(March 18, 2020 at 6:27 pm)Belacqua Wrote:

(March 18, 2020 at 11:22 am)Fake Messiah Wrote: Jews who are mostly only culturally Jewish (they don't exactly believe in burning bush and flood)

[...]


Because if you have a lot of faith in nonsense from holy books,  you have to spend a lot of mental energy every day to rationalize those nonsensical things in order so that they appear to you as "real" in face of actuall reality, so you don't have enough mental energy left to do the real thinking and learning.

This is a mistake you make all the time. You assume that all religious people are literalist sola scriptura. This is ignorance on your part, and the reason you won't learn otherwise appears to be bigotry. 

There are many religious Jews -- to whom their religion is very important -- who don't read the burning bush and flood as literal historical events. The non-literal reading has a long history, is well known, and people who, unlike you, know what they're talking about have no problem with it.

Likewise educated Muslims don't have to waste time rationalizing myths and wasting their mental energy.

You're the one wasting mental energy by making false and prejudiced assumptions about a huge and diverse group of people.

---

(March 18, 2020 at 5:16 pm)BrianSoddingBoru4 Wrote: It appears that the study was pointing out THAT Muslim students fail to be awarded degrees and not WHY this is the case.

Boru

It appears that some of our fellow posters are happy to ignore that part, and draw whatever conclusion they want. In the case above, that conclusion is his usual "religious people dumb."

That’s not exactly FM’s point, though. He emphasized the difference between secular and non-secular Muslims and Jews. He was addressing people who ‘...have a lot of faith in nonsense from holy books...’ as opposed to making some sort of blanket generalization about all or even most believers. 

And you also appear to be among those who missed the caveat I quoted from the study.

Boru

(March 18, 2020 at 6:33 pm)BrianSoddingBoru4 Wrote: That’s not exactly FM’s point, though. He emphasized the difference between secular and non-secular Muslims and Jews. He was addressing people who ‘...have a lot of faith in nonsense from holy books...’ as opposed to making some sort of blanket generalization about all or even most believers. 

He says that "secular" people don't believe the myths, and religious people do believe the literal truth of the myths, which cause them to waste mental energy on reconciling these things.

This is not true.

(March 18, 2020 at 6:43 pm)Belacqua Wrote:

(March 18, 2020 at 6:33 pm)BrianSoddingBoru4 Wrote: That’s not exactly FM’s point, though. He emphasized the difference between secular and non-secular Muslims and Jews. He was addressing people who ‘...have a lot of faith in nonsense from holy books...’ as opposed to making some sort of blanket generalization about all or even most believers. 

He says that "secular" people don't believe the myths, and religious people do believe the literal truth of the myths, which cause them to waste mental energy on reconciling these things.

This is not true.

Here’s what he said:

Quote:Most religious people that are in academia are secular and especially Jews who are mostly only culturally Jewish (they don't exactly believe in burning bush and flood). I mean if you look at Nobel laureates you can see a lot of "Jews" but basically no Muslims.

Similar case is with Christians.

Of course, secular Muslims are still very rare, so that is perhaps why they aren't in noticable numbers in academia.
Because if you have a lot of faith in nonsense from holy books, you have to spend a lot of mental energy every day to rationalize those nonsensical things in order so that they appear to you as "real" in face of actuall reality, so you don't have enough mental energy left to do the real thinking and learning.

I think you’re missing - deliberately or not - his qualifiers. He didn’t say ‘religious people’ - he said people who have faith in the nonsense in the holy books. I agree with you completely that this qualifier excludes the great majority of religionists. 

You’re replying as if he made some sort of sweeping generalization about believers. He didn’t.

Re-read the post with that in mind, I think you’ll see what I’m driving at.

Boru

(March 18, 2020 at 7:41 pm)BrianSoddingBoru4 Wrote:

(March 18, 2020 at 6:43 pm)Belacqua Wrote: He says that "secular" people don't believe the myths, and religious people do believe the literal truth of the myths, which cause them to waste mental energy on reconciling these things.

This is not true.

Here’s what he said:

Quote:Most religious people that are in academia are secular and especially Jews who are mostly only culturally Jewish (they don't exactly believe in burning bush and flood). I mean if you look at Nobel laureates you can see a lot of "Jews" but basically no Muslims.

Similar case is with Christians.

Of course, secular Muslims are still very rare, so that is perhaps why they aren't in noticable numbers in academia.
Because if you have a lot of faith in nonsense from holy books, you have to spend a lot of mental energy every day to rationalize those nonsensical things in order so that they appear to you as "real" in face of actuall reality, so you don't have enough mental energy left to do the real thinking and learning.

I think you’re missing - deliberately or not - his qualifiers. He didn’t say ‘religious people’ - he said people who have faith in the nonsense in the holy books. I agree with you completely that this qualifier excludes the great majority of religionists. 

You’re replying as if he made some sort of sweeping generalization about believers. He didn’t.

Re-read the post with that in mind, I think you’ll see what I’m driving at.

Boru

Quote:secular and especially Jews who are mostly only culturally Jewish (they don't exactly believe in burning bush and flood)

Many many religious Jews, who are not secular or only culturally Jewish, do not believe in a literal burning bush or flood.

Quote:secular Muslims are still very rare, so that is perhaps why they aren't in noticable numbers in academia.
Because if you have a lot of faith in nonsense from holy books, you have to spend a lot of mental energy every day to rationalize those nonsensical things

Fake's narrow take on the matter is that religious Muslims believe the literal truth of myths, and that this takes up their mental energy when they try to be reasonable scientists.

This is not true. There are many religious Muslims who do not believe myths.

Fake limits his definition of religion to the literal belief in myths like burning bushes and global floods. This is not fair.

The original article contained what the researchers thought:

https://www.theguardian.com/education/20...ss-degrees

Quote:It suggested that differences in students’ backgrounds and experiences, differences in treatment from staff and other students, and “barriers specifically associated with religious observation” could all play a part in explaining the attainment gap.

As a Muslim, I never experienced being surrounded by non-Muslims except in this forum, the effects of the propaganda carried out towards Muslims is explosive and damaging beyond extent; it's hard to study and focus on knowledge when everybody around you judges you just for the mere belonging to Muslim family, your concentration will be shattered between your studies and between the looks of anybody around.

When you're a suspect before even a crime happens; you get into that state.
Aside from the very sad situation in the Muslim homeland.

Jews are better in their studies because they face no harassment. Siekhs and Hindus are probably mistaken for being Muslims; so they also get hammered by the propaganda against Muslims.

Studying and achieving needs a calm, friendly environment. Muslims don't get that, they get accused just for being Muslim.

---

(March 18, 2020 at 5:07 pm)Belacqua Wrote:

(March 18, 2020 at 10:02 am)Succubus#2 Wrote: From the Guardian. No link but it's easy enough to find.


Yes no doubt, there must be no end of variables involved but this:


Appears to be in conflict with this:


WTF? I eagerly await an explanation for this from our Muslim colleagues.


Every picture tells a story.

Does the research factor in other socioeconomic factors? 

For example, it may be (I don't know) that Muslim students are more likely to be immigrants or the children of immigrants. They may well be at a disadvantage in their primary education. Likewise, they may be living in poorer areas with lots of immigrants, or lower tax bases, in the schools aren't as good. 

Peter Hitchens has written a lot about how in the bad old days high schools could select students by merit, but the new system means that kids in rich areas, or kids with very rich parents, have clear advantages.

I don't know... I'm just thinking we should look at likely factors apart from religion.

When I went to high school in a totally podunk town with a barely-functioning high school, I was told that it's impossible to study for the SAT entrance exam. Then I got to New York and all the rich kids said they had been taking SAT prep courses for years before the exam. They had full-time counsellors and special tutoring included in their schools. They had full time placement officers in their high schools whose job it was to get them into the best college. 

Some of those kids were genuinely smarter than me, but some of them weren't -- they were the kids of rich parents who had their hands held all through college, who did the minimum amount of work anyway, and got great jobs out of college because of connections. They were generous with their cocaine, though, as a way of having us not hate them.

Anyway, there need to be many other things factored in to such a study.

I'm sorry to read about your past troubles.

As a Muslim, our region is drenched in pure poverty, lack of future, etc. We mainly look forward to an immigration chance to a western country so we live. I don't think academics would be our concern, but how to get work so we gain cash enough for us to survive.

You can see a glimpse of that in the immigrants boarding the death-boats to the borders of Europe, or the Millions of Syrians crossing to Turkey then Europe.

But yes. Rich, well-rest students are of course at an advantage. Only bigots would fail to see due to bigotry and ignoring of facts.

---

(March 18, 2020 at 6:27 pm)Belacqua Wrote:

(March 18, 2020 at 11:22 am)Fake Messiah Wrote: Jews who are mostly only culturally Jewish (they don't exactly believe in burning bush and flood)

[...]


Because if you have a lot of faith in nonsense from holy books,  you have to spend a lot of mental energy every day to rationalize those nonsensical things in order so that they appear to you as "real" in face of actuall reality, so you don't have enough mental energy left to do the real thinking and learning.

This is a mistake you make all the time. You assume that all religious people are literalist sola scriptura. This is ignorance on your part, and the reason you won't learn otherwise appears to be bigotry. 

There are many religious Jews -- to whom their religion is very important -- who don't read the burning bush and flood as literal historical events. The non-literal reading has a long history, is well known, and people who, unlike you, know what they're talking about have no problem with it.

Likewise educated Muslims don't have to waste time rationalizing myths and wasting their mental energy.

You're the one wasting mental energy by making false and prejudiced assumptions about a huge and diverse group of people.

---

(March 18, 2020 at 5:16 pm)BrianSoddingBoru4 Wrote: It appears that the study was pointing out THAT Muslim students fail to be awarded degrees and not WHY this is the case.

Boru

It appears that some of our fellow posters are happy to ignore that part, and draw whatever conclusion they want. In the case above, that conclusion is his usual "religious people dumb."

Ignore poor FM; he's a bigot repeating the same message over and over and over. Sometimes I feel he is a bot.

He is not wasting "his" energy; but seeking to waste yours, so watch out.

(March 18, 2020 at 6:27 pm)Belacqua Wrote: You assume that all religious people are literalist sola scriptura.

In what way do you conclude that I assume all religious people are literalist sola scriptura, especially since I just wrote "secular Jews"? I mean are you really this retarded or just trolling? Why do I even ask?

(March 18, 2020 at 6:27 pm)Belacqua Wrote: This is ignorance on your part, and the reason you won't learn otherwise appears to be bigotry.

Well, FUCK YOU you dumb asshole and your idiotic accusations. Do you hear that? FUCK YOU, YOU DUMB MOTHERFUCKER!!!

Wow.  A member makes a valid comment about a small segment of believers in three religions, SAYS it's not about all believers, and is castigated for being a bigot.

Where's the real bigotry here?

Boru

(March 19, 2020 at 6:14 am)BrianSoddingBoru4 Wrote: Wow.  A member makes a valid comment about a small segment of believers in three religions, SAYS it's not about all believers, and is castigated for being a bigot.

Where's the real bigotry here?

Boru

Reading this comment of the member FM  carries the answer:

https://atheistforums.org/thread-60629-p...pid1962801

Quote:Fake Messiah said:
Yeah, Muslims should look-up to the Jews if they want to be more successful in life.

Then again:
https://atheistforums.org/thread-60629-p...pid1962809

Quote:Fake Messiah said:
Because if you have a lot of faith in nonsense from holy books, you have to spend a lot of mental energy every day to rationalize those nonsensical things in order so that they appear to you as "real" in face of actuall reality, so you don't have enough mental energy left to do the real thinking and learning.

To conclude, he first judged all Muslims implicitly, then made his judgement explicit by judging anybody that has a strong belief in their holy books to have small mental energy to give to thinking and learning.

That's a bigot, fair and square. That's a bigot calling all religious people stupid, judging all religious people to be stupid.

(March 19, 2020 at 6:14 am)BrianSoddingBoru4 Wrote: Wow.  A member makes a valid comment about a small segment of believers in three religions, SAYS it's not about all believers, and is castigated for being a bigot.

Where's the real bigotry here?

Boru

The way I read his comment, he's saying that "cultural Jews" are the ones who don't believe in the literal truth of the myths. To me, this sounds as though he thinks that religious Jews DO believe these as literal truth. 

Given other things he's said in the past, my inference is reasonable. If he'd like to clarify, and explain that many many religious Jews and religious Muslims DO NOT believe in the literal truth of talking snakes, global floods, etc., he can certainly do that. I suspect that he won't be willing to agree that there are religious people who don't believe stupid stuff.

I think he is suffering from cognitive dissonance. He assumes a priori that religious people believe stupid stuff. If, therefore, a Jew or a Muslim does not believe stupid stuff, then FM assumes that he must be only a "cultural" Jew or Muslim, not a religious one. 

If that's what he believes, he's wrong. If it's not what he believes, he can clarify.

---

(March 19, 2020 at 4:34 am)WinterHold Wrote: I'm sorry to read about your past troubles.

It's OK, it was a fascinating time for me. 

I worked at a very high-priced art gallery in NYC for several years. Since I'd grown up in a tiny town with basically no culture, it was a big change. The whole thing felt so unreal that I didn't resent the privileges of the 1% -- it was like watching a movie. And even though I was the one hanging the picture and doing the track lighting, the pictures I was hanging up were the same ones I'd been studying in art history classes, and that was fun for me. 

There was also a clear distinction between the people who got rich because of talent and those who got rich just because of money. Wall Street people treated everyone they were around who wasn't their financial equal like a slave. But the artists were almost always kind and personable. I went to Paloma Picasso's house a few times to take pictures or organize shipping, and even though she looked superhumanly well put together, she was always welcoming. My favorite was Saul Steinberg, who was famous for New Yorker covers. He acted like someone who wasn't famous. I always had a book under my arm for when I had to wait, and he invariably wanted to know about what I was reading, and if he should read it, and suggested similar things I'd like. He was a wonderful man. 

Quote:As a Muslim, our region is drenched in pure poverty, lack of future, etc. We mainly look forward to an immigration chance to a western country so we live. I don't think academics would be our concern, but how to get work so we gain cash enough for us to survive.

You can see a glimpse of that in the immigrants boarding the death-boats to the borders of Europe, or the Millions of Syrians crossing to Turkey then Europe.

But yes. Rich, well-rest students are of course at an advantage. Only bigots would fail to see due to bigotry and ignoring of facts.

Yes, I think there's no doubt about this at all. Western colonization has worked diligently to keep Muslim regions poor in order to extract the resources cheaply.

It's certain that a great deal of Western antipathy to Islam is manufactured by the media to distract us from our own government's evil policies, and pretend that there is something intrinsically bad about people in those countries. As if their desire to hit us back is due only to irrational religion. 

I read an article a while back about Britain's need for cotton in the 18th century. Most of it came from the American colonies, and the war for independence was fought at least in part for control of the cotton. Instead of shipping it to England to be woven and therefore have most of the value added, the colonies wanted to weave it themselves and derive the whole benefit. When England lost this resource after 1776, they turned to Egyptian cotton and made sure not to repeat the mistake they'd made in North America: they made absolutely sure that Egyptians themselves would never be able to benefit from the profits of the cotton, and to do this required keeping Egyptian education and its economy as primitive as possible. And then of course they blamed the Egyptians for not being an advanced country.

Here is where the useful idiots like Hitchens and Dawkins serve as spokespeople for empire. By blaming religion for what can much more fairly be attributed to their own countries' economic policies, they scapegoat others and exonerate themselves.

In the UK there is definitely an education issue with being muslim, look at page 14, table 3: http://bridgeinstitute.co.uk/wp-content/...-FINAL.pdf

All non muslims "gained intended award" (graduated?) at a higher rate.