Are we doomed to repeat the Crusades?

  • News
  • Thread starter Loren Booda
  • Start date
In summary: The number of people who would be offended by such a statement is irrelevant.Jumping from 'since most' to dismissing all isn't rightly intellectual either.But it does tend to be the case, and that's a problem.In summary, the conversation discusses the idea of learning from past struggles of civilization to gain insight into current world conflicts. The Crusades and the maintenance of knowledge by Islam during the European Dark Ages are mentioned as potential sources of lessons. The conversation also touches on the need for secular education and criticism in Muslim societies, and the role of religion in defining identity in Eastern cultures. The conversation takes a turn when one participant suggests that religion has no intellectual or moral value, to which another participant disagrees. The conversation ends with
  • #1
Loren Booda
3,125
4
How can we learn about our current world conflicts with respect to past struggles of civilization? For instance, are there any lessons to glean from the Crusades, pitting Christian against Moslem? How about the maintenance of knowledge by Islam during the European Dark Ages, or exemplary societies that practiced religious tolerance for all?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
"Doomed to" would imply future tense, where as in fact we have long been engaged the process of 'concurring' Jerusalem from Arabs yet again, the progress up to September 2005 can be seen in detail on http://www.btselem.org/Download/Jerusalem_Separation_Barrier_Eng.PDF" [Broken]. Granted, we aren't necessarily doomed to continue this medieval madness; but unfortunately, few Westerners seem interested in stopping it.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #3
Loren Booda said:
How can we learn about our current world conflicts with respect to past struggles of civilization? For instance, are there any lessons to glean from the Crusades, pitting Christian against Moslem? How about the maintenance of knowledge by Islam during the European Dark Ages, or exemplary societies that practiced religious tolerance for all?
Hmm..get rid of the religious mentality as such, perhaps?

A very good start would be to give maximal financial and judicial support to those few brave individuals in the Muslim world who want to take their societies in a more secular direction.
Unsurprisingly, such persons are continually harassed and mistreated in their native countries.

In particular, the vast majority of Muslims need to be educated in accepting personal criticism of their prophet Mohammed, and of his supposed teachings.
Only secularly oriented persons have the personal qualities necessary to start such programmes of internal criticisms (called Enlightenment in the historical movement against Christian doctrine in Europe).
 
Last edited:
  • #4
arildno said:
A very good start would be to give maximal financial and judicial support to those few brave individuals in the Muslim world who want to take their societies in a more secular direction.
So, basically, give up their identity, is what you're saying.


In the West, we define ourselves primarily by the geographic region (nation) in which we live, and only incidentally by our belief system. In the East, it matters little where you are. Your beliefs are what define you.

Frankly, if you look at it objectively, we're the ones with the kooky concept of identity.
 
  • #5
DaveC426913 said:
So, basically, give up their identity, is what you're saying.
Why should you applaud the torture of individuals in the Middle East whose identity does not conform to the religious ideal prevalent there?
 
  • #6
arildno said:
Why should you applaud the torture of individuals in the Middle East whose identity does not conform to the religious ideal prevalent there?
In all my time on PF I have never seen a more bizarre non sequitur.

How did you go from
'they should become more secular' and 'but their religion is their identity'
to
'applauding torture'
?

You must be pulling my leg, because I know you're no fool.
 
Last edited:
  • #7
arildno said:
Hmm..get rid of the religious mentality as such, perhaps?
Do I misunderstand you here, our are you contesting that Atheism is the One True Path?
 
  • #8
arildno said:
In particular, the vast majority of Muslims need to be educated in accepting personal criticism of their prophet Mohammed...
So, you believe that they are an uneducated people.

Just trying to establish your stance on the "problem".
 
  • #9
  • #10
DaveC426913 said:
So, you believe that they are an uneducated people.

Just trying to establish your stance on the "problem".
They certainly are. Most Muslims would be highly offended if someone told them their prophet was a criminal, a common high-way robber, but that is a matter of historical fact. The community at Medina under Mohammed terrorized the caravans passing through the country to Mecca.
 
Last edited:
  • #11
kyleb said:
Do I misunderstand you here, our are you contesting that Atheism is the One True Path?
Since most religions are based on wholly unjustified and nonsensical statements about what exists or happens in the world, they have no intellectual value, even less any moral value.
 
Last edited:
  • #12
DaveC426913 said:
In all my time on PF I have never seen a more bizarre non sequitur.

How did you go from
'they should become more secular' and 'but their religion is their identity'
to
'applauding torture'
?

You must be pulling my leg, because I know you're no fool.
You were the one who came with an utterly false statement about what constitutes the "identity" of people in the Eastern world.

Religion does NOT constitute the identity of persons living in the East, even though their imams are constantly hammering down that message upon their flock.
That religion is a stronger COMPONENT of the mentality of the people of the East than in the West is due to the constant and systematic brainwash they are exposed to. Brainwashing is effective!

One of the most used tools in this ongoing brainwashing process is to reveal to people what happens to non-believers:
Harassment, frequent jailings, torture and mutilation along with good ol' murder.

So, if you want to think it's fine with a culture defining itself primarily* in terms of its religious beliefs, then you must also think it is fine with torture.
You can't have the one without the other.


*I.e, by the socially dominant stratum of society
 
Last edited:
  • #13
arildno said:
They certainly are. Most Muslims would be highly offended if someone told them their prophet was a criminal, a common high-way robber, but that is a matter of historical fact. The community at Medina under Mohammed terrorized the caravans passing through the country to Mecca.
Yeah, and many people would be highly offended if I said "Moses was a genocidal maniac" as well. That tends to happen when one takes such a slanted argument against a person who others hold in high regard, and Muslims aren't inhernetly any different than the rest of us on that.
arildno said:
Since most religions are based on wholly unjustified and nonsensical statements about what exists or happens in the world, they have no intellectual value, even less any moral value.
Jumping from 'since most' to dismissing all isn't rightly intellectual either.
 
  • #14
kyleb said:
Yeah, and many people would be highly offended if I said "Moses was a genocidal maniac" as well. (snip)

Moses was a genocidal maniac. If one happens to believe that the individual actually existed whenever it was he is purported to have existed, the documentation supporting arguments for his existence also includes records of genocidal activities. It's not "offensive," it's not "inoffensive," it just is. Moses was a genocide, and Mohammed was a highwayman --- so what.
 
  • #15
kyleb said:
Yeah, and many people would be highly offended if I said "Moses was a genocidal maniac" as well.
You'll find that virtually all of those who disagree with that statement will not engage in anything resembling the responses to much less venomous statements about Islam and its prophet - and that includes responses by non-Muslims too.
 
  • #16
arildno said:
You were the one who came with an utterly false statement about what constitutes the "identity" of people in the Eastern world.

Religion does NOT constitute the identity of persons living in the East, even though their imams are constantly hammering down that message upon their flock.
That religion is a stronger COMPONENT of the mentality of the people of the East than in the West is due to the constant and systematic brainwash they are exposed to. Brainwashing is effective!

One of the most used tools in this ongoing brainwashing process is to reveal to people what happens to non-believers:
Harassment, frequent jailings, torture and mutilation along with good ol' murder.

So, if you want to think it's fine with a culture defining itself primarily* in terms of its religious beliefs, then you must also think it is fine with torture.
You can't have the one without the other.


*I.e, by the socially dominant stratum of society
This is ridiculously combative and back-and-white; you state opinions as if fact. It reads as if written by a newbie. From past posts, I'd thought you were more eloquent than this.

If this has just sunk to fist-pounding, frankly, I've lost intrerest.
 
Last edited:
  • #17
And this is why we can't discuss religion even in political or historical perspectives. We've proven, once again, that people are way too sensitive when it comes to their religious beliefs.

Thread closed.
 

1. What were the Crusades and why do they continue to be a topic of discussion?

The Crusades were a series of religious wars fought between Christians and Muslims in the Middle Ages, primarily over control of the Holy Land. They still hold relevance today because they had a significant impact on European and Middle Eastern history and their consequences are still felt in modern conflicts.

2. Is there a likelihood of history repeating itself with another Crusade?

It is unlikely that there will be another Crusade in the same sense as the ones that occurred in the Middle Ages. However, conflicts and tensions between different religious and cultural groups continue to exist and can lead to similar types of violence.

3. What were the main motivations for participating in the Crusades?

The main motivations for participating in the Crusades were religious fervor, the promise of spiritual rewards, and political and economic gains. Many also saw it as an opportunity for adventure and conquest.

4. Were there any positive outcomes of the Crusades?

While the Crusades were ultimately unsuccessful in their goal of permanently recapturing the Holy Land, they did have some positive outcomes. They led to increased trade and cultural exchange between Europe and the Middle East, and the introduction of new ideas and technologies to Europe.

5. How can we learn from the mistakes of the Crusades to prevent similar conflicts in the future?

To prevent similar conflicts, we can learn from the mistakes of the Crusades by promoting understanding, tolerance, and respect for different cultures and religions. Additionally, addressing underlying issues such as economic disparities and political power imbalances can help to prevent the escalation of conflicts into violent wars.

Similar threads

  • General Discussion
5
Replies
161
Views
10K
  • General Discussion
Replies
32
Views
9K
  • General Discussion
5
Replies
169
Views
18K
  • General Discussion
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • General Discussion
2
Replies
43
Views
5K
  • General Discussion
2
Replies
49
Views
6K
  • General Discussion
Replies
25
Views
3K
  • General Discussion
Replies
12
Views
3K
  • General Discussion
Replies
19
Views
3K
Replies
97
Views
14K
Back
Top