Moderator should close this thread. The atheists here make all sort of comments insulting religions and yet, when we confront them rationally and with respect, they run away only to come back with more shit load of crap.
Kathleen Taylor, Neuroscientist, Says Religious Fundamentalism Could Be Treated As A Mental Illness
The Huffington Post | By Meredith Bennett-Smith Posted: 05/31/2013 12:21 pm EDT | Updated: 06/06/2013 7:57 pm EDT
An Oxford University researcher and author specializing in neuroscience has suggested that one day religious fundamentalism may be treated as a curable mental illness.
“Someone who has for example become radicalised to a cult ideology -- we might stop seeing that as a personal choice that they have chosen as a result of pure free will and may start treating it as some kind of mental disturbance," Taylor said. “In many ways it could be a very positive thing because there are no doubt beliefs in our society that do a heck of a lot of damage."
The author went on to say she wasn't just referring to the "obvious candidates like radical Islam," but also meant such beliefs as the idea that beating children is acceptable.
Taylor was not immediately available for comment.
This is not the first time Taylor has explored the mind processes of a radical. In 2006, she wrote a book about mind control called Brainwashing: The Science of Thought Control, which explored the science behind the persuasive tactics of such groups as cults and al Qaeda.
"We all change our beliefs of course," Taylor said in a YouTube video about the book. "We all persuade each other to do things; we all watch advertising; we all get educated and experience [religions.] Brainwashing, if you like, is the extreme end of that; it's the coercive, forceful, psychological torture type."
Taylor also noted that brainwashing, though extreme, is part of a the "much more widespread phenomenon" of persuasion. That is, "how we make people think things that might not be good for them, that they might not otherwise have chosen to think."
"Technologies which directly scan or manipulate brains cannot be neutral tools, as open to commercial exploitation as any new gadget," Taylor wrote in a blog post for The Huffington Post in 2012. "The brain supremacy offers chances to improve human dignity, but it also risks abuse."
Watch the video below to hear Kathleen Taylor discuss her book Brainwashing: The Science of Thought Control.
Ahmadiyya Times | News Watch | Archives
Source/Credit: Chowk | History
By Yasser Latif Hamdani | January 2, 2005
The history of Islam, especially the 'golden age of Islam,' is full of instances of narrow parochial, sectarian and tribal divisions.The modern age is characterized by the existence and the acceptance of nation state as a legal entity in the world order. Islamic world is no exception. Early 20th century saw the rise of nation states in the Muslim world. The process started with the emergence of the Republic of Turkey. The Second World War and the subsequent decolonization resulted in the creation of several new nation states in the Muslim world, such as Iraq, Jordan, Pakistan, Indonesia etc. In Iran, even Khomeni’s famous Islamic revolution in 1979 accepted the existence of this modern reality, choosing to set up an Islamic Republic instead of some sort of a pan-Islamic Kingdom of God. Hence the shift that has occurred within Muslim politics from a reformist agenda as espoused the by the modernists like Jamaluddin Afghani, Sir Syed Ahmed Khan, Mohammed Iqbal and Mahomed Ali Jinnah, to the exact opposite in form of Maudoodi and Khomeni has so far been accepting of the ground reality i.e. the nation state.
There is however a new thought process (or lack thereof) that has captured imagination of a few uneducated youth, usually A-Level dropouts from the UK, though their rank and file include a few professionals as well. They call themselves the Hizb-e-tahrir, and are agitating for something that they call “Khilafah”. They reject the nation state and present a vision of a utopia.
They say that with the coming of the Khilafah, all ills of the Muslim world will vanish, and Islam will rise once again as the greatest ideology in the world. To prove their point, they rely on certain myths about Islamic history that have pervaded the Muslim psyche and stunted its intellectual growth. The purpose of this article is to debunk some of these myths:
The golden age of Islam is specified as between 7th century AD to the 16th Century AD when the Islamic Empires reached their zenith, in political and military might as well as scientific advancement.
Myth No.1: Muslim Rulers of the golden age were pious and adhered strictly to tenets of Islam, which is why they constituted the most advanced civilization on the planet.
This is completely untrue. With the exception of the 4 pious caliphs and a few rulers here and there, the great majority of the Muslim rulers of this age suffered from the same frailties of humanity as any Muslim alive today. Some of them drank, some liked women and had huge harems, others liked men and many a combination of any of the above. The history of Islam as documented by Tabari, Yaqoobi, Ibn-e-Asir and Ibn-e-Khuldun lends enough evidence to safely conclude that the myth above is simply is figment of an overactive Islamist imagination.
The success of the Muslims as successful scientists, thinkers, writers and medicine men had little to do with their religious piety. If you look at the lives of the greatest philosophers and scientists of the time, you will realize that a great number of them were agnostics if not completely atheists. Avicenna, Razi, and Omar Khayam were not orthodox believers.
Their success had more to do with the existing intellectual climate of the Muslim world which encouraged creativity and freedom of thought. Slowly Muslims moved away from this culture of tolerance, and adopted a narrower course which led to the stagnation that we complain of today.
Myth No.2: The Muslims of the classical age lived under the Islamic system of government called the Khilafah.
The myth here lies in the definition of “Islamic system of government” called the “Khilafah”. Any system of government has certain elements that distinguish it from other governments. These elements concern themselves with 1) How the government is formed? 2) What are the institution of this government 3) How is this government changed?
In no period of Islamic history and in no document of Islamic literature do we find any such system laid down. The earliest political entity that we find in Islam is the confederation of Medinan Tribes under the leadership of our Holy Prophet (PBUH) based on a man made constitution known in history as the “Mesaq-e-Medina”. The constitution and the government that resulted from it was political and not spiritual. Muhammad Bin Abdullah (PBUH) commanding the confidence of the Muslims of Medina, was the natural leader of this arrangement. Each tribe was autonomous in most matters except in their dealings with each other. The final arbiter of that was the Prophet (PBUH) himself and he decided according to the existing laws of the time, without any divine intervention.
Even during the period of the pious Caliphate we see that the election of each Caliph was different from the other. Consider:
1) Hazrat Abu Bakr Siddique (RA) was elected by notables after the demise of the Holy Prophet.
2) Hazrat Umar Bin Khitab (RA) was appointed by Abu Bakr and confirmed through “bait” by the rest.
3) Hazrat Usman Ghani (RA) was elected through an electoral college of 6 notables.
4) Hazrat Ali bin Abu Talib (KW) was the next obvious choice confirmed by the faithful
Which of these systems will be considered Islamic? Furthermore the Islamic rule during this earlier period was more of a confederation of tribes, as it was necessary in the existing tribal system. As the Islamic Empire expanded, the requirements forced the Muslim leadership to adopt the existing secular system of the time i.e. Monarchy. As we read more of the history of the Arabian Peninsula we become aware of an intensely political struggle that raged in a very secular fashion that had little to do with religion and more politics.
Islam as an ideology does not give a political system. Instead it seeks to reform the individual who can then go on to work diligently and honestly within the system. Political system is result of evolutionary thought, and not the result of ideology. Ideology thus works within the system to establish itself, but it is not concerned with the working of the system as such.
Myth No 3: Muslims of the Golden Age were united under one Caliphate, which is why they were successful.
Muslims of the golden age were never united. Since the time of Usman (RA), the Islamic world has been deeply divided. First it was the division between the supporters of Ali (RA) and supporters of Usman (RA). This was the manifestation of the century old power struggle between the Banu-Hashim (Holy Prophet’s tribe) and Banu-Ummaya (Abu Sufiyan’s tribe) that predated Islam. When Usman was murdered, Ali(KW) was accused by most of Usman’s supporters as being complicit of the act. Two wars were fought in this time that completely wrecked the unity of the Muslim world:
1) Battle of Jumal/Camel : Hazrat Aisha (RA), the mother of the faithful, launched a campaign against Hazrat Ali (KW). Some of the greatest companions of the Holy Prophet (PBUH) met their end at this battle.
2) Battle of Siffin: Muawiyyah, the cousin of Usman, went to war with Ali (KW). Ultimately he became the overlord of Syria, while Ali (KW) was the ruler of the remainder.
During Ali’s time, a band of brigands and extremists broke away and created their own movement within Islam. They were known as the Khawarij. One of these Khawarij murdered Ali (KW) and brought the pious Caliphate as we know it to an end. Thus the irony of Islamic history is that 3 of its 4 most pious caliphs were assassinated. Is this the Islamic unity we talk of? After Ali(KW), his son Hassan(RA) was chosen to lead the Islamic Empire. He abdicated in the favor of Muawiyah in return for a fixed pension. Before Muawiyah died, he nominated his son Yazid to be the ruler in his place. We all know the tragedy of Karballah, which led to the massacre of 72 of the Holy Prophet’s closest family.
The struggle between Banu Ummaya and Banu Hashim rose to surface once again, when a branch of Banu-Hashim, the Banu Abbass challenged the authority of Banu Ummaya. The Ummayads were over thrown and the house of Abbass inherited the Caliphate. Meanwhile the last heir to the throne, Abdul Rahman fled to Spain where he formed the rule of the ummayads again. In Egypt, in the 9th century the Fatmids established their rule. They were Ismaili Shiites from the sevener school of Shiite thought.
Thus for nearly 3 centuries the Islamic world had 3 distinct states that often allied themselves with non-Muslim powers against other Muslim powers. By the 11th and 12th centuries the Islamic world consisted of many strong sultanates such as Ghaznavi, Ghori, Seljuk, and later Zengi, Ayubi, Khawarzim, Ghulaman, Tughlaq, and Mameluke. While the Abbassid Caliph still ruled in Baghdad but his power was limited to a small area around that grand city. Perhaps the most telling aspect of “Islamic unity” of this time was the fact that when the crusaders attacked the holiest sites of Islam, not single call for Jehad was given by the Caliph of Islam. It got even worse when in the 13th century, the Caliph in Baghdad invited the Mongol warlord Genghis Khan to destroy the Khawarzim rule in Turkestan. The Caliph of Islam aided in the complete destruction and devastation of one of the biggest Muslim empires of the time. Ofcourse a few decades later the same Mongols under the leadership of Helagu destroyed Baghdad and put an end to the Abbassid Caliphate.
The Ottoman Empire was founded by a central asian adventurer named Osman. The Sultan of this Empire was not always the Caliph. The title of Caliph was adopted out of political expediency. This title brought obedience with it. The conqueror of Constantinople, Sultan Mehmet Fateh, is rumored to have even fancied becoming the head of the Orthodox Christian church. When Ottoman Empire reached its height, it was rivaled by two other great Muslim Empires i.e. Safavids in Persia and Mughals in India. The Safavids were shiites and therefore automatically hostile to the Ottomans who were largely sunnis of the Hanafi sect. The Mughals appear to be mostly unconcerned with the Ottoman Empire. They did have some contact with the Safavids and the relations between the two empires were cordial. It is clear that the Mughals did not consider the Ottoman Empire to be a Caliphate but merely another different sovereign empire.
The history of Islam, especially the golden age of Islam, is full of instances of narrow parochial, sectarian and tribal divisions. The Islamic world was never united, and it is highly unlikely that it will ever be united in the future. This is not to say that the Muslim identity does not exist. In fact there is a very strong sense of Muslim identity that exists all through out the Muslim World, but how one views one’s own identity is quite another matter. There is no one definition of a Muslim, and there is no one way of being a Muslim. While the mobilization and temporary unity of Muslims is possible for a perceived threat or injustice, but there will never be any agreement on the nitty gritty. The way forward is to accept the diversity of views, cultures, languages, and nations within the Muslim ummah. Pipe dreams of “Khilafah” will never bring together Muslims, but will bring more heartbreak to an already devastated community.
prototaip posted on 27-6-2013 05:36 PM
Islamic scientific golden age has nothing to do with Islam,Koran or Hadiths.
http://ahmadiyyati ...
i dont care either , if my point before is just wrong.....or proven wrong....
i came here with those atheist fortune cookies, with no problem of having my point debunked.....
you can call me stupid if u want to.....because to me atheist just dont cut it....
it is just very funny when they think they have concur the semiconductors technology and think they have reach the peak human knowledge of all time....
do you know atheist exist long before our time, and in the cycle of human knowlegde era, it has been ups and down, and we arent having the best knowledge as we think,
it has been ups and down, and our ancestors may have better set of law before...the different is juat the material in each time cycle.....
in out time, in our turn , we manipulate semiconductors.... people before has manipulate other material ...thats all the different....
it is so silly to think that we have the best knowledge....or law...of phisysc...or the law of so called-truth
Razi
Muhammad ibn Zakariyā Rāzī (Arabic: أبو بكر محمد بن يحيى بن زكريا الرازي Abu Bakr Mohammad Bin Yahia Bin Zakaria Al-Razi)(Persian: محمد زکریای رازی Mohammad-e Zakariā-ye Rāzi), known as Rhazes or Rasis after medieval Latinists (August 26, 865 – 925), was a Persian polymath, a prominent physician, alchemist and chemist, philosopher, and scholar.
A new review of 63 scientific studies stretching back over decades has concluded that religious people are less intelligent than non-believers.
A piece of University of Rochester analysis, led by Professor Miron Zuckerman, found “a reliable negative relation between intelligence and religiosity” in 53 out of 63 studies.
According to thestudy entitled, 'The Relation Between Intelligence and Religiosity: A Meta-Analysis and Some Proposed Explanations', published in the 'Personality and Social Psychology Review', even during early years the more intelligent a child is the more likely it would be to turn away from religion.
In old age above average intelligence people are less likely to believe, the researchers also found.
One of the studies used in Zuckerman's paper was a life-long analysis of the beliefs of 1,500 gifted children with with IQs over 135.
The study began in 1921 and continues today. Even in extreme old age the subjects had much lower levels of religious belief than the average population.
The review, which is the first systematic meta-analysis of the 63 studies conducted in between 1928 and 2012, showed that of the 63 studies, 53 showed a negative correlation between intelligence and religiosity, while 10 showed a positive one.
Only two studies showed significant positive correlations and significant negative correlations were seen in a total of 35 studies.
The authors of the review looked at each study independently, taking into account the quality of data collection, the size of the sample and the analysis methods used.
The three psychologists carrying out the review defined intelligence as the “ability to reason, plan, solve problems, think abstractly, comprehend complex ideas, learn quickly, and learn from experience”.
Religiosity is defined by the psychologists as involvement in some (or all) facets of religion.
According to the review, other factors - such as gender or education - did not make any difference to the correlation between intelligence and religious belief.
The level of belief, or otherwise, did however vary dependent upon age with the correlation found to be weakest among the pre-college population.
The paper concludes that: "Most extant explanations (of a negative relation) share one central theme —the premise that religious beliefs are irrational, not anchored in science, not testable and, therefore, unappealing to intelligent people who 'know better'."
Criticisms of the conclusions include that the paper only deals with a definition of analytic intelligence and fails to consider newly identified forms of creative and emotional intelligence.
The psychologists who carried out the review also sought to pre-empt the secularist interpretation of the findings by suggesting that more intelligent people are less likely to have religious beliefs as they associate themselves with ideas around personal control."Intelligent people typically spend more time in school - a form of self-regulation that may yield long-term benefits," the researchers wrote.
"More intelligent people get higher level jobs (and better employment (and higher salary) may lead to higher self-esteem, and encourage personal control beliefs."
Clear example of the Influence that religious oppression has on human intellectual advancement and expression.
The Islam “Enlightenment” period was between 800 - 1100 AD and centered in Baghdad. This was the intellectual capital of the world scholars will agree... During this 300 year period, 2/3 of the stars were named with Arabic names. We have Arabic numerals, also during this period, they developed algebra, algorithms, exploited discovery of zero, medicine, biology, engineering, architecture, law, etc, and countless books were translated into Arabic. Then this man came unto the stage, he was Imam Hamid AL-Ghazali AD 1058 – 1111(Real asxxxle)...Him and a bunch of other asxxxles like him declared war on Mathematics and Science saying it was the work of the devil and since then absolutely nothing good has come out of that philosophy.........Mass
Author
Post time 7-6-2013 03:30 PM
Last edited by banapore on 20-6-2013 09:19 PM 
Post time 13-6-2013 09:45 AM
Last edited by banapore on 11-9-2013 04:56 PM 
a
![[Netflix] D.P. - Jung Hae In, Koo Kyo Hwan, Kim Sung Kyun, Son Seok Goo (Season 2 Premier Date 28 July 2023)](https://uf.cari.com.my/forumx/mforum/block/88/880da9653d08e02576de3ddf4ea3fbbb.jpg)
![[KUIZ PERUBATAN MINGGUAN VOL. 7]: Mudah aje, ilmu harian! VOL.7](https://uf.cari.com.my/forumx/mforum/forum/202110/17/070456cplzfjf9p5pa2aqs.jpg)
