iCambrian

Advanced Members
  • Content count

    1,872
  • Joined

  • Last visited

3 Followers

About iCambrian

  • Rank
    The Scientist

Previous Fields

  • Religion
    Christian Humanist
  • Gender
    Male

Recent Profile Visitors

1,986 profile views
  1. We have fundamentally different views and likely will not agree. All the best.
  2. Maybe. A lot of environmental works are financially driven. People pay money to combat contamination. But wildlife doesnt have money to pay, nor do they have a voice. Many people complain about the dakota access pipeline, and its this big shpeal in the media...meanwhile the amazon forest is getting pummeled, but i rarely hear about it. The difference? Well, the pipeline is near water that we drink. But who talks about the pipelines going near the drinking places of wildlife? Sure, some stand for the environment and wildlife. But, in general, most people in my opinion, are focused on themselves. Its only when the pipeline came near the place of a human communities drinking water, that everyone stepped in and got involved. Before then? Sure some were there standing against it, but most are elsewhere doing other things, not really worried about the environment where it isnt in our own backyard.
  3. And as for this, Islam is a way of life. Ayatollahs provide rulings on many many many things in life. There are many topics they give rulings on, on all sorts of life related activities. And people have different levels of trust in them on these topics. A topic was just made right here on Shia Chat related to ayatollahs being able to see into the future. So, while some of us can comfortably say "we dont believe everything they do", other people view them in...well, exceptionally high regard to the extent that, I suspect that it becomes unreasonable. Thankfully they appear to be generally righteous people. Its good to get advice and to learn from scholars. But you should always be willing to test ideas, challenge ideas, ponder, and not simply rule out your own opinion or anyone elses without consideration. Isaac Newton was considered a brilliant man, a highly respected scholar. And in science, some people are shunned or disregarded when they challenge scholars. But it only took one Einstein, one person who thought from a different perspective, to revolutionize physics. In a world of 1.6 billion muslims, i bet there are many Einsteins, and their ideas ought to be respected and considered.
  4. Generally speaking, expert advice is what you want to go with, but as you have said, there are matters that you may disagree with. I typically trust in doctors, but I know for a fact that at times they dont know what theyre talking about and sometimes make huge mistakes. Mistakes that may have been avoided, had I taken a different route and sought out anothers opinion. Ayatollahs really are beyond comparison with doctors though, because there are, maybe only 30 ayatollahs? Whereas there are hundreds of millions of doctors. Ayatollahs would be the equivalent of super doctors (imagine a class of only 30 doctors in the world), as if such a thing could exist (its unrealistic). I disagree, I think you would be surprised what knowledge can be found among billions of people. Ive met non geologists who could be considered experts without having taken a single course. And as serious as muslims take religious matters (relatively speaking), im sure there is a vast body of knowledge among the 1 billion non ayatollah muslims of the planet. Because the body of knowledge contained in the 1.6 billion (1,600,000,000, think about that number and how many of them educate themselves in Islamic matters) muslims of the world, is greater than that of 30 individuals, no matter who those 30 individuals are (or perhaps who people think they are). Either way, im going to move on now. Thanks for the chat. Best of luck.
  5. If scholar A (the one who is most knowledgeable), gets question 1 wrong, and person B who overall may be less knowledgeable gets question 1 correct, then the opinion of person B on question number 1 ought to take precedence.
  6. Yes. This is a better approach than following just one individual, though this does not necessarily mean that Marja have all bases covered.
  7. Consider this hypothetical... Lets say there is a classroom of 3 students. An exam is given with 4 questions. Person A gets a 75% on their exam (3 out of 4 questions correct) Person B and Person C get a 50% on their exam (2 out of 4 questions). Person A gets question #1 of 4 incorrect. Person B gets question 2 of 4 incorrect. Person C gets question 3 of 4 incorrect. Person A may be "most knowledgable, as they recieved the highest, general overall grade. However, collectively, person B and person C, recieved a grade of 100%. Ayatollahs are very few in number in comparison to the billion muslims on this planet. They undoubtably make mistakes and lack knowledge in areas of Islam, whereas the other 1 billion muslims, undoubtably, collectively, hold more knowledge. If person As opinion were to override all others, you would have person B and person C getting incorrect answers, despite following the person who is "most knowledgable". And if person C and Person Bs opinions were ignored, while only person As opinion was accepted, it would put everyone in a bad position, despite the fact that person A is the most knowledgable and recieved the highest grade.
  8. I disagree, the way the question is asked, It assumes that scholar A has more knowledge of every fathomable concept in Islam, over everyone else. Islam is a very deep religion. No individual can be "most knowledgable" of it, to the extent that they would be correct over all others in understanding every facet of it.
  9. Oh, and as for the question of if pipelines harm the environment. Oil use in general, no matter what its mode of transport, can and does harm people and the environment. The truth though is, nobody actually cares about the environment though, they simply care about themselves. Nobody would care if the pipeline were not in their own back yard, and nobody would care if the pipeline were through an area home to wildlife. It is only when the pipeline crosses someones back yard that they begin to complain.
  10. "Harmful to the environment" is relative. Industrial sites discharge chemical waste, all over the world, continuously every day. I think this is all predominantly a political battle. It is a battle between green energy/renewables, verses fossil fuels. Its a battle between a risk of future detriment to the environment, and the current state we live in. Its about atmospheric pollution versus clean energy etc. The Keystone pipeline is just like a poster child for a much larger debate.
  11. In certain areas, without a doubt, there will be non ayatolla people with greater knowledge. Its just the way it is. Just like with Steven Hawking, the guy is brilliant, has studied physics for decades. But to say he is more knowledgeable in every single fathomable topic related to physics, is really an insult to the worlds physicists. Now, thankfully Steven Hawking doesnt claim to be more intelligent or knowledgeable in every physics related concept we could fathom, over all other physicists. But, the point still remains. You cannot lump Islam into one concept, in the sense that one individual could ever be the most knowledgeable of it, in every way, over everyone else. Its just too complex and has too much depth. Not even a team of 10 people, or 20, or 30, or 50, could ever contain enough knowledge to be correct over all the rest of mankind on every detail of Islam. Its just not humanly possible. Just think about my jeopardy game show analogy. Do you really think that a team of 30 people, could win in Islamic jeopardy against 1 billion muslim opponents? Theres just no way, think about that number, one billion. Its 100 hundred million. The knowledge that collectively exists amongst the worlds muslims and non ayatollah Islamic scholars, is extraordinarily vast in comparison to any single individuals, no matter how knowledgeable that individual may be. And i really want to push this point again that, I think that, when people say that ayatollahs are correct, in every scenario, over all the rest of mankind, or the rest of all Islamic scholars....its an insult to the rest of us and an insult to muslims. This is an insult, because it greatly downsizes and underestimates the quantity and quality of knowledge, of all other scholars and people on planet earth. You have to understand, there are 7 billion people on this planet. And Islam, truly is a very deep and rich religion. Meanwhile, an individual human mind, no matter how great it is, is limited. And placing 20 people, above all others, in a way, concedes your own intelligence and the rest of the muslim worlds. As if the 1 billion muslims, are lesser than a mere 20 or 30 individuals (granted, an intelligent 20 or 30, but still just 20 or 30 limited human minds that have limited experiences and limited perspectives). Lesser in any topic you could think of, in understanding of any hadith, in understanding of the pillars, or theological questions, or really anything you could imagine (Islam is more than just a religion, it is a way of life, so this includes really any question related to our way of life). ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Either way, this isnt my battle to fight (this is a question shias must determine for themselves). If you disagree, it doesnt really negatively or positively impact my life either way. So, i have no reason to try to explain or convince anyone and will probably just be on my way.
  12. And this us just my opinion, but to propose that the ayatollahs would win Islamic jeapordy, or if they did, I think it would be an insult to Muslim scholars world wide. from a scientific perspective, I would say the same thing. Guys like Stephen hawking are brilliant, but there is just no way he would be able to out compete the worlds remaining physicists in a physics trivia competition. Even if he has spent his entire life studying, even if he has read countless books, the worlds physicists have spent an absurdly greater amount of time studying and have collectively read an absurdly greater number of research documents and books. Hawking would stand no chance. so to go back to the original question, is there ever a time in which a non ayatolla would ever be more correct on any fathomable decision over an ayatolla? Absolutely, without a shadow of a doubt.
  13. And please pardon my grammatical errors. i like to think of it like this, let's say we have a game show called Islamic jeapordy. At one table you have ayatollahs. Im not sure how many there are. Maybe 20-30 marja? At the other table you have every other Muslim on the planet. Hundreds of millions? Maybe over a billion. This included every scholar you've ever met, every scholar that has ever spoke at any masjid you have ever been to (excluding marja). if this game show were real, the ayatollahs, as knowledgable as they are, would not stand a chance against the rest of humanity, the sheer number of educated Muslims and Islamic scholars, (numbering in the millions or even hundreds of millions) on this planet collectively encompass so much knowledge, that it would be an easy win.
  14. A child in preschool and their parent isn't an adequate response because we live on a planet of over 7 billion people, millions of which are highly educated in many things. I ask again, have you never been in a scenario in which you have known more on a particular topic than a proclaimed expert? How about a doctor? Or an engineer or scientist? There are over a billion Muslims on this planet. To propose that a number of scholars that you could count on your hands, undoubtably is greater in knowledge than all others, I think sounds absurd. As if no others of the billion could ever succeed over the scholars on a single topic.
  15. A child in preschool and their parent isn't an adequate response because we live on a planet of over 7 billion people, millions of which are highly educated in many things. I ask again, have you never been in a scenario in which you have known more on a particular topic than a proclaimed expert? How about a doctor? Or an engineer or scientist?