3 ms·

Reminds me of Orthodox Judaism (other religions may be similar, but it's what I grew up with). Intense debate was highly valued and encouraged, but as soon as y

Reminds me of Orthodox Judaism (other religions may be similar, but it's what I grew up with). Intense debate was highly valued and encouraged, but as soon as you questioned the fundamental truths that the belief system was founded on, you went too far. e.g. questioning that the bible was written by God, or whether God even exists.

TangoTrotFox 9y ago
That in turn reminds me of Al-Ghazali [1], and the impact he had on Islam. Unable to resolve why some things seemed to contradict Islamic beliefs, he developed and successfully spread the view that there's actually no such thing as causality or logic -- that every single thing is an independent act of god. In other words a leaf does not start burning when exposed to fire because it reaches a certain temperature (speaking loosely), but rather because god decided he'd set it alight at that exact moment. And of course that ash is not created by the fire, but instead by an instantaneous decision by god to turn the burnt object to ash. By rejecting any and all causality, he was able to dismiss all logical issues by simply asserting that causality and logic are social constructs. And that belief spread like wildfire, as such rationale that offers easy explanations for uncomfortable to accept phenomena is wont to do... Today somewhere around 1/4 of the world's population is Islamic. And there have been a total of 3 Islamic Nobel laureates in the sciences. It's a rather nice demonstration on the question of whether 'geniuses' are born or made. If Allah's hand is not chained, what point is there in seeking to discover these alleged laws of nature? [1] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Al-Ghazali https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Al-Ghazali
- adamsea 9y ago
  Over half the number of Muslim Nobel laureates (sciences and more), according to that Wikipedia link, have occurred since the year 200. So, obviously, since the graph is spiking, we can expect to see lots more. This is my sarcastic way of saying that taking a single metric which is affected by tons of different factors, and applying it to a complex argument about, basically, sociology/anthropology (human behavior and culture) really doesn’t provide a lot of value. I think your post opens a door to a lot of interesting conversations, but that using the # of Nobel Prize nominations per religious / cultural group as a metric closed most of those doors. It’s also not very scientific.
- fjsolwmv 9y ago
  Please keep the crypto racism off HN. The Nobel Prize is a European institution.
baud147258 9y ago
I'd say it's the same in other religions (from my personal anecdata with catholicism). But I think that, in such context, the acceptance of fundamental truths are necessary to have a debate, like mathematical axioms are necessary for proofs. In addition to that the fundamental truths are about one's Faith, so I don't think there's a lot to debate on, either you belive or you don't.

TangoTrotFox 9y ago

That in turn reminds me of Al-Ghazali [1], and the impact he had on Islam. Unable to resolve why some things seemed to contradict Islamic beliefs, he developed and successfully spread the view that there's actually no such thing as causality or logic -- that every single thing is an independent act of god. In other words a leaf does not start burning when exposed to fire because it reaches a certain temperature (speaking loosely), but rather because god decided he'd set it alight at that exact moment. And of course that ash is not created by the fire, but instead by an instantaneous decision by god to turn the burnt object to ash. By rejecting any and all causality, he was able to dismiss all logical issues by simply asserting that causality and logic are social constructs. And that belief spread like wildfire, as such rationale that offers easy explanations for uncomfortable to accept phenomena is wont to do... Today somewhere around 1/4 of the world's population is Islamic. And there have been a total of 3 Islamic Nobel laureates in the sciences. It's a rather nice demonstration on the question of whether 'geniuses' are born or made. If Allah's hand is not chained, what point is there in seeking to discover these alleged laws of nature? [1] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Al-Ghazali https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Al-Ghazali

adamsea 9y ago
Over half the number of Muslim Nobel laureates (sciences and more), according to that Wikipedia link, have occurred since the year 200. So, obviously, since the graph is spiking, we can expect to see lots more. This is my sarcastic way of saying that taking a single metric which is affected by tons of different factors, and applying it to a complex argument about, basically, sociology/anthropology (human behavior and culture) really doesn’t provide a lot of value. I think your post opens a door to a lot of interesting conversations, but that using the # of Nobel Prize nominations per religious / cultural group as a metric closed most of those doors. It’s also not very scientific.
fjsolwmv 9y ago
Please keep the crypto racism off HN. The Nobel Prize is a European institution.

baud147258 9y ago

I'd say it's the same in other religions (from my personal anecdata with catholicism). But I think that, in such context, the acceptance of fundamental truths are necessary to have a debate, like mathematical axioms are necessary for proofs. In addition to that the fundamental truths are about one's Faith, so I don't think there's a lot to debate on, either you belive or you don't.