Alfonso XII monument, Madrid (photo from trekearth.com)
Please note, the post is actually fairly short if one just reads the main body and not the footnotes.
As part of my post-viva PhD revisions I was required to do some psychological and scientific research on consciousness, that was to work in concert with my already theological and philosophical approach. I presented a bit of this information back on May 13, 2009 with the article 'Consciousness, universalism, and Dos Equis'.
This new post will provide more material on consciousness.
How is this relevant to theology, philosophy of religion and Biblical Studies and more particular in my case, theodicy and the problem of evil? Well, I must admit I wondered why I was digging through secular psychology and science journals for my PhD revisions, but actually the findings do not, in my opinion, work against the Biblical idea of a human immaterial soul/spirit.
Sir John Houghton (1995) defines consciousness as ‘a quality possessed by human beings’ and the extent that it may be possessed by higher animals is the subject of debate.[1] Although the human brain is sometimes compared to a computer,[2] the human brain seems different as it thinks, feels, and demonstrates the property of self-awareness and consciousness.[3] Rocco J. Gennaro (2006) of Indiana State University documents grammatically that the main term under review, consciousness is derived from the Latin con (with)[4] and scire (know).[5]
Michael Winkelman (2004) of the American Anthropological Association writes that common understanding of a model of consciousness includes attention-awareness, phenomenal experiences, self-referencing, learning and the use of information, interpreting meanings, having goals, and systems of social reference.[6] It is suggested that consciousness manifests itself through the physical properties of the brain.[7] John Perry (1998) within ‘Circumstantial Attitudes and Benevolent Cognition’ suggests desires, beliefs and other cognitive aspects of persons are associated with mental states.[8] These mental states[9] relate by implication to human consciousness. There are strands of thought that desires and related functions may be found within human consciousness.[10]
David M. Rosenthal (2007) in ‘Philosophy, and the Study of Consciousness’ states that a person or creature is conscious when it can be awake and respond to ‘sensory stimulation.’[11] Being conscious also relates to a creature that senses and perceives about a thing or has a thought about that thing being present.[12] It is also defined as the state of being aware in contrast to being unaware.[13] Wade Novin (2004) in his journal article on quantum physics and consciousness explains consciousness is a ‘unique problem for the sciences’.[14] Cognitive science has recently made advances in understanding the structures and process of sensory input leading to bodily functions, but still little is known about consciousness.[15] It is noted that presently it is difficult to explain the need for consciousness within physical organisms within a physical, natural world.[16] Consciousness is considered as part of natural phenomenon because it is reasoned to exist, but not because any scientific theory can predict or explain its emergence.[17]
Peter Carruthers (2001)(2007) documents that modern higher-order theories[18] concerning consciousness attempts to reason out the distinctive properties of consciousness in regard to higher-order representation of sorts as in the ‘subjective dimensions’ of feelings.[19] Within the International Journal of Philosophy, Isabel Gois (2001) suggests that in written work consciousness is often viewed as a mystery.[20] She seeks to make consciousness less mysterious through the use of scientific inquiry.[21] Some philosophers and many scientists are skeptical concerning human ability to explain how the brain works in regard to the shape of events, thoughts and feelings.[22] There is a common view that no matter how detailed and complete a scientific theory of consciousness may be it will not be able to explain why the human ‘conscious experiences alone have an apparent quality to their occurrences’ while unconscious processes do not.[23]
Gois thinks this is a mistaken perspective[24] and instead reasons that science should ‘either provide physical evidence for the truth of those introspective impressions, or bow to the conclusion that it can never know our minds as well as they know themselves’.[25] She suggests that most reason that the second option is the more likely one, although she disagrees and reasons science can one day empirically understand consciousness.[26] Sir John Houghton writes that we should not expect to find extra material as part of the brain called ‘consciousness or self-awareness’ which ‘pervades the brain without being a part of it,[27] and I accept this is as a sound statement.
There is no clear understanding despite the fact consciousness, desires and related are studied within philosophy, religion, psychology and psychiatry.[28] The term and concept of consciousness has not been developed with enough clarity from scientists and others with related expertise.[29] It can be reasoned that possibly consciousness is the starting point where the human being has self-awareness and an understanding that they are an individual apart from any other entity.[30] Consciousness is a difficult subject,[31] but psychologist and philosopher William James (1904) states that if the idea of consciousness in understanding human thought is eliminated there is not an explanation for brain function.[32] If human consciousness is rejected because it is not completely understood,[33] then other ideas need to be invented which probably are not as intellectually satisfying.
[1] Houghton (1995: 219).
[2] Houghton (1995: 92).
[3] Houghton (1995: 92).
[4] Gennaro (2006: 1).
[5] Gennaro (2006: 1).
[6] Winkelman (2004: 1).
[7] Winkelman (2004: 1).
[8] Perry (1998: 1).
[9] Perry (1998: 1).
[10] Biologist Alfred Gierer from Tubingen suggests that consciousness appears as ‘a system’s feature of our brain with neural processes strictly following the laws of physics’. Gierer (2003: 1). Gierer explains that there is not however, a general and exhaustive theory of human consciousness. Gierer (2003: 1). E. Ordunez, I. Badillo, and E Peon state the basic conjecture is that matter, energy and related information within the universe activates brain function and the nervous system and the human experiences of ‘memory, logic, sentiments, awareness, perception, cognition’, and other processes. Ordunez, Badillo, and Peon (2008: 1).
[11] Rosenthal (2007: 1).
[12] Rosenthal (2007: 1). This would include an imagination of something possible.
[13] Rosenthal (2007: 1).
[14] Novin (2004: 1).
[15] Novin (2004: 1-2).
[16] Novin (2004: 2).
[17] Novin (2004: 2). Neil C. Manson writes that there is unlikely to be a simple, direct way to connect mental discourse to ultimate conclusions concerning the nature of consciousness. Manson (2002: 1).
[18] Carruthers (2001)(2007: 1). Higher-order thought will allow one to be conscious of his/her own state. Rosenthal (2007: 9-11). See also Ned Block of New York University. Block (2008: 1-2) and Gennaro (2006: 1-2).
[19] Carruthers (2001)(2007: 1).
[20] Gois (2001: 3). However, Gierer notes that most scientists reason mental states are clearly linked to the empirical physical states of the human brain. Gierer (2003: 6).
[21] Gois (2001: 3-4).
[22] Gois (2001: 4). Many philosophers and scientists are sceptical that human consciousness can be properly explained. Houghton admits it is difficult for many observers to accept that consciousness can be defined in a meaningful way or to describe it in terms of other things. Houghton (1995: 92-93).
[23] Gois (2001: 4).
[24] Gois (2001: 4).
[25] Gois (2001: 4). Gierer reasons one of the difficulties with the problem of understanding human consciousness and understanding humanity is the question of human free will. Gierer (2003: 13). Consciousness allows a person to have knowledge and understanding of self and environment and, therefore to have a perception of both good and evil. Ordunez, Badillo, and Peon (2008: 2).
[26] Gois (2001: 4). Marco Biagini, an Italian scientist with a PhD in Solid State Physics that operates the Center of Scientific Divulgation of Consciousness comments consciousness is ‘directly observable phenomena.’ Biagini (2009: 1-4). He takes a more optimistic approach to the idea of coming to scientific conclusions concerning consciousness. Houghton admits that consciousness will require new scientific theories and insights. Houghton (1995: 210).
[27] Houghton (1995: 70).
[28] Ordunez, Badillo, and Peon (2008: 2).
[29] Ordunez, Badillo, and Peon (2008: 2). Houghton (1995: 210).
[30] Descartes in Lormand (1648)(1996: Volume 3: 335). Hume (1739-1740)(1973: 185). Gierer (2003: 9).
[31] Gierer (2003: 9). Gois (2001: 4).
[32] James (1904: 477-491).
[33] James (1904: 477-491).
BIAGINI, MARCO (2009) ‘Mind and brain: A scientific discussion leading to the existence of the soul’, CSDC, Italy, Center of Scientific Divulgation about Consciousness.
BLACKBURN, SIMON (1996) Oxford Dictionary of Philosophy, Oxford, Oxford University Press.
BLOCK, NED (2008) ‘Comparing the Major Theories of Consciousness’, in The Cognitive Neurosciences IV, V.M. Gazzaniga (ed.), Cambridge, Massachusetts, MIT Press.
CARRUTHERS, PETER (2001)(2007) ‘Higher-Order Theories of Consciousness’, in Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, Palo Alto, California, Stanford University Press.
DESCARTES, RENE (1648)(1996) ‘Conversation with Burman’, in Eric Lormand: University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, The University of Michigan.
DARROW, CLARENCE (1928)(1973) ‘The Myth of the Soul’, in The Forum, October, in Paul Edwards and Arthur Pap (eds.), A Modern Introduction To Philosophy, New York, The Free Press.
ERICKSON, MILLARD (1994) Christian Theology, Grand Rapids, Baker Book House.
FEINBERG, JOHN.S. (1994) The Many Faces of Evil, Grand Rapids, Zondervan Publishing House.
GENNARO, ROCCO, J. (2006) ‘Consciousness’, in The Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy, Martin, Tennessee, The Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
GIERER, ALFRED (2003) ‘Brain, mind, and limitations of a scientific theory of human consciousness’, Preprint of a contribution to the symposium: Proteus im Spiegel-Kritische Theorie des Subjekts im 20, Tubingen, Max-Planck-Institute Biology, Tubingen.
GOIS, ISABEL (2001) ‘Understanding Consciousness’, in Disputaitio: International Journal of Philosophy, Lisbon, The Philosophy Centre of the University of Lisbon.
GRENZ, STANLEY J. AND ROGER E. OLSON (1992) Twentieth Century Theology, Downers Grove, Illinois, InterVarsity Press.
HOUGHTON, JOHN (1995) The Search for God, Can Science Help?, Lion Publishing, Oxford.
HUME, DAVID (1739-1740)(1973) ‘A Treatise of Human Nature’, in Paul Edwards and Arthur Pap (eds.), A Modern Introduction To Philosophy, New York, The Free Press.
JAMES, WILLIAM (1904) ‘Does ‘Consciousness’ Exist?’, in Journal of Philosophy, Psychology, and Scientific Methods, Volume 1, pages 477-491. New York, Columbia University.
MANSON, NEIL C. (2002) ‘What does language tell us about consciousness? First-person mental discourse and higher-order thought theories of consciousness’, in Philosophical Psychology, La Jolla, California, University of California, San Diego.
NOVIN, WADE (2004) ‘Can Quantum Physics Explain Consciousness? A report on the Quantum Mind conference’, in Skeptic, Spring, London, Goldsmiths, University of London.
ORDUNEZ, E., I. BADILLO, AND E. PEON (2008) ‘Toward the Concept of the Consciousness Field-Some Reflections’, Ordunez, Badillo, Peon, Mexico City. Ordunez, Badillo, Peon.
PERRY, JOHN (1998) ‘Circumstantial Attitudes and Benevolent Cognition’, in Language, Mind and Logic, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.
POJMAN, LOUIS P. (1996) Philosophy: The Quest for Truth, New York, Wadsworth Publishing Company.
ROSENTHAL, DAVID M. (2007) ‘Philosophy and the Study of Consciousness’, Oxford Companion to Consciousness, Timothy Bayne (ed.), Oxford, Oxford University Press.
WINKELMAN, MICHAEL (2004) ‘Understanding Consciousness Using Systems Approaches and Lexical Universal’, American Anthropological Association, Arlington, Virginia, American Anthropological Association.
A good place for a cult leader to live?
Do not eat at Dairy Queen and then 'floor it' down that road.
Interesting, but I would not paint a house yellow with an orange roof. It reminds me of the Vancouver Blazers of the World Hockey Association back when I was a little boy.
If you own a pair of Ray-Bans you can keep them on while driving through tunnels.
This topic always reminds me of the hopes and expectations for artificial intelligence and how this developed over time. In the 1960's, sci-fi flicks gave us visions of human like robots, while the 1970's saw a development into artificial intelligence. The 80's gave us the Fifth Generation push by Japan that scared the US tech community, but then things started changing. In the 90's, the notion of general artificial intelligence was dying, but very specific problems were starting to be solved after a huge amount of effort, like voice recognition and pattern recognition. These are finally starting to mature, as long as the goals aren't too ambitious.
ReplyDeleteThe last hope for general artificial intelligence is the neural network, which promises to match the brain more. Again, hard work leads to highly specialized solutions, but nothing general. The only reason for hope is that neural networks can be made increasingly large and complex so that what they do is intractable, so people can also say "who knows what it can do?". Indeed.
Anyway, it is clear that the attempts to achieve humanoid consciousness from the technology side have failed.
Thanks, Looney.
ReplyDeleteI thought with your background that you may have something significant to add in comments.
Frequent commenter, Chucky, also has an interest in artificial intelligence.
'Anyway, it is clear that the attempts to achieve humanoid consciousness from the technology side have failed.'
Reasonable. I suppose we shall see over time just how close technology can bring artificial intelligence and something considered perhaps virtual consciousness to comparing to human intelligence and consciousness.
It's interesting to see how the "secular" (or natural) mind and the "spiritual" mind approach a study of this sort. I'm not sure that we will (or can) ever come up with a definition of consciousness that will be universally acceptable (I think we can merely describe it in various ways) because consciousness is a part of what it means to be "image-bearer". The "secular mind", therefore, because it seeks its knowledge from a purely humanistic rational base, has already cut itself off from the necessary means to understanding what consciousness is. But then with regard to both the "secular" or the "spiritual" mind, I think we will only (and ever) be able to speak in terms of description (which we've been doing throughout the millennia of our existence as human beings).
ReplyDeleteI think consciousness falls within the paradigm of the mystery of what it means to be God's "image-bearers". The only way I believe that we can be faithful in an attempt to understand (not define) what it means to be a "conscious" entity is to study the Person of the Trinity (whose "image" we bear).
And that, my friend (as you know), is a study that we'll be engaged in throughout eternity as we grow in the knowledge of our Lord/Creator/Savior.
GGM
I read a Heinlein book not too long ago, "The Moon Is A Harsh Mistress", in which a large computer network used to manage information on the Moon for the prison colony there spontaneously achieves consciousness, and is befriended by the computer maintenance man.
ReplyDeleteI like that "cult leader" house. It looks like it belongs in some fantasy movie.
ReplyDelete'It's interesting to see how the "secular" (or natural) mind and the "spiritual" mind approach a study of this sort.'
ReplyDeleteHi GGM,
I received your comments and Saint Chucklin's while at my eye surgeon's office in Vancouver. All my floaters in the one eye are gone. Thank God. My health is on the way up, besides already being the physical kingpin.
Yes, as much as I found that series of revisions unnecessary, it was good to look through science journals and like to get a different perspective.
'I'm not sure that we will (or can) ever come up with a definition of consciousness that will be universally acceptable (I think we can merely describe it in various ways)...'
Yes.
'I think consciousness falls within the paradigm of the mystery of what it means to be God's "image-bearers". The only way I believe that we can be faithful in an attempt to understand (not define) what it means to be a "conscious" entity is to study the Person of the Trinity (whose "image" we bear).'
Reasonable.
'And that, my friend (as you know), is a study that we'll be engaged in throughout eternity as we grow in the knowledge of our Lord/Creator/Savior.'
Agreed.
Thanks.
'I read a Heinlein book not too long ago, "The Moon Is A Harsh Mistress", in which a large computer network used to manage information on the Moon for the prison colony there spontaneously achieves consciousness, and is befriended by the computer maintenance man.'
ReplyDeleteThat sounds like your frienships with Zombie and/or Manson.
Cheers.
'I like that "cult leader" house. It looks like it belongs in some fantasy movie.'
ReplyDeleteAgreed.
It would be a cool place to work.
To the scientists who have now admitted that there is something more to human consciousness that cannot be empirically measured, well I guess that there is more to this world and to human beings and their complexity than meets the eye!
ReplyDelete-Doc Oc-
Thanks, Doc Oc.
ReplyDelete'To the scientists who have now admitted that there is something more to human consciousness that cannot be empirically measured...'
Suspicious yes.:)
'Cognitive science has recently made advances in understanding the structures and process of sensory input leading to bodily functions, but still little is known about consciousness.[15] It is noted that presently it is difficult to explain the need for consciousness within physical organisms within a physical, natural world.[16] Consciousness is considered as part of natural phenomenon because it is reasoned to exist, but not because any scientific theory can predict or explain its emergence.[17]'
you have some beautiful pics
ReplyDeleteThanks, Daij.
ReplyDeleteI like the shades of blue with the Madrid photo. That is one of my favourite I have collected, and recently, for my desktop pictures.
The other four are not desktop pictures but are very colourful.
I like very much brilliant colours and depth with photos.
Additional comment:
AS
According to the police official, under Islamic law an underage girl can be charged with adultery or related crime whether or not she had willing underage sex or was raped.
That is a law of a twisted religion.
My take is that many men in authority there like having control and use of underage sex.
Outside of adult age and marriage, that is simply the abuse of sexuality.
detailed and exhaustive work, Cousin!
ReplyDeleteLoved the pate-cleansing drive after. Think deep - live deep.
Aloha from Honolulu :)
Comfort Spiral
'detailed and exhaustive work, Cousin!
ReplyDeleteLoved the pate-cleansing drive after. Think deep - live deep.'
Thank you, Cloudia.
I still look forward to visiting Hawaii one day, as I am sure some of my readers have already.
I am glad I can be of assistance.
Regarding that first photo of that house, I bet it would be a real pain to go to the store...or to go anywhere, for that matter.
ReplyDeletePrayers for my financial situation would be greatly appreciated, especially that I would not lose my house.
That Jehovah's Witness is continuing to leave comments on my old blog post. He recently left 14 more comments, but right now I am so busy with work that I really don't have time to debate with him. Today is my one day off, and I am trying to catch up with all the errands, phone calls, paying bills, etc. that I need to do. But thanks to that JW, comments between him and I for that one blog article have reached 631 comments, a record for me.
And, since I always have Islam on my mind, it seems, here are some related links:
'Burka Bandit' story from May
At odds on Burka Ban
Repulsive Time Magazine cover: Afghan Women and the Return of the Taliban
YouTube Video: Anti-Defamation League Reverses Position on Ground Zero Mosque
And this one you may not be able to get, but I'll try it anyway:
Group to fight vote clearing way for NYC mosque
Cheers, Jeff.
ReplyDelete'Regarding that first photo of that house, I bet it would be a real pain to go to the store...or to go anywhere, for that matter.'
Yes, I imagine that products may be purchased in bulk and stored.
'Prayers for my financial situation would be greatly appreciated, especially that I would not lose my house.'
I am still remembering you in prayer. However:
Lord, I ask in Jesus' name for financial, physical and spiritual blessings for Jeff. Also bless his work and ministry.
'That Jehovah's Witness is continuing to leave comments on my old blog post. He recently left 14 more comments, but right now I am so busy with work that I really don't have time to debate with him.
You know, you and I have emailed on the topic of when it is time to give up on something and/or someone online. Well, seems to me this gentleman should take a hint and give up on the debate.
'Today is my one day off, and I am trying to catch up with all the errands, phone calls, paying bills, etc. that I need to do. But thanks to that JW, comments between him and I for that one blog article have reached 631 comments, a record for me.'
I am 12 pages into my first e-Book on a topic which has approximately 18 million hits on Google. I think I will sell the book for $10 USD.
Please pray for success.
'And, since I always have Islam on my mind, it seems, here are some related links:'
'ALWAYS ON MY MIND (Elvis Presley)
Maybe I didn't love you quite as good as I should have,
Maybe I didn't hold you quite as often as I could have,
Little things I should have said and done,
I just never took the time.
You were always on my mind,
You were always on my mind.
Maybe I didn't hold you all those lonely, lonely times,
And I guess I never told you, I'm so happy that you're mine,
If I made you feel second best,
I'm sorry, I was blind.
You were always on my mind,
You were always on my mind,
Tell me, tell me that your sweet love hasn't died,
Give me, give me one more chance to keep you satisfied,
If I made you feel second best,
I'm sorry, I was blind.
You were always on my mind,
You were always on my mind.'
My friend Bobby Buff is a frequent commenter, semi-professional singer and a huge Elvis fan. Back in the 1990s he was an obsessed body-builder and I created a version of this song and lyrics for him entitled, 'I was always on my own mind'.
Russ,
ReplyDeleteYes, I imagine that products may be purchased in bulk and stored.
Good luck to the postman, Fed Ex, or UPS trying to deliver there! A helicopter letting down a basket on the end of a line might be a good way to deliver things there.
Lord, I ask in Jesus' name for financial, physical and spiritual blessings for Jeff. Also bless his work and ministry.
Thank you Russ. I called today to have a packet sent to me to start the litigation process to possibly get an adjustment to my mortgage. And work is going better! Yay!
I am 12 pages into my first e-Book on a topic which has approximately 18 million hits on Google. I think I will sell the book for $10 USD.
Very cool!
Please pray for success.
OK, and please keep us posted.
Back in the 1990s he was an obsessed body-builder and I created a version of this song and lyrics for him entitled, 'I was always on my own mind'.
That's funny.
Here is the site of a recent commenter on my blog site:
Intelligent Design Facts
The IDF site looks useful.
ReplyDeleteThanks, Sir Jenkins of Ocala.
With regards to Jeff's picture of TIME magazine with the woman's nose missing, How Horrible!! I mean what gives her husband the right to treat another person with such horrid behavior and abuse??
ReplyDelete-Walter T. Franklin-
'With regards to Jeff's picture of TIME magazine with the woman's nose missing, How Horrible!! I mean what gives her husband the right to treat another person with such horrid behavior and abuse??
ReplyDelete-Walter T. Franklin-'
It is no way to treat a female, human being, or any living creature.
Thank you.
Walter T. Franklin:
ReplyDeleteWith regards to Jeff's picture of TIME magazine with the woman's nose missing, How Horrible!! I mean what gives her husband the right to treat another person with such horrid behavior and abuse??
The Qur'an allows a husband to beat his wife:
Qur'an (4:34) - "Men are the maintainers of women because Allah has made some of them to excel others and because they spend out of their property; the good women are therefore obedient, guarding the unseen as Allah has guarded; and (as to) those on whose part you fear desertion, admonish them, and leave them alone in the sleeping-places and beat them; then if they obey you, do not seek a way against them; surely Allah is High, Great."
Muhammad is considered (by Muslims) to be the 'perfect Muslim,' so, Muslims try to do as Muhammad did. And, in the Hadith, it gives an example of how to treat your wife:
Muslim (4:2127) - Muhammad struck his favorite wife, Aisha, in the chest one evening when she left the house without his permission. Aisha narrates, "He struck me on the chest which caused me pain."
BTW, Muhammad married Aisha when she was 6 and copulated with her when she was 9.
Also from the Hadith:
Abu Dawud (2141) - "Iyas bin ‘Abd Allah bin Abi Dhubab reported the Apostle of Allah (may peace be upon him) as saying: Do not beat Allah’s handmaidens, but when ‘Umar came to the Apostle of Allah (may peace be upon him) and said: Women have become emboldened towards their husbands, he (the Prophet) gave permission to beat them. Then many women came round the family of the Apostle of Allah (may peace be upon him) complaining against their husbands. So the Apostle of Allah (may peace be upon him) said : Many women have gone round Muhammad’s family complaining against their husbands. They are not the best among you." At first, Muhammad forbade men from beating their wives, but he rescinded this once it was reported that women were becoming emboldened toward their husbands. Beatings are sometimes necessary to keep women in their place.
Abu Dawud (2142) - "The Prophet (peace be upon him) said: A man will not be asked as to why he beat his wife."
Ishaq 969 - Commands that a married woman be "put in a separate room and beaten lightly" if she "act in a sexual manner toward others." According to the Hadith, this can be for an offense as petty as merely being alone with a man to whom she is not related.
Sheikh Yousef al-Qaradhawi, one of the most respected Muslim clerics in the world, once made the famous (and somewhat ridiculous statement) that "It is forbidden to beat the woman, unless it is necessary." He also went on to say that "one may beat only to safeguard Islamic behavior," leaving no doubt that wife-beating is a matter of religious sanction.
Dr. Muzammil Saddiqi, the former president of ISNA (the Islamic Society of North America), a mainstream Muslim organization, says it is important that a wife "recognizes the authority of her husband in the house" and that he may use physical force if he is "sure it would improve the situation."
Sheikh Dr. Ahmad Muhammad Ahmad Al-Tayyeb, the head of Al-Azhar, Sunni Islam's most prestigious institution says that "light beatings" and "punching" are part of a program to "reform the wife".
According to Islamic law, a husband may strike his wife for any one of the following four reasons:
ReplyDelete- She does not attempt to make herself beautiful for him (ie. "let's herself go")
- She refuses to meet his sexual demands
- She leaves the house without his permission or for a "legitimate reason"
- She neglects her religious duties
Any of these are also sufficient grounds for divorce.
Muslim apologists sometimes say that Muhammad ordered that women not be harmed, but they are actually basing this on what he said before or during battle, such as in Bukhari (59:447), when Muhammad issued a command for all the men of Quraiza be killed and the women and children taken as slaves. (Having your husband murdered and being forced into sexual slavery apparently doesn't qualify as "harm" under the Islamic model).
But, in fact, there are a number of cases in which Muhammad did have women killed in the most brutal fashion. One was Asma bint Marwan, a mother or five, who wrote a poem criticizing the Medinans for accepting Muhammad after he had ordered the murder of an elderly man. In this case, the prophet's assassins literally pulled a sleeping infant from her breast and stabbed her to death.
After taking Mecca in 630, Muhammad also ordered the murder of a slave girl who had merely made up songs mocking him. The Hadith are rife as well with accounts of women planted in the ground on Muhammad's command and pelted to death with stones for sexual immorality - yet the prophet of Islam actually encouraged his own men to rape women captured in battle (Abu Dawood 2150) and did not punish them for killing non-Muslim women (as Khalid ibn Walid did on several occasions - see Ibn Ishaq 838 and 856).
In summary, according to the Qur'an, Hadith and Islamic law, a woman may indeed have physical harm done to her if the circumstances warrant, with one such allowance being in the case of disobedience. This certainly does not mean that all Muslim men beat their wives, only that Islam permits them to do so.
'The Qur'an allows a husband to beat his wife:
ReplyDeleteQur'an (4:34) - "Men are the maintainers of women because Allah has made some of them to excel others and because they spend out of their property; the good women are therefore obedient, guarding the unseen as Allah has guarded; and (as to) those on whose part you fear desertion, admonish them, and leave them alone in the sleeping-places and beat them; then if they obey you, do not seek a way against them; surely Allah is High, Great."
Muhammad is considered (by Muslims) to be the 'perfect Muslim,' so, Muslims try to do as Muhammad did. And, in the Hadith, it gives an example of how to treat your wife:
Muslim (4:2127) - Muhammad struck his favorite wife, Aisha, in the chest one evening when she left the house without his permission. Aisha narrates, "He struck me on the chest which caused me pain."'
Thank you, Jeff.
Educational.
'BTW, Muhammad married Aisha when she was 6 and copulated with her when she was 9.'
She was a girl.
She was not biologically a woman, or did she likely appear to be so.
She was underage.
Sexual conduct with her was very wrong.
Further:
'Beatings are sometimes necessary to keep women in their place.'
That can be used by a husband all the time. And perhaps men in general.
It is a way to maintain male dominance.
'"It is forbidden to beat the woman, unless it is necessary."'
The husband decides when it is necessary.
'According to Islamic law, a husband may strike his wife for any one of the following four reasons:
ReplyDelete- She does not attempt to make herself beautiful for him (ie. "let's herself go")
- She refuses to meet his sexual demands
- She leaves the house without his permission or for a "legitimate reason"
- She neglects her religious duties
Any of these are also sufficient grounds for divorce.'
Yes, so the husband can basically strike or divorce his wife at will.
Further:
'Muslim apologists sometimes say that Muhammad ordered that women not be harmed, but they are actually basing this on what he said before or during battle, such as in Bukhari (59:447), when Muhammad issued a command for all the men of Quraiza be killed and the women and children taken as slaves. (Having your husband murdered and being forced into sexual slavery apparently doesn't qualify as "harm" under the Islamic model).
But, in fact, there are a number of cases in which Muhammad did have women killed in the most brutal fashion. One was Asma bint Marwan, a mother or five, who wrote a poem criticizing the Medinans for accepting Muhammad after he had ordered the murder of an elderly man. In this case, the prophet's assassins literally pulled a sleeping infant from her breast and stabbed her to death.
After taking Mecca in 630, Muhammad also ordered the murder of a slave girl who had merely made up songs mocking him. The Hadith are rife as well with accounts of women planted in the ground on Muhammad's command and pelted to death with stones for sexual immorality - yet the prophet of Islam actually encouraged his own men to rape women captured in battle (Abu Dawood 2150) and did not punish them for killing non-Muslim women (as Khalid ibn Walid did on several occasions - see Ibn Ishaq 838 and 856).
In summary, according to the Qur'an, Hadith and Islamic law, a woman may indeed have physical harm done to her if the circumstances warrant, with one such allowance being in the case of disobedience. This certainly does not mean that all Muslim men beat their wives, only that Islam permits them to do so.'
There is not significant divine love being demonstrated here.
There is not significant divine justice being demonstrated here.
Islam is a man made religion.
Interesting statements from Jeff on Islam, very scary stuff when someone has the authority to beat someone else!!
ReplyDelete-W.T.Franklin-
'Interesting statements from Jeff on Islam, very scary stuff when someone has the authority to beat someone else!!
ReplyDelete-W.T.Franklin-'
Well, I am not at all a radical feminist, but I certainly support basic human rights for women.
Cheers.
Bringing things back to the original topic, somewhat, mathematician Alan Turing proposed a test by which a machine could be judged to be intelligent:
ReplyDelete(from wikipedia):
"It proceeds as follows: a human judge engages in a natural language conversation with one human and one machine, each of which tries to appear human. All participants are placed in isolated locations. If the judge cannot reliably tell the machine from the human, the machine is said to have passed the test. In order to test the machine's intelligence rather than its ability to render words into audio, the conversation is limited to a text-only channel such as a computer keyboard and screen."
According to the 2006 "Rough Guide to the Brain", no computer has passed the test yet. Although I suppose it would depend on the human candidate picked... :)
'According to the 2006 "Rough Guide to the Brain", no computer has passed the test yet. Although I suppose it would depend on the human candidate picked... :)'
ReplyDeleteChuck, please do not be so humble...
Thanks.
Okay, enough for on-topic stuff.
ReplyDeleteMini reviews
Delta Force II
Pain in the something that rhymes with farce.
Insanely hard missions. I couldn't last more than a few minutes.
Rush: Beyond the Lighted Stage
Haven't seen the movie yet. Just watched some clips from the special features. Interesting commentary from the band members about their past experiences, and present hobbies.
Like Delta Force (1998), Delta Force 2 (1999), has fine artistic graphics. Both games create worlds that seem very nice to visit apart from the military battles.
ReplyDeleteI have managed to eventually do all the missions on Delta Force, and am working on the missions on Delta Force 2, which I just purchased online.
I cannot really state that Delta Force 2 is much more than a very slight upgrade from Delta Force. They seem like one game.
Further:
One special operations soldier with primarily a machine gun against sometimes 50+ soldiers does not seem a realistic, reasonable strategy for a mission.
Alpha 1 and 2 and Charlie 1 and 2 often do too little to assist as does Black Widow, the helicopter.
Some missions can become more realistic with the use of weapons cheats, such as an unlimited use of rockets.
Unrealistic God-mode can be used which would serve in a sense as body-armour for one doing such outlandish missions.
Even with God-mode there are other ways to lose a mission, such as a hostage dying or Black Widow being destroyed.
Cheats are legal within the game and a win is a win, but one is then called pansy all through the game. Is one a pansy that spends several hours on a mission without cheats only to be shot again and again by someone that cannot even be seen?
I conclude that the game is very difficult at some points.
In regard to the Rush film:
From the little portion I have viewed so far, I thought the band interviews were fairly original from other Rush related material I have viewed.