The intellectual mind

Submitted by John Bastile (Malaysia), Dec 1, 2005 at 23:54

AMK and all,

The world that we inherit is not new. Civilizations were docummented for thousands of years. Thus, we have a long history. Though we may not remember all of them, we will remember those are are important and those that shaped our lives today.

When christians, secularist or any rational minds talk about history, we are aware of certain possibilities that history may be rewritten to suit the victors and politicians. There are issues where Japan has 'watered' down the the historical records on the "Rape of Nangking" and the Chinese are visibly upset. Therefore, history books can be different from the truths. Once again, political, social and economical pressures may be a result of history being written and rewritten. Therefore, the first challenge is that - DID the event really happened?

If no, then it is a legend or a myth. If yes, then it is history.

The next question is - HOW did it happen?

Coming back to the "Rape of Nangking". It's impossible for the Japanese to claim that it did not happen as we have evidence. The Japanese may desire to erase that history by destroying all evidences but the rest of the world will still have them. Therefore, an effective way to see the truth, as much as possible, is to look at as many sources as possible. The test of independece is crucial. For arguments' sake. Let's say that the Japanese's version and the Chinese's version are completely opposing, then who shall we turn to? Video tapes? Books?

Now' let's come back to the manner when we discuss or debate with muslim intellectuals.

When they bring up the issue of "Crusaders", the favourite point of oppression besides the Palastinian issue, they will recount stories of "horror and massacre". However, the christians and secularist did not deny that it happened. In fact, most of the points that the muslims used are sourced from their collections of historical records.

We sit down and we dissect the issues. We try to understand the "Crusaders". We try to ask for the motivations that this people would leave their homes, travel thousands of miles, and possible to die in a foreign land. Would it be because their holy land was conquered. Was it because Europe was beseiged by muslims in Spain and Eastern Europe? Stories of nuns being raped on the altar at churches might anger them? Or is it that Popes have strong influence over them? Or do they desire the treasures of Jerusalem? We asked objectively.

Yes. Some barbaric acts were documented. What did the church did? They acknowledged. They condemn the act and they asked for forgiveness, as it should.

Now, let's see how muslims argue. When you tell them about the invasion of Persia, India and Spain. You tell them that millions died terribly. How do muslim intellectuals react?

They tell you that Islam was spread peacefully in Indonesia and Malaysia. They remind you of the Crusaders and the Spanish Inquisitions. No mention of the issues concerned.

People of rational minds, when you argue with muslim intelectuals, you will discover they mostly are incapable of objective thoughts. They cannot allow or concede an inch to admit their errors or fault.

You can see a rational person, like Lisa saying "Sure the Crusaders may include a bunch of gangsters. However, they did what they have to to achieve political goals. They have to stop the muslim invasions unto their lands.".

You can hear a muslim intellectual saying "What cruelty in Persia and India? Islam spread peacefully in Indonesia and Malaysia. Why don't we look at Crusaders and Spanish Inquisitions?"

You can see a rational person saying "Let's look at the facts in the Quran and Hadiths objectively. Your prophet raided Khaybar, killed and tortured people for their treasures, raped Safiyyah"

You can see a muslim intellectual replying "What blasphemy. Our prophet is the most perfect man. He is most merciful. I didn't kill anybody nor rape anyone so how can you say that about my prophet?"

People of rational minds. Please teach me the most effective way to converse with muslims.

---

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".