Unsympathetic, perhaps. Not intolerant, though. I'm perfectly happy letting anybody live in whatever delusional world-view they find compelling.
On the other hand, I am decidedly intolerant of religious proselytizing. Or religion-based judgmental behavior. Or religion-based intolerance. Or religion-based wars. Or religion-based cruelty towards animals. Other than than, I'm perfectly fine with religion. --Doug On Fri, Sep 14, 2012 at 9:35 AM, Nicholas Thompson < nickthomp...@earthlink.net> wrote: [...] > ** ** > > Third, Doug is intolerant of religion. > [...] Nick **** > > ** ** > > ** ** > > *From:* friam-boun...@redfish.com [mailto:friam-boun...@redfish.com] *On > Behalf Of *Douglas Roberts > > *Sent:* Friday, September 14, 2012 10:37 AM > *To:* The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group > *Subject:* Re: [FRIAM] Fwd: America and the Middle East: Murder in Libya > | The Economist**** > > ** ** > > Well, as much as I respect your opinion, Dave, I could not possibly > disagree more with you. Or at least with your opening sentence.**** > > ** ** > > While I choose not to state it as absolute fact, I would like to suggest > that Religion *is* the problem.**** > > ** ** > > Human kind's ongoing attempts to cast one's existence into one or another > particular narrow religious world-view where some or another deity is > responsible for them, for their well being, for their punishment for > failing to follow the tenents of their religion, and for their path to > redemption; this is *the* problem. Again, just my opinion. I would not > presume to be a dispenser of absolute truth.**** > > ** ** > > --Doug**** > > On Fri, Sep 14, 2012 at 8:20 AM, Prof David West <profw...@fastmail.fm> > wrote:**** > > The problem is not with the Religion - it is with various interpretations > of the religion. And it is a myth that there is a "majority" available to > counteract or condemn the "minority"**** > > **** > > Take the obscene group of "Christians" that like to protest at military > funerals claiming "the death is a good thing because it is God's > punishment for tolerating gays." Or the group that financed the film at > issue the last few days. (Or Mel Gibson's father's church.) ....**** > > **** > > Following Owen's argument we should see almost every other person who > professes to be a Christian denounce this kind of base misinterpretation of > their Religion. But it does not happen - because "they" are not "us" and > so we do not have to explain, apologize or denounce. Only a few political > and religious leaders will react - the Archbishop of Santa Fe, for example, > stated that those people are not following the precepts of the Christian > religion and should be ignored. Note: no one said they should be expelled, > excommunicated, from Christianity or that Christians were in any way > responsible - even though the extreme position is grounded in another, more > mainstream *interpretation* of what the Bible may or may not say about > homosexuality. Hussein Abbas' eloquent response is a personal example of > exactly this kind of phenomenon.**** > > **** > > There is an exact parallel evident in the middle east today. Yesterday I > heard two imams, the president of Egypt, and the president of Yemen state > that Islam provided no excuse for the violence - that blasphemy is not an > excuse for violence, even to the blasphemer. (Homenei's famous fatwa > against Salman Rushdie was denounced by a majority of other imams.) Also > heard were promises to seek out and punish the perpetrators (hard there and > equally hard here because of the rule of law). In Pakistan, it is the imams > that are denouncing the morons that apparently framed and wanted to put to > death a young women with mental development issues, for blasphemy.**** > > **** > > Owen will never see the reaction he seeks - here, there, anywhere - > because sectarianism in every religion means there is no "majority" that > can react and that every sect sees themselves as apart from "those idiots > over there" and therefore Not Responsible. Nevertheless, Individual > leaders, religious and political, do and are currently doing exactly what > Owen asks - denouncing, pointing out misinterpretations, apologizing (for > faith and for country) for the miscreants, asking for understanding, and > promising all possible corrective action/punishment.**** > > **** > > Is it our own insistence to treat a highly diverse group as a monolithic > bloc the real root of the problems? Coupled, of course, with our > unwillingness to truly examine and understand our own religion let alone > that of someone else.**** > > **** > > dave west**** > > **** > > **** > > On Thu, Sep 13, 2012, at 09:25 PM, Hussein Abbass wrote:**** > > Owen**** > > **** > > While I am an IT professor, I am very backward in using > blogs and almost incapable of expressing myself in emails or otherwise. > Your question would be better discussed in a long session with lots of > coffees and chocolates J**** > > **** > > I do not normally put my Moslim hat on; almost never > because I see religion as a relationship between me and God that is no one > else business. Therefore, my actions are my responsibilities and if I do > something good I take the reward personally so why when I do something bad > should my religion, or any dimension of my identity be blamed.**** > > **** > > But your question was interesting. Not just from > complexity perspective, from many other dimensions that once more, writing > long emails would not send the right message through.**** > > **** > > Sometimes the good Moslims (whatever this means and in > whose eyes) do not respond simply because they do not agree with the > premise. The premise of the religion as the centre for conflict. The > premise that we should be blamed for our belief. The premise that I should > spend my time justifying someone else actions simply because there is a > perception that I and them share something in common because it is written > in my passport or on a system somewhere. If I believe in doing good, I > would like to invest my time in that, and not invest my time to defend bad > when bad was not my action in the first place. **** > > **** > > So call it an ego-centric or whatever, this is I. In > Islam, when we do good, we should not talk about it because we are doing it > to fulfil a sacred commitment to God. In fact, there is a premise that you > should hide the good you are doing to get a better reward from God. This is > too complicated to explain in an email!**** > > **** > > Some of us just do not wish to be bothered to defend or discuss the bad > because the time and resources to spend on doing good alone are very > limited. The world is full of opportunities to do good, why should we spend > the time to discuss the bad!**** > > **** > > Sometimes also if we wish to explain concepts properly, > you would not do it properly in a simple email or a simple discussion. > There are things that can take a long time to understand before we can use > them to explain!**** > > **** > > If this sounds a weak argument, we have to dig down to the > roots to see what defines weak and strong arguments; and that is a long > discussion!**** > > **** > > If I want to use a complexity lens, the Egyptian reply was > a choice they made on a Pareto curve. If someone seriously wishes to > understand it, they will need to analyse in details the underlying axes for > this Pareto curve, the sources of anti-correlation, and the interaction of > the utility functions. Only then, they will see the complex dilemma setting > at the roots of this reply as compared to a possibly artificial politically > correct reply that some people expect.**** > > **** > > If the above is a starting point for a discussion, next > time you visit Australia, drop by and we can attempt to resolve it all on a > nice cup of coffee with nice dark chocolates J**** > > **** > > Kind regards**** > > Hussein**** > > **** > > *From:* friam-boun...@redfish.com [mailto:friam-boun...@redfish.com] *On > Behalf Of *Owen Densmore > *Sent:* Friday, 14 September 2012 3:01 AM > *To:* Complexity Coffee Group > *Subject:* [FRIAM] Fwd: America and the Middle East: Murder in Libya | > The Economist**** > > **** > > The Economist sent out their weekly email, which included a story on the > Libya fiasco: http://goo.gl/0mfCW**** > > **** > > This reminded me of one of my possibly Politically Incorrect notions: Why > don't the civilized muslim world attempt to counter this insanity on the > part of their fundamentalists? At least some attempt to apologize for My > Religion, The Bad Parts? God knows I do!**** > > **** > > We had an imam visit the cathedral in Santa Fe to discuss the simplicity > and beauty of his religion. Some questions were asked about The Bad Parts, > in a very civilized manor. The conversation was sane, polite, and > certainly informative.**** > > **** > > What if the Vatican sent out a hit squad for all the similar > anti-Christian movies or other inflammatory media? Or the Buddhists sent > ninjas after non-believers? Or the Jews killed Dutch cartoonists?**** > > **** > > What I'm getting at is this: why *isn't* there a strong community of sane > and vocal muslims at least trying to communicate to the rest of us?**** > > **** > > Please do understand that this is not a rant against religion, but more of > a puzzled look at an insane situation. And Yes, I really wish we'd keep > our nose out of other's affairs. I'm not trying to be a bigot. But I truly > would like to grok this phenomenon. **** > > **** > > What am I missing? Good complexity question, I bet.**** > > **** > > -- Owen **** > > ============================================================**** > > FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv**** > > Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College**** > > lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org**** > > **** > > > ============================================================ > FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv > Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College > lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org**** > > > > **** > > ** ** > > -- > Doug Roberts > drobe...@rti.org > d...@parrot-farm.net**** > > http://parrot-farm.net/Second-Cousins**** > > > 505-455-7333 - Office > 505-670-8195 - Cell**** > > ** ** > > ============================================================ > FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv > Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College > lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org > -- Doug Roberts drobe...@rti.org d...@parrot-farm.net http://parrot-farm.net/Second-Cousins <http://parrot-farm.net/Second-Cousins> 505-455-7333 - Office 505-670-8195 - Cell
============================================================ FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org
