Islam more modern than the west?

[DSM0305]

Medieval Islam

See also: Early Islamic philosophy
Many medieval Muslim thinkers pursued humanistic, rational and scientific discourses in their search for knowledge, meaning and values. A wide range of Islamic writings on love, poetry, history and philosophical theology show that medieval Islamic thought was open to the humanistic ideas of individualism, occasional secularism, skepticism, and liberalism.[22]
According to Imad-ad-Dean Ahmad, another reason the Islamic world flourished during the Middle Ages was an early emphasis on freedom of speech, as summarised by al-Hashimi (a cousin of Caliph al-Ma'mun) in the following letter to one of the religious opponents he was attempting to convert through reason:[23]

"Bring forward all the arguments you wish and say whatever you please and speak your mind freely. Now that you are safe and free to say whatever you please appoint some arbitrator who will impartially judge between us and lean only towards the truth and be free from the empery of passion, and that arbitrator shall be Reason, whereby God makes us responsible for our own rewards and punishments. Herein I have dealt justly with you and have given you full security and am ready to accept whatever decision Reason may give for me or against me. For "There is no compulsion in religion" (Qur'an 2:256) and I have only invited you to accept our faith willingly and of your own accord and have pointed out the hideousness of your present belief. Peace be with you and the blessings of God!"

According to George Makdisi, certain aspects of Renaissance humanism has its roots in the medieval Islamic world, including the "art of dictation, called in Latin, ars dictaminis", and "the humanist attitude toward classical language".[24]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Humanism

The Islamic Golden Age refers to the period in the history of Islam during the Middle Ages when much of the Muslim world was ruled by various caliphates, experiencing a scientific, economic, and cultural flourishing.[1][2][3] This period is traditionally understood to have begun during the reign of the Abbasid caliph Harun al-Rashid (786 to 809) with the inauguration of the House of Wisdom in Baghdad, where scholars from various parts of the world sought to translate and gather all the known world's knowledge into Arabic.[4][5] It is taken to have ended with the collapse of the Abbasid Caliphate with the Mongol invasions and the Sack of Baghdad in 1258.[6] Several contemporary scholars, however, place the end around the 15th to 16th centuries.[1][2][3]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamic_Golden_Age

As we all know, Islam in medieval times/old days, were by far more rational and free thinking. The question is by how much, and why are they no more. If we take Islam from that time, it had by far surpassed the west morally and in terms of rationality, even by modern standards.

[Badlun]

How many years were this free thinking Islam out of 1400 years? And all these free thinkers were declared infidels by the Mullahs of that time.
Islam is a religion , a faith and thus nothing to do with reason and science.

[Khostai]

Islam was not modern, Islam was never modern, like any relligion Islam is also a static relligion, it was the people of that time that persued humanism, free thinking and science. Despite Islamic clearagy opressing them, those people would still excist even if they would follow other relligion. The difrence was that the mullah did not have that much influence on others. Unkike the Priests in Christian Europe. So the free thinkers had more freedom.

And by the way saying that the scientist and philosophers of that time was all thank to Islam is wrong, its like claiming that Pythagoras, Plato, Aristitales and other greek philosophers and mathematician did their work becuase of the ancient Greek relligion, but we all know that it was not the case, most of those philosophers did their work despite the threat of the relligious figures, the same was in the Islamic era.

The thing that changed was that the mullahs have won and the free rational people lost the fight. And in europe it was the other way around.

[asad71]

Islam is not a religion as defined in the dictionary. It does not have the ingredients like priest class, images/idols or unusual rituals.Islam is a continuous and vibrant revolution to reform mankind. It is neither stagnant nor rigid except in basic principles.

[Khostai]

Islam is not a religion as defined in the dictionary. It does not have the ingredients like priest class, images/idols or unusual rituals.Islam is a continuous and vibrant revolution to reform mankind. It is neither stagnant nor rigid except in basic principles.

That is not true, yes it doesn't have classes of priests and what not, but it is not vibrant or reformist. No relligion is reformist, even Christianity is still the same as it was couple of hundreds years ago, the diffrence is that people stoped following it word for word, but muslims still do that.
If it was so vibrant and reformist every muslim country would be as free and developed as the West, but in reality its the opposite.

[DSM0305]

You guys deny facts and defy logic. It almost feels like you guys didn't even read what I posted, but rather continued the same rhetoric posted by various atheists.

Instead of discussing like a radio stuck in repeat button. I would highly appreciate your claims with evidence.

The logic you guys put forward is basically saying; nothing effect individualism. You guys basically implying, that economics, social structure, education, culture, religion, state etc. have no slightest effect on the individual. This logic/statement in itself is contradicting the very point you guys trying to make. If we for a moment pretend your logic/statement is true, then this will also mean that religion have no effect on the individual, which basically means that your ''struggle'' for a secular society is meaningless.

Yet, lets take a step deeper and think for ourselves for a second. If we look at the Islamic leaders of that time(including the prophet himself), then we will discover that their moral was even compatible even to modern standard. Even Europe/Christians of that time were shocked by the tolerance of the Islamic world. No matter whether one is atheist or religious, one cannot deny the fact that the Islamic leaders of that time had extreme hight level of tolerance.

To put it simply, the achievements of that time would never have been achieved if it wasn't for the Islamic rule. Because if it wasn't for the tolerance of the Islamic rule, the free thinking and knowledge of various places wouldn't have been able to gather. Basically the little to non-existent tolerance of that time, would have made it impossible for those with knowledge to achieve their full potential, and strive for their goal. Tolerance and logic was something that was needed back then, which Islam brought at the most crucial moment.

Many here may wonder why Islam isn't the way it was.
To put it simple, the borderline of the misfortune of the Muslim world is on the Muslim people themselves. They have strayed from the fundamental principles of Islam, which was based upon rationality and logic, and have replaced it with almost possessed trance state.
As to why that happened. That answer lies in a very complex political and historical foundations.

[asad71]

You guys deny facts and defy logic. It almost feels like you guys didn't even read what I posted, but rather continued the same rhetoric posted by various atheists.

Instead of discussing like a radio stuck in repeat button. I would highly appreciate your claims with evidence.

The logic you guys put forward is basically saying; nothing effect individualism. You guys basically implying, that economics, social structure, education, culture, religion, state etc. have no slightest effect on the individual. This logic/statement in itself is contradicting the very point you guys trying to make. If we for a moment pretend your logic/statement is true, then this will also mean that religion have no effect on the individual, which basically means that your ''struggle'' for a secular society is meaningless.

Yet, lets take a step deeper and think for ourselves for a second. If we look at the Islamic leaders of that time(including the prophet himself), then we will discover that their moral was even compatible even to modern standard. Even Europe/Christians of that time were shocked by the tolerance of the Islamic world. No matter whether one is atheist or religious, one cannot deny the fact that the Islamic leaders of that time had extreme hight level of tolerance.

To put it simply, the achievements of that time would never have been achieved if it wasn't for the Islamic rule. Because if it wasn't for the tolerance of the Islamic rule, the free thinking and knowledge of various places wouldn't have been able to gather. Basically the little to non-existent tolerance of that time, would have made it impossible for those with knowledge to achieve their full potential, and strive for their goal. Tolerance and logic was something that was needed back then, which Islam brought at the most crucial moment.

Many here may wonder why Islam isn't the way it was.
To put it simple, the borderline of the misfortune of the Muslim world is on the Muslim people themselves. They have strayed from the fundamental principles of Islam, which was based upon rationality and logic, and have replaced it with almost possessed trance state.
As to why that happened. That answer lies in a very complex political and historical foundations.

I am afraid you have mixed up Muslims and Islam. One is human, and the other is a faith to reform the human.

[Al-Afghani]

Islam allows cousin marriage, which is known to lower intelligence throughout generations. What you see as Islamic Golden Age, I think is the continuation and gradual decline of Mesopotamian, Persian, Phoenician civilizations because of the decrease of average IQ.

[DSM0305]

I am afraid you have mixed up Muslims and Islam. One is human, and the other is a faith to reform the human.

Point out where I have mixed Muslim and Islam. Don't tell me you're one of those parrots who repeat the same thing over and over again, because you heard it somewhere else.

I don't like meaningless statement, which is written just for the sake of it. Evidence is what gives meaning to a statement. My post is there without edition, so be my guest and highlight the place where those two terms got mixed up.

[DSM0305]

Islam allows cousin marriage, which is known to lower intelligence throughout generations. What you see as Islamic Golden Age, I think is the continuation and gradual decline of Mesopotamian, Persian, Phoenician civilizations because of the decrease of average IQ.

Cousin marriage were quite common and encouraged throughout the world, before 20th century. Even today it is allowed everywhere in the world, except some stats in the US.

Today there doesn't exist a single human being, who isn't a product of cousin marriage somewhere in their ancestry.

Regarding the lower intelligence, it is completely false. If that was true, humans today would be a retarded specie.

Einstein, and even Darwin himself, have married their cousin. As I said before, cousin marriage getting the spotlight is a recent phenomenon that stem from the US.

Regarding Persian civilization. It was always in decline. Actually, Islam was the reason it got some influence, before that it was like a sinking Titanic. The only time Persian had influence worth mentioning, was under Darius.


And I know you're an uneducated person, so I am pretty sure you're not aware that Persians long before Islam married their cousins as if there were no tomorrow.

Cousin marriage was practiced in ancient as well as modern Persia.[10] The Achaemenid kings habitually married their cousins and nieces.[11] In a more recent example, in October 1867 the Crown Prince of Persia was married his cousin at age sixteen.[12] The percentage of Iranian cousin marriages increased from 34 to 44% between the 1940s and 1970s, according to one study. There is a strong preference for marrying a first cousin, but no specific preference for the father's brother's daughter. For the quarter of women married after age 21 it was found that the incidence of consanguinity declined. Additionally, the proportion of cousin marriage among urban families stayed constant: it was only rural families that drove the increase. For all periods the proportion of cousin marriage among highly educated women was somewhat lower than among uneducated women. It is hypothesized that decreases in infant mortality during the period may have created a larger pool of eligible cousins to marry.[13]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cousin_marriage_in_the_Middle_East#Persia

[asad71]

Point out where I have mixed Muslim and Islam. Don't tell me you're one of those parrots who repeat the same thing over and over again, because you heard it somewhere else.

I don't like meaningless statement, which is written just for the sake of it. Evidence is what gives meaning to a statement. My post is there without edition, so be my guest and highlight the place where those two terms got mixed up.

Aren't we all parrots in some ways?But what I have said is what I have deduced from your statement. You have indeed confused the two - Islam the faith and Muslim the human.

[DSM0305]

Aren't we all parrots in some ways?But what I have said is what I have deduced from your statement. You have indeed confused the two - Islam the faith and Muslim the human.

Well, I guess you and I aren't the same specie then.
Considering the fact that you claim to have some parrot features, then it doesn't come as a surprise, that you lack comprehension skills.

I can safely assume this conversation is over. Coming to the conclusion that your statement is baseless, due the fact that you couldn't provide a simple highlight.

[khushal]

Civilizations rise and fall because of economics regardless of tolerance. Many civilizations have surpassed todays West on a Moral scale. It was Socrates that said if one wants to measure civilizations on a moral scale, look at its treatment of prisoners.

The Wests rise and dominations of the World has to do with how it accumulated its wealth through its Navy's. The turning point was when the Ottomans put a trade embargo on Europe which forced the Europeans to become master ship builders that went around Africa to keep trade with India and the far East. Spain and Britain were super power because of there Navys not because they had high tolerance, if anything they were butchers that exterminated indigenous populations in lands they colonized and had monopolized the slave trade.

Wealth buys brilliant and creative people that builds your empire and wealth buys corrupt people to poison your competition.

Also the cousin marriage comment has no merit. Not only did Einstein marry his cousin but he is the product of cousin marriage. Cousin marriage does not create stupid people, only stupid people believe in such a thing that have not read scientific studies.

http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2012-04/nesc-wnm042512.php

http://www.nytimes.com/2002/04/04/us/few-risks-seen-to-the-children-of-1st-cousins.html