(August 15, 2016 at 7:43 pm)Simon Moon Wrote:(August 15, 2016 at 4:23 pm)Irrational Wrote: Well, aside from the chart I just referred to in previous post, he mentioned FGM as an example to illustrate the point that culture irrespective of religion can play a significant role in fostering barbaric "ideals" and made some other points that escape my mind at the moment. But the overall point is that you can't make generalizations about the Muslim population based on a bad handling of statistics or without consideration of the role of culture in triggering certain practices/attitudes or of the multiple different ways in which religious doctrines are interpreted (leading to different ways of applying beliefs).
I am not making generalisations, and I don't think a correct understanding of what Harris says, can lead to anyone making such generalisations.
Neither I, nor Harris ever said that Islam is the only source for terrorism. The point is, when the holy text they believe is the exact word of their god, is full of barbaric ideas, it allows for an easy route to acting on such bad ideas. Yes, no question, it also takes religious leaders, and the right cultural milieu, to get followers to act. But to say that the Koran is not also a big motivator, is being a bit naive.
I'm not saying scriptures don't enable or motivate violence. But again, sometimes that depends on how adherents interpret the scriptures. With Islam in particular, we are talking about a book that suffers from an utter lack of clear context, so when you read some of the verses in the Qur'an, it's just not clear what context they're supposed to be embedded in. Add to that verses and surahs that just seem to contradict each other, and it's not obvious at all what is the on true interpretation (if there is any). For example, you have the violence verses vs. peace verses in that book. Or compulsion vs. no compulsion verses. Or other verses that just don't seem to be in harmony with each other. So what exactly is the Muslim supposed to follow and apply exactly? Well, like I said before, it's going to depend on interpretation and selective application of the verses.
Unfortunately, the Muslim leadership in some of the environments resort to a more aggressive approach because, well, it's just suitable for their political view. So this is more a fault with the state, and it's more influenced by certain political ideologies than an absolute literal and objective interpretation of a religious book that cannot be objectively interpreted anyway on the whole.
