Islam and the Future of Tolerance - Sam Harris, Maajid terney.info - Ebook download as ePub .epub), Text File .txt) or read book online. Jacket design: Graciela Galup (alk. paper) -8 (EPUB) Islam and the future of tolerance: a dialogue / Sam Harris, Maajid Nawaz. But the problem is that Islam isn't a religion of peace, and the so-called . Islam and the Future of Tolerance: A Dialogue [ebook] by Sam Harris (epub/mobi ) In this short book, Sam Harris and Maajid Nawaz invite you to join an urgently needed conversation: Is Islam a religion of peace or war?.
|Language:||English, Spanish, Arabic|
|Distribution:||Free* [*Registration Required]|
Read [PDF] Islam and the Future of Tolerance: A Dialogue Book PDF EPUB. 1. Author Sam Harris Islam and the Future of Tolerance: A. Islam and the future of tolerance is a feature length documentary of an unlikely conversation between prominent atheist author and philosopher sam harris and. Islam and the Future of Tolerance, EPUB eBook invite you to join an urgently needed conversation: Is Islam a religion of peace or war?.
Is it amenable to reform? Why do so many Muslims seem drawn to extremism? The authors demonstrate how two people with very different views can find common ground. Recensie s [A] wise little volume. Those interested in a deferential and detailed dialogue about human rights, Islam, jihadism, and pluralism will find this book both enlightening and engaging.
Their back-and-forth clarifies multiple confusions that plague the public conversation about Islam. Sam Harris and Maajid Nawaz should be commended for conducting a frank and wide-ranging conversation about a number of key issues around religion, reform, and Islam in the modern world.
Nawaz's approach is based upon detailed familiarity with extremist worldviews, and with the history and tradition of reform theology and renewal within Islam that desperately needs to be amplified. I hope that this debate will be a fruitful endeavor, and illustrate that, in our increasingly-polarized world, it is possible and even normal for people with different viewpoints to have a civilized conversation and to learn from each other.
Usama Hasan, Islamic scholar Back in Islam's formative centuries, the engagement of Muslims with their ideological opponents helped them to forge the doctrines and traditions of their nascent faith--and perhaps now, as Maajid Nawaz locks horns with Sam Harris, we are at the start of another stage in Islam's evolution. It is certainly a privilege to read their conversation, and to enjoy a flavor of those great debates between rival scholars that were once staged for the entertainment of the Caliph in Baghdad.
The Birth of Islam and the Rise of the Global Arab Empire It is sadly uncommon, in any era, to find dialogue based on facts and reason--but even more rarely are Muslim and non-Muslim intellectuals able to maintain critical distance on broad questions about Islam.
Which makes Islam and the Future of Tolerance something of a unicorn. Nawaz and Harris discuss Islamism and jihadism from a historical as well as a philosophical angle, with no trace of sentiment or dogma. Most conversations about religion are marked by the inability of either side to listen, but here, at last, is a proper debate.
The result is as illuminating as it is fascinating. Courteous and at times even chivalrous, the two men address every thorny issue on Islam, issues that lead so many others into wild shouting matches, personal attacks, and accusations of Islamophobia.
In this gem of a book the authors lay it all out and set the rest of us a great example: Given the importance and the urgency of the topic, we must all read it and follow in their footsteps.
Islam and the Future of Tolerance exemplifies the virtues of open dialogue All Harris and Nawaz seek is to give voice to the spirit of rebellion and reformation smoldering in the lands of Islam. Forcing it into flame will doubtless be a long time coming, but these two men should be lauded for endeavoring to provide a spark.
They seem a vital contribution to the current conversation, so often defined by the real or imagined divides that the authors encourage us to cross Islam and the Future of Tolerance deepens our understanding of religion, ideology, politics and the possibility of common ground.
It could hardly come at a better time. This honest and intelligent dialogue is a superb exploration of the intellectual and moral issues involved. Lees de eerste pagina's. Reviews Schrijf een review. SVerberne 23 november Ik raad dit product aan. Goede kwaliteit Voordelige koop. Geschreven bij Islam and the Future of Tolerance Twee pluspunten: Vond je dit een nuttige review?
Overige kenmerken Subtitel A Dialogue. Kies je bindwijze. Direct beschikbaar.
Verkoop door bol. Ebook Op verlanglijstje. E-book is direct beschikbaar na aankoop E-books lezen is voordelig Dag en nacht klantenservice Veilig betalen. Anderen bekeken ook. Sam Harris The End of Faith: We include attitudes toward these three groups in a single model to recover correlations in prejudice after adjusting for known demographic and ideological sources of prejudice, as well as for theoretically postulated media effects.
We want to clarify that we do not test a theory of media-induced Asian or Arab prejudice, nor evaluate a theory of the relative size of association of media-exposure toward these groups. The advantages of our multivariate regression models are that they pool information about attitudes to the three minority groups within a single model to obtain more accurate estimates of all coefficients, while also obtaining more accurate estimates of prejudice correlations from the residuals of the models [ 21 ].
Second, our statistical models adjust for the co-variation of media exposure with demographic and ideological drivers of prejudice, which enables us to isolate the relative contribution of media influences over and above mechanisms identified in previous research [ 13 ].
Third, we adjust for correlated error terms arising from latent group-level dependencies by modelling religious denominations and geographical locations as random effects. This allows us to handle statistical non-independence arising from group-level clustering. Fourth, we use Bayesian regression to estimate parameters in the model, which improves uncertainty estimates and affords transparent and intuitive probabilistic interpretations [ 22 ].
We use Bayesian estimation because we follow those who urge that statistical inference is best conceived as a process of estimating unknown, and in most cases unknowable, population parameters as best one can, with a clear appreciation of the inevitable limitations that confront inferences based on inherently uncertain magnitudes and systems [ 23 ]. Fifth, in both sets of analyses— 1 anger toward Muslims and 2 warmth toward Muslims—we model the interaction between political orientation and news exposure to estimate whether media exposure effects reliably differ among liberals and conservatives.
Such differences would be expected if media effects were limited to mirroring pre-existing preferences among previously prejudiced segments of the population. By contrast, a news exposure—prejudice association that holds across the full political spectrum would be puzzling in the absence of media-fueled Islamophobia.
Though these five features of our modeling strategy improve inference, we emphasize that our method does not demonstrate causation. Rather, we believe the correlational evidence from our large and diverse Western sample helps to improve inference by affording a rigorous test of whether the predicted association between media exposure and Muslim prejudice holds after adjusting for all the other factors that might drive prejudice in a general population.
However, our efforts to pragmatically improve inference should not be confused as a definitive test of media-induced Islamophobia hypothesis. We analyzed data from participants who completed the Time 5 wave of the NZAVS, the most recent wave for which data was entered at the time of this study, and the first wave with measures of news exposure. The Time 5 wave of the NZAVS contained responses from 18, participants 10, retained from one or more previous waves, 7, new additions from booster sampling, and unmatched participants or unsolicited opt-ins.
The sample retained 3, participants from the initial Time 1 NZAVS of 6, participants a retention rate of Participants were mailed a copy of the questionnaire, with a second postal follow-up two months later.
Participants who provided an email address were also emailed and invited to complete an on-line version if they preferred. We also mailed our yearly pamphlet summarizing key research findings published during the most recent wave of the study. Of these participants, 40 self-identified as Muslim, 30 as Middle Eastern, and others as Asian. Because we were interested in out-group determinants of prejudice toward Arabs, Asians, and Muslims, only non-Muslim, non-Middle Eastern born, non-Asian participants were included in the analyses.
Moreover, an additional participants did not indicate how often they attend to the news, and were removed from analyses. Missing data for demographic variables, religious identification, and political orientation were multiply imputed using the Amelia package in R [ 24 ]. An exception was in responses to education, where missing responses were observed for Missing data We adopted two strategies for handling missing data.
First, we modeled associations using multiple imputation, in which missing responses were imputed using the Amelia package in R [ 24 ]. Multiple imputation of missing data preserves information and attenuates the effects of response biases in conditions where the causes of missingness may be predicted from other observed variables.
For this reason, we prefer multiple imputation, and report multiply-imputed datasets in the main text of this study. There were no practically important differences in the interpretation of results for the two methods of handling missing data. The multiple imputation strategy we favor shrunk coefficients estimates closer to zero, and is therefore more conservative.
Sample information and results for the analysis using pairwise deletion are reported in S2 — S10 Tables.
Additionally, a side-by-side comparison of the solutions using 1 the multiply imputed dataset and 2 the pairwise deleted dataset are presented in S1 and S2 Figs. The remaining missing indicators for fixed effects predictors were assumed to be continuous real numbers.
Indicators for denominations a factor with 85 levels and territorial authorities a factor with 67 levels were not imputed by Amelia because random effects can be imputed during Markov Chain Monte Carlo MCMC estimation [ 25 ].
The posterior distributions that are generated from MCMC are probabilistic distributions for modeled associations, which are conditional on the data, model, and priors note: owing to the size and diversity of the dataset we use non-informative priors.
Following Amelia package recommendations, where low frequencies of missing responses are observed, we imputed five missing datasets. Multivariate multilevel regression models were performed separately on each dataset, and the MCMC chains were subsequently combined to obtain aggregate estimates, because in each analysis the models were conditionally independent of the others [ 18 ].