clear

September 14th, 2007
└ Tags: ,

Discussion (16)¬

  1. tie says:
    September 14, 2007 at 5:14 am

    brilliant! LOL , this reminds me of a classic case of ‘avoiding to get wet’ Muslim ‘moderate’ school teacher with a uncanny skill to avoid a straight answer. Check it out.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_hBXHtQDxOo&feature=PlayList&p=C2259113CCA7C126&index=8

  2. Jonathan says:
    September 14, 2007 at 5:38 am

    Treble taqiyyas all round!!

  3. arensb says:
    September 14, 2007 at 8:30 am

    tie:
    Ah, the exquisite Dance of the Seven Questions. That’s a useful skill in a politician. She should run for office.

  4. TB says:
    September 14, 2007 at 1:31 pm

    Beating around the bush: Helping dickheaded parents, teachers, religious men and politicians retain their authority over millenia.

  5. Chris says:
    September 14, 2007 at 7:29 pm

    Why run for office when you can get people to accept you as their unquestioned supreme religious leader? Mo was a clever little bastard in real life as well 🙂

  6. Toast in the machine says:
    September 15, 2007 at 3:19 am

    “Speaking is a means to achieve objectives. If a praiseworthy aim is attainable through both telling the truth and lying, it is unlawful to accomplish it through lying because there is no need for it. When it is possible to achieve such an aim by lying but not by telling the truth, it is permissible to lie if attaining the goal is permissible…, and obligatory to lie if the goal is obligatory. …One should compare the bad consequences entailed by lying to those entailed by telling the truth, and if the consequences of telling the truth are more damaging, one is entitled to lie…”

    Ahmad ibn Naqib al-Misri, The Reliance of the Traveller, translated by Nuh Ha Mim Keller, Amana publications, 1997, section r8.2, page 745

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taqiyya

    Likewise with Tariq Ramadan: “…and when he is cornered with questions on the brutality of some punishments of Islamic law, such as stoning, he tells us that he is against them, but (there is always a “but”) they are in Quranic texts and so he cannot fully condemn them…”

    http://usgovinfo.about.com/od/defenseandsecurity/a/ramadantxt_2.htm

    There seems to be a pattern here…

  7. Hobbes says:
    September 16, 2007 at 5:01 am

    Toast,

    We now need to define “truth.” I submit there are two kinds of truth.

    1. Objective truth: A proposition for which there is ample objective evidence in support, e.g., the heliocentric nature of our solar system.

    2. Subjective truth: A proposition for which there is no objective evidence in support (may even be objective evidence against), e.g., the earth-centric nature of the universe, as suggested in the “Bible.”

    “Objective” defined as existing in reality (the physical world), as opposed to existing only in the mind.

    “Subjective” defined as existing in the mind as opposed to existing in the physical world.

    The unexamined belief is not worth believing.

  8. Don says:
    September 16, 2007 at 7:38 am

    I don’t see the big deal with Taqiyya. How is it different from, ‘The truth is preferable, but if lying gets you out of a jam then lie your ass off.’ What’s wrong with that? Works for me.

  9. tie says:
    September 17, 2007 at 5:06 am

    “I don’t see the big deal with Taqiyya,”

    well, Hypocrisy and platitudes as a way of spreading your ideas, plus hiding your true intentions when needed … all mandated by the creator of the universe…

    nothing wrong with that…

  10. JayBee says:
    September 17, 2007 at 6:32 am

    Mo seems to be REALLY answering the question…
    Oh pardon me, most muslims faced with such questions do that; they must follow their prophet’s great example!

  11. Siquo says:
    November 26, 2007 at 4:59 am

    To be a wise-ass: Wouldn’t it be the 15th century according to Mohammed’s calendar?

  12. Topi says:
    February 26, 2015 at 8:11 am

    It seems here is question of proactive and reactive use.

    I don’t know but I assume that the original intention was for reactive usage and I’m all for that. If I’m accused of something I’m not compelled to tell the truth, that’s basis of western law also.

    But for proactive use where I lie to my teeth to get you do something. That’s not right at all.

    To Hobbes. Your example of subjective truth is totally wrong. The subjectivity of a lie doesn’t make it true. What is a subjective truth is something that others might not know to be true, but you do.

    Truth: p iff “p”

  13. Bones'sDog says:
    April 30, 2017 at 8:57 pm

    TB, “anus” is “arsehole” in Latin, give or take a few declensions. Similarly, “annus” is “year”. You are telling us that equivocation to avoid being pinned to an unpopular position without quite contradicting the dogma has allowed the Good and the Great to rule over thousands of bums.
    Possibly a deeply true conjecture.

  14. Coldchild says:
    November 20, 2018 at 5:52 pm

    {Quote} “I don’t see {end quote}

    I know what it’s supposed to read but does anyone chewing through the archive know why my browser (Firefox running under Snow Leopard on a Mac) renders it as gibberish?
    Do I not have Author’s choice of typeface or something?

  15. J. Doe says:
    January 4, 2024 at 6:31 pm

    ’t

  16. J. Doe says:
    January 4, 2024 at 6:32 pm

    Happy Holidays

Comment¬

NOTE: This comments section is provided as a friendly place for readers of J&M to talk, to exchange jokes and ideas, to engage in profound philosophical discussion, and to ridicule the sincerely held beliefs of millions. As such, comments of a racist, sexist or homophobic nature will not be tolerated.

If you are posting for the first time, or you change your username and/or email, your comment will be held in moderation until approval. When your first comment is approved, subsequent comments will be published automatically.