Metal in Favour of Islamism

Join Share

94 members| 256 shouts

Leader: Fiximus
Join Policy: Open
Created on: 17 Sep 2007
Description:
A group for metalheads that support the spread of Islam accross the globe and its ultimate victory over the decadence of Americanized judeo-christianity.

Join if you think Döner Kebab is much more awesome than international zionism.

(and you should! Because for a start, you can't eat international zionism.)



Muhammad statt Jesus!

Weekly Top Artists

Connected Artists

Shoutbox

Leave a comment. Log in to Last.fm or sign up.
  • postvegan

    amazing group

    29 Aug 2014 Reply
  • Slovanka

    Islam forbidding music? Really? :)

    25 Jul 2014 Reply
  • aggroroofer

    You really don't see any problem with refusing to learn about something and then presenting your idea of it as fact? (p. s. The most visible case would be the religion of market and competition; I encounter that everywhere...)

    6 Apr 2014 Reply
  • Slovanka

    How can I speak out your thoughts? Telepathy? Why would I argue my case with marxist-leninists or pretty much anyone else, I am just giving an example of the most visible case of atheist people, who are actually religious, but their religion is political (civic, secular or whatever) one? It'd be useless to argue. Just like arguing my case with you. You're obviously already decided, what's right and wrong in this case, just like I am.

    5 Apr 2014 Reply
  • aggroroofer

    I'm pretty sure you wouldn't even listen to marxist economic theory, so how could you argue your case? (Since you're so anxious to talk about marxism), is there anything in particular that they're wrong about?... (For Soocrates, read this, I'm not a scholar), but sure his antagonists may have been rational - that's what I said on April 2 about "perspective and purpose". - I don't know the Quran, but not everything else is religion. - And you weren't speaking out YOUR thoughts but MINE, which you were proud of not wanting to know about ("like if you knew us, but you don't").

    4 Apr 2014 Reply
  • Slovanka

    The problem is, that marxism-leninism is just that, scientific and therefore correct. Logical fallacy or not, explain it to marxist-leninists. It's not like they'd listen though. And really, I am not sure about 'rational' thought of Socrates, but you already know, I hate the word rationality. How is actually Socrates 'rational'? And how it actually got him killed? Maybe it didn't? Weren't Athenian opponents of Socrates just as 'rational' as he was? Just because I am not interested in someone else's thoughts, I should refrain from speaking out mine? Well, actually, I mostly do refrain, mostly. Religion as a precursor of science, but I guess it starts and ends with creation myth. But it matters not, whether it was a precursor of science or not. Most of Quran is just about life, society, ethics etc. It does not explain that much, it guides or gives a hint on how to conduct and that's why I refer to it as a 'guide'. And of course, it is a historic source as well.

    3 Apr 2014 Reply
  • aggroroofer

    "And what if I am not interested in their ideas..."? You might refrain from trying to explain them. (duh!) Here's something you said a while ago: "How easy it is to say that someone has no idea of life, like if you knew us, but you don't."

    3 Apr 2014 Reply
  • aggroroofer

    Yes, Socrates used rational thought for political gains... - What you perceive religion to be doesn't matter for its origins. Look at natural and creation myths all over the world - religion started out as a precursor for science (I have nothing against life guides if that works for you). - "proclaimed itself scientific and therefore correct" that's a logical fallacy. Science always relies on the available facts or those it thinks pertinent. So as new facts or connections become available, new models have to be developed, old ones discarded or adapted. Exactly like you (well I, at any rate) learned natural sciences in school. - And by the way, I have read the "Capital", and while not including modern development for obvious reasons it is definitly scientific economic theory (and a lot more methodical than popular theories about capitalism).

    3 Apr 2014 Reply
  • Slovanka

    And what if I am not interested in their ideas and way of thinking either? Why would I make myself angry? What's the point? Of course sometimes I stumble on bullshit I don't agree with, it can't be helped, but generally I avoid it, because I won't change their opinion and they won't change mine. Seriously, for example no socialist ever convinced me of his truth. I was only infuriated with them. Although I try not to give a damn. Hmm, wasn't Socrates executed, because he opposed Athenian government (Athenian democracy) and praised Sparta at the same time? Although, officially he was executed for corrupting hearts and minds of Athenians and disrespect for Greek gods and goddesses, wasn't he? Believing in Quran is also a belief in a certain possibility in the end. Also I've never perceived religion as science or world explaining ideology. It is more like a guide to me. And by the way, marxism-leninism proclaimed itself scientific and therefore correct. And that's the problem.

    3 Apr 2014 Reply
  • aggroroofer

    Sorry, got it a little late: "Using the word"? I suppose you mean actual excuses? Even so, behind every deliberate social agenda there is a rationale. But those are always subject to perspective (or better yet purpose), so one would have to determine the specific purpose of every reasoning. A discussion of marxism doesn't really belong here and would take far too long, but there are good reason for calling marxist theory 'scientific' (which isn't the same as 'all correct'). If you wanted to know you should ask; if not don't scoff, please.

    2 Apr 2014 Reply
  • aggroroofer

    The point isn't interest in specific people but interest in ideas and thinking itself. How would you know how I think if you never tried to understand? Belief can be many things; believing in certain possibilities is fundamentally different from a belief that explains the whole world. Sciences aren't useless religions; rather religion was mankinds first and crudest attempt at science. But when I say 'reason', 'logic' and 'rationality' I am ineed talking about philosophy because it can handle those terms. Btw, "using the word 'rationality' politically" is exactly what Socrates had done, apparently he was even executed for it...

    2 Apr 2014 Reply
  • Slovanka

    Actually, using the word 'rationality' politically or for real political gains is actually quite a new thing. It was for example marxism-leninism that proclaimed itself scientific. :D It's not the same as rational, but we're getting there. I am not talking about philosophy here. So, you were having discussions with religious folk and they didn't ask you back about yourself. That kind of proves nothing. When I am asked such question I rarely ask back, unless that person is of any actual interest for me. If someone is interested in me doesn't mean I am interested in him too. Also, the self-proclaimed irreligious (anti-religious, atheist etc.) people have some sort of set of beliefs as well and they're probably believers of some 'substitute religion', 'secular religion', 'political religion' etc. And so, in the end we're pretty much all religious. Some are Muslims, some Leninists and some believe in Global Warming.

    2 Apr 2014 Reply
  • RedArmada

    This is the most embarrassing thing I've ever seen on Last.fm

    2 Apr 2014 Reply
  • aggroroofer

    And please get your head around the idea that I DON'T DENY NOR SUPRESS EMOTIONS (8th time). Remember: You think the mere presence of them cancels out rationality. But I have emotions all the time (some are real fun), yet I can often see if and where they override a calculation and I may do something unreasonable, like not go for groceries but a kebab due to laziness. It really isn't only about worldview, but everyday calculation of scenarios for decisions. That's why I won't run out of examples, ever ;-)

    1 Apr 2014 Reply
  • aggroroofer

    And 'nowadays' seems to have begun two and a half millenia ago at the age of Socrates and Plato. You keep insisting on the term 'justification', which simply ignores the fact that (contrary to doctrine) the 'art of thinking' teaches a way to think that enables people get similar results out of an unfamiliar question. --- The real problem here is (I think) religion. Over the last twenty years I've had quite a bit of conversation with religious folk. One thing about that stood out: While I've learned a lot about their respective worldviews and way of thinking, not more than twice have I ever been asked about the way I think. You guys just assume you already know, although you're almost always wrong predicting or interpreting my answers. I don't have the same problem...

    1 Apr 2014 Reply
  • aggroroofer

    (Thanks for someone who at least keeps to the subject!) But no, psychology is mostly inwardly focussed, on our reactions to our surroundings. But if there is no medical distinction between feeling and reasoning it just is the wrong tool for the job. I also wouldn't use physics to explain economy though they obviously have some kind of relationship.

    1 Apr 2014 Reply
  • Slovanka

    I am kind of late with reply, but I went on a vacation with my husband to Passo del Tonale for skiing and ignored the internet, among other things, completely. Funny thing is you mentioned psychology, which is a social science and in fact is aimed at our surroundings outside our skull. And admittedly, I am not a psychologist. I've always focused on actual processes in our brains. Anyways, since you asked a question, why the term "rationality" exists. Nowadays, it also exists as a justification for certain world-views to dominate (they proclaims themselves to be rational, it's a hip word). Although, in the beggining it meant a faith or belief (!!!) in human capabality of thinking clearly without emotion.

    30 Mar 2014 Reply
  • RedArmada

    ISLAM WILL DOMINATE THE WORLD

    25 Mar 2014 Reply
  • aggroroofer

    كافر‎ I am (Very astute of you; I think no one else noticed!), but how exactly am I an imperialist? I'm a freaking roofer, I don't own anything...

    24 Mar 2014 Reply
  • RedArmada

    AGGROROOFER IS A KAFIR IMPERIALIST

    24 Mar 2014 Reply
  • All 256 shouts
Play Group Chart

Newest Members (94)

See all members

Recent Activity

  • borifilico joined this group. last week
  • postvegan joined this group. August 2014
  • A deleted user joined this group. July 2014
  • Slurmz94 left this group. July 2014
  • SebaVegan joined this group. July 2014
  • Dulukk joined this group. July 2014
  • Slurmz94 joined this group. May 2014
  • MelankoliaGoth joined this group. April 2014
  • zoraxx left this group. March 2014
  • zoraxx joined this group. March 2014