Results are out! Find what you need...fast. Get quick advice or join the chat
Hey there! Sign in to have your say on this topicNew here? Join for free to post

Young British Muslims more conservative than their elders?

Announcements Posted on
Applying to Uni? Let Universities come to you. Click here to get your perfect place 20-10-2014
    • 5 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Mehmoodd)
    But if you could pick and choose what part of religion you like, what's the point?
    You cannot really argue that, as that is what most muslims do anyway. Are they all not muslims also?

    I used to socialise with muslim lads loads when I was a teenage girl, and sorry but the vast vast majority of them were muslims by their own admission, would openly slate pork yet would still engage in pre marital sex and drinking, they were just very wary of any family or family friends finding out. Hence my friend, who dated quite a few of them over the years would often be told to duck down in the car by some when driving about so no family members or associates knew they had a white/kuufar girl in the car.

    Im not lying about this it is true, I have lots of experience as I've always lived in heavily pakistani populated areas, where a lot are muslims or their families are.
    • 12 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Indo-Chinese Food)
    hmm comments could be made there...

    by facade i mean many young guys run around with badly grown beards and chant political islamist slogans, but ask them to quote a specific passage of the quran of your choice- and you get silence.
    Young muslim men join 'islamic groups' for the same reason as young white men join football hooligan firms, it gives them a forum to vent
    This

    In my school there is a Friday prayer behind imam, and you probably get some of the worst Muslim boys there. Hanging around with girls, swearing, smoking etc. And in the winter, coming in with clothes covered in mud after playing football. I'm sure that is the only prayer they pray. There aren't many but still you do get them there.
    • 3 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by FJ1994)
    Where was this study conducted ? what was the sample like ?
    The study was conducted by Populus, an independent polling organization. They polled 1003 Muslims and weighted them in order to reflect the Muslim demographic in the UK as a whole.
    • 0 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Chloe xxx)
    You cannot really argue that, as that is what most muslims do anyway. Are they all not muslims also?

    I used to socialise with muslim lads loads when I was a teenage girl, and sorry but the vast vast majority of them were muslims by their own admission, would openly slate pork yet would still engage in pre marital sex and drinking, they were just very wary of any family or family friends finding out. Hence my friend, who dated quite a few of them over the years would often be told to duck down in the car by some when driving about so no family members or associates knew they had a white/kuufar girl in the car.

    Im not lying about this it is true, I have lots of experience as I've always lived in heavily pakistani populated areas, where a lot are muslims or their families are.
    That is not what most muslims do though.
    Alcohol is either banned in muslim countries or very hard to obtain.

    The majority of muslims don't drink.

    I understand that some may, you've had personal experiences, but to make this synonymous with Islam or that drinking is integrating is wrong.

    They can still be muslims tbf, if they repent and if they still believe. Just bad muslims init

    And your example of having to duck in a car is showing that what they're doing is wrong lol.
    • 0 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Indo-Chinese Food)
    hmm comments could be made there...

    by facade i mean many young guys run around with badly grown beards and chant political islamist slogans, but ask them to quote a specific passage of the quran of your choice- and you get silence.
    Young muslim men join 'islamic groups' for the same reason as young white men join football hooligan firms, it gives them a forum to vent
    Errrrr... Using call girls in not part of Islam at all...

    Lol. That does occur with a few, but the majority of the 'islamic group' members are taught. They justify why they think they're right, even if they're not.

    The passive ones, like those part of the facebook groups, chatting **** probably don't.
    • 142 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by avhhs)
    Being rude to anyone who disagrees with them, e. g. calling them kafir, giving dirty looks, discriminating (to name a few)
    Most muslims don't though. They just believe that all the infidels will go to hell It would be worse if one of someones child told them they didn't believe in Islam then they would probably go mental. I've experienced it as all my family & relatives are muslims.
    • 3 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by orcprocess)
    The study was conducted by Populus, an independent polling organization. They polled 1003 Muslims and weighted them in order to reflect the Muslim demographic in the UK as a whole.
    Hmmmm. 1003 out of 2.869x10^6 muslims isn't hugely representative. That's only 0.035% of the Muslim population. So I'm slightly worried about the statistics, because from what I've been told it hasn't been stratified for socio-economic and religious sect factors. It's false to believe Sunnis, Shias or Alevis have the same beliefs. Even in the Sunnis we have the Barelvis, Deobandi, Ahl al-Hadith, Ahmadiyya; I can go on. (So it's misleading to merely label them as Muslims when conducting a study). I think there may be a strong socio-economic correlation.

    Also internet polls and telephone surveys have a low response rate and there is a danger of thus only appealing to those who engage with such polls. We should also consider which type of people answer such questionnaires.

    I haven't had time to read the study, but from what I've heard it hasn't taken into consideration the different types of Muslims. If think there has to be further studies to make any real comment, and doing so without repeating the study multiple times to increase reliability would be foolish. There is a real danger of falsely using statistics and as a Statistician would point out this isn't enough evidence to make any bold claims; but then again those of the Humanities probably aren't as rigorous and it's slightly saddening to see mathematics being degraded in such a way. Nothing conclusive can be said with the evidence that has been given to us at the moment. The is the possibility that the 0.035% of people surveyed were all of the same school of thought or we may have merely selected people with whom support these so called more "conservative views". It would also be incorrect to call these views conservative as that would assume they are traditional attitudes and values and cautious about change or innovation.

    Hmm... my conclusion is nothing conclusive can be drawn from the evidence I have been presented with, and to be honest Journalists and Politicians are not mathematicians and have very little understanding of Statistics as a subject.
    • 3 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by RadiantA)
    Hmmmm. 1003 out of 2.869x10^6 muslims isn't hugely representative. That's only 0.035% of the Muslim population. So I'm slightly worried about the statistics, because from what I've been told it hasn't been stratified for socio-economic and religious sect factors. It's false to believe Sunnis, Shias or Alevis have the same beliefs. Even in the Sunnis we have the Barelvis, Deobandi, Ahl al-Hadith, Ahmadiyya; I can go on. (So it's misleading to merely label them as Muslims when conducting a study). I think there may be a strong socio-economic correlation.
    They have been weighted for socio-economic factors etc. 1000 may not sound a lot but compare it to voting intention polls which survey roughly 2,000 for the entire UK electorate (and these are usually very accurate). Furthermore the actual population size doesn't matter per se since interviewing more and more people has diminishing marginal returns.

    Also internet polls and telephone surveys have a low response rate and there is a danger of thus only appealing to those who engage with such polls. We should also consider which type of people answer such questionnaires.
    Again they use these surveys for voting intention and other surveys and they are usually accurate why in this case should it be different?

    I haven't had time to read the study, but from what I've heard it hasn't taken into consideration the different types of Muslims. If think there has to be further studies to make any real comment, and doing so without repeating the study multiple times to increase reliability would be foolish. There is a real danger of falsely using statistics and as a Statistician would point out this isn't enough evidence to make any bold claims; but then again those of the Humanities probably aren't as rigorous and it's slightly saddening to see mathematics being degraded in such a way. Nothing conclusive can be said with the evidence that has been given to us at the moment. The is the possibility that the 0.035% of people surveyed were all of the same school of thought or we may have merely selected people with whom support these so called more "conservative views". It would also be incorrect to call these views conservative as that would assume they are traditional attitudes and values and cautious about change or innovation.
    Well yes repeating the study would be nice but it is quite expensive. The statistician would probably point to the margin of error which is pretty good in this survey. Which sort of Muslim do you believe to answer surveys more than other? Why do you think that a random survey of muslims (then weighted by class, region, age etc) would produce a lopsided sample?

    and to be honest Journalists and Politicians are not mathematicians and have very little understanding of Statistics as a subject.
    Well we're in full agreement there. :P
    • 5 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Mehmoodd)
    That is not what most muslims do though.
    Alcohol is either banned in muslim countries or very hard to obtain.

    The majority of muslims don't drink.

    It doesnt make any difference to the fact that behind closed doors, many do. Ive also come across many older generations drinking. Of course, they go to all lengths to prevent other muslims finding out, hence why you think it is so unusual.

    I understand that some may, you've had personal experiences, but to make this synonymous with Islam or that drinking is integrating is wrong.

    Ive pointed out numerous times that this isnt what I think. It just proves that atleast integration is happening.

    They can still be muslims tbf, if they repent and if they still believe. Just bad muslims init

    Fair enough, not something that bothers me, I'm still in a state of mortal sin to my grandma

    And your example of having to duck in a car is showing that what they're doing is wrong lol.
    It shows that to them and who they know it is wrong. Doesnt make it wrong in general, if so all my friends (and quite a few other friends/acquaintances I might add) boyfriends in the past wouldnt have been pakistanis/muslims and also westerners on the sly from their families
    • 3 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Chloe xxx)
    It shows that to them and who they know it is wrong. Doesnt make it wrong in general, if so all my friends (and quite a few other friends/acquaintances I might add) boyfriends in the past wouldnt have been pakistanis/muslims and also westerners on the sly from their families
    Morals don't exist - nothing is wrong in general. Morals are merely a product of a tinkerbell effect. Why should anything be wrong if ones own existence is refutable? As far as we know we could be in the matrix.

    In short if we assume our existence is not assigned to the matrix but the plane of reality I see before me. (I can not assume we both see the same plane of realities or both existence in the same dimension as such assumptions are inaccurate, but if hypothetically if we did). We should choose our morals based on what advances humanity. So morals should be based on what increases growth per capita, technology and human knowledge. That is assuming we choose these as indicators for human advancements.

    So in this hypothetical reality I would indeed limit alcohol consumption to increase human productivity as alcohol has a large negative externalities making it a inferior good. (In case you do not know what an inferior good is, and inferior good is defined as a good which negative externalities are greater than it's positive externalities leading to a negative spillover which is not covered by the initial transaction.)

    This is more or less how I would prefer the world to work but as morals are a figment of imagination the world can exist any form it chooses to, or not exist at all. As there is no definite argument for why it should or shouldn't exist or what is or is't morally acceptable everything is acceptable as if a thing is to or is not to exist it must have cause, reason or logic. There is an evolution argument for morality though if moral have evolved they are not absolute thus they are again a figment of ones imagination. For example hot and cold are merely relative terms and are only defined as there is an absolute scale of temperature.

    I also find it odd why you're right winged - though I guess it's you're choice. There's probably an inverse correlation between the number of people who are right winged and those who study formal or natural science. This is just a preliminary hypothesis based on what I have observed. Inequality is viewed by the Right as inevitable, natural, normal, or desirable. Right-wing have been defined as the support or acceptance of social hierarchy. Well this is the definitions of right winged.

    I am unsure of your fixation on Asian or Muslim threads - I assume there is an underlying cause for such a fixation. It would be interesting for you to explain this in a logical scientific manner, though I assume the cause is anecdotal.

    I also find it odd why you want people to integrate with each other by becoming "westernised" as you put. As neither culture is superior and morals do not exist and there is no absolute scale for cultures I fail to see the reasoning. The logical path would be to accept to cultures and use the new culture to help the current culture to evolve. As I have come to the assumption you are not a natural or formal scientist you probably have a different perspective on the world filled with more emotion and less logic. Asian, African and Native American cultures are slowly diminishing so to some extent I think these cultures need to be preserved though at the same time all cultures must evolve though there is no rational reason why one should lose their culture to attempt to integrate with a society. As any sense of morality you hold is false I can not see you logic.

    Then again as you are probably not a scientist it is safe to assume that you probably aren't as rigorous and analytical when looking at the world. Though such an assumption would not be fair, so I will leave you with the benefit of the doubt.
    • 5 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by RadiantA)
    Morals don't exist - nothing is wrong in general. Morals are merely a product of a tinkerbell effect. Why should anything be wrong if ones own existence is refutable? As far as we know we could be in the matrix.


    In short if we assume our existence is not assigned to the matrix but the plane of reality I see before me. (I can not assume we both see the same plane of realities or both existence in the same dimension as such assumptions are inaccurate, but if hypothetically if we did). We should choose our morals based on what advances humanity. So morals should be based on what increases growth per capita, technology and human knowledge. That is assuming we choose these as indicators for human advancements.

    So in this hypothetical reality I would indeed limit alcohol consumption to increase human productivity as alcohol has a large negative externalities making it a inferior good. (In case you do not know what an inferior good is, and inferior good is defined as a good which negative externalities are greater than it's positive externalities leading to a negative spillover which is not covered by the initial transaction.)

    This is more or less how I would prefer the world to work but as morals are a figment of imagination the world can exist any form it chooses to, or not exist at all. As there is no definite argument for why it should or shouldn't exist or what is or is't morally acceptable everything is acceptable as if a thing is to or is not to exist it must have cause, reason or logic. There is an evolution argument for morality though if moral have evolved they are not absolute thus they are again a figment of ones imagination. For example hot and cold are merely relative terms and are only defined as there is an absolute scale of temperature.

    I also find it odd why you're right winged - though I guess it's you're choice. There's probably an inverse correlation between the number of people who are right winged and those who study formal or natural science. This is just a preliminary hypothesis based on what I have observed. Inequality is viewed by the Right as inevitable, natural, normal, or desirable. Right-wing have been defined as the support or acceptance of social hierarchy. Well this is the definitions of right winged.

    I am unsure of your fixation on Asian or Muslim threads - I assume there is an underlying cause for such a fixation. It would be interesting for you to explain this in a logical scientific manner, though I assume the cause is anecdotal.

    I also find it odd why you want people to integrate with each other by becoming "westernised" as you put. As neither culture is superior and morals do not exist and there is no absolute scale for cultures I fail to see the reasoning. The logical path would be to accept to cultures and use the new culture to help the current culture to evolve. As I have come to the assumption you are not a natural or formal scientist you probably have a different perspective on the world filled with more emotion and less logic. Asian, African and Native American cultures are slowly diminishing so to some extent I think these cultures need to be preserved though at the same time all cultures must evolve though there is no rational reason why one should lose their culture to attempt to integrate with a society. As any sense of morality you hold is false I can not see you logic.

    Then again as you are probably not a scientist it is safe to assume that you probably aren't as rigorous and analytical when looking at the world. Though such an assumption would not be fair, so I will leave you with the benefit of the doubt.
    I've not read that, all I can see throughout is 'morals' and 'morality', repeating itself over and over again.

    Most people dont think dating and socialising with others is immoral.

    I am really not interested in what you have to say if you feel the need to write such an essay lecturing others on what is moral or immoral and what we should base our morals on. Talk about trying to dictate, keep your snottily moralistic viewpoints to yourself thankyou.
    • 3 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Chloe xxx)
    I've not read that, all I can see throughout is 'morals' and 'morality', repeating itself over and over again.

    Most people dont think dating and socialising with others is immoral.

    I am really not interested in what you have to say if you feel the need to write such an essay lecturing others on what is moral or immoral and what we should base our morals on. Talk about trying to dictate, keep your snottily moralistic viewpoints to yourself thankyou.
    Quod erat demonstrandum. A beautiful statement to sum up my logical philisophical proof.

    moral - concerned with principles of right and wrong or conforming to standards of behavior and character based on those principles; "moral sense"; "a moral scrutiny"; "a moral lesson"; "a moral quandary"; "moral convictions"; "a moral life".

    To prescribe with authority; impose: dictated the rules of the game.
    To control or command:

    I suppose my initial assumption and hypothesis have been proven. You should note you have used the wrong terminology. I will not bother insulting you because are you have rightly demonstrate you do not seem adequate enough to comprehended high level logic or reasoning.

    By attempting to reply to me without reading what I have typed tells us an awful lot of information in regards to your personality. Despite what I typed was not at all insulting you felt the need to jump to conclusion and insult me.

    The definitions of "moralistic" and "dictate" do not at all reflect what I had typed - in fact I merely explain the realities of the world, as such I have nothing more to discuss with such a person.

    I am sorry to disappoint you, but sadly everything I have typed is perfectly logical. If you feel logic and rational is only an opinion; I am sorry.

    I have nothing to say to those who choose to believe fact is only an opinion.
    • 5 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by RadiantA)
    Quod erat demonstrandum. A beautiful statement to sum up my logical philisophical proof.

    moral - concerned with principles of right and wrong or conforming to standards of behavior and character based on those principles; "moral sense"; "a moral scrutiny"; "a moral lesson"; "a moral quandary"; "moral convictions"; "a moral life".

    To prescribe with authority; impose: dictated the rules of the game.
    To control or command:

    I suppose my initial assumption and hypothesis have been proven. You should note you have used the wrong terminology. I will not bother insulting you because are you have rightly demonstrate you do not seem adequate enough to comprehended high level logic or reasoning.

    By attempting to reply to me without reading what I have typed tells us an awful lot of information in regards to your personality. Despite what I typed was not at all insulting you felt the need to jump to conclusion and insult me.

    The definitions of "moralistic" and "dictate" do not at all reflect what I had typed - in fact I merely explain the realities of the world, as such I have nothing more to discuss with such a person.

    I am sorry to disappoint you, but sadly everything I have typed is perfectly logical. If you feel logic is only an opinion I am sorry.
    Your essay had nothing to do with my original post and was nothing except a lecture and lesson on your version of social morals.

    If my post had been about mother and son having children together or a criminal robbing an old woman it would have been relevant.

    You are just trying to insinuate your own moral standard on everyone else, its quite bigoted.
    • 0 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    Because they are more educated in terms of they have a distinction between faith and culture that older generations didn't have, mosques have taken a turn around and began teaching in English without influence of culture, again previous generations were confused as culture seemed to take predesence over religion. As well as this as a young British Muslim, surrounded by a different culture and being treated as an alien can lead to a higher value and pride of their own religion.
    • 3 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Chloe xxx)
    Your essay had nothing to do with my original post and was nothing except a lecture and lesson on your version of social morals.

    If my post had been about mother and son having children together or a criminal robbing an old woman it would have been relevant.

    You are just trying to insinuate your own moral standard on everyone else, its quite bigoted.
    I'll take it you still aren't able to comprehend such logic, but c'est la vie.

    If only I could simplify things for you, but you're arrogance probably wouldn't allow you to read what I had posted or answer any of my numerous question I had asked. I see you still haven't bothered to read my post and have just jumped to another assumption. The assumption that it was my version of social morals is flawed as what I have said is not an opinion but pure rational, fact and logic; which may be a bit too advanced for you.

    You are indeed very amusing - by using the word bigot you assume these are my opinion. Which again is false. Is e^piexi = -1 an opinion.

    What I have said is merely a philosophical proof which follows a path of logic and rational that I assume you aren't familiar with. It is enjoyable watching you ramble on about these so called "opinions" I have presented you with -when indeed there are none. As you haven't bothered to read what I have typed you are not able to comment upon it. Funny - such simple logic even supersedes you. I suppose you believe wave-particle duality, quantum entanglement and relativity are all opinions. You indeed are an odd creature.

    Actually forget it - such people are not even worth me replying to. Keep believing atoms don't exist and mathematics is merely an opinion. You are probably happy living in you're little ignorant world. You are not even worth my time.
    • 5 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by RadiantA)
    I'll take it you still aren't able to comprehend such logic, but c'est la vie.

    If only I could simplify things for you, but you're arrogance probably wouldn't allow you to read what I had posted or answer any of my numerous question I had asked. I see you still haven't bothered to read my post and have just jumped to another assumption. The assumption that it was my version of social morals is flawed as what I have said is not an opinion but pure rational, fact and logic; which may be a bit too advanced for you.

    You are indeed very amusing - by using the word bigot you assume these are my opinion. Which again is false. Is e^piexi = -1 an opinion.

    What I have said is merely a philosophical proof which follows a path of logic and rational that I assume you aren't familiar with. It is enjoyable watching you ramble on about these so called "opinions" I have presented you with -when indeed there are none. As you haven't bothered to read what I have typed you are not able to comment upon it. Funny - such simple logic even supersedes you. I suppose you believe wave-particle duality, quantum entanglement and relativity are all opinions. You indeed are an odd creature.

    Actually forget it - such people are not even worth me replying to. Keep believing atoms don't exist and mathematics is merely an opinion. You are probably happy living in you're little ignorant world. You are not even worth my time.
    Another essay of absoloute rubbish that has nothing to do with what I originally said.

    What are you bleating on about philosophy and logic for?

    The difference in supposed 'morals' is a product of upbringing and culture, all people are also different on their view of life, I have no idea why you felt the need to write such a long winded rant. Its not that I dont understand it, its that it is totally irrelevant. You seem to lump all people into one category and then try and explain why they have their morals and others dont have any, in your words. I never even mentioned morals once in my post, it was IRRELEVANT.

    About 3 paragraphs on your posts have also been calling me names, shows a lot about your supposed supreme intelligence doesnt it?

    Please, stop going on Ill lose it if you write another essay...post in the philosophy section.

    DO you even know what morals are? Why do you need to rant so much about them? Because you want every being to sucumb to what you believe is moralistic.
    • 3 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Chloe xxx)
    Another essay of absoloute rubbish that has nothing to do with what I originally said.

    What are you bleating on about philosophy and logic for?

    The difference in morals is a product of upbringing and culture, I have no idea why you felt the need to write such a long winded rant. Its not that I dont understand it, its that it is totally irrelevant.

    About 3 paragraphs on your posts have also been calling me names, shows a lot about your supposed supreme intelligence doesnt it?

    Please, stop going on Ill lose it if you write another essay...post in the philosophy section.
    Very interesting you seem to know very little about the differences in morals. Morality is far more complex than what you seem to assume and is merely a product of the tinker-bell effect. I could explain it to you but isn't this more fun just watching you lose it. Calling you names; hmm.. I believe everything I have said is accurate. Now if I had insulted you it probably is your own fault - jumping to such conclusions it's no surprise you can't maintain calm and rational. I do believe everything is a philosophical or scientific question. The definition of philosophy is the "the study of the fundamental nature of knowledge, reality, and existence".

    Funny how you haven't read a word of my posts and continue to reply with such poorly thought out logic. By calling my intelligence supreme you assumes it is superior to all yet I have not at all made any such comment. I have merely said you are not able to follow any logical argument I present you with. Calling you names really has nothing to do with the level of intellect a person has, but I don't assume you would know that. Now if we examine the cause of all this we will see that in fact everything I have said has strong foundations and your actions have only further strengthened my hypothesises as regards to you.

    Rant: Speak or shout at length in a wild, impassioned wary

    Despite my comment avoid showing any emotions you felt it was impassioned. Either you have a rudimentary grasp of language or you still refuse to read what I have said and thus continue to merely enrage yourself.

    As you seem to feel my essays are "absolute rubbish" I guess you probably can't see how perfectly logical it is. It applies to what you have said on multiple levels and still currently applies to what you say.

    Funny you do I know what morals are - interesting how my first comment explains the concept of morals in far more detail that you probably understand. I find it even more humerus how idiotic you come across when my opinions on morals haven't at all been shown. I have explain the concept of morality and given a well defined proof. This is probably far beyond you.

    Maybe I can point you to a few books on the origin of morality and the concept of morality to enlighten your bleak mind.
    Lectures on the History of Moral Philosophy is a very good book and could probably help you understand better what I have been talking about.

    I assume you don't understand the definition of moralistic as in this context it is again the wrong word to use.

    Such fallacy is indeed humerus. Well I have no more time to entertain such an easily confused mind; besides as much as I would enjoy humiliating you and watch you crumble, my time is far more important that to waste on a person who is already at tipping point. Good luck "losing it". Indeed keep believing you understand a word I type.

    With this beautiful quote I think I will leave you to continue on your self destructive rampage. "Where ignorance is bliss, 'tis folly to be wise."
    • 5 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by RadiantA)
    Very interesting you seem to know very little about the differences in morals. Morality is far more complex than what you seem to assume and is merely a product of the tinker-bell effect. I could explain it to you but isn't this more fun just watching you lose it. Calling you names; hmm.. I believe everything I have said is accurate. Now if I had insulted you it probably is your own fault - jumping to such conclusions it's no surprise you can't maintain calm and rational. I do believe everything is a philosophical or scientific question. The definition of philosophy is the "the study of the fundamental nature of knowledge, reality, and existence".

    Funny how you haven't read a word of my posts and continue to reply with such poorly thought out logic. By calling my intelligence supreme you assumes it is superior to all yet I have not at all made any such comment. I have merely said you are not able to follow any logical argument I present you with. Calling you names really has nothing to do with the level of intellect a person has, but I don't assume you would know that. Now if we examine the cause of all this we will see that in fact everything I have said has strong foundations and your actions have only further strengthened my hypothesises as regards to you.

    Rant: Speak or shout at length in a wild, impassioned wary

    Despite my comment avoid showing any emotions you felt it was impassioned. Either you have a rudimentary grasp of language or you still refuse to read what I have said and thus continue to merely enrage yourself.

    As you seem to feel my essays are "absolute rubbish" I guess you probably can't see how perfectly logical it is. It applies to what you have said on multiple levels and still currently applies to what you say.

    Funny you do I know what morals are - interesting how my first comment explains the concept of morals in far more detail that you probably understand. I find it even more humerus how idiotic you come across when my opinions on morals haven't at all been shown. I have explain the concept of morality and given a well defined proof. This is probably far beyond you.

    Maybe I can point you to a few books on the origin of morality and the concept of morality to enlighten your bleak mind.
    Lectures on the History of Moral Philosophy is a very good book and could probably help you understand better what I have been talking about.
    Another essay. Why dont you just answer what my original post had to do with morals at all?
    • 3 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Chloe xxx)
    Another essay. Why dont you just answer what my original post had to do with morals at all?
    Oh I have - if such basic logic is far beyond you're understanding I feel no reason to simplify it. The concept of wrong and right is in fact is a philosophical and moral question. I'm not surprised that you are unable to understand such basic concepts.

    Well I think we should leave it there - with a rudimentary grasp of concepts you aren't at all helping your case.

    As we can see you are a complete waste of my time - the only reason I am continuing is due to that small satisfaction I gain from watching you drown...

    The concept of morality is probably far beyond you - I would congratulate you for attempting to understand something you obviously have no experience, though you have barely made any effort at all.

    So from here on I end my conversations with you - "Where ignorance is bliss, 'tis folly to be wise".
    • 5 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by RadiantA)
    Oh I have - if such basic logic is far beyond you're understanding I feel no reason to simplify it.
    No you havnt. My post had nothing to do with morals at all, it was about my friend who had dated many pakistani men.

    No idea how morals come into it at all but hey thats TSR for you, snottily moralistic.

Reply

Submit reply

Register

Thanks for posting! You just need to create an account in order to submit the post
  1. this can't be left blank
    that username has been taken, please choose another Forgotten your password?
  2. this can't be left blank
    this email is already registered. Forgotten your password?
  3. this can't be left blank

    6 characters or longer with both numbers and letters is safer

  4. this can't be left empty
    your full birthday is required
  1. By joining you agree to our Ts and Cs, privacy policy and site rules

  2. Slide to join now Processing…

Updated: April 11, 2012
New on TSR

A-level results day

Is it about making your parents proud?

Article updates
Useful resources
Reputation gems:
You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.