Skip navigation
Sidebar -

Advanced search options →

Welcome

Welcome to CEMB forum.
Please login or register. Did you miss your activation email?

Donations

Help keep the Forum going!
Click on Kitty to donate:

Kitty is lost

Recent Posts


What music are you listen...
by zeca
Yesterday at 06:05 PM

Lights on the way
by akay
November 22, 2024, 02:51 PM

Do humans have needed kno...
November 22, 2024, 06:45 AM

Gaza assault
November 21, 2024, 07:56 PM

Qur'anic studies today
by zeca
November 21, 2024, 05:07 PM

New Britain
November 20, 2024, 05:41 PM

اضواء على الطريق ....... ...
by akay
November 20, 2024, 09:02 AM

Marcion and the introduct...
by zeca
November 19, 2024, 11:36 PM

Dutch elections
by zeca
November 15, 2024, 10:11 PM

Random Islamic History Po...
by zeca
November 15, 2024, 08:46 PM

AMRIKAAA Land of Free .....
November 07, 2024, 09:56 AM

The origins of Judaism
by zeca
November 02, 2024, 12:56 PM

Theme Changer

 Topic: Why Most Terrorists are Muslims

 (Read 4237 times)
  • 1« Previous thread | Next thread »
  • Why Most Terrorists are Muslims
     OP - December 22, 2013, 02:40 PM

    You might have noticed that most terrorists are also Muslims. That means that, per capita, the group that produces the most terrorists is Muslims. Why is this the case? It boils down to differences in tradition. The cultures where Islam is dominant have traditions that promote terrorism where other cultures have different traditions that don’t do that. I’ll discuss these traditions in detail.

    Traditions are ideas that are commonly known among the vast majority of a culture. People learn these traditions generation after generation. In some cultures the traditions change quickly – we call these dynamic societies – while in other cultures, their traditions don't change quickly – we call these static societies. This raises the question: what is the thing that makes a society dynamic instead of static?


    Static vs Dynamic Societies

    Consider all the dynamic societies you know – what do they have in common? And the static societies? In dynamic societies there exists a tradition of criticism – it is seen as something good – while in static society’s there exists the opposite tradition – that criticism is bad and thus frowned upon.

    So why do the static societies have this bad tradition? Well, human societies started out with this bad tradition. In the beginning, when people had disagreements, they used physical force to resolve their disputes. So the default state of a society is this bad tradition that sees criticism as something bad.

    Let's look back at history. The tradition of criticism that we have today dates back to the beginning of the Enlightenment and more specifically, the Scientific Revolution. Actually even before that, there was one society in history that had a tradition of criticism but lost it. It was the ancient Greeks. Interestingly, it was the ancient Greeks that created the Scientific Method -- which is a method of negative hypothesis elimination where the elimination happens by criticism.

    In ancient Greek society, even children were encouraged to question the ideas of their teachers. Criticism was a good thing because it was seen as something that helps people learn to think critically. It helps correct mistakes from teachers.

    Then the Greeks lost this dynamic feature when they became an empire and fell to the Romans. After the Greeks, the next dynamic society was the Italians in the 16th century and that resulted in the phenomenon we now know as the Enlightenment. What happened was that society regained the tradition of criticism by studying the ancient Greek texts.

    The West today is still a dynamic society because it has sustained the tradition of criticism since the Enlightenment that started over 500 years ago. And many other cultures in our modern world have acquired this dynamic feature by adopting this tradition of criticism. How did this happen?


    The Tradition of Criticism

    The tradition of criticism became widely adopted because it is part of the process known as the Scientific Method. In this method, people hypothesize testable theories about physical reality and then they, and others, create experiments designed to falsify those theories. With each new hypothesis, a scientist is guessing a new theory. And with each successful experiment, a theory is refuted. Then scientists create new guesses for theories and again they design experiments to try to refute the new theories. Note that the experiments are criticism – criticism that uses physical evidence.

    In the 20th century, Karl Popper examined the history of science and discovered that all scientific knowledge is created by guesses and criticism. And he realized that all knowledge is created this way, not just scientific knowledge. He realized that all knowledge evolves – step-by-step, one guess at a time, one criticism at a time.

    Now imagine a society that doesn’t have this tradition of criticism. The people in authority don’t like it when other people criticize their ideas. Religious leaders tell people not to think for themselves and to just believe what the scholars say. Parents and teachers tell kids to do what they say without question. And when people do question these authorities, the authorities get offended and often this leads to anger and sometimes it’s followed by physical retaliation, like spanking and raising a city.

    So in these static societies people learn that questioning authority leads to anger and retaliation. They learn to shy away from criticism because they see it as confrontational – because that's the way the authorities see it. This affects kids the most because they can’t yet defend themselves from their parents. So kids develop a method of thinking that is void of criticism and void of creativity. They learn to judge ideas by justifying them by the authorities instead of criticizing those ideas themselves using their own reasoning. And these kids grow up to be adults that do the same – they don’t think for themselves.

    What does it mean to judge ideas without criticism? Note that everybody has mistaken ideas – no one is perfect. So by adopting ideas from the authorities without your own criticism, then you are adopting all their mistaken ideas too – i.e. without any possibility of correcting those mistakes. A society that does this cannot correct its own mistaken ideas. So its mistaken ideas go on indefinitely without any mode of error correction; hence it is a static society, it doesn't change for the better.

    Now imagine a society that does have a tradition of criticism. People are encouraged to criticize the authorities. Children are encouraged to ask their parents critical questions. Children sometimes correct their parents' mistaken ideas. So when they have their own children, they don’t make all the same mistakes that their own parents made. Similarly, scientists are encouraged to criticize each others' theories in an effort to discover mistakes and correct them thus getting ever closer to the truth. In this way, criticism is seen as a good thing.

    With a tradition of criticism comes the freedom of dissent. People know that it’s ok for everyone to have their own opinions. Sometimes people might get offended by other peoples' opinions, but resorting to physical retaliation is not part of the tradition. Instead, people learn to debate – to hash out their differences with peaceful discussion. And with each discussion, both parties go into the discussion realizing that each of them will learn something new. Their mistakes are being exposed and so they have the opportunity to correct those mistakes, and they regularly do. This is how knowledge evolves – within each one of us and as a society as a whole.

    So dynamic societies have this tradition of criticism that promotes error correction while static societies don’t. Our knowledge is not perfect. And it’s the imperfections that cause human suffering. In order to lesson our suffering, we must improve our knowledge. And the only way to improve our knowledge is to discover our mistaken ideas (using criticism) and to correct those mistakes (using creativity and more criticism).


    Islamic Societies are Static Societies

    Now getting back to Muslims and terrorism, Islamic societies are static societies. These societies have not yet adopted the tradition of criticism. They see criticism as something bad and so criticism is frowned upon. Questioning your parents is bad. Questioning Allah is bad. This is what causes their knowledge to be static – it halts the evolution of knowledge.

    Ironically, the Quran explicitly states that it will not be changed. That Allah is protecting it from man-made changes. So it doesn’t evolve. And Muslims claim this as their proof that Islam is right and all other religions are wrong. But knowledge evolution is good, because it corrects mistakes. So, other religions like Christianity have evolved, which means that their knowledge has improved, namely their morality.


    What is Terrorism?

    What does all this have to do with terrorism? Well what is terrorism? It’s an act of fear mongering – of trying to instill fear in other people. And what is the goal of fear mongering? It’s to try to prevent people from doing a certain behavior. Consider how some parents use physical punishment with their kids, like spanking. What is the purpose of that? To teach their kids that if they do a certain behavior, they’ll receive physical pain. And their purpose is to instill fear in their kids – fear of what would follow, punishment and the associated physical pain.

    And why is it that parents respond with punishment? In other words, what can the child do for the parent to choose to punish him? The child must have disagreed with the parent. He must have criticized his parent’s idea. He must have questioned his authority. So the parent reacts with punishment. This is analogous to terrorism. Muslim terrorists respond to the criticism coming from non-Muslims, like videos mocking their prophet, by physically punishing them. Clearly terrorists see criticism as something that is bad and they believe that the moral way to react to criticism is with physical force. And this is a tradition that pervades all Islamic societies today.


    How Do We Stop Terrorism?

    This raises the question, how will terrorism stop? Well we need an agent of change, one that will change Islamic cultures everywhere. That agent of change will play a role in their societies adopting a tradition of criticism. I don’t know how this will happen. I don’t know what things must fall into place for this to happen. What I do know is that by adopting a tradition of criticism, a society will enter a golden age, its own Enlightenment. And if it can sustain its tradition of criticism, then it will continue to be a dynamic society indefinitely.

    In this sort of society, people would not turn to terrorism when their values are criticized. They would not see criticism as a bad thing. They would know that criticism is a necessary part of evolving our knowledge and so criticism is good! When people criticize our mistakes, they are providing explanations of flaws that they see in our ideas. This means that each one of us has multiple sources of criticism in which to discover our mistakes, not just ourselves. So exposing one’s mistakes is seen as a good thing because doing so means that we have more opportunities to correct our mistakes. So when our mistakes are exposed through criticism, we get ecstatic! We are happy to find our mistakes and to correct them because we know that that means we are improving!

    It’s important to note that terrorism is not just a weird phenomenon born out of having a tradition of shunning criticism. The act of terrorism is directly encouraged in the Quran. So how could Islamic societies adopt a tradition of criticism while their holy book explicitly states that terrorism is encouraged? The answer may lie in the other societies who have done similar things. Consider that there are some bad morals in the religion of Christianity too, and Western societies have evolved their moral knowledge – they've corrected some of the Christian moral knowledge. The same sort of thing could happen with Islam.

    Then there is the idea that the Quran cannot change. It’s questionable whether Muslims will accept the idea of changing the Quran such that its moral knowledge can be improved upon. Again the answer may lie in other societies who have done similar things. The Bible has changed, but some of its bad morals are still in there. And still, Western societies have evolved their moral knowledge and no longer believe in all the bad morals that still exist in the Bible. The same sort of thing could happen with Islam. Muslims of the future might see the Quran the same way that Christians see their Bible today, a book about God and morals and some other weird symbolic stories that only the people of previous centuries thought to be real.

    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    See my other articles:

    Why atheists fail to persuade theists
    http://www.councilofexmuslims.com/index.php?topic=25470.0

    Why don't ex-Muslims go public?
    http://www.councilofexmuslims.com/index.php?topic=25472.0

    Is God real?
    http://www.councilofexmuslims.com/index.php?topic=25473.0
  • Why Most Terrorists are Muslims
     Reply #1 - December 22, 2013, 03:31 PM

    Currently listening to a podcast on the subject of terrorism.

    http://downloads.bbc.co.uk/podcasts/worldservice/whys/whys_20131220-1735a.mp3

    `But I don't want to go among mad people,' Alice remarked.
     `Oh, you can't help that,' said the Cat: `we're all mad here. I'm mad.  You're mad.'
     `How do you know I'm mad?' said Alice.
     `You must be,' said the Cat, `or you wouldn't have come here.'
  • Why Most Terrorists are Muslims
     Reply #2 - December 29, 2013, 08:32 PM

    "You might have noticed that most terrorists are also Muslims"  is such a ridiculous opening statement, seeing as the  majority of terrorist attacks in the world are not carried out by Muslims. For example, according to Europol, in 2005 there were 498 terrorist incidents in Europe, ETA were responsible for 136 of these, and Muslims were responsible for only 1. According to the FBI, between 1980 and 2005, only 6 per cent of all terrorist incidents on US soil were carried out by Muslims.

    Your idea that the single root cause of terrorism is that terrorists come from societies without a tradition of criticism, and terrorists use terrorism as a means to prevent criticism of authority is laughable, Firstly, in countries where Islamic terrorism is a problem, such as Pakistan, people in authority generally tend to condemn terrorist attacks so you don't really have a point there. Also, why are you ignoring imperialism and oppressive governments as causes of terrorism, as these are far more important factors than "static societies".

    Also, your idea that European and Western societies are nice societies where people "hash out their differences with peaceful discussion" whereas terrorists thrive in Islamic societies where people cannot have peaceful discussion but resolve their differences with violence, is at best a rose tinted view of the West and at worst, offensive and racist.

    Religion - The hot potato that looked delicious but ended up burning your mouth!

    Knock your head on the ground, don't be miserly in your prayers, listen to your Sidi Sheikh, Allahu Akbar! - Lounes Matoub
  • Why Most Terrorists are Muslims
     Reply #3 - December 29, 2013, 09:08 PM


    Also, your idea that European and Western societies are nice societies where people "hash out their differences with peaceful discussion" whereas terrorists thrive in Islamic societies where people cannot have peaceful discussion but resolve their differences with violence, is at best a rose tinted view of the West and at worst, offensive and racist.


    I completely agree with you. We seem to forget that our current peace and friendship we share in Europe between different nations and people is fairly young. Not too long ago we had a World War that killed off 58 million people if my memory serves me correct. No less than 10 years ago we had the last outburst of conflict on the Balkans in Kosovo, 20 years ago we had Serbia, Bosnia and Croatia fighting each other. And then we have centuries of imperialism, crimes against humanity and colonialism that has given us the very same prosperity we (the western world) boast about as if it was due to us being "benevolent" and "peaceful" towards other people and nations. This naive, and incorrect, idea of "western culture" reminds me a bit of the idea about the "civilised savage" some centuries ago. Seems we haven't gotten rid of that idea yet...

    "The healthiest people I know are those who are the first to label themselves fucked up." - three
  • Why Most Terrorists are Muslims
     Reply #4 - December 29, 2013, 09:39 PM

    Crude philosophy. How can you even talk about criticism and dissent without talking about the advent of the individuated industrial bourgeoisie? You can't just expect for epistemology to radically alter without a cataclysmic rupture in the productive forces of a society and how they are constituted in relation to the superstructure (E: democracy or etatism)...

    RE: I remember Poppers Open Society being a pile of horseshit when I read it. Democratic discourse will ipso facto ensure transparency. I put this down to shoddy economics (for what constitutes itself to be an analytic tradition, no less!) so it is unsurprising that even for some philosophers, 'The ideas of the ruling class are in every epoch the ruling ideas'.
  • Why Most Terrorists are Muslims
     Reply #5 - December 29, 2013, 10:17 PM

    The UN sanctions against Iraq killed a million people (according to UN's own figures) in the 90's.

    Well - at least they also hit the Assyrians (Christians) pretty hard lipsrsealed

    Danish Never-Moose adopted by the kind people on the CEMB-forum
    Ex-Muslim chat (Unaffliated with CEMB). Safari users: Use "#ex-muslims" as the channel name. CEMB chat thread.
  • Why Most Terrorists are Muslims
     Reply #6 - December 30, 2013, 01:06 AM

    "You might have noticed that most terrorists are also Muslims"  is such a ridiculous opening statement, seeing as the  majority of terrorist attacks in the world are not carried out by Muslims. For example, according to Europol, in 2005 there were 498 terrorist incidents in Europe, ETA were responsible for 136 of these, and Muslims were responsible for only 1. According to the FBI, between 1980 and 2005, only 6 per cent of all terrorist incidents on US soil were carried out by Muslims.

    Your idea that the single root cause of terrorism is that terrorists come from societies without a tradition of criticism, and terrorists use terrorism as a means to prevent criticism of authority is laughable, Firstly, in countries where Islamic terrorism is a problem, such as Pakistan, people in authority generally tend to condemn terrorist attacks so you don't really have a point there. Also, why are you ignoring imperialism and oppressive governments as causes of terrorism, as these are far more important factors than "static societies".

    Also, your idea that European and Western societies are nice societies where people "hash out their differences with peaceful discussion" whereas terrorists thrive in Islamic societies where people cannot have peaceful discussion but resolve their differences with violence, is at best a rose tinted view of the West and at worst, offensive and racist.

     Most of those ideas you posted above  seem to have come from that TAM.. The American Muslim Mixu Paatelainen.
      
    Hmm Sheila Musaji looks very young at TAM

    Any ways You have a point in your post Mixu_P  and I am sure RamiRustom will counter your post  but what is your opinion on Why acknowledging the Qur’an’s influence upon violent extremism is an important part of combating it.

    And I am glad to read your posts again + happy new year to you..
    yeezevee

    Do not let silence become your legacy.. Question everything   
    I renounced my faith to become a kafir, 
    the beloved betrayed me and turned in to  a Muslim
     
  • Why Most Terrorists are Muslims
     Reply #7 - December 30, 2013, 10:50 AM

    Those statistics I posted did come from The American Muslim, but I could pull out far more statistics to prove my point. I would also like to point out that it is true that most terrorist incidents in Islamic countries are Muslim but that is demographics.

    I do acknowledge the role of Islamic teachings in terrorism, but I feel that imperialism and oppressive governments are the two biggest causes of terrorism, even Islamic terrorism in the west. For example, all the 7/7 bombers spoke about was foreign policy and the guys who murdered Lee Rigby spoke about foreign policy. When the Woolwich attack happened, Boris Johnson said that it would be wrong to link what happened with British foreign policy - why? After all, that is what the guys were talking about so lets have this discussion. We are constantly told by the powers that be that these things happened because "they don't like our way of life" or "they want to impose Shariah law" - to try and deflect the debate away from the inconvenient truth that these terrible things happened as some sort of misguided revenge for the terrible things that the British government is doing abroad.

    The Iraqi insurgency and the Taliban were fighting against invading forces. These terrorists were certainly not born out of a tradition of a lack of criticism but because there were people bombing their land. If there was an invading force in Britain, would everyone sit around the table with their invaders and "hash out their differences with peaceful discussion", or would there be an active, violent resistance?

    Religion - The hot potato that looked delicious but ended up burning your mouth!

    Knock your head on the ground, don't be miserly in your prayers, listen to your Sidi Sheikh, Allahu Akbar! - Lounes Matoub
  • Why Most Terrorists are Muslims
     Reply #8 - December 30, 2013, 10:57 AM

    Saying that most terrorists are Muslims like saying most godfathers are Italian grin12!
  • Why Most Terrorists are Muslims
     Reply #9 - December 30, 2013, 10:59 AM

    You mean they aren't?! finmad

    `But I don't want to go among mad people,' Alice remarked.
     `Oh, you can't help that,' said the Cat: `we're all mad here. I'm mad.  You're mad.'
     `How do you know I'm mad?' said Alice.
     `You must be,' said the Cat, `or you wouldn't have come here.'
  • Why Most Terrorists are Muslims
     Reply #10 - December 30, 2013, 11:35 AM

    Please calm down Eris. Yes many Muslims are terrorists, but all terrorists don't come from that religious background.
  • Why Most Terrorists are Muslims
     Reply #11 - December 30, 2013, 12:01 PM

    What's that got to do with Italian godfathers? Huh?

    `But I don't want to go among mad people,' Alice remarked.
     `Oh, you can't help that,' said the Cat: `we're all mad here. I'm mad.  You're mad.'
     `How do you know I'm mad?' said Alice.
     `You must be,' said the Cat, `or you wouldn't have come here.'
  • Why Most Terrorists are Muslims
     Reply #12 - December 30, 2013, 12:11 PM

    I heard that the trend of godfathers started from Italy. I may be wrong so please feel free to correct me if I am.
  • Why Most Terrorists are Muslims
     Reply #13 - December 30, 2013, 12:17 PM

    It will ruin some of my fav movies and the Sopranos if most godfathers aren't Italian. Still, if not it paves the way for me to get the job. Smiley

    `But I don't want to go among mad people,' Alice remarked.
     `Oh, you can't help that,' said the Cat: `we're all mad here. I'm mad.  You're mad.'
     `How do you know I'm mad?' said Alice.
     `You must be,' said the Cat, `or you wouldn't have come here.'
  • Why Most Terrorists are Muslims
     Reply #14 - December 30, 2013, 02:10 PM

    Those statistics I posted did come from The American Muslim, but I could pull out far more statistics to prove my point. I would also like to point out that it is true that most terrorist incidents in Islamic countries are Muslim but that is demographics.

    I do acknowledge the role of Islamic teachings in terrorism, but I feel that imperialism and oppressive governments are the two biggest causes of terrorism, even Islamic terrorism in the west. For example, all the 7/7 bombers spoke about was foreign policy and the guys who murdered Lee Rigby spoke about foreign policy. When the Woolwich attack happened, Boris Johnson said that it would be wrong to link what happened with British foreign policy - why? After all, that is what the guys were talking about so lets have this discussion. We are constantly told by the powers that be that these things happened because "they don't like our way of life" or "they want to impose Shariah law" - to try and deflect the debate away from the inconvenient truth that these terrible things happened as some sort of misguided revenge for the terrible things that the British government is doing abroad.

    The Iraqi insurgency and the Taliban were fighting against invading forces. These terrorists were certainly not born out of a tradition of a lack of criticism but because there were people bombing their land. If there was an invading force in Britain, would everyone sit around the table with their invaders and "hash out their differences with peaceful discussion", or would there be an active, violent resistance?

    Hello Mixu Paatelainen., I may not agree with all the you wrote because, you choose  to answer with or blame the so called  western Imperialism as the  root cause of all problems in   nations where Islam/Muslim are in majority. But you do have a point. I will come back to your post but for  now please  read  and air opinions on the article The ‘harb’ at home by ZARRAR KHUHRO which is published today.  It is closely related to what you are saying.

    Do not let silence become your legacy.. Question everything   
    I renounced my faith to become a kafir, 
    the beloved betrayed me and turned in to  a Muslim
     
  • Why Most Terrorists are Muslims
     Reply #15 - December 30, 2013, 02:38 PM

    Saying that most terrorists are Muslims like saying most godfathers are Italian grin12!


    Saying that most terrorists are Muslims like saying most Italians are in the Mafia.
  • Why Most Terrorists are Muslims
     Reply #16 - December 30, 2013, 02:44 PM

    Saying that most terrorists are Muslims like saying most Italians are in the Mafia.

     Nooo..  It has to go this way..

    "Saying that most Muslims are  terrorists  is  like saying most Italians are in the Mafia." 
    or
    "Saying that most terrorists are Muslims is  like saying most of the mafia members and leaders are Italians "

     Cheesy

    Do not let silence become your legacy.. Question everything   
    I renounced my faith to become a kafir, 
    the beloved betrayed me and turned in to  a Muslim
     
  • Why Most Terrorists are Muslims
     Reply #17 - December 30, 2013, 02:51 PM

    Nooo..  It has to go this way..

    "Saying that most Muslims are  terrorists  is  like saying most Italians are in the Mafia." 
    or
    "Saying that most terrorists are Muslims is  like saying most of the mafia members and leaders are Italians "

     Cheesy

    you rascal criticize Italians leaders    how dare ya??  finmad




    I loved that moment, when he got hit  Cheesy


  • 1« Previous thread | Next thread »