Islamic apologist HIJAB told that Objectivists (meaning atheists) can NOT ask about Moral Questions (e.g child marriage) because their first premise is unsubstantiated.
HOW ON EARTH DOES IT WORK?
Firsty, the issue of Abrogation of Verses (Nasikh-Manshukh) proves that Islam itself is not objectivist. Secondly, u dont ask questions about things that doesnt change (objectivism), u only ask about things that changes (subjectivism).
I grew up in a Christian household in a Christian community in the middle of The Bible Belt. Took me over forty years to finally escape my religious indoctrination, even though the bible and its teachings never made sense to me from the time I was 7 or 8. Wanna know the primary reason it took me so long to free my mind? It’s actually quite an impressive and simplistically INGENIUS failsafe method concocted by those who developed the whole “belief system”. In a nutshell: DO NOT QUESTION GOD. Questioning God is the same as admitting you do not have faith in God. And you risk going to hell. Doing any sort of research in regards to the bible and its origins/development is the same as questioning God. And you risk going to hell. Those who try to provide you with any information that counters the bible are “agents of Satan” trying to lead you astray. And no matter how logical or reasonable they sound, ignore them, or risk going to hell. Remember, Satan is “The Great Deceiver” and will use many tricks to pull you away from the Lord. And so on and so on and so on…
Bottom line is, “Sit down, shut up, and believe what your preacher and Christian family/friends tell you. NEVER question God or the bible. A TRUE person of faith requires NO explanations. And if you DO question God, you will send yourself to hell.” Again, it is a simple, yet diabolical, retention system. Very difficult to escape. I know this from personal experience.
Tell him his beliefs are entirely subjective, and that all morality is subjective, and that it cannot be otherwise. Even if he could demonstrate any objective evidence for any deity, how would he know the claims assigned it are objectively moral, without resorting to a circular reasoning fallacy? If he has nothing beyond the usual circular reasoning fallacy, that the claims are perfectly moral because the deity is perfectly moral, then without objective evidence for both claims tell him his argument is irrational, and that you don’t accept irrational or unevidenced arguments.
I’d also tell him that you don’t care what he believes about your moral worldview, as it is your subjective view, and you have the same right to this as he does to his subjective adherence to unevidenced religious doctrine and dogma.
As others have said, until he explains what he is claiming this first premise is, we have no idea what he’s claiming. However prima facie atheism is disbelief, it is the lack of belief in a deity or deity, that neither has nor needs a first premise, so it sounds like he is using an argumentum ad ignorantiam fallacy as well, though I can’t be sure until he explains exactly what he is claiming.
How did Atheists get to be Objectivists? Atheism has nothing to do with Objectivism. Does the idiot know what Objectivism is? Perhaps our friend has read one too many Ann Ryand Books.
Atheists are people who do not believe in a God. Why is this so difficult a concept to grasp. The Muslim says, “There is one God and Allah is his name.” The atheist says, "I don’t get it. Why should I believe you? How do you know this and what evidence do you have? " Um… that has nothing to do with Objectivism.
All human beings ask about moral questions. Every human culture on the planet, theist and non-theist has asked about moral questions. What sort of idiot assumes a family, clan, tribe, community, small town, of any kind, can exist without some sense of shared morality? Nobody is that stupid! Or are they?
Who cares if Islam is Objectivist? This is complete nonsense, a red herring word tossed out to get you to focus on a complete non-issue. Objectivism has shit all to do with nothing. It was a philosophy of the 50’s, popularized by Ann Rynd and has nothing to do with Islam or Atheism. This is a bunch of rambling nonsense. Objectivist movement - Wikipedia
This guy is too stupid to argue with. He sets up a straw man by defining atheism the way he wants to define it and then proceeds to beat it with a stick. This is fallacious bullshit 101.
Worse still; typically, when an argument depends on something that can’t (or won’t) be
proved (or substantiated), we include it as a premise. Pointing out that someone’s premise is unsubstantiated is like pointing out that water is wet.
This person [you’re quoting] sounds like a crack cocaine addict.
Having encountered pedlars of Islamic apologetics in the past, I’m familiar with their total failure to understand even elementary rules of discourse, let alone anything sophisticated enough to feature in the output of, say, Willard Van Ormand Quine.
Most of them are toddlers pretending (extremely badly) to be Bertrand Russell level philosophers.
Absolutely. Questioning and searching for answers IS one of the best ways to prevent such harmful mindsets. HOWEVER… When you are conditioned from a very young age to believe you will be tortured for eternity if you DARE start doubting and questioning The LORD, well… … Let’s just say it’s quite an effective method to keep inquisitive minds at bay. THEN, on top of the threat of hell, you also run the risk of being outcast by your friends AND family. And that is often a more scary prospect than the hell threat. Speaking from personal experience, here’s the thing…
As I’ve said before, all the inconsistencies and contradictions I was taught in church never made sense to me. Naturally, I was confused and I wanted to understand. Thus, I would ask questions and seek answers from the adults who loved me and cared about me. Simple questions were handled easily enough, but I rarely asked simple questions. (And even the answers to the simple questions typically left me with MORE questions.) Anyway, long story short, when the questions I asked started getting too difficult for the adult to explain (aka: making them uncomfortable), the standard response became, “Well, we don’t always know why God does certain things. We just have to have faith and trust him and love him.” Of course, for the questions that took their discomfort to higher levels, the responses became, “Young man, God loves you, and that is all you need to know. Satan is very deceitful, and he puts these doubts and questions in your head to lead you away from God.” As you might guess, the thought of having the devil control your mind is a terrifying concept for a little kid. Therefore, after hearing that enough times, those questions stopped being asked. And if they did happen to pop back into the brain now and then, they were quickly stuffed back into the mental closet, out of sight out of mind. But they are never really gone…
So, believe me when I tell you, I can truly relate to those who are having doubts but are too afraid to question. Aside from some of the idiots here I call friends, that is one of the main reasons I hang around this place. If given the chance, I want to help those who come here genuinely wanting assistance in escaping their religious stranglehold. Because I know how miserable it can be having all that doubt and anxiety stuck in your head.
1610s, originally in the philosophical sense of “considered in relation to its object” (opposite of subjective), formed on pattern of Medieval Latin objectivus, from objectum “object” (see object (n.)) + -ive. Meaning “impersonal, unbiased” is first found 1855, influenced by German objektiv. Related: Objectively.
Objectivist: a tendency to lay stress on the objective or external elements of cognition . the tendency, as of a writer, to deal with things external to the mind rather than with thoughts or feelings.
: any of various theories asserting the validity of objective phenomena over subjective experience especially :REALISM sense 2a
2**:** an ethical theory that moral good is objectively real or that moral precepts are objectively valid
3**:** a 20th century movement in poetry growing out of imagism and putting stress on form