The reintroduction of sharia is a longstanding goal for Islamist movements in Muslim countries. Attempts to impose sharia have been accompanied by controversy, violence and even war (Afghanistan, Chechnya, Iran, Iraq, Libya, Sudan, Syria, Egypt, Mali…).
Sharia (also meaning “path” in Arabic) guides all aspects of Muslim life, including daily routines, familial and religious obligations, and financial dealings. It is derived primarily from the Quran and the Sunna (the sayings, practices, and teachings of the Prophet Mohammed). Precedents and analogy applied by Muslim scholars are used to address new issues. The consensus of the Muslim community also plays a role in defining this theological manual.
Sharia developed several hundred years after the Prophet Mohammed’s death in 632 CE. Since the Prophet Mohammed was considered the most pious of all believers, his life and ways became a model for all other Muslims and were collected by scholars into what is known as the hadith. As each locality tried to reconcile local customs and Islam, hadith literature grew and developed into distinct schools of Islamic thought.
The two pilars of Religious Law are
Orthodoxy and Idolatry
Sharia law in its pure (non-secular) form always stands for ORTHODOXY: You have to OBEY the religious scholar or ‘leader’. He who refuses to obey will be punished.
So the scholar is not merely ‘a wise man’, an adviser, but he is also judge, jury and executioner. That means, scholars are in charge of every decision made, and they have the power to be rid of whomever they choose.
Sharia (or religious) law is based on IDOLISATION and DEIFICATION.
Ordinary human beings (prophets, imams, and in the case of chosen peoples a whole tribe) have gotten a divine status. They are no humans anymore, they are ‘God’, as are their opinions. Opinions of dreamers and warriors are written down and become ‘holy books’ – that means: they have to be adored, and by adoring them they become idols…: so they also are ‘God’. Anyone who offends (desacrifice) that what is called ‘HOLY’ will be punished.
“This is atavistic behaviorism “
Jihad Watch Reaction, June 2012
Islam is a theo-political Bronze Age cult still mired in ancient violent times, seeking to control human beings body and soul, to threaten and oppress them with its paternalism, as enshrined by the behaviors of their alleged ‘prophet’ in whose name they carry out their actions.
It is a belief system that is still promoting this kind of atavistic behaviorism long abandoned by the civilized world. Summarily punishing any who dare to disobey its tribal paternalism, or failing to give sufficient homage to the ignorant dictates of its god; failure which is often punishable by death.
Atavism is a cultural tendency — for example, people in the modern era reverting to the ways of thinking and acting of a former time. The word atavism is derived from the Latin atavus. An atavus is a great-great-great-grandfather or, more generally, an ancestor. (Wikipedia)
Behaviourism: ‘controlling the human mind’
Behaviourism focuses on one particular view of learning: a change in external behaviour achieved through a large amount of repetition of desired actions, the reward of good habits and the discouragement of bad habits.
Within the behaviourist view of learning, the “teacher” is the dominant person and takes complete control – evaluation of learning comes from the teacher who decides what is right or wrong.
The learner does not have any opportunity for evaluation or reflection within the learning process, they are simply told what is right or wrong.
The conceptualization of learning using this approach could be considered “superficial” as the focus is on external changes in behaviour ie not interested in the internal processes of learning leading to behaviour change and has no place for the emotions involved the process. (Wikipedia Info)
B.F. Skinner: a salesman for behaviorism
Chatafrik Network 2012
Skinner’s contribution to behaviorism is adding what he called operant conditioning to Pavlov’s classical conditioning. The idea is to find a way to positively reinforce a desired behavior; the belief is that if behavior is reinforced that such behavior would be repeated in the future.
You habituate a person to doing something by positively reinforcing it whenever he does it. If you want somebody to extinguish an undesirable behavior you find a way to discourage it.
Skinner wrote many books, including ‘Walden Two’ and ‘Beyond Freedom and Dignity’. In ‘Walden Two’ he visualized a utopian commune where the principles of his operant conditioning were practiced. He imagined that such a society would be a well ordered and productive society.
Here however is a problem: who is the person who knows what are appropriate behaviors and would be dolling out the positive conditioning? Would it be the leader of the commune? If so, would that not make the leader a totalitarian dictator? And who is that leader?
The Social Scientific Dictatorship:
by Paul and Phillip Collins, March 21st, 2006
Within the traditional theocratic power structures of antiquity, state sanctioned priesthoods constituted epistemological cartels. The Pharisees that engineered the crucifixion of Jesus Christ provide a stellar example. The Mystery cults of Mesopotamia supply another.
The Pharisees were one of the two largest Jewish sects in the first half of the first century CE. Jesus condemned them as hypocrites for being so concerned with the letter of the law while blithely ignoring its spirit.
A Pharisee was a highly strict enforcer of the the traditional law of Moses. Anyone who would do anything that opposed those laws at any amount would either be criticized in public about what they were doing, they would be brought before the court of religious law because that person was reported by a Pharisee. Most of the Pharisees would also be given orders to have people arrested who didn’t follow certain customs or traditions. (wiki.answers)
In both cases, an elite few exercised rigid control over the knowable. In so doing, they maintained the socioeconomic dominance of political oligarchs. Within their authoritarian economy of thought, ideas like “liberty” and “human dignity” were appropriated no currency.
However, it was a state of affairs that would inevitably change. As the ruling elite’s religious institutions began to lose credibility with the masses, it became apparent that the oligarchs would have to adopt a more secular system of control. The result of this transformation was the emergence of what Aldous Huxley called a “scientific dictatorship.”
In essence, the scientific dictatorship is merely a theocracy premised upon the religion of scientism.
An exclusively scientific approach jettisons all “axiomatic values.” The “esthetic and moral judgments” that preserve man’s humanity must be totally disregarded… In fact, man himself must be altered. Because man’s humanity poses a problem.., that particular attribute of his being must be expunged.
A scientific dictatorship requires a scientific man. Of course, such a being would cease to be human at all and this is precisely what the social engineers of the scientific dictatorship are endeavoring to create…: a machine man or, in the words of Adam Weishaupt,‘Maschinenmenschen’. …
Man is determined by the state
What is being abolished is the autonomous man – the inner man, the homunculus, the possessing demon, the man defended by the literatures of freedom and dignity.
For Skinner and those who carry on his behaviorist tradition, humanity is little more than a lab animal to be conditioned and controlled. …
Skinner concludes ‘Walden Two’ with the following contention: “…in the long run man is determined by the state”.