From: eoahmad@ntuix.ntu.ac.sg (Othman Ahmad)
Subject: Re: Reason vs. Morals
Organization: Nanyang Technological University - Singapore
X-Newsreader: Tin 1.1 PL4
Date: Mon, 5 Oct 1992 10:08:04 GMT

bc205cs@opie.bgsu.edu writes:
: In his article, RE:Arabic Names, ahmad@ra.cs.umb.edu says that, although
: western science is a wonderful tool, it does not provide morality.  I agree
: with (dare I say it?) Martillo when he stated the driving forces of Western
: thought to be reason and humanity (Or something along those lines).
: 
: Reason is a tool, and a very powerful one at that, but I have come to believe
: that unchecked reason is harmful to humanity.  I agree with ahmad one-hundred
: percent when he says that something is missing, but my Western upbringing leads
: me to believe that reason is supreme.  
: 
: I am at a sort of a dilemma here.  On one hand is the belief that truth is more
: important than anything else (very roughly analogous to the story of Oedipus 
: digging further and further into the truth, even when he knew it was going to 
: condemn him.)  On the other hand is the belief that human life is highest on 
: the list, (Do unto others, etc..).  Somewhere in-between is Jesus, saying "Love
: your neighbor.., and The truth shall set you free.".

It is your christian western influence that led you into the dilemma.
The translations of the bible had been corrupted that we lost the actual
words of the message.
: 
: I believe that an absolute adherance to reason abolishes morals, so they can't
: co-exist, so my question is, which is right.  I have no set ideas on the

morals are just codes of conduct. If the morals are unreasonable, it is useless.
They are interlinked or at least in the Islamic point of view.

: subject, so I welcome anyone's response on the subject.  My qustion to ahmad
: is, "Who cares about morals?"  and my question to Martillo is, "If reason
: doesn't fit my moral code, why live by it?".
: 
Are you sure you have reasoned enough? Anyway what is reason? 
I have suspicions that reasons are just concensus based on observable facts.
Maybe you may want to read my paper called "Quantitative Measure of
Intelligence" which just ridicules intelligence to virtually nothing remarkable.

reasons also must depend on "anchor" or "hyphothesis" to be of any use.
	One anchor widely quoted is the "preservation of human life" but
this can be misused to the extent of eliminating all other life just for
short term gain, or to the destruction other humans except itself.
	This anchor is not universal because it neglects the universe.  
The best anchor is the presence of a supreme being(god) which can explain
anything that can be reasoned. If you make the hypothesis that there is
no god, everything collapses into the absurd remark "just happens", which
is extremely unreasonable, unacceptable to any scientist.
	However this hypothesis is the basis of Islam. Islam does not rely
on faith alone. However the presence of the Quran is a manifestation of the
presense of a supreme being.

--
Othman bin Ahmad, School of EEE,
Nanyang Technological University, Singapore 2263.
Internet Email: eoahmad@ntuix.ntu.ac.sg
Bitnet Email: eoahmad@ntuvax.bitnet