Islam: A radicial religion?

[VicBlack]

Well, she can bring it on.

Why am I supposed to be thinking of Aristotle? hehe

[Arkasha]

Russia.com.... hmmm....

It seems that those who regularly post on a site entitled "Russia.com" might at least know a little bit about Russia and that which is Russian.

Arkasha, umen****elnaja forma for Arkadii, is very much a male name, thank you.

One of whose professionals, Mr. Rebel? Certainly you must know as you have already identified me as having thrown my lot in someone's corner. Amazing feat, I must say. ESP? Are you clarivoyant?

"...the action of Islam today." What a generality. What could you mean? oh, I get it. The CNN force-feed. If you were to actually expand you mind long enough to experience the world a bit more I can guarantee a stance alteration. As I said before, I'm neither a muslim nor an apologist. I have great fears about the rise of Wahhabism and its effect on disenfranchised segments of populations. I believe it is a cancer within Islam, and I know that it doesn't represent the whole religion, a view differing from the majority on this forum.

"Why am I supposed to be thinking of Aristotle?" Sorry about that, Vic. I assumed a rudimentary knowledge of philosophy.

[kazanova3]

http://www.islamtomorrow.net/yusuf.htm

[VicBlack]

Hi Mr. Arkasha,

Ouch!!! I know who Aristotle is - but I haven't memorized all his works and certainly within the framework of how you threw his name out there - I have no idea what you are making reference to. I'd appreciate you're explaining to me in what context you use Aristotle. Please, just think of Plato.

[Arkasha]

Vic.
Sorry, didn't mean to be coarse.

I was talking about the basic underlying element of formal logic.... the Aristotelian syllogism.

<<quoting>>...In his fundamental treatise Organon, Aristotle gives the following definition:
A syllogism is discourse in which, certain things being stated, something other than what is stated follows of necessity from their being so. I mean by the last phrase that they produce a consequence, and by this, that no further term is required from without in order to make the consequence necessary.

[VicBlack]

Did he REALLY say that? No wonder I never read everything he ever wrote.

[CastleStormer]

:-)