Hoodbhoy, I didn't expect this from you

[Bilal Khan (Quwa)]

I remember Hoodbhoy from this debate I watched long ago.

We had a British Muslim convert of Greek origin, Hamza Tzortis, come to LUMS in Pakistan to debate with Pervez Hoodbhoy, an avowed Pakistani atheist and secularist, about religion and rationality.

You really can't make this up. Here is the clip for those interested.

Ofcourse he will oppose the founding of an Islamic state, he has left the faith long ago. So to him and people like him, there is no difference between Paks and Indians.



You peaked my interest, so I took a look. He is exactly uttering the same anti-Muslim, anti-Prophet saws, and anti-Allah swt doctrine as this avowed Islamophobe Bertrand Russell.

How did we let a person like this influence so many minds in our country?

I'm not a fan of Hoodbhoy, but I can understand his frustration here.

This is an inter-ideological debate between one man who's coming from a purely secular line of thought, and another from purely an Islamist perspective (note: just forget about the connotations of each concept, look at purely as a descriptive tag). So, the issue here is that neither of them agree on the same reference point, as a result, there's no real discussion here, just purely an argument for the sake of conformation bias among those listening. Neither one genuinely cares for what the other has to say.

In situations as this, a sincere discussion should've been had in private between them, without any incentive to stir egos or "win" (which is what an audience typically brings).

As Muslims -- and as Pakistanis, especially -- we've lost the art of having a discussion for the sake of knowledge and advancement. It's become a game of who can win arguments, and not so much about trying to convince the other side of changing their beliefs. Sure, someone might walk out of it, and nothing may change, but they would have much more respect for one another (and the opposing view) if that had occurred.

 

[Pan-Islamic-Pakistan]

Thank you Brother, may God you and bless our country.

Ameen my brother, wa iyya kum (and to you.)

I'm not a fan of Hoodbhoy, but I can understand his frustration here.

This is an inter-ideological debate between one man who's coming from a purely secular line of thought, and another from purely an Islamist perspective (note: just forget about the connotations of each concept, look at purely as a descriptive tag). So, the issue here is that neither of them agree on the same reference point, as a result, there's no real discussion here, just purely an argument for the sake of conformation bias among those listening. Neither one genuinely cares for what the other has to say.

In situations as this, a sincere discussion should've been had in private between them, without any incentive to stir egos or "win" (which is what an audience typically brings).

As Muslims -- and as Pakistanis, especially -- we've lost the art of having a discussion for the sake of knowledge and advancement. It's become a game of who can win arguments, and not so much about trying to convince the other side of changing their beliefs. Sure, someone might walk out of it, and nothing may change, but they would have much more respect for one another (and the opposing view) if that had occurred.

I can understand what you wrote and I agree.

As you noted, I dislike the meaningless terms Islamist, political Islam as nothing but ideological warfare on Muslims by the US and allies.

Hamza Tzortis does active street dawah, so he is da'ee rather than a scholar.

If you want to see some amazing debates, take a look at Ahmad Deedat vs Jimmy Swaggart.

 

[peagle]

I'm not a fan of Hoodbhoy, but I can understand his frustration here.

This is an inter-ideological debate between one man who's coming from a purely secular line of thought, and another from purely an Islamist perspective (note: just forget about the connotations of each concept, look at purely as a descriptive tag). So, the issue here is that neither of them agree on the same reference point, as a result, there's no real discussion here, just purely an argument for the sake of conformation bias among those listening. Neither one genuinely cares for what the other has to say.

In situations as this, a sincere discussion should've been had in private between them, without any incentive to stir egos or "win" (which is what an audience typically brings).

As Muslims -- and as Pakistanis, especially -- we've lost the art of having a discussion for the sake of knowledge and advancement. It's become a game of who can win arguments, and not so much about trying to convince the other side of changing their beliefs. Sure, someone might walk out of it, and nothing may change, but they would have much more respect for one another (and the opposing view) if that had occurred.

Bilal, you have no idea how good it feels to hear such perspective from a Pakistani, Muslim or otherwise. Please never stop thinking.

 

[Longhorn]

Pakistanis constantly crib about rising intolerance in India, how fascist Modi govt is. At the sametime, the way prof Hoodbhoy who is a public intellectual have been name called as traitor who shoud kicked out of pakistan for expressing his opinion is sheer hypocrisy of gargantuan proportions. Instead of making argument what he said, he is being name called for opening his mouth. These are same people who criticise Modi and Yoji and radical Hindu . You are clowns of Modi and yoji expect belong to different religion.

Same back side different cheek.
They don't do irony on this forum.

 

[Pan-Islamic-Pakistan]

it's an ego boosting forum for the dregs of the world after-all.
"oh mammy look at me I am challenging a PhD professor, I don't know what I am talking about but look at all them likes I am getting"

So we don't have a right to criticize him for denigrating Quaid e Azam?

The problem with Pakistan is basically there are two camps: normal everyday religious conservative, patriotic Pakistanis who respect others or those liberal elite who feel they are superior to everyone else, including God.

TLP are fringe, therefore I am not mentioning them.

It is quite clear that the education system for elites of this country has failed miserably and is creating an anti-national base which will have to be dealt with.

Pervez Hoodbhoy, Asma Jehangir, etc. basically is the other side of the coin which Lal Masjid was.

 

[Longhorn]

So we don't have a right to criticize him for denigrating Quaid e Azam?

The problem with Pakistan is basically there are two camps: normal everyday religious conservative, patriotic Pakistanis who respect others or those liberal elite who feel they are superior to everyone else, including God.

TLP are fringe, therefore I am not mentioning them.

It is quite clear that the education system for elites of this country has failed miserably and is creating an anti-national base which will have to be dealt with.

Pervez Hoodbhoy, Asma Jehangir, etc. basically is the other side of the coin which Lal Masjid was.

Why cannot someone who espouses liberal , tolerant, inclusive values be patriotic?
Is patriotism exclusive to the religious conservatives?
Who is anyone to declare another Pakistani as an anti national for holding different views?
How do you intend to deal with these people?
This Pakistan belongs to all Pakistanis, whatever colour of views they may hold.

 

[Pan-Islamic-Pakistan]

Why cannot someone who espouses liberal , tolerant, inclusive values be patriotic?
Is patriotism exclusive to the religious conservatives?
Who is anyone to declare another Pakistani as an anti national for holding different views?
How do you intend to deal with these people?
This Pakistan belongs to all Pakistanis, whatever colour of views they may hold.

Views in support of an enemy state and against the origin of your state, founder, civilization, and its raison d'être are dangerous to health of the country.

The young generation is being brainwashed by these charlatans who pass themselves off as some superior intellect that cannot be criticized by the masses of the Pakistani awaam.

Legal proceedings need to begin to erase these anti-national figures' toxic effects on society.

Not all liberals are the problem, but these certain ultra-liberal type of treacherous voices are.

We are taking actions against religious extremism, why should we neglect liberal/socialist extremism?

 

[Longhorn]

Views in support of an enemy state and against the origin of your state, founder, civilization, and its raison d'être are dangerous to health of the country.

The young generation is being brainwashed by these charlatans who pass themselves off as some superior intellect that cannot be criticized by the masses of the Pakistani awaam.

Legal proceedings need to begin to erase these anti-national figures' toxic effects on society.

Not all liberals are the problem, but these certain ultra-liberal type of treacherous voices are.

We are taking actions against religious extremism, why should we neglect liberal/socialist extremism?

We are taking action against religious extremism because religious extremists shoot and kill people.
You can't bring legal proceedings just because you don't agree with someone.
They need to have broken a law.
It's not against the law to hold a minority view.

 

[SQ8]

There is a section of society in Pakistan who after having experienced western society and gaining recognition, tend to want more of the attention and approval from the west in an attempt to assuage their own ideals of what it means to be intellectuals and forward thinkers.

It goes back to the system itself and history since the Eastern world was essentially in a dark ages for the past 500 years while the west developed in societal and scientific thoughts beyond them.

While the scientific superiority of the west/developed countries is undebatable, the societal development has to do with evolution being undertaken in those places versus the eastern society being stymied in its natural path of development by poor leaders.

Eventually, once the scientific thought and social thought evolves to what it is for the locals; the need for western approval will subside.

We are taking action against religious extremism because religious extremists shoot and kill people.
You can't bring legal proceedings just because you don't agree with someone.
They need to have broken a law.
It's not against the law to hold a minority view.

Legal proceedings are generally only valid if they lead to a defamation of character or threat to life.

 

[Rafi]

Can mods clear this thread, unnecessary sectarian bs and also attacking our Ismaeli brothers who are a big chunk of GB and are die hard Patriots.

 

[Longhorn]

There is a section of society in Pakistan who after having experienced western society and gaining recognition, tend to want more of the attention and approval from the west in an attempt to assuage their own ideals of what it means to be intellectuals and forward thinkers.

It goes back to the system itself and history since the Eastern world was essentially in a dark ages for the past 500 years while the west developed in societal and scientific thoughts beyond them.

While the scientific superiority of the west/developed countries is undebatable, the societal development has to do with evolution being undertaken in those places versus the eastern society being stymied in its natural path of development by poor leaders.

Eventually, once the scientific thought and social thought evolves to what it is for the locals; the need for western approval will subside.


Legal proceedings are generally only valid if they lead to a defamation of character or threat to life.

I think the " approval of the West" is a stick that is used to beat anyone that espouses liberal, inclusive or tolerant views.
Everyone has a right to voice their idea of what kind of a country they wish Pakistan to be.
Everyone has a right to air their views without fear.
I'm not sure why people are so afraid to hear an alternative opinion. These people don't go around killing people, they present their opinions in a civilised way. We should listen to what they have to say and then respond with a counter narrative if we have one. That's how it works.
Varied opinions are a good thing.
They make for an open and healthy society.

 

[Pan-Islamic-Pakistan]

I think the " approval of the West" is a stick that is used to beat anyone that espouses liberal, inclusive or tolerant views.
Everyone has a right to voice their idea of what kind of a country they wish Pakistan to be.
Everyone has a right to air their views without fear.
I'm not sure why people are so afraid to hear an alternative opinion. These people don't go around killing people, they present their opinions in a civilised way. We should listen to what they have to say and then respond with a counter narrative if we have one. That's how it works.
Varied opinions are a good thing.
They make for an open and healthy society.

Unfortunately some parts of our political elite are influenced by such extremist viewpoints.

N, PPP, ANP, MQM, Q, and even PTI have some sections who take the words of these people literally.

Pakistani media is one of the most toxic of all countries, they promote obscenity, target political leaders, and harass victims of abuse, etc.

This is why a media watchdog like PEMRA needs to be reformed and given new powers. Educational institutions and religious organizations need to be properly vetted.

Every tom, dick, and harry who has an opinion should not be allowed to influence the public, and esp the young generation.

In this way, we can study China and Turkey to properly reform our society.

Why wait for ultra-liberals, communists to take up arms against the state to take action?

 

[OldenWisdom...قول بزرگ]

I think the " approval of the West" is a stick that is used to beat anyone that espouses liberal, inclusive or tolerant views.
Everyone has a right to voice their idea of what kind of a country they wish Pakistan to be.
Everyone has a right to air their views without fear.
I'm not sure why people are so afraid to hear an alternative opinion. These people don't go around killing people, they present their opinions in a civilised way. We should listen to what they have to say and then respond with a counter narrative if we have one. That's how it works.
Varied opinions are a good thing.
They make for an open and healthy society.

Here is your problem Longhorn... Not all Pakistanis understand the context some are peddling!
If it is all a native discourse and everyone chimes in, well... good for them and good for all... a reasonable contextual debate is indeed the need of the hour... instead what you have is a guy frothing at mouth and turning blue... spewing a diatribe that most in that audience cannot contextualize. His subtle omissions and spiced edges are putting his audience in a trance ... who applaud his every utterance as prophetic.
Instead you compare him with ones who would take a life for far less... yet the ultimate orator satan itself is here to stay till the very last day and NOT blowing up on someone's face. The ultimate free speech guy!
These minions follow a very western tradition in lying at your face and peddling facts... while knowing fully well their own spin and lies without flinching a muscle... and on your face...

 

[Longhorn]

Unfortunately some parts of our political elite are influenced by such extremist viewpoints.

N, PPP, ANP, MQM, Q, and even PTI have some sections who take the words of these people literally.

Pakistani media is one of the most toxic of all countries, they promote obscenity, target political leaders, and harass victims of abuse, etc.

This is why a media watchdog like PEMRA needs to be reformed and given new powers. Educational institutions and religious organizations need to be properly vetted.

Every tom, dick, and harry who has an opinion should not be allowed to influence the public, and esp the young generation.

In this way, we can study China and Turkey to properly reform our society.

Why wait for ultra-liberals, communists to take up arms against the state to take action?

You opine that they are influencing other people to their way of thinking and that, in your opinion, is bad. Why? Why is it bad to change someone's opinion through debate, discussion and discourse? Isn't that what you are trying to do by posting on this forum? People should indeed be encouraged to present their views in a peaceful and civilised manner regardless of what those views are. If they chime with people's aspirations then they may gain traction, if not then they will just fade away. That's how democracy and a free society works. Why is your vision of Pakistani society more valid than their vision of a Pakistani society. Are they not equal citizens like you? Don't equal citizens have equal rights? Why should your preference prevail? Why are you so sure your vision is right and their's is wrong?
We need to learn to let people talk without labelling them traitors or anti nationals.

 

[Yaseen1]

this happens when you try to remove Islamic ideology from Pakistan and promote liberal ideology