|
Obama's speech to the Muslim world (pg. 4)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| jerZ07002 |
| quote: | Originally posted by Krypton
I would recommend watching the documentary I posted. |
sorry dude - i have a pretty firm policy against online video documentaries. Videos are a real easy way to convince people of the author/producers point of view with emotions rather than facts. I only support written media because it is relatively easy to discern bull from fact. Videos also make it easy for people NOT to think about the issue too deeply. |
|
|
| Krypton |
| quote: | Originally posted by jerZ07002
sorry dude - i have a pretty firm policy against online video documentaries. Videos are a real easy way to convince people of the author/producers point of view with emotions rather than facts. I only support written media because it is relatively easy to discern bull from fact. |
If anything, watch for your own enjoyment. It is a rather interesting documentary, and is relevant to this conversation. The point is, the Muslims have contributed much to the sciences, arts, and engineering. This documentary is one extensive example of that. |
|
|
| jerZ07002 |
| quote: | Originally posted by Krypton
If anything, watch for your own enjoyment. It is a rather interesting documentary, and is relevant to this conversation. The point is, the Muslims have contributed much to the sciences, arts, and engineering. This documentary is one extensive example of that. |
i don't disagree, but the contributions were foundational. certainly, most (edit) advanced (/edit) contributions to modern society have come from europeans/americans and asians. |
|
|
| Krypton |
| quote: | Originally posted by jerZ07002
i don't disagree, but the contributions were foundational. certainly, most (edit) advanced (/edit) contributions to modern society have come from europeans/americans and asians. |
Back then, those contributions were state of the art. Who is to say our modern contributions are simply foundational to future generations? There really is no difference. |
|
|
| jerZ07002 |
| quote: | Originally posted by Krypton
Back then, those contributions were state of the art. Who is to say our modern contributions are simply foundational to future generations? There really is no difference. |
I'm not focusing on how future generations will view the contributions we make today. I said, "contributions to MODERN SOCIETY." My focus is on how we, today, view the contributions by various contributors. You're right in both respects, (i) that those foundational contributions were cutting edge back then, and (ii) that future generations may very well view some of our contributions as foundational. Again, however, i'm not evaluating the importance of those contributions in the year 900 or the importance in the year 3100. Despite the potential truth of your statement, it misses the point. |
|
|
| Krypton |
| Well, if you disagree with my view that the Islamic world is capable of intellectual advances of its own, we'll have to agree to disagree. Not saying the Middle East is the center of academic pursuits today, just saying, history has shown they are capable of it. What I think is stifling them is the prominence of authoritarianism throughout the region...of course supported by the West. |
|
|
| jerZ07002 |
| quote: | Originally posted by Krypton
Well, if you disagree with my view that the Islamic world is capable of intellectual advances of its own, we'll have to agree to disagree. |
not at all. our discussion was about tangible contributions to modern society (i think the modern society part was pretty clearly implied).
I certainly believe that all people have innate intellectual capacity. I don't think people from one geographical location have more intellectual capacity than those in another area. The islamic world, however, does not have the political or educational infrastructure to harness its capacity. that's a shame not only for muslims, but the world. If muslims were more focused on intellectual advancement than on religious bull, perhaps they wouldn't be so focused on negative and blaming others for their problems. Anyway, generally speaking, humans are better off when we use all of our resources for intellectual advancement. |
|
|
| Krypton |
| quote: | Originally posted by jerZ07002
not at all. our discussion was about tangible contributions to modern society (i think the modern society part was pretty clearly implied).
I certainly believe that all people have innate intellectual capacity. I don't think people from one geographical location have more intellectual capacity than those in another area. The islamic world, however, does not have the political or educational infrastructure to harness its capacity. that's a shame not only for muslims, but the world. If muslims were more focused on intellectual advancement than on religious bull, perhaps they wouldn't be so focused on negative and blaming others for their problems. Anyway, generally speaking, humans are better off when we use all of our resources for intellectual advancement. |
It is hard to pursue intellectual advances when living under authoritarian regimes supported by the West. You'r right on that. |
|
|
| jerZ07002 |
| quote: | Originally posted by Krypton
It is hard to pursue intellectual advances when living under authoritarian regimes supported by the West. You'r right on that. |
that victim bs is getting old. a much larger problem in the muslim world is the lack of criticism of islam and the muslim way of life. blind adherence to an unchallenged way is far more dangerous than american support for regimes. |
|
|
| Krypton |
No, I'm not talking about a "victim mentality". But really, the movement towards religion is an escapism from the oppression of the state. In such states, the intellectuals leave the country. Intellectual freedom is stifled both by the state's authoritarianism and the people's movement to religion.
Also, do you honestly think a desire for freedom is a "victim mentality"?? |
|
|
| MisterOpus1 |
It was a nice speech, but I wish speeches really meant something more to me, and unfortunately it often times doesn't matter who the president is. I do appreciate Obama's oratory skills, and if there's anyone I'd like to listen making speeches it would be him. But overall I just get sick of the political rhetoric.
I hear one too many politicians blow smoke up my ass about how great things are or could be, but when it comes to actions to follow they either get weak-kneed or their policies get so damn watered down, often times a result of conflicting lobbyist interests. So I'll be more interested in how Obama actually handles things in the Middle East in the coming days and years versus what he has to say about it and the Muslim culture. |
|
|
| The17sss |
| quote: | Originally posted by Krypton
Your problem 17sss, is you fail to have empathy for valid alternative points of view. It isn't radicals who are against us. It's average men and women. And if we'r going to have them on our side, we have to acknowledge their point of view, on equal terms. |
You are unfortunately correct... the average men and women of those countries are against us, and they shouldn't be for the most part. There is a difference between the American people and our politicians, the same way that there's a difference between the average Gaza citizen and Hamas. I was making the point on the equivalency stuff that some of it just wasn't equivalent. Christopher Hitchens put out a good article today about the hijab nonsense (or "hajib" as Obama called it... *imagines flack Bush would have got if he mispronounced that in Cairo*) here ---> http://www.slate.com/id/2220000/?from=rss
David Frum made a good point about it on Wolf Blitzer's show the other day:
| quote: | What the president did was he set in motion a dynamic where he legitimated the most angry -- the most alienated members of the Islamic world as the most legitimate. I mean, Salman Rushdie is a member of the Muslim world. The speech wasn't for him. Those terrorized young gays in Iran are part of the Muslim world. The speech wasn't for them. The speech was addressed to the people who are angriest. So you legitimate them as the most authentic.
One example of this. The president took a slap at the government of France when he condemned those Western governments that ban the hijab. There's only one Western government does that, France, and only in state schools. They do that in order to protect girls from violence from these vigilante youth gangs that patrol some of the French suburbs. Now, aren't those girls who are terrorized, aren't they part of the Muslim world?
But so the line he draws is extremist here, everybody else here. Meanwhile, seculars, progressives, modern people, they're all lumped in exactly where they don't want to be -- with this conformist idea that to be an authentic Muslim means that you have to belong to this aggrieved group. |
|
|
|
|
|
