Is Islam Inherently Violent?

I've shifted our discussion to the Good Karma Café near the corner of 10th & Pine in Washington Square West neighborhood, since several of our members recommended it as a quieter alternative to some of the bars & restaurants we've used in the past. It's fairly easy to get to if you're using public transit. With SEPTA, take the Broad Street Line & get off at the Lombard South Station, and walk 2 blocks east on Lombard and then turn left on 10th street and it's up a half block. With PATCO, it's a bit more of a hike - get off at 15th & Locust stop and walk 6 blocks east on Locust to 10th, then turn right and walk 2 blocks south. For those who are driving, parking in the neighborhood can be tough to find. I'd suggest parking in the parking deck connected to the ACME at 10th & South. If you buy at least $10 worth of groceries from ACME, they'll validate your parking so it's free.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

AN ANALYSIS OF THE "NEW ATHEISTS" VS. THE "REGRESSIVE LEFT" FEUD OVER WHETHER OR NOT ISLAM IS INHERENTLY VIOLENT

This meetup discussion will address the growing debate over the nature of radical Islam and the roots of Islamic terrorism between a group of public intellectuals known as the "New Atheists" -- particularly Sam Harris, Bill Maher, Richard Dawkins & Ayaan Hirsi Ali -- and left-wing pundits & intellectuals such as Glenn Greenwald, Murtaza Hussein, Cenk Uygur, Reza Aslan, and Noam Chomsky who the New Atheists have been dubbed the "Regressive Left" for the contradictions between their supposedly progressive political views and their apologetics for radical Islam.

A lot of the debate seems to involve the question of whether or not Islamic terrorism is motivated more by religious ideology or other factors like poverty, ethnic conflict, and/or resentment over foreign interventions in the Middle East. While a lot of the issues at stake here are based on differences in values, we will try to focus on disputes over factual statements which can either be verified or debunked. We'll also try to see what overall lessons we can take away from these debates.

I've selected the articles & video clips below because I think they do a good job of summarizing the main points of contention from the debates between the "New Atheists" & the "Regressive Left". It's a lot of material & I don't expect you to look at all of it. As you can see, I've labeled 2 of the articles as "extra reading" because they're longer & more involved. I've included some notes beneath each article that summarize the major arguments, so I hope that helps. Just look at as much of it as you can and I'll explain whatever you missed during the course of our discussion.

SAM HARRIS'S DEBATES WITH GLENN GREENWALD & BEN AFFLECK: WHAT CAN POLLS OF THE MUSLIM WORLD TELL US? DO SAM HARRIS'S CRITICISMS OF ISLAM AMOUNT TO RACISM OR WAR MONGERING?

1. "Ben Affleck, Sam Harris & Bill Maher Debate Radical Islam" (video, 10:05 min.)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vln9D81eO60

2. Jerry Coyne, "Maher, Harris, Kristof, Steele, and Affleck squabble about Islam"

https://whyevolutionistrue.wordpress.com/2014/10/04/maher-harris-kristof-steele-and-affleck-squabble-about-islam/

• EXTRA READING: Jeffrey Tayler, "Free Speech and Islam — In Defense of Sam Harris"

http://quillette.com/2016/04/21/free-speech-and-islam-in-defense-of-sam-harris/

THE SAM HARRIS / NOAM CHOMSKY DEBATE: SHOULD THE INTENTIONS OR THE CONSEQUENCES OF U.S. FOREIGN POLICY CARRY MORE WEIGHT? DOES ISLAMIC TERRORISM STEM MORE FROM RELIGIOUS IDEOLOGY OR BLOWBACK?

3. Phil Torres, "Why Sam Harris and Noam Chomsky Are Both Right"

http://www.debunking-christianity.com/2015/10/why-harris-and-chomsky-are-both-right.html

• EXTRA READING: Hugh Harris, "The Chomsky/Harris feud: Tribalism, Ethics and the Debate that Wasn’t"

http://thedailybanter.com/2015/07/the-chomskyharris-feud-tribalism-ethics-and-the-debate-that-wasnt/

FACT-CHECKING THE CLAIM THAT ISLAM IS INHERENTLY VIOLENT & OPPRESSIVE:

4. Barbara Bradley Hagerty w/ Philip Jenkins, Andrew Bostom & Waleed El-Ansary, "Is The Bible More Violent Than The Quran?" (podcast, 7:22 min.)

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=124494788

5. M. Steven Fish, "No, Islam Isn't Inherently Violent and The Math Proves It"

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2015/02/15/no-islam-isn-t-inherently-violent-and-the-math-proves-it

6. Daniel Greenfield, "The 'More Muslims, Less Homicide' Hoax"

http://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/261591/more-muslims-less-homicides-hoax-daniel-greenfield

7. Reza Aslan, "Does Islam Promote Violence?" (6:03 min.)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G1QfgDkFR5E

8. Muhammad Syed & Sarah Haider, "Reza Aslan Is Wrong About Islam and This Is Why"

http://www.patheos.com/blogs/friendlyatheist/2014/10/05/reza-aslan-is-wrong-about-islam-and-this-is-why/

NOTE: I was originally going to include a discussion of why the Southern Poverty Law Center labelled Maajid Nawaz & Ayaan Hirsi Ali as "anti-Muslim extremists" in their 2016 report. I've omitted it from the outline because I don't think we'll get to it, but I've listed the 2 articles I planned on using in our Discussion tab here: https://www.meetup.com/Philly-Skeptics/messages/boards/thread/50814883