Is Islam an appropriate subject to study in US universities? (no spam)

[CM]

Evening all.
Been busy with work.
But here are my views.

I know from a lot of friends and family that after sept 11th, religion classes on islam are fulled to the brim.
People are really interested and they should be given the chance to learn.
Georgetown has a special section on the Middle East and Islam.
They provide a degree and Master program catering for the Middle east, and religion is a major part of teh middle east.
I think teaching about Islam is right.
You should teach it in class...and educate people.

However forcing people to read is just wrong.
If they dont want to read they dont have to.
That is plain wrong and it should be challenged, if people are going to be forced to do so.

However i will be honest and direct.
The college most likely choose the stupidest book out there.
Not that the college is bad.
But rather it linked closer to what people think of Islam and thus would provide a basic intro to the religion.
Or went completely opposite and glorifies it completely.
To be clearer.
The media goes on and on and on on how muslims promote the killing of americans (Saw this on CNN 20 min ago). The person from the rand corporation or such said that muslims imams (priests) say to kill americans and that islam is the best and teh rest of the religion such.
If a book says the opposite, which average joe will believe it after sept 11?
Not really.
Rather he or she would believe their own media as it is closer to them and fits in with what they hear everywhere.
So the book most likely tries to strike a balance and does so horribly.

My 2 cents.

[Tom]

I am surprised at your post CM

You seriously criticise a book you have never read and go on to criticise the college for choosing it. I think that to be fair to the author and college you would have to at least read the book before you criticise it or the college.

You also say that the college should not choose what it students read. But of course not only have the college the right but also the duty to choose what it sees fit. If people wish to leave because of the academic work they have to do then they are not fit to study there or anywhere.

My sig is about open-mindedness - warning that you can have too much of a good thing. But, to politically interfere with university reading in this way shows extreme and dangerous closed-mindedness.

[Sojourner]

Originally posted by Tom
My sig is about open-mindedness - warning that you can have too much of a good thing. But, to politically interfere with university reading in this way shows extreme and dangerous closed-mindedness.

However, this is not about open-mindedness, but about whether promoting a religion in public university is appropriate. The caption in the article specifically states, Michael A. Sells said the point of his book was to explain why people find meaning in Islam.. I find it unlikely that this book sheds much light on current events (unless the people stating islam doesn't promote terrorism are lying), and find it highly objectionable that this is required reading for all incoming students. If the university wants to tap into the interest in current events, they should do so, without resorting to highly questionable materials, and perhaps, for once, they should teach some history if students really want to understand what's happening in the world and why. If they want to discuss religion, they should do so within the context of a optional religions course. Matters of faith should be left where they belong: in the church. In closing, parents have always had the right to censure what universities teach: with their wallets.

[Weasel]

Originally posted by Gwalchmai
I see your point. If their intent is to educate about religion, then I would agree. But if they only intend to educate about current events, then maybe not. But as Sojourner points out, their choice of required text may not be the best for this purpose. *shrugs*

I can agree with "current events". And I see HLD has posted there is a way for the one's who don't want read it.


As to the book, I haven't read it and cannot have a opinion on it. If my child was going, I might sit down and read it.

The way I see the world....everyone is basied towards their own belief or no belief and any book written will be either for or against a religion. Very few will be equal to both sides. As CM said muslims promote the killing of americans is not imo the true meaning of Islam. It is the view some radical muslims has.

[Tybaltus]

Originally posted by Weasel


I can agree with "current events". And I see HLD has posted there is a way for the one's who don't want read it.


As to the book, I haven't read it and cannot have a opinion on it. If my child was going, I might sit down and read it.

The way I see the world....everyone is basied towards their own belief or no belief and any book written will be either for or against a religion. Very few will be equal to both sides. As CM said muslims promote the killing of americans is not imo the true meaning of Islam. It is the view some radical muslims has.

I believe thats what I meant to say in my first post. Because this is exactly how I feel. Sorry if I wasnt clear about it in the first place.

[fable]

You folks have been focusing on the University, and their use of the text. What about their critics? Do they have reasonable grounds for complaint? What if any steps would you take to resolve the issue? Is it, indeed, capable of a solution?

[Weasel]

Originally posted by fable
You folks have been focusing on the University, and their use of the text. What about their critics? Do they have reasonable grounds for complaint? What if any steps would you take to resolve the issue? Is it, indeed, capable of a solution?

Before I could answer this,

Has anyone read the book?
And can you tell if the book tells both sides?
Is the book a fair view on current events?
Or is the book a personal jab at muslims?
Or is a personal jab at another religion?

The answers to these questions will tell if the critics are in the wrong.

[Sojourner]

Originally posted by fable
You folks have been focusing on the University, and their use of the text. What about their critics? Do they have reasonable grounds for complaint? What if any steps would you take to resolve the issue? Is it, indeed, capable of a solution?

Yes, I believe the critics have reasonable grounds for complaint, based on what the author says about the book. I really don't know what the university hoped to accomplish here - if they were hoping for controversy - they've got it, in spades. I disagree with their current proposal, in having students who do not wish to read the book defend their position. It places them in a bad situation - black-listing does happen - I've seen it. This so-called open-mindedness is another form of intolerance. A better choice would be to select a text more appropriate to the topic they wanted to cover. And if that topic was religion, then they're out of line in making it a requirement.

[CM]

Originally posted by Tom
I am surprised at your post CM

You seriously criticise a book you have never read and go on to criticise the college for choosing it. I think that to be fair to the author and college you would have to at least read the book before you criticise it or the college.

You also say that the college should not choose what it students read. But of course not only have the college the right but also the duty to choose what it sees fit. If people wish to leave because of the academic work they have to do then they are not fit to study there or anywhere.

My sig is about open-mindedness - warning that you can have too much of a good thing. But, to politically interfere with university reading in this way shows extreme and dangerous closed-mindedness.

Call me a cynic or whatever. But i have yet to see a book come out after Sept 11th, that gives a very fair representation of my religion. This will sound racist, but this is what i believe and many i know also. Search Amazon.com, how many books will you see about Islam and or terrorism that are written by people with western names? Many. How many are correct? few. I could count all the books i see as fair on one hand, if i was using a loose definition of fair.

While on the other hand, muslim authors go facting over board in doing the opposite. Islam is a religion of peace sure. But we have elements of war. We attempt to strike a balance. Some of what Osama Bin Laden can be dervied from select quotes. Read as a whole of course OBL is plain wrong. Like SS asked a long time ago, why is their a whole Chapter in the Quran on Jihad. It is simple, war is part of society and we have rules. So arent all peace loving hippies. The books by some muslims (though there are few published) go overboard on proving that Islam is right and all peace loving. They dont give a fair representation either.

My background is politics. I am an IR major. Books on politics are a passion of mine. I have read some of the books after Sept 11th. And honestly a majority that i have read are crap. Some are worse. Ahmed Rashids books are great. Even when he blames my country for creating and helping the Taliban. He can have his opinion and i respect him for it as he in my eyes knows what he is talking about. But i wont accept CNN expert on Terrorism (he wrote a book) as a valid author. Sadly many fall in this category. I cover the islamic world politics scene as a hobby, i believe i well versed in a majority of the problems and issues. Thus i believe i am well aware of people who have written and are travelled the islamic world and have solid research to back what they say even if i dont agree with it. However post sept 11th i have seen names come up who have written books on Islam, that i have never heard of. The quality and level of writing of books on Islam post sept 11th are neither correct, valid or sound in their research in my opinion.

If you want i can start a thread about the books on Islam and Politics post sept 11th that are good reads or crap. I think that would be a good idea.

So when i look at the problems and see the overall majority of the books published, i personally believe it is a bad book.

As for the college. I dont agree with forcing people to read something they dont want to. The college has every right to choose what they want the students to read. However there are limits. I dont think Mein Kampf should be mandatory reading. People should be able to choose what they want. Same with say a book written by OBL. People shouldnt be forced to read what they dont want to. However if it is optional i dont see a problem at all. If it is a optional then that is fine with me. I would encourage people to read books on Islam and Political Islam. However you cant force people to do so.

Michael A. Sells is a good writer in my opinion, having read only one of his books, i can agree with him on that one. However that does not mean this one is a good book.

[CM]

Ok guys i have made a few calls and i should have the book tomorrow from a friend.
I will read it and give you guys a quick description latest friday.
I want to see what is so contreversial about this book.

[Dottie]

If 'Mein kampf' was required reading I wouldnt assume it was to teach nazist values. Same goes for this book.

If you cant rely on a students ability to make his own judgement on things, perhaps something is wrong on a more fundamental level than what books to read/not read.

Imo its a bloody duty of any educational institution to provide provoking and thought-provokeing material to the students. If they consider it an abuse of thier values to read something that differs, thats a serious failure of their intellectual upbringing

[C Elegans]

Originally posted by Sojourner
However, this is not about open-mindedness, but about whether promoting a religion in public university is appropriate. The caption in the article specifically states, Michael A. Sells said the point of his book was to explain why people find meaning in Islam.. I find it unlikely that this book sheds much light on current events (unless the people stating islam doesn't promote terrorism are lying), and find it highly objectionable that this is required reading for all incoming students.

As HLD has already pointed out, it isn't compulsory reading, the students could choose assignment as you can read in his post above.

Secondly, do you mean that the book is "promoting a religion" just because the author aim to explain why people find meaning in islam? Do you view any material that explains why people think something or like something, as propaganda or promotion for that idea?

[Tamerlane]

If there is one thing that I hate its stubborn Christians. Being a RC, I meet and see them all the time, an arrogant lot. I would love to study Islam, but it doesn't mean that I'll shun Christianity. And even if I did it doesn't mean I'll turn "evil" or go fight in somewhere like Kashmir.

But some evangelical Christian leaders -- including the Rev. Franklin Graham, who gave the invocation at Bush's inauguration -- have denounced Islam since Sept. 11 as an "evil" religion. Despite the furor those remarks have caused, Graham repeated in radio and television appearances this week that the Koran preaches violence and that terrorism is supported by "mainstream" Muslims around the world.

That passage basically discredits the whole argument IMO

[Sojourner]

Originally posted by C Elegans
Secondly, do you mean that the book is "promoting a religion" just because the author aim to explain why people find meaning in islam? Do you view any material that explains why people think something or like something, as propaganda or promotion for that idea?

When it comes to religion, yes. I am highly suspicious of anything that smacks of indoctrination. What was the point of choosing this book for study? It covers neither current events nor explains them. So, obviously, the point was to discuss religion of another's choosing, in a mandatory course at a public unviversity, without presenting other view points (and probably even going so far as to stifle debate in the interest of "open-mindedness").

[HighLordDave]

Originally posted by Sojourner
What was the point of choosing this book for study? It covers neither current events nor explains them. So, obviously, the point was to discuss religion of another's choosing, in a mandatory course at a public unviversity, without presenting other view points (and probably even going so far as to stifle debate in the interest of "open-mindedness").

Without having examined the reading lists for UNC's other required classes, I would say that some books with Christian themes are probably on mandatory syllabi somewhere (they are at every 2-year and 4-year college I have ever attended). Would you have those books stricken from the required reading lists, too, despte their educational value? Perhaps the purpose of reading this book is to provide the equal time that has been lacking for all of these years.

I also hardly think reading a book on why someone else follows their religion qualifies as indoctrination. Reading a book on why you should enjoy someone else's (or even your own) religion is indoctrination. At what point does religious indoctrination stop? Would you have UNC and other public universities cease all cash transactions and only take check, credit cards and debit cards as payment because all of the nation's coinage and currency reads, "In God We Trust" (and if that's not indoctrination, I don't know what is!)?

From what I've read, the purpose of this assignment is hardly to convert people to Islam or to poison the minds of freshmen. Universities, even public ones, have a responsibility to push the buttons of their students, make them uncomfortable and get them to re-examine their core beliefs. A free-thinking democratic society cannot survive if its children are sheltered from ideas that are different and not allowed to ask questions and find answers that may be uncomfortable.

[Sojourner]

Originally posted by HighLordDave

Without having examined the reading lists for UNC's other required classes, I would say that some books with Christian themes are probably on mandatory syllabi somewhere (they are at every 2-year and 4-year college I have ever attended). Would you have those books stricken from the required reading lists, too, despte their educational value? Perhaps the purpose of reading this book is to provide the equal time that has been lacking for all of these years.

Not on any syllubi I've seen. If there is any instruction on any religion, it is normally done within the context of a optional religious course.

I also hardly think reading a book on why someone else follows their religion qualifies as indoctrination. Reading a book on why you should enjoy someone else's (or even your own) religion is indoctrination.

When a balanced view of a religion is not presented (read what the author himself says), it's indoctrination.

From what I've read, the purpose of this assignment is hardly to convert people to Islam or to poison the minds of freshmen. Universities, even public ones, have a responsibility to push the buttons of their students, make them uncomfortable and get them to re-examine their core beliefs. A free-thinking democratic society cannot survive if its children are sheltered from ideas that are different and not allowed to ask questions and find answers that may be uncomfortable.

Members of a free-thinking society should also not have other ideas forced on them, in particular, religious beliefs. Universities have a responsibility to educate. This is not the same as exposing students to "uncomfortable" ideas and forcing them to re-examine their core beliefs.

[HighLordDave]

Originally posted by Sojourner
Not on any syllubi I've seen. If there is any instruction on any religion, it is normally done within the context of a optional religious course.

Where have you gone to college? In one of my posts above, I cited two examples of a public school requiring its students to read texts with religious themes in the interests of education, not indoctrination. I think that if you delve into the core curricula of many public schools, particularly Western Civ and Intro to Philosophy, which are requried at every college I've attended (University of North Florida, Tallahassee Community College, Florida State University, Marshall University), you'll find texts with religious (often Christian) themes on the mandatory reading lists.

Members of a free-thinking society should also not have other ideas forced on them, in particular, religious beliefs.

There is a difference between exposing someone to a set of beliefs (education) and forcing a person to believe them (indoctrination). By requiring students to reading a book about Islam (or doing the university's alternate assignment), I find it hard to believe the UNC is telling students they must abandon their existing beliefs and suddenly start following the teachings of the Prophet.

[Mr Sleep]

This arguement regarding what is indoctrination seems to be moving more towards semantics, if you wish to discuss your ideas on indoctrination vs education please open up a new thread for that discussion.

[Tom]

@CM I think it is good you are reading the book but I am still surprised you would criticise it so comprehensively before doing so.

I can see no reason for criticising and trying to sensor what a university require its student to read as a small pre-start assignment. It does not matter if the book is good or bad - if it serves the purpose of educating the students. One would hope that potential university students have opinions of their own and exercise their critical faculties - that is also part of university education.
When I applied for a college I was given an article to comment on. It was a dreadful article full of circular arguments and other errors. Students are not children that need to be sheltered from bad books or inaccurate books or books that have unpalatable opinions. To do so and in the way it appears to have been done here amounts to crypto-fascism.

I repeat that the worst thing that happened here is that the institution bowed to the pressure and made it optional reading.

[Sojourner]

Originally posted by HighLordDave
Where have you gone to college? In one of my posts above, I cited two examples of a public school requiring its students to read texts with religious themes in the interests of education, not indoctrination. I think that if you delve into the core curricula of many public schools, particularly Western Civ and Intro to Philosophy, which are requried at every college I've attended (University of North Florida, Tallahassee Community College, Florida State University, Marshall University), you'll find texts with religious (often Christian) themes on the mandatory reading lists.

That's squarely within the so-called Bible Belt, isn't it. That would explain the presence of books with Christian themes on the mandatory lists. If they are, as you say, books with Christian themes and not just books that mention Chrisitianity, I believe it's only a matter of time before that's challenged.

I went to Michigan State University, and the only books I ever read with any religious theme were those assigned in my optional comparative religions course, taught by a rather open professor who was widely traveled in the Mid-east and Asia. I did learn about islam, enough to know that I disliked it intensely. I could have dropped the course - I had that option. Making such readings mandatory removes that choice, and is a decision I strongly disagree with.

Once again, I ask, what was the point of using this book? The university made a very poor choice, and should have anticipated the response.