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

Reply via email to