- This topic is empty.
- Posts
Quote (WhatIsTrue @ Jan. 17 2010,06:54) Quote (bodhitharta @ Jan. 16 2010,06:29) Quote (WhatIsTrue @ Jan. 16 2010,07:42) Quote (bodhitharta @ Jan. 15 2010,10:14) Quote (WhatIsTrue @ Jan. 15 2010,14:41) bodhitharta wrote: Quote The problem with your response is that it didn't answer my question. When slavery was perfectly acceptable in America it was because of Social Capital which is really just another word for Politics. What stopped slavery in America was Religion and the belief in God. Let me try this again, since you clearly missed the point.
Why don't most people walk around in public in pajamas, dirty clothes, or naked?
A) They believe they will be punished in the afterlife, if they don't make themselves presentable in public.
B) They want to present a good image in their everyday social interactions so that others will treat them well and/or think of them positively.
(Bonus question: Why do many kids in highschool dress in ways that many adults find embarrassing? Hint: Think of what's “socially normal” on college campuses.)
Why don't people generally settle disputes with their family and friends by beating the crap out of them?
A) They believe they will be punished in the afterlife, if they physically hurt someone.
B) They don't want to alienate the people in their immediate social network as that might leave them isolated relationally and perhaps materially as well.
(As a bonus question, why do men who beat their wives generally try to hide it from other people? Hint: Think about what things are considered socially acceptable.)
If you think the answers are closer to A than to B, then I can't help you.
Religion has very little to do with how people act on a day to day basis, and that is true of most religious people as well. Religious people do have an added incentive to behave well, (i.e. their social capital with their god), but in most cases, they seem far more willing to offend their god then to offend their neighbor.
I'm sorry, you seem to not really know about society. have you ever lived in an actual city?People do settle their disputes with violence all the time and when they don't it's from fear of being arrested not an outcast, same thing with abusive husbands they don't want to be arrested.
People do all the time walk around in pajamas and dirty clothes and once again they don't walk around naked because they will be arrested.
Where do you live? Not in New York, Los Angelas, Chicago, Newark or any major city, am I right?
I have always lived in big cities, trust me I know what I'm talking about.
Those who are willing to offend God are more than willing to offend their neighbor.
You actually demonstrate my point perfectly. Wherever people value their social interactions, there is more civility. Wherever people don't value their social interactions, you find more crime, more violence, more filth, etc.. In big cities, social capital is less valuable and therefore less influential. In small towns, social capital is very valuable, thus much less crime, nicer neighbors, etc..Go back and take my quiz. Skip the bonus questions, 'cause you're not ready for them yet.
The populations are by far in the larger cities therefore your whole point is moot.
When you can explain to me what you think my point is, we can discuss whether or not it's moot. As of now, my impression is that you just don't get it.
The fact is you were deceived thinking social capital is any diferent than politicsQuote (bodhitharta @ Jan. 17 2010,08:13) Quote (Stu @ Jan. 16 2010,20:13) Quote I am saying that if someone wants to drink and can control themselves, yes. ALLAH, does not wish to oppress His servants but at the same time not many can control themselves with alcohol which leads to a lot of misery and lapses of judgement so it is not the alcohol itself it is the effect that it can have on an individual that is the problem. The same goes for gambling, I have lived in Las Vegas and I will tell you, gambling has caused many people to kill themselves and often their spouse and children as well because a man lost control and gambled away all the money they had.
All Spiritual Laws are the way of life that leads to successful relations
I take it that your difference with other muslims on this issue is to do with your attitude towards the hadiths. Is that fair?
Stuart
I don't have an additude towards the Hadiths, I have never considered them because they are not the words of ALLAH
In that case you DO have an attitude to them!Do you disagree with other muslims about alcohol consumption?
Stuart
Quote Morality is directly correlated to obedience of a standard of behaviour. Any standard of obedience must come from a recognition of Authority.
I don't think this is true. Maybe those who are 'submission'-afflicted have come to view the world this way, but I don't think that is how most people see it. That is because most people go though a development in their ethical thinking, by a process of progressive discussions with others who are slightly more sophisticated at it.You are operating at what Kohlberg would describe as the ethical thinking of childhood, his Stage One level.
Islam: the religion for those who don't mind being infantilised.
Stuart
Quote (Stu @ Jan. 17 2010,09:47) Quote (bodhitharta @ Jan. 17 2010,08:13) Quote (Stu @ Jan. 16 2010,20:13) Quote I am saying that if someone wants to drink and can control themselves, yes. ALLAH, does not wish to oppress His servants but at the same time not many can control themselves with alcohol which leads to a lot of misery and lapses of judgement so it is not the alcohol itself it is the effect that it can have on an individual that is the problem. The same goes for gambling, I have lived in Las Vegas and I will tell you, gambling has caused many people to kill themselves and often their spouse and children as well because a man lost control and gambled away all the money they had.
All Spiritual Laws are the way of life that leads to successful relations
I take it that your difference with other muslims on this issue is to do with your attitude towards the hadiths. Is that fair?
Stuart
I don't have an additude towards the Hadiths, I have never considered them because they are not the words of ALLAH
In that case you DO have an attitude to them!Do you disagree with other muslims about alcohol consumption?
Stuart
No, I have no attitude towards the Hadiths because I have never read them.Muslims don't need to agree about alcohol consumption, they need only agree about how they behave and I am telling you whether a person drinks or not is not the point, the point is what Jesus said:
Not that which goeth into the mouth defileth a man; but that which cometh out of the mouth, this defileth a man.
Matthew 15:10-12Good grief. Your attitude towards the hadiths at least must be that they have not, thusfar, warranted the effort required to read them!
I agree with you regarding drinking, but if you have not read the hadiths how do you know it is there that muslims find prohibitions on alcohol?
Stuart
Quote (Stu @ Jan. 17 2010,13:26) Good grief. Your attitude towards the hadiths at least must be that they have not, thusfar, warranted the effort required to read them! I agree with you regarding drinking, but if you have not read the hadiths how do you know it is there that muslims find prohibitions on alcohol?
Stuart
The Quran is the Holy Book, It is the standardI prefer The Very Hungry Caterpillar by Eric Carle. It contains more useful information per page than the koran and in it no one has to die because of a Dark Age mentality.
Stuart
Quote (bodhitharta @ Jan. 17 2010,03:18) Quote (WhatIsTrue @ Jan. 17 2010,06:54) Quote (bodhitharta @ Jan. 16 2010,06:29) Quote (WhatIsTrue @ Jan. 16 2010,07:42) Quote (bodhitharta @ Jan. 15 2010,10:14) Quote (WhatIsTrue @ Jan. 15 2010,14:41) bodhitharta wrote: Quote The problem with your response is that it didn't answer my question. When slavery was perfectly acceptable in America it was because of Social Capital which is really just another word for Politics. What stopped slavery in America was Religion and the belief in God. Let me try this again, since you clearly missed the point.
Why don't most people walk around in public in pajamas, dirty clothes, or naked?
A) They believe they will be punished in the afterlife, if they don't make themselves presentable in public.
B) They want to present a good image in their everyday social interactions so that others will treat them well and/or think of them positively.
(Bonus question: Why do many kids in highschool dress in ways that many adults find embarrassing? Hint: Think of what's “socially normal” on college campuses.)
Why don't people generally settle disputes with their family and friends by beating the crap out of them?
A) They believe they will be punished in the afterlife, if they physically hurt someone.
B) They don't want to alienate the people in their immediate social network as that might leave them isolated relationally and perhaps materially as well.
(As a bonus question, why do men who beat their wives generally try to hide it from other people? Hint: Think about what things are considered socially acceptable.)
If you think the answers are closer to A than to B, then I can't help you.
Religion has very little to do with how people act on a day to day basis, and that is true of most religious people as well. Religious people do have an added incentive to behave well, (i.e. their social capital with their god), but in most cases, they seem far more willing to offend their god then to offend their neighbor.
I'm sorry, you seem to not really know about society. have you ever lived in an actual city?People do settle their disputes with violence all the time and when they don't it's from fear of being arrested not an outcast, same thing with abusive husbands they don't want to be arrested.
People do all the time walk around in pajamas and dirty clothes and once again they don't walk around naked because they will be arrested.
Where do you live? Not in New York, Los Angelas, Chicago, Newark or any major city, am I right?
I have always lived in big cities, trust me I know what I'm talking about.
Those who are willing to offend God are more than willing to offend their neighbor.
You actually demonstrate my point perfectly. Wherever people value their social interactions, there is more civility. Wherever people don't value their social interactions, you find more crime, more violence, more filth, etc.. In big cities, social capital is less valuable and therefore less influential. In small towns, social capital is very valuable, thus much less crime, nicer neighbors, etc..Go back and take my quiz. Skip the bonus questions, 'cause you're not ready for them yet.
The populations are by far in the larger cities therefore your whole point is moot.
When you can explain to me what you think my point is, we can discuss whether or not it's moot. As of now, my impression is that you just don't get it.
The fact is you were deceived thinking social capital is any diferent than politics
Suscpicion confirmed!Quote (WhatIsTrue @ Jan. 18 2010,06:31) Quote (bodhitharta @ Jan. 17 2010,03:18) Quote (WhatIsTrue @ Jan. 17 2010,06:54) Quote (bodhitharta @ Jan. 16 2010,06:29) Quote (WhatIsTrue @ Jan. 16 2010,07:42) Quote (bodhitharta @ Jan. 15 2010,10:14) Quote (WhatIsTrue @ Jan. 15 2010,14:41) bodhitharta wrote: Quote The problem with your response is that it didn't answer my question. When slavery was perfectly acceptable in America it was because of Social Capital which is really just another word for Politics. What stopped slavery in America was Religion and the belief in God. Let me try this again, since you clearly missed the point.
Why don't most people walk around in public in pajamas, dirty clothes, or naked?
A) They believe they will be punished in the afterlife, if they don't make themselves presentable in public.
B) They want to present a good image in their everyday social interactions so that others will treat them well and/or think of them positively.
(Bonus question: Why do many kids in highschool dress in ways that many adults find embarrassing? Hint: Think of what's “socially normal” on college campuses.)
Why don't people generally settle disputes with their family and friends by beating the crap out of them?
A) They believe they will be punished in the afterlife, if they physically hurt someone.
B) They don't want to alienate the people in their immediate social network as that might leave them isolated relationally and perhaps materially as well.
(As a bonus question, why do men who beat their wives generally try to hide it from other people? Hint: Think about what things are considered socially acceptable.)
If you think the answers are closer to A than to B, then I can't help you.
Religion has very little to do with how people act on a day to day basis, and that is true of most religious people as well. Religious people do have an added incentive to behave well, (i.e. their social capital with their god), but in most cases, they seem far more willing to offend their god then to offend their neighbor.
I'm sorry, you seem to not really know about society. have you ever lived in an actual city?People do settle their disputes with violence all the time and when they don't it's from fear of being arrested not an outcast, same thing with abusive husbands they don't want to be arrested.
People do all the time walk around in pajamas and dirty clothes and once again they don't walk around naked because they will be arrested.
Where do you live? Not in New York, Los Angelas, Chicago, Newark or any major city, am I right?
I have always lived in big cities, trust me I know what I'm talking about.
Those who are willing to offend God are more than willing to offend their neighbor.
You actually demonstrate my point perfectly. Wherever people value their social interactions, there is more civility. Wherever people don't value their social interactions, you find more crime, more violence, more filth, etc.. In big cities, social capital is less valuable and therefore less influential. In small towns, social capital is very valuable, thus much less crime, nicer neighbors, etc..Go back and take my quiz. Skip the bonus questions, 'cause you're not ready for them yet.
The populations are by far in the larger cities therefore your whole point is moot.
When you can explain to me what you think my point is, we can discuss whether or not it's moot. As of now, my impression is that you just don't get it.
The fact is you were deceived thinking social capital is any diferent than politics
Suscpicion confirmed!
Suspicion confirmed?Quote (bodhitharta @ Jan. 17 2010,22:07) Quote (kejonn @ Jan. 18 2010,14:26) Suspicion confirmed!!
Suspicion confirmed?
WIT said you do not get what he has been talking about. You have shown that to be true.Quote (kejonn @ Jan. 19 2010,00:08) Quote (bodhitharta @ Jan. 17 2010,22:07) Quote (kejonn @ Jan. 18 2010,14:26) Suspicion confirmed!!
Suspicion confirmed?
WIT said you do not get what he has been talking about. You have shown that to be true.
No,he didn't know what he was talking about
If what he was saying was correct you would not have Gay Marriage being legalized in many of the states in america.
Quote (bodhitharta @ Jan. 18 2010,15:29) Quote (kejonn @ Jan. 19 2010,00:08) Quote (bodhitharta @ Jan. 17 2010,22:07) Quote (kejonn @ Jan. 18 2010,14:26) Suspicion confirmed!!
Suspicion confirmed?
WIT said you do not get what he has been talking about. You have shown that to be true.
No,he didn't know what he was talking about
If what he was saying was correct you would not have Gay Marriage being legalized in many of the states in america.
You still don't get it. They are legalized in states where the society is more accepting of such.People's behavior is often a reflection of the social groups they associate with. If it is socially acceptable to drink, then more people will drink. If it is socially acceptable to be sexually promiscuous, more people will be sexually promiscuous.
Quote (kejonn @ Jan. 19 2010,14:33) Quote (bodhitharta @ Jan. 18 2010,15:29) Quote (kejonn @ Jan. 19 2010,00:08) Quote (bodhitharta @ Jan. 17 2010,22:07) Quote (kejonn @ Jan. 18 2010,14:26) Suspicion confirmed!!
Suspicion confirmed?
WIT said you do not get what he has been talking about. You have shown that to be true.
No,he didn't know what he was talking about
If what he was saying was correct you would not have Gay Marriage being legalized in many of the states in america.
You still don't get it. They are legalized in states where the society is more accepting of such.People's behavior is often a reflection of the social groups they associate with. If it is socially acceptable to drink, then more people will drink. If it is socially acceptable to be sexually promiscuous, more people will be sexually promiscuous.
Actually gay marriages have been made legal in places where they overwhelmingly have rejected it. Rights of people often go against the populus that's why there are high courts to protect the minority.Most behaviours of people are curtailed by Law not popularity, if it was a matter of popularity most people who drink would gladly drive drunk.
Drugs are extremely popular and yet they are illegal and most don't indulge because of the legal factor.
Quote (bodhitharta @ Jan. 18 2010,22:35) Actually gay marriages have been made legal in places where they overwhelmingly have rejected it. Where?
Quote Rights of people often go against the populus that's why there are high courts to protect the minority. Most behaviours of people are curtailed by Law not popularity, if it was a matter of popularity most people who drink would gladly drive drunk.
Drugs are extremely popular and yet they are illegal and most don't indulge because of the legal factor.
We are not discussing legality, we a re discussing what is socially acceptable. There IS a difference!Quote (kejonn @ Jan. 19 2010,16:51) Quote (bodhitharta @ Jan. 18 2010,22:35) Actually gay marriages have been made legal in places where they overwhelmingly have rejected it. Where?
Quote Rights of people often go against the populus that's why there are high courts to protect the minority. Most behaviours of people are curtailed by Law not popularity, if it was a matter of popularity most people who drink would gladly drive drunk.
Drugs are extremely popular and yet they are illegal and most don't indulge because of the legal factor.
We are not discussing legality, we a re discussing what is socially acceptable. There IS a difference!
California voted against prop 8 which was to legalize gay marriage and now it is in court and will probably be made legal there soon just like it has in other places. Keep in mind that San Francisco and other parts of California are known for its acceptance of Gays.SF even has a Gay Mayor
I just made the point that legality of something affects more than social acceptance because there are less people that make the law than the ones that have to follow the law.
So you may have an entire community one place that abhors abortion but if it is lawful in that community it is acceptable by LAW
And there are communities like this where it is not socially acceptable to get an abortion and yet those clinics stay busy.
Being an absolute drug addict is not socially acceptable and drugs usage is on the rise everywhere, one of the reasons are that the ideas of community has truly decreased and will do so more and more. In my community I know maybe 2 out of 1000 neighbors, we all wave to each other and greet one another with a smile but I only “know” a few.
My community is spread out over many states so by far the people that effect our behaviours the most are few.
Gangs for instance don't start out as 500 strong they grow from 1 or 2 people and spread like that.
I don't know about you or where you live but social capital only will work in closed political systems.
Have you ever been on myspace if you have you would find out that it is a social network that is not really social at all. It is basically like having a phonebook and calling people up randomly. There is nothing new under the sun.
If social capitol was valid there would be no crime at all but people are more complex than that
You still don't get it. It may not be socially acceptable for many things in a broad society, but social capital has more to say about what goes on inside of social networks. If your social network consists of many gays and lesbians, then gay marriage is acceptable. If your social network consists of many gang members, drive-by shootings are acceptable. If your social network consists of many Western hating radical Islamists, terrorism is acceptable.
Catching on?
Quote (kejonn @ Jan. 20 2010,22:12) You still don't get it. It may not be socially acceptable for many things in a broad society, but social capital has more to say about what goes on inside of social networks. If your social network consists of many gays and lesbians, then gay marriage is acceptable. If your social network consists of many gang members, drive-by shootings are acceptable. If your social network consists of many Western hating radical Islamists, terrorism is acceptable. Catching on?
All your talking about is “birds of a the same feather flock together”That's not about influence it's about seeking the same level like water.
A person who already feels gay will seek out others who already feel the same way.
Do you understand what I am saying?
The type of social networking you are talking about, those networks are self-forming because they Already agree on certain issues not that they or those issues form as a result of the networking. It is the effect not the cause
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
