Jump to content

.InshAllah.

Veteran Member
  • Content count

    3,252
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

.InshAllah. last won the day on June 17 2014

.InshAllah. had the most liked content!

About .InshAllah.

  • Rank
    Level 6 Member
  • Birthday 05/02/2005

Contact Methods

  • Website URL
    http://godandphilosophy.wordpress.com/

Previous Fields

  • Gender
    Male

Recent Profile Visitors

7,587 profile views
  1. In modern liberal societies, it's not enough to tolerate homosexuality, rather we have to celebrate it. We have to see it as a good and positive thing, on par with heterosexuality. Here are 2 philosophical arguments against this. The first is that homosexuality is a kind of disability, and the second is that homosexuality requires an internal disharmony. Disability 1. A disability is a physical or mental condition that prevents or restricts normal human activities. 2. Homosexuality prevents or restricts the normal human activity of natural sexual reproduction 3. So, homosexuality is a disability. Disabilities are not good things in themselves that should be celebrated. While we should value and even celebrate the achievements of disabled people, we shouldn't celebrate their disabilities, e.g. we shouldn't celebrate not having an arm, or being wheelchair bound, or being blind, or regard being blind as on par with having sight. Rather we should be looking for ways to cure blindness, to restore mobility, etc. Disharmony If your biological organs are directed at the opposite sex, but your attraction is for the same sex, then your organs and attraction are not in harmony. Your biology and your psychology are not united - they are in a state of disharmony with respect to each other. On the other hand, if your psychology and your biology are both directed at the same sex, then they are in harmony. All things considered it is better to be in a state of harmony than disharmony. Homosexuality is a state of disharmony. People who want us to celebrate homosexuality want us to celebrate a state that is necessarily disharmonious. But such a state isn't worthy of celebration. We should instead be trying to restore the harmony within the individual, not celebrating it. None of this implies that we should hate homosexuals, or that they are evil, and I certainly do not accept either. The point is simply that the state of homosexuality is not the ideal state, and is not something to be viewed positively.
  2. .InshAllah.

    A question about wahdat alwujud

    Yea God=Existence doesnt mean wahdatul wujud, but its a consequence of it. I will edit to remove confusion.
  3. I'm hoping someone who has studied mulla sadra can show me the problem with this argument. 1. God is Existence 2. Existence is gradated [tashkik alwujud] 3. Therefore God is gradated The conclusion is surely false, so where does it go wrong?
  4. .InshAllah.

    I believe in the Trinity, am I a Mushrikeen?

    The Qur'an has a lot of criticism of Christians, but also says many positive things. Have a look at this thread:
  5. .InshAllah.

    Buddhists & Fear of Death

    Its not false if the belief in question is supposed to produce a particular desirable character. I have no reason to interpret ilaha as 'enduring self'.
  6. .InshAllah.

    Why is there a God?

    If something is a necessary truth then it is self explanatory.
  7. .InshAllah.

    Buddhists & Fear of Death

    Salam ethereal My initial thought was that accepting Buddhism leads to incoherence - if you live as a devoted Buddhist, and accept there is no enduring self, then you will act and behave as if there is an enduring self. If you accept this doctrine that is supposed to make you both more generous, and fearless of death, you will end up fearing death more than anyone else, and be the least generous. Then I asked myself what I would think if a similar study was done on Muslim scholars, but they only interviewed Wahabbi ulema in Saudi. My reaction would be that these Wahabbi ulema don't actually practice Islam properly. So a Buddhist can reject my initial conclusion, but only if they say that the monks from the 2 monasteries were not actually practicing Buddhism properly. I don't have a reason to think that, so prima facie I think being a Buddhist leads to incoherence.
  8. Death and the Self Shaun Nichols , Nina Strohminger , Arun Rai , Jay Garfield First published: 22 January 2018 It is an old philosophical idea that if the future self is literally different from the current self, one should be less concerned with the death of the future self (Parfit, 1984). This paper examines the relation between attitudes about death and the self among Hindus, Westerners, and three Buddhist populations (Lay Tibetan, Lay Bhutanese, and monastic Tibetans). Compared with other groups, monastic Tibetans gave particularly strong denials of the continuity of self, across several measures. We predicted that the denial of self would be associated with a lower fear of death and greater generosity toward others. To our surprise, we found the opposite. Monastic Tibetan Buddhists showed significantly greater fear of death than any other group. The monastics were also less generous than any other group about the prospect of giving up a slightly longer life in order to extend the life of another. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1111/cogs.12590
  9. .InshAllah.

    The Gods of Man

    Yea it doesnt take into account that fact that God exists and sent Prophets But apart from that, your account is basically that religion arose out of incorrect and unsophisticated reasoning. There's no mention of the fact that religious belief is innate to humanity. Its not forced upon us, and it cant be explained away as faulty reasoning. We have an innate tendency to believe in God and to see purpose in everything.
  10. .InshAllah.

    Women are superior to men- Sayyed Kamal AlHaidery

    ^Interestingly we also have ahadith saying the opposite, although I don't know about their chains. For example, 4628 - وروى عمار الساباطي عن أبي عبد الله عليه السلام قال: " أكثر أهل الجنة من المستضعفين النساء، علم الله عز وجل ضعفهن فرحمهن ".From Abi Abdillah [as] : Most of the people of Jannah are the vulnerable/oppressed [mustath'afeen] women. Allah knew their weakness, so He showed them mercy http://shiaonlinelibrary.com/الكتب/1151_من-لا-يحضره-الفقيه-الشيخ-الصدوق-ج-٣/الصفحة_468
  11. .InshAllah.

    Psychological differences between sexes

    Sister men aren't superior. I don't know how you concluded that from my post. In fact I would have been less surprised if you had concluded that women are superior to men, as my topics have highlighted that women are on average superior to men in many ethical virtues, e.g. empathy, benevolence, sociability. You have obviously suffered at the hands of certain people, but don't confuse their oppressive actions with Islam. As a matter of fact, I believe the yardstick to judge superiority is Taqwa, as per the Quran, not sex. Having said that, at least one marji' has suggested that according to the Qur'an, women are superior to men:
  12. .InshAllah.

    What is masculinity and femininity?

    If we want to say that differences in sex are significant enough to determine differences in social roles, then this means that gender roles are (at least partly) grounded in nature, and not completely socially constructed. This is a good reason to pay attention to the current debates on gender. Many people seem to take it for granted that gender roles are completely socially constructed. They think that the traditional idea that gender roles are innate is outdated, wrong, and even oppressive. Obviously this isnt the Islamic position, and its not what the evidence suggests.
  13. In a previous thread I discussed the fact that women are more empathetic than men, and that this difference is innate, and not due to socialisation, patriarchy etc. My goal here is to see to what extent traditional gender roles are justified by innate differences between the sexes. Feminists want to abolish traditional gender roles, and view them as inherently oppressive, and one way they try and do this is by denying real differences between the sexes. Traditional gender roles have men as the providers, and women as the carers and nurturers. Note that you can champion traditional gender roles whilst also being fully supportive of women getting an education and working. The summary below is based on these 2 articles: https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/sexual-personalities/201603/are-men-more-helpful-altruistic-or-chivalrous-women https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/sexual-personalities/201504/are-women-more-emotional-men -Women experience more negative emotions that men, e.g. guilt, shame, embarrassment -The personality trait most closely associated with negative emotions is neuroticism, Women tend to score higher in neuroticism than men. Its interesting that neuroticism is associated with taking less risks. Both of the above have been found across multiple cultures, and in fact the differences between sexes are more pronounced in egalitarian cultures. This shows that they are not due to social factors forces as patriarchy, but are due to innate differences between men and women: -The same goes for personal values such as benevolence (being giving, wanting to help others, provide welfare) and universalism: - And also for agreeableness, and other help-related traits across cultures. -And they score lower on anti-social personality traits such as narcissism and psychopathy. Again these differences are greater in egalitarian societies, so cannot be explained away by socialisation and patriarchy: In conclusion, in addition to women being more empathetic than men, they are: -more risk averse -more benevolent -more agreeable -less likely to be anti-social e.g. less likely to be narcissitic and psychopathic. And these differences are innate, not cultural. It's not hard to see why this would make them better carers and nurturers than men.
  14. .InshAllah.

    Hell cannot be eternal?

    'Except as your Lord please' is mentioned in the case of Heaven aswell so cannot be taken to mean that the outcome is temporary, otherwise people in Heaven wont be there forever. So you havent shown that the verse I posted is qualified or conditional. Although some inhabitants of Hell will eventually enter Heaven, the Quran seems to say that many wont. As there is nothing incoherent with the idea of eternal Hell, that isnt a problem. I get the attraction of wanting everyone to end up in Heaven. I want everyone in Heaven in the same way I want everyone to be decent human beings. But neither will happen.
×