Hi, Gilberto,
I wrote:
However, I assume you believe in contextualizing some sort of timeless (?)
essentialist morality.
You replied:
Sure. Except I'm not sure I can clearly even imagine the alternative. My
understanding of existentialism would suggest an individual boldly making
whatever
Gilberto,
At 06:50 PM 1/30/2005, you wrote:
Yes, I know. Existentialism and Essentialism are often contrasted. So if Mark
is opposing essentialist morality it suggests or at least raises the
possibility that he is defending some version of existentialism.
Okay. I wasn't sure why you referred
In my personal gestalt, I have often equated Sartre with Warholesque
theatricalism. For existential think, I far prefer Albert Camus and Soren
Kirkegaard.
Well, Camus certainly perfected the art of tragedy.
What about Sartre do you think is pop culturist?
Regards, Mark A. Foster
Gilberto,
At 07:55 AM 1/30/2005, you wrote:
I gave this a little more thought and I think that perhaps we could all agree
that morality can be situational and that what is appropriate or
inappropriate can depend on the concrete specifics of a situation, but I
think that would still see
On Sun, 30 Jan 2005 11:36:14 -0600, Mark A. Foster [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Gilberto,
At 07:55 AM 1/30/2005, you wrote:
I gave this a little more thought and I think that perhaps we could all
agree that morality can be situational and that what is appropriate or
inappropriate can depend
In a message dated 1/30/2005 12:52:43 PM Central Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
That would be my view, yes. However, I assume you believe in contextualizing some sort of timeless (?) essentialist moralitySure. Except I'm not sure I can clearly even imagine the alternative.My
On Sun, 30 Jan 2005 15:09:27 EST, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
In a message dated 1/30/2005 12:52:43 PM Central Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
That would be my view, yes. However, I assume you believe in
contextualizing some sort of timeless (?) essentialist morality
Gilberto,
At 01:13 AM 1/28/2005, you wrote:
or even trial and error, sure.
Well, thought experiments are not exactly based on trial and error.
I wrote:
I am not sure what you mean by certain kinds of actions. However, off the
top of my head, I can think of many situations in which that would
Gilberto (not dear Gilberto):
If by moral relativism you mean the kind of mentality and attitude that
anything goes and everything is OK, then Baha'is are definitely not
moral relativists. As I said, just read Shoghi Effendi's Advent of
Divine Justice for example. The relativism that we Baha'is
On Thu, 27 Jan 2005 21:41:05 -0600, Mark A. Foster [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Gilberto,
I wrote:
What kind of reasoning process?
You replied:
One example would be through some kind of deliberative process where we
think about the consequences of having certain rules and what kind of
See below..
Quoting Gilberto Simpson [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
On Fri, 28 Jan 2005 10:31:43 -0500, Iskandar Hai
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Gilberto (not dear Gilberto):
If by moral relativism you mean the kind of mentality and attitude
that
anything goes and everything is OK, then Baha'is are
On Fri, 28 Jan 2005 12:14:42 -0500, Iskandar Hai [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
See below..
Quoting Gilberto Simpson [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
On Fri, 28 Jan 2005 10:31:43 -0500, Iskandar Hai
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Gilberto (not dear Gilberto):
If by moral relativism you mean the kind of
On Fri, 28 Jan 2005 11:43:16 EST, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
In a message dated 1/28/05 8:06:41 AM Pacific Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Gilberto (not dear Gilberto):
If by moral relativism you mean the kind of mentality and attitude that
anything goes and
In a message dated 1/28/2005 12:10:52 PM Central Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Gilberto:It's not a hang-up. I'm perfectly happy to let the matter drop. I justwouldn't want to casually suggest that prophets might lie or commitidolatry.
I do not think a Prophet ever lied. I believe
Susan,
At 10:43 AM 1/28/2005, you wrote:
That's because the definition above is not our understanding of moral
relativism. We understand that morality 'relates' to concrete circumstances,
it isn't just an absolute ideal up in the sky somewhere.
Yes.
Regards, Mark A. Foster
On Fri, 28 Jan 2005 14:17:36 -0600, Mark A. Foster [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Susan,
At 10:43 AM 1/28/2005, you wrote:
That's because the definition above is not our understanding of moral
relativism. We understand that morality 'relates' to concrete
circumstances, it isn't just an absolute
G:Alot of emphasis is put on the fact that the Quran was revealed in stages
Know of a certainty that in every Dispensation the light of Divine Revelation hath been vouchsafed unto men in direct proportion to their spiritual capacity... if the Sun of Truth were suddenly to reveal, at the earliest
Gilberto,
At 10:29 PM 1/26/2005, you wrote:
Could you give examples of each to explain how they are different?
Justice is a virtue. It is defined (structurized) by Baha'u'llah, in one sense,
as upheld by reward and punishment:
O people of God! That which traineth the world is Justice, for
Hi, Gilberto,
At 11:24 PM 1/26/2005, you wrote:
So would it be fair to say that the sinlessness is a non-falsifiable
statement? You aren't saying that they conform to some prior moral
principles, but that by definition, beecause they are the Manifestation they
could do no wrong?
Yes, IMO,
Dear Firouz,
I think this is a big challenge Baha'u'llah is inviting people to
produce a verse like what He is revealing.
The verse in the Tablet of Ahmad doesn't appear to me to be an invitation to
produce man-made verses. He is stating that it's impossible for men to come up
with such
On Thu, 27 Jan 2005 02:13:23 EST, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
In a message dated 1/26/2005 7:25:35 P.M. Central Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I DID answer her question in the most reasonable way I know how. If
you don't like that answer I'm not sure how to help you.
And further, it is an allegorical indication that man can never reach the
station of God.
|
| I think this is a big challenge Baha'u'llah is inviting people to
| produce a verse like what He is revealing.
|
|The verse in the Tablet of Ahmad doesn't appear to me to be an
|invitation to produce
Gilberto,
At 06:16 AM 1/27/2005, you wrote:
Ok, then part of the difficulty is that we are using words differently.
Yes.
Whether or not one belches in public is not a moral question.
As I said, I would call etiquette and all low-level social norms folkways.
Norms and values, as I define them,
In a message dated 1/27/2005 1:57:20 A.M. Central Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I remember long long time back when I was living in Dubaiwe had a
deepening class about Tablet of Ahmad, our Egyptian teacher explained it
to us this way.
Well, now that I compare it with
On Thu, 27 Jan 2005 09:36:46 -0600, Mark A. Foster [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Gilberto,
At 06:16 AM 1/27/2005, you wrote:
Ok, then part of the difficulty is that we are using words differently.
Yes.
Whether or not one belches in public is not a moral question.
As I said, I would call
Gilberto,
At 06:14 PM 1/27/2005, you wrote:
But what makes one set of laws high-level and another low-level?
It is relative to the norms of that community. Mores are norms which, in a
particular time and place, are punished (formally or informally) more severely
than folkways. A more in one
On Thu, 27 Jan 2005 19:53:07 -0600, Mark A. Foster [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Gilberto,
You replied:
I'm speaking imprecisely. I don't think I mean that kind of logic. I mean a
different kind of reasoning process.
Mark:
What kind of reasoning process?
Gilberto:
One example would be
Dear Susan,
I came to this conclusion after reading several online accounts of British activity in the middle east subsequent to WW1. I read that Lawrence of Arabia was deeply involved in the Arab revolt against the Ottoman hegemony instigated by Sharif Hussein bin Ali . Sharif
Hussein had been
Gilberto,
I wrote:
What kind of reasoning process?
You replied:
One example would be through some kind of deliberative process where we think
about the consequences of having certain rules and what kind of society that
would result in.
A thought experiment.
Sure but even apart from language,
Hi Iskandar,
I think you are misunderstanding Gilberto and his intentions. I do not think he is saying that Baha'is don't take morality seriously, so there is no need for an apology. Gilberto is stating the Islamic stance on the issue, which is different from the Baha'i view. I am positive he is
On Thu, 27 Jan 2005 19:57:22 -0800 (PST), JS [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi Iskandar,
I think you are misunderstanding Gilberto and his intentions. I do not
think he is saying that Baha'is don't take morality seriously, so there is
no need for an apology. Gilberto is stating the Islamic
On Thu, 27 Jan 2005 22:49:29 -0500 (EST), Iskandar Hai, M.D.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
.
A girl of 8, 9, or 10 years of age who has had her menses is still a girl,
not a woman. From around 13 to about 18-19 years of age, she is called a
teenager. Past nineteen, she can be called a woman (or
On Thu, 27 Jan 2005 21:41:05 -0600, Mark A. Foster [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Gilberto,
I wrote:
What kind of reasoning process?
You replied:
One example would be through some kind of deliberative process where we
think about the consequences of having certain rules and what kind of
On Tue, 25 Jan 2005 23:03:37 -0600, Susan Maneck [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
In Islam, that's when a person becomes an adult. What other definition
of woman are you using?
Dear Gilberto,
So do you think it would be okay today if a mature man married and had
intercourse with a ten year old
On Wed, 26 Jan 2005 17:26:59 EST, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
In a message dated 1/26/2005 2:31:41 PM Central Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Which social laws? I don't think the Bible or the Quran given minimum
ages for marriage. Like I said elsewhere its not a
In a message dated 1/26/2005 4:39:10 PM Central Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
This is going in circles. I would want to make a distinction betweenthe laws which people make up and the ones which God gives. Iunderstand that Bahais disagree. This is nothing new.
People make laws
In a message dated 1/26/2005 7:25:27 PM Central Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I don't think you should talk to me like that. This is part of why Iwould rather use a more neutral example. I have absolutely no interestin marrying a nine-year old girl and as I said in my answer, I have
That is true. However The house of Sa'ud entered into an alliance with
the Wahhabis and subsequent to attaining control of Arabia, they
exported Wahhabism through the funding of religious schools throughout
the middle East. One also might note British encouragement of the sect
as well as by
-
Marriages then were rarely a matter of simple choice
no matter what age you
were, but by all accounts it was a happy marriage.
Dear Susan,
I realise that. I said this because she might not at
all have been unwilling to marry Muhammad, maybe have
even wished for it. It is not usual that
Gilberto,
At 08:01 PM 1/26/2005, you wrote:
The original point was how do you evaluate prophets and think about
sinlessness. I would say that there is a certain minimal core morality which
is more fundamental and you could in principle use that the judge prophets.
Mark seemed to say it was
On Wed, 26 Jan 2005 20:20:03 -0600, Mark A. Foster [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Gilberto,
There is, IMO, a difference between virtues, which are divine
structurizations, and morals (norms and values), which are human
structurizations. Through the Will of God (virtues) or through the wills of
On Wed, 26 Jan 2005 18:25:25 -0800, Elaine Crowell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
That is true. However The house of Sa'ud entered into an alliance with
the Wahhabis and subsequent to attaining control of Arabia, they
exported Wahhabism through the funding of religious schools throughout
the
On Wed, 26 Jan 2005 18:29:01 -0800 (PST), JS [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Mark seemed to say it was reversed and that within their dispensation
prophets could do anything and almost by definition it would be correct.
-- Hi Gilberto, I think the idea is based on the following verses of
On Wed, 26 Jan 2005 20:38:28 -0600, Mark A. Foster [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Gilberto,
At 08:01 PM 1/26/2005, you wrote:
The original point was how do you evaluate prophets and think about
sinlessness. I would say that there is a certain minimal core morality
which is more fundamental and
Gilberto addressing Mark:
It seems like you are reading it correctly. I just don't think I would
agree with it. The Quran actually invites people to examine itself for
contradictions. Dares people to try to come up with verses like it. In
other places the Quran also calls itself the Criterion but
On Thu, 27 Jan 2005 12:30:04 +0700, Firouz Anaraki [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Gilberto addressing Mark:
It seems like you are reading it correctly. I just don't think I would
agree with it. The Quran actually invites people to examine itself for
contradictions. Dares people to try to come up
In a message dated 1/26/2005 11:30:40 P.M. Central Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Baha'u'llah also challenges people to come up a verse like what
Baha'u'llah has revealed and goes further and allows them to assist each
other:" O people, if ye deny these verses, by what proof
In a message dated 1/26/2005 8:21:55 P.M. Central Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
One also might note British encouragement of the sect as well as by
favouring Ibn Sa'ud over the Sharif of Mecca.
Dear Elainna,
Where does your information that the British favoured
Dear Firouz,
I never read that passage that way. I thought He was asking them to come up
with proof they believed in God, not come up with better verses.
warmest, Susan
Dear Susan,
I remember long long time back when I was living in Dubaiwe had a
deepening class about Tablet of Ahmad,
Scott,
At 08:40 PM 1/24/2005, you wrote:
Mark seems to have come into the faith the same way I did, through the
written words of Baha`u'llah. When truth sings in your heart, you are carried
away. Baha`u'llah's words reveal His character. Abdu'l Baha's words reveal
Baha`u'llah's character. That
Hi, Susan,
At 08:11 AM 1/25/2005, you wrote:
I didn't see any big problem with that book aside from the fact it had never
gone through review.
Gaver imported a lot of popular Baha'isms, urban legends, or
kitab-i-hearsays, into the book. I would need to go back and find them.
However, overall,
On Tue, 25 Jan 2005 07:29:38 -0600, Mark A. Foster [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Gilberto,
At 09:25 PM 1/24/2005, you wrote:
I would probably prefer to discuss this point with an issue that wasn't so
emotionally charged because because it can be sensitive for alot of folks.
But I would say,
In a message dated 1/25/2005 8:37:34 A.M. Central Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Gaver imported a lot of popular "Baha'isms," urban legends, or
"kitab-i-hearsays," into the book.
Dear Mark,
I suppose at the time I read that book I took those things for granted.
warmest,
In a message dated 1/25/2005 8:33:56 A.M. Central Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
However,
some other things have been much greater concerns to me recently, especially
Ruhi.
Well, if it is any comfort, Baha'u'llah didn't do that.
;-}
Susan,
At 08:11 AM 1/25/2005, you wrote:
Aisha, not Khadija.
Yep. ;-)
I think of circumstances where it might for me. For instance if Baha'u'llah
had authorized anything similiar to the massacre of the Banu Qurayza I doubt
if I could recognize Him as having the remedy we need for this day.
Gilberto,
At 08:42 AM 1/25/2005, you wrote:
But if its not a case of abused and if you are just talking about people
getting married at ages atypical for 21st century Kansas, I don't think
that's a moral question.
I think it would clearly be a moral issue to most Americans for an adult to
Susan,
At 08:46 AM 1/25/2005, you wrote:
Well, if it is any comfort, Baha'u'llah didn't do that. ;-}
I suppose we can all ask Him about it in the next world.
Regards, Mark A. Foster http://markfoster.net [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sacred cows make the tastiest hamburger. Abbie Hoffman
Gilberto,
At 10:09 AM 1/25/2005, you wrote:
That she was pre-pubescent is an assumption on your part. There are
indications otherwise.
I know the issue is not decided. However, the author of the article you
referenced before on the subject said that, presently, the evidence *did*
support that
I'm saying that when a 53-year old male marries a 20-30 year old female,
he has married a young woman, and when he marries a female who is
barely 18 he then has married a teenager. When a 53-year old male
marries a female who has just barely tuned 9 lunar years, it is not
accurate to say that he
I do not take all of the comments here about the marriage between Muhammad and Aisha asevidencethat Muhammad was evil or had ill intentions.
As our society changes, there is a need to renew the Revelation of God, which is, after all, written forUS inOUR language based onOUR society.As our
The sources indicate that the nikah didn't occur until after puberty.
In Islam, that's when a person becomes an adult. What other definition
of woman are you using?
Peace
Gilberto
On Tue, 25 Jan 2005 20:59:53 -0500 (EST), Iskandar Hai, M.D.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'm saying that when a
yep I agree with you Gilberto.
It could be that at a young age this woman recognised
the purity and specialness of the Prophet and was
therefore very willing to marry Him.
Times and habits and way of thinking and mores were
completely different then. Plus, the Prophet was a
very special
In Islam, that's when a person becomes an adult. What other definition
of woman are you using?
Dear Gilberto,
So do you think it would be okay today if a mature man married and had
intercourse with a ten year old girl so long as she had had her menses?
warmest, Susan
Janine:
It could be that at a young age this woman recognised
the purity and specialness of the Prophet and was
therefore very willing to marry Him.
Should the Prophet marry any girl (no matter what age) who would like to get
married to Him?
regards,
Firouz
In a message dated 1/24/2005 8:35:53 PM Central Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Mark I did not accept Baha'u'llah based on His character. In fact, I knew next to nothing about Him when I became a Baha'i in 1970. For whatever *reason*, my heart responded to His claim, and I recognized
Gilberto,
At 08:33 PM 1/24/2005, you wrote:
Personally I don't see the above issues as requiring or suggesting
relativism. In the case of Moses one could argue that the death was in
self-defense. The issue of Muhammad and Aishah might be addressed by pointing
out that marrying a young woman,
Iskandar,
why could Aishah not marry again?
much love,
janine"Iskandar Hai, M.D." [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Mon, 24 Jan 2005, Gilberto Simpson wrote: Gilberto: Personally I don't see the above issues as requiring or suggesting relativism. In the case of Moses one could argue that the death
In a message dated 1/24/2005 9:11:47 P.M. Central Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
why could Aishah not marry again?
Dear John,
In the Islamic (and Baha'i) context it is unheard of for someone who was
married to prophet to ever marry someone else. That's why Shoghi
On Mon, 24 Jan 2005 20:50:55 -0600, Mark A. Foster [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Gilberto,
At 08:33 PM 1/24/2005, you wrote:
Personally I don't see the above issues as requiring or suggesting
relativism. In the case of Moses one could argue that the death was in
self-defense. The issue of
I'd say a child of around 7 or 9 lunar years of age is a more accurate
term than young woman when she marries a person 50 years older than her.
She is what she is whether she is married or not.
She was barely 18 when she became a widow, and could not marry again
In the Quran it says:
33.6] The Prophet has a greater claim on the faithful than they have
on themselves, and his wives are (as) their mothers; and the
possessors of relationship have the better claim in the ordinance of
Allah to inheritance, one with respect to another, than (other)
believers,
71 matches
Mail list logo
