Where to place new Islam thread?

Filan

To the relevant moderators
I wish to pose the quuestion "Is Islamic belief compatible with western liberal values?" ...I would like an open debate where participants are free to express their views, refined or polluting alike , whatever they may be. Could the relevant Moderators please suggest an appropriate forum for such as I wish to avoid a re-run of the controversy which has recently infected the Islam strand.
Hope all are well
A

Amz

Why not humanities?

I want to start a thread on Happy Days, particularly "Was the Fonz a real style icon?" where should I post that, I feel Fashion Appearance is too restrictive and TV is also not suitable.

John

Amz wrote:

I want to start a thread on Happy Days, particularly "Was the Fonz a real style icon?" where should I post that, I feel Fashion Appearance is too restrictive and TV is also not suitable.

Biology and Medicine. Obviously.

Amz

Gawd! *slaps head* it's so obvious!

InFront

If you want to know how Islamic teachings are compatible with certain western values, by all means ask in Islam. Maybe narrow it down to a few things, it sounds very broad. Or ask in humanities if you feel more comfortable doing so (you'll get the same people responding anyway:D )

Don't be too uptight about what you can ask in Islam, nobody's going to give out for starting a thread with a genuine question like that.

metrovelvet

Well it would seem that there is a fundamental incompatibility even in dialoguing styles, so it doesnt seem that it makes much sense for someone with western values/educational background try to discuss anything on an Islam forum, where those styles/allowances/prohibitions will be endorsed.

The socratic method is deeply imbued into western debate which seeks to challenge, and this is incombatable with reverence. So if anyone has "questions" then its probably more sensible to bring them to humanities.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socratic_method

Socratic Method (or Method of Elenchus or Socratic Debate) is a dialectic method of inquiry, largely applied to the examination of key moral concepts and first described by Plato in the Socratic Dialogues. For this, Socrates is customarily regarded as the father and fountainhead for western ethics or moral philosophy.

It is a form of philosophical inquiry. It typically involves two speakers at any one time, with one leading the discussion and the other agreeing to certain assumptions put forward for his acceptance or rejection. The method is credited to Socrates, who began to engage in such discussion with his fellow Athenians after a visit to the Oracle of Delphi.

"A Socratic Dialogue can happen at any time between [two people] when they seek to answer a question [about something] answerable by their own effort of reflection and thinking [starting] from the concrete [asking] all sorts of questions [until] the details of the example are fleshed out [as] a kind of platform for reaching more general judgments" [1].

The practice involves asking a series of questions surrounding a central issue, and answering questions of the others involved. Generally this involves the defense of one point of view against another and is oppositional. The best way to 'win' is to make the opponent contradict themselves in some way that proves the inquirer's own point.

Plato famously formalized the Socratic Elenctic style in prose — presenting Socrates as the curious questioner of some prominent Athenian interlocutor — in some of his early dialogues, such as Euthyphro or Ion, and the method is most commonly found within the so-called "Socratic dialogues", which generally portray Socrates engaging in the method and questioning his fellow citizens about moral and epistemological issues.

The term Socratic Questioning is used to describe the kind of questioning, with which an original question was responded to as though it were an answer. This in turn forces the first questioner to reformulate a new question in the light of the progress of the discourse.

aidan_walsh

You realise this thread wasn't actually the start of the topic, right?

RuggieBear

post it in any of the sports forums.



then i could ban you

oleras

Motors tbh, call it "fog lights, on or off"

DeVore

Jesus do you EVER SHUTUP?!

DeV.

Boston

*Me regrets backing up metrovelvet previously.

Time Magazine

It would appear to me that Islam goes against Grecian pedastry also.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pederasty_in_ancient_Greece

Possible beginnings

The ancient Greeks were the first to describe, study, systematize, and establish pederasty as an institution. The origin of that tradition has been variously explained. One school of thought, articulated by Bernard Sergent, holds that the Greek pederastic model evolved from far older Indo-European rites of passage, which were grounded in a shamanic tradition with roots in the neolithic.

Another explanation, articulated by Anglophone scholars such as William Percy, holds that pederasty was formalized in ancient Crete around 630 BC as a means of population control, together with delayed age of marriage for men of thirty years.

The earliest Greek texts, specifically the works attributed to the Ionian poet Homer, do not overtly document formal pederastic practices. A number of theories attempt to explain that lack. A largely held view is the Dorian hypothesis first established by K.O. Müller in the 1800s. According to this theory pederasty was brought in by the Dorian warrior tribes who conquered Greece around 1200 BC. They settled most of the Peloponnese along with the islands Crete, Thera, and Rhodes. This forced the Ionian Greeks towards Asia Minor but left important cities in Attica and Euboea. Another explanation is that the epic style excluded discussion of certain topics, among them pederastic relations. Nevertheless, Homer's works hint at homoerotic relationships obliquely, as in the mentions of the myth of Zeus and Ganymede in the Iliad and the Homeric Hymn to Aphrodite.

Alternative forms

Pederasty was constructed in various ways. In some areas, such as Boeotia, the man and boy were formally joined together and lived as a couple. In other areas, such as Elis, boys were persuaded by means of gifts, and in a few, such as Ionia, such relations were forbidden altogether. The Spartans however were said to practise chaste pederasty. Where allowed, a free man was usually entitled to fall in love with a boy, proclaim it publicly, and court him as long as the boy in question manifested the traits prerequisite to a pederastic relationship: he had to be kalos (καλός), "handsome" and agathos (ἀγαθός), good, brave, just, and modest. The boy was expected to be circumspect and not let himself be easily won. Generally, the role of the lover had many of the characteristics of that of legal guardian, similar to the role of male relatives of the boy.

Poets such as Theognis and Anacreon self-identify as pederasts, each thus presenting a persona embodying his own ideals for the tradition. In the case of Theognis, pederasty is political and pedagogical — the elite male's method of passing on his wisdom and loyalties to his beloved. Anacreon's values are erotic and Dionysiac, which is to say sensual and spiritual, and no less ideal than those of Theognis. Vase iconography of the period is consistent with this interpretation: the gifts offered, and the context of the palaestra speak of pedagogic values, while the repeated inscriptions of "KALOS" idealize the beauty and physical attraction of the erōmenos (the beloved boy).

Problematics

Foucault declared that pederasty was "problematized" in Greek culture, that it was "the object of a special — and especially intense — moral preoccupation" focusing on concern with the chastity/moderation of the erōmenos (the term used for the "beloved" youth). Foucault's conclusions however are now thought to hold true only of Classical Athenian texts, while in Archaic Greece pederasty, rather than being problematized, was variously associated with the highest ideals.

A different perspective is offered by Jeremy Bentham, in an essay written in 1785, not published in his lifetime, and which only saw the light of day in 1978. According to Bentham, what was condemned by the Greeks was not the same-sex aspect of the relationship, but immoderation such as may also be implicated in relationships with women: "They might be ashamed of what they looked upon as an excess in it, or they might be ashamed of it as a weakness, as a propensity that had a tendency to distract men from more worthy and important occupations, just as a man with us might be ashamed of excess or weakness in his love for women."

The study of Greek pederasty is complicated by the fact that the pederastic record has been subject to systematic destruction since antiquity. Of all the Greek works dealing principally with love between people of the same sex, none has survived, suggesting to at least one historian that "queer works were deliberately suppressed and destroyed rather than merely lost during the passage of time," though in general only a small percentage of ancient literature has been preserved. Nonetheless, there are some conspicuous exceptions to the general picture such as the Paidikē Mousa of Strato and the Erōtes of Pseudo-Lucian.

Evolution and extinction

Greek pederasty went through a series of changes over the millennium from its entry into the historical record and its final demise as an official institution. In some areas, such as Athens, the construction of the relationship seems to have gone from greater modesty in the early days to a freer physicality and lack of restraint in classical times, followed by a return to a more spiritual form in the early fifth century. Its formal end resembled its beginning, in that it came by official decree – that of emperor Justinian, who also put an end to other institutions that sustained ancient culture, such as Plato's Academy and the Olympic Games.

Wibbs

What the jumpin...... I swear I hear the Twilight Zone music.

Hobbes

Some people just don't get the concept of what each forum is and isn't about.

Stargal

Calm down lads

Ibid was making a (really kinda funny) joke - by copying and pasting a wiki entry on something really quite irrelevant in the same way that metrovelvet had done a couple of entries previously, he was simultaneously taking the piss out of the fact that she was unable to back up her thoughts with an original argument and also parodying the crap that went on in the last Islam thread here in Feedback.

Personally I thought it was pretty funny, but maybe I just have really low standards for what passes for humour from an economist

Wibbs

Hobbes wrote:

Some people just don't get the concept of what each forum is and isn't about.

QFT

Laika wrote:

Calm down lads:)

Ibid was making a (really kinda funny) joke -

Naw we got that, but surreal or wha? I went a tad sideways for a second.....

Boston

Laika wrote:

Personally I thought it was pretty funny,

Lets not say things we can't take back.

Stargal

Boston wrote:

Lets not say things we can't take back.

Meh, je ne regrette rien. It's been a long time coming but Ibid has finally said something funny. It deserved to be acknowledged

Ibid, you know I'm joking. I think you're hilarious*

Wibbs wrote:

Naw we got that, but surreal or wha? I went a tad sideways for a second.....

Sorry, I thought that Ibid's attempt at humour had been too er, lacking in actual humorous content for people to get that it was a joke

*looking

Amz

It's a bit sad that you felt the need to point it out. Ruins his attempt at humour a little.

So where did the topic go in the end??

Amz

Ah, Filan was probably off fighting for truth justice and the fundamentalist Christian way, to have time to post it yet.

Cuddlesworth

Wheres the cat pictures and Gathering cards?

Cat pics are here anyways. But I'm sure a few will wander to feedback shortly.

Time Magazine

Amz wrote:

It's a bit sad that you felt the need to point it out. Ruins his attempt at humour a little.

It's a bit sad that you felt to need to disparage both her efforts at explaining and my attempt at humour simultaneously.

Boston

Ibid ftl.

Amz

Ibid wrote:

It's a bit sad that you felt to need to disparage both her efforts at explaining and my attempt at humour simultaneously.

Awww *cry*

Yeah right!

Why reduce yourself to my level if it's so beneath you?

Time Magazine

Amz wrote:

Awww *cry*

Yeah right!

Why reduce yourself to my level if it's so beneath you?

Cop on to yourself Amz.

Grow up.

Boston

2 - 0 to Amz.

DeVore

Sigh.

DeV.