The Islamic Intellectual Tradition

 
burt
 
Avatar
 
 
burt
Total Posts:  15031
Joined  17-12-2006
 
 
 
25 March 2018 09:08
 

An informative presentation. https://vimeo.com/10039565

 
Igawa
 
Avatar
 
 
Igawa
Total Posts:  374
Joined  19-07-2017
 
 
 
25 March 2018 10:53
 

I watched the whole thing and didn’t find much information. The most informative thing, and something I had a feeling he was building towards for the first 25 minutes or so, is that Islam teaches the postmodern ethos of human nothingness, of infinite subjectivity and essential indeterminability of human nature.

The lecture was basically a white, upper class western intellectual apologism for Islam and how it really is synonymous with deep postmodern thought. Utter. Bullshit.

 
Celal
 
Avatar
 
 
Celal
Total Posts:  2934
Joined  07-08-2011
 
 
 
25 March 2018 12:23
 
Igawa - 25 March 2018 10:53 AM

I watched the whole thing and didn’t find much information. The most informative thing, and something I had a feeling he was building towards for the first 25 minutes or so, is that Islam teaches the postmodern ethos of human nothingness, of infinite subjectivity and essential indeterminability of human nature.

The lecture was basically a white, upper class western intellectual apologism for Islam and how it really is synonymous with deep postmodern thought. Utter. Bullshit.

If Burt thinks it’s informative, most likely it is bullshit, especially when it come to Islam. Burt represents the Western hypocrisy most clearly when discussing Islam and its virtues.  So called Western intellectuals with some notable exceptions have utterly failed the humanity,  especially the women in Islam. 

For best known example, in the struggle for the liberation of the Muslim Women, the veil has become the symbol. Also known as “Hijab” and many other names depending on the country Iran, Egypt, Turkey to Morooco, etc.  Regardless of the preferred name, it is used to separate and establish a barrier… as the root of the verb “hajaba” means to “hide”.

Women fought hard to shed the limitations imposed on them. In the 1920s, in Egypt, feminist Union members defiantly threw their veils into the sea. There was a “no more hijab” campaign in Turkestan in the same decade.  Likewise, after hundreds of women been killed by their family members for not conforming to Islam, 80-90 Thousand women in Uzbekistan repudiated their covers.  Shah of Afganistan ordered his wife to unveil in public to help with the reforms also in the 1920s as well as Ataturk and his dress reforms are well known in Turkey.  In 1930s in Iran, the Shah forbade the Iranian styled veil by special decree. .. so on.  But the religion’s hold on the population so deep and insidious, many of the reforms were vacated.  So, women in Muslim countries have enormous challenges. Western countries support for the Islamic fascism to maintain status quo come in many flavors, the latest is ...

the Macy’s announcement of 2018 ... Hijab fashion line.

 
burt
 
Avatar
 
 
burt
Total Posts:  15031
Joined  17-12-2006
 
 
 
25 March 2018 14:26
 
Igawa - 25 March 2018 10:53 AM

I watched the whole thing and didn’t find much information. The most informative thing, and something I had a feeling he was building towards for the first 25 minutes or so, is that Islam teaches the postmodern ethos of human nothingness, of infinite subjectivity and essential indeterminability of human nature.

The lecture was basically a white, upper class western intellectual apologism for Islam and how it really is synonymous with deep postmodern thought. Utter. Bullshit.

Wow, guess you don’t have the same background as I do. I could see the roots of ideas in Greek and Hellenistic philosophy and neo-Platonism as well as a relatively easy transition over to basic metaphysical assumptions underlying modern science.

 
icehorse
 
Avatar
 
 
icehorse
Total Posts:  6569
Joined  22-02-2014
 
 
 
04 April 2018 07:47
 
burt - 25 March 2018 09:08 AM

An informative presentation. https://vimeo.com/10039565

I didn’t watch the whole video, but I watched enough to draw a conclusion that made it not necessary to watch the rest.

What theologists tend to do, regardless of the faith they adhere to, is to reverse engineer thinking from other disciplines and find ways to map this borrowed thinking onto scripture.

To me, none of this matters. As Hitchens said (more or less): “It doesn’t matter to me if there ever was a Socrates. All that matters is that we have his method.” OTOH, theologists are keen to find some value in scripture. They’re driven to find ways to give scripture some value to the world, so original attribution is important to them. I just don’t care. It might be historically interesting how some thinkers 1000 years ago, when saddled with the constraint of Islamic scripture, managed to do some reverse engineering, but it doesn’t add any credibility at all to Islamic ideas.