Religion
Related: About this forumLifting the Veil of Harris & Hirsi Ali
Mohamed Ghlian / 3 days ago
New atheist/ex-Muslim Ayaan Hirsi Ali has been one of the people of interest to be discussed as of late. After much outcry, she lost an honorary degree that Brandeis University had intended to award her. They cite in their statement that Hirsi Ali’s “past statements are inconsistent with Brandeis University’s core values.” That was their politically correct way of saying they did not realize the extent her Islamophobia and bigotry had gone to when they initially wanted to award her that degree.
At the time there was a bit of social media lashing out that came from some figures, particularly among the new atheist crowd. Somehow it was turned into a freedom of speech issue, which it was most definitely not. For others it was a bogus Islamophobia issue – enter Sam Harris.
In spite of the increasing awareness of something wrong taking place in how Islam and Muslims are being viewed by some, Harris and other Islamophobia deniers refuse to acknowledge it as a real thing. They cover their bigotry with a veneer of what they call “justified criticism.” For those who have trouble with the term, a report was released in 1991 in which it was used for the first time to incorporate the following cocktail of attitudes that Hirsi Ali, Harris, and many in their camp most definitely harbour:
•Islam is monolithic and cannot adapt to new realities
•Islam does not share common values with other major faiths
•Islam as a religion is inferior to the West. It is archaic, barbaric, and irrational.
•Islam is a religion of violence and supports terrorism.
•Islam is a violent political ideology.
Individuals like Harris and Hirsi Ali are not concerned to find out any truth. They may pretend to be rational, but they fit a description of the “sham inquirer” as put forth by Susan Haack:
“A genuine inquirer aims to find out the truth of some question, whatever the color of that truth…. A pseudo-inquirer seeks to make a case for the truth of some proposition(s) determined in advance. There are two kinds of pseudo-inquirer, the sham and the fake. A sham reasoner is concerned, not to find out how things really are, but to make a case for some immovably-held preconceived conviction. A fake reasoner is concerned, not to find out how things really are, but to advance himself by making a case for some proposition to the truth-value of which he is indifferent.
Neither sham nor fake inquiry is really inquiry; but we need to get beyond this tautology to understand what is wrong with sham and fake reasoning. The sham inquirer tries to make a case for the truth of a proposition his commitment to which is already evidence- and argument-proof.
http://mohamedghilan.com/2014/05/18/lifting-the-veil-of-harris-hirsi-ali/
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
AtheistCrusader
(33,982 posts)the director of the script she wrote (Submission) and her friend, Theo Van Gogh, was murdered by an Islamic extremist for his work on that film.
"•Islam is a violent political ideology."
Ayaan has had occasion to taste that claim first hand. But I wouldn't ask Jeanne Tiller for a fair/nuanced analysis of evangelical Christianity either. One of them slaughtered her husband in church. People who are literally survivors of X ideology, or X implementation of an ideology, are going to analyze it from a different perspective than you or I.
I would also point out:
"•Islam as a religion is inferior to the West. It is archaic, barbaric, and irrational."
The 'West' is a culture, not a religion, so that's a bizarre comparison. Islam is much more than just culture. (Or, is only religion and not culture, depending on your views) Difficult to constructively mix the terms to start with.
snagglepuss
(12,704 posts)This is a straw man created by her detractors.
snagglepuss
(12,704 posts)bigbangaphobe?
AtheistCrusader
(33,982 posts)He's REALLY negative on it. I think he may have explicitly stated that, in fact, in an interview I posted somewhere last week... hmm.
I think Jordan is a working example of a culturally Islamic nation that is politically neutral. There aren't many positive examples though. Turkey is similar, but has some military authoritarian problems...
snagglepuss
(12,704 posts)Religious beliefs shouldn't be given a free pass. I along with countless millions despise Scientology. Should we shut the hell up because Scientologists feel offended?
cpwm17
(3,829 posts)and seriously attacks the humanity of an entire people, they are not engaging in fair criticism. They are demonstrating that they are just plain old bigots.
It is not surprising that bigots like Harris, who often claim that Muslims are so violent, are themselves very pro-war – least as long as the victims of their fantasized wars are the proper sub-human targets.
snagglepuss
(12,704 posts)taking offense at ANY criticism of Mohammed, the Koran or Islam. Muslims themselves are at risk of death for criticizing their faith, even wanting to renounce Islam is deemed to be a capital offense. The problem is that offensiveness is subjective. It seems to me that Muslims are following the Zionist playbook which accuses anyone who criticizes Israel as being anti-Semitic.
cpwm17
(3,829 posts)Harris goes way beyond that. Harris, and some others like him, have a very simple minded and bigoted view of how the world works. He has a lot in common with the far right.
The OP is about Harris, and it's important to point out what's wrong with Harris' type of thinking.
snagglepuss
(12,704 posts)to denounce it in any way she deems appropriate.
pinto
(106,886 posts)Historically a state with huge immigrant populations. I knew lots of Lebanese, Syrians, Armenians. 1st, 2nd, 3rd generation immigrants. Never met a Jordanian.
MisterP
(23,730 posts)
http://www.georgetownbookshop.com/display2.asp?id=718
maybe they'll pick on the doukhobors next; or the Malagasy
Jim__
(14,077 posts)From The Justice:
A press release from the administration, published by BrandeisNOW on the evening of Tuesday, April 8, said that while Hirsi Ali “is a compelling public figure and advocate for women’s rights … we cannot overlook certain of her past statements that are inconsistent with Brandeis University’s core values.” The press release added that the University “regret[s]” that it was “not aware of these statements earlier.”
The press release stated in conclusion that Hirsi Ali is “welcome to join us on campus in the future to engage in a dialogue about these important issues,“ but that the commencement ceremony was not the appropriate forum for said discussion.
...
Does anyone know if she went? A discussion at Brandeis would do far more to convince me of the sincerity of her views than any softball interview with Harris.
rug
(82,333 posts)Jim__
(14,077 posts)... to discuss her views:
Unless I'm missing something in your cited article, it confirms that.
rug
(82,333 posts)
MellowDem
(5,018 posts)And there is nothing bigoted about saying so.
These apologetics for terrible belief systems because they are religions just highlight religious privilege more and more.
I'm reminded of the persecuted right wing Christians who now scream bigotry against them at every turn. Apparently the strategy has spread.
Once your belief system has enough believers, no matter the terrible shit it proclaims explicitly, a certain amount of deference and respect are expected thanks to religious privilege. Fuck religious privilege and all the apologetics enabling it.
rug
(82,333 posts)The first sign of it is when you don't know what you're talking about but press on nonetheless.
MellowDem
(5,018 posts)But who cares about the definition of words when you can "press on nonetheless".
Islam, on the other hand, is an explicitly bigoted belief system, in a whole lot of nasty ways.
rug
(82,333 posts)