

Probably because you continue to deliberately distort it, as you have done yet again. The simple belief that "there is no God" does not imply in any way that 'anything goes' in relation to ethics and morality.

 

[CosmicPathos]

Probably because you continue to deliberately distort it, as you have done yet again. The simple belief that "there is no God" does not imply in any way that 'anything goes' in relation to ethics and morality.

no one said that anything goes among your ilk. Rather what goes on among your ilk is subject to natural forces and what if those natural forces became evil? So then what "would go" among your ilk would certain be evil, from an unbiased point of view, yet for your ilk it would be normal as the situation is such that it changes the perception.

 

[Pygoscelis]

What does "natural forces mean"?

Note that if you consider "good" to equate to "what God wants" then good is just obedience to God and "your ilk" is easily made to do evil by convincing them that God wants it. History shows this isn't impossible and has happened a number of times.

 

[Justufy]

no one said that anything goes among your ilk. Rather what goes on among your ilk is subject to natural forces and what if those natural forces became evil? So then what "would go" among your ilk would certain be evil, from an unbiased point of view, yet for your ilk it would be normal as the situation is such that it changes the perception.

Natural forces going evil? what is this?

I don't get what you mean here.

 

[CosmicPathos]

Natural forces going evil? what is this?

I don't get what you mean here.

lets say many people have contracted a virus whose spread can only be stopped by killing those people in a timely manner in order to save the rest of humanity. In such cases, certain people's godless morality might decide that "greater evil must be stopped by committing the lesser evil"

 

[tetsujin]

lets say many people have contracted a virus whose spread can only be stopped by killing those people in a timely manner in order to save the rest of humanity. In such cases, certain people's godless morality might decide that "greater evil must be stopped by committing the lesser evil"

I can not think of a "moral" action taken by a believer in this scenario that could not be taken by a non-believer, without resorting to a holy book for an answer. What's the Islamic/religious response to a hypothetical deadly and contagious H5N1 outbreak?


All the best,


Faysal

 

[جوري]

I can not think of a "moral" action taken by a believer in this scenario that could not be taken by a non-believer, without resorting to a holy book for an answer. What's the Islamic/religious response to a hypothetical deadly and contagious H5N1 outbreak?


All the best,


Faysal

Greetings,

the Islamic response to any plague and as was demonstrated during plague times under the Muslims empire is that no one leaves the city and no one enters!

all the best

 

[جوري]

Volume 4, Book 56, Number 679:

Narrated Usama bin Zaid:
Allah's Apostle said, "Plague was a means of torture sent on a group of Israelis (or on some people before you). So if you hear of its spread in a land, don't approach it, and if a plague should appear in a land where you are present, then don't leave that land in order to run away from it (i.e. plague)."



_____________________________


Volume 4, Book 56, Number 680:

Narrated 'Aisha:
(the wife of the Prophet) I asked Allah's Apostle about the plague. He told me that it was a Punishment sent by Allah on whom he wished, and Allah made it a source of mercy for the believers, for if one in the time of an epidemic plague stays in his country patiently hoping for Allah's Reward and believing that nothing will befall him except what Allah has written for him, he will get the reward of a martyr."



_______________________________________________
Volume 7, Book 71, Number 624:

Narrated Saud:
The Prophet said, "If you hear of an outbreak of plague in a land, do not enter it; but if the plague breaks out in a place while you are in it, do not leave that place."



________________________________________




so you now you know quarantining and its Islamic roots although I know you view Islamic philosophy as inferior.. the more we pursue knowledge the more superior it becomes!


all the best

​

​

 

[Skavau]

no one said that anything goes among your ilk. Rather what goes on among your ilk is subject to natural forces and what if those natural forces became evil? So then what "would go" among your ilk would certain be evil, from an unbiased point of view, yet for your ilk it would be normal as the situation is such that it changes the perception.

If 'natural forces' became evil or destructive (somehow) that I see no reason why atheists could not view these natural forces are evil or destructive. There is no compulsion for an atheist to consider nature as moral, or as a guideline for what ought. Natural forces now are and can be destructive, killing millions at a whim and yet I know of no secular individual that would look upon natural disasters with apathy.

However, as Pygo touched upon - with a moral system direct from God. With a moral system direct from and with its foundations in obedience towards God, no exceptions - any notion of 'right' and 'wrong' cannot be seperated from that. So if God was to decree murder, or rape as acceptable, you could not despite any potential inclinations have any reason to consider it wrong. If your criteria and moral system involves complete subjugation to the rule of God then this is the only conclusion that you can come to. That 'good' means 'obedience', that 'bad' means 'disobedience'. That humanity is merely tools for 'devout' to do work on God's behalf. And remember, much evil has been committed for the objectives of doing work on behalf of some emperor, king, or monarch of sorts.

If God is the focus of a theists morality (something many are proud to announce) - then I will say humanity is the focus of the atheists, or the humanists.

 

[tetsujin]

Volume 4, Book 56, Number 679:

Narrated Usama bin Zaid:
Allah's Apostle said, "Plague was a means of torture sent on a group of Israelis (or on some people before you). So if you hear of its spread in a land, don't approach it, and if a plague should appear in a land where you are present, then don't leave that land in order to run away from it (i.e. plague)."



_____________________________


Volume 4, Book 56, Number 680:

Narrated 'Aisha:
(the wife of the Prophet) I asked Allah's Apostle about the plague. He told me that it was a Punishment sent by Allah on whom he wished, and Allah made it a source of mercy for the believers, for if one in the time of an epidemic plague stays in his country patiently hoping for Allah's Reward and believing that nothing will befall him except what Allah has written for him, he will get the reward of a martyr."



_______________________________________________
Volume 7, Book 71, Number 624:

Narrated Saud:
The Prophet said, "If you hear of an outbreak of plague in a land, do not enter it; but if the plague breaks out in a place while you are in it, do not leave that place."



________________________________________
​

That's wonderful. Why didn't anyone think that a contagious disease could be controlled by separating the apparently sick, from the apparently healthy? I mean we knew diseases were spread by microorganisms, right? No, wait, it was god.

That's okay, those [insert enemy] deserved it. It's god's punishment for rejecting him and opposing the believers. He sent plagues as a message to other non-believers. Except for believers who died, for them it was a reward. When god sends a plague, he doesn't discriminate against the children, the weak and feeble, the nomad who was just passing by, or the cold hearted kuffar. Let them all die, I'll sort it out once they're buried.

You see god can perform the same action and it's a punishment for the enemy, and a test of faith and even a reward for the believers.

It's not that god doesn't like you (the faithful), he just wanted to thank you for all the effort and standing by his revealed truth. Can't be called a martyr if you don't die... :clever:

It's not that he couldn't save you (the faithful), but if he only selectively killed the kuffar, then it wouldn't seem like religion is a choice.

Whatever you do, you definitely shouldn't leave the area. What if god noticed you fleeing and got trigger happy. You wouldn't want to kill people in the next town or village, right?

Is that about right?

so you now you know quarantining and its Islamic roots

I had no idea people are quarantined because god selected a punishment for those people. It is not because people do not want to be infected, or out empathy for the neighbouring towns and villages.

although I know you view Islamic philosophy as inferior..

No, that's not something I would say. Just as you would not say Islamic philosophy is superior. Revealed truth cannot be ranked on a scale. If you have principles you stand by them. That's what your religion teaches you, and despite our inability to live up to our principles at every moment it is what we continue to strive for.

the more we pursue knowledge the more superior it becomes!

The more superior knowledge becomes? Don't bother clarifying.


All the best,


Faysal​

 

[جوري]

That's wonderful. Why didn't anyone think that a contagious disease could be controlled by separating the apparently sick, from the apparently healthy? I mean we knew diseases were spread by microorganisms, right? No, wait, it was god.

Did we know? imagine then the lives that would have been saved in many of the various plagues if folks had applied such a basic principals!.. imagine all the rave when Dr. Ignaz Semmelweis discovered that hand-washing saves lives and it only took an autopsy and the death of his friend (the pathologist) for that to be clear sometime around 1847 or so!

That's okay, those [insert enemy] deserved it. It's god's punishment for rejecting him and opposing the believers. He sent plagues as a message to other non-believers. Except for believers who died, for them it was a reward. When god sends a plague, he doesn't discriminate against the children, the weak and feeble, the nomad who was just passing by, or the cold hearted kuffar. Let them all die, I'll sort it out once they're buried.

clearly not all the ahadith speak of just enemies being plagued.. the whole point is what to do during a plague whether you are incurring the wrath of God or not isn't the point.. your adds and subtracts and 'what does it all mean' should be left to ponder by yourself on your own private time.

You see god can perform the same action and it's a punishment for the enemy, and a test of faith and even a reward for the believers.

indeed!

It's not that god doesn't like you (the faithful), he just wanted to thank you for all the effort and standing by his revealed truth. Can't be called a martyr if you don't die... :clever:

It is the human condition of course you are free to not be a part of it and make your own 'superior' philosophy on the side-- whether you think God has anything to do with it or not, and whether sinners are being punished or not is not the focus of what do to during plague times, I'd think that would be kind of obvious but I feel your need for a personal purge on the side.

It's not that he couldn't save you (the faithful), but if he only selectively killed the kuffar, then it wouldn't seem like religion is a choice.

I have no idea what this means, but I notice that your repeated attempts at witty are failing you.. which is unfortunate...

Whatever you do, you definitely shouldn't leave the area. What if god noticed you fleeing and got trigger happy. You wouldn't want to kill people in the next town or village, right?

I am sure you personal village (composed of two people perhaps with a death wish) would appreciate a locust of sick individuals reigning down on them.. but most people don't.. most folks like situations to be under-control!

Is that about right?

what is about right?

I had no idea people are quarantined because god selected a punishment for those people. It is not because people do not want to be infected, or out empathy for the neighbouring towns and villages.

People are quarantined for medical reasons, whether or not they are sinners is a judgment that lies with God!
in fact any matter in medicine the ethical issues are judicial in nature and have a judge presiding over them once your clinical judgment no longer covers medicine but extends beyond it!

No, that's not something I would say. Just as you would not say Islamic philosophy is superior. Revealed truth cannot be ranked on a scale. If you have principles you stand by them. That's what your religion teaches you, and despite our inability to live up to our principles at every moment it is what we continue to strive for.

I actually would say that Islamic philosophy is superior if I didn't think it was I wouldn't be Muslim. I live in the west and am quite independent financially and emotionally and have an education that only 1% of the population are fortunate to have be that east or west- so I wouldn't speak for me- obviously.. furthermore Islam isn't merely philosophy, which is why I think it superior, no other individual system covers every aspect of our lives from medicine to politics, to economics, to social structure, to spirituality, everyday living etc. etc.

The more superior knowledge becomes? Don't bother clarifying.

I won't.. I usually view time wasted on atheists as just that a waste! nonetheless there is the occasion that arises when it might clarify something for another Muslim or a sincere seeker of knowledge and that is the only thing that compels me to reply!

All the best,


Faysal

and to you!