Are Muslims who do not...

[redneck_billcollector]

I have an undergrad degree in history with an emphasis on middle eastern studies. There were about 4 courses on Islam, and 7 or 8 on middle eastern history to include zionism. Dr. V. Eggar at Georgia Southern back in the mid-80's to late 80's was a great proffessor. I also took a few middle eastern comparative politics classes (had dual degrees, one in Poly Sci too, with a minor in International Studies).

I have a huge library on the subject too, (to include a couple of translated qu'rans and a translation of the various haditha) I found it interresting and I have attempted to keep up with what is going on.

After about 2 years of me and a couple of other students pushing, we finally got arabic and farsi courses offered, but alas, they were offered my final quarter and I had been accepted in grad school so I was not able to take advantage of those classes. I have often though that when I can retire I am going to re-enroll and get a degree in arabic.

I have always found Islam to be a fascinating subject, I was in the military prior to college and visited the middle east during a "bright star" deployment (Egypt). The Lebanese civil war was going on at that time along with the Iraqi/Iranian war and the soviet occupation of Afghanistan and I figured we were going to be involved in that region of the world (both militarilly and economically) to a rather large extent in the future. Pan-arabism was proving to be a failure and the rise of Iran's Islamic Republic and Hezobllah in Lebanon seemed to signal the wave of the future. The popularity of the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt along with the assasination of Sadat seemed to enforce my beliefs on this matter.

The soviet bloc was on the decline and everyone knew it and I figured our next major opponent was going to be the salafi islamic movement that was taking root within the world of islam (in the sunni dominated areas of Egypt, Algeria, Yemen, the southern Philippines and Pakistan) so I wanted to learn all I could. I also toyed with the idea of taking emplyment with ARAMCO as opposed to going to grad school for awhile, but in the end, due to the fact I was married at the time, I choose grad school.

 

[redneck_billcollector]

That sounds like divine inspiration to me. How have you learned so much about Islam?

They will say the qu'ran is not due to "divine inspiration" that would mean it was partially a work of man or that man was inspired to write it. They say it is the word of allah reduced to text with no human intervention other than Muhammad relaying it verbatum to scribes (even though there are no qu'rans dated to the time of Muhammad).

That is why the Sa'na qu'ran is causing so much controversy, it is the oldest known manuscript and it has some differences (although minor) with the accepted qu'ran. It has been both radio carbon dated and dated via the archaic script that was used, it was a "proto-arabic" script so to speak, there were no vowels used. These minor differences would give the qu'ran a history, so to speak, just like we acknowledge with the bible, which is something that the muslims have always denied for the qu'ran. They have always claimed that it has not changed one iota since the time of their prophet and it is a verbatum recitation of the revelations given to muhammad.

This belief of the qu'ran being a verbatum manuscript is why the qu'ran being translated is frowned upon, because you loose some meanings in translation and it is not man's place to alter the word of allah.

 

[stringmusic]

I have an undergrad degree in history with an emphasis on middle eastern studies. There were about 4 courses on Islam, and 7 or 8 on middle eastern history to include zionism. Dr. V. Eggar at Georgia Southern back in the mid-80's to late 80's was a great proffessor. I also took a few middle eastern comparative politics classes (had dual degrees, one in Poly Sci too, with a minor in International Studies).

I have a huge library on the subject too, (to include a couple of translated qu'rans and a translation of the various haditha) I found it interresting and I have attempted to keep up with what is going on.

After about 2 years of me and a couple of other students pushing, we finally got arabic and farsi courses offered, but alas, they were offered my final quarter and I had been accepted in grad school so I was not able to take advantage of those classes. I have often though that when I can retire I am going to re-enroll and get a degree in arabic.

I have always found Islam to be a fascinating subject, I was in the military prior to college and visited the middle east during a "bright star" deployment (Egypt). The Lebanese civil war was going on at that time along with the Iraqi/Iranian war and the soviet occupation of Afghanistan and I figured we were going to be involved in that region of the world (both militarilly and economically) to a rather large extent in the future. Pan-arabism was proving to be a failure and the rise of Iran's Islamic Republic and Hezobllah in Lebanon seemed to signal the wave of the future. The popularity of the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt along with the assasination of Sadat seemed to enforce my beliefs on this matter.

The soviet bloc was on the decline and everyone knew it and I figured our next major opponent was going to be the salafi islamic movement that was taking root within the world of islam (in the sunni dominated areas of Egypt, Algeria, Yemen, the southern Philippines and Pakistan) so I wanted to learn all I could. I also toyed with the idea of taking emplyment with ARAMCO as opposed to going to grad school for awhile, but in the end, due to the fact I was married at the time, I choose grad school.

Are you Christian? just curious. If not what do you consider yourself?

 

[redneck_billcollector]

Hmmmm, I was raised christian, I do not attend church because most churchs do not suit my attitudes about religion. I believe my relationship with God is just that, my relationship with God. I do not believe in a strict interpretation of the bible, I believe it was God's way of telling a primative people very complex set of circumstances. (you know, creation and evolution) If I had to choose a christian denomination I would probably be more Gnostic than anything else. One of the gnostic beliefs is an individual's relationship with God, is just that...there is no need for organized churches to be near to God, they were also some of the first christians, they were rather widespread in the middle east prior to Constantine's conversion which created organized churches. They were considered heretical by the early church because it was dangerous to the heirarchy of the church, (Constantine wanted a rigid hierarcy for political purposes) remember that is the same reason protestantism were deemed heretical by the church also, it started as nothing more than a reform movement in the catholic church. It is my understanding of the history of the bible and the rise of christianity that leads me to my particular beliefs. One thing I find really funny with many Christians is they ignore what Jesus' role was, he led a reform movement in the jewish faith, he claimed to be a rabi. Paul is the one who set out to preach to gentiles (non-jews), he was a roman citizen who spread the faith outside of judaism, were it not for Paul there would be no christians today as we know them. The first couple of "christian" generations were almost exclusively jewish and they eventually split with judaism and were spared some of the problems with the revolt against Rome because they did not partake in it. The pre-protestant bible as we know it was created by the council of Nicea after Constantine's conversion (many say for purely political reasons, there is evidence that he kept his pagan beliefs until his death). He ordered it because he wanted a unified dominate religion for the roman empire and it was the one religion that could be found through out most of the empire to a small extent and it was gaining status in the middle east which was very important to the roman empire because that is where most of the wheat, which was the staple food of the empire, was produced. There are more texts that were ommited from the bible than there were that were included in it, such as the gospels of judas, mary, paul, etc..., though some of their writtings were included in some of the books such as Paul in the book of romans. A good bit of the jewish books were ommitted from the old testimant too.

I am not muslim if that is what you are asking. I find Islam a dangerous religious/political movement that has been at odds with the west since the capture of Mecca.

 

[stringmusic]

First off I just want to say that these are simply questions, I am asking them because I have no idea what you think, I am not assuming anything.

I believe my relationship with God is just that, my relationship with God.

Does this include Jesus as your way to that relationship?

I believe it was God's way of telling a primative people very complex set of circumstances. (you know, creation and evolution)

Do you believe that the primative people was the only reason for the bible? or do you think it was written for everybody in any time period?

If I had to choose a christian denomination

I dont believe you do

I am not muslim if that is what you are asking.

no I was not asking that, you knew alot about Muslims, that doesnt make me think your Islamic.

 

[redneck_billcollector]

First off I just want to say that these are simply questions, I am asking them because I have no idea what you think, I am not assuming anything.

I have edited my answer above while you were writting this.

Does this include Jesus as your way to that relationship?

More so how the Gnostic viewed him, as a divine person and I don't question his relationship with his father, I have some problem with the trinity, that was developed by the council of Nicea and was not a widespread belief amongst the early christians in the holy land.

Do you believe that the primative people was the only reason for the bible? or do you think it was written for everybody in any time period?

A good bit of the old testiment is attributed to Moses by hebrew scholars and as for the new testiment, I have read a good bit about the council of Nicea and my belief is that alot of the bible that exists today was put together for political considerations during Constantine's time, and the King Jame's bible was purely political, we know that because of contemporary reports. It was an attempt to break from the catholic church and prove to the english that he was not a closet catholic (which many folks thought he was).

I dont believe you do

I don't either, hence my beliefs.

no I was not asking that, you knew alot about Muslims, that doesnt make me think your Islamic.

At one time my folks thought I wanted to convert because I lived, ate and slept Islam, I was fascinated but never believed its teachings. One of my proffessors refered to me as Lawrence Jr. (after T. E. Lawrence who was a famous "arabphile, you know, Lawrence of Arabia) because I was so engrossed in my studies. I find most religion fascinating because religion has done more to shape cultures and mankind than anything else. It fulfills a certain desire we have to know that there is something else bigger than us and our lives have some kind of meaning. It gives order on a universal scale even better than governments and it is the basis for our morals.
It lets us believe that once we die we become something more than worm food. Without religion we, as a species, would be so afraid of death.... I wonder sometimes about the origin of religion and whether it was our attempt to over ride a fear of death , because we developed knowledge and understanding and because we UNDERSTOOD the basic concept of death, loss, sorrow and all that goes hand in hand with death. Religion is what made us become human and somehow different from all other animals more so than anything else, even the use of tools and the advent of agriculture and domestication of animals. We are what we are because of religion...

 

[Miguel Cervantes]

Another non sensible Gibberish.
It is not about disagreeing within the same faith as there are several Muslim faiths, but they all subscribe to Sharia.
All Christians subscribe to the New Testament even if they make a mockery and misunderstand what they are reading.

This is an inaccurate statement.

 

[redneck_billcollector]

Another non sensible Gibberish.
It is not about disagreeing within the same faith as there are several Muslim faiths, but they all subscribe to Sharia.
All Christians subscribe to the New Testament even if they make a mockery and misunderstand what they are reading.

The only sharia that would be universal amongst muslims are the laws contained within, and derived from, the qu'ran. Most of sharia comes from the various sunnah and haditha and the various sects of islam have different sunnah and haditha that emphasis is placed on due to early political considerations (who is gonna lead the muslim nation/umma). The divergance is due to political infighting amongst muslims after the death of muhammad over who should lead the muslim people politically. As stated earlier that was the cause of the shia'/sunni split. There are other reform movements within the various sects, with suffism being the most widespread within the sunni section of islam. The widespread suffi beliefs in the Ottoman Empire (in antatolia proper) is one of the reasons it was able to become the first secular government within the muslim world and is why the "young Turks" revolution was able to succeed. That is also why there was widespread arab revolt against them in W.W.I. the arabs considered them heretics. It is more mysitical and less literal than the dominate beliefs in islam. The shia' have their reform movements too that are seen as the peak of heretical teachings amongst most muslims (many think they are down right apostates), they believe in bringing about the return of the hidden Imam and are what led to the cult of "assassins" and even the term assassin.

Sharia just means Allah's law. All muslims believe in need for sharia law and are beholding to it, it is just that they all don't agree on what it is.

 

[stringmusic]

First off I just want to say that these are simply questions, I am asking them because I have no idea what you think, I am not assuming anything.

I have edited my answer above while you were writting this.

Does this include Jesus as your way to that relationship?

More so how the Gnostic viewed him, as a divine person and I don't question his relationship with his father, I have some problem with the trinity, that was developed by the council of Nicea and was not a widespread belief amongst the early christians in the holy land.

Do you believe that the primative people was the only reason for the bible? or do you think it was written for everybody in any time period?

A good bit of the old testiment is attributed to Moses by hebrew scholars and as for the new testiment, I have read a good bit about the council of Nicea and my belief is that alot of the bible that exists today was put together for political considerations during Constantine's time, and the King Jame's bible was purely political, we know that because of contemporary reports. It was an attempt to break from the catholic church and prove to the english that he was not a closet catholic (which many folks thought he was).

I dont believe you do

I don't either, hence my beliefs.





At one time my folks thought I wanted to convert because I lived, ate and slept Islam, I was fascinated but never believed its teachings. One of my proffessors refered to me as Lawrence Jr. (after T. E. Lawrence who was a famous "arabphile, you know, Lawrence of Arabia) because I was so engrossed in my studies. I find most religion fascinating because religion has done more to shape cultures and mankind than anything else. It fulfills a certain desire we have to know that there is something else bigger than us and our lives have some kind of meaning. It gives order on a universal scale even better than governments and it is the basis for our morals.
It lets us believe that once we die we become something more than worm food. Without religion we, as a species, would be so afraid of death.... I wonder sometimes about the origin of religion and whether it was our attempt to over ride a fear of death , because we developed knowledge and understanding and because we UNDERSTOOD the basic concept of death, loss, sorrow and all that goes hand in hand with death. Religion is what made us become human and somehow different from all other animals more so than anything else, even the use of tools and the advent of agriculture and domestication of animals. We are what we are because of religion...

Thanks man, You should come visit the A/A/A forum sometimes, lot of good discussion going on.
oh, just some advice, when you quote parts of the original quote, just use the / inside the

at the end.

 

[Tim L]

Are Muslims who do not practice Sharia Law really Muslims?

Yes

 

[ambush80]

At one time my folks thought I wanted to convert because I lived, ate and slept Islam, I was fascinated but never believed its teachings. One of my proffessors refered to me as Lawrence Jr. (after T. E. Lawrence who was a famous "arabphile, you know, Lawrence of Arabia) because I was so engrossed in my studies. I find most religion fascinating because religion has done more to shape cultures and mankind than anything else. It fulfills a certain desire we have to know that there is something else bigger than us and our lives have some kind of meaning. It gives order on a universal scale even better than governments and it is the basis for our morals.
It lets us believe that once we die we become something more than worm food. Without religion we, as a species, would be so afraid of death.... I wonder sometimes about the origin of religion and whether it was our attempt to over ride a fear of death , because we developed knowledge and understanding and because we UNDERSTOOD the basic concept of death, loss, sorrow and all that goes hand in hand with death. Religion is what made us become human and somehow different from all other animals more so than anything else, even the use of tools and the advent of agriculture and domestication of animals. We are what we are because of religion...

These ideas fascinate me. I would like to think on them and then engage you in conversation about them.

 

[redneck_billcollector]

These ideas fascinate me. I would like to think on them and then engage you in conversation about them.

I have always been fascinated by this too. Maybe one day we shall. I have some preacher friends that love to talk with me, and others that swear I am a tool of satan.

 

[ambush80]

It fulfills a certain desire we have to know that there is something else bigger than us and our lives have some kind of meaning. It gives order on a universal scale even better than governments and it is the basis for our morals.

Do you think that the desire you refer to is innate or do you think that it's origins are intellectual? Why do you think that belief is necessary to give your life meaning? It seems to me that such a belief gives order only when everybody agrees on what that belief is. If only belief in "God" were enough to get people to behave. Unfortunately, what actually happens is that people wage war in the name of their particular God.

It lets us believe that once we die we become something more than worm food. Without religion we, as a species, would be so afraid of death.... I wonder sometimes about the origin of religion and whether it was our attempt to over ride a fear of death , because we developed knowledge and understanding and because we UNDERSTOOD the basic concept of death, loss, sorrow and all that goes hand in hand with death.

Absence of religion can give you peace as well. As a matter of fact, those that take comfort in their religion are guilty of the utmost in intellectual dishonesty; claiming that they alone know what's going to happen to them, disregarding the possibility that someone else might be right. The real fear of death is rooted in our survival instinct. The manufactured myths about the afterlife are what create the emotional fear of death. If your knowledge and understanding lead you to the conclusion that once you're gone then you're just gone, then that's comforting too.

Religion is what made us become human and somehow different from all other animals more so than anything else, even the use of tools and the advent of agriculture and domestication of animals. We are what we are because of religion...

How do you see religion as the driving force behind the advancement of humanity?

 

[redneck_billcollector]

Do you think that the desire you refer to is innate or do you think that it's origins are intellectual? Why do you think that belief is necessary to give your life meaning? It seems to me that such a belief gives order only when everybody agrees on what that belief is. If only belief in "God" were enough to get people to behave. Unfortunately, what actually happens is that people wage war in the name of their particular God.

It is both, innate and originating in the intellectual relm. We know that it has been present since the begining of humankind. The oldest burials show some ritual with pigments and grave goods. It is innate and became a human trait as soon as man understood what death was. It evolved in the intellectual and this is evidenced by all the debate that has accompanied religion ever since. Yes people wage war in the name of religion, they wage it for every other human trait too. Greed, hunger, any reason that motivates the individual also motivates groupings of people and in many cases towards war. When has this country waged war in the name of religion? We haven't as a nation, though some individuals might have joined the fray for religious reasons. Laws come from religion to some extent or other because most religions deal with relationships between people to some extent or other. It is ironic though, that most of the laws (though not all by any means)present in secular societies such as in the PRC or defunct Soviet Union are basically the same laws as those with their basis in judeo-christian societies other nations that had some religious guidance.



[/QUOTE]
Absence of religion can give you peace as well. As a matter of fact, those that take comfort in their religion are guilty of the utmost in intellectual dishonesty; claiming that they alone know what's going to happen to them, disregarding the possibility that someone else might be right. The real fear of death is rooted in our survival instinct. The manufactured myths about the afterlife are what create the emotional fear of death. If your knowledge and understanding lead you to the conclusion that once you're gone then you're just gone, then that's comforting too.[/QUOTE]

Maybe for some, but not the majority. Intellectual dishonesty takes many forms, finding comfort in the fact that there is something bigger than you is no more intellectually dishonest than saying the individual is in ultimate control of destiny. Some, if not most of the greatest minds known to man also held the belief that there is something after death and that there was a divine order to the universe. I do know religious folks tend to accept death better than those that have no belief (at least in my experience). I personally have my beliefs that give me comfort. Folks tend to discount the imagination, but don't forget, most of what we know as science started with the imagination, art is created by the imagination in that part of the mind that can conceive something greater than "us". The altar of the intellect is no more intellectually honest than the altar of any religion. It forgets that it was religion that led to science and a sense of community, it was the glue that bound early man.



[/QUOTE]
How do you see religion as the driving force behind the advancement of humanity?[/QUOTE]

Religion is what gave one man a relationship to another. All early communities had religion for guidance, for cohesiveness and most importantly, for a sense of belonging in something bigger than the brutish life most people lived. Most everything that folks think of as secular humanism was in response to religion, without religion there would have never been that debate. It is hard to explain, most religious folks would say, you would never understand and that is your loss. My belief is that there is a force out there greater than anything man could make or conceive and it is there for all to see, if only they choose too. I believe in creation yet I believe in the big bang, is that intellectually dishonest? Intellectual honesty is ambiguous as anything can be. Alot of what was scientific certainty when I was born has since fallen into the the wastebasket of ideas.

Man is different from other animals when it comes to the survival instinct, we all the time knowingly sacrifice our lives to make it better for others, we do that, in part, because of religion. It is the driving force that gave humans humanity, a willingness to sacrifice our lives for the betterment of others.

 

[ambush80]

It is both, innate and originating in the intellectual relm. We know that it has been present since the begining of humankind. The oldest burials show some ritual with pigments and grave goods. It is innate and became a human trait as soon as man understood what death was. It evolved in the intellectual and this is evidenced by all the debate that has accompanied religion ever since.

What I see as innate is that organisms want to live. There are very strong survival reactions. I think that the concept of something morphing into another thing could have readily been developed from observation of the natural world and then applied to humans. Watching a log burn would seem pretty mystical to a primitive person. I don't think one can definitively say if there is a hard wiring for a sense of the "beyond". I know I was exposed to the notion, clung to it for some time, and then was able to replace it with another notion; with no residual inclinations to return to my previous way of thinking.

Yes people wage war in the name of religion, they wage it for every other human trait too. Greed, hunger, any reason that motivates the individual also motivates groupings of people and in many cases towards war. When has this country waged war in the name of religion? We haven't as a nation, though some individuals might have joined the fray for religious reasons.

Manifest Destiny wasn't a war, per se, but it was an atrocity fueled by religion. It was also about greed and hunger as well. What other cause can people rally around that doesn't have be logical or reasonable that will allow them to justify atrocities other than dogma?

Laws come from religion to some extent or other because most religions deal with relationships between people to some extent or other. It is ironic though, that most of the laws (though not all by any means)present in secular societies such as in the PRC or defunct Soviet Union are basically the same laws as those with their basis in judeo-christian societies other nations that had some religious guidance.

I don't think that's necessarily true. I think most of the moral codes that came along aid in survival. When put together, people will come up with guidelines for behavior to aid their survival. Religion results from someone in the group claiming that they have been given guidelines by a God. If they can get others to believe them, they do well.

Maybe for some, but not the majority. Intellectual dishonesty takes many forms, finding comfort in the fact that there is something bigger than you is no more intellectually dishonest than saying the individual is in ultimate control of destiny.

That there are things that are bigger than you is obvious. That there are things that you don't understand is obvious as well. Observing that things are not in your control is obvious. The existence of God is not obvious unless you pre-suppose Him.

Some, if not most of the greatest minds known to man also held the belief that there is something after death and that there was a divine order to the universe. I do know religious folks tend to accept death better than those that have no belief (at least in my experience). I personally have my beliefs that give me comfort. Folks tend to discount the imagination, but don't forget, most of what we know as science started with the imagination, art is created by the imagination in that part of the mind that can conceive something greater than "us". The altar of the intellect is no more intellectually honest than the altar of any religion. It forgets that it was religion that led to science and a sense of community, it was the glue that bound early man.

The Divine; it is a compelling notion. Once you give it credence, it's a difficult concept to look at objectively ever again, much less extricate from your consciousness. I think the desire to learn fuels science. I think the position of knowing ultimate truth does the opposite.

Religion is what gave one man a relationship to another. All early communities had religion for guidance, for cohesiveness and most importantly, for a sense of belonging in something bigger than the brutish life most people lived.

Until they came across a tribe with a different religion.

Most everything that folks think of as secular humanism was in response to religion, without religion there would have never been that debate. It is hard to explain, most religious folks would say, you would never understand and that is your loss. My belief is that there is a force out there greater than anything man could make or conceive and it is there for all to see, if only they choose too.

"There there are things that are inconceivable" is absolutely true. That they exist is not. What I don't get is that people believe that they have some privy to understanding the inconceivable that others do not.

I believe in creation yet I believe in the big bang, is that intellectually dishonest? Intellectual honesty is ambiguous as anything can be. Alot of what was scientific certainty when I was born has since fallen into the the wastebasket of ideas.

Scientific ideas don't always get completely scrapped. They get built upon when new information comes along. Religion never scraps anything, even when new evidence demonstrates it to be flawed, nor does it build upon new information because it assumes perfect authority on everything.

Man is different from other animals when it comes to the survival instinct, we all the time knowingly sacrifice our lives to make it better for others, we do that, in part, because of religion. It is the driving force that gave humans humanity, a willingness to sacrifice our lives for the betterment of others.

I'll let Pnome tackle that one, if he ever shows up here.

 

[pnome]

I'll let Pnome tackle that one, if he ever shows up here.

You rang?

Man is different from other animals when it comes to the survival instinct, we all the time knowingly sacrifice our lives to make it better for others, we do that, in part, because of religion. It is the driving force that gave humans humanity, a willingness to sacrifice our lives for the betterment of others.

When humans sacrifice themselves for other humans what are they sacrificing themselves for, exactly? Isn't is so that the other humans can survive? When a soldier falls on a grenade he does it to ensure that his buddies survive.

Moral behavior is survival behavior above the individual level.

 

[ambush80]

You rang?




When humans sacrifice themselves for other humans what are they sacrificing themselves for, exactly? Isn't is so that the other humans can survive? When a soldier falls on a grenade he does it to ensure that his buddies survive.

Moral behavior is survival behavior above the individual level.

I rang.

I'm sure there are examples of someone acting in a selfish way; letting many perish to save his/her own hide. In those cases, what may have caused the moral compass to fail? Perhaps they may have even been sickly or terminally ill. How strong is the instinct for self preservation?

 

[pnome]

I rang.

I'm sure there are examples of someone acting in a selfish way; letting many perish to save his/her own hide. In those cases, what may have caused the moral compass to fail? Perhaps they may have even been sickly or terminally ill. How strong is the instinct for self preservation?

Selfishness. Sometimes this can be explained by irrational thinking. But more often is the result of a lack of empathy.

Empathy plays a very important role in our moral decisions. For instance, no one (at least that I know) would laud a soldier for diving on a grenade in order to save the life of Osama Bin Laden. But we would give him the medal of honor if he did it to save a group of U.S. Navy SEALS.

When we think someone as being "selfish" we are saying that this person does not display the level of empathy we are expecting toward what we consider to be fellow "herd" (for lack of a better term) members. We think that selfishness is a bad thing because non-selfish herd members are more conducive to herd survival than selfish ones.

 

[ambush80]

Selfishness. Sometimes this can be explained by irrational thinking. But more often is the result of a lack of empathy.

Empathy plays a very important role in our moral decisions. For instance, no one (at least that I know) would laud a soldier for diving on a grenade in order to save the life of Osama Bin Laden. But we would give him the medal of honor if he did it to save a group of U.S. Navy SEALS.

When we think someone as being "selfish" we are saying that this person does not display the level of empathy we are expecting toward what we consider to be fellow "herd" (for lack of a better term) members. We think that selfishness is a bad thing because non-selfish herd members are more conducive to herd survival than selfish ones.

Does this support capitalism? I digress....

 

[pnome]

Does this support capitalism? I digress....

It does if our information tells us that capitalism is better for herd survival than communism.

And my information certainly points in that direction.