The Islamic State

[Michael]

The problem is that no one thinks he is part of the 90%.

Whether or not you're in the 90% is perfectly testable. If you haven't tested whether you are or not by saying no to the establishment or an authority, and then suffered significant consequences because of it, you have not made it into the initial screening of not being in the 90%.

Of the 10% who are not in the herd, I have heard that 3% are psychopaths, 3% are morally principled, and the rest sociopaths. The "herd" are those who sit on the fence, trying to avoid trouble, and can be easily pulled in one direction or the other based mostly on emotional responses and purely self-preservation instincts that are limited by a relatively short depth of focus into the future.

[allen2saint]

I love how everyone has gained some type of global insight to become ontological statisticians on this board. "Wel...90% of religious people are this....2.5% are this with a twist..."

Anyone arrive at these mystical univeral gatherings of data on all religious people via any formal research? Anyone here done any actual reading on the sociology of religion?

Just come out and say the truth which is, "I have a predisposition against organized religion and religious people" rather than waving all these completely unsupported statistics around.

Or, better yet, say, "Religious people on this board, you are welcomed to join in this discussion only as long as you accept without argument, that you are labeled as second class citizens in this discussion and you will be repeatedly treated as such."

Anything less is smoke and mirrors, because your biases are plain as day.

[Doc Stier]

Right on, Allen! It's been like this here for a very long time. Religion bashing in general, and Christianity bashing in particular, has become increasingly more negative and hostile.

[Steve James]

If you haven't tested whether you are or not by saying no to the establishment or an authority, and then suffered significant consequences because of it, you have not made it into the initial screening of not being in the 90%.

So, just saying no to the establishment makes one part of the 10% Of course, parents are everyone's first authority figures, and everyone says no to them. In fact, the more childish one is, the more one says "no" just to say "no." I just came back from visiting my grandkids, and "no" was their favorite word. The teenager is different. He just think he knows better than anyone over 25. Oh well, when I was a teen --and then teens were much more politically active than today-- the saying was "Don't trust anyone over 30." What I, and I guess many others, found was that our parents were often right; and what we lacked was judgment.

Anyway, afa the % stuff, imo it's silly to think that people (i.e., individuals) are so one-dimensional that their opinions can be cataloged to the point where if they believe one thing (such as that the gov't did or didn't do this or that) anyone can then tell what their opinion is on an entire catalog of issues. This applies as much to religion as to politics. 9/11 is not the same as Monsanto or big Pharm. Being a member of a particular sect of a religion doesn't mean that one agrees with everything that members of that sect do.

Afa the criticisms of "religion," personally, I think the criticisms are directed toward Christians and almost never toward Christianity or the words of Jesus. Most recently, I think ededed and others have criticized "organized religion" but the criticism wasn't aimed at any particular religion. (Btw, I disagree primarily because I think religion is just the fact that people will agree with a certain set of beliefs and how to practice them. So, if one wants to criticize, it would be better to pick something specific and illustrate how that practice is negative, like taking communion or baptism or worshiping on Sunday). Otoh, there have been numerous criticisms of Islam as a religion, per se. In the thread about the Zen Buddhist priest, the criticism is about what he did. But, having a harem of sexual partners or financial embezzlement and enrichment are not foreign to Any church. In fact, I don't even think it's foreign to any external or internal cma.

[allen2saint]

But, having a harem of sexual partners or financial embezzlement and enrichment are not foreign to Any church. In fact, I don't even think it's foreign to any external or internal cma.

In fact, I'd dare say, it isn't foreign to, let's face it fellas, men with status. That status can come from politics, religion, money, the way we brush our hair, whatever. It's what some men do when they have power and it certainly does not stem from or root itself solely in religion. And, Steve, if you will read that thread again, there were many condemnations of all Japanese Buddhists and all Japanese Buddhism, but thanks for your reasonable response. Here's my issue:

To engage in any of these discussions, the implicit social law of this these threads is, as we've repeatedly seen,a religion, person or group, or the entirety of religion itself, can be criticized and I would add, irresponsibly so, with impugnity. Period. This thread was created for some to speculate about the "Islamic State" and yet,Islam itself has been attacked with little to no understanding of the faith. Muslims who have patiently responded to this thread, trying to explain their religion are rebuffed, and the discourse has now devolved into some pseudo intellectual speculation about how all religions are malware, all religious people are this or that. It's a "my way of the highway" attitude and the way is biased against people who follow a traditional religion in many of these threads.

I don't think religion or religous people should be privileged on this board or anywhere else, but there should be equal respect and no group should be demeaned this way, at least among a group of people who supposedly share things in common that are usually associated with respect and honor, no matter how silly that may seem to some.

[Doc Stier]

+1. Well said!

[Michael]

My comments about the percentages were about human nature and not about religion, but meant to illustrate that group behavior within any organization or institution will follow certain trends, such as Allen's comment about men with status.

[Michael]

If you haven't tested whether you are or not by saying no to the establishment or an authority, and then suffered significant consequences because of it, you have not made it into the initial screening of not being in the 90%.

So, just saying no to the establishment makes one part of the 10% Of course, parents are everyone's first authority figures, and everyone says no to them.

Depending on the family and the culture, disobeying your parents can have very significant consequences. In China it's still common for children to be disowned if they marry someone who is not approved, not to mention India or places with the practice of killing daughters who disobey.

[muttaqi]

In regards to this whole 90% thing - I just don't think it holds water in regards to the last principle being "Killing all who claim the superiority of other ruminants"

I'm reminded of something Anthony Bourdain said on one of his TV shows - and I'll have to paraphrase very loosely as it's been awhile, but the basic gist of it was this - that although he's by nature of cynical guy - that all his years of traveling, meeting people of different cultures and religions (eating with them in their homes etc), actually led him to have a pretty upbeat view of humanity - seeing that most people are generally good natured and have a shared love of family, friends, food etc.

I've experienced the same exact reality in my years of travel.

It's actually the 90 percent that take whatever belief system they have and utilize it to live as functional lives as possible, and being generally speaking, decent human beings. Groups like ISIS don't even represent 1%. No more than extremist Buddhist groups in Burma represent Buddhism or most Buddhist when they ethnically cleanse Muslims.

Most people are not psychopaths. And no religion could ever survive based off of psychotic behavior. Certainly, there's been a fair share tyrants and crazies within all the religions over the centuries - but the overriding thing that draws humanity to religion, is hope and love. When those tendencies are lost, it is ultimately the downfall of religion not its high point.

On a related note - despite a tendency of some to write this whole ISIS thing off as one more example of crazy Muslims killing each other over a centuries old sectarian battle, that is simply not true. Sure, there have been battles between Sunni and Shi'a (as there have been between Sunni and Sunni for that matter) but in general, when the two groups live side by side, they have not only accommodated each other but had regular relationships on every level including marriage.

From a traditional Muslim point of view - ISIS are not merely some minority "controversial' group. Rather, they are outside the religion altogether and represent a satanic force who have made the blood of the innocent halal In their twisted theology.

Unfortunately, politics being what they are - you have different disaffected groups within Syria and Iraq willing to play with the devil in a temporary alliance that will come back to burn them, much in the same way the West's alliance with The House of Saud and The Wahabi's came back to bite them.

[leifeng]

but the overriding thing that draws humanity to religion, is hope and love.

Or fear?


16:49

And to Allah prostrates whatever is in the heavens and whatever is on the earth of creatures, and the angels [as well], and they are not arrogant.
16:50


They fear their Lord above them, and they do what they are commanded.
16:51

And Allah has said, "Do not take for yourselves two deities. He is but one God, so fear only Me."

[Michael]

but the overriding thing that draws humanity to religion, is hope and love.

Or fear?

I think muttaqi's right, it's hope and love, and when things are relatively stable, the 90% will gravitate to and venerate the principles within the religion that express hope and love the most. IMO, they do so in spite of problems or corruption within the religious institution that are, for the most part, expressions of the general flaws within human nature.

That's why groups like ISIS are created, to destabilize society and spread fear and terror in order to prevent the majority of people from learning they have nothing to fear from each other and that bonds of love and hope between them allow their quality of life to constantly improve.

[grzegorz]

Thank you, leifeng, for explaining the pattern. I just thought they were a bunch of criminals with guns who like to cut people's heads off and steal their shit. Glad to know they're more legit than I'd at first perceived.

Michael, you're so naive! LOL

we just need to export democracy to the middle east...again.

[grzegorz]

Thank you, leifeng, for explaining the pattern. I just thought they were a bunch of criminals with guns who like to cut people's heads off and steal their shit. Glad to know they're more legit than I'd at first perceived.

Michael, you're so naive! LOL

we just need to export democracy to the middle east...again.

since it works so well whenever the Americans arrive.

[leifeng]

"Religion is based primarily and mainly upon fear. It is partly the terror of the unknown and partly the wish to feel that you have a kind of elder brother who will stand by you in all your troubles and disputes. Fear is the basis of the whole thing – fear of the mysterious, fear of defeat, fear of death. Fear is the parent of cruelty, and therefore it is no wonder if cruelty and religion have gone hand in hand. It is because fear is at the basis of those two things."

“Fear is the main source of superstition, and one of the main sources of cruelty. To conquer fear is the beginning of wisdom.”

Bertrand Russell

[leifeng]

but the overriding thing that draws humanity to religion, is hope and love.

Or fear?

I think muttaqi's right, it's hope and love, and when things are relatively stable, the 90% will gravitate to and venerate the principles within the religion that express hope and love the most. IMO, they do so in spite of problems or corruption within the religious institution that are, for the most part, expressions of the general flaws within human nature.

That's why groups like ISIS are created, to destabilize society and spread fear and terror in order to prevent the majority of people from learning they have nothing to fear from each other and that bonds of love and hope between them allow their quality of life to constantly improve.

Without fear you won't need any religions to create hope and love.