Morality & Obedience

[ardianto]

Re: Straight Answers to the Controversial Questions about Islam

I have to agree very strongly, and I point you to the Obedience vs Morality thread: Morality & Obedience. I made an offhanded comment in another thread about how Obedience is not morality and a mod here turned that into its own thread. It became very interesting reading the posts from the Muslims there, in how they didn't seem to be able to see Obedience and Morality as separate concepts.

Obedience without morality will make us 'blind', which we just do whatever told to us regardless it is right or wrong. Morality without obedience can make us break the rule, which we think we do something right although actually wrong.

So, basically obedience require morality, and morality require obedience. These two things should not be separated.

Do you agree?. It's okay if you disagree. Since I was kid I have been taught to respect different opinion.

 

[Pygoscelis]

Re: Straight Answers to the Controversial Questions about Islam

^ And here we see a demonstration of why I don't lump all muslims into one group. Search and ardianto are both what I would consider exceptions to the norm.

ardianto, I would disagree with you on that yes. I see no virtue in obedience in and of itself. I see some situations where obedience is necessary due to time restraints (military orders where there isn't time to explain - but even there I would disobey an order such as the Nazi soldiers were receiving). I see other situations where obedience makes sense because of (not independent of) cooperation/morality. I obey traffic signals and pay taxes only because I understand the reasoning behind them and agree with them. If I had reason to question such orders, I would. And I would certainly never try to justify something immoral like genocide (example above), killing my son (ie, Abe; Jepthah) or discriminating against homosexuals by saying an authority demanded it.

 

[ardianto]

Re: Straight Answers to the Controversial Questions about Islam

ardianto, I would disagree with you on that yes. I see no virtue in obedience in and of itself. I see some situations where obedience is necessary due to time restraints (military orders where there isn't time to explain - but even there I would disobey an order such as the Nazi soldiers were receiving). I see other situations where obedience makes sense because of (not independent of) cooperation/morality. I obey traffic signals and pay taxes only because I understand the reasoning behind them and agree with them. If I had reason to question such orders, I would. And I would certainly never try to justify something immoral like genocide (example above), killing my son (ie, Abe; Jepthah) or discriminating against homosexuals by saying an authority demanded it.

Few of my friends are gays. I never hostile them or excommunicate them because morality forbids me to do it. I understand, if that being homosexual for them is not a choice, but something that they could not avoid.

But in another side my religious obedience make me cannot support them like I support my heterosexual friends when they were looking for wife. If I just follow morality without obedience, then very possible I would support their homosexual activity.

To be honest, obedience and morality make me feel like stand over a ravine which my right foot was on one cliff, and my left foot was on another cliff. If I was not wise then I would fall. But this is the challenge that the religious people must face. How to live religious wisely.

 

[AabiruSabeel]

Thread re-opened now. Let's all stick to the topic.

...It became very interesting reading the posts from the Muslims there, in how they didn't seem to be able to see Obedience and Morality as separate concepts. They insist that Obedience to authority (Allah) is the very definition of morality and it seems blind, as if no independent thought is applied. This truly perplexes me.

The morality of Atheists is blind, because it is not guided by the One who created them. Your morality depends on what society teaches you. If your society tells you having polygamous relations without committing to marriage is ok, you take it as right. When it tells you charging interest on loans and making poor go poorer is ok, you accept it as ok.

But our morality is guided by the One who knows everything. His wisdom encompasses everything.

So the fact is, your morality is blind without a guide and our morality is guided by Allah, the Most Wise. Whether you accept it or not, that is your choice.

 

[M.I.A.]

Everybody turns up for somebody.

...is what you do when you get there important?


I ain't writing no book about it.

 

[Pygoscelis]

The morality of Atheists is blind, because it is not guided by the One who created them. Your morality depends on what society teaches you.

It goes a little deeper than that. It stems primarily from senses of empathy and fairness, which are evolved into us, hard coded, and not totally unique to our species. Empathy means seeing yourself in others, identifying with them, and feeling their pain and suffering (even literally - see mirror neuron research). The dark side of that is tribalism. We have an easier time feeling empathy for those who we most identify with. This is explains why people care more about their children than their neighbours and more about their neighbours than strangers, and more about strangers from their country than strangers from other countries. The very dark side of that is things like racism, homophobia, islamophobia, and other groupings of us vs them, and in a religious context it can be taken all the way to "don't take kafir as friends" or "infidels should burn in hell for not believing as we do". Both sides of this Empathy/Tribalism dynamic can be found in all of us, and it varies from person to person which side is stronger. it also explains why people who hold identical texts holy can read them so very differently, setting aside parts as analogy or simply ignoring them, while emphasizing other parts as key. You don't meet many Jews who worry about wearing mixed fibres or eating shellfish today, and not many of them go around stoning people to death for various infractions, as their holy text tells them to.

If your society tells you having polygamous relations without committing to marriage is ok, you take it as right. When it tells you charging interest on loans and making poor go poorer is ok, you accept it as ok.

Social norms, peer pressure, and other social forces do definitely play a role. Religion is key amongst them. At the end of the day though, the empathy and fairness instincts can prevail, and logic and reason can be applied, if we don't blind ourselves with adherence to some externally applied code and think things through for ourselves. Personally, I will revise my position on various social issues, and have done so on more than one occasion as I gain better data and think or hear better arguments. Should polygamy be ok? Should usury? I can see arguments on both sides of both of those issues and I don't blindly follow any dictator of thought or belief.

But our morality is guided by the One who knows everything. His wisdom encompasses everything.

As I wrote earlier in this thread, if you truly do have a God who knows all, and who is perfectly benevolent towards you, which is awfully hard to explain given the world we live in, with natural disasters and disease and animals that can only survive and reproduce by eating others from the inside out, then you have a point. And, as I was forced to earlier in this thread by an admin, I grant you that Allah is perfect and wise and just and benevolent, etc etc. Horray, your forum rules make you win a no-prize.

But that doesn't undo my point earlier in this thread in any way, because there are OTHER "gods": FALSE Gods. There are followers of those false Gods who believe just as strongly as you do that anything they think their false God is telling them to do must be good and just, even if they can't see why or how. They follow the exact same reasoning you do, in shutting off or overriding their own internal moral senses of empathy and fairness, because surely their (false) god knows better than they do, and so they believe some truly horrible things and engage in some truly horrible behaviour thinking it just and good. Everything from forcing poisoned Koolaid on children, to murdering people who they think are possesed by demons, to "witch" burnings, to hanging homosexuals, to flying planes into buildings, and on and on it goes. And you can't reason with these people once they have farmed their moral decision making out. They have made themselves into well meaning monsters.

Note that religion isn't the only reason farm out their moral decision making. This can happen in a secular context as well. We should be weary to defer moral decision making to any leader, real or imagined. Obedience is not in and of itself morality, and in fact it is often its opposite.

 

[Serinity]

Complete obedience is for Allah, ALONE. Worship is for Allah ALONE.

Get it? We do not obey anyone or worship anyone or anything besides Allah. This obedience is unique.

what will you do when because of your failed - and erring in judgment, you decide to do something immoral? There are many instances where people, who may be very moral, snap in anger and attack, and then feel regret.

Would you kill someone or disobey your leader on a mission if that means saving a comrade, yet at the expense of the whole team while you percieve not the consequences at that time? Now you may give a informed answer, but at that you have no time to think, will you not then give in to this empathy of your and save a comrade losing sight of the greater purpose? Can you say, for certain, that you are willing to sacrifice your life, time, happiness, for the happiness of others? To die ?

Would you be able to face certain death? or is what you say just words and you value yourself more than every human? Do you think about how many ants you kill? don't you have any regard to their worth of living? Reality is, you don't have any empathy, and most likely, at time of certain death, you'd save yourself before others. With your mindset, I figure yes. It is natural, afaik, and may Allah forgive me if wrong, to value and love yourself more than others. I think. May Allah :swt: forgive me if I said wrong.

A true Muslim would sacrifice his life and property, as Allah is invaluable, incomparable. For a Muslim, Allah is all he needs, a Muslim would sacrifice arms and limbs for the sake of Allah.

We need a guide, cuz reality is, either greed, ego, or failed judgment may put everyone at risk. This empathy is corrupted by either greed or ego. In a certain situation, you'd probably overlook, unconsciously, your empathy for your own good.

Empathy can be easily corrupted.

What and who do you fight for, mere feelings? Humans who can do you no benefit or harm? Islam adds sacred value to life. It adds meaning.

Obedience and morality is inclusive in Islam.

 

[piXie]

Re: Straight Answers to the Controversial Questions about Islam

^ I obey traffic signals and pay taxes only because I understand the reasoning behind them and agree with them.

What about those people who don't understand the reasoning or agree with paying taxes in the amounts imposed upon them. After all, it is their hard earned money and they should have a choice if they wish to give and how much. Do you believe these people should be forced to obey, or should they be allowed to decide based upon what they feel is moral and correct?

 

[Pygoscelis]

Re: Straight Answers to the Controversial Questions about Islam

What about those people who don't understand the reasoning or agree with paying taxes in the amounts imposed upon them. After all, it is their hard earned money and they should have a choice if they wish to give and how much. Do you believe these people should be forced to obey, or should they be allowed to decide based upon what they feel is moral and correct?

They should be free to leave the country. They should also be free to vote, to run for office or to otherwise attempt to change the laws. And ultimately they can refuse on principle if that is their moral conviction. Doens't mean they won't face consequences for it. For example, if I see a red light at 4am and the land is flat and I can see there are no other cars for miles, I may go straight through that light. It isn't morally wrong for me to do so. But there may be a red light camera that catches me and I may be faced with at ticket. In some other scenarios, it may even be morally imperative that I refuse the authority figure, such as a nazi conscript told to to gas the Jews at Auschwitz.

 

[piXie]

Re: Straight Answers to the Controversial Questions about Islam

They should be free to leave the country

How is that freedom and how is that fair ? Isn't this their country too and their money ? Shouldn't they be allowed to live in their country freely and not have taxes imposed upon them or any other "law" they don't agree with ?

Shouldn't man be free to choose and live by what he believes is right, why should there be any law and do's and donts in the first place?

Isn't our evolved sense of morality and fairness enough?


Also, morality is doing what is right, but what is "right" ? How can mankind implement the quote in your signature when so many disagree with what this word means and so many are confused.

Please could you englighten us.

Thank you.

 

[ardianto]

Re: Straight Answers to the Controversial Questions about Islam

How is that freedom and how is that fair ? Isn't this their country too and their money ? Shouldn't they be allowed to live in their country freely and not have taxes imposed upon them or any other "law" they don't agree with ?

In living together we must be willing to contribute for the public benefit, and tax is our contribution to build facilities for public benefit such as street, road, public building, park, including to help poor people. If we want to use public facilities but not willing to contribute, this is a selfish behaviour that not only morally wrong, but also Islamically wrong.

 

[Pygoscelis]

Re: Straight Answers to the Controversial Questions about Islam

How is that freedom and how is that fair ? Isn't this their country too and their money ? Shouldn't they be allowed to live in their country freely and not have taxes imposed upon them or any other "law" they don't agree with ?

Shouldn't man be free to choose and live by what he believes is right, why should there be any law and do's and donts in the first place?

Because Anarchy isn't much good for anybody. We come together collectively as societies and set rules for ourselves, based on culture, empathy, social contract (I don't want you killing me so I won't kill you), etc. Or the greed of the powerful overrides our collective will and creates harsh laws that are less than fair or just, creating kings or dictators ruling with an iron fist; much like how many Gods are depicted to do, and we strive to overturn them and create more just societies. It is an eternal struggle between the positive and negative aspects of human nature.

You can imagine it as a struggle between Good and Evil if you want, and many do. And you can even personify these forces and call some angels and some devils, etc. I simply note the danger is taking that further to the point of forgetting the good and the bad and simply endorsing or opposing such characters created by this personification; and obeying some of them simply because you are told to and know they are the "Good" ones, even though they order some pretty horrific bad things.

Isn't our evolved sense of morality and fairness enough?

No. It isn't. I just explained that in the posts above. Our senses can fail us. Consider the trolley moral thought experiment and many others. That doesn't mean these senses are useless. It just means we have to apply reason and logic to ethical thought. It certainly does not mean we should abandon ethical thought altogether and simply go by might makes right, and follow whatever dear leader says is good. North Korea isn't an ideal scenario; neither would a celestial North Korea be.

Also, morality is doing what is right, but what is "right" ? How can mankind implement the quote in your signature when so many disagree with what this word means and so many are confused.

We are working it out. Our societies have made a lot of progress since the times these "holy" texts were written, for example. We no longer go on witch hunts (for the most part), stone people to death for trivial offences to imaginary people, or keep an entire gender subdued. We will develop further. I predict that there will be more vegetarianism in the future as we discover how much suffering animals can go through when harvested as food. The day will likely come when people people look back in horror at how we killed and ate beings as intelligent as pigs, dolphins, etc.

Thank you.

You're welcome.

 

[Zafran]

Re: Straight Answers to the Controversial Questions about Islam

There are anarchists who will disagree with you like Chomsky. According to him its the people in power that keep us in line eg "manufacturing consent" etc etc.

We are working it out. Our societies have made a lot of progress since the times these "holy" texts were written, for example. We no longer go on witch hunts (for the most part), stone people to death for trivial offences to imaginary people, or keep an entire gender subdued. We will develop further. I predict that there will be more vegetarianism in the future as we discover how much suffering animals can go through when harvested as food. The day will likely come when people people look back in horror at how we killed and ate beings as intelligent as pigs, dolphins, etc.

Dont forget the Nuke and modern warfare and spying tech etc - Theres plenty of things that are wrong and seem to be getting worse. Modernity has its own demons. You also seem to think that women/men are not oppressed or that people dont kill people for trivial offences anymore - It still happens in every society. With Modern tech to boost the whole horror.

 

[Pygoscelis]

Re: Straight Answers to the Controversial Questions about Islam

Dont forget the Nuke and modern warfare and spying tech etc - Theres plenty of things that are wrong and seem to be getting worse. Modernity has its own demons. You also seem to think that women/men are not oppressed or that people dont kill people for trivial offences anymore - It still happens in every society. With Modern tech to boost the whole horror.

All the more need for the development of true ethics instead of mere obedience to authority and tribalism. Imagine if the Nuke was in the hands of ancient tribes that thought their Gods were literally telling them to commit genocide and destroy all the surrounding tribes. We would not be here today.

 

[Zafran]

Re: Straight Answers to the Controversial Questions about Islam

All the more need for the development of true ethics instead of mere obedience to authority and tribalism. Imagine if the Nuke was in the hands of ancient tribes that thought their Gods were literally telling them to commit genocide and destroy all the surrounding tribes. We would not be here today.

No need to as there are people who used it in the modern progressive world (The US), people that wouldn't hesitate to use it (Theresa May) and people who believe they have the authority to have them and nobody else (nuclear powers). For them there is No need of God - Just themselves.

 

[Eric H]

Re: Straight Answers to the Controversial Questions about Islam

Greetings and peace be with you Pygoscelis;

I predict that there will be more vegetarianism in the future as we discover how much suffering animals can go through when harvested as food. The day will likely come when people people look back in horror at how we killed and ate beings as intelligent as pigs, dolphins, etc.

Man seems to have little concern for their own kind, let alone dolphins, I think you may be living in a dream world. We allow around twenty thousand children to die every day as a result of grinding poverty, preventable disease and starvation. That is around a hundred million unnecessary deaths since 9/11, this is the result of a disobedience to god's teaching when it comes to the care and concern for the poor.

In the spirit of praying for the poor and oppressed.

Eric

 

[Eric H]

Greetings and peace be with you Pygoscelis;

And what if God told you to fly a plane into a building?

No we should all follow the law of God and the law of the land, do not kill.



In a speech on the 1st October 2015, president Obama said, 24 Americans have been killed by terrorism in the last decade, while 280,024 Americans were killed by guns.
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-m...hecking-comparison-gun-deaths-and-terrorism-/

In the Land of the Free, we are told to “fear the terrorists” but US police kill 58 times more people than all terrorist activity against US civilians since 9-11!
http://thefreethoughtproject.com/shock-report-americans-killed-police-911-soldiers-killed-war/



If Americans obeyed the law, there should be no killings, but many clearly do disobey the most obvious law of do not kill.

I hope at some point along the line you would start to follow your own internal sense of morality instead of mere obedience to what you think is power

Many people think like you do, they make up their own justifications to do what they want to do, they follow their own sense of morality, the law is a free for all, hence we have to live with all the murder and crime.

In the spirit of praying for justice for all people

Eric

 

[Eric H]

Re: Straight Answers to the Controversial Questions about Islam

Greetings and peace be with you Zafran;

No need to as there are people who used it in the modern progressive world (The US), people that wouldn't hesitate to use it (Theresa May) and people who believe they have the authority to have them and nobody else (nuclear powers). For them there is No need of God - Just themselves.

Sadly, a vote has just taken place to renew the trident nuclear programme in the UK. Labour Leader Jeremy Corbyn, voted against it, he is pretty much on his own in parliament, very few MPs have the courage to back him. He said if he became prime minister, he would not authorise pushing the nuclear button. His MPs are rebelling against him on this issue.

In the spirit of praying for peace on Earth.

Eric

 

[piXie]

Re: Straight Answers to the Controversial Questions about Islam

In living together we must be willing to contribute for the public benefit, and tax is our contribution to build facilities for public benefit such as street, road, public building, park, including to help poor people. If we want to use public facilities but not willing to contribute, this is a selfish behaviour that not only morally wrong, but also Islamically wrong.

JazakAllaah Khair brother, though I wasn't voicing my opinion about tax. I was just giving an example of how everyone has a different concept about what is right and moral and if we all followed what we personally thought was right without a set criteria, there would be chaos. Men can never collectively come together and create this criteria themselves or agree, and to think that they can is (again) a denial of the awful realities of this world and complete ignorance about the nature of man.

Man might be able to work some things out through trial and error, but this is foolishness when we have an instruction manual (The Quran) from the Creator who Created us and understands our very nature. Following this manual is the most safest, most rational and effective solution and involves the least risks or damage to man or to society as a whole.

We are working it out.

Well you can speak about what is moral and right after its been worked out then. Until then, keep working it out.

Peace.

 

[kritikvernunft]

Aside from whether or not this kind of slaughter is the most humane ...

You are allowed to run after a sheep, catch it, bite it in the throat with your teeth, and wait until it bleeds to death, because that is how wolves do it. If wolves are allowed to do that, to survive, why not you? Therefore, any way of killing a sheep that is not more cruel than the standard case in nature, is obviously permissible:

Quran 2:173: He only prohibits for you the eating of animals that die of themselves (without human interference), blood, the meat of pigs, and animals dedicated to other than God. If one is forced (to eat these), without being malicious or deliberate, he incurs no sin. God is Forgiver, Most Merciful.

In fact, it is even the other way around. You are NOT allowed to eat a prey animal, if you or another person did NOT purposely kill it.

Quran:6:119: Why should you not eat from that upon which God's name has been mentioned ? He has detailed for you what is prohibited for you, unless you are forced. Indeed, many people mislead others with their personal opinions, without knowledge. Your Lord is fully aware of the transgressors.

In my impression, you should say something like this to the prey animal "In the name of Allah, the most merciful, I will bite you in the throat now, and bleed you to death, in order to eat you." while you are running after it, if you intend to hunt, kill, and eat it in the way of the wolves. As you know, prey animals, such as sheep, are supposed to be eaten by their predators. That is simply what they are here for. I do not see where the problem is that people make about all of that !? If I am hungry, and this happens to be the most convenient way to get hold of food, why would I NOT run after a prey animal in order to kill and eat it?