Free DHTML scripts provided by Dynamic Drive
welcome to our humble abode!
posted by »|m|u|n|i|r|a|« at 6/01/2005 05:19:00 pm
This is similar to the problem of ethics in Psychology. I'll try to determine whether Freaky and Burgh are absolutists or relativists. It sounds as though they're relativists, but I have to think a bit more. I'll get back to you.
they sound relitivist to me as well, if not nihilistic.
Existentialists, relativists and nihilists...how depressing. It reminds me of King Lear...a whole lot of text about NOTHING, literally!I suppose you're right...they don't fit the absolutist criteria. Doesn't this mean that arguing with them would be futile? Presenting logic to them is not going to work because they'll simply manipulate logic and reason to suite their own agendas.
I'll let you in on a lil secret. My philosophy lecturer said that the biggest weakness of the relativist theory (any form of relativism) is they their absolute convition that things are relative. *lol* Think about it...if you believe nothing in this world is absoloute, you must also believe the theory of relitivism may or may not be true...accurate...only in the eye of the beholder...
The same point was raised in my Psych tute. Funny thing is, intellectuals still seem to prefer it. Isn't there a half-way, in-between kind of ethical ideology?
well many ppl seemed to think there is. I'll call it the 'Opportunist stand' or the 'Convinient stand' for all those wavering, two-faced...no... multi-faced ppl who can't make up their mind about where they stand!
Can some1 please explain these terminology to me? I am not a student of psychology!
Ethical relativism holds that all potentially "moral" decisions (ie- what is right or wrong) in any given situation depends on what the actual situation. Absolitists, on the other hand, hold the view that there are fixed rules that apply, no matter what the situation or the circumstance...no matter who is involved. The root word, "absolute" gives a hint: there is only and absolute right or wrong for any given moral dilemma.I'm not sure if this clarifies for you, Ishi. Help me out here, M. Apu...I'm not quite sure if my definitions are comprehensive, or even correct fot that matter.
Please ignore the typos...there are far too many for me to be sitting here and correcting them all...apologies if it is a tad illegible.
flynn, you definition are quite close to what i'd say. I don't want to supplement or elaborate for fear of confusing our poor lay*woman* i.e. iishii. Just do a word search in yahoo to get some easy definitions.These theories are all concocted by humans. So, I guess there is not need to find a fit with Islam for any of it, but you can screen it from an Islamic perspective, yes, in-fact you should! As Muslims and conscious human-beings we must question everything we learn at uni and anywhere. The only...and I repreat...the only thing we should never question is Gods' word (and interpretations of thereof in which we do not hold expertise). Everything else must be critically analysed.
Whilst its true that we must not question God's words- I should point out that it is our DUTY to question those who are passing off their words as those of God's (this happens too often!). So questioning is vital to the future of our religion-we must seek answers!
Yeah, I didnt say we shouldn't question things in religion! Esp in regard to those who pass off their words as God's own. However, its important for us to realise that we cannot question the opinions of a scholar unless we hold a similar level of knoweldge and expertise. Many Muslims (as we live in a time of democracy, liberty, equality where every human being is seen as a rational, logical being) question and disagree with scholars when they do not hold expertise in that area! If I'm an ordinary person and I'm making a judgement regarding a fatwa, that would be a gross misconduct and certainly punished by Allah. I know of a person who teaches his son that we should say "Salamun Alaika" and NOT "assalamu alaikum" because Allah greeted Prophets like that in the Qur'an! Obviously in exercising his own judgement, this person has completely ignored the tradition of our noble Prophet (S). Many Muslims combine the Asr and Duhr prayer for reasons/circumstances vastly different from that shown by our Prophet. It's not ok for us to make that decision, however, if there's a scholar who fatwed it ok, then we can do it. Then again, we must question the integrity of scholars in so far as we're able. As a layman, another thing we can do is to compare the opinions of several scholars on a issue and follow one that which we think is most right. In that case we're not making a judgment and therefore not doing wrong.
Post a Comment
<< Home
12 Comments:
This is similar to the problem of ethics in Psychology. I'll try to determine whether Freaky and Burgh are absolutists or relativists. It sounds as though they're relativists, but I have to think a bit more. I'll get back to you.
they sound relitivist to me as well, if not nihilistic.
Existentialists, relativists and nihilists...how depressing. It reminds me of King Lear...a whole lot of text about NOTHING, literally!
I suppose you're right...they don't fit the absolutist criteria. Doesn't this mean that arguing with them would be futile? Presenting logic to them is not going to work because they'll simply manipulate logic and reason to suite their own agendas.
I'll let you in on a lil secret. My philosophy lecturer said that the biggest weakness of the relativist theory (any form of relativism) is they their absolute convition that things are relative. *lol* Think about it...if you believe nothing in this world is absoloute, you must also believe the theory of relitivism may or may not be true...accurate...only in the eye of the beholder...
The same point was raised in my Psych tute. Funny thing is, intellectuals still seem to prefer it. Isn't there a half-way, in-between kind of ethical ideology?
well many ppl seemed to think there is. I'll call it the 'Opportunist stand' or the 'Convinient stand' for all those wavering, two-faced...no... multi-faced ppl who can't make up their mind about where they stand!
Can some1 please explain these terminology to me? I am not a student of psychology!
Ethical relativism holds that all potentially "moral" decisions (ie- what is right or wrong) in any given situation depends on what the actual situation. Absolitists, on the other hand, hold the view that there are fixed rules that apply, no matter what the situation or the circumstance...no matter who is involved. The root word, "absolute" gives a hint: there is only and absolute right or wrong for any given moral dilemma.
I'm not sure if this clarifies for you, Ishi. Help me out here, M. Apu...I'm not quite sure if my definitions are comprehensive, or even correct fot that matter.
Please ignore the typos...there are far too many for me to be sitting here and correcting them all...apologies if it is a tad illegible.
flynn, you definition are quite close to what i'd say. I don't want to supplement or elaborate for fear of confusing our poor lay*woman* i.e. iishii. Just do a word search in yahoo to get some easy definitions.
These theories are all concocted by humans. So, I guess there is not need to find a fit with Islam for any of it, but you can screen it from an Islamic perspective, yes, in-fact you should! As Muslims and conscious human-beings we must question everything we learn at uni and anywhere. The only...and I repreat...the only thing we should never question is Gods' word (and interpretations of thereof in which we do not hold expertise). Everything else must be critically analysed.
Whilst its true that we must not question God's words- I should point out that it is our DUTY to question those who are passing off their words as those of God's (this happens too often!). So questioning is vital to the future of our religion-we must seek answers!
Yeah, I didnt say we shouldn't question things in religion! Esp in regard to those who pass off their words as God's own.
However, its important for us to realise that we cannot question the opinions of a scholar unless we hold a similar level of knoweldge and expertise. Many Muslims (as we live in a time of democracy, liberty, equality where every human being is seen as a rational, logical being) question and disagree with scholars when they do not hold expertise in that area! If I'm an ordinary person and I'm making a judgement regarding a fatwa, that would be a gross misconduct and certainly punished by Allah.
I know of a person who teaches his son that we should say "Salamun Alaika" and NOT "assalamu alaikum" because Allah greeted Prophets like that in the Qur'an! Obviously in exercising his own judgement, this person has completely ignored the tradition of our noble Prophet (S). Many Muslims combine the Asr and Duhr prayer for reasons/circumstances vastly different from that shown by our Prophet. It's not ok for us to make that decision, however, if there's a scholar who fatwed it ok, then we can do it.
Then again, we must question the integrity of scholars in so far as we're able. As a layman, another thing we can do is to compare the opinions of several scholars on a issue and follow one that which we think is most right. In that case we're not making a judgment and therefore not doing wrong.
Post a Comment
<< Home