Escolar Documentos
Profissional Documentos
Cultura Documentos
Edd
As I watched the ex-president of American Atheist, Ed.D. Edd
Buckner debate against public speaker and intellectual activist,
Hamza Andreas Tzortzis I realised the differences and common
grounds they differ upon and share. Like many good debates1,
structured upon a real concern to convince and share, this one
excelled in this particular way that enthused me. I would also
like to express my appreciation to those many people who
presented me with the opportunity to listen and observe their
good debates; those who helped me with my compilations and
framework. And aforemost, I thank and praise my good God,
the Lord of the worlds.
Is it balanced?
Or is it both?!!!
An Introduction:
As I was watching this debate something struck me as odd; is
this debate from a pure philosophical predilection or is it a
scientific inquisition? Stuck in an either-or whirlpool, since theists
are usually more to the philosophical side, and Atheist refute
theology with a philosophical-scientific approach, I believe we all
end up having a philosophical doctrine with corresponding faithful
correlations. As many theories, including Darwins theories, reach a
point when you cant prove them more, thence deeming them as
plausible or sceptically trivialising their evolution or impact; likewise,
is done to religious doctrines. At a point you would have to believe
on or rebuff, choosing your own diet and filling your own plate with
the colors and nutritional values you deem as worthwhile. However,
after listening to many debates relating to similar arguments, I
realized the reason why they teach scientific thinking before
philosophical thinking: tapping into the memories of how I reverted
to Islam, I remembered how relieved I was to hear that from chaos
comes order, yet still equally satisfied later by becoming certain of
the existence of one creator. I believe that was not possible except
through the scientific tunnel vision and its thinking tools; for me it
was my astronomy class, which I proclaimed as Monotheism101.
Later, I realized that this was the perspective the divine verbatim
miraculous Islamic scriptural evidence offers to many of those who
are researching to find genuine signs that correlate to proof the
existence of a divine being, hence divine guidance2. Upon reaching
evidence of monotheism, I started correlating philosophical
arguments of theology and balanced morality; usually labelled as
2 I will show them my signs in the heavens and the earth tell
they apprehend that it is the truth; is not enough testimony
that your lord is a witness over everything: Verily they are wary
from them meeting their Lord; verily he is inclusive to all.
(Meanings from the Quran: 41:53-54)
5 https://youtu.be/YI9owlpOQl0
6 Meanings from the verbatim words of God: The Holy Quran:
The 49th Chapter correlated upon the parable of the prophetic
private quarters: 13.
My Second Quandary:
The importance of practical philosophy in counselling science and
scientists; a step further to the theological ultimatum.
My Third Quandary:
The scientific model we live in: Does our innate demo-graphy
always disagree with our communal sense via our common
sense?!!!
i.
ii.
All in all, I will end my quandary quoting more from the best-selling
book The Road Less Travelled, hoping we both not lose our civil
accommodations to human-developed dogmas or blame:
Anyone who knows a died-in-the-wool Atheist will know that
such an individual can be as dogmatic about unbelief as a
believer can be about belief; and as accusing as a believer
can be cruel.10
10 M. Scott Peck, The Road Less Travelled: The Baby and the
Bath Water.
Case discussion:
Muslims have an incoherent objective concept of Allaah due to the
many attributes and names they exalt Allaah with?
Invoking upon Allaahs divinity in Islam is the collective respective
use of divine attributes and names as to correlate meaningful facets of
the same being that are particular to a situation, objectively bonding the
worshipper, tendering and directing him in this certain situation! That is
also manifested in the Muslims belief and perspective in the purposeful
creation of the dimensional model we live in: in other words, when one
recalls a situation for an objective reason he would look upon it
differently than someone who recalls for a recreational reason. Our
perspective of life differs with our reasoning to our existence, those who
believe in an afterlife will consequently appraise life and choices
differently. As with morals, the use of divine names and the reasoning we
give to fate, defines and correlates our perception of utility and our
perspective of praiseworthy. As a believer enciphers life as salvational,
such different adjectives connect to him in a corresponding nature; our
perception can change the world around us, moreover they deeply affect
us as individuals. As we choose which name or facet to invoke upon,
thus we believe we are affecting, thence we are effected; this defines our
priorities, course of action and our belief. As an Atheist basically
perceives life as evolutionary chaotic, a mundane survival jungle, where
luck is the utmost controller with a spoonful of synergetic evolutionary
wisdom. Building upon what is socially determined by the herd or
through trial and error; a believer believes that ultimately there is and will
be a divine perfect gnostic.
@ ...Or is it aptness?
Whilst being a very epistemic answer with respect to some
peoples perception; I argue its epistemic morality and rationality.
So you would believe in the existence of a creator that created the
heavens and the earth, and that provides us with material, a chance and
a will to choose, then you would choose to ignore this all?!! Is it the lack
of skill and attributes in the scientific model around you? Would you
rather revert to re-creation? But where? And how? Can we create
another reality? Another earth? Different logic? A different scientific
balance?
Or is it the lack of gratefulness?
Or is it how you would like to invest upon the choice and chance
you were given?
Do you think it was unfair to introduce you to an existence
then make you suffer the consequence of nurture and evolution in
order to reach this kind of preliminary epistemic understanding
and correlation of consequence? Is there another way to
understand consequence rather than empiricism, do you prefer a
cyborg existence? Do you question that drive that pushes you to
learn, evolve and become the fittest, or would you rather we were
all be bionic replicas of the fittest? Or are you privileged and
wondering about the under privileged, but arent you fitted for a
more active role to service them with support?
Life may seem very confusing, but when fractioned over infinity in
a mathematical way it can either mean fie, or ir-ratio-nal! Getting Real
about symbols, fie does mean something, but something beyond
ratio and perspective!!! Losing infinity for a fleeting creation is a
decision worth pondering upon; to us we are considering something like
here and after, whilst acknowledging before and ever-after!
I didn't understand this idea of a God who says, 'You have to
acknowledge me. You have to say that I'm the best, and then I'll give you
eternal happiness. If you won't, then you don't get it!' It seemed to be
about ego. I can't see God operating from ego, so it made no sense to
me.
@ Or is it ego?
God from their perspective, always has an ego problem, but they
don't!?
Sometimes what really doesnt make sense to us is what we dont
want to understand or comprehend. So epistemically this argument built
on a presumed premise that one believes that somebody created
everything, and because he has an ego problem when he tells us to
worship him, he must not be a real God?!!
God must be all-forgiving, and never fair; he must provide us with
perfect answers and life, but never choice, guidance and care.
. It even rhymes, shall I start my new bible??
But then no one should ask us to acknowledge his personal platform and
importance in our life, and his academic achievements and personal
accomplishments; hence we can assign and adopt whatever
substantiation we want Only, but thats not rational, even though the
ego concept is apparent! Acknowledging people respectively is good
kind of ego! Ego, when it is based on real self-worth is so handy, it
teaches us to respect those who should be respected: when it is more...
when it is less... it is a mess...! Anarchisting to bogus perspectives!
Ego-Worthy is a good quality, it does not mean vain, and keeps
distance from meek; it presents people in their respective and useful
titles, especially in the presence of the not so proper. This is a facet
including one of the names of God, which is the Haughty. Imagine if
every time -keeping in mind that he is the Almighty Creator- God hears
this person utter words of ignorance or insolence in describing him, or do
something really immoral: isnt it a blessing to that person that God is so
Haughty and does not lash back instantaneously at everyone who
transgresses? Isnt it a name one can correlate to mercy, thats if it is
Ego-worthy balancing with other attributes? If he was not so great and
haughty, he couldnt be so merciful and forgiving. Yet also, isnt it a
name one can correlate to capability? As to justly and skilfully deal
with those who have passed their limit, with wisdom, and without
fast overruling and pathetic anger!
scientific tunnel vision chop off the baby and our need for bathing,
leaving us just with the overwhelming bathing water and its impurities!
12
12 M. Scott Peck, The Road Less Travelled: The Baby and The
Bath Water.
14
Case study:
The affix in the word the-o-ry rooting us to Theo - from the Greek
word meaning God- or Thea- from the Greek word meaning a
viewpoint or theatre-. This creates two sub-divisional philosophical
paths: one strenuous in its requirement of the belief in a Theo and his
uni-versal order, and the other evolutionary for observational and
educational reasons of our fleeting existence and recreational reality.
22 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aristotle
They would argue that the word god outposts from " a root
(verb) *geuu - "to pour, libate" (Sanskrit huta, see hotr ), or from
a root (verb) *gauu - (*geuu h2-) "to call, to invoke" (Sanskrit
hta)"25. This is much resonated when researching the Arabic
word and comparing it upon the anthropological usage of the
word. This pouring of feelings, overwhelming to the point of
invoking "sweetness" or "goodness", is the meaning of the
Arabic verb "Laha" which can be also considered as highly
onomatopoeic in the pouring and questing music it evokes, like
that upon seeing something morally or physically beautiful. With
the "Al" for exclusiveness, the proper noun "Al-lah" assembles:
the deservingly invoked through overwhelming (pouring) need
and our acknowledgment of goodness and beauty. The
overwhelming pouring of our inner beings is also observed in
the common usage meaning of the Arabic word "allah", not
capitalized, but still meaning amazingly good; it has been
observed that innately (if untampered) we as individuals
have a pouring inclination to the good, the beautiful, the
moral and the belief in God.
For Aristotle, therefore, epistemology is based on the study of particular
phenomena and rises to the knowledge of essences, while for Plato,
epistemology begins with knowledge of universal forms (or ideas) and
descends to knowledge of particular imitations of these. 26
Blaming a not so great god does not reflect but our choice
and how we choose to exercise our willpower. Willpower that
should be used to build and help ourselves and others. Do we
believe our collective willpower presents us with a very far from
perfect reality? Or is it our lame aspirations that requires a
bliss on earth, with no trials or consequence? Whether
maturing in or out of belief, an immature understandings of the
essence of difficulties in this life is a neurosis, in which
avoidance becomes a substitute to legitimate suffering.
Rational problems of delusions not all stem from mental
deficiencies, but eminently from neurosis.
Speaking of the oppressive forces that thwart our freedom can enable
us to victimize ourselves more to them, giving away part of our freedom.
The freedom to choose between two evils, to explore the issue more
fully, resenting life simply because some of its choices are painful
The more clearly we see the realities in the world, the more equipped we
are to deal with them. And the less we see, the more befuddled by
falsehood, misperceptions and illusions! 28
27 http://www.dorar.net/hadith?skeys=
%D8%A7%D9%84%D9%85%D9%84%D9%83+
%D8%A7%D9%84%D9%85%D8%B3%D9%84%D8%B7+
%D8%A7%D9%84%D9%85%D8%A8%D8%AA
%D9%84%D9%89+&st=a&xclude=
28 excerpts from the bestseller: The Road Less Travelled, by M.
Scott Peck (see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M._Scott_Peck )
Case discussion
War and suffering: between philosophical Islamic practices and
interpretations, unto realizing objective balance.
Upon reading this description for the first time, one would think
that the inhabitants of this village were rewarded for revering on
their holidays with the remunerative provision of more fish;
however, they were not, rather they were tempted by the
phenomenal behavior of fish, to break their reverence!
33 Meanings from the scripture of the Quran: (7:163).