From Newsgroup: alt.buddha.short.fat.guy

Religious fanaticism has been catastrophic for a region that was once
the intellectual hub of the world


A strange and unfamiliar feeling stirred as I sat down to write these
words. A feeling that has been largely absent over recent years when
writing this column. It rose up within me as I pondered the diplomatic breakthrough by Donald Trump rCo a stunning achievement, even with all the caveats about the risks and obstacles ahead rCo and the prospects for an entire region. Hope.

The opportunity for the Middle East is difficult to exaggerate, a region
from which my paternal ancestors trace their heritage, back as far as
the great Persian civilisation and its Islamic successor (my family tree
is chronicled in a direct line to Muhammad, the documents lovingly
preserved by my cousin Zafar). A region that could, with goodwill,
leadership and the courage of its peoples, experience the blessings of
the journey we call life rather than endemic hatred, bloodshed and conflict.

It is easy to forget that this region was once the intellectual hub of
the world, a place that spawned the myriad breakthroughs of the Islamic
Golden Age. I am not just talking about the great strides in algebra, astronomy and mathematics but the vibrancy of a region described by the philosopher Will Durant as rCLthe torchbearer of civilisationrCY. The translation movement, rendering the wisdom of the ancient Greeks into
Arabic, was hailed by the Yale classicist Dimitri Gutas as rCLequal in significance to the Italian RenaissancerCY. Ibn Khaldun, a 14th-century scholar, contrasted the enlightenment of the region with the rCLsavageryrCY
of Europe.

What, then, went wrong for the Muslim world? Why did it regress? One of
the presiding iniquities of much western scholarship is the myth that
all ills in the world can be traced to European colonialism, an untruth
that serves as a sop to the developing world, the comforting delusion
that the blame can be placed on outsiders and never on developments from within. The truth, of course, is that the degeneration of Islamic
civilisation long predated colonialism and, in a certain sense,
permitted it. I am talking about religion or, perhaps more accurately,
that variant we call fundamentalism.

War and peace newsletter Tom Newton-DunnrCOs concise guide to global
conflict rCo with reasons for optimism. Sign up with one click
I guess I am not alone in wondering how different the Middle East might
have been had it not been for the seismic influence of Al-Ghazali, that revered scholar of Sunni thought, who in the 12th century argued that
science is not a liberator but a threat to the word of God and a danger
to the clerics, who had every incentive to thwart the thirst for
knowledge to maintain their power and privileges. rCLInnovatorrCY was not regarded as a term of praise but, as the scholar Toby Huff has put it,
rCLa term for a heretic and non-believer, subject to deathrCY.

The historian Bernard Lewis notes in What Went Wrong? that as the
influence of fundamentalist Islam percolated through the region during
the later Middle Ages, rCLthe relationship between Christendom and Islam
in the sciences was reversed. Those who had been disciples now became teachers.rCY Sayyid Jamal al-Din al-Afghani, a 19th-century intellectual, wrote that Arab civilisation, which had once rCLthrown such a live light
on the world, suddenly became extinguishedrCY.

To describe this as a catastrophe is an understatement. While
universities such as those at Bologna, Pisa and Oxford were slowly
freeing themselves from the grip of the church rCo notwithstanding the
arrest of Galileo in the 17th century rCo Islamic power structures were imprisoning the human mind within the cage of revealed truth. As a
Taliban leader put it recently: rCLWestern education is a sinrCY, ramming
his point home by explaining his view of rain. rCLWe believe it is a
creation of God rather than an evaporation caused by the sun that
condenses and becomes rain.rCY

And this, I believe, hints at the true prize for the Middle East in this accord. Western leaders must stop beating around the bush. The problem
in the region isnrCOt a lack of aid, investment or peace initiatives, all
of which in a sense put the cart before the horse. The problem is
fanaticism, a virus that will infect and ultimately kill whatever peace
is proposed. Fanatics, you see, lack that most civilising of virtues:
doubt. Seized by absolute truth, they are not merely justified in
slaughtering infidels; they have a duty to do so. Look at those who most
abhor this deal: yes, Hamas (a reluctant signatory), but also Hezbollah,
the Houthis and, most of all, the cult known as the Islamic Republic of
Iran, which has impoverished and repressed its own people.

I am no fan of Mohammed bin Salman (we should never forget his role in
the gruesome murder of a journalist) but should we not at least
acknowledge what Gulf regimes are up against? They are seeking to seed
the notion in a younger generation that they might benefit by freeing themselves from the grip of the madrassas; that by embracing peace and
trade with Israel they will experience prosperity and hope. That is why
I support any Arab leader who takes on the Wahhabist fanatics rCo while
always acknowledging the moral ambiguity and messiness of any transition.

But let us also note the religious zealots in Israel, who oppose this
deal with similar swivel-eyed zeal. Look at Bezalel Smotrich, Itamar
Ben-Gvir and their followers, who proclaim that the land between the
river and the sea is rCLpromisedrCY to them by their own fictional deity in the sky; that settling the West Bank violently is divine will; that they
are the chosen ones and the Arabs the hated Amalek. They, to me, are
every bit as abhorrent as, say, the Taliban and perhaps even more
dangerous. For these extremists (along with the rapidly growing
ultra-Orthodox population) are threatening the very foundations of the
one liberal miracle yet to unfold in the Middle East.

Yet let me finish back in the Islamic world. It may be politically
incorrect these days, but it is important to note that the 57 Muslim
majority nations have just one university in the top 200 of the world;
that there are two billion followers of Islam but only four winners of a
Nobel science prize. A report in Nature magazine in 2002 found only
three scientific areas in which Islamic countries excelled:
desalination, falconry and camel reproduction. Over the past three
decades (despite huge investment by Gulf states), Muslim-majority
nations published just 5 per cent of science papers while making up
almost 15 per cent of the global population. In highly literate Iran, scientific progress occurs not because of the regime but despite it.

By citing these statistics, I am not seeking to demonise the people of Afghanistan, Yemen, Palestine and the like. On the contrary, they are as intelligent and capable as anyone else rCo indeed the best and brightest
have often enriched western universities by escaping the intellectual
bondage back home. I merely wish to underline the catastrophic influence
of fundamentalist Islam. Where Christianity gradually (and, yes,
reluctantly) adapted and moderated its theology in the light of
scientific progress, Muslim majority nations typically sought to shut it
down. This, more than anything else, captures the otherwise mystifying divergence in the trajectory of two civilisations.

And itrCOs why the most urgent task of a provisional council in Gaza (and
any other governing authority in the Middle East) is to challenge what
happens in schools and colleges, in madrassas and Islamic seminaries.
For it is only by severing the transmission mechanisms of the virus we
call fundamentalism, by thwarting the mass indoctrination that still
unfolds in large swathes of the Islamic world, that these brilliant
peoples can be freed from the historic trap into which they have fallen.
This, ultimately, is where the launchpad of rational inquiry, scientific curiosity and economic progress is to be found. All else is fluff and
window dressing.


Matthew Syed
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.buddha.short.fat.guy


Religious fanaticism has been catastrophic for a region that was once
the intellectual hub of the world


A strange and unfamiliar feeling stirred as I sat down to write these
words. A feeling that has been largely absent over recent years when
writing this column. It rose up within me as I pondered the diplomatic breakthrough by Donald Trump rCo a stunning achievement, even with all the caveats about the risks and obstacles ahead rCo and the prospects for an entire region. Hope.

The opportunity for the Middle East is difficult to exaggerate, a region
from which my paternal ancestors trace their heritage, back as far as
the great Persian civilisation and its Islamic successor (my family tree
is chronicled in a direct line to Muhammad, the documents lovingly
preserved by my cousin Zafar). A region that could, with goodwill,
leadership and the courage of its peoples, experience the blessings of
the journey we call life rather than endemic hatred, bloodshed and conflict.

It is easy to forget that this region was once the intellectual hub of
the world, a place that spawned the myriad breakthroughs of the Islamic
Golden Age. I am not just talking about the great strides in algebra, astronomy and mathematics but the vibrancy of a region described by the philosopher Will Durant as rCLthe torchbearer of civilisationrCY. The translation movement, rendering the wisdom of the ancient Greeks into
Arabic, was hailed by the Yale classicist Dimitri Gutas as rCLequal in significance to the Italian RenaissancerCY. Ibn Khaldun, a 14th-century scholar, contrasted the enlightenment of the region with the rCLsavageryrCY
of Europe.

What, then, went wrong for the Muslim world? Why did it regress? One of
the presiding iniquities of much western scholarship is the myth that
all ills in the world can be traced to European colonialism, an untruth
that serves as a sop to the developing world, the comforting delusion
that the blame can be placed on outsiders and never on developments from within. The truth, of course, is that the degeneration of Islamic
civilisation long predated colonialism and, in a certain sense,
permitted it. I am talking about religion or, perhaps more accurately,
that variant we call fundamentalism.

I guess I am not alone in wondering how different the Middle East might
have been had it not been for the seismic influence of Al-Ghazali, that revered scholar of Sunni thought, who in the 12th century argued that
science is not a liberator but a threat to the word of God and a danger
to the clerics, who had every incentive to thwart the thirst for
knowledge to maintain their power and privileges. rCLInnovatorrCY was not regarded as a term of praise but, as the scholar Toby Huff has put it,
rCLa term for a heretic and non-believer, subject to deathrCY.

The historian Bernard Lewis notes in What Went Wrong? that as the
influence of fundamentalist Islam percolated through the region during
the later Middle Ages, rCLthe relationship between Christendom and Islam
in the sciences was reversed. Those who had been disciples now became teachers.rCY Sayyid Jamal al-Din al-Afghani, a 19th-century intellectual, wrote that Arab civilisation, which had once rCLthrown such a live light
on the world, suddenly became extinguishedrCY.

To describe this as a catastrophe is an understatement. While
universities such as those at Bologna, Pisa and Oxford were slowly
freeing themselves from the grip of the church rCo notwithstanding the
arrest of Galileo in the 17th century rCo Islamic power structures were imprisoning the human mind within the cage of revealed truth. As a
Taliban leader put it recently: rCLWestern education is a sinrCY, ramming
his point home by explaining his view of rain. rCLWe believe it is a
creation of God rather than an evaporation caused by the sun that
condenses and becomes rain.rCY

And this, I believe, hints at the true prize for the Middle East in this accord. Western leaders must stop beating around the bush. The problem
in the region isnrCOt a lack of aid, investment or peace initiatives, all
of which in a sense put the cart before the horse. The problem is
fanaticism, a virus that will infect and ultimately kill whatever peace
is proposed. Fanatics, you see, lack that most civilising of virtues:
doubt. Seized by absolute truth, they are not merely justified in
slaughtering infidels; they have a duty to do so. Look at those who most
abhor this deal: yes, Hamas (a reluctant signatory), but also Hezbollah,
the Houthis and, most of all, the cult known as the Islamic Republic of
Iran, which has impoverished and repressed its own people.

I am no fan of Mohammed bin Salman (we should never forget his role in
the gruesome murder of a journalist) but should we not at least
acknowledge what Gulf regimes are up against? They are seeking to seed
the notion in a younger generation that they might benefit by freeing themselves from the grip of the madrassas; that by embracing peace and
trade with Israel they will experience prosperity and hope. That is why
I support any Arab leader who takes on the Wahhabist fanatics rCo while
always acknowledging the moral ambiguity and messiness of any transition.

But let us also note the religious zealots in Israel, who oppose this
deal with similar swivel-eyed zeal. Look at Bezalel Smotrich, Itamar
Ben-Gvir and their followers, who proclaim that the land between the
river and the sea is rCLpromisedrCY to them by their own fictional deity in the sky; that settling the West Bank violently is divine will; that they
are the chosen ones and the Arabs the hated Amalek. They, to me, are
every bit as abhorrent as, say, the Taliban and perhaps even more
dangerous. For these extremists (along with the rapidly growing
ultra-Orthodox population) are threatening the very foundations of the
one liberal miracle yet to unfold in the Middle East.

Yet let me finish back in the Islamic world. It may be politically
incorrect these days, but it is important to note that the 57 Muslim
majority nations have just one university in the top 200 of the world;
that there are two billion followers of Islam but only four winners of a
Nobel science prize. A report in Nature magazine in 2002 found only
three scientific areas in which Islamic countries excelled:
desalination, falconry and camel reproduction. Over the past three
decades (despite huge investment by Gulf states), Muslim-majority
nations published just 5 per cent of science papers while making up
almost 15 per cent of the global population. In highly literate Iran, scientific progress occurs not because of the regime but despite it.

By citing these statistics, I am not seeking to demonise the people of Afghanistan, Yemen, Palestine and the like. On the contrary, they are as intelligent and capable as anyone else rCo indeed the best and brightest
have often enriched western universities by escaping the intellectual
bondage back home. I merely wish to underline the catastrophic influence
of fundamentalist Islam. Where Christianity gradually (and, yes,
reluctantly) adapted and moderated its theology in the light of
scientific progress, Muslim majority nations typically sought to shut it
down. This, more than anything else, captures the otherwise mystifying divergence in the trajectory of two civilisations.

And itrCOs why the most urgent task of a provisional council in Gaza (and
any other governing authority in the Middle East) is to challenge what
happens in schools and colleges, in madrassas and Islamic seminaries.
For it is only by severing the transmission mechanisms of the virus we
call fundamentalism, by thwarting the mass indoctrination that still
unfolds in large swathes of the Islamic world, that these brilliant
peoples can be freed from the historic trap into which they have fallen.
This, ultimately, is where the launchpad of rational inquiry, scientific curiosity and economic progress is to be found. All else is fluff and
window dressing.


Matthew Syed
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.buddha.short.fat.guy

On Oct 12, 2025 at 5:50:01rC>AM EDT, "Julian" <julianlzb87@gmail.com> wrote:

Religious fanaticism has been catastrophic for a region that was once
the intellectual hub of the world

A strange and unfamiliar feeling stirred as I sat down to write these
words. A feeling that has been largely absent over recent years when
writing this column. It rose up within me as I pondered the diplomatic breakthrough by Donald Trump rCo a stunning achievement, even with all the caveats about the risks and obstacles ahead rCo and the prospects for an entire region. Hope.

The opportunity for the Middle East is difficult to exaggerate, a region
from which my paternal ancestors trace their heritage, back as far as
the great Persian civilisation and its Islamic successor (my family tree
is chronicled in a direct line to Muhammad, the documents lovingly
preserved by my cousin Zafar). A region that could, with goodwill,
leadership and the courage of its peoples, experience the blessings of
the journey we call life rather than endemic hatred, bloodshed and conflict.

It is easy to forget that this region was once the intellectual hub of
the world, a place that spawned the myriad breakthroughs of the Islamic Golden Age. I am not just talking about the great strides in algebra, astronomy and mathematics but the vibrancy of a region described by the philosopher Will Durant as rCLthe torchbearer of civilisationrCY. The translation movement, rendering the wisdom of the ancient Greeks into
Arabic, was hailed by the Yale classicist Dimitri Gutas as rCLequal in significance to the Italian RenaissancerCY. Ibn Khaldun, a 14th-century scholar, contrasted the enlightenment of the region with the rCLsavageryrCY of Europe.

What, then, went wrong for the Muslim world? Why did it regress? One of
the presiding iniquities of much western scholarship is the myth that
all ills in the world can be traced to European colonialism, an untruth
that serves as a sop to the developing world, the comforting delusion
that the blame can be placed on outsiders and never on developments from within. The truth, of course, is that the degeneration of Islamic civilisation long predated colonialism and, in a certain sense,
permitted it. I am talking about religion or, perhaps more accurately,
that variant we call fundamentalism.

War and peace newsletter Tom Newton-DunnrCOs concise guide to global
conflict rCo with reasons for optimism. Sign up with one click
I guess I am not alone in wondering how different the Middle East might
have been had it not been for the seismic influence of Al-Ghazali, that revered scholar of Sunni thought, who in the 12th century argued that
science is not a liberator but a threat to the word of God and a danger
to the clerics, who had every incentive to thwart the thirst for
knowledge to maintain their power and privileges. rCLInnovatorrCY was not regarded as a term of praise but, as the scholar Toby Huff has put it,
rCLa term for a heretic and non-believer, subject to deathrCY.

The historian Bernard Lewis notes in What Went Wrong? that as the
influence of fundamentalist Islam percolated through the region during
the later Middle Ages, rCLthe relationship between Christendom and Islam
in the sciences was reversed. Those who had been disciples now became teachers.rCY Sayyid Jamal al-Din al-Afghani, a 19th-century intellectual, wrote that Arab civilisation, which had once rCLthrown such a live light
on the world, suddenly became extinguishedrCY.

To describe this as a catastrophe is an understatement. While
universities such as those at Bologna, Pisa and Oxford were slowly
freeing themselves from the grip of the church rCo notwithstanding the
arrest of Galileo in the 17th century rCo Islamic power structures were imprisoning the human mind within the cage of revealed truth. As a
Taliban leader put it recently: rCLWestern education is a sinrCY, ramming
his point home by explaining his view of rain. rCLWe believe it is a
creation of God rather than an evaporation caused by the sun that
condenses and becomes rain.rCY

And this, I believe, hints at the true prize for the Middle East in this accord. Western leaders must stop beating around the bush. The problem
in the region isnrCOt a lack of aid, investment or peace initiatives, all
of which in a sense put the cart before the horse. The problem is
fanaticism, a virus that will infect and ultimately kill whatever peace
is proposed. Fanatics, you see, lack that most civilising of virtues:
doubt. Seized by absolute truth, they are not merely justified in slaughtering infidels; they have a duty to do so. Look at those who most abhor this deal: yes, Hamas (a reluctant signatory), but also Hezbollah,
the Houthis and, most of all, the cult known as the Islamic Republic of
Iran, which has impoverished and repressed its own people.

I am no fan of Mohammed bin Salman (we should never forget his role in
the gruesome murder of a journalist) but should we not at least
acknowledge what Gulf regimes are up against? They are seeking to seed
the notion in a younger generation that they might benefit by freeing themselves from the grip of the madrassas; that by embracing peace and
trade with Israel they will experience prosperity and hope. That is why
I support any Arab leader who takes on the Wahhabist fanatics rCo while always acknowledging the moral ambiguity and messiness of any transition.

But let us also note the religious zealots in Israel, who oppose this
deal with similar swivel-eyed zeal. Look at Bezalel Smotrich, Itamar
Ben-Gvir and their followers, who proclaim that the land between the
river and the sea is rCLpromisedrCY to them by their own fictional deity in the sky; that settling the West Bank violently is divine will; that they
are the chosen ones and the Arabs the hated Amalek. They, to me, are
every bit as abhorrent as, say, the Taliban and perhaps even more
dangerous. For these extremists (along with the rapidly growing ultra-Orthodox population) are threatening the very foundations of the
one liberal miracle yet to unfold in the Middle East.

Yet let me finish back in the Islamic world. It may be politically
incorrect these days, but it is important to note that the 57 Muslim
majority nations have just one university in the top 200 of the world;
that there are two billion followers of Islam but only four winners of a Nobel science prize. A report in Nature magazine in 2002 found only
three scientific areas in which Islamic countries excelled:
desalination, falconry and camel reproduction. Over the past three
decades (despite huge investment by Gulf states), Muslim-majority
nations published just 5 per cent of science papers while making up
almost 15 per cent of the global population. In highly literate Iran, scientific progress occurs not because of the regime but despite it.

By citing these statistics, I am not seeking to demonise the people of Afghanistan, Yemen, Palestine and the like. On the contrary, they are as intelligent and capable as anyone else rCo indeed the best and brightest
have often enriched western universities by escaping the intellectual
bondage back home. I merely wish to underline the catastrophic influence
of fundamentalist Islam. Where Christianity gradually (and, yes,
reluctantly) adapted and moderated its theology in the light of
scientific progress, Muslim majority nations typically sought to shut it down. This, more than anything else, captures the otherwise mystifying divergence in the trajectory of two civilisations.

And itrCOs why the most urgent task of a provisional council in Gaza (and
any other governing authority in the Middle East) is to challenge what happens in schools and colleges, in madrassas and Islamic seminaries.
For it is only by severing the transmission mechanisms of the virus we
call fundamentalism, by thwarting the mass indoctrination that still
unfolds in large swathes of the Islamic world, that these brilliant
peoples can be freed from the historic trap into which they have fallen. This, ultimately, is where the launchpad of rational inquiry, scientific curiosity and economic progress is to be found. All else is fluff and
window dressing.

Matthew Syed

" Fanatics, you see, lack that most civilising of virtues:
doubt."
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.buddha.short.fat.guy

On 12/10/2025 14:51, Tara wrote:

On Oct 12, 2025 at 5:50:01rC>AM EDT, "Julian" <julianlzb87@gmail.com> wrote:

Religious fanaticism has been catastrophic for a region that was once
the intellectual hub of the world


A strange and unfamiliar feeling stirred as I sat down to write these
words. A feeling that has been largely absent over recent years when
writing this column. It rose up within me as I pondered the diplomatic
breakthrough by Donald Trump rCo a stunning achievement, even with all the >> caveats about the risks and obstacles ahead rCo and the prospects for an
entire region. Hope.

The opportunity for the Middle East is difficult to exaggerate, a region
from which my paternal ancestors trace their heritage, back as far as
the great Persian civilisation and its Islamic successor (my family tree
is chronicled in a direct line to Muhammad, the documents lovingly
preserved by my cousin Zafar). A region that could, with goodwill,
leadership and the courage of its peoples, experience the blessings of
the journey we call life rather than endemic hatred, bloodshed and conflict. >>
It is easy to forget that this region was once the intellectual hub of
the world, a place that spawned the myriad breakthroughs of the Islamic
Golden Age. I am not just talking about the great strides in algebra,
astronomy and mathematics but the vibrancy of a region described by the
philosopher Will Durant as rCLthe torchbearer of civilisationrCY. The
translation movement, rendering the wisdom of the ancient Greeks into
Arabic, was hailed by the Yale classicist Dimitri Gutas as rCLequal in
significance to the Italian RenaissancerCY. Ibn Khaldun, a 14th-century
scholar, contrasted the enlightenment of the region with the rCLsavageryrCY >> of Europe.

What, then, went wrong for the Muslim world? Why did it regress? One of
the presiding iniquities of much western scholarship is the myth that
all ills in the world can be traced to European colonialism, an untruth
that serves as a sop to the developing world, the comforting delusion
that the blame can be placed on outsiders and never on developments from
within. The truth, of course, is that the degeneration of Islamic
civilisation long predated colonialism and, in a certain sense,
permitted it. I am talking about religion or, perhaps more accurately,
that variant we call fundamentalism.

War and peace newsletter Tom Newton-DunnrCOs concise guide to global
conflict rCo with reasons for optimism. Sign up with one click
I guess I am not alone in wondering how different the Middle East might
have been had it not been for the seismic influence of Al-Ghazali, that
revered scholar of Sunni thought, who in the 12th century argued that
science is not a liberator but a threat to the word of God and a danger
to the clerics, who had every incentive to thwart the thirst for
knowledge to maintain their power and privileges. rCLInnovatorrCY was not
regarded as a term of praise but, as the scholar Toby Huff has put it,
rCLa term for a heretic and non-believer, subject to deathrCY.

The historian Bernard Lewis notes in What Went Wrong? that as the
influence of fundamentalist Islam percolated through the region during
the later Middle Ages, rCLthe relationship between Christendom and Islam
in the sciences was reversed. Those who had been disciples now became
teachers.rCY Sayyid Jamal al-Din al-Afghani, a 19th-century intellectual,
wrote that Arab civilisation, which had once rCLthrown such a live light
on the world, suddenly became extinguishedrCY.

To describe this as a catastrophe is an understatement. While
universities such as those at Bologna, Pisa and Oxford were slowly
freeing themselves from the grip of the church rCo notwithstanding the
arrest of Galileo in the 17th century rCo Islamic power structures were
imprisoning the human mind within the cage of revealed truth. As a
Taliban leader put it recently: rCLWestern education is a sinrCY, ramming
his point home by explaining his view of rain. rCLWe believe it is a
creation of God rather than an evaporation caused by the sun that
condenses and becomes rain.rCY

And this, I believe, hints at the true prize for the Middle East in this
accord. Western leaders must stop beating around the bush. The problem
in the region isnrCOt a lack of aid, investment or peace initiatives, all
of which in a sense put the cart before the horse. The problem is
fanaticism, a virus that will infect and ultimately kill whatever peace
is proposed. Fanatics, you see, lack that most civilising of virtues:
doubt. Seized by absolute truth, they are not merely justified in
slaughtering infidels; they have a duty to do so. Look at those who most
abhor this deal: yes, Hamas (a reluctant signatory), but also Hezbollah,
the Houthis and, most of all, the cult known as the Islamic Republic of
Iran, which has impoverished and repressed its own people.

I am no fan of Mohammed bin Salman (we should never forget his role in
the gruesome murder of a journalist) but should we not at least
acknowledge what Gulf regimes are up against? They are seeking to seed
the notion in a younger generation that they might benefit by freeing
themselves from the grip of the madrassas; that by embracing peace and
trade with Israel they will experience prosperity and hope. That is why
I support any Arab leader who takes on the Wahhabist fanatics rCo while
always acknowledging the moral ambiguity and messiness of any transition.

But let us also note the religious zealots in Israel, who oppose this
deal with similar swivel-eyed zeal. Look at Bezalel Smotrich, Itamar
Ben-Gvir and their followers, who proclaim that the land between the
river and the sea is rCLpromisedrCY to them by their own fictional deity in >> the sky; that settling the West Bank violently is divine will; that they
are the chosen ones and the Arabs the hated Amalek. They, to me, are
every bit as abhorrent as, say, the Taliban and perhaps even more
dangerous. For these extremists (along with the rapidly growing
ultra-Orthodox population) are threatening the very foundations of the
one liberal miracle yet to unfold in the Middle East.

Yet let me finish back in the Islamic world. It may be politically
incorrect these days, but it is important to note that the 57 Muslim
majority nations have just one university in the top 200 of the world;
that there are two billion followers of Islam but only four winners of a
Nobel science prize. A report in Nature magazine in 2002 found only
three scientific areas in which Islamic countries excelled:
desalination, falconry and camel reproduction. Over the past three
decades (despite huge investment by Gulf states), Muslim-majority
nations published just 5 per cent of science papers while making up
almost 15 per cent of the global population. In highly literate Iran,
scientific progress occurs not because of the regime but despite it.

By citing these statistics, I am not seeking to demonise the people of
Afghanistan, Yemen, Palestine and the like. On the contrary, they are as
intelligent and capable as anyone else rCo indeed the best and brightest
have often enriched western universities by escaping the intellectual
bondage back home. I merely wish to underline the catastrophic influence
of fundamentalist Islam. Where Christianity gradually (and, yes,
reluctantly) adapted and moderated its theology in the light of
scientific progress, Muslim majority nations typically sought to shut it
down. This, more than anything else, captures the otherwise mystifying
divergence in the trajectory of two civilisations.

And itrCOs why the most urgent task of a provisional council in Gaza (and
any other governing authority in the Middle East) is to challenge what
happens in schools and colleges, in madrassas and Islamic seminaries.
For it is only by severing the transmission mechanisms of the virus we
call fundamentalism, by thwarting the mass indoctrination that still
unfolds in large swathes of the Islamic world, that these brilliant
peoples can be freed from the historic trap into which they have fallen.
This, ultimately, is where the launchpad of rational inquiry, scientific
curiosity and economic progress is to be found. All else is fluff and
window dressing.


Matthew Syed

" Fanatics, you see, lack that most civilising of virtues:
doubt."

Here is some good news.

It is rumoured that Matthew might run for London Mayor.
It would great if Sadiq Khan was challenged by someone
with a non-fundamentalist Muslim story.
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.buddha.short.fat.guy

On Oct 12, 2025 at 10:22:29rC>AM EDT, "Julian" <julianlzb87@gmail.com> wrote:

On 12/10/2025 14:51, Tara wrote:

On Oct 12, 2025 at 5:50:01rC>AM EDT, "Julian" <julianlzb87@gmail.com> wrote: >>

Religious fanaticism has been catastrophic for a region that was once
the intellectual hub of the world


A strange and unfamiliar feeling stirred as I sat down to write these
words. A feeling that has been largely absent over recent years when
writing this column. It rose up within me as I pondered the diplomatic
breakthrough by Donald Trump rCo a stunning achievement, even with all the >>> caveats about the risks and obstacles ahead rCo and the prospects for an >>> entire region. Hope.

The opportunity for the Middle East is difficult to exaggerate, a region >>> from which my paternal ancestors trace their heritage, back as far as
the great Persian civilisation and its Islamic successor (my family tree >>> is chronicled in a direct line to Muhammad, the documents lovingly
preserved by my cousin Zafar). A region that could, with goodwill,
leadership and the courage of its peoples, experience the blessings of
the journey we call life rather than endemic hatred, bloodshed and conflict.

It is easy to forget that this region was once the intellectual hub of
the world, a place that spawned the myriad breakthroughs of the Islamic
Golden Age. I am not just talking about the great strides in algebra,
astronomy and mathematics but the vibrancy of a region described by the
philosopher Will Durant as rCLthe torchbearer of civilisationrCY. The
translation movement, rendering the wisdom of the ancient Greeks into
Arabic, was hailed by the Yale classicist Dimitri Gutas as rCLequal in
significance to the Italian RenaissancerCY. Ibn Khaldun, a 14th-century
scholar, contrasted the enlightenment of the region with the rCLsavageryrCY >>> of Europe.

What, then, went wrong for the Muslim world? Why did it regress? One of
the presiding iniquities of much western scholarship is the myth that
all ills in the world can be traced to European colonialism, an untruth
that serves as a sop to the developing world, the comforting delusion
that the blame can be placed on outsiders and never on developments from >>> within. The truth, of course, is that the degeneration of Islamic
civilisation long predated colonialism and, in a certain sense,
permitted it. I am talking about religion or, perhaps more accurately,
that variant we call fundamentalism.

War and peace newsletter Tom Newton-DunnrCOs concise guide to global
conflict rCo with reasons for optimism. Sign up with one click
I guess I am not alone in wondering how different the Middle East might
have been had it not been for the seismic influence of Al-Ghazali, that
revered scholar of Sunni thought, who in the 12th century argued that
science is not a liberator but a threat to the word of God and a danger
to the clerics, who had every incentive to thwart the thirst for
knowledge to maintain their power and privileges. rCLInnovatorrCY was not >>> regarded as a term of praise but, as the scholar Toby Huff has put it,
rCLa term for a heretic and non-believer, subject to deathrCY.

The historian Bernard Lewis notes in What Went Wrong? that as the
influence of fundamentalist Islam percolated through the region during
the later Middle Ages, rCLthe relationship between Christendom and Islam >>> in the sciences was reversed. Those who had been disciples now became
teachers.rCY Sayyid Jamal al-Din al-Afghani, a 19th-century intellectual, >>> wrote that Arab civilisation, which had once rCLthrown such a live light >>> on the world, suddenly became extinguishedrCY.

To describe this as a catastrophe is an understatement. While
universities such as those at Bologna, Pisa and Oxford were slowly
freeing themselves from the grip of the church rCo notwithstanding the
arrest of Galileo in the 17th century rCo Islamic power structures were
imprisoning the human mind within the cage of revealed truth. As a
Taliban leader put it recently: rCLWestern education is a sinrCY, ramming >>> his point home by explaining his view of rain. rCLWe believe it is a
creation of God rather than an evaporation caused by the sun that
condenses and becomes rain.rCY

And this, I believe, hints at the true prize for the Middle East in this >>> accord. Western leaders must stop beating around the bush. The problem
in the region isnrCOt a lack of aid, investment or peace initiatives, all >>> of which in a sense put the cart before the horse. The problem is
fanaticism, a virus that will infect and ultimately kill whatever peace
is proposed. Fanatics, you see, lack that most civilising of virtues:
doubt. Seized by absolute truth, they are not merely justified in
slaughtering infidels; they have a duty to do so. Look at those who most >>> abhor this deal: yes, Hamas (a reluctant signatory), but also Hezbollah, >>> the Houthis and, most of all, the cult known as the Islamic Republic of
Iran, which has impoverished and repressed its own people.

I am no fan of Mohammed bin Salman (we should never forget his role in
the gruesome murder of a journalist) but should we not at least
acknowledge what Gulf regimes are up against? They are seeking to seed
the notion in a younger generation that they might benefit by freeing
themselves from the grip of the madrassas; that by embracing peace and
trade with Israel they will experience prosperity and hope. That is why
I support any Arab leader who takes on the Wahhabist fanatics rCo while
always acknowledging the moral ambiguity and messiness of any transition. >>>
But let us also note the religious zealots in Israel, who oppose this
deal with similar swivel-eyed zeal. Look at Bezalel Smotrich, Itamar
Ben-Gvir and their followers, who proclaim that the land between the
river and the sea is rCLpromisedrCY to them by their own fictional deity in >>> the sky; that settling the West Bank violently is divine will; that they >>> are the chosen ones and the Arabs the hated Amalek. They, to me, are
every bit as abhorrent as, say, the Taliban and perhaps even more
dangerous. For these extremists (along with the rapidly growing
ultra-Orthodox population) are threatening the very foundations of the
one liberal miracle yet to unfold in the Middle East.

Yet let me finish back in the Islamic world. It may be politically
incorrect these days, but it is important to note that the 57 Muslim
majority nations have just one university in the top 200 of the world;
that there are two billion followers of Islam but only four winners of a >>> Nobel science prize. A report in Nature magazine in 2002 found only
three scientific areas in which Islamic countries excelled:
desalination, falconry and camel reproduction. Over the past three
decades (despite huge investment by Gulf states), Muslim-majority
nations published just 5 per cent of science papers while making up
almost 15 per cent of the global population. In highly literate Iran,
scientific progress occurs not because of the regime but despite it.

By citing these statistics, I am not seeking to demonise the people of
Afghanistan, Yemen, Palestine and the like. On the contrary, they are as >>> intelligent and capable as anyone else rCo indeed the best and brightest >>> have often enriched western universities by escaping the intellectual
bondage back home. I merely wish to underline the catastrophic influence >>> of fundamentalist Islam. Where Christianity gradually (and, yes,
reluctantly) adapted and moderated its theology in the light of
scientific progress, Muslim majority nations typically sought to shut it >>> down. This, more than anything else, captures the otherwise mystifying
divergence in the trajectory of two civilisations.

And itrCOs why the most urgent task of a provisional council in Gaza (and >>> any other governing authority in the Middle East) is to challenge what
happens in schools and colleges, in madrassas and Islamic seminaries.
For it is only by severing the transmission mechanisms of the virus we
call fundamentalism, by thwarting the mass indoctrination that still
unfolds in large swathes of the Islamic world, that these brilliant
peoples can be freed from the historic trap into which they have fallen. >>> This, ultimately, is where the launchpad of rational inquiry, scientific >>> curiosity and economic progress is to be found. All else is fluff and
window dressing.


Matthew Syed

" Fanatics, you see, lack that most civilising of virtues:
doubt."

Here is some good news.

It is rumoured that Matthew might run for London Mayor.
It would great if Sadiq Khan was challenged by someone
with a non-fundamentalist Muslim story.

fingers crossed for London.
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.buddha.short.fat.guy

On Sun, 12 Oct 2025 10:50:01 +0100, Julian <julianlzb87@gmail.com>
wrote:

Religious fanaticism has been catastrophic for a region that was once
the intellectual hub of the world

A strange and unfamiliar feeling stirred as I sat down to write these
words. A feeling that has been largely absent over recent years when
writing this column. It rose up within me as I pondered the diplomatic >breakthrough by Donald Trump u a stunning achievement, even with all the >caveats about the risks and obstacles ahead u and the prospects for an >entire region. Hope.

The opportunity for the Middle East is difficult to exaggerate, a region >from which my paternal ancestors trace their heritage, back as far as
the great Persian civilisation and its Islamic successor (my family tree
is chronicled in a direct line to Muhammad, the documents lovingly
preserved by my cousin Zafar). A region that could, with goodwill, >leadership and the courage of its peoples, experience the blessings of
the journey we call life rather than endemic hatred, bloodshed and conflict.

It is easy to forget that this region was once the intellectual hub of
the world, a place that spawned the myriad breakthroughs of the Islamic >Golden Age. I am not just talking about the great strides in algebra, >astronomy and mathematics but the vibrancy of a region described by the >philosopher Will Durant as othe torchbearer of civilisationo. The >translation movement, rendering the wisdom of the ancient Greeks into >Arabic, was hailed by the Yale classicist Dimitri Gutas as oequal in >significance to the Italian Renaissanceo. Ibn Khaldun, a 14th-century >scholar, contrasted the enlightenment of the region with the osavageryo
of Europe.

What, then, went wrong for the Muslim world? Why did it regress? One of
the presiding iniquities of much western scholarship is the myth that
all ills in the world can be traced to European colonialism, an untruth
that serves as a sop to the developing world, the comforting delusion
that the blame can be placed on outsiders and never on developments from >within. The truth, of course, is that the degeneration of Islamic >civilisation long predated colonialism and, in a certain sense,
permitted it. I am talking about religion or, perhaps more accurately,
that variant we call fundamentalism.

War and peace newsletter Tom Newton-DunnAs concise guide to global
conflict u with reasons for optimism. Sign up with one click
I guess I am not alone in wondering how different the Middle East might
have been had it not been for the seismic influence of Al-Ghazali, that >revered scholar of Sunni thought, who in the 12th century argued that >science is not a liberator but a threat to the word of God and a danger
to the clerics, who had every incentive to thwart the thirst for
knowledge to maintain their power and privileges. oInnovatoro was not >regarded as a term of praise but, as the scholar Toby Huff has put it,
oa term for a heretic and non-believer, subject to deatho.

The historian Bernard Lewis notes in What Went Wrong? that as the
influence of fundamentalist Islam percolated through the region during
the later Middle Ages, othe relationship between Christendom and Islam
in the sciences was reversed. Those who had been disciples now became >teachers.o Sayyid Jamal al-Din al-Afghani, a 19th-century intellectual, >wrote that Arab civilisation, which had once othrown such a live light
on the world, suddenly became extinguishedo.

To describe this as a catastrophe is an understatement. While
universities such as those at Bologna, Pisa and Oxford were slowly
freeing themselves from the grip of the church u notwithstanding the
arrest of Galileo in the 17th century u Islamic power structures were >imprisoning the human mind within the cage of revealed truth. As a
Taliban leader put it recently: oWestern education is a sino, ramming
his point home by explaining his view of rain. oWe believe it is a
creation of God rather than an evaporation caused by the sun that
condenses and becomes rain.o

And this, I believe, hints at the true prize for the Middle East in this >accord. Western leaders must stop beating around the bush. The problem
in the region isnAt a lack of aid, investment or peace initiatives, all
of which in a sense put the cart before the horse. The problem is >fanaticism, a virus that will infect and ultimately kill whatever peace
is proposed. Fanatics, you see, lack that most civilising of virtues:
doubt. Seized by absolute truth, they are not merely justified in >slaughtering infidels; they have a duty to do so. Look at those who most >abhor this deal: yes, Hamas (a reluctant signatory), but also Hezbollah,
the Houthis and, most of all, the cult known as the Islamic Republic of >Iran, which has impoverished and repressed its own people.

I am no fan of Mohammed bin Salman (we should never forget his role in
the gruesome murder of a journalist) but should we not at least
acknowledge what Gulf regimes are up against? They are seeking to seed
the notion in a younger generation that they might benefit by freeing >themselves from the grip of the madrassas; that by embracing peace and
trade with Israel they will experience prosperity and hope. That is why
I support any Arab leader who takes on the Wahhabist fanatics u while
always acknowledging the moral ambiguity and messiness of any transition.

But let us also note the religious zealots in Israel, who oppose this
deal with similar swivel-eyed zeal. Look at Bezalel Smotrich, Itamar >Ben-Gvir and their followers, who proclaim that the land between the
river and the sea is opromisedo to them by their own fictional deity in
the sky; that settling the West Bank violently is divine will; that they
are the chosen ones and the Arabs the hated Amalek. They, to me, are
every bit as abhorrent as, say, the Taliban and perhaps even more
dangerous. For these extremists (along with the rapidly growing >ultra-Orthodox population) are threatening the very foundations of the
one liberal miracle yet to unfold in the Middle East.

Yet let me finish back in the Islamic world. It may be politically
incorrect these days, but it is important to note that the 57 Muslim >majority nations have just one university in the top 200 of the world;
that there are two billion followers of Islam but only four winners of a >Nobel science prize. A report in Nature magazine in 2002 found only
three scientific areas in which Islamic countries excelled:
desalination, falconry and camel reproduction. Over the past three
decades (despite huge investment by Gulf states), Muslim-majority
nations published just 5 per cent of science papers while making up
almost 15 per cent of the global population. In highly literate Iran, >scientific progress occurs not because of the regime but despite it.

By citing these statistics, I am not seeking to demonise the people of >Afghanistan, Yemen, Palestine and the like. On the contrary, they are as >intelligent and capable as anyone else u indeed the best and brightest
have often enriched western universities by escaping the intellectual >bondage back home. I merely wish to underline the catastrophic influence
of fundamentalist Islam. Where Christianity gradually (and, yes, >reluctantly) adapted and moderated its theology in the light of
scientific progress,

Christianity is far from innocent of fundamentalist impulses.
Including, in recent years, capture by political interests in the us.

Muslim majority nations typically sought to shut it
down. This, more than anything else, captures the otherwise mystifying >divergence in the trajectory of two civilisations.

And itAs why the most urgent task of a provisional council in Gaza (and
any other governing authority in the Middle East) is to challenge what >happens in schools and colleges, in madrassas and Islamic seminaries.
For it is only by severing the transmission mechanisms of the virus we
call fundamentalism, by thwarting the mass indoctrination that still
unfolds in large swathes of the Islamic world, that these brilliant
peoples can be freed from the historic trap into which they have fallen. >This, ultimately, is where the launchpad of rational inquiry, scientific >curiosity and economic progress is to be found. All else is fluff and
window dressing.

Matthew Syed

Thanks, Matt, that was so very good.
--
Noah Sombrero mustachioed villain
Don't get political with me young man
or I'll tie you to a railroad track and
<<<talk>>> to <<<YOOooooo>>>
Who dares to talk to El Sombrero?
dares: Ned
does not dare: Julian shrinks in horror and warns others away

--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.buddha.short.fat.guy

On 10/12/2025 5:50 AM, Julian wrote:

Religious fanaticism has been catastrophic for a region that was once
the intellectual hub of the world

A strange and unfamiliar feeling stirred as I sat down to write these
words. A feeling that has been largely absent over recent years when
writing this column. It rose up within me as I pondered the diplomatic breakthrough by Donald Trump rCo a stunning achievement, even with all the caveats about the risks and obstacles ahead rCo and the prospects for an entire region. Hope.

The opportunity for the Middle East is difficult to exaggerate, a region from which my paternal ancestors trace their heritage, back as far as
the great Persian civilisation and its Islamic successor (my family tree
is chronicled in a direct line to Muhammad, the documents lovingly
preserved by my cousin Zafar). A region that could, with goodwill, leadership and the courage of its peoples, experience the blessings of
the journey we call life rather than endemic hatred, bloodshed and
conflict.

It is easy to forget that this region was once the intellectual hub of
the world, a place that spawned the myriad breakthroughs of the Islamic Golden Age. I am not just talking about the great strides in algebra, astronomy and mathematics but the vibrancy of a region described by the philosopher Will Durant as rCLthe torchbearer of civilisationrCY. The translation movement, rendering the wisdom of the ancient Greeks into Arabic, was hailed by the Yale classicist Dimitri Gutas as rCLequal in significance to the Italian RenaissancerCY. Ibn Khaldun, a 14th-century scholar, contrasted the enlightenment of the region with the rCLsavageryrCY of Europe.

What, then, went wrong for the Muslim world? Why did it regress? One of
the presiding iniquities of much western scholarship is the myth that
all ills in the world can be traced to European colonialism, an untruth
that serves as a sop to the developing world, the comforting delusion
that the blame can be placed on outsiders and never on developments from within. The truth, of course, is that the degeneration of Islamic civilisation long predated colonialism and, in a certain sense,
permitted it. I am talking about religion or, perhaps more accurately,
that variant we call fundamentalism.

War and peace newsletter Tom Newton-DunnrCOs concise guide to global conflict rCo with reasons for optimism.-a Sign up with one click
I guess I am not alone in wondering how different the Middle East might
have been had it not been for the seismic influence of Al-Ghazali, that revered scholar of Sunni thought, who in the 12th century argued that science is not a liberator but a threat to the word of God and a danger
to the clerics, who had every incentive to thwart the thirst for
knowledge to maintain their power and privileges. rCLInnovatorrCY was not regarded as a term of praise but, as the scholar Toby Huff has put it,
rCLa term for a heretic and non-believer, subject to deathrCY.

The historian Bernard Lewis notes in What Went Wrong? that as the
influence of fundamentalist Islam percolated through the region during
the later Middle Ages, rCLthe relationship between Christendom and Islam
in the sciences was reversed. Those who had been disciples now became teachers.rCY Sayyid Jamal al-Din al-Afghani, a 19th-century intellectual, wrote that Arab civilisation, which had once rCLthrown such a live light
on the world, suddenly became extinguishedrCY.

To describe this as a catastrophe is an understatement. While
universities such as those at Bologna, Pisa and Oxford were slowly
freeing themselves from the grip of the church rCo notwithstanding the arrest of Galileo in the 17th century rCo Islamic power structures were imprisoning the human mind within the cage of revealed truth. As a
Taliban leader put it recently: rCLWestern education is a sinrCY, ramming his point home by explaining his view of rain. rCLWe believe it is a creation of God rather than an evaporation caused by the sun that
condenses and becomes rain.rCY

And this, I believe, hints at the true prize for the Middle East in this accord. Western leaders must stop beating around the bush. The problem
in the region isnrCOt a lack of aid, investment or peace initiatives, all
of which in a sense put the cart before the horse. The problem is fanaticism, a virus that will infect and ultimately kill whatever peace
is proposed. Fanatics, you see, lack that most civilising of virtues:
doubt. Seized by absolute truth, they are not merely justified in slaughtering infidels; they have a duty to do so. Look at those who most abhor this deal: yes, Hamas (a reluctant signatory), but also Hezbollah,
the Houthis and, most of all, the cult known as the Islamic Republic of Iran, which has impoverished and repressed its own people.

I am no fan of Mohammed bin Salman (we should never forget his role in
the gruesome murder of a journalist) but should we not at least
acknowledge what Gulf regimes are up against? They are seeking to seed
the notion in a younger generation that they might benefit by freeing themselves from the grip of the madrassas; that by embracing peace and
trade with Israel they will experience prosperity and hope. That is why
I support any Arab leader who takes on the Wahhabist fanatics rCo while always acknowledging the moral ambiguity and messiness of any transition.

But let us also note the religious zealots in Israel, who oppose this
deal with similar swivel-eyed zeal. Look at Bezalel Smotrich, Itamar Ben-Gvir and their followers, who proclaim that the land between the
river and the sea is rCLpromisedrCY to them by their own fictional deity in the sky; that settling the West Bank violently is divine will; that they
are the chosen ones and the Arabs the hated Amalek. They, to me, are
every bit as abhorrent as, say, the Taliban and perhaps even more
dangerous. For these extremists (along with the rapidly growing ultra- Orthodox population) are threatening the very foundations of the one
liberal miracle yet to unfold in the Middle East.

Yet let me finish back in the Islamic world. It may be politically
incorrect these days, but it is important to note that the 57 Muslim majority nations have just one university in the top 200 of the world;
that there are two billion followers of Islam but only four winners of a Nobel science prize. A report in Nature magazine in 2002 found only
three scientific areas in which Islamic countries excelled:
desalination, falconry and camel reproduction. Over the past three
decades (despite huge investment by Gulf states), Muslim-majority
nations published just 5 per cent of science papers while making up
almost 15 per cent of the global population. In highly literate Iran, scientific progress occurs not because of the regime but despite it.

By citing these statistics, I am not seeking to demonise the people of Afghanistan, Yemen, Palestine and the like. On the contrary, they are as intelligent and capable as anyone else rCo indeed the best and brightest have often enriched western universities by escaping the intellectual bondage back home. I merely wish to underline the catastrophic influence
of fundamentalist Islam. Where Christianity gradually (and, yes, reluctantly) adapted and moderated its theology in the light of
scientific progress, Muslim majority nations typically sought to shut it down. This, more than anything else, captures the otherwise mystifying divergence in the trajectory of two civilisations.

And itrCOs why the most urgent task of a provisional council in Gaza (and any other governing authority in the Middle East) is to challenge what happens in schools and colleges, in madrassas and Islamic seminaries.
For it is only by severing the transmission mechanisms of the virus we
call fundamentalism, by thwarting the mass indoctrination that still
unfolds in large swathes of the Islamic world, that these brilliant
peoples can be freed from the historic trap into which they have fallen. This, ultimately, is where the launchpad of rational inquiry, scientific curiosity and economic progress is to be found. All else is fluff and
window dressing.

Matthew Syed

Syed is approaching religion as the problem, a negative proposition, and
seems to believe he stands above that sort of thing. The problem with
this is it alienates rather than uplifts and inspires.

People who say that god is simply a "fictional deity in the sky" do not actually understand those beliefs at all. And they understand the people
who hold them even less.

There's a certain quality, a very real transcendental beauty, in seeing
rain as "a creation of God". The thing is, it can be understood to be
both that and the process of evaporation and condensation at the same
time. And I believe it must be both because we as humans seem to have a
need for that sense of magic and wonder in order to thrive. The idea
that we don't (and maybe even can't) know everything, that there is
mystery in the world, inspires and humbles. That combination is the
necessary pathway to understanding and joy which give life meaning.

There's a theory that says the ideas that ultimately survive over time
are the ones that enhance the survival of the people holding those ideas.

There's no guarantee that every good idea makes it past the survival
filter, or that all bad ideas are filtered out immediately. But over
time, given the chance, memetic theory says that's how it works.

Denying the mystical and the mysterious aspects of existence won't
convince or persuade those who hold those ideas. I believe that's true
because a strictly materialistic explanation of reality is lacking
something vital and necessary for long term human flourishing. And
that's why a dogmatic materialistic framework is not going to make it.
Because it denies what makes us human.

--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.buddha.short.fat.guy

On Sun, 12 Oct 2025 11:34:48 -0400, Wilson <Wilson@nowhere.invalid>
wrote:

On 10/12/2025 5:50 AM, Julian wrote:

Religious fanaticism has been catastrophic for a region that was once
the intellectual hub of the world


A strange and unfamiliar feeling stirred as I sat down to write these
words. A feeling that has been largely absent over recent years when
writing this column. It rose up within me as I pondered the diplomatic
breakthrough by Donald Trump u a stunning achievement, even with all the
caveats about the risks and obstacles ahead u and the prospects for an
entire region. Hope.

The opportunity for the Middle East is difficult to exaggerate, a region
from which my paternal ancestors trace their heritage, back as far as
the great Persian civilisation and its Islamic successor (my family tree
is chronicled in a direct line to Muhammad, the documents lovingly
preserved by my cousin Zafar). A region that could, with goodwill,
leadership and the courage of its peoples, experience the blessings of
the journey we call life rather than endemic hatred, bloodshed and
conflict.

It is easy to forget that this region was once the intellectual hub of
the world, a place that spawned the myriad breakthroughs of the Islamic
Golden Age. I am not just talking about the great strides in algebra,
astronomy and mathematics but the vibrancy of a region described by the
philosopher Will Durant as othe torchbearer of civilisationo. The
translation movement, rendering the wisdom of the ancient Greeks into
Arabic, was hailed by the Yale classicist Dimitri Gutas as oequal in
significance to the Italian Renaissanceo. Ibn Khaldun, a 14th-century
scholar, contrasted the enlightenment of the region with the osavageryo
of Europe.

What, then, went wrong for the Muslim world? Why did it regress? One of
the presiding iniquities of much western scholarship is the myth that
all ills in the world can be traced to European colonialism, an untruth
that serves as a sop to the developing world, the comforting delusion
that the blame can be placed on outsiders and never on developments from
within. The truth, of course, is that the degeneration of Islamic
civilisation long predated colonialism and, in a certain sense,
permitted it. I am talking about religion or, perhaps more accurately,
that variant we call fundamentalism.

War and peace newsletter Tom Newton-DunnAs concise guide to global
conflict u with reasons for optimism.a Sign up with one click
I guess I am not alone in wondering how different the Middle East might
have been had it not been for the seismic influence of Al-Ghazali, that
revered scholar of Sunni thought, who in the 12th century argued that
science is not a liberator but a threat to the word of God and a danger
to the clerics, who had every incentive to thwart the thirst for
knowledge to maintain their power and privileges. oInnovatoro was not
regarded as a term of praise but, as the scholar Toby Huff has put it,
oa term for a heretic and non-believer, subject to deatho.

The historian Bernard Lewis notes in What Went Wrong? that as the
influence of fundamentalist Islam percolated through the region during
the later Middle Ages, othe relationship between Christendom and Islam
in the sciences was reversed. Those who had been disciples now became
teachers.o Sayyid Jamal al-Din al-Afghani, a 19th-century intellectual,
wrote that Arab civilisation, which had once othrown such a live light
on the world, suddenly became extinguishedo.

To describe this as a catastrophe is an understatement. While
universities such as those at Bologna, Pisa and Oxford were slowly
freeing themselves from the grip of the church u notwithstanding the
arrest of Galileo in the 17th century u Islamic power structures were
imprisoning the human mind within the cage of revealed truth. As a
Taliban leader put it recently: oWestern education is a sino, ramming
his point home by explaining his view of rain. oWe believe it is a
creation of God rather than an evaporation caused by the sun that
condenses and becomes rain.o

And this, I believe, hints at the true prize for the Middle East in this
accord. Western leaders must stop beating around the bush. The problem
in the region isnAt a lack of aid, investment or peace initiatives, all
of which in a sense put the cart before the horse. The problem is
fanaticism, a virus that will infect and ultimately kill whatever peace
is proposed. Fanatics, you see, lack that most civilising of virtues:
doubt. Seized by absolute truth, they are not merely justified in
slaughtering infidels; they have a duty to do so. Look at those who most
abhor this deal: yes, Hamas (a reluctant signatory), but also Hezbollah,
the Houthis and, most of all, the cult known as the Islamic Republic of
Iran, which has impoverished and repressed its own people.

I am no fan of Mohammed bin Salman (we should never forget his role in
the gruesome murder of a journalist) but should we not at least
acknowledge what Gulf regimes are up against? They are seeking to seed
the notion in a younger generation that they might benefit by freeing
themselves from the grip of the madrassas; that by embracing peace and
trade with Israel they will experience prosperity and hope. That is why
I support any Arab leader who takes on the Wahhabist fanatics u while
always acknowledging the moral ambiguity and messiness of any transition.

But let us also note the religious zealots in Israel, who oppose this
deal with similar swivel-eyed zeal. Look at Bezalel Smotrich, Itamar
Ben-Gvir and their followers, who proclaim that the land between the
river and the sea is opromisedo to them by their own fictional deity in
the sky; that settling the West Bank violently is divine will; that they
are the chosen ones and the Arabs the hated Amalek. They, to me, are
every bit as abhorrent as, say, the Taliban and perhaps even more
dangerous. For these extremists (along with the rapidly growing ultra-
Orthodox population) are threatening the very foundations of the one
liberal miracle yet to unfold in the Middle East.

Yet let me finish back in the Islamic world. It may be politically
incorrect these days, but it is important to note that the 57 Muslim
majority nations have just one university in the top 200 of the world;
that there are two billion followers of Islam but only four winners of a
Nobel science prize. A report in Nature magazine in 2002 found only
three scientific areas in which Islamic countries excelled:
desalination, falconry and camel reproduction. Over the past three
decades (despite huge investment by Gulf states), Muslim-majority
nations published just 5 per cent of science papers while making up
almost 15 per cent of the global population. In highly literate Iran,
scientific progress occurs not because of the regime but despite it.

By citing these statistics, I am not seeking to demonise the people of
Afghanistan, Yemen, Palestine and the like. On the contrary, they are as
intelligent and capable as anyone else u indeed the best and brightest
have often enriched western universities by escaping the intellectual
bondage back home. I merely wish to underline the catastrophic influence
of fundamentalist Islam. Where Christianity gradually (and, yes,
reluctantly) adapted and moderated its theology in the light of
scientific progress, Muslim majority nations typically sought to shut it
down. This, more than anything else, captures the otherwise mystifying
divergence in the trajectory of two civilisations.

And itAs why the most urgent task of a provisional council in Gaza (and
any other governing authority in the Middle East) is to challenge what
happens in schools and colleges, in madrassas and Islamic seminaries.
For it is only by severing the transmission mechanisms of the virus we
call fundamentalism, by thwarting the mass indoctrination that still
unfolds in large swathes of the Islamic world, that these brilliant
peoples can be freed from the historic trap into which they have fallen.
This, ultimately, is where the launchpad of rational inquiry, scientific
curiosity and economic progress is to be found. All else is fluff and
window dressing.


Matthew Syed

Syed is approaching religion as the problem, a negative proposition, and >seems to believe he stands above that sort of thing. The problem with
this is it alienates rather than uplifts and inspires.

I don't think we can expect the truth of any matter to uplift and
inspire. Usually it is quite boring.

People who say that god is simply a "fictional deity in the sky" do not >actually understand those beliefs at all. And they understand the people
who hold them even less.

Matt said no such thing. Now go back and read him again. Notice that
it is not "fictional deity in the sky", but fundamentalist belief
concerning that deity, including the idea that everything there is to
know about that deity has already been delivered by said deity in
sacred texts. All of which is literally and completely absolutely
true.

There's a certain quality, a very real transcendental beauty, in seeing
rain as "a creation of God". The thing is, it can be understood to be
both that and the process of evaporation and condensation at the same
time. And I believe it must be both because we as humans seem to have a
need for that sense of magic and wonder in order to thrive. The idea
that we don't (and maybe even can't) know everything, that there is
mystery in the world, inspires and humbles. That combination is the >necessary pathway to understanding and joy which give life meaning.

There's a theory that says the ideas that ultimately survive over time
are the ones that enhance the survival of the people holding those ideas.

There's no guarantee that every good idea makes it past the survival
filter, or that all bad ideas are filtered out immediately. But over
time, given the chance, memetic theory says that's how it works.

Denying the mystical and the mysterious aspects of existence won't

You are running to unreasonable extremes in order to be able to deny
what he says.

convince or persuade those who hold those ideas. I believe that's true >because a strictly materialistic explanation of reality is lacking
something vital and necessary for long term human flourishing. And
that's why a dogmatic materialistic framework is not going to make it. >Because it denies what makes us human.

--
Noah Sombrero mustachioed villain
Don't get political with me young man
or I'll tie you to a railroad track and
<<<talk>>> to <<<YOOooooo>>>
Who dares to talk to El Sombrero?
dares: Ned
does not dare: Julian shrinks in horror and warns others away

--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.buddha.short.fat.guy

On Oct 12, 2025 at 11:34:48rC>AM EDT, "Wilson" <Wilson@nowhere.invalid> wrote:

On 10/12/2025 5:50 AM, Julian wrote:

Religious fanaticism has been catastrophic for a region that was once
the intellectual hub of the world


A strange and unfamiliar feeling stirred as I sat down to write these
words. A feeling that has been largely absent over recent years when
writing this column. It rose up within me as I pondered the diplomatic
breakthrough by Donald Trump rCo a stunning achievement, even with all the >> caveats about the risks and obstacles ahead rCo and the prospects for an
entire region. Hope.

The opportunity for the Middle East is difficult to exaggerate, a region
from which my paternal ancestors trace their heritage, back as far as
the great Persian civilisation and its Islamic successor (my family tree
is chronicled in a direct line to Muhammad, the documents lovingly
preserved by my cousin Zafar). A region that could, with goodwill,
leadership and the courage of its peoples, experience the blessings of
the journey we call life rather than endemic hatred, bloodshed and
conflict.

It is easy to forget that this region was once the intellectual hub of
the world, a place that spawned the myriad breakthroughs of the Islamic
Golden Age. I am not just talking about the great strides in algebra,
astronomy and mathematics but the vibrancy of a region described by the
philosopher Will Durant as rCLthe torchbearer of civilisationrCY. The
translation movement, rendering the wisdom of the ancient Greeks into
Arabic, was hailed by the Yale classicist Dimitri Gutas as rCLequal in
significance to the Italian RenaissancerCY. Ibn Khaldun, a 14th-century
scholar, contrasted the enlightenment of the region with the rCLsavageryrCY >> of Europe.

What, then, went wrong for the Muslim world? Why did it regress? One of
the presiding iniquities of much western scholarship is the myth that
all ills in the world can be traced to European colonialism, an untruth
that serves as a sop to the developing world, the comforting delusion
that the blame can be placed on outsiders and never on developments from
within. The truth, of course, is that the degeneration of Islamic
civilisation long predated colonialism and, in a certain sense,
permitted it. I am talking about religion or, perhaps more accurately,
that variant we call fundamentalism.

War and peace newsletter Tom Newton-DunnrCOs concise guide to global
conflict rCo with reasons for optimism. Sign up with one click
I guess I am not alone in wondering how different the Middle East might
have been had it not been for the seismic influence of Al-Ghazali, that
revered scholar of Sunni thought, who in the 12th century argued that
science is not a liberator but a threat to the word of God and a danger
to the clerics, who had every incentive to thwart the thirst for
knowledge to maintain their power and privileges. rCLInnovatorrCY was not
regarded as a term of praise but, as the scholar Toby Huff has put it,
rCLa term for a heretic and non-believer, subject to deathrCY.

The historian Bernard Lewis notes in What Went Wrong? that as the
influence of fundamentalist Islam percolated through the region during
the later Middle Ages, rCLthe relationship between Christendom and Islam
in the sciences was reversed. Those who had been disciples now became
teachers.rCY Sayyid Jamal al-Din al-Afghani, a 19th-century intellectual,
wrote that Arab civilisation, which had once rCLthrown such a live light
on the world, suddenly became extinguishedrCY.

To describe this as a catastrophe is an understatement. While
universities such as those at Bologna, Pisa and Oxford were slowly
freeing themselves from the grip of the church rCo notwithstanding the
arrest of Galileo in the 17th century rCo Islamic power structures were
imprisoning the human mind within the cage of revealed truth. As a
Taliban leader put it recently: rCLWestern education is a sinrCY, ramming
his point home by explaining his view of rain. rCLWe believe it is a
creation of God rather than an evaporation caused by the sun that
condenses and becomes rain.rCY

And this, I believe, hints at the true prize for the Middle East in this
accord. Western leaders must stop beating around the bush. The problem
in the region isnrCOt a lack of aid, investment or peace initiatives, all
of which in a sense put the cart before the horse. The problem is
fanaticism, a virus that will infect and ultimately kill whatever peace
is proposed. Fanatics, you see, lack that most civilising of virtues:
doubt. Seized by absolute truth, they are not merely justified in
slaughtering infidels; they have a duty to do so. Look at those who most
abhor this deal: yes, Hamas (a reluctant signatory), but also Hezbollah,
the Houthis and, most of all, the cult known as the Islamic Republic of
Iran, which has impoverished and repressed its own people.

I am no fan of Mohammed bin Salman (we should never forget his role in
the gruesome murder of a journalist) but should we not at least
acknowledge what Gulf regimes are up against? They are seeking to seed
the notion in a younger generation that they might benefit by freeing
themselves from the grip of the madrassas; that by embracing peace and
trade with Israel they will experience prosperity and hope. That is why
I support any Arab leader who takes on the Wahhabist fanatics rCo while
always acknowledging the moral ambiguity and messiness of any transition.

But let us also note the religious zealots in Israel, who oppose this
deal with similar swivel-eyed zeal. Look at Bezalel Smotrich, Itamar
Ben-Gvir and their followers, who proclaim that the land between the
river and the sea is rCLpromisedrCY to them by their own fictional deity in >> the sky; that settling the West Bank violently is divine will; that they
are the chosen ones and the Arabs the hated Amalek. They, to me, are
every bit as abhorrent as, say, the Taliban and perhaps even more
dangerous. For these extremists (along with the rapidly growing ultra-
Orthodox population) are threatening the very foundations of the one
liberal miracle yet to unfold in the Middle East.

Yet let me finish back in the Islamic world. It may be politically
incorrect these days, but it is important to note that the 57 Muslim
majority nations have just one university in the top 200 of the world;
that there are two billion followers of Islam but only four winners of a
Nobel science prize. A report in Nature magazine in 2002 found only
three scientific areas in which Islamic countries excelled:
desalination, falconry and camel reproduction. Over the past three
decades (despite huge investment by Gulf states), Muslim-majority
nations published just 5 per cent of science papers while making up
almost 15 per cent of the global population. In highly literate Iran,
scientific progress occurs not because of the regime but despite it.

By citing these statistics, I am not seeking to demonise the people of
Afghanistan, Yemen, Palestine and the like. On the contrary, they are as
intelligent and capable as anyone else rCo indeed the best and brightest
have often enriched western universities by escaping the intellectual
bondage back home. I merely wish to underline the catastrophic influence
of fundamentalist Islam. Where Christianity gradually (and, yes,
reluctantly) adapted and moderated its theology in the light of
scientific progress, Muslim majority nations typically sought to shut it
down. This, more than anything else, captures the otherwise mystifying
divergence in the trajectory of two civilisations.

And itrCOs why the most urgent task of a provisional council in Gaza (and
any other governing authority in the Middle East) is to challenge what
happens in schools and colleges, in madrassas and Islamic seminaries.
For it is only by severing the transmission mechanisms of the virus we
call fundamentalism, by thwarting the mass indoctrination that still
unfolds in large swathes of the Islamic world, that these brilliant
peoples can be freed from the historic trap into which they have fallen.
This, ultimately, is where the launchpad of rational inquiry, scientific
curiosity and economic progress is to be found. All else is fluff and
window dressing.


Matthew Syed

Syed is approaching religion as the problem, a negative proposition, and seems to believe he stands above that sort of thing. The problem with
this is it alienates rather than uplifts and inspires.

People who say that god is simply a "fictional deity in the sky" do not actually understand those beliefs at all. And they understand the people
who hold them even less.

There's a certain quality, a very real transcendental beauty, in seeing
rain as "a creation of God". The thing is, it can be understood to be
both that and the process of evaporation and condensation at the same
time. And I believe it must be both because we as humans seem to have a
need for that sense of magic and wonder in order to thrive. The idea
that we don't (and maybe even can't) know everything, that there is
mystery in the world, inspires and humbles. That combination is the
necessary pathway to understanding and joy which give life meaning.

There's a theory that says the ideas that ultimately survive over time
are the ones that enhance the survival of the people holding those ideas.

There's no guarantee that every good idea makes it past the survival
filter, or that all bad ideas are filtered out immediately. But over
time, given the chance, memetic theory says that's how it works.

Denying the mystical and the mysterious aspects of existence won't
convince or persuade those who hold those ideas. I believe that's true because a strictly materialistic explanation of reality is lacking
something vital and necessary for long term human flourishing. And
that's why a dogmatic materialistic framework is not going to make it. Because it denies what makes us human.

I agree with all that you say. Syed would agree as well, I think. He qualified though, saying: "I am talking about religion or, perhaps more accurately, that variant we call fundamentalism."
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.buddha.short.fat.guy

On 10/12/2025 1:08 PM, Tara wrote:

On Oct 12, 2025 at 11:34:48rC>AM EDT, "Wilson" <Wilson@nowhere.invalid> wrote:

On 10/12/2025 5:50 AM, Julian wrote:

Religious fanaticism has been catastrophic for a region that was once
the intellectual hub of the world


A strange and unfamiliar feeling stirred as I sat down to write these
words. A feeling that has been largely absent over recent years when
writing this column. It rose up within me as I pondered the diplomatic
breakthrough by Donald Trump rCo a stunning achievement, even with all the >>> caveats about the risks and obstacles ahead rCo and the prospects for an >>> entire region. Hope.

The opportunity for the Middle East is difficult to exaggerate, a region >>> from which my paternal ancestors trace their heritage, back as far as
the great Persian civilisation and its Islamic successor (my family tree >>> is chronicled in a direct line to Muhammad, the documents lovingly
preserved by my cousin Zafar). A region that could, with goodwill,
leadership and the courage of its peoples, experience the blessings of
the journey we call life rather than endemic hatred, bloodshed and
conflict.

It is easy to forget that this region was once the intellectual hub of
the world, a place that spawned the myriad breakthroughs of the Islamic
Golden Age. I am not just talking about the great strides in algebra,
astronomy and mathematics but the vibrancy of a region described by the
philosopher Will Durant as rCLthe torchbearer of civilisationrCY. The
translation movement, rendering the wisdom of the ancient Greeks into
Arabic, was hailed by the Yale classicist Dimitri Gutas as rCLequal in
significance to the Italian RenaissancerCY. Ibn Khaldun, a 14th-century
scholar, contrasted the enlightenment of the region with the rCLsavageryrCY >>> of Europe.

What, then, went wrong for the Muslim world? Why did it regress? One of
the presiding iniquities of much western scholarship is the myth that
all ills in the world can be traced to European colonialism, an untruth
that serves as a sop to the developing world, the comforting delusion
that the blame can be placed on outsiders and never on developments from >>> within. The truth, of course, is that the degeneration of Islamic
civilisation long predated colonialism and, in a certain sense,
permitted it. I am talking about religion or, perhaps more accurately,
that variant we call fundamentalism.

War and peace newsletter Tom Newton-DunnrCOs concise guide to global
conflict rCo with reasons for optimism. Sign up with one click
I guess I am not alone in wondering how different the Middle East might
have been had it not been for the seismic influence of Al-Ghazali, that
revered scholar of Sunni thought, who in the 12th century argued that
science is not a liberator but a threat to the word of God and a danger
to the clerics, who had every incentive to thwart the thirst for
knowledge to maintain their power and privileges. rCLInnovatorrCY was not >>> regarded as a term of praise but, as the scholar Toby Huff has put it,
rCLa term for a heretic and non-believer, subject to deathrCY.

The historian Bernard Lewis notes in What Went Wrong? that as the
influence of fundamentalist Islam percolated through the region during
the later Middle Ages, rCLthe relationship between Christendom and Islam >>> in the sciences was reversed. Those who had been disciples now became
teachers.rCY Sayyid Jamal al-Din al-Afghani, a 19th-century intellectual, >>> wrote that Arab civilisation, which had once rCLthrown such a live light >>> on the world, suddenly became extinguishedrCY.

To describe this as a catastrophe is an understatement. While
universities such as those at Bologna, Pisa and Oxford were slowly
freeing themselves from the grip of the church rCo notwithstanding the
arrest of Galileo in the 17th century rCo Islamic power structures were
imprisoning the human mind within the cage of revealed truth. As a
Taliban leader put it recently: rCLWestern education is a sinrCY, ramming >>> his point home by explaining his view of rain. rCLWe believe it is a
creation of God rather than an evaporation caused by the sun that
condenses and becomes rain.rCY

And this, I believe, hints at the true prize for the Middle East in this >>> accord. Western leaders must stop beating around the bush. The problem
in the region isnrCOt a lack of aid, investment or peace initiatives, all >>> of which in a sense put the cart before the horse. The problem is
fanaticism, a virus that will infect and ultimately kill whatever peace
is proposed. Fanatics, you see, lack that most civilising of virtues:
doubt. Seized by absolute truth, they are not merely justified in
slaughtering infidels; they have a duty to do so. Look at those who most >>> abhor this deal: yes, Hamas (a reluctant signatory), but also Hezbollah, >>> the Houthis and, most of all, the cult known as the Islamic Republic of
Iran, which has impoverished and repressed its own people.

I am no fan of Mohammed bin Salman (we should never forget his role in
the gruesome murder of a journalist) but should we not at least
acknowledge what Gulf regimes are up against? They are seeking to seed
the notion in a younger generation that they might benefit by freeing
themselves from the grip of the madrassas; that by embracing peace and
trade with Israel they will experience prosperity and hope. That is why
I support any Arab leader who takes on the Wahhabist fanatics rCo while
always acknowledging the moral ambiguity and messiness of any transition. >>>
But let us also note the religious zealots in Israel, who oppose this
deal with similar swivel-eyed zeal. Look at Bezalel Smotrich, Itamar
Ben-Gvir and their followers, who proclaim that the land between the
river and the sea is rCLpromisedrCY to them by their own fictional deity in >>> the sky; that settling the West Bank violently is divine will; that they >>> are the chosen ones and the Arabs the hated Amalek. They, to me, are
every bit as abhorrent as, say, the Taliban and perhaps even more
dangerous. For these extremists (along with the rapidly growing ultra-
Orthodox population) are threatening the very foundations of the one
liberal miracle yet to unfold in the Middle East.

Yet let me finish back in the Islamic world. It may be politically
incorrect these days, but it is important to note that the 57 Muslim
majority nations have just one university in the top 200 of the world;
that there are two billion followers of Islam but only four winners of a >>> Nobel science prize. A report in Nature magazine in 2002 found only
three scientific areas in which Islamic countries excelled:
desalination, falconry and camel reproduction. Over the past three
decades (despite huge investment by Gulf states), Muslim-majority
nations published just 5 per cent of science papers while making up
almost 15 per cent of the global population. In highly literate Iran,
scientific progress occurs not because of the regime but despite it.

By citing these statistics, I am not seeking to demonise the people of
Afghanistan, Yemen, Palestine and the like. On the contrary, they are as >>> intelligent and capable as anyone else rCo indeed the best and brightest >>> have often enriched western universities by escaping the intellectual
bondage back home. I merely wish to underline the catastrophic influence >>> of fundamentalist Islam. Where Christianity gradually (and, yes,
reluctantly) adapted and moderated its theology in the light of
scientific progress, Muslim majority nations typically sought to shut it >>> down. This, more than anything else, captures the otherwise mystifying
divergence in the trajectory of two civilisations.

And itrCOs why the most urgent task of a provisional council in Gaza (and >>> any other governing authority in the Middle East) is to challenge what
happens in schools and colleges, in madrassas and Islamic seminaries.
For it is only by severing the transmission mechanisms of the virus we
call fundamentalism, by thwarting the mass indoctrination that still
unfolds in large swathes of the Islamic world, that these brilliant
peoples can be freed from the historic trap into which they have fallen. >>> This, ultimately, is where the launchpad of rational inquiry, scientific >>> curiosity and economic progress is to be found. All else is fluff and
window dressing.


Matthew Syed

Syed is approaching religion as the problem, a negative proposition, and
seems to believe he stands above that sort of thing. The problem with
this is it alienates rather than uplifts and inspires.

People who say that god is simply a "fictional deity in the sky" do not
actually understand those beliefs at all. And they understand the people
who hold them even less.

There's a certain quality, a very real transcendental beauty, in seeing
rain as "a creation of God". The thing is, it can be understood to be
both that and the process of evaporation and condensation at the same
time. And I believe it must be both because we as humans seem to have a
need for that sense of magic and wonder in order to thrive. The idea
that we don't (and maybe even can't) know everything, that there is
mystery in the world, inspires and humbles. That combination is the
necessary pathway to understanding and joy which give life meaning.

There's a theory that says the ideas that ultimately survive over time
are the ones that enhance the survival of the people holding those ideas.

There's no guarantee that every good idea makes it past the survival
filter, or that all bad ideas are filtered out immediately. But over
time, given the chance, memetic theory says that's how it works.

Denying the mystical and the mysterious aspects of existence won't
convince or persuade those who hold those ideas. I believe that's true
because a strictly materialistic explanation of reality is lacking
something vital and necessary for long term human flourishing. And
that's why a dogmatic materialistic framework is not going to make it.
Because it denies what makes us human.

I agree with all that you say. Syed would agree as well, I think. He qualified
though, saying: "I am talking about religion or, perhaps more accurately, that
variant we call fundamentalism."

Yes he was talking about fundamentalism.

I was criticizing, "But let us also note the religious zealots in
Israel...who proclaim that the land between the river and the sea is rCLpromisedrCY to them by their own fictional deity in the sky".

Whether you think the modern state of Israel is a good idea or not,
that's a bad take and the sort of thing atheists often say, showing they
have no clue.

--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.buddha.short.fat.guy

On Oct 13, 2025 at 12:06:51rC>PM EDT, "Wilson" <Wilson@nowhere.invalid> wrote:

On 10/12/2025 1:08 PM, Tara wrote:

On Oct 12, 2025 at 11:34:48rC>AM EDT, "Wilson" <Wilson@nowhere.invalid> wrote:

On 10/12/2025 5:50 AM, Julian wrote:

Religious fanaticism has been catastrophic for a region that was once
the intellectual hub of the world


A strange and unfamiliar feeling stirred as I sat down to write these
words. A feeling that has been largely absent over recent years when
writing this column. It rose up within me as I pondered the diplomatic >>>> breakthrough by Donald Trump rCo a stunning achievement, even with all the >>>> caveats about the risks and obstacles ahead rCo and the prospects for an >>>> entire region. Hope.

The opportunity for the Middle East is difficult to exaggerate, a region >>>> from which my paternal ancestors trace their heritage, back as far as
the great Persian civilisation and its Islamic successor (my family tree >>>> is chronicled in a direct line to Muhammad, the documents lovingly
preserved by my cousin Zafar). A region that could, with goodwill,
leadership and the courage of its peoples, experience the blessings of >>>> the journey we call life rather than endemic hatred, bloodshed and
conflict.

It is easy to forget that this region was once the intellectual hub of >>>> the world, a place that spawned the myriad breakthroughs of the Islamic >>>> Golden Age. I am not just talking about the great strides in algebra,
astronomy and mathematics but the vibrancy of a region described by the >>>> philosopher Will Durant as rCLthe torchbearer of civilisationrCY. The
translation movement, rendering the wisdom of the ancient Greeks into
Arabic, was hailed by the Yale classicist Dimitri Gutas as rCLequal in >>>> significance to the Italian RenaissancerCY. Ibn Khaldun, a 14th-century >>>> scholar, contrasted the enlightenment of the region with the rCLsavageryrCY
of Europe.

What, then, went wrong for the Muslim world? Why did it regress? One of >>>> the presiding iniquities of much western scholarship is the myth that
all ills in the world can be traced to European colonialism, an untruth >>>> that serves as a sop to the developing world, the comforting delusion
that the blame can be placed on outsiders and never on developments from >>>> within. The truth, of course, is that the degeneration of Islamic
civilisation long predated colonialism and, in a certain sense,
permitted it. I am talking about religion or, perhaps more accurately, >>>> that variant we call fundamentalism.

War and peace newsletter Tom Newton-DunnrCOs concise guide to global
conflict rCo with reasons for optimism. Sign up with one click
I guess I am not alone in wondering how different the Middle East might >>>> have been had it not been for the seismic influence of Al-Ghazali, that >>>> revered scholar of Sunni thought, who in the 12th century argued that
science is not a liberator but a threat to the word of God and a danger >>>> to the clerics, who had every incentive to thwart the thirst for
knowledge to maintain their power and privileges. rCLInnovatorrCY was not >>>> regarded as a term of praise but, as the scholar Toby Huff has put it, >>>> rCLa term for a heretic and non-believer, subject to deathrCY.

The historian Bernard Lewis notes in What Went Wrong? that as the
influence of fundamentalist Islam percolated through the region during >>>> the later Middle Ages, rCLthe relationship between Christendom and Islam >>>> in the sciences was reversed. Those who had been disciples now became
teachers.rCY Sayyid Jamal al-Din al-Afghani, a 19th-century intellectual, >>>> wrote that Arab civilisation, which had once rCLthrown such a live light >>>> on the world, suddenly became extinguishedrCY.

To describe this as a catastrophe is an understatement. While
universities such as those at Bologna, Pisa and Oxford were slowly
freeing themselves from the grip of the church rCo notwithstanding the >>>> arrest of Galileo in the 17th century rCo Islamic power structures were >>>> imprisoning the human mind within the cage of revealed truth. As a
Taliban leader put it recently: rCLWestern education is a sinrCY, ramming >>>> his point home by explaining his view of rain. rCLWe believe it is a
creation of God rather than an evaporation caused by the sun that
condenses and becomes rain.rCY

And this, I believe, hints at the true prize for the Middle East in this >>>> accord. Western leaders must stop beating around the bush. The problem >>>> in the region isnrCOt a lack of aid, investment or peace initiatives, all >>>> of which in a sense put the cart before the horse. The problem is
fanaticism, a virus that will infect and ultimately kill whatever peace >>>> is proposed. Fanatics, you see, lack that most civilising of virtues:
doubt. Seized by absolute truth, they are not merely justified in
slaughtering infidels; they have a duty to do so. Look at those who most >>>> abhor this deal: yes, Hamas (a reluctant signatory), but also Hezbollah, >>>> the Houthis and, most of all, the cult known as the Islamic Republic of >>>> Iran, which has impoverished and repressed its own people.

I am no fan of Mohammed bin Salman (we should never forget his role in >>>> the gruesome murder of a journalist) but should we not at least
acknowledge what Gulf regimes are up against? They are seeking to seed >>>> the notion in a younger generation that they might benefit by freeing
themselves from the grip of the madrassas; that by embracing peace and >>>> trade with Israel they will experience prosperity and hope. That is why >>>> I support any Arab leader who takes on the Wahhabist fanatics rCo while >>>> always acknowledging the moral ambiguity and messiness of any transition. >>>>
But let us also note the religious zealots in Israel, who oppose this
deal with similar swivel-eyed zeal. Look at Bezalel Smotrich, Itamar
Ben-Gvir and their followers, who proclaim that the land between the
river and the sea is rCLpromisedrCY to them by their own fictional deity in
the sky; that settling the West Bank violently is divine will; that they >>>> are the chosen ones and the Arabs the hated Amalek. They, to me, are
every bit as abhorrent as, say, the Taliban and perhaps even more
dangerous. For these extremists (along with the rapidly growing ultra- >>>> Orthodox population) are threatening the very foundations of the one
liberal miracle yet to unfold in the Middle East.

Yet let me finish back in the Islamic world. It may be politically
incorrect these days, but it is important to note that the 57 Muslim
majority nations have just one university in the top 200 of the world; >>>> that there are two billion followers of Islam but only four winners of a >>>> Nobel science prize. A report in Nature magazine in 2002 found only
three scientific areas in which Islamic countries excelled:
desalination, falconry and camel reproduction. Over the past three
decades (despite huge investment by Gulf states), Muslim-majority
nations published just 5 per cent of science papers while making up
almost 15 per cent of the global population. In highly literate Iran,
scientific progress occurs not because of the regime but despite it.

By citing these statistics, I am not seeking to demonise the people of >>>> Afghanistan, Yemen, Palestine and the like. On the contrary, they are as >>>> intelligent and capable as anyone else rCo indeed the best and brightest >>>> have often enriched western universities by escaping the intellectual
bondage back home. I merely wish to underline the catastrophic influence >>>> of fundamentalist Islam. Where Christianity gradually (and, yes,
reluctantly) adapted and moderated its theology in the light of
scientific progress, Muslim majority nations typically sought to shut it >>>> down. This, more than anything else, captures the otherwise mystifying >>>> divergence in the trajectory of two civilisations.

And itrCOs why the most urgent task of a provisional council in Gaza (and >>>> any other governing authority in the Middle East) is to challenge what >>>> happens in schools and colleges, in madrassas and Islamic seminaries.
For it is only by severing the transmission mechanisms of the virus we >>>> call fundamentalism, by thwarting the mass indoctrination that still
unfolds in large swathes of the Islamic world, that these brilliant
peoples can be freed from the historic trap into which they have fallen. >>>> This, ultimately, is where the launchpad of rational inquiry, scientific >>>> curiosity and economic progress is to be found. All else is fluff and
window dressing.


Matthew Syed

Syed is approaching religion as the problem, a negative proposition, and >>> seems to believe he stands above that sort of thing. The problem with
this is it alienates rather than uplifts and inspires.

People who say that god is simply a "fictional deity in the sky" do not
actually understand those beliefs at all. And they understand the people >>> who hold them even less.

There's a certain quality, a very real transcendental beauty, in seeing
rain as "a creation of God". The thing is, it can be understood to be
both that and the process of evaporation and condensation at the same
time. And I believe it must be both because we as humans seem to have a
need for that sense of magic and wonder in order to thrive. The idea
that we don't (and maybe even can't) know everything, that there is
mystery in the world, inspires and humbles. That combination is the
necessary pathway to understanding and joy which give life meaning.

There's a theory that says the ideas that ultimately survive over time
are the ones that enhance the survival of the people holding those ideas. >>>
There's no guarantee that every good idea makes it past the survival
filter, or that all bad ideas are filtered out immediately. But over
time, given the chance, memetic theory says that's how it works.

Denying the mystical and the mysterious aspects of existence won't
convince or persuade those who hold those ideas. I believe that's true
because a strictly materialistic explanation of reality is lacking
something vital and necessary for long term human flourishing. And
that's why a dogmatic materialistic framework is not going to make it.
Because it denies what makes us human.

I agree with all that you say. Syed would agree as well, I think. He qualified
though, saying: "I am talking about religion or, perhaps more accurately, that
variant we call fundamentalism."

Yes he was talking about fundamentalism.

I was criticizing, "But let us also note the religious zealots in Israel...who proclaim that the land between the river and the sea is rCLpromisedrCY to them by their own fictional deity in the sky".

Whether you think the modern state of Israel is a good idea or not,
that's a bad take and the sort of thing atheists often say, showing they
have no clue.

Agreed. It would be great if people could refrain from slipping their personal digs in. Takes away from the often thoughtful and otherwise rational message.
People, eh!
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.buddha.short.fat.guy

On Mon, 13 Oct 2025 12:06:51 -0400, Wilson <Wilson@nowhere.invalid>
wrote:

On 10/12/2025 1:08 PM, Tara wrote:

On Oct 12, 2025 at 11:34:48?AM EDT, "Wilson" <Wilson@nowhere.invalid> wrote: >>

On 10/12/2025 5:50 AM, Julian wrote:

Religious fanaticism has been catastrophic for a region that was once
the intellectual hub of the world


A strange and unfamiliar feeling stirred as I sat down to write these
words. A feeling that has been largely absent over recent years when
writing this column. It rose up within me as I pondered the diplomatic >>>> breakthrough by Donald Trump u a stunning achievement, even with all the >>>> caveats about the risks and obstacles ahead u and the prospects for an >>>> entire region. Hope.

The opportunity for the Middle East is difficult to exaggerate, a region >>>> from which my paternal ancestors trace their heritage, back as far as
the great Persian civilisation and its Islamic successor (my family tree >>>> is chronicled in a direct line to Muhammad, the documents lovingly
preserved by my cousin Zafar). A region that could, with goodwill,
leadership and the courage of its peoples, experience the blessings of >>>> the journey we call life rather than endemic hatred, bloodshed and
conflict.

It is easy to forget that this region was once the intellectual hub of >>>> the world, a place that spawned the myriad breakthroughs of the Islamic >>>> Golden Age. I am not just talking about the great strides in algebra,
astronomy and mathematics but the vibrancy of a region described by the >>>> philosopher Will Durant as othe torchbearer of civilisationo. The
translation movement, rendering the wisdom of the ancient Greeks into
Arabic, was hailed by the Yale classicist Dimitri Gutas as oequal in
significance to the Italian Renaissanceo. Ibn Khaldun, a 14th-century
scholar, contrasted the enlightenment of the region with the osavageryo >>>> of Europe.

What, then, went wrong for the Muslim world? Why did it regress? One of >>>> the presiding iniquities of much western scholarship is the myth that
all ills in the world can be traced to European colonialism, an untruth >>>> that serves as a sop to the developing world, the comforting delusion
that the blame can be placed on outsiders and never on developments from >>>> within. The truth, of course, is that the degeneration of Islamic
civilisation long predated colonialism and, in a certain sense,
permitted it. I am talking about religion or, perhaps more accurately, >>>> that variant we call fundamentalism.

War and peace newsletter Tom Newton-DunnAs concise guide to global
conflict u with reasons for optimism. Sign up with one click
I guess I am not alone in wondering how different the Middle East might >>>> have been had it not been for the seismic influence of Al-Ghazali, that >>>> revered scholar of Sunni thought, who in the 12th century argued that
science is not a liberator but a threat to the word of God and a danger >>>> to the clerics, who had every incentive to thwart the thirst for
knowledge to maintain their power and privileges. oInnovatoro was not
regarded as a term of praise but, as the scholar Toby Huff has put it, >>>> oa term for a heretic and non-believer, subject to deatho.

The historian Bernard Lewis notes in What Went Wrong? that as the
influence of fundamentalist Islam percolated through the region during >>>> the later Middle Ages, othe relationship between Christendom and Islam >>>> in the sciences was reversed. Those who had been disciples now became
teachers.o Sayyid Jamal al-Din al-Afghani, a 19th-century intellectual, >>>> wrote that Arab civilisation, which had once othrown such a live light >>>> on the world, suddenly became extinguishedo.

To describe this as a catastrophe is an understatement. While
universities such as those at Bologna, Pisa and Oxford were slowly
freeing themselves from the grip of the church u notwithstanding the
arrest of Galileo in the 17th century u Islamic power structures were
imprisoning the human mind within the cage of revealed truth. As a
Taliban leader put it recently: oWestern education is a sino, ramming
his point home by explaining his view of rain. oWe believe it is a
creation of God rather than an evaporation caused by the sun that
condenses and becomes rain.o

And this, I believe, hints at the true prize for the Middle East in this >>>> accord. Western leaders must stop beating around the bush. The problem >>>> in the region isnAt a lack of aid, investment or peace initiatives, all >>>> of which in a sense put the cart before the horse. The problem is
fanaticism, a virus that will infect and ultimately kill whatever peace >>>> is proposed. Fanatics, you see, lack that most civilising of virtues:
doubt. Seized by absolute truth, they are not merely justified in
slaughtering infidels; they have a duty to do so. Look at those who most >>>> abhor this deal: yes, Hamas (a reluctant signatory), but also Hezbollah, >>>> the Houthis and, most of all, the cult known as the Islamic Republic of >>>> Iran, which has impoverished and repressed its own people.

I am no fan of Mohammed bin Salman (we should never forget his role in >>>> the gruesome murder of a journalist) but should we not at least
acknowledge what Gulf regimes are up against? They are seeking to seed >>>> the notion in a younger generation that they might benefit by freeing
themselves from the grip of the madrassas; that by embracing peace and >>>> trade with Israel they will experience prosperity and hope. That is why >>>> I support any Arab leader who takes on the Wahhabist fanatics u while
always acknowledging the moral ambiguity and messiness of any transition. >>>>
But let us also note the religious zealots in Israel, who oppose this
deal with similar swivel-eyed zeal. Look at Bezalel Smotrich, Itamar
Ben-Gvir and their followers, who proclaim that the land between the
river and the sea is opromisedo to them by their own fictional deity in >>>> the sky; that settling the West Bank violently is divine will; that they >>>> are the chosen ones and the Arabs the hated Amalek. They, to me, are
every bit as abhorrent as, say, the Taliban and perhaps even more
dangerous. For these extremists (along with the rapidly growing ultra- >>>> Orthodox population) are threatening the very foundations of the one
liberal miracle yet to unfold in the Middle East.

Yet let me finish back in the Islamic world. It may be politically
incorrect these days, but it is important to note that the 57 Muslim
majority nations have just one university in the top 200 of the world; >>>> that there are two billion followers of Islam but only four winners of a >>>> Nobel science prize. A report in Nature magazine in 2002 found only
three scientific areas in which Islamic countries excelled:
desalination, falconry and camel reproduction. Over the past three
decades (despite huge investment by Gulf states), Muslim-majority
nations published just 5 per cent of science papers while making up
almost 15 per cent of the global population. In highly literate Iran,
scientific progress occurs not because of the regime but despite it.

By citing these statistics, I am not seeking to demonise the people of >>>> Afghanistan, Yemen, Palestine and the like. On the contrary, they are as >>>> intelligent and capable as anyone else u indeed the best and brightest >>>> have often enriched western universities by escaping the intellectual
bondage back home. I merely wish to underline the catastrophic influence >>>> of fundamentalist Islam. Where Christianity gradually (and, yes,
reluctantly) adapted and moderated its theology in the light of
scientific progress, Muslim majority nations typically sought to shut it >>>> down. This, more than anything else, captures the otherwise mystifying >>>> divergence in the trajectory of two civilisations.

And itAs why the most urgent task of a provisional council in Gaza (and >>>> any other governing authority in the Middle East) is to challenge what >>>> happens in schools and colleges, in madrassas and Islamic seminaries.
For it is only by severing the transmission mechanisms of the virus we >>>> call fundamentalism, by thwarting the mass indoctrination that still
unfolds in large swathes of the Islamic world, that these brilliant
peoples can be freed from the historic trap into which they have fallen. >>>> This, ultimately, is where the launchpad of rational inquiry, scientific >>>> curiosity and economic progress is to be found. All else is fluff and
window dressing.


Matthew Syed

Syed is approaching religion as the problem, a negative proposition, and >>> seems to believe he stands above that sort of thing. The problem with
this is it alienates rather than uplifts and inspires.

People who say that god is simply a "fictional deity in the sky" do not
actually understand those beliefs at all. And they understand the people >>> who hold them even less.

There's a certain quality, a very real transcendental beauty, in seeing
rain as "a creation of God". The thing is, it can be understood to be
both that and the process of evaporation and condensation at the same
time. And I believe it must be both because we as humans seem to have a
need for that sense of magic and wonder in order to thrive. The idea
that we don't (and maybe even can't) know everything, that there is
mystery in the world, inspires and humbles. That combination is the
necessary pathway to understanding and joy which give life meaning.

There's a theory that says the ideas that ultimately survive over time
are the ones that enhance the survival of the people holding those ideas. >>>
There's no guarantee that every good idea makes it past the survival
filter, or that all bad ideas are filtered out immediately. But over
time, given the chance, memetic theory says that's how it works.

Denying the mystical and the mysterious aspects of existence won't
convince or persuade those who hold those ideas. I believe that's true
because a strictly materialistic explanation of reality is lacking
something vital and necessary for long term human flourishing. And
that's why a dogmatic materialistic framework is not going to make it.
Because it denies what makes us human.

I agree with all that you say. Syed would agree as well, I think. He qualified
though, saying: "I am talking about religion or, perhaps more accurately, that
variant we call fundamentalism."

Yes he was talking about fundamentalism.

I was criticizing, "But let us also note the religious zealots in >Israel...who proclaim that the land between the river and the sea is >opromisedo to them by their own fictional deity in the sky".

I'd say that this article is about all kinds of fundamentalism
christian
islamic
hebraic

Whether you think the modern state of Israel is a good idea or not,
that's a bad take and the sort of thing atheists often say, showing they >have no clue.

I guess you don't know whether Matt is an atheist. But he is probably
not a religious fundamentalist.
--
Noah Sombrero mustachioed villain
Don't get political with me young man
or I'll tie you to a railroad track and
<<<talk>>> to <<<YOOooooo>>>
Who dares to talk to El Sombrero?
dares: Ned
does not dare: Julian shrinks in horror and warns others away

--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2