The thing I respect about Islam

[muhammad_isa]

Indeed. I judge by how behavior actually impacts the world and the sentient beings that inhabit it..

..and the Creator of the universe and all that it contains is not aware of how mankind should behave?
Maybe you just can't see it, and think that you know better, although you can't even create a fly.

My intention is to treat people with kindness and help them if they are in need. And I do that because it's nice to be nice..

That is a very good start..

..And the more space I share with you, the more I'll care..

Well, believers are taught to wish for their brethren, what they wish for themselves.
Neither right-wing or left-wing, but a middle way.
..extremes veer towards evil.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

..and the Creator of the universe and all that it contains is not aware of how mankind should behave?
Maybe you just can't see it, and think that you know better, although you can't even create a fly.

It's not hard. That which is detrimental to well-being is bad. That which is beneficial to well-being is good. That which has no effect either way is neutral.

Anyone, god or otherwise, that disconnects well-being from morality and which instead advocates blind obedience to a perceived authority (regardless of who that authority is), is advocating the type or moral compass that a psychopath has. Someone who isn't able of moral reasoning, who lacks the necessary social skills to do so.

A moral entity would never demand blind obedience as a way to behave morally.
That isn't morality. That's mere obedience.

When I tell my child not to beat kids and not to bully them.... Then I don't consider my child a moral kid if he then refrains from doing so only because he fears my punishment. In fact, such behavior would worry me greatly.

I want him to understand why beating kids up and being a bully is not a good thing. And I want him to then refrain from such behavior simply because he understands that and doesn't want to be a *********.

For that reason, I try to go out of my way to teach my kids LESSONS instead of just handing out rules and "commandments".

My son will turn 7 in a couple weeks. And already I see the result of this parenting technique. When I compare his behavior to other kids whose parents DO merely hand out rules and commandments... I notice that they can happily turn into little monsters whenever the perceived authority is out of sight.

Not my boy.
Off course, it's just an anecdote and I'ld need a bigger sample then "one" to make that case properly.
But it is nevertheless my experience.

Children that actually get lessons instead of rules / commandments, in my experience, will maintain "good behavior" when unsupervised also.

The other kids quickly revered into the idea of "I can get away with it now....".
While in the case of my boy, there's nothing to "get away" with. Because it is NOT about getting away with it or not. It is instead about how you actually treat people.

The "divine command theory" of morality, is the moral compass of psychopaths. It's moral bankruptcy.

That is a very good start..

Imo, it's the only start and not only "the start"". It's the start, the middle and the finish.
There's nothing more to it then that.

Well, believers are taught to wish for their brethren, what they wish for themselves.
Neither right-wing or left-wing, but a middle way.
..extremes veer towards evil.

You can make wishes all you want off course.
As long as they remain wishes and not actual practices where you'll try and impose upon me that which you wish for yourself. Perhaps I don't like what you wish for me and yourself.

 

[muhammad_isa]

It's not hard. That which is detrimental to well-being is bad. That which is beneficial to well-being is good. That which has no effect either way is neutral..

..very simplistic .. you make your own judgement, without any Divine guidance.
This means that you think you know better than God, imo.

Anyone, god or otherwise, that disconnects well-being from morality...

Whose morality .. yours, Putin's, Trumps ?

..and which instead advocates blind obedience to a perceived authority (regardless of who that authority is)

..dislike/disrespect of authority syndrome..
Would you be happy if your "7 year old" behaved in that manner towards you?

Imo, it's the only start and not only "the start"". It's the start, the middle and the finish.
There's nothing more to it then that..

That's it?
You have a PhD in the humanities and claim that's all you need to know?

Perhaps I don't like what you wish for me and yourself.

Perhaps a psychopath wouldn't like what I have to offer either .. too bad.

 

[syo]

Every Muslim I know

Every Muslim I know has severe inferiority complex. I dislike them.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

..very simplistic .. you make your own judgement, without any Divine guidance.
This means that you think you know better than God, imo.

You have yet to demonstrate that this "divine" guidance even exists and that anybody is able to tap into it. From where I sit, all you have is your opinion and undemonstrable beliefs.

You make your own judgement also. You're just basing it other things.
I base it on the effect it has on well-being.
You base it on the undemonstrable dogma's of a religion.

Like said, your moral compass is one of mere obedience to a perceived authority.
My moral compass is one that is based on well-being.

Whose morality .. yours, Putin's, Trumps ?

This is what I usually encounter in discussions about this exact topic. You don't even seem able to step out of your comfort zone and NOT think about morality as something that is asserted by a perceived authority.
Otherwise you wouldn't ask "whose morality". That is a question that is asking about what perceived authority dictates what is and isn't moral.

I'm in fact stating the opposite. There is no moral authority. Morality is not about being obedient to a moral authority. Morality is about what impact behavior has on the well-being of sentient creatures.

Morality is not dictated.
Morality instead is concluded after a reasoning process.
The question "whose morality" is an invalid question to ask me. Because in my view of morality, the very notion of "ownership" of morals is an oxymoron.

Morality is not a matter of opinion in my view.
It's a matter of facts and detectable effect and impact of behavior.

Rape factually causes suffering. Both physical and psychological. That is why it is bad.
Engaging in charity, say handing out free food to the hungry, factually increases the well-being of the hungry. That is why it is good.

These things aren't good or bad because someone, anyone, "commands" them or "forbids" them.
They are good and bad for the reasons mentioned. Determined by the type of impact those actions have on the well-being of sentient creatures. They are such because of the facts involved. Regardless of what someone, anyone, says.

..dislike/disrespect of authority syndrome..

Has nothing to do with it.
We are talking about morality and what it is.

Would you be happy if your "7 year old" behaved in that manner towards you?

I actively encourage my 7-year old to behave in this manner.
Again, as I said, I don't just bombard my kid with a bunch of commandments that imo "define" what "good behavior" looks like and then just demand obedience. I consider that to be very bad parenting.

Instead, I teach him the tools one requires to engage in proper moral reasoning.
Or to say it in simpler terms:

Instead of telling him what is good and what is bad...
I teach him how he himself can tell good from bad

That's it?
You have a PhD in the humanities and claim that's all you need to know?

Not sure what you think you are referring to. I'm not getting whatever joke you are trying to make/

Perhaps a psychopath wouldn't like what I have to offer either .. too bad.

No a psychopath pretty much requires a "divine command theory" as they are literally unable of proper moral reasoning. It's in fact exactly that which makes them psychopaths.


Don't you know about the classic test to see if children have psychopathic tendencies?

It goes like this:

In the classroom, it is forbidden to drink during the lessons. However on a particularly hot day, the teacher allows it exceptionally. The kids are asked if, under such circumstances, it would be ok to drink in class.
All kids will answer yes. It's hot, so there's good reason. And the teacher allows it. It's ok.

Next comes question two. It is forbidden for kids to fight in class. However on a particular day, the same day that there is a legendary boxing match with some Mike Tyson - like legend, the teachers says that in spirit of that legendary fight, it is allowed to punch your neighbor in class in the face.
The kids are asked if, under such circumstances, it would be ok.

Guess which kids will answer "yes"?
The reason they do, is because they get their morality from perceived authorities.
And the teacher (the perceived authority) says it's okay, therefor it's ok.

The other kids, who already developed a fairly reasonable moral compass, will instantly recognize that it's not okay to do so. And the vast majority of kids will also find it very unsettling that a teacher would allow it.

 

[muhammad_isa]

Morality instead is concluded after a reasoning process..

This implies that believers are unable to reason .. they just blindly follow. That is a sweeping generalisation.

I actively encourage my 7-year old to behave in this manner..

What .. to disrespect authority and their parents?

 

[Father Heathen]

No it's not.
What you or I think is "good" are not the same thing..
..you do not judge by what Almighty God has revealed.
The intention by somebody hoping for reward is to "please God" .. what's yours?
Do you care what Almighty God teaches is good and what is not? No.

My morality is based on reason, empathy/compassion, and consequence. Being good should be about valuing others and ourselves, not going through some arbitrary and insincere motions just to sate god's ego.

Secular morality - Wikipedia

 

[Shaul]

It sounds like you have an opportunity to overcome your preconceptions by seeking out and getting to personally know some Jews. Shalom aleichem, Alaikum salaam. The languages rhyme, cousin, we should get acquainted.

 

[RestlessSoul]

My morality is based on reason, empathy/compassion, and consequence. Being good should be about valuing others and ourselves, not going through some arbitrary and insincere motions just to sate god's ego.

Secular morality - Wikipedia

It's how you act that impacts on others, not the reasoning behind it. If somebody is hungry and you feed him, what does it matter why you chose to do so?

 

[muhammad_isa]

It's how you act that impacts on others, not the reasoning behind it. If somebody is hungry and you feed him, what does it matter why you chose to do so?

It does matter.
We might have an intention to show others how "good we are", for some worldly reason .. we might not even be consciously aware of it.
That is the reason the intention behind why we do things is important.
Everything we think and do affects us spiritually.

It is very easy to claim that we do "good deeds" because we are "good"
Almighty God knows what is deep in our hearts.

If indeed, an atheist [ or believer ] does good with a pure intention, then their soul will be nourished by it.
..claiming "we have no soul", is likely to negate that, unfortunately.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

This implies that believers are unable to reason .. they just blindly follow. That is a sweeping generalisation.

No. That is instead what YOU said. That you FOLLOW the morality laid down by your god.
Your ability to reason, or lack thereof, isn't even part of the equation. Nore did I imply you were unable of it.

As a matter of fact... I'ld submit that for a lot of things you actually DO reason your way through a moral conundrum, in the way that I actually said one does it: by considering the impact on well-being.
The problem only occurs once one sacrifices that part in favor of "religious commandments".

Because what will you do for example, if the moral argument (based on the actual facts and an analysis of the impact on well-being) tells you it is not detrimental to well-being at all, and even beneficial to well-being, while your religion tells you it is evil?

I bet you will then just state that it is evil. Even though you can't give a proper reason for that assertion. All you can do is point to your book and say "...'cause my religion says so".

In my world, morality and moral judgements require underpinning in sound reasoning. If you wish to say of something that is moral or immoral, you should have a proper reason for that judgement.

WHY is it immoral? "because X says so", is not a proper reason.
I'ld just follow that answer up with "why does X say so?".
And then I'ld once more be asking about the actual reason for the judgement. The underlying reasoning / argument.

What facts lead to that conclusion?

What .. to disrespect authority and their parents?

Do you consider it "disrespecting authority" when one refuses to comply when the authority asks one to do something immoral?

If my son refuses to obey when I ask him to do something immoral, then I did a great job as a dad.
If my son tries to act morally just for the sake of it instead of him merely hoping for a reward for good behavior, then I did a great job as a dad.
If my son is capable of moral reasoning and has a solid moral compass, then I did a great job as a father.

I raise a human being, a moral agent, an individual. Not a mindless drone who just does as he's told.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

It's how you act that impacts on others, not the reasoning behind it. If somebody is hungry and you feed him, what does it matter why you chose to do so?

Because morality is also about the intent behind the act.

If you look at just the act, then you only get part of the story.
The morality lies in the motivation and intention also. Perhaps even more so then anything else.


Suppose someone helps a needy person. Judging just by the act, this is a good thing.
However, the motivation / intention turns out to be that the donator did what he did only to have fuel for blackmailing the person he helped. Is the act of "helping" still good? Even if the plan doesn't work and he doesn't get to blackmail the victim?

Or some wealthy person sets up a charity organization to help the hungry and millions are indeed used for food distribution. But as it turns out, from the very beginning the only reason the organization exists is to launder many more millions earned through heroine traffic. The only reason millions were actually used for food, is just so that it would be easier to cover up the true purpose of the charity.


Seemingly good acts can easily be tainted by corrupted motivation.
Intention does matter imo.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

If indeed, an atheist [ or believer ] does good with a pure intention, then their soul will be nourished by it.
..claiming "we have no soul", is likely to negate that, unfortunately.

See, that makes no sense at all.

If one does good with good intention, then it's good. Period.

Whether we believe that a ghost resides in our body or not is very irrelevant to that.

 

[GURSIKH]

If people are good just because they expect a reward, are they truly good?

Hi, Sikhs don't believe in God who reward some with wine, girls and others with fire after death. According to Sikh theology we all are part of God but unaware of it due to five vices. Sikhi is about this self-realization.

 

[muhammad_isa]

I bet you will then just state that it is evil. Even though you can't give a proper reason for that assertion. All you can do is point to your book and say "...'cause my religion says so"..

That is your claim.
It doesn't matter what evidence I put forward, you won't be satisfied.

Do you consider it "disrespecting authority" when one refuses to comply when the authority asks one to do something immoral?

If my son refuses to obey when I ask him to do something immoral, then I did a great job as a dad.

It is you who suggest what is immoral and what is not..
You think you know better than Almighty God [Bible/Quran]
People can show respect [to others] or disrespect .. you know that.

 

[muhammad_isa]

Whether we believe that a ghost resides in our body or not is very irrelevant to that.

Call it a "ghost" if you like .. the soul is an immaterial concept, as is good and evil. You cannot touch it.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

That is your claim.
It doesn't matter what evidence I put forward, you won't be satisfied.

No, that's what you implied when you appealed to the authority of allah as the "lawgiver of morality".
From that, it follows that if an argument based on the actual facts shows that a certain act is detrimental to well-being (and thus immoral) contradicts the "morality as received from allah", then you'll assume the argument to be wrong and go with what you believe allah has commanded.


If that is not the case, then your appeal to Allah's perceived moral authority is meaningless. Since then it can be overruled by an argument. That doesn't sound right in light of what you stated.

If I misunderstood your point about appealing to Allah as a moral authority, then please explain.
As it stands, the above seems to me to be a very accurate implication of this appeal.

It is you who suggest what is immoral and what is not..

No. It's the facts.
As such, I can be wrong in my moral judgement. So I could be asking him to do something immoral while not realizing it. I could also be a douche and asking him to do something immoral while knowing it is immoral.

In either case, I would hope that my son would disobey. Again, I feel like I would have failed as father if he didn't.

You think you know better than Almighty God [Bible/Quran]

I don't believe in an "almighty god" and I consider both the bible and the quran the work of men which reflects the moral understanding of the times they were written in.

And when reading it and seeing the primitive and downright barbaric things in there that are just mentioned as a footnote, as if they are the most normal thing in the world (which they were at the time), it only confirms this stance.

If either are REALLY reflective of the beliefs and values of an actual god, then that god is an immoral pyschopath.

People can show respect [to others] or disrespect .. you know that.

Sure.

But disobeying my orders when those orders are immoral is not a showing of disrespect.
It is instead a showing of courage and integrity.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

Call it a "ghost" if you like .. the soul is an immaterial concept, as is good and evil. You cannot touch it.

Good and evil are collective labels we slap on behavior.
As nouns, they only exist as metaphors. Then they refer to the collective of good and bad behaviors.

Neither exists in the real world independent of human behavior.
And "concepts" aren't real either. They are concepts.

 

[muhammad_isa]

And "concepts" aren't real either. They are concepts.

If they weren't real, they could not be realised.

 

[loverofhumanity]

Why is the penalty for apostasy (?) death ?

There is no punishment for apostasy in the Quran. This punishment, like many others, were devised by the clergy. Many Shariah laws originate not from the Quran but the religious leaders.

The Quran teaches freedom of religion and belief.

And say: The truth is from your Lord, so let him who please believe, and let him who please disbelieve.}*(Al-Kahf 18:29)

Read More on islamonline :
Should an Apostate be Killed? - IslamOnline