God's message to Mohamed (was: God, Education, Epistemology)

[Rami Rustom]

On Sun, Oct 14, 2012 at 18:42 AM, Bruno Marchal

This is again belief. (revelation through him) Btw the prophet never lied in his entire life even before prophethood.

Does some physical book say this? A physical book in the universe that obey the laws of physics? Is god the only infallible thing? Or is the book infallible too? Is reading the book a process that could introduce errors?
If you are fallible...and the book could have a mistake (consistent with physics) then how can you be *absolutely certain* he never lied? If you are not absolutely certain then how confident are you? How do you access this confidence? Is there other evidence to test the theory about the prophet's *never* having lied? What other evidence? Is there video of him from the moment he was born til the day he died?
No?
Then on what basis can you possibly make that claim?

OK concerning this "fallible humans and fallible world" argument of yours I think this type of thinking will not lead us to a meaningful position. It is so obvious that humans are fallible since we are limited beings thrown into existence. We are limited by physics, limited by space-time and limited in scope so this brings fallibility necessarily.
Having said that as fallible beings we have to construct beliefs and assumptions in order to proceed with our lives (in all dimensions). I will give an example to make my point. Most of the scientific world agrees that Newton was a "special" physicist and scientist. Actually he is the guy who came up with the idea of gravitation and now we have a "law" of gravitation that has been used in countless experiments, machinery etc without any visible hesitation and doubt.

False. Einstein showed the flaw in Newton's theory. So Newton's theory
is only an approximation that works well in some situations
(approximation means that it contains error). And in other situations,
Newton's theory is wildly wrong (like near speed of light situations).

Now lets' suppose that the law of gravity that stems from a deeper physical phenomenon that we do not have yet fully understood is subject to change in 2013. This will be so because this deeper physical phenomenon will have an abrupt evolution that we could have anticipated if we had complete understanding of gravity (if we had been infallible concerning gravitation let's say).
But of course we are fallible. Based on strict applicability of fallibility principle, we should then say that all machinery utilizing gravitational law as a given should be stopped and taken out of service as a first precaution (since we are fallible in our acceptance of gravitational law).

No. Those machines you speak of are working just fine, because they
are situations where Newton's theory works well (approximately, but
enough).

By extrapolating this to all science and to all daily practice, we would arrive to such point that all of us would die from starvation as paralyzed whereever we are.
So the "the prophet never lied in his entire life even before prophethood" is a similar belief.

Lets assume he didn't lie. And that he didn't lie that he believed he
received a message. So what? Its possible he heard a voice that was
within his own mind. Note that people labeled as schizophrenics
routinely hear voices in their heads and attribute them to external
sources, like demons. Do you believe that demons are real? Do you
believe that demons possess people? Do you believe that these
possessed people here the demons speak to them?

I believe in him since I see him as the "Newton" of the religion. You could say that law of gravitation is not only about Newton being a special genius but it is also confirmed through test and verification by objective experiments. But again these are experiments by fallible humans done through fallible equipments. The ethical integrity of the prophet is also reported in various historical reports under differing circumstances (these observations might also be fallible in principle)
To keep it short, we humans have to form reasonable beliefs and act positively according to them by taking into account the fallibility of the humans but by not being blocked by this fact. I think all this situation is also part of the existential "test" we are in.

This is not only about "knowing". You are omitting irrational component. The muslims believe that the prophet both knew and felt that this was revelation from God without slighest doubt.

Many people have such experiences...such feelings. They do not guarantee much. There is a wing in a hospital in Israel specifically for people who have Savior Complex. They come to Israel feeling certain they are Jesus. They aren't Jesus are they? You don't really think a *feeling* can be evidence of truth, do you?

Given the prophets impeccable ethical background, his (almost extreme) tolerance, his jocular and sincere attitude towards everyone and his strong emphasis on rationality&science as an illiterate desert-dwelling Arab, I believe he was wise enough to distinguish the feeling of divine from the fake feeling of divine.

So your entire belief rests on the idea that you've just revealed to
us. That the voice that Mohamed heard was Allah and not his own. And
you've already admitted that Mohamed is fallible. So the conclusion is
that you believe that Allah exists because you believe that Mohamed
was (fallibly) able to know the difference between the feeling of
divine and the fake feeling of divine.

Note that the Quran does not claim that Allah spoke to Mohamed. It
claims that angel Gabriel was the speaker.

-- Rami Rustom
http://ramirustom.blogspot.com

[Ismail Atalay]

Post by Rami Rustom

Does some physical book say this? A physical book in the universe that obey the laws of physics? Is god the >>>only infallible thing? Or is the book infallible too? Is reading the book a process that could introduce errors?
If you are fallible...and the book could have a mistake (consistent with physics) then how can you be >>>*absolutely certain* he never lied? If you are not absolutely certain then how confident are you? How do >>>you access this confidence? Is there other evidence to test the theory about the prophet's *never* having >>>lied? What other evidence? Is there video of him from the moment he was born til the day he died?
No?
Then on what basis can you possibly make that claim?

OK concerning this "fallible humans and fallible world" argument of yours I think this type of thinking will not >>lead us to a meaningful position. It is so obvious that humans are fallible since we are limited beings thrown >>into existence. We are limited by physics, limited by space-time and limited in scope so this brings fallibility >>necessarily.
Having said that as fallible beings we have to construct beliefs and assumptions in order to proceed with our >>lives (in all dimensions). I will give an example to make my point. Most of the scientific world agrees that >>Newton was a "special" physicist and scientist. Actually he is the guy who came up with the idea of gravitation >>and now we have a "law" of gravitation that has been used in countless experiments, machinery etc without >>any visible hesitation and doubt.

False. Einstein showed the flaw in Newton's theory. So Newton's theory
is only an approximation that works well in some situations
(approximation means that it contains error). And in other situations,
Newton's theory is wildly wrong (like near speed of light situations).

Please (re)read what I have said. I have said that "Newton is the guy who came up with the idea of gravitation". Is this false? Then I have said "now we have a law of gravitation that has been used practically in countless ways" is this false? I did not say that Newton is infallible or his theory is flawless, I did not say his theory has given the complete gravitational theory picture (actually Einstein's approach also does not give the complete picture but anyway). You are extrapolating subjectively on what you read and this is not good interpretation practice whether you read scientific or religious argument.

Post by Rami Rustom

Now lets' suppose that the law of gravity that stems from a deeper physical phenomenon that we do not have >>yet fully understood is subject to change in 2013. This will be so because this deeper physical phenomenon >>will have an abrupt evolution that we could have anticipated if we had complete understanding of gravity (if >>we had been infallible concerning gravitation let's say).
But of course we are fallible. Based on strict applicability of fallibility principle, we should then say that all >>machinery utilizing gravitational law as a given should be stopped and taken out of service as a first >>precaution (since we are fallible in our acceptance of gravitational law).

No. Those machines you speak of are working just fine, because they
are situations where Newton's theory works well (approximately, but
enough).

It seems you completely misunderstood my point (or I could not make myself clear enough). I am talking about a hypothetical situation here based on inherent fallibility as human beings. We are all fallible concerning gravitation phenomenon as well and if we really become too serious and strict about it, there would be no way we can have confidence on the law of gravitation would operate the way it is next year for example (2013). So as a precaution we should stop all machines operating based on this principle (because we are fallible). But of course we not do this since we HAVE to form reasonable beliefs and go on with our lifes.

Post by Rami Rustom

By extrapolating this to all science and to all daily practice, we would arrive to such point that all of us would >>die from starvation as paralyzed whereever we are.
So the "the prophet never lied in his entire life even before prophethood" is a similar belief.

Lets assume he didn't lie. And that he didn't lie that he believed he
received a message. So what? Its possible he heard a voice that was
within his own mind. Note that people labeled as schizophrenics
routinely hear voices in their heads and attribute them to external
sources, like demons. Do you believe that demons are real? Do you
believe that demons possess people? Do you believe that these
possessed people here the demons speak to them?

I do not believe in demons or their possession of people. There is no scientific, logical, philosophical or theological evidence for their existence. I do not understand how one can develop reasonable belief on demons.

Post by Rami Rustom

Given the prophets impeccable ethical background, his (almost extreme) tolerance, his jocular and sincere >>attitude towards everyone and his strong emphasis on rationality&science as an illiterate desert-dwelling >>Arab, I believe he was wise enough to distinguish the feeling of divine from the fake feeling of divine.

So your entire belief rests on the idea that you've just revealed to
us. That the voice that Mohamed heard was Allah and not his own. And
you've already admitted that Mohamed is fallible. 
So the conclusion is
that you believe that Allah exists because you believe that Mohamed
was (fallibly) able to know the difference between the feeling of
divine and the fake feeling of divine.

No you are departmentalizing the whole idea and then you criticize the vulnerable part. It is not only that I trust the prophet's wisdom. It is one component in the entire inseparably linked package. I obviously look also into the message's content and the positive/progressive impact this message has had on the immediate community and on the human history. Also the fact that the Mahomed is fallible does not make the message itself fallible. In the human-divine relationship, the orthodox muslim belief is that the God Himself made sure that the communication and the divine message's integrity is protected. The basis for this belief is mentioned in the Quran.

Post by Rami Rustom
Note that the Quran does not claim that Allah spoke to Mohamed. It
claims that angel Gabriel was the speaker.

Yes you are correct.

Ismail

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

[Rami Rustom]

Post by Ismail Atalay

Post by Rami Rustom
False. Einstein showed the flaw in Newton's theory. So Newton's theory
is only an approximation that works well in some situations
(approximation means that it contains error). And in other situations,
Newton's theory is wildly wrong (like near speed of light situations).

Please (re)read what I have said. I have said that "Newton is the guy who came up with the idea of gravitation". Is this false? Then I have said "now we have a law of gravitation that has been used practically in countless ways" is this false? I did not say that Newton is infallible or his theory is flawless, I did not say his theory has given the complete gravitational theory picture (actually Einstein's approach also does not give the complete picture but anyway). You are extrapolating subjectively on what you read and this is not good interpretation practice whether you read scientific or religious argument.

You said "without doubt". Einstein "doubted" Newton's gravitation theory.

Post by Ismail Atalay

Post by Rami Rustom
No. Those machines you speak of are working just fine, because they
are situations where Newton's theory works well (approximately, but
enough).

It seems you completely misunderstood my point (or I could not make myself clear enough). I am talking about a hypothetical situation here based on inherent fallibility as human beings. We are all fallible concerning gravitation phenomenon as well and if we really become too serious and strict about it, there would be no way we can have confidence on the law of gravitation would operate the way it is next year for example (2013). So as a precaution we should stop all machines operating based on this principle (because we are fallible). But of course we not do this since we HAVE to form reasonable beliefs and go on with our lifes.

I agree that just because we can't know whether any of our ideas are
objective knowledge, doesn't mean we shouldn't act on any of them. We
should act on the best knowledge we have (conjectural knowledge). And
the best (conjectural) knowledge we have is defined as the knowledge
that is currently unrefuted.

Post by Ismail Atalay

Post by Rami Rustom
Lets assume he didn't lie. And that he didn't lie that he believed he
received a message. So what? Its possible he heard a voice that was
within his own mind. Note that people labeled as schizophrenics
routinely hear voices in their heads and attribute them to external
sources, like demons. Do you believe that demons are real? Do you
believe that demons possess people? Do you believe that these
possessed people here the demons speak to them?

I do not believe in demons or their possession of people. There is no scientific, logical, philosophical or theological evidence for their existence. I do not understand how one can develop reasonable belief on demons.

Because the Quran talks about demons. 7th century arabs believed it,
which is why it was put in the Quran, and many 21st century arabs
still believe it, because its in the Quran. The word for demon is
jinn, which is used in the Quran over 100 times. Here's one:

Quran 1.2 (translated by Sahih): All the praises and thanks be to
Allah, the Lord of the 'Alamin (mankind, jinns and all that exists).

And some of the verses refer directly to demons possessing people.

Post by Ismail Atalay

Post by Rami Rustom
So your entire belief rests on the idea that you've just revealed to
us. That the voice that Mohamed heard was Allah and not his own. And
you've already admitted that Mohamed is fallible.
So the conclusion is
that you believe that Allah exists because you believe that Mohamed
was (fallibly) able to know the difference between the feeling of
divine and the fake feeling of divine.

No you are departmentalizing the whole idea and then you criticize the vulnerable part. It is not only that I trust the prophet's wisdom. It is one component in the entire inseparably linked package. I obviously look also into the message's content and the positive/progressive impact this message has had on the immediate community and on the human history. Also the fact that the Mahomed is fallible does not make the message itself fallible.

You haven't persuaded me nor Bruno of that. Why do you believe you're
right? Do you have criticisms of our criticisms? If so, why haven't
you replied to those posts with your criticisms?

Post by Ismail Atalay
In the human-divine relationship, the orthodox muslim belief is that the God Himself made sure that the communication and the divine message's integrity is protected. The basis for this belief is mentioned in the Quran.

And that idea conflicts with the laws of physics. Do you agree?

-- Rami

[Ismail Atalay]

I do not believe in demons or their possession of people. There is no scientific, logical, philosophical or >>theological evidence for their existence. I do not understand how one can develop reasonable belief on >>demons.

Because the Quran talks about demons. 

No the Quran talks about Jinns. They are different. Demon is a bad spirit coming from Christian theology (not sure if it is an authentic concept though). 

7th century arabs believed it,
which is why it was put in the Quran, and many 21st century arabs
still believe it, because its in the Quran. The word for demon is
Quran 1.2 (translated by Sahih): All the praises and thanks be to
Allah, the Lord of the 'Alamin (mankind, jinns and all that exists).

Btw the statements in parantheses are just explanations in Quranic translation. So jinn is not literally stated in above verse. But you are right, jinns are stated in the Quran explicitly as well. They are presented as moral agents of different existential nature (not physical creatures in the way humans are) that were created before humanbeings. There is no detailed knowledge provided about them

And some of the verses refer directly to demons possessing people.

No there are no possessions in Quran. Quran explains that some jinns (who are given the permission of doing it) are able to trigger negative thoughts in people minds  but just trigger for one instant. Then it is humanbeings responsibility to fight the thought and make it go away. 

In the human-divine relationship, the orthodox muslim belief is that the God Himself made sure that the >>communication and the divine message's integrity is protected. The basis for this belief is mentioned in the Quran.

And that idea conflicts with the laws of physics. Do you agree?

I am not still convinced why the integrity protection of a text or a message is against the laws of physics. We are perfectly capable of transmitting long messages in the world and in the deep space and in most of the cases their integrity is fully protected via special coding and redundancy schemes. 

You can say that the idea of "always perfect" integrity protection is against the laws of physics. But here you should consider that divine protection is not and could not be subject to laws of physics. If you think it should be like that (divine protection is subject to laws of physics) then you are elevating the laws of physics to the divine status and this does not make sense to me (since I do not have any pantheistic tendencies)

Ismail