Home » News, Off Topic » Why Islam is in as much trouble as the West, despite the hype

Why Islam is in as much trouble as the West, despite the hype

From MercatorNet: Because numbers matter and no one can beat demographic collapse:

“The average young Tunisian woman – like her Iranian or Turkish counterpart – grew up in a family of seven children, but will bear only one or two herself.”

So what happens when she and her sibs are all seniors?

Education for women doesn’t in itself cause birth dearth, but abandonment of the land does. Muslims are not immune from the urbanization that turns children who were once a source of wealth into a major cost centre. Increasing numbers of people, there as here, hope that others will undertake the trouble.

Just some thoughts.

  • Delicious
  • Facebook
  • Reddit
  • StumbleUpon
  • Twitter
  • RSS Feed

8 Responses to Why Islam is in as much trouble as the West, despite the hype

  1. Hi News,

    What implications does this have for intelligent design?

  2. Well it might harm ID if there are less potential ID proponents.

    BTW There is an article in the Independent (Sunday, 23) October 2011 about Dawkins avoidance of William Lane Craig by Paul Vallely:

    “God knows why Dawkins won’t show

    Our leading atheists prefer abuse to argument when faced with a tough-talking Christian opponent” Did I miss it on UD?

  3. Alan, you might have missed it on UD. We don’t catch everything that flies. We’re a volunteer news service. We catch enough to pay our server fees.

  4. Denyse,
    I’m holding my breath for part II. Don’t make me faint.

    It is a well-hidden fact that Islam is responsible for most of the ills besetting Christendom, including Darwinism. I’ll let you figure out the percentage, but here’s the link. Islam conquered and then lost Spain and left behind a highly educated, philosophical position of God’s absolute power. Let’s call that nominalism. Nominalism emphasized ideology over induction. Contrast with the neo-Platonism of Augustine, and you’ll start to spot the differences. During the Reformation and the Counter-Reformation you had this playing out in philosophy: Augustinian Reformers versus Aristotelian nominalists. Darwin’s exposure to Atheism at the tender age of 16 exposed him to nominalism and the raw power of ideology, which he massaged for 30 years or so to make it palatable to a British Victorian society. It was still ideology but cleverly packaged as induction. Darwin’s real genius lay in marketing, no matter what you may have read otherwise.

    The impending collapse of Islam is both a breakdown of authoritarian structure and ideology. The modern Muslim looks around and values what he sees (prosperity, smaller families, job mobility) over what he hears (Imam talking about eternal punishment for not having kids, etc). He is choosing induction over nominalism, ID over Darwinism.

    It’s not always clear which is ideology and which is induction, and part of Darwin’s genius was selling evolution as induction–which it isn’t. But as Imre Lakatos argues, you can spot the difference between the two in the manner in which they handle exceptions and ad hoc hypotheses. Which comes back to ID being the recognition that not only is Design recognizable, but it is also the opposite of nominalism–it is interactive.

  5. Robert Sheldon:

    “It is a well-hidden fact that Islam is responsible for most of the ills besetting Christendom, including Darwinism.”

    Interesting, I always thought the ills that have befallen Christendom were usually often of their own making. Darwinism is yet another religion with it’s own ills, but it’s extistance does have more to do with Christendom’s existance as anything else.

  6. Robert,

    How did you uncover this ‘well-hidden fact’?

  7. Tracing the history of ideas. Sort of like reconstructing the scene of a crime, or the proliferation of nuclear weapons.

  8. Could you cite some sources for your information?

Leave a Reply