Islam is one of the controversial topics of our time. Who could forget where they were and what they were doing at the exact moment in time when they found out about the tragic events of 9/11? In the past decade Westerners have become increasingly suspicious of Muslims, and the media has taken full advantage of this and some would say promoted this fear by it's coverage of events such as the Danish Cartoon episode and the Cronulla riots. One Muslim recently responded by posting billboards in Sydney and Adelaide and had civil discussions with Christian leaders on publicchristianity.com and at The City Bible Forum in order to boost and positively influence the public's understanding of his faith.
But ultimately, is there any basis for believing in Islam? This is a question that David Wood seeks to answer- in the negative. Wood is a philosopher and a former atheist who converted to Christianity but then became increasingly interested in Islam as a result of his interactions with Muslim friends. One of his close friends converted to Christianity and then became a ministry partner of Wood's, and so Wood continues his work on Islam.
Go here to download a 90 minute interview with Wood.
The interview covers many topics:
- The Dearborn Arab Festival in the US, in a town where 30% of the population is Arabic, they hold a festival each year. Wood details his exploits and the trouble he's found himself in over the years- semi-interesting but insignificant in the big picture.
- His own background and how he became interested in Islam. Skip the first 20 or 30 mins of the interview- the good stuff comes later.
- Arguments Muslims use for their own position such as the Argument from Literary Excellence which says that the poetry in the Koran is perfect thus it has a perfect source.
- The Koran's claim that the Torah and New Testament predict the coming of Mohammed. Thus, Muslims claim that Deutoronomy 18 and the Gospel of John 14-16 both predict his arrival.
- The idea of abrogation. This is the hermeneutical principle that contradicting ideas are resolved by appealing to a chronological evolution, based on the idea that God would only give a revelation equal to or better than a prior one.
Wood discussed various verses from the Koran-to the effect of "There is no compulsion in religion" and "You have your religion and I will have mine" and contrasts these with later verses on violence and later dictations about the treatment of unbelievers, who were forced to pay a tax or submit to Islam. He argues that the journey of Mohammed's life saw him go from advocating peacefulness when his followers were in the minority, towards negative jihad and then finally towards positive jihad when the numbers allowed it, and that this could help explain why Muslims in the West usually have a more tolerant attitude to unbelievers than do Muslims in Muslim dominated regions. He warns that Muslims may be well meaning and uneducated about their own faith but that the proper use of abrogation (which is funnily enough more popular in Muslim countries, he claims) inevitably will result in negative behaviour towards unbelievers in the long term.
- The need to understand Muslims on their own terms and thus respond appropriately to their arguments with this understanding in mind. He says that no apologetics type books actually do this well enough, and that no apologetics works give the fullest, deepest responses (Although he says Answering Islam by Geisler and Saleeb is the best book answer to Islam that he knows of). He says Answering-Islam.org is the most comprehensive archive or responses to Islam and that it will not fall foul on the charge he levels against the books that are in print.
He gives the example of responding to the Muslim charge that the Bible has been corrupted. He says the first response should be that Surah 6:115 and Surah 18:27 claim that God's word can't be corrupted or changed, that the Koran teaches that the Torah and the Gospel are God's word, and that therefore if God's word cannot be corrupted then the Muslim shouldn't be arguing that the Koran is wrong and that God's word has been corrupted. Then, he says, after making this argument you should go onto make the standard textual criticism type arguments on the basis of manuscript evidence and the like.
Monday, July 11, 2011
Sunday, July 10, 2011
The Art of Persuasion
John Dickson has a new article titled Art of Persuasion Not so Simple. In many ways it's similar in theme and argument to a prior article of his titled The Way we Believe which I mentioned last year except with discussions of some different sources to illustrate his points.
His conclusion is worth taking heed of:
Whether on climate change, politics, religion or ethics, we do not change our minds on the basis of facts alone. Indeed, they may even bolster contrary views. What environmental campaigners, refugee advocates, gay rights lobbyists, atheist evangelists and churches need if they are to be persuasive are not just more facts but a narrative that stirs our hearts and a social movement that wins our trust.
His conclusion is worth taking heed of:
Whether on climate change, politics, religion or ethics, we do not change our minds on the basis of facts alone. Indeed, they may even bolster contrary views. What environmental campaigners, refugee advocates, gay rights lobbyists, atheist evangelists and churches need if they are to be persuasive are not just more facts but a narrative that stirs our hearts and a social movement that wins our trust.
Thoughts on Philosophy of Reading
Why read? Are there different types of reading? What should I read? Is there any specific advice I should take heed of when it comes to reading?
For those of us for whom reading is a relatively big part of our lives, the above questions will inevitably be crucial. Here I'll lay out some general thoughts on reading.
Why Read?
- It enhances literary skills- both reading and writing.
- It broadens ones perspective and develops ones understanding of issues with a depth that other forms of learning will inevitably fail to achieve.
- It helps develop the ability to disseminate information and process it.
- It is enjoyable.
Are there different types of reading?
- According to the Classic How to Read a Book by Adler and Van Doren, there are three types of reading or purposes for reading: Reading for entertainment, reading for information, and reading for understanding.
- Fiction and Non Fiction.
- Genre: History, science, philosophy, theology, etc etc.
- Format: Books- scholarly books, popular level books, textbooks, website articles, scholarly journal articles, blog entries, magazines, newspapers.
What Should I Read? is a far more complicated and difficult question. Using Adler's 3 categories, generally I personally read for understanding. Many other issues come into play here- this is now an interpretive issue rather than just a basic question like the first two above.
Some random thoughts follow:
- Read old and new books. CS Lewis suggests at least one old work for every 3 contemporary works. We're all a product of our times to one degree or another, regardless of whether we want to be or not. Opening one's mind to the exchanges at the table of ideas from days gone past can serve many purposes: Helps free our thinking and helps us avoid getting stuck in our own cultural vortex thus avoiding chronological snobbery, teaches us that "there's nothing new under the sun", opens our eyes, allows us to consider different frameworks for understanding or new ways of looking at issues that we may not have considered.
Read things at an appropriate level for you. . Fairly self explanatory I would have thought, but failing to take stock of this one could have drastic consequences. What can happen is picking up a book and realising it's just way above your head and then losing interest as a result. As per my list before, writing comes in various formats and at various levels. Also, different writings presuppose different levels of existing understanding within their readers. Always look at things like: How many pages long is the book? How technical is the language? Have I read anything else on the specific topic or issues from this book? Always flick through a book, read the table of contents, and read a few paragraphs here and there. Even the blurb and commendations may help because they may indicate who the book is intended for and at what level it is written.
Tips?
Again, a complicated question.
- Understand what you are reading and read thoroughly and deeply: This is a difficult one for me because I constantly see new books I want to read. But I'm still convinced that the whole enterprise of reading is almost pointless unless one gets a thorough understanding of what one is reading, remembers the main points or arguments that the author has made, considers consequences of their reading and how the ideas presented may be true or false, the assumptions and presuppositions, and how they may relate to, complement or conflict with existing ideas, thoughts and frameworks of understanding.
Use tools to help you read more effectively Underline, highlight key points, make notes, whatever works for you really.
Connect the dots. Keep an eye on th author's Big Picture. Attempt to follow the author's argument- if he is a good author this should be relatively clear. Inevitably, a book will have a central theme. It may be structured in various ways; with standalone chapters, or with chapters that build on each other and thus presuppose a reading of the prior chapters, etc. The argument will usually build as the book continues, though. Always try to understand where your current bit fits into the whole. This will help you make sense of the book's main line of thought and critically consider how ideas are interconnected and how the various arguments depend on each other or are interconnected.
Remember the finiteness of human attempts to reason through problems in any form, even including the literary form- the best form I know of for gaining understanding This may seem a bizarre inclusion but allow me to justify. This is more of an epistemological observation but it relates to reading hence I've included it. (Anyone who reads through more than a couple of my blog entries will observe the importance that generally I place on epistemology; thus there is almost nowhere where epistemological thoughts aren't welcome).
I disagree with the argument of Adler (if I remember correctly- I do not have the book in front of me) to the effect that one is compelled to action- or changing one's beliefs if one cannot pin the author on one of the four possible criticisms Adler offers, ie: The author is not aware of/has not considered other information that could render his thesis less plausible, the author has made an error of logic etc etc. It appears to me that Adler is guilty of an overestimation of the powers of human reason here, an overtly rationalistic approach that is untenable in light of the inability of humans to solve all the necesaary puzzles they wish they could with the powers of their grey matter alone.
I would perhaps agree with Adler but reduce some of the force of his suggestion: I'd suggest that readers are obligated to critically consider what they read, but I wouldn't say that necessarily they owe the author and that it is their duty to change views because they personally cannot, at that point, show exactly why the author is wrong. Note: I'm not advocating irrationalism here, I'm merely attempting to work in an understanding of human finiteness as it relates to reading. One should initially contemplate and take time to work through the author's conclusions, and seek to look at the problem from various angles through different frameworks, and examine the author's assumptions. If, through the cold light of day and after considering the issue carefully one comes to a different conclusion or changes their view to align with the author's that is good and should be welcomed, but one should always take the time to digest what a particular view means and balance the importance of that view or it's strength against opposing views.
If one comes across an unanswerable puzzle, there may in fact be a good answer that one has not yet come across. This is related to the general observation that conflicting ideas do exist and often need to be balanced against each other, and that occasionally one can be justified in believing in the existence of unanswerable paradoxes or simply not committing to any given idea; for example if other conflicting ideas exist and there is evidence in both directions. (Also, as I previously noted, one of the marks of an educated mind is holding different ideas in tension).
Take a speed reading course . I haven't done this but would like to do it one day. All reports suggest it's a worthwhile exercise.
Don't become a dogmatic know-it-all. We must also remember the vast pool of human knowledge that exists. Even the most learned and intelligent members of society know only a miniscule amount of the possible pool of current human knowledge, thus it seems that one should always keep in mind that having too much certainty about one's knowledge or views is often a bad thing. In my own experience, the more I learn the more I realise how much I don't know.
Enjoy and grow without being consumed or isolated Reading is enjoyable, as I already noted. And reading helps one grow one's knowledge, as I already noted. But reading is like many other things: there is something known as "too much of a good thing". Always keep in mind the purposes for which you read nd if you find those purpose unwittingly changing then consider this carefully. For example, you may read to increase your understanding of issues A, B and C, but could there be other purposes slipping in- for example to pridefully prove how much you know to other people? (This was a dot point on a sermon I recently heard at my home church on the Discipline of Study), or to escape from life because life itself isn't really working for you? These are just examples.
Be careful, because the mere mechanics of reading open up the possibility of becoming overly engrossed to an unreasonable point. Reading is an isolated activity; being social creatures, this can mean reading too much can mean we are too isolated.
That's about all I have- this has been unlike most of the posts on this blog thus far in the sense that this is probably more random and less well proof-read. But the purpose of this was to simply jot down my thoughts on reading- and I've accomplished that purpose. I hope these thoughts benefit anyone who might read this.
For those of us for whom reading is a relatively big part of our lives, the above questions will inevitably be crucial. Here I'll lay out some general thoughts on reading.
Why Read?
- It enhances literary skills- both reading and writing.
- It broadens ones perspective and develops ones understanding of issues with a depth that other forms of learning will inevitably fail to achieve.
- It helps develop the ability to disseminate information and process it.
- It is enjoyable.
Are there different types of reading?
- According to the Classic How to Read a Book by Adler and Van Doren, there are three types of reading or purposes for reading: Reading for entertainment, reading for information, and reading for understanding.
- Fiction and Non Fiction.
- Genre: History, science, philosophy, theology, etc etc.
- Format: Books- scholarly books, popular level books, textbooks, website articles, scholarly journal articles, blog entries, magazines, newspapers.
What Should I Read? is a far more complicated and difficult question. Using Adler's 3 categories, generally I personally read for understanding. Many other issues come into play here- this is now an interpretive issue rather than just a basic question like the first two above.
Some random thoughts follow:
- Read old and new books. CS Lewis suggests at least one old work for every 3 contemporary works. We're all a product of our times to one degree or another, regardless of whether we want to be or not. Opening one's mind to the exchanges at the table of ideas from days gone past can serve many purposes: Helps free our thinking and helps us avoid getting stuck in our own cultural vortex thus avoiding chronological snobbery, teaches us that "there's nothing new under the sun", opens our eyes, allows us to consider different frameworks for understanding or new ways of looking at issues that we may not have considered.
Read things at an appropriate level for you. . Fairly self explanatory I would have thought, but failing to take stock of this one could have drastic consequences. What can happen is picking up a book and realising it's just way above your head and then losing interest as a result. As per my list before, writing comes in various formats and at various levels. Also, different writings presuppose different levels of existing understanding within their readers. Always look at things like: How many pages long is the book? How technical is the language? Have I read anything else on the specific topic or issues from this book? Always flick through a book, read the table of contents, and read a few paragraphs here and there. Even the blurb and commendations may help because they may indicate who the book is intended for and at what level it is written.
Tips?
Again, a complicated question.
- Understand what you are reading and read thoroughly and deeply: This is a difficult one for me because I constantly see new books I want to read. But I'm still convinced that the whole enterprise of reading is almost pointless unless one gets a thorough understanding of what one is reading, remembers the main points or arguments that the author has made, considers consequences of their reading and how the ideas presented may be true or false, the assumptions and presuppositions, and how they may relate to, complement or conflict with existing ideas, thoughts and frameworks of understanding.
Use tools to help you read more effectively Underline, highlight key points, make notes, whatever works for you really.
Connect the dots. Keep an eye on th author's Big Picture. Attempt to follow the author's argument- if he is a good author this should be relatively clear. Inevitably, a book will have a central theme. It may be structured in various ways; with standalone chapters, or with chapters that build on each other and thus presuppose a reading of the prior chapters, etc. The argument will usually build as the book continues, though. Always try to understand where your current bit fits into the whole. This will help you make sense of the book's main line of thought and critically consider how ideas are interconnected and how the various arguments depend on each other or are interconnected.
Remember the finiteness of human attempts to reason through problems in any form, even including the literary form- the best form I know of for gaining understanding This may seem a bizarre inclusion but allow me to justify. This is more of an epistemological observation but it relates to reading hence I've included it. (Anyone who reads through more than a couple of my blog entries will observe the importance that generally I place on epistemology; thus there is almost nowhere where epistemological thoughts aren't welcome).
I disagree with the argument of Adler (if I remember correctly- I do not have the book in front of me) to the effect that one is compelled to action- or changing one's beliefs if one cannot pin the author on one of the four possible criticisms Adler offers, ie: The author is not aware of/has not considered other information that could render his thesis less plausible, the author has made an error of logic etc etc. It appears to me that Adler is guilty of an overestimation of the powers of human reason here, an overtly rationalistic approach that is untenable in light of the inability of humans to solve all the necesaary puzzles they wish they could with the powers of their grey matter alone.
I would perhaps agree with Adler but reduce some of the force of his suggestion: I'd suggest that readers are obligated to critically consider what they read, but I wouldn't say that necessarily they owe the author and that it is their duty to change views because they personally cannot, at that point, show exactly why the author is wrong. Note: I'm not advocating irrationalism here, I'm merely attempting to work in an understanding of human finiteness as it relates to reading. One should initially contemplate and take time to work through the author's conclusions, and seek to look at the problem from various angles through different frameworks, and examine the author's assumptions. If, through the cold light of day and after considering the issue carefully one comes to a different conclusion or changes their view to align with the author's that is good and should be welcomed, but one should always take the time to digest what a particular view means and balance the importance of that view or it's strength against opposing views.
If one comes across an unanswerable puzzle, there may in fact be a good answer that one has not yet come across. This is related to the general observation that conflicting ideas do exist and often need to be balanced against each other, and that occasionally one can be justified in believing in the existence of unanswerable paradoxes or simply not committing to any given idea; for example if other conflicting ideas exist and there is evidence in both directions. (Also, as I previously noted, one of the marks of an educated mind is holding different ideas in tension).
Take a speed reading course . I haven't done this but would like to do it one day. All reports suggest it's a worthwhile exercise.
Don't become a dogmatic know-it-all. We must also remember the vast pool of human knowledge that exists. Even the most learned and intelligent members of society know only a miniscule amount of the possible pool of current human knowledge, thus it seems that one should always keep in mind that having too much certainty about one's knowledge or views is often a bad thing. In my own experience, the more I learn the more I realise how much I don't know.
Enjoy and grow without being consumed or isolated Reading is enjoyable, as I already noted. And reading helps one grow one's knowledge, as I already noted. But reading is like many other things: there is something known as "too much of a good thing". Always keep in mind the purposes for which you read nd if you find those purpose unwittingly changing then consider this carefully. For example, you may read to increase your understanding of issues A, B and C, but could there be other purposes slipping in- for example to pridefully prove how much you know to other people? (This was a dot point on a sermon I recently heard at my home church on the Discipline of Study), or to escape from life because life itself isn't really working for you? These are just examples.
Be careful, because the mere mechanics of reading open up the possibility of becoming overly engrossed to an unreasonable point. Reading is an isolated activity; being social creatures, this can mean reading too much can mean we are too isolated.
That's about all I have- this has been unlike most of the posts on this blog thus far in the sense that this is probably more random and less well proof-read. But the purpose of this was to simply jot down my thoughts on reading- and I've accomplished that purpose. I hope these thoughts benefit anyone who might read this.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)