5d ago

nature is music

59 comments

Quran 17:44
تُسَبِّحُ لَهُ ٱلسَّمَـٰوَٰتُ ٱلسَّبْعُ وَٱلْأَرْضُ وَمَن فِيهِنَّ ۚ وَإِن مِّن شَىْءٍ إِلَّا يُسَبِّحُ بِحَمْدِهِۦ وَلَـٰكِن لَّا تَفْقَهُونَ تَسْبِيحَهُمْ ۗ إِنَّهُۥ كَانَ حَلِيمًا غَفُورًۭا
"The seven heavens, the earth, and all those in them glorify Him. There is not a single thing that does not glorify His praises—but you cannot comprehend their glorification. He is indeed Most Forbearing, All-Forgiving."
- Alternate reading: stop running about and breaking the hearts of the unmarried freewomen, if you're shagging her, do it properly and above board.
  Medieval era was, alas, pretty poor on women's rights and slavery was taken for granted. I don't think you'll find any slavery where rape was in practice forbidden.
  
  That verse is used to justify rape. Not just rape, but entire slave trade networks that revolve around rape. (and that's in today's world, not some ugly footnote in distant history)
  That you personally interpret it differently is moot: people's actual lives are destroyed over a fairy tale, and that shit is absolutely evil.
  I don't think you'll find any slavery where rape was in practice forbidden.
  Yeah no shit, that's because slavery, and the people who engage in slavery are and always have been abhorrent, as are systems that enable slavery regardless of religious vs secular context.
  
  OK, because the way you replied with that off-topic Quran verse to a Quran verse related to the topic of the post made my think that your point was railing on Islam. Not that you were opposed to slavery regardless of secular or religious structures and strictures.
  Not that "slavery is bad", which I also didn't think needed to be replied somewhat arcanely to posts.
  Do we need to write a "slavery is bad" reply to any time vikings or Christianity come up in the comments?
  Edit: or that rape is bad, too.
  
  My beef is with religious down-throatism. I don't care if it's Islam, or Christianity, or Satanism, or the Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster.
  If you want to talk about your favorite ghost story, make or visit a community for it - it has no place here.
  Edit-
  railing on Islam
  Just to be clear, since my original post was removed: my initial comment here was literally just the text on 'the one ring' from LoTR and Frodo's line about not being able to read it: mild snark just to illustrate the off-topic-ness. The mods took that down for some reason, so then I dropped the irrelevant Quran quote, which was way more aggressive, but if Quran quote are what's allowed to stay, then that's what I'll work with (which has also since been removed, so fuck me I guess). Had someone come in with a top-level post with a Bible verse, I probably would have replied with the Bible verse about the daughters who got their dad drunk and fucked him.
  Again, the opposition is to religious down-throatism, not Islam specifically. They're all the same as far as I'm concerned.
  ...just in case you're feeling targeted.
  
  It's a shame that a relevant quote from literature was removed.
  Poor show on the part of the mods.
  Where I disagree is that someone having a quote from a religious thing is invalid, when it's not actively pushing to convert. Just kinda existing showing religion is there. But I guess we just have different perceptions of what passes for "down-your-throatism".
  Anyhow, all the best and have a good night (or whatever time of day it is when you (or anyone else) read this).
  
  Where I disagree is that someone having a quote from a religious thing is invalid, when it’s not actively pushing to convert. Just kinda existing showing religion is there. But I guess we just have different perceptions of what passes for “down-your-throatism”.
  I mean that's something we can explore... the post is about some of the cool euphonic examples you can run into in nature or space. The top level comment I took issue with just popped in out of the blue with 'yay god!' ...like, does the Quran or Bible or w/e say anything about the sound of the cosmos? By all means, share that - it'd relevant to at least some extent, even if it isn't scientific.
  Another approach - role reversal! Let's say you're really into knitting and you find some cool new design that you wanted to share with the internet; so you do. Then I pop in and say "Man, that reminds me: isn't Satan just the coolest?! Freedom from tyranny and all that - everything just reflects back on what a quality god he is!" ...your reaction would probably be akin to "...what the actual fuck? What does that have to do with knitting?" So even if I was a satanist, that wouldn't be an appropriate time to bring it up; nor could I accuse you of being anti-satanist for pointing that out.
  But that's what I mean by religious down-throatism. I'm not calling for a ban on religious content, I'm asking that religious people use the same discretion you would with any other topic. Like, I really enjoy old-school RPGs, Symphonic Metal, Indian food, (and, and, and,) but that hypothetical thread about knitting isn't an appropriate place to post about any of those either.
  I'd wager that vast majority, if not all, of the negative response this comment chain started with was from that angle. As opposed to targeted religious bigotry, which is not and should not be tolerated.
  
  Yeah, I - like you - put a quote from Tolkien and a quote from the Quran on the same level in that situation.
  A related quote from either is as on topic.
  I went back to look at it, and it wasn't an explicitly linked as I recalled. I've been on a couple of Islam related rabbit holes recently, with Sufiism and Alevis, and there's a strong belief in singing is a praise to Allah/Haq. So I think I just kinda filled some blanks in in my mind.
  I very much get being annoyed by seeing your clearly on topic lit post getting eaten, while not apparently linked religious text gets to say.
  Silly mods. All the best to you.
  
  That a sexual relationship is permissable as opposed to being prohibited, like adultery or fornication, does not equate to rape. Neither is adultery rape if both parties consent, yet it is prohibited under islamic and other abrahamic religions.
  Those are necessary requirements not sufficient requirements. You know, like how a driving licencse is a necesaary requirement for driving, but it does not allow you to drive if your car has no lights and you are under the influence, as these are also necessary requirements.
  
  That verse is used to justify rape. Not just rape, but entire slave trade networks that revolve around rape.
  That you personally interpret it differently is moot: people's actual lives are destroyed over a fairy tale, and that shit is absolutely evil.
  
  And genetics were used to justify genocide and eugenics. By your logic are genetics absolutely evil?
  The constitution of the US is interpreted by some in a way to justify the most horrific crimes against mankind. Is the constitution absolutely evil? Many philosophers works were used by Fascists to justify their empires. Are those philosophers absolutely evil?
  As for the designation as "fairy tale". I would expect people that see themselves as scientists or following scientific principles to have their curiosity sparked if a 1400 years old book made statements that link to todays scientific discoveries, rather than immediately making a point of rejecting it in an aggressive way.
  
  Look, you can do the same thing with any religious document. See for instance Jeremy England's Every Life is on Fire in which he equates passages in the Torah about Moses to the thermodynamical necessity of the emergence of life as an autocatalytic process. The metaphor is tortured and the whole enterprise comes off as awkward and unnecessary. Scientific principles are entirely nihilistic; it's our interpretations of them that make them magical. And those interpretations aren't captured by any holy document.
  
  And genetics were used to justify genocide and eugenics. By your logic are genetics absolutely evil?
  Genetics are real and we have an inconceivable amount of evidence to support them.
  What do you have? Because you've got a Nobel Prize (and much more) waiting for you if you're holding back some evidence.
  
  What is your evidence of genetics? Unless you are a biochemist and have run experiments yourself, it will boil down to "somebody told me/I have read it in a book". So your evidence boils down to a chain of narration. Which narrators you trust or distrust is a subjective matter.
  Genetics are a great example though. Modern genetics are often perceived to start with the work of Mendel in the 19th century. Imagine instead of being taught about genetics in school and maybe later in university, you would have lived in the 17th century. Would you have rejected the concept of genes as "fairy tale" because there was no evidence you deemed credible available?
  What about atomic models? Would you have considered them to be "fairy tales" prior to the developments of the late 19th and early 20th century? What about how atom models changed? Would you mock Nils Bohr because his atomic model became partly obsolete with the work of Heisenberg? Did you do any of the experiments which lead to the developments of atomic models yourself?
  So in practice the only scientific approach is to say: "I have neither evidence that convinces me for or against it, therefore i don't know". Saying something is false or does not exist because you don't see evidence for it, is a matter of faith, rather than a matter of science.
  EDIT: As for the experiments, i had both the typical experiments for genetics in biochemistry and for atoms in physics lectures for my engineering degree. As for narrations there exist plenty of evidence for the life and work of the prophet Mohamed (sas.). Whether you accept it as evidence of prophethood is a subjective matter, just like it is a subjective matter if you believe your biology or your physics textbook, unless you have verified this information by your own experiments.
  
  Evidence of genetics? Let's see... DNA testing works? That enough for you? I know people who bred flies in school while learning genetics.
  Or how about this, I understand how science works, so I'm comfortable accepting (in general), the scientific consensus on subjects that I don't know very well. I really hate this, "did you get a PhD in x? No? Then how can you really know?" Bullshit.
  Just an FYI, I didn't read your comment past the first sentence and I have no intention of continuing this conversation.
  
  So do you believe genes existed before genetic testing? What would you have said to someone suggesting genes exist before there were tests for them?
  It is a quite simple question of whether you accept the possibility of things existing, before there is a scientific consensus on their existence. The scientific approach then is simply to say "i dont know" rather than "i dont know therefore it does not exist". Because of this fallacy i also consider atheists to be people of faith rather than science. They should just not conflate the two and claim their faith to be science.
  
  And genetics were used to justify genocide and eugenics. By your logic are genetics absolutely evil?
  genetics are a constant truth, so the argument should be based from the perspective that genetics mean something, in regards to genocide and eugenics, not that genetics itself is flawed, because genetics didn't create this perception, humans did.
  edit: retards was a typo of regards lmao, what an unfortunate typo.
  
  Uh oh here come the apologetics!
- Wrong crowd buddy.
- I am sorry that people reacted so poorly to this. I thought it was beautiful. It is still bothering me, after seeing the reports made on this.
  
  it's the internet, and this is a post about blackholes and a bird being recorded. This is a tad bit out of place for what it is, not surprised people downvoted it, probably because they thought it was irrelevant, oh well, that's the internet, sometimes people like what you have to say, other times they don't. Don't think about it too hard, at the end of the day it's just internet karma.
  
  It was more than that. There were hateful reports.
  
  ah, yeah no that would do it, i wouldn't report shit like this either. People are entitled to posting their dogshit opinions on the internet (myself included lmao)
- interesting moderation history you got there

59 comments