The chicken or the egg?
-
Peace "enquirer",
peace neo. For those people they have covered up/disregarded/forgotton their intrinsic morality and real function/purpose in life,(because of their free-will and deliberate ignorance.)..Which is to live as peacefully as possible.(islam.) This disregarding is equivelant to the term 'kufr'(covering up the natural truth.) in the quran. Doesnt the quran say we have a natural inclination(fitrah.) to do good?
peace all.JK- I ahvent read anywhere in he Quran that man has an iherited inclination towards good. This is what the sunnis teach. Infact its quite the opposite. Mankind is argumentative by nature, is arrogant and egotistical. Only by studying things carefully through unbiased observation can he become successful and this I believe is the method GOD wants us to use. GOD Bless!
I disagree. I think evolution has designed us to be sociatal creatures.
-
Peace "neo",
- Your criterea for discerning god's word is entirely subjective and arbitrary. The existence of god does not necessitate that it adheres to the humane doctrine of proof.
JK- As i said the scientific method is the only logical way. If GOD didnt want us to use the scientific method to find the Truth then i believe He didnt need to create all those complex atoms, no need for such a vast universe with similar heavenly bodies following similar laws allowing us to identify the substances by anaylising the em spectrum. On the contrary He could have just created us with empty bodies which had no heart, cells, brain or other organs. No i believe these things are there to ponder upon. Similar goes for the scriptures. GOD could have sent a scripture for our guidance and we need the scientific method to identify it. Also if we dont use the scientific method then everyone would just have equal probability of being right, be he christian jew hindu sunni shia etc.
- I agree with you that morality changes over the ages.
JK- Ok.
Is morality then absolute?
JK- No i believe its relative. But when a scripture from GOD comes telling us certain laws of which some refer to moraility then those become the standard for the time the scripture has been validated, which in case of the Quran would be till the end of the universe since it claims to be a completion of the Message. Yet the Qurn does NOT contain all laws pertaing to marality BUT, AS I BELIEVE, ONLY THE MOST IMPORTANT WHICH WOULD STAND OUT SIGNIFICANTLY TILL THE END OF THIS UNIVERSE. We can very well define our additional moral laws as long as they dont contradict GOD's Message which i believe to be the Quran. GOD Bless!
-
Johny K
If god is to exist with the attributes listed in the Qur'an it would have to exist outside the scientifically observable universe, so how would you apply the scientific method to something that's beyond the sciences? Also, the scientific method is not the only logical path available to us. In fact, the scientific method is purely inductive whereas a perfect logical method is deductive.
If morality is relative then am I right in killing someone if I believe him to be evil?
-
Peace "neo",
I disagree. I think evolution has designed us to be sociatal creatures.
JK- First of all evolution or not, it has to be setup by an Intelligent Source prior to our creation. Evolution designing anything doesnt make sense. Things resuting out of evolution is how it should be phrased. I believe in an intelligent and calculated evolution which lead to the rise of the universe, its laws and all things, living or non-living, in it. Now back to the point. You believe we were designed to be sociatal creatures and i agree with that. But we disregarded and became arrogant. Even according to ape-men evos, with whom i disagree on this point, mankind used to be uncivilized and viiolent at a time on earth with which i agree(Quran mentions after Adam and his wife fell from heaven humanity became enemies of each other, disputing, quarelling etc). IT WAS ONLY THROUGH THE SCIENTIFIC METHOD THAT OUR BECOMING SOCIATAL WAS ACHIEVED, once again. GOD Bless!
-
Peace "neo",
I disagree. I think evolution has designed us to be sociatal creatures.
JK- First of all evolution or not, it has to be setup by an Intelligent Source prior to our creation. Evolution designing anything doesnt make sense. Things resuting out of evolution is how it should be phrased. I believe in an intelligent and calculated evolution which lead to the rise of the universe, its laws and all things, living or non-living, in it. Now back to the point. You believe we were designed to be sociatal creatures and i agree with that. But we disregarded and became arrogant. Even according to ape-men evos, with whom i disagree on this point, mankind used to be uncivilized and viiolent at a time on earth with which i agree(Quran mentions after Adam and his wife fell from heaven humanity became enemies of each other, disputing, quarelling etc). IT WAS ONLY THROUGH THE SCIENTIFIC METHOD THAT OUR BECOMING SOCIATAL WAS ACHIEVED, once again. GOD Bless!
The scientific method isn't really that old, maybe a few centuries? Civilisations existed for a long time prior to that (I think 10,000 BC is the favourite date at the moment.).
And of course I didn't mean evolution designed anything of will, I just didn't want to type all that out ^^. P
-
Peace "neo",
Johny K
If god is to exist with the attributes listed in the Qur'an it would have to exist outside the scientifically observable universe, so how would you apply the scientific method to something that's beyond the sciences?
JK- The important point is that the Quran Itself is testable within the scientific realm. Once t withdtood the test we have high probability in believing in whatever it states. This further justifies our belief in the attributes of GOD mentioned in It as well as particular things in it which are not yet understood or may appear to be absurd relative to us at a particular time period. An example of such a verse would be 2130 which would appear very absurd to people 1000 yrs ago but now has been proved. Infact that was one of the strongest proofs that led me to the conclusion that the Quran is the Word of GOD before the code-19 pattern.
Also, the scientific method is not the only logical path available to us. In fact, the scientific method is purely inductive whereas a perfect logical method is deductive.
JK- This is where mathematics comes in. That is perefectly logical except for the terminlogies which are arbitary and language based. But the essential numerical part and its operations are entirely logical. Hence Dr Rashad Khalifa came up with statistically signifcant mathematical proof of the Quran.
If morality is relative then am I right in killing someone if I believe him to be evil?
JK- According to some cultures this is very well the case. However the scientifc method has shown that this type of behavior leads to destruction of society and human welfare and hence id say its incorrect. Thats why i believe in having proper courts and judgement. In addition to the witnesses i even believe to use lie detectors to further narrow down the probability of false conviction. GOD Bless!
-
Peace "neo",
And wait how do you believe in evolution but not ape-man? /
JK- I believe in an intelligent evoltion where man probably first appeared in embryoic form forming from the molecules around in a particular area which met ideal conditions for that to happen, without having to go through inferior ape like creature stages over long periods of time. GOD Bless!
-
Peace "neo",
The scientific method isn't really that old, maybe a few centuries? Civilisations existed for a long time prior to that (I think 10,000 BC is the favourite date at the moment.).
JK- Science means studying things through observation. It doesnt mean one has to have micro & nano technology, cars and aeroplanes in general. And this scientific method was very well applied by thinkers of all time even in the past who separated themselves from the false dogmas which were mostly made by the elite to control the common folk.
And of course I didn't mean evolution designed anything of will, I just didn't want to type all that out ^^.
JK- The phrase "evolution designed..." by itself doesnt make any sense. It should be "as a result of evolution". So you dont believe that the things resulting out of evolution have any ppurpose. Ok i know that many hink like that. As an exmple people in the past didnt understood the function of many organs, declaring them as vestigial while later it was proven that they did have one. For example the pelvis on the whale was declared to be vestigial. Now it is known those are anchor points with little muscles attached to them which allow them to reproduce. This is just one eg. So i believe everything is created for a purpose and it serves its purpose for a particular time including us. GOD Bless!
-
Peace All,
I believe we are born with an empty potential, in perfect peace. I think right/wrong is taught, either from family, friends, or life experiences. A client's son kicked me today. I told him that wasn't nice. But what if I didn't tell him that? He would continue kicking people. And what if no one ever told him it was wrong? He would continue kicking people. Not until he was either told it was wrong, or saw with his own eyes and understanding that kicking people is wrong or harmful, would he stop.
Peace,
Tay -
Johny K
When I say "scientific method" I'm talking in the strictest most modern sense, the proper definition if you will. I don't mean 'sensible thinking' when I say 'scientific method'.
With that in mind, let's continue on
The Qur'an and Scientific Methods
The qur'an is not testable within the scientific realm because its premise cannot be tested - that of the existence of a deity. Therefore the scientific method is inapplicable to the Qur'an. As for 19 - numerical patterns exist in all sorts of works (including phone books!) so that by itself does not lend any credence to the works discussed. Rashid Khalida's 'statistically significant' proof was nothing more than numerology.
Using the scientific method to establish ethical laws is very dangerous. Evolution values the survival of a species over all else. Individualism has no place in evolution, however individualism is the basis of our ethics and morality. If we followd the evolutionary ways, we'd be killing people in the masses - to eliminate the so-called weaknesses in order to better our gene-pool. Obviously we don't do this because it's inhumane.
About Morality
Morality cannot be 'relative'. Morality is first and foremost based on rational thought and rational thought by definition is objective. Saying morality is subjective is like saying "truth is subjective", whereupon you will fall into the nihilist's contradiction. So how does one qualify the various cultures and their various moral standards? I don't know, but I do know this the basis of morality is a simple sentence "do unto others what you want others to do unto you". That I believe is the cogito-ergo-sum of morality and ethics. Starting with that principle it is possible to derive all other moral values.
Other Stuff
As for your ape-man theory what scientific grounds do you have for believing this?
If the scientific method implied studying things through observation then some monkies and apes use the scientific method too, and it's far more than 10,000 years old.
P.s. lie detectors are based on pseudo-scientific principles and cannot be used in a court of law as evidence.
-
I dont need any religion to Believe........
-
peace Neo
The scientific method to me is thinking objectively and using first hand experience to verify something. The scientific method isn't to follow scientific theories inhumanely.
I agree with you about morality. There is only one universal moral code and it's present in every religion and society. -
-
Hi Enquirer,
Do you have any children sister? I believe we remind children what is right and wrong,as well as helping them apply their morals to different situations. Children know/learn how to lie because they have their own will too,or they misinterpret certain situations or copy others. Children know right from wrong relative to their own individual capacity,our job is to help expand this capacity for different and new scenarios...
No, I dont, but that doesnt mean I havent been/lived with them to know enough to have said what I did. Children learn right from the wrong as they grow up, from their own life, from people around them, from their environment, from knowledge/education gained, from their own self awakening etc. Thats why they ought to be supervised and guided well during their foundation years as they are very vital to who they become.
Yes, humans have a natural tendency to be/do good. I am not refuting that. But unfortunately, it is not that simple either. The ''good'' is highly subjective, depending on each person. And also, we(humans), have weaknessess which we can easily fall prey to, if we are not sensible enough. So, unless a person is mindful of his 'self' and his activities, he can easily succumb to those weaknessess, temptations and so on.....that arise from needs or desires etc.
So to be mindful, some use self -awakening, some use inspirations, some use scriptures, some use life experiences and some most of the above etc. Does it matter what they use, as long as they derive the 'righteous morals' ?By your logic if a person as an adult claims he didnt know it was wrong to steal etc..then he is excused from punishment,right?
Oops! I never said that. Right and wrong or for that matter anything under the sky, ought to be understood first to actually 'know' it. And children are actually too young to understand some complex details and thats why they need to be 'taught' and also supervised/guided.
I never implied adults can be excused from punishment if they ''claim'' they didnt know it was wrong. There is no way that such knowledege/learning can escape them unless they are mentally retarded and incapable of understanding the basic stuff, in which case they r'nt punished.You seem to agree that the quran can be used for evil,which is what i am saying...
Our hands can be used for honest labour as well as to steal. But what do u think they were intended for? And also, would u blame the hand?
Without natural morality the quran is useless,as evidenced by those that murder innocents in its name..
I do not know where u got the idea that Quran substitutes consciousness. Quran is meant to awaken the very same consciousness. Quran is only a guidance. Infact one of the guidances. There are so many factors that help us mould our consciousness in the right manner such as knowledge, intelligence, wisdom, guidance, faith etc. Without these, there is no 'natural morality'. Thats why people in the olden days(pre Quranic era) did all kind of mischief as they did not 'know' or 'understand' the wrong from the right. Quran informed them of what they did not know and reminded them of what they did know. No blind following is expected. Allah tells us to think and see reason in whatever we do. Thats awakening, isnt it?
There is a difference between a persons overall mind and their natural morality...that voice that tells you whats right and wrong...and this is our god to be followed...not unverified words,claimed to be all from god,which we think are better than our own verifiable,first hand morality.
That voice is influenced by knowledge, life, guidance, intelligence, wisdom etc
Peace!
-
I believe we are born with an empty potential, in perfect peace. I think right/wrong is taught, either from family, friends, or life experiences. A client's son kicked me today. I told him that wasn't nice. But what if I didn't tell him that? He would continue kicking people. And what if no one ever told him it was wrong? He would continue kicking people. Not until he was either told it was wrong, or saw with his own eyes and understanding that kicking people is wrong or harmful, would he stop.
peace Tay,
I kind of disagree. I think that although we can be taught morals, we are capable of knowing right from wrong without any kind of teaching.
The son of that client of yours would indeed have kept kicking people if you hadn't told him, but over time, throught experience, he would have found out that it isn't such a good idea to kick people. Maybe he would go further and know why it isn't good to kick people.
But that would be learning the hard way (through experience). The Quran, and some people (like our parents) do us a great favor by leading us toward the right path. -
Well it's fine that you have your own methodology of thinking and verification but that's not the Scientific Method.
Also, isn't experience the cornerstone of subjectivity?
ETA Science is impartial and has no regards for what is or is not 'humane'.
)
what is the scientific method then?
I think it is- develop hypothesis (quran)
- test it (if doens't work find new hypothesis, the bible not recommended)
- end up with law or theory
-
I do not know where u got the idea that Quran substitutes consciousness. Quran is meant to awaken the very same consciousness. Quran is only a guidance. Infact one of the guidances.
peace PM,
I agree with the above. The Quran helps us connect to our 'self.'
-
Peace Pheonix1,
You stated
I kind of disagree. I think that although we can be taught morals, we are capable of knowing right from wrong without any kind of teaching.
The son of that client of yours would indeed have kept kicking people if you hadn't told him, but over time, through experienceAre you sure you disagree??
Here's what I said
I think right/wrong is taught, either from family, friends, or life experiences.
Peace,
Tay