Man sentenced to death for sorcery.

[England my lionheart]

Then it's Materialism vs. Spiritualism?

Or common sense logic and reasoning and a good dash of evidence vs superstition

 

[JMorris]

i sympathize with the man. but he (and everyone else) should know that going to muslim countries (some more than others) is dangerous, regardless of who you are or what your there to do.

 

[Mr Spinkles]

Thank you for taking the time to provide the above interesting links for me...but unfortunately they are irrelevant , because i have no religious reason to believe in parapsycological phenomena , remote viewing , dowsing, or people with x-ray vision....and of course i never claimed that people should seek magical healing instead of medicine

I was specific in my request ,i think

You're welcome! I'm sorry it wasn't what you had in mind. We were talking about magic and witchcraft. You asked in post #729:

"I would like to know how were those studies done ? did they bring magicians and ask them to do their magic ? what was the most recent study ?

I would like to see evidence and scientific papers that convince me that it's taken for granted as you say"
​

You may not believe in remote viewing, Indian magic healers, etc. but these are all claims of magic. And if genuine, they are considered "witchcraft", depending on whom you ask. They are all claims about how a person can influence the world, see the future, etc. with only their mind or simple rituals, or by contacting "spirits". These were just a few examples which I thought would show you that there has been scientific study of magical claims, and help answer your question about why it is taken for granted that they are all bogus, unless proven otherwise by very convincing evidence.

It sounds like you want to hear cases about jinns, specifically. Let me make a point about this.

I don't know if I can find many controlled tests of supposed psychics or magicians where the person puts their powers in a specifically Islamic context as the work of jinns, since I only know of this kind of skeptical scientific study being done in the West and India. But scientifically, we're first only interested in establishing whether or not a person has magical powers at all, no matter HOW those powers are believed to work.

People who believe in so-called "New Age" ideas might say their powers work by contacting the benign spirits of dead friends and relatives. Or they might believe their mental/psychic abilities are not supernatural, but an untapped power of the human mind that we all possess. It's worth pointing out that, apparently, on Mr. Sibat's show he put his psychic powers in the New Age context, as do many Western psychics.

Fundamentalist Christians OTOH sometimes say the "New Age" people are actually deriving their powers from Satan or demons, and in that respect they share a similar view with some Muslims in the Middle East, apparently.

It's worth considering that if the Saudi religious police raided a classroom of people trying to do remote viewing, perhaps they would interpret the powers and the strange scribblings on paper as sorcery. Perhaps the impressionable and eccentric people who imagine they genuinely have remote viewing powers would be convinced, by persuasion or intimidation or torture, that their powers came from jinns.

The fact that skeptical study, whenever it is carried out, always shows these psychics to be frauds or self-deceived, or at least never finds any convincing evidence of real magic, should raise the question that many people who are thought to be sorcerers in the Islamic world could also be frauds or self-deceived. In some cases alleged sorcerers may even be a little insane -- delusional, but harmless.

Let me make a few points about the scientific literature, too. There are many impediments to publishing a controlled test of a psychic as if it were a physics experiment. The literature is rich, in spite of these impediments, but let me explain them.

First, the believer has to care enough to undertake such a test and not be insulted by it. They also have to be mentally sound and able to coherently explain what measurable powers they have. It turns out that many, many people who believe they have magical powers cannot form coherent sentences, much less describe how their powers could be objectively measured.

Second, a skeptic has to care enough to not consider these tests a complete waste of time. A scientific journal has to exist that doesn't consider it a complete waste of time. Over the last 200 years, after so much research falling victim to fraud, hoax, and illusion, serious scientists have all but abandoned and rejected these pursuits as chasing after nothing. Often, the people who don't consider it a waste of time are psychologists and anthropologists studying the nature of belief and self-deception. OR they are people who already believe in the phenomenon. The latter case sometimes leads to papers being published using questionable methods in obscure journals, and no one outside the field takes them seriously because the results aren't repeatable, some tiny statistical effect goes away when skeptics are doing the measurements.

Finally, the test is often remarkably simple. If some martial-arts guru or Christian preacher claims he can knock people down without touching them, and this is due to magical powers instead of imagination and suggestion, this is very, very simple to test. Ask him to knock down a non-believer. If he can't do it, there's little to say or to write about. Ordinarily in science, you have an observed phenomenon, and then you spend a lot of time trying to understand how it works. When there is no observed phenomenon, there's nothing to study. It would be almost embarrassing to write this up as if it was a physics experiment, with Methods, Results, and Conclusions, and publish it in a journal. No one would be impressed by that. Instead, you would simply write a brief article about it and publish it in newspapers, magazines, or skeptical journals.

In spite of all these impediments, occasionally a group of scientists (like the Skeptics Society) see some value in testing paranormal/magical claims and occasionally they find coherent people who are willing to subject themselves to a test. Some of the earliest work was done hundreds of years ago, by people like Benjamin Franklin and later Harry Houdini. Here is a log of the claims, protocols, and results of many people over the years who applied to be tested for James Randi's $1 Million Paranormal Challenge, which you may find interesting: http://forums.randi.org/forumdisplay.php?f=43

I think those two links are relevant to our topic ,but unfortunataly anthropological studies...forgive my ignorance ,but in what way are anthropologists supposed to observe the evidence ? i mean ,do they perform scietific studies to verify what people believe or how they behave? isn't the belief and the behaviour itself the topic of study but not verifying it ?

Yes, that's true. That's a fair point. But consider this: Anthropologists observe some amazing rituals and feats of human behavior. For example, they have observed how the Maasai people subsist (or used to subsist) largely on the blood and milk of their animals. They can leap incredibly high in the air (its part of a dance) and they insert enormous disks in their ear lobes as decoration. These are remarkable facts, but they don't necessarily require a physics experiment for verification. Establishing their existence only requires observation, perhaps a photograph or two brought back by scientists in the field. More research would only be necessary to figure out how this behaviors work, etc. but not to establish its existence.

Now, suppose this was a myth. Suppose the Maasai didn't really exist. Instead, anthropologists go to a bunch of African tribes who all fervently believe in the Maasai. They say they see the Maasai all the time. But it's usually at night. Or in dreams. Each tribe has a different version of the Maasai. Sometimes the Maasai are invisible. Sometimes, when the villagers find one of their animals has disappeared, they say the Maasai stole it for its blood and milk, and interpret the missing animal as clear proof. Anthropologists, however, never see any Maasai.

This is what's happening with witches. If witchcraft was real, it's surprising so many African villagers would believe in their own peculiar cultural/religious versions of it, see proof of it everywhere, stories of it circulate everywhere, and yet a scientist or skeptic never observes anything to elevate the phenomenon above the status of a myth. It it was real, anthropologists could document it just as they document the real Maasai people.

You talked about a (huge body of research ) that disproved magic (or witchcraft) ,and i was expecting scientific papers ,not anthropological studies...am i missing something ?

I believe I quoted the U.S. National Academy of Sciences chapter about parapsychology. This includes many citations to scientific papers. Parapsychology includes abilities like telekinesis, mind reading, etc. are "magic" to me, and would be considered witchcraft by some, I presume. Tell me specifically, what did you have in mind?

Here is one meta-study of the efficacy of intercessory prayer: The Efficacy of “Distant Healing” — Ann Intern Med
You may not have access, so here's the citation: John A. Astin, et al., The efficacy of "distant healing", Annals of Internal Medicine, 132 (2000).
Here's another one on intercessory prayer: ScienceDirect - Journal of Chronic Diseases : The objective efficacy of prayer : : A double-blind clinical trial
The citation is: C.R.B. Joyce and R.M.C. Welldon B.Litt., The objective efficacy of prayer: A double-blind clinical trial. Journal of Chronic Diseases, 18:4 (1965).

Scientific papers on other kinds of magic can be found, just tell me what you want.

 

[Mr Spinkles]

I understand that it's hard for you to believe in god or revealation...but why it's so hard to believe that there are people who do believe in god and revealation...are you really expecting all people to view life as you and have exactly the same philosophy ?
....

Whoah whoah whoah. Settle down. You misunderstood. I said your revelation is not hard to accept, it's hard to believe. That doesn't mean I can't believe that you and others believe it. It just means it's hard for me to believe in your revelation without evidence. I thought we were talking about the merits of ideas in an intellectual context. In that case I don't believe your revelation without evidence, just as you don't believe the Mormon or Christian revelations. That doesn't mean you can't believe Mormons or Christians exist. OTOH, if we are talking about tolerating diversity and people with different views, of COURSE I accept and believe there exist different points of view, and I tolerate them. I very much appreciate everything you said about me being entitled to my opinion, how you would fight for people like me to be tolerated in your society, etc. I feel EXACTLY the same about you.

i think you misunderstood me....my point was not that i don't care for your opinions ,personally......my point was that no muslim cares of a kaffir's opinions regarding his religion

Okay, not just you, all Muslims. Got it. You believe none of them care about my opinions on your religion. You've made your opinion abundantly clear. I was having a discussion about the OP with other members of the forum before you jumped in and kept repeating this, and I will continue when you are finished repeating it. Thanks.

if you want to continue discussing...fine...but i don't think you will find a listener among muslims because we don't like to be told what to believe in and how to behave and what laws to apply in our own countries....we don't like the western angels who talk with superiority and arrogance

I wouldn't like that, either. If I have ONCE commanded you what to believe in or how to behave or what laws to apply in your countries, from a position of superiority and arrogance, instead of expressing my opinion about these things from a position of candor and genuine interest in the issues, it was not my intent. Please show me where I did this, so I can try not to repeat this mistake.

 

[Mr Spinkles]

By the way, something like the American, British, and Indian skeptical societies might be useful in the Middle East, including from a Muslim perspective. If you don't want people to believe in psychics, just ask psychics to agree to simple tests and educate people about the tricks of the mind and the psychology that makes astrology, fortune-telling, palm-reading, etc. appear to work.

 

[kai]

Mr Spinkles i am afraid to tell you that no matter what papers or links you put up as a source for your point of view, Maro is correct no Muslim will be interested in anything that even attempts to however inadvertently even suggest that the Quran is wrong.

suggesting that jinn and sorcery may not exist is tantamount to blasphemy is it not? I fear for your head and its continuous banging against that brick wall.

 

[Caladan]

By the way, something like the American, British, and Indian skeptical societies might be useful in the Middle East, including from a Muslim perspective. If you don't want people to believe in psychics, just ask psychics to agree to simple tests and educate people about the tricks of the mind and the psychology that makes astrology, fortune-telling, palm-reading, etc. appear to work.

I wonder, will this skeptical society also question the existence of Jinn, witches, or that prophets ride flying steeds? will it protect people from the righteousness of the major religion?

 

[kai]

By the way, something like the American, British, and Indian skeptical societies might be useful in the Middle East, including from a Muslim perspective. If you don't want people to believe in psychics, just ask psychics to agree to simple tests and educate people about the tricks of the mind and the psychology that makes astrology, fortune-telling, palm-reading, etc. appear to work.

How could you have a skeptical society from a muslim perspective?

 

[JMorris]

How could you have a skeptical society from a muslim perspective?

lol! right

 

[Gharib]

OK i understand that part,so if a Man communicates with supposed Jinns and his intent was to do Haram things then at worst he could only be tried for intent as their would be no evidence of the communication,like one half of a telephone conversation.

asking it to do something is the haram part, to ask a jinn to do something for you (something haram) first you have to commit shirk, as that link explains. and since he commits shirk and on top of that he brakes the islamic law of "do not ask the jinn to do things for you" (or how ever the law is and what it states) he gets punished.

but all cases that involve asking a jinn to do things for you are probably not punishable with death, it is dependent on what evidence there is.

 

[England my lionheart]

asking it to do something is the haram part, to ask a jinn to do something for you (something haram) first you have to commit shirk, as that link explains. and since he commits shirk and on top of that he brakes the islamic law of "do not ask the jinn to do things for you" (or how ever the law is and what it states) he gets punished.

but all cases that involve asking a jinn to do things for you are probably not punishable with death, it is dependent on what evidence there is.

Its a plain silly superstitious Law IMO,but it a reminder to us all what happens when a religion holds the reins of power there will always be injustice.

 

[Gharib]

Its a plain silly superstitious Law IMO,but it a reminder to us all what happens when a religion holds the reins of power there will always be injustice.

are you telling me that your fat domocratic and royal highnesses never did any injustice.

tell me if the following word rings a bell like most other words in it's category:
Australia. does it ring a bell?

 

[Gharib]

have you heard the phrase "fight fire with fire"?

i didn't know the islamic ruling on only communicating with the jinn earlier but now i found out

Islam Question and Answer - Is it possible to talk to the jinn and use them?

the link says: "It is possible to talk to the jinn, but finding about unseen matters and what is in people’s hearts is haraam."
............
"It is OK to speak with the jinn if this happens without you seeking it, and in fact it is mustahabb to call them to the religion of Allaah and to adhere to His sharee’ah, just as you call people."

having said that, i do not know if using one jinn to get information from another jinn of someone else about the person they are watching over is permissible or not.

but the point is, if permissible, scholars or people who have contact with the jinn are able to find out if a particular person can communicate with jinn and tell them to do things that are not permissible in islam. does that sort of make sense?

you don't accept the existence of jinn anyway but i'm just giving explanations to you about how it could work if it does work that way.

read this link too if you want to:
Ruling on seeking the help of the jinn

anyone going to respond to this? any feedback?

 

[England my lionheart]

are you telling me that your fat domocratic and royal highnesses never did any injustice.

tell me if the following word rings a bell like most other words in it's category:
Australia. does it ring a bell?

Whats your point Esalam,the Queen does'nt have any power,the Queen is an Ambassador,if you are saying the injustice to Aboriginies i'm right with you but it has little to do with the Queen.

The real issue here is an unfortunate victim of superstitious nonsense is going to part company with his Head

 

[challupa]

Whats your point Esalam,the Queen does'nt have any power,the Queen is an Ambassador,if you are saying the injustice to Aboriginies i'm right with you but it has little to do with the Queen.

The real issue here is an unfortunate victim of superstitious nonsense is going to part company with his Head

He may have been referring to something that happened further back in history. Like England shipping all their convicts to Australia and sometimes these people were not even guilty? Don't know for sure but he can correct me if I'm wrong...

 

[TashaN]

Of course, other people's criticism is meaningless when directed at an absolute truth.

You see, that's what i'm talking about. You are still using this lame tactic of "the whole world got my back in every single word i say". I was being clear that i'm not talking about *others* but about your opinion in specific, and i already explained why.

 

[England my lionheart]

He may have been referring to something that happened further back in history. Like England shipping all their convicts to Australia and sometimes these people were not even guilty? Don't know for sure but he can correct me if I'm wrong...

Yes maybe,i will certainly admit the injustice handed out by my Country in its history but how pertinent that is to the present i have no idea.

 

[angellous_evangellous]

Is there any more news on this?

 

[Caladan]

You see, that's what i'm talking about. You are still using this lame tactic of "the whole world got my back in every single word i say".

:no: I do not need reaffirmation on my take. plenty of my posts on the boards make it obvious that I view any form of religious policing as antagonistic. I don't appreciate religious elements in my nation that try influence our domestic affairs, and I have no reservation in commenting on international current affairs that we are discussing here. my opinions are not surprising, and do not need an appeal to a majority.

I was being clear that i'm not talking about *others* but about your opinion in specific, and i already explained why.

And you dismissed my opnions because you claim I have no grasp of the situation for being an atheist. which to me, is nothing more than shrugging off an opnion based on religious discrimination.
Yes the fact that I'm an atheist give a certain flavor to my opinion, it does not make it any less valid, as if I need a unique revelation to have a valid one.

 

[TashaN]

:no: I do not need reaffirmation on my take. plenty of my posts on the boards make it obvious that I view any form of religious policing as antagonistic. I don't appreciate religious elements in my nation that try influence our domestic affairs, and I have no reservation in commenting on international current affairs that we are discussing here. my opinions are not surprising, and do not need an appeal to a majority.

And you dismissed my opnions because you claim I have no grasp of the situation for being an atheist. which to me, is nothing more than shrugging off an opnion based on religious discrimination.
Yes the fact that I'm an atheist give a certain flavor to my opinion, it does not make it any less valid, as if I need a unique revelation to have a valid one.

I was speaking about your background, being an atheist, that will prevent you from seeing how religion can work well in the state affairs. You will just reject the whole idea of laws coming from God which should be applied in our lives. Can you see my point now?