Al-G on Math and Religion

Question 1: The description of math and smallpox tell us that Islamic values do not depend on math or science to prove religion.  But it is used to prove things rather than replace beliefs.  Math and science do not need to prove religion but they can be used to prove other objects and ideas.

Question 2: Al-Ghazzali thinks that religion and math do not need to be separated until man steps away from religion because he thinks math disproves it.  He says that math does not prove anything against religion and it does not prove anything for religion.  But he does say that math creates two problems.  These two problems are man stepping away from religion because he think it is disproved by math.  Or when man thinks that it is illogical because other men think that it is illogical. 

Quran Teachings

The Quran's teachings are basically telling the followers or Islam what they should do and what they must be. The Quran also mentions how Allah should always be praised and how he should not be forgotten.  The relationship between Allah and human beings is that the humans follow him and he will reward them if they follow him with lots of devotion. 
Compared to Zoroastrians, Muslims must follow a set guideline, Zoroastrians followed moderation and did not have any "rules." Zoroastrians also followed other gods in addition to Ahura Mazda.  The Quran says "You alone we worship, and to You alone turn for help" which means they can only believe in Allah and no other gods.  When comparing Judaism, Christianity and Islam, the three say that they should only follow one God and one God only. 
Jews, Christians and Muslims all have something that tell them how they should behave and what they should be.  There are the Ten Commandments for Jews and Christians and the Five Pillars for Muslims.  The three also have some form of a judgement day just like Zoroastrianism. But the Quran and its teachings are very specific and strict compared to that of the other three religions. 

Questions on McNeill's Article

1. What’s McNeill’s argument?
McNeill's argument is that the Indian caste system and the political ideologies of Greece structured two different societies from similar types of nomadic people. 

2. How does McNeill define Caste? Does this match up with the textbook’s definition?

McNeill defines caste as how people associate with each other.  It is mainly based on how people separate each other and look down upon people of lower classes.  His definition refers to people eating with each other and intermarrying rather than the occupational reasons that the textbook brings up.  

3. What three feelings and thoughts helped to maintain the idea of caste:

1. The higher caste's rejection of association with those of the lower castes allowed for the caste system to stay.

2. The feelings and thoughts of superiority and inferiority maintained the idea of the caste.

3. The hopeful thought of being born into a higher caste through reincarnation also allowed for the caste system to remain intact.

4. Are these convincing?

 I would say that those three feelings and thoughts are pretty convincing.  People definitely did not want their reputation to be soiled if they were to have anything to do with someone in a lower caste.  The higher class people definitely wanted to keep their social standing and had a superior air to them while the lower class people believed they were inferior and had little hope to change it.  The final thought is probably the most convincing as a person would be content with their current status if they hoped to have a more favorable conditions in their next life.  Hope is pretty strong and that probably maintained the caste system as no one would argue or defy it if they could look forward to something better. 

5. Why did caste itself not cause strong political organization to form?

People of higher caste did not want to associate with people of lower caste, creating a communication and unification boundary among the groups. 

6. What causes Indian religion to shift from deity pleasing to the act of worship itself?

The shift from deity pleasing to the act of worship itself is caused by the Upanishads.

7. How did the Upanishads change the nature of Indian religion and thus the goals of Indian society?

 The Upanishads basically got rid of the priests and allowed people to strive for a release form the cycle or rebirth through asceticism, meditation, and withdrawal from worldly pleasures. 

8. How does McNeill define “Territorial Sovereignty?”

McNeill defines "territorial sovereignty" as political organization through territorial sovereign or states. In order words, a political structure where states serve as the primary unit.

9. Why did Greeks turn away from religion as an explanatory factor in organizing society?

The Greeks turned away from religion because they wanted to created a political structure using the laws of nature, not "mystical illumination."  There were no agreements on the reason why he world was the way that it was, so they got rid of gods in order to find answer through natural law. 

10. What was the consequence of the Greeks’ rigid adherence to the polis?

The consequence of the Greeks' rigid adherence to the polis was that they could agree on certain things.  The Greeks were unable to remain loyal to the state as they tried obtaining holiness. 

11. Do you buy his argument? Why or why not?
I do not buy his argument because he is discussing two different cultures base don two different things. He is discussing the strange unification of India through the caste system, a social hierarchy, and the political stratification of Greek city-states through the belief of natural law. His argument for India is based on religion and social structures. His argument for Greece is their political arrangement based on their pursuit of natural law.

Bhagavad Gita: Compare and Contrast

The reflections on the caste duties and detachment are a combination of the on the moral and ethical teachings of Zarathrustra and Confucius.  Zarathrustra focused on moderation while Confucius focused on becoming a "junz" or a superior man.  The teachings in the Bhagavad Gita combine the two and state that a soul must have moderation so they do not get distracted and that they must fulfill their duty in the caste system.  

Confucianism: What is it?

Is Confucianism a religion?  Well, to answer that, one needs to define religion.  One definition given by dictionary.com is "a set of beliefs concerning the cause, nature, and purpose of the universe, especially when considered as the creation of a superhuman agency or agencies, usually involving devotional and ritual observances, and often containing a moral code governing the conduct of human affairs." Basically, religion is trying to explain why the Earth exists, why things happen, and why humans exist. It gives people a "moral code" to live by.  Based on that definition, I do not think Confucianism is a religion because it is not trying to explain the world and other things.  It does not have "devotional and ritual observances."  Confucianism is basically a belief system. The book basically states things that a man has says and what he believes.  It is pretty close to a code of conduct.  It tells people how they should live and what they should do and what is right.

The reading supports the idea that people are born naturally bad.  One example is in book, chapter four, "I daily examine myself on three points:--whether, in transacting business for others, I may have been not faithful;--whether, in intercourse with friends, I may have been not sincere;--whether I may have not mastered and practised the instructions of my teacher."  In this quote, the speaker is explaining that they judge themselves based on these three criteria.  They check themselves for being faithful to people, sincere and whether or not they listened to their teacher.  The first two are qualities that everyone wants people to have.  The last one, "mastered and practised the instructions of my teacher" sounds like being obedient. Since the speaker is trying to make sure that they are faithful, sincere and obedient, it shows that they know they are prone to ignoring those three qualities.  Since they know they are prone to forgetting about being faithful, sincere and obedient, it proves people are more likely to be bad.

Another example is in book one, chapter six, "The Master said, "A youth, when at home, should be filial, and, abroad, respectful to his elders.  He should be earnest and truthful.  He should overflow in love to all, and cultivate the friendship of the good.  When he has time and opportunity, after the performance of these things, he should employ them in polite studies."" The Master is talking about how a youth should behave. Just to point this out, young people are more mischievous than older people and they are stereo-typically portrayed as bad, but that can be disregarded.  Ignoring, "a youth", this quote is about how person should be "filial" and "respectful to his elders", he should also be earnest and truthful.  A person should also be loving and polite.  This is basically a laundry list of qualities a person should possess.  This is telling a person how they should behave and if people were thought to be born good, they would not need to be told to behave like this.  Since the Master must tell people they should behave a certain way, it supports that people are born bad.  Another part of this quote that stands out is "cultivate the friendship of the good."  A person should make friends with good people and good intentions is basically what I am getting out of that statement.  This makes me think that the Master thinks people are more likely to befriend bad people or make friends for bad reasons rather than good.  This quote shows that he believes that people have the tendency to do bad things.

A final example is also in book one, chapter eight, line two, "Hold faithfulness and sincerity as first principles." This quote is really short , but it also supports the idea that people are born bad.  As mentioned before, if people are born good, they do not need to be told to be good or behave properly.  Here, faithfulness and sincerity are told to be important principles that a person must follow.  A person born good would not need to be told that these are important principles.  Another point is that nowadays, most laws are made because someone, somewhere decided to do something and it caused a problem.  In order to avoid this problem, a law was made.  Like in some states, people cannot chew gum in certain areas.  Well, since this is a law, even if it is a ridiculous law, it clearly must have caused some problem.  Likewise, unfaithful and insincere people are the reason why Confucius has decided that these principles need to be instilled in people.  In other words, since there are unfaithful and insincere people, this statement was made because people need to be told to be faithful and sincere.

Overall, this book's reading supports the idea that people are born bad by instructing people how they should behave and what their ideals and principles should be.

Zarathustra on Good and Evil Question

Zarathustra made assumptions that humans would make the bad choices as he is telling everyone that they should make the right choices.  Throughout the hymn, he refers back to doing good deeds and all the good choices that Ahura Mazda made while his twin made all the bad choices. There is a description of how the good followers would be rewarded and how the evil would have the worst experience. He also tells people that they have the choice to do whatever they desire. However, he emphasizes how the bad will suffer and how the good will not.  At then end, it says "Long punishment for the evil-doer, and bliss for the follower of Truth", which serves as a reminder that the follower of goodness won't be punished while the evil-doer will.  Overall, I think Zarathustra assumes that people will be more likely to make the bad choices and just need to be told that they need to be good.  After they are told to be good, they just need to be reminded to remain good and not fall towards the dark side.  The hymn really serves as a reminder for people that they should be morally good so they can be rewarded.