http://www.religioustolerance.or...rg/ reconstr.htm

Razib:
explain something to me here
as a south asian indian atheist the above is pretty much what i have come to understand as agood analogy. Fantastic actually.


You are telling me that the american elite dont YET comprehend islam as THAT.
You are kidding right ???

* elite broadly construed, as in the 'talented tenth,' not the billionaire plutocrats.

Or even the billionaire plutocrats ????

nah!!!

Really?

You are telling me that the american elite dont YET comprehend islam as THAT.
You are kidding right ???

i think implicitly this is obvious. but, i have had discussions with many of my liberal friends (in fact all of my friends outside of people i meet through the internet are "liberal," broadly construed), and the following anecdote is representative.

after 9/11 a group of muslims in a small college town gave a talk to a class that was studying other cultures (something related to multiculturalism). they talked about islam, it is peace, love, anti-racist, etc. etc. my acquaintance asked about the idea that people outside of islam are going to hell. the respondants (all foreign students from muslim countries) responded that of course non-muslims were going to hell. she was shocked. she had grown up as an atheist in a very conservative part of the country, and it was clear that the attitude she found here was very similar to what she had hated throughout her childhood. now, many protestants in the US will tell you that "non-christians" are going to hell, primarily of the born-again (often baptist) sort who take a passage in john quite literally (and so don't express the humility that is normal for many christians as to whether they are going to heaven or not, as they are quite sure in their own minds). if you look at data in rod stark's and william bainbridge's 1984 which surveys attitudes of various sects you find strange attitudes (the poll results as to whether non-believers can go to heaven seem to conflict sometimes, probably due to semantic issues), but among conservative christians there is a narrow view, while other protestants and roman catholics tend to be more equivocal and pluralistic as to the necessary preconditions for salvation (partly due to social restrictions in some of these groups as to expressing an opinion on an issue supposedly reserved for the judgement of god i suspect).

but in any case, the verbal discourse does not reflect these facts, which many westerners have understood. even g.w. bush tends to express the attitude that muslim has been added on to protestant-catholic-jew without modification. but many people, often conservative, realize that as the politicians tell them islam is a religion of peace, the international terrorists who seem so amoral (in that their aims are not as tightly political as the IRA or even the secular palestinian terrorists of the 1970s) tend to identify as muslim. so they simply flip to the other type, which as a short term operational assumption is probably valid. the problem comes into the fact that this model tends to hamstring one in resolving any long term solution save götterdämmerung.

so that to me is the long term problem, people are thinking in two typologies, one that ignores the empirical reality, while another that constructs a model exceedingly simple because it is based on a single salient trait in the short term (predisposition to radical violence).

i see your point

it is a scary point

and the western muslim elite is not catching on to this rather scary situation

and i am with you on one thing
i do not want to become collatral damage

i do not want to become collatral damage

Avoid large cities.

I sure hope someone can figure out how this truck works and how to fix it one of these days. It won't be me, and I almost wish that I could spend less time trying, as at the end of the day I have read so many conflicting, opposing opinions from so many different mechanics that I realize I have wasted a lot of my time on this. And then I realize that they have too. I wonder how much total time has been wasted by the world on completely wrong mechanical analysis of this truck? And I wonder if when it is figured out correctly, I will be able to recognize this or not.

Razib...earnest question:

Over at www.secularislam.org , the idea seems to be that nastiness is built into the Koran, with quote after quote to validate the point. Of course, the flip response to that is to offer up the unpleasantness of the old testament, but I'm not particularly interested in defending that book either, and I'm skeptical that the nastiness quotients of the two books are anything near equal.

Outside of kooks like Jerry Falwell, you hear very little consideration given to the thought that terrorism is embedded in the Koran, and that bin Laden and his guys are about as pious as can be. It's amazing to me how little intelligent discussion is to be found on the role of the book itself in this whole situation...very taboo.

Any thoughts?

vic,

To not be collateral damage is easy for someone who stays in a non-muslim country --- but what about those who lives in countries like Indonesia, Malaysia, etc? For all I know there is a huge population of non-muslims, and a significant number of apostate muslims (whose lives are in danger) in those countries.

I think the liberal world needs to respond more urgently to the problem of Islam --- at least in understanding that there are really people suffering from their inactions.

May I suggest that it is not just the degree of religiosity that is important, but its nature?

Question about the Protestant-Catholic/Sunni-Shia analogy, concerning the history. Does the analogy refer to chronology or substance? You said it has "flipped" since the 80s. I've seen Shias more often compared to Catholics and Sunnis to Protestants except that Sunnis have a central authority (or is it?) So is the ambiguity of the flipped analogy due to differences of opinion about when the divide occurred? Sunnis will say they came first, while Shias maintain that their belief in the 12 imams makes them the original true blues (n'est pas?) Or is it the nature or "style" of how their beliefs manifest, i.e. the Persians and north Indian muslims took the prohibition against representing the human image much less seriously than most other Muslims, hence we have Persian miniatures (even if they were done by Armenians, the Persians had them) and 12th c. couples picnicking in gardens, theme being: a loaf of bread, a jug of wine and thou. The culture of the Shias (obviously I am referring to those who could afford it) is more epicene (any boutique attendant will tell you Persian women really know how to dress while the Arab ladies need a lot help even when money is no problem), they believe in saints and pilgrimages, do sometimes have graven images, and have all sorts of beliefs that could go by the shorthand "mystical."
One British orientalist who loved "Arabia" with all the fervor of T.E. Lawrence, was quite critical of Persian cultural/religious expression for being so flowery and given to what he considered imaginative fancy regarding their Muslim beliefs. He thought it led them into grievous error, rather like Catholics with their saints, images and the imaginative interior decor of their churches. He saw the Sunnis as spare, ascetic, stripped down to the basics of sun and sand, their art expressed only in endless repetition of logical geometric shapes, the essence of their faith like the inside of Protestant church. That's how he saw them anyway. He saw Sunni as basic and Shia as embellished. The way he described the situation, it reminded me of the ying/yang dichotomy, which seems to form inevitably everywhere.

mc,

Once again I have to totally agree with you on this. The Protestant (especially evangelical) are very concerned with the "word" of God, with the Bible, so too are the Sunnis (maybe especially the Salafists I'm guessing), whereas the Catholics like the Shi'a are more syncretic in their beliefs, and more accomodation is given to tradition and regional culture. For instance in Mexico all the major Aztec festivals have been co-opted into Catholic "Saint's Days". The same plays out in Iran, where Zoroastrian festivals are still celebrated.

So by it's very nature Catholicism and Shi'a are more accomodationist and inclusive, whereas Sunni and Protestant are more exclusive.

In fact Iran (Persia) is such an interesting place, as it is the epicenter of most of the worlds major religions. As what is Islam, but Judiasm and possibility some early Christinity mixed with Bedouin folkways. What is Christinity but Judiasm, Hellenism mixed with European folkways. What is post-exilic Judiaism but Zoroastrianism mixed with Jewish folkways.

So the prime mover in this scenario is Zarathustra (Zoroaster). It's fascinating that his message and teachings, in one form or the other, give meaning to so much of the world's population. I urge anyone interested in finding out more to read the book In Search of Zarathustra. Also check out this illuminating site Zoroastrian Influences on Judaism and Christianity.

thanks pconroy. i'm glad to hear others think about this stuff; however we are both miscreants. i just re-read razib's post and he asked that people not comment on Islam. Sorry, but I really was curious about this particular analogy.
"In fact Iran (Persia) is such an interesting place, as it is the epicenter of most of the worlds major religions.."
also Baha'i, considered by Sunnis to be a Shia sect, but even France(!) and Egypt long ago declared it a separate religion and not a sect or cult. It had nothing to do with whether they believed in any religion, a lot of the French being atheists, but just according to definition of religion.
I have to say the Persian religious tradition, politics please jump off a cliff, is one most interesting to me for its permutations.

i just re-read razib's post and he asked that people not comment on Islam.

annoying comments ;) so don't worry, you asked questions, you didn't speculate about stuff you didn't know.

in any case:

So by it's very nature Catholicism and Shi'a are more accomodationist and inclusive, whereas Sunni and Protestant are more exclusive.

this is sort of assertion that sometimes get made, but there is a lot of variance in shiism, it might be top-down with a group, but it is highly fragmented as an umbrella movement, with many marginal groups whose affiliation is notional (the alevis). shiism is more top-down like roman catholicism, etc. but the two groups here are very diverse. shia are very diverse, there are many arab shia (iraq is majority shia, yemen has a shia minority, shia are a plural majority in lebanon), there are many turkish shia (azeris, who are 25% of iran's population), while 20% of pakistanis and 10% of indian muslims are shia, there are hardlly any bangladeshi shia. so i think it is hard to make an ethnic connection. there is a lot of variance in shiism i think because it has not traditionally (outside of iran and occassionally in south india) been an 'established' religion so it worked outside of central homogenized channels.

sunnis tend to emphasize text, but in reality the biggest difference is that the supposedly revere their clerisy less. i don't think this is necessarily true-the same generalization holds with radical protestants, but in practice they are just as attached to their pastor's interpretation of their religion as catholics are to their priest's, the made difference is that radical protestants tend to schism constantly.

ultimately, i think muslims will fix the truck themselves. though i think non-muslims can help them with some diagnostics and perhaps some design sketches.

Koa: “I wonder how much total time has been wasted by the world on completely wrong mechanical analysis of this truck?”

My view is that the total truck is far too complicated for any person to understand more than a small part. There are so many different models that can be fit to the data.

On this blog, the focus is on belief systems and HBD. An economic blog would focus on international economic competition. A military blog would focus on military conflict between nations or groups. Many, many ways the world can be viewed.

Is this effort wasted on wrong analysis? Models are improving. New tools to communicate, organize, and process information are spreading throughout the world community. If you have a specific set of goals or expectations, they are unlikely to be met and the effort may seem misguided and wasted. If you see the process as the evolution of a global community and a worldwide hive mind then the effort (with all its warts) is necessary for progress.

“And I wonder if when it is figured out correctly, I will be able to recognize this or not.”

I doubt I will ever understand more than small part of what is happening. There will be historians that neatly wrap up the events and present a simple storyline but I doubt that story will reflect more than the largest currents and forces. The story will omit the alternate futures that could have followed from a slightly different sequence of events.

razib,

What's your take on Liberation Theology as an analog to Islamism? There is a meaningful difference between a Massoud and a bin Laden. The difference was big enough to get Massoud murdered two days before 9-11. Both Liberation Theology and Islamism critically seek to transform society through the "propaganda of the deed".

Massoud : Christian fundamentalism :: bin Laden : Christian radicalism.

Both Lib Theo and Islamism attract those who are more educated and more affluent in the name of the downtrodden.

william:

the collatral damage that I do not want to become is - as a brown skinned non muslim south asian living in the US. When and if local reprisals do occur. I do not wish to be mistaken for a mulah and harrassed/ attacked.

My fear though is that to an extent OBL and Co. are setting up the Muslim diaspora to be inadvertent suicide bombers. And unless the muslim elite in North America and Europe take head and rapidly dissociate themselves from this radical BS...human nature being what it is - the veneer of civillization may be very thin.

tex,

there are parts where the analogy fits. many islamists have been influenced by socialism, and work for the down-trodden is a critical part of the activities of the muslim brotherhood. but, where there is a big difference is that liberation theology was, from what i gather, generally considered a failure without deep roots in the pesantry.* what i heard was that the liberation priests chose the people (the barely christianized indigenous masses), and the people chose protestant evangelical charismatic christianity (which is apolitical). islamism, though spearheaded by a core of commited educated leaders, does have deep roots and sympathies through the social matrix. i think this is because liberation theology was in many ways a forced synthesis of marx and christ, but islamism doesn't appeal to marx and works on traditional lines.

* nicaragua during the sandanista period might have been an exception

Salman Rushdie weighs in

http://www.washingtonpost.com/ wp...5080501483.html