Richard Dawkins criticised for Twitter comment about Muslims

[Richard Hakluyt]

............and they are mainly Gujarati round my way; but, confusingly, half the Gujaratis in my district are Hindus.

[Viking]

Constructive criticism from within, even with very conservative groups, works better than outsiders shouting a  them to change their ways.

Where does internal criticism come from within very conservative groups who, by definition, would be very reluctant to make any changes and by extension even contemplate such changes.

Kids realising how fucked up things are I guess.
You do increasingly see liberal Muslim groups in the west.
Though I've no idea where on earth this is going, it has all rather veered away from the original point :s

No, the original point of this thread was a discussion about if an outsider is legitimate in criticizing any idea associated with an ethnic or social or cultural identity.

[crazy canuck]

Constructive criticism from within, even with very conservative groups, works better than outsiders shouting a  them to change their ways.

Where does internal criticism come from within very conservative groups who, by definition, would be very reluctant to make any changes and by extension even contemplate such changes.

Kids realising how fucked up things are I guess.
You do increasingly see liberal Muslim groups in the west.
Though I've no idea where on earth this is going, it has all rather veered away from the original point :s

What you are talking about is not people within the conservative group making changes but people that have made a choice to leave the conservative group and are making changes from the outside.  Isnt that generally how change occurs?

The conservative group will fight those changes just has hard wither the people proposing the change are white, brown, yellow or pink.

[Grallon]

Isn't snark like Dawkins posted the entire purpose of Twitter?

Indeed - this latest brouhaha only shows how useless Twitter truly is.  Storms in a teapot central - with very little substance other than a few good witticisms.  I despise the thing.  I find it reveals an exacerbated need to share yourself with others, down to the the most insignificant trivialities, that is quite vulgar - the bling bling - get rich/famous quick type of vulgarity.  It's also depressing to consider how empty these people apparently are - to lap up avidly whatever whisper echos down this glorified grapevine.

As for what Dawkins said he was right of course - Islam is a regressive influence now that it's fossilized past precambrian levels.



G.

[Valmy]

I'm not saying it's not allowed to criticise other religions. It is however different for an outsider to criticise than an insider to do so. As an insider anything goes, as an outsider you do have to be a bit more careful you've got your facts  straight and you're not being offensive.

Well so long as being factual and not offensive is something you are going for.

[Viking]

Regarding "being offensive" it is literally impossible to be offensive. Offense taken is in the eye of the beholder not in the content of the statement or even the intention of the putative offender. The object of provocation always has the option of not being offended or provoked. This is what makes us humans and not animals. We can consider the consequences of our actions. When you are offended or provoked you are so on purpose. When you can't control your offense taking or provokedness being then that is grounds for psychiatric treatment, not respect.

If you can't not be provoked or offended you cease to be a moral agent or a person, you are nothing more than a madman or an animal. At that point your opinion doesn't count.

[Josquius]

Kids realising how fucked up things are I guess.
You do increasingly see liberal Muslim groups in the west.
Though I've no idea where on earth this is going, it has all rather veered away from the original point :s

What you are talking about is not people within the conservative group making changes but people that have made a choice to leave the conservative group and are making changes from the outside.  Isnt that generally how change occurs?

The conservative group will fight those changes just has hard wither the people proposing the change are white, brown, yellow or pink.

Not really. Liberal Muslims still call  themselves Muslims. Due to its cultural ties in fact even people who completely abandon the religion will often still call themselves Muslim.

I really don't think things work that way. Just look at how so many good ideas get attacked in the US on account of being socialist,un-American, etc....
Identifying something as the other, as a dastardly outside influence, is a key way conservatives rally people behind them. If it actually does come from the inside then they have a harder  time doing that (which isn't to say they can't still do it....Not at all)

But anyway. This has totally abandoned my original point which  is simply that it is different for a member of a group to attack his own group than it is for an outsider.
For the record the only problem I have with what Dawkins originally said is that it was rather asinine. It is the comments from offended Christians that I have a problem with

[Eddie Teach]

Regarding "being offensive" it is literally impossible to be offensive. Offense taken is in the eye of the beholder not in the content of the statement or even the intention of the putative offender. The object of provocation always has the option of not being offended or provoked. This is what makes us humans and not animals. We can consider the consequences of our actions. When you are offended or provoked you are so on purpose. When you can't control your offense taking or provokedness being then that is grounds for psychiatric treatment, not respect.

If you can't not be provoked or offended you cease to be a moral agent or a person, you are nothing more than a madman or an animal. At that point your opinion doesn't count.

So if I said your mother was a whore, you wouldn't be offended?

[Viking]

Not really. Liberal Muslims still call  themselves Muslims. Due to its cultural ties in fact even people who completely abandon the religion will often still call themselves Muslim.

Yes, they choose that affiliation. Your Asian suppsoed muslims could identify as Bengali, Sindhi, Baluchi, Punjabi or Indian or whatever. They choose Muslim and will as a consequence have to suffer the baggage of that choice. Just like if modern Germans choose to identify as Aryan they will have to deal with the baggage.

[garbon]

Constructive criticism from within, even with very conservative groups, works better than outsiders shouting a  them to change their ways.

Where does internal criticism come from within very conservative groups who, by definition, would be very reluctant to make any changes and by extension even contemplate such changes.

Kids realising how fucked up things are I guess.
You do increasingly see liberal Muslim groups in the west.
Though I've no idea where on earth this is going, it has all rather veered away from the original point :s

No, the original point of this thread was a discussion about if an outsider is legitimate in criticizing any idea associated with an ethnic or social or cultural identity.

Was that the original point?

[Viking]

Regarding "being offensive" it is literally impossible to be offensive. Offense taken is in the eye of the beholder not in the content of the statement or even the intention of the putative offender. The object of provocation always has the option of not being offended or provoked. This is what makes us humans and not animals. We can consider the consequences of our actions. When you are offended or provoked you are so on purpose. When you can't control your offense taking or provokedness being then that is grounds for psychiatric treatment, not respect.

If you can't not be provoked or offended you cease to be a moral agent or a person, you are nothing more than a madman or an animal. At that point your opinion doesn't count.

So if I said your mother was a whore, you wouldn't be offended?

Given that you don't know anything about her apart vicariously through the character I play on languish I wouldn't be offended. Even if you did know her and even if there was some grounds for that insult and it caused me shame and distress none of those emotions on my part justify anything.

[crazy canuck]

Kids realising how fucked up things are I guess.
You do increasingly see liberal Muslim groups in the west.
Though I've no idea where on earth this is going, it has all rather veered away from the original point :s

What you are talking about is not people within the conservative group making changes but people that have made a choice to leave the conservative group and are making changes from the outside.  Isnt that generally how change occurs?

The conservative group will fight those changes just has hard wither the people proposing the change are white, brown, yellow or pink.

Not really. Liberal Muslims still call  themselves Muslims. Due to its cultural ties in fact even people who completely abandon the religion will often still call themselves Muslim.

I really don't think things work that way. Just look at how so many good ideas get attacked in the US on account of being socialist,un-American, etc....
Identifying something as the other, as a dastardly outside influence, is a key way conservatives rally people behind them. If it actually does come from the inside then they have a harder  time doing that (which isn't to say they can't still do it....Not at all)

Sure they still consider themselves Muslim but they are not "within" the conservative group, as you put it.  For example, almost all of the Muslims I know are Iranian families who fled Iran during or after the revolution.  The have absolutely nothing in common with the society that has been transformed by the revolution into a theocracy.

Simply being a Muslim does not put a person within the conservative group anymore than someone considering themselves to be Christian puts them within the same group as any number of conservative denominations of Christianity.

[Viking]

Constructive criticism from within, even with very conservative groups, works better than outsiders shouting a  them to change their ways.

Where does internal criticism come from within very conservative groups who, by definition, would be very reluctant to make any changes and by extension even contemplate such changes.

Kids realising how fucked up things are I guess.
You do increasingly see liberal Muslim groups in the west.
Though I've no idea where on earth this is going, it has all rather veered away from the original point :s

No, the original point of this thread was a discussion about if an outsider is legitimate in criticizing any idea associated with an ethnic or social or cultural identity.

Was that the original point?

From the horses mouth

http://www.richarddawkins.net/foundation_articles/2013/8/9/calm-reflections-after-a-storm-in-a-teacup

[Josquius]

Not really. Liberal Muslims still call  themselves Muslims. Due to its cultural ties in fact even people who completely abandon the religion will often still call themselves Muslim.

Yes, they choose that affiliation. Your Asian suppsoed muslims could identify as Bengali, Sindhi, Baluchi, Punjabi or Indian or whatever. They choose Muslim and will as a consequence have to suffer the baggage of that choice. Just like if modern Germans choose to identify as Aryan they will have to deal with the baggage.

They often  do that too. There's a lot of history there though and they want to differentiate themselves from non-Muslim Indian groups.

It's not like Muslims are the only  ones doing this. Just look at all those people who dutifully tick Christian on the census despite only ever going to a church for an occasional big 3 and never having read a bible.

[Warspite]

Regarding "being offensive" it is literally impossible to be offensive. Offense taken is in the eye of the beholder not in the content of the statement or even the intention of the putative offender. The object of provocation always has the option of not being offended or provoked. This is what makes us humans and not animals. We can consider the consequences of our actions. When you are offended or provoked you are so on purpose. When you can't control your offense taking or provokedness being then that is grounds for psychiatric treatment, not respect.

If you can't not be provoked or offended you cease to be a moral agent or a person, you are nothing more than a madman or an animal. At that point your opinion doesn't count.

So if I said your mother was a whore, you wouldn't be offended?

Given that you don't know anything about her apart vicariously through the character I play on languish I wouldn't be offended. Even if you did know her and even if there was some grounds for that insult and it caused me shame and distress none of those emotions on my part justify anything.

It must be nice to be a robot.