brilliant! LOL , this reminds me of a classic case of ‘avoiding to get wet’ Muslim ‘moderate’ school teacher with a uncanny skill to avoid a straight answer. Check it out.
Why run for office when you can get people to accept you as their unquestioned supreme religious leader? Mo was a clever little bastard in real life as well 🙂
“Speaking is a means to achieve objectives. If a praiseworthy aim is attainable through both telling the truth and lying, it is unlawful to accomplish it through lying because there is no need for it. When it is possible to achieve such an aim by lying but not by telling the truth, it is permissible to lie if attaining the goal is permissible…, and obligatory to lie if the goal is obligatory. …One should compare the bad consequences entailed by lying to those entailed by telling the truth, and if the consequences of telling the truth are more damaging, one is entitled to lie…â€Â
Ahmad ibn Naqib al-Misri, The Reliance of the Traveller, translated by Nuh Ha Mim Keller, Amana publications, 1997, section r8.2, page 745
Likewise with Tariq Ramadan: “…and when he is cornered with questions on the brutality of some punishments of Islamic law, such as stoning, he tells us that he is against them, but (there is always a “but”) they are in Quranic texts and so he cannot fully condemn them…”
We now need to define “truth.” I submit there are two kinds of truth.
1. Objective truth: A proposition for which there is ample objective evidence in support, e.g., the heliocentric nature of our solar system.
2. Subjective truth: A proposition for which there is no objective evidence in support (may even be objective evidence against), e.g., the earth-centric nature of the universe, as suggested in the “Bible.”
“Objective” defined as existing in reality (the physical world), as opposed to existing only in the mind.
“Subjective” defined as existing in the mind as opposed to existing in the physical world.
I don’t see the big deal with Taqiyya. How is it different from, ‘The truth is preferable, but if lying gets you out of a jam then lie your ass off.’ What’s wrong with that? Works for me.
well, Hypocrisy and platitudes as a way of spreading your ideas, plus hiding your true intentions when needed … all mandated by the creator of the universe…
Mo seems to be REALLY answering the question…
Oh pardon me, most muslims faced with such questions do that; they must follow their prophet’s great example!
It seems here is question of proactive and reactive use.
I don’t know but I assume that the original intention was for reactive usage and I’m all for that. If I’m accused of something I’m not compelled to tell the truth, that’s basis of western law also.
But for proactive use where I lie to my teeth to get you do something. That’s not right at all.
To Hobbes. Your example of subjective truth is totally wrong. The subjectivity of a lie doesn’t make it true. What is a subjective truth is something that others might not know to be true, but you do.
TB, “anus” is “arsehole” in Latin, give or take a few declensions. Similarly, “annus” is “year”. You are telling us that equivocation to avoid being pinned to an unpopular position without quite contradicting the dogma has allowed the Good and the Great to rule over thousands of bums.
Possibly a deeply true conjecture.
I know what it’s supposed to read but does anyone chewing through the archive know why my browser (Firefox running under Snow Leopard on a Mac) renders it as gibberish?
Do I not have Author’s choice of typeface or something?
Jesus & Mo (the characters) are absurd, blinkered, and oddly very sweet. J&M (the cartoon) is brilliant: sharp, delicious, irresistible. Salman Rushdie
Jesus and Mo cartoons are wonderfully funny and true. Richard Dawkins
Jesus and Mo make the world a better place, bless their little hearts. Ophelia Benson
In a world defined by outrage and offence and liberal spinelessness, Jesus and Mo is a treasure, whose value we should never fail to recognize. Read them. Laugh. And think. Kenan Malik
The brilliant, celebrated, freaking hilarious atheist comic strip ... Greta Christina
...rays of sanity in a befuddled world. Keri Hulme
The liveliest depictions of Muhammad currently available... Malise Ruthven
J & Mo is the funniest and most consistently thought-provoking cartoon strip on the Net. In a saner world, it would run in a major newspaper. Nelson Jones, Heresy Corner
Consistently amusing, frequently thought-provoking and often heart-warming. New Humanist
Jesus & Mo is one of the most wonderful things on the internet.. JT Eberhard
Wittily captures much of the absurdity of religious apologetics. Mano Singham
I love jesusandmo.net cartoons - witty and sharp! Katha Pollitt
Often hilarious, frequently wry, these cartoons do what all the best cartoons do: they tell the truth through humour. Terry Sanderson, NSS President
...a wonderfully acid British cartoonist... Nick Cohen
I love the scrappy mockery of Jesus and Mo. Freedom of speech
includes the freedom to mock any person, any thing, any activity, and
any belief -- and J&M stands up for this unflinchingly Richard Stallman
...empowering, important and deeply progressive, not to mention hilarious... Council of Ex-Muslims
November 14, 2008
brilliant! LOL , this reminds me of a classic case of ‘avoiding to get wet’ Muslim ‘moderate’ school teacher with a uncanny skill to avoid a straight answer. Check it out.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_hBXHtQDxOo&feature=PlayList&p=C2259113CCA7C126&index=8
Treble taqiyyas all round!!
tie:
Ah, the exquisite Dance of the Seven Questions. That’s a useful skill in a politician. She should run for office.
Beating around the bush: Helping dickheaded parents, teachers, religious men and politicians retain their authority over millenia.
Why run for office when you can get people to accept you as their unquestioned supreme religious leader? Mo was a clever little bastard in real life as well 🙂
“Speaking is a means to achieve objectives. If a praiseworthy aim is attainable through both telling the truth and lying, it is unlawful to accomplish it through lying because there is no need for it. When it is possible to achieve such an aim by lying but not by telling the truth, it is permissible to lie if attaining the goal is permissible…, and obligatory to lie if the goal is obligatory. …One should compare the bad consequences entailed by lying to those entailed by telling the truth, and if the consequences of telling the truth are more damaging, one is entitled to lie…â€Â
Ahmad ibn Naqib al-Misri, The Reliance of the Traveller, translated by Nuh Ha Mim Keller, Amana publications, 1997, section r8.2, page 745
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taqiyya
Likewise with Tariq Ramadan: “…and when he is cornered with questions on the brutality of some punishments of Islamic law, such as stoning, he tells us that he is against them, but (there is always a “but”) they are in Quranic texts and so he cannot fully condemn them…”
http://usgovinfo.about.com/od/defenseandsecurity/a/ramadantxt_2.htm
There seems to be a pattern here…
Toast,
We now need to define “truth.” I submit there are two kinds of truth.
1. Objective truth: A proposition for which there is ample objective evidence in support, e.g., the heliocentric nature of our solar system.
2. Subjective truth: A proposition for which there is no objective evidence in support (may even be objective evidence against), e.g., the earth-centric nature of the universe, as suggested in the “Bible.”
“Objective” defined as existing in reality (the physical world), as opposed to existing only in the mind.
“Subjective” defined as existing in the mind as opposed to existing in the physical world.
The unexamined belief is not worth believing.
I don’t see the big deal with Taqiyya. How is it different from, ‘The truth is preferable, but if lying gets you out of a jam then lie your ass off.’ What’s wrong with that? Works for me.
well, Hypocrisy and platitudes as a way of spreading your ideas, plus hiding your true intentions when needed … all mandated by the creator of the universe…
nothing wrong with that…
Mo seems to be REALLY answering the question…
Oh pardon me, most muslims faced with such questions do that; they must follow their prophet’s great example!
To be a wise-ass: Wouldn’t it be the 15th century according to Mohammed’s calendar?
It seems here is question of proactive and reactive use.
I don’t know but I assume that the original intention was for reactive usage and I’m all for that. If I’m accused of something I’m not compelled to tell the truth, that’s basis of western law also.
But for proactive use where I lie to my teeth to get you do something. That’s not right at all.
To Hobbes. Your example of subjective truth is totally wrong. The subjectivity of a lie doesn’t make it true. What is a subjective truth is something that others might not know to be true, but you do.
Truth: p iff “p”
TB, “anus” is “arsehole” in Latin, give or take a few declensions. Similarly, “annus” is “year”. You are telling us that equivocation to avoid being pinned to an unpopular position without quite contradicting the dogma has allowed the Good and the Great to rule over thousands of bums.
Possibly a deeply true conjecture.
{Quote} “I don’t see {end quote}
I know what it’s supposed to read but does anyone chewing through the archive know why my browser (Firefox running under Snow Leopard on a Mac) renders it as gibberish?
Do I not have Author’s choice of typeface or something?
’t
Happy Holidays