gwydion@tavi.rice.edu (Basalat Ali Raja) (02/25/90)
In article <b2Pb02PV8aki01@amdahl.uts.amdahl.com> reddy@uts.amdahl.com (T.S. Reddy) writes: > Clever! On a purely subjective topic such as religion, there are no right >or wrong ways (despite the protestations of the net bigots). How can you >make the claim that a person is totally mistaken to follow a particular >religion? I am afraid that I disagree with your above assertion. I will furthermore assume that you are not playing games and implying that anyone who protests your assertion above is a net bigot. For the time being, I will assume that you have more dignity and a facility for rational thought than that. Anyways, look at it from my subjective point of view. For me, the Quran is a *fact*. It is a truth. Think of the Quran as a collection of statements, as a subset of a universe of statements. Using the basic rules of logic, we can arrive at a closure of this subset; this will be all the statements that can be logically derived from the Quran. Given this classification, the universe of statements can be divided into three sets; statements which are in the Quran, statements which are opposed to the Quran, and statements which have no relevance to the Quran. Statements which are in the Quranic subset, I feel to be the truth. Statements which are not in the Quranic subset, I consider to be incorrect. Statements which are not in either of the two, I decide on the basis of other factors, usually personal preferences etc. >people (non-bigots, at least) discuss religion, they do it with >the understanding that everyone has their own path towards spiritual >satisfaction and do not feel that the other person is wrong in his views. Another person can uphold another classification. When I say that I respect a person's point of view; that is not exactly correct. What I say is that I respect that person's right to make his own decisions (assuming such decisions do not entail personal attacks on other people etc. of course). In many cases, I can even see how he has reached the conclusions that he has. This however, in no manner constrains me to accept that he is correct. If you feel that it is necessary that I accept that you are not mistaken in your religious beliefs before I can be classified as a non-bigot, then so be it. >For example, the very fact that you're in this country following the >religion of your choice is consciously due to the fact that the founding >fathers of this country realized that religion was a personal matter. >So your assertion that all religious discussions are based on the premise >that the other person is mistaken is quite passe. I stand corrected. It is not necessary that ALL religious discussions be based on such a premise. But many are. You see, Islam is a rather stern religion. To follow it, one is making a very serious commitment about oneself and one's beliefs. Muslims are very intent on following their religion, leading a pious life, doing good works, etc. This requires a great deal of commitment, which I believe cannot be inherently present when one is being wishy-washy about one's religious beliefs.
reddy@uts.amdahl.com (T.S. Reddy) (02/27/90)
[ I took the liberty of replacing ">" with "#" since inews refused to accept it due to "too much included text". This will be my usual policy (except in outrageous cases) when inews complains. --Naim ] In article <9064@wpi.wpi.edu> gwydion@tavi.rice.edu (Basalat Ali Raja) writes: # #In article <b2Pb02PV8aki01@amdahl.uts.amdahl.com> reddy@uts.amdahl.com (T.S. Reddy) writes: ## # Clever! On a purely subjective topic such as religion, there are no right ##or wrong ways (despite the protestations of the net bigots). How can you ##make the claim that a person is totally mistaken to follow a particular ##religion? # ... #Anyways, look at it from my subjective point of view. For me, the Quran #is a *fact*. It is a truth. Think of the Quran as a collection of #statements, as a subset of a universe of statements. Using the basic #rules of logic, we can arrive at a closure of this subset; this will be #all the statements that can be logically derived from the Quran. # #Given this classification, the universe of statements can be divided into #three sets; statements which are in the Quran, statements which are opposed #to the Quran, and statements which have no relevance to the Quran. # #Statements which are in the Quranic subset, I feel to be the truth. #Statements which are not in the Quranic subset, I consider to be #incorrect. Statements which are not in either of the two, I decide #on the basis of other factors, usually personal preferences etc. # Again, you feel that the Koran is a *fact* (which, I presume, means that you take it to be the literal truth, that it was passed down to a mortal by God). You start from a premise which is questionable (in the minds of people of other religions or with no religion). This is an old argument of mine which has not been disproven. Be that as it may, the Bible, Gita or the Torah contain beliefs which are also in the Koran. This is a subset that you have left out. Why is it a mistake for a Christian to be following the same tenet that a Muslim is, in the mind of a Muslim? ##people (non-bigots, at least) discuss religion, they do it with ##the understanding that everyone has their own path towards spiritual ##satisfaction and do not feel that the other person is wrong in his views. # #Another person can uphold another classification. When I say that I #respect a person's point of view; that is not exactly correct. What #I say is that I respect that person's right to make his own decisions #(assuming such decisions do not entail personal attacks on other #people etc. of course). In many cases, I can even see how he has #reached the conclusions that he has. This however, in no manner #constrains me to accept that he is correct. If you feel that it is #necessary that I accept that you are not mistaken in your religious #beliefs before I can be classified as a non-bigot, then so be it. # You don't HAVE to reach the conclusion or acceptance that a person is correct/incorrect in following a particular path. If, by following a religion, a person is spiritually satisfied then so be it. He has found the path that leads to his happiness. For example, there is nothing wrong in a Muslim finding happiness by praying 5 times a day in the direction of Mecca and a Christian visiting Church on Sunday and finding the same spiritual happiness. ##For example, the very fact that you're in this country following the ##religion of your choice is consciously due to the fact that the founding ##fathers of this country realized that religion was a personal matter. ##So your assertion that all religious discussions are based on the premise ##that the other person is mistaken is quite passe. # #I stand corrected. It is not necessary that ALL religious discussions #be based on such a premise. But many are. You see, Islam is a rather #stern religion. To follow it, one is making a very serious commitment #about oneself and one's beliefs. Muslims are very intent on following #their religion, leading a pious life, doing good works, etc. This requires #a great deal of commitment, which I believe cannot be inherently present #when one is being wishy-washy about one's religious beliefs. If you take the essence of any religion, it distills to the same ideals: lead a honest, righteous life, love/help thy neighbor and do good in general. People of other religious faiths also take their religion very seriously. This is something that has to be respected. -- T.S.Reddy Arpa: reddy@uts.amdahl.com uucp:...!{ames,decwrl,uunet,pyramid,sun}!amdahl!reddy
gwydion@tavi.rice.edu (Basalat Ali Raja) (02/28/90)
In article <4426@accuvax.nwu.edu> "T.S. Reddy" <reddy@amdahl.uts.amdahl.com> writes: > Again, you feel that the Koran is a *fact* (which, I presume, means >that you take it to be the literal truth, that it was passed down to a >mortal by God). You start from a premise which is questionable (in the >minds of people of other religions or with no religion). This is an old >argument of mine which has not been disproven. I fail to see the necessity of disproving it within the context of my exposition. My whole point was that you and I have quite different world views. Your own premise, which is almost the logical negation of mine is just as questionable in my eyes as mine is in yours. For social and historical reasons, it might be even more questionable. > Be that as it may, the Bible, Gita or the Torah contain beliefs which >are also in the Koran. This is a subset that you have left out. Why >is it a mistake for a Christian to be following the same tenet that a >Muslim is, in the mind of a Muslim? A non-sequitor. I do not understand how you can reach the conclusion that I feel that it is mistaken. If there is any doubt in your mind, I assure you that I do not feel so. But I am interested at how you could arrive at a conclusion that it is possible for me to do so. > You don't HAVE to reach the conclusion or acceptance that a person >is correct/incorrect in following a particular path. If, by following a >religion, a person is spiritually satisfied then so be it. He has >found the path that leads to his happiness. For example, there is >nothing wrong in a Muslim finding happiness by praying 5 times a day >in the direction of Mecca and a Christian visiting Church on Sunday >and finding the same spiritual happiness. Again, you speak from your own personal viewpoint. I have another world view, which contains a heaven and a hell. Within the context of this earth and this life, I will agree with you - a law-abiding citizen may be just as happy, no matter what the religion. Yet, I will not follow the paths of Christians, for example, because I believe that such a paty is incorrect. You seem to be assuming that since I disagree with someone, I find it necessary to pass judegement on them, possibly moral judgement. Such is not the case. To me, happiness is not the ultimate goal in life. Survival, in this life, and the next is more important. > If you take the essence of any religion, it distills to the same >ideals: lead a honest, righteous life, love/help thy neighbor and do good >in general. People of other religious faiths also take their religion >very seriously. This is something that has to be respected. Very true. No argument with that.