Draw a map of the brain when fear and anxiety are involved, and the amygdala -- the brain's almond-shaped center for panic and fight-or-flight responses -- looms large.
Fear is an adaptive response, essential to the survival of many species. This behavioural adaptation may be innate but can also be a consequence of conditioning, during the course of which an animal learns that a particular stimulus precedes an unpleasant event. There is a large amount of data indicating that the amygdale is strongly involved during the learning of "conditioned" fear. Shown to play a key role in the processsing of emotions, the amygdala forms part of the limbic system.

In humans and other animals, this subcortical brain structure is linked to both fear responses and pleasure. Its size is positively correlated with aggressive behavior across species. Research shows that specific phobias express in this region of the limbic system. A phobia is a fear which is caused by a specific object or situation. The fear may be by the actual presence of, or by, the anticipation of the presence of that object or situation. Anxiety, triggered by the fear, may approach the intensity of panic.


In cognitive psychology, the criteria for a diagnosis of specific phobia involves the following differential:
· The patient experiences a strong, persistent fear that is excessive or unreasonable. It is cued by a specific object or situation that is either present or anticipated.
· The phobic stimulus almost always immediately provokes an anxiety response, which may be either a panic attack or symptoms of anxiety that do not meet criteria for a panic attack.
· The fear is unreasonable or out of proportion, and the patient realizes this.
· The patient either avoids the phobic stimulus or endures it with severe anxiety or distress.
· Patient is under the age of 18, but must have had the symptoms for 6 months or longer.
· Either there is marked distress about this fear or it markedly interferes with the patient's usual routines or social, job or personal functioning.
The term Islamophobia dates back to the late 1980s, but came into prolific usage after the September 11, 2001 attacks in the United States, to refer to types of political dialogue that appeared prejudicially resistant to “pro-Islamic argument."
Professor Anne Sophie Roald writes that steps were taken toward official acceptance of the term in January 2001 at the "Stockholm International Forum on Combating Intolerance", where Islamophobia was recognized as a form of intolerance alongside Xenophobia and Antisemitism.
In 1997, the British Runnymede Trust defined Islamophobia as the "dread or hatred of Islam and therefore, to the fear and dislike of all Muslims," stating that it also refers to the practice of discriminating against Muslims by excluding them from the economic, social, and public life of the nation. It purports to include the perception that “Islam has no values in common with other cultures, is inferior to the West and is a violent political ideology rather than a religion.” The trust’s website boasts the accomplishment-
“Through the work of the Commission on British Muslims and Islamophobia, Runnymede achieved tangible response from policy makers and the general public. For example, the Government approved the first state funding for specifically Muslim schools in late 1997, and there has been some improvement in media portrayals of Islam. The UK National Census in 2001 contained a question on religion.”

Ignoring for a moment the very dubious success of having isolated Muslims in order to accommodate polity, a quick look at the text of this supposedly victimized orthodoxy is in order. We shall assume that Muslims hold the words of the Qu’uran to be the word and command of their god, Allah, for them to follow of their intrinsic merit by virtue of their source.
"...now that a Book confirming their own has come to them from God, they deny it...they reply: 'We believe in what was revealed to us.' But they deny what has since been revealed, although it is truth...Say: 'Whoever is an enemy of Gabriel' (who has by God's grace revealed to you [Muhammad] the Koran as a guide...confirming previous scriptures)..will surely find that God is the enemy of the unbelievers.'...And now that an apostle has come to them from God confirming their own Scriptures, some of those to whom the Scriptures were given cast off the Book of God behind their backs...The unbelievers among the People of the Book, and the pagans, resent that any blessings should have been sent down to you from your Lord. " (Surah 2:88-, 98-, 103-)
"The only true faith in God's sight is Islam." (Surah 3:19)
And what is this pristine and invulnerable divine codification?
The Qu’uran proscribes:

"Slay them wherever you find them...Idolatry is worse than carnage...Fight against them until idolatry is no more and God's religion reigns supreme." (Surah 2:190-)

"Fighting is obligatory for you, much as you dislike it." (Surah 2:216)


"Seek out your enemies relentlessly." (Surah 4:103-)


"Believers, do not make friends with any but your own people...They desire nothing but your ruin....You believe in the entire Book...When they meet you they say: 'We, too, are believers.' But when alone, they bite their finger-tips with rage." (Surah 3:118, 119)

"If you should die or be slain in the cause of God, His forgiveness and His mercy would surely be better than all the riches..." (Surah 3:156-)


"Believers, take neither Jews nor Christians for your friends." (Surah 5:51)


"Men are tempted [in this life] by the lure of women...far better is the return of God. Say: 'Shall I tell you of better things than these, with which the righteous shall be rewarded by their Lord? Theirs shall be gardens watered by running streams, where they shall dwell for ever: wives of perfect chastity..." (Surah 3:14, 15)

"Try as you may, you cannot treat all your wives impartially." (Surah 4:126-)


“Believers, when you encounter the infidels on the march, do not turn your backs to them in flight. If anyone on that day turns his back to them, except it be for tactical reasons...he shall incur the wrath of God and Hell shall be his home..." (Surah 8:12-)

"Make war on them until idolatry shall cease and God's religion shall reign supreme." (Surah 8:36-)
"If you fear treachery from any of your allies, you may fairly retaliate by breaking off your treaty with them." (Surah 8:51-)

"...make war on the leaders of unbelief...Make war on them: God will chastise them at your hands and humble them. He will grant you victory over them..." (Surah 9:12-)

"Fight against such as those to whom the Scriptures were given [Jews and Christians]...until they pay tribute out of hand and are utterly subdued." (Surah 9:27-)


"If you do not fight, He will punish you sternly, and replace you by other men." (Surah 9:37-)

"Prophet make war on the unbelievers and the hypocrites and deal rigorously with them. Hell shall be their home." (Surah 9:73)

"Believers, make war on the infidels who dwell around you. Deal firmly with them." (Surah 9:121-)

"Muhammad is God's apostle. Those who follow him are ruthless to the unbelievers but merciful to one another." (Surah 48:

Well, this hardly sounds the attitude that would lead one to accommodate your ideological “foes” with a school of their own, so they can be free from pestering!
While I most definitely do not support the discrimination, legal or social, of any person on the basis of their ethnicity or race, or place of origin, the protective attitudes of many regarding Islam fall well short of the criteria for a phobia.The argument that the practices of honor killing, death for apostasy, female genital mutilation, and the overall subjugation of women that occurs in Islamic nations and within Muslim enclaves is a matter of "cultural" tradition is meaningless. Religious customs help make up the culture. Holy writ that promotes hate will spawn hate in its followers.
Does fear of the above sound irrational to you?

I am not singling out Islam to distinguish it from other religions in its nature--it is, like all supernatural dogma, a mental virus. This virus has some frightening particulars, and the pernicious nature of religious moralism combined with the singularly brutal and regressive orthodoxy of this faith make it a perfect storm, a tempest of deranged behaviour and social attitudes. These traditions incubate in isolation, protected from the demands of society's cultural selection. And some think it wise to mandate its enclavement among children, the most vulnerable to cognitive infection?
Islam is an ideology. Rejection of an ideology is not, excecpt as ad hominem, classified as phobia. To call the opponents of an ideology phobic is a fallacy. All ideologies have their critics and opponents but we do not hear Christians calling the critics of Christianity Christianophobe, communists calling their critics communitophobe or Hindus calling theirs hinduphobe. The term "Islamophobia" is both technically and logically incorrect and misleading. Nor do we refer to the Allies as Fasciphobes, Naziphobes, or Nippophobes. This is an attack on the source of criticism, resulting from a lack of ammunition to attack the critique itself.

On the whole, humans start establishing control over their offspring’s behavior by imposing fear as soon as, in some ways before, their progeny can comprehend. There is a reaction to fear that could be summed up as reflex (call it “Fight or Flight”).
A broad secular education can undermine dogmatic religious faith. Knowing this, many Muslims clerics will mandate their followers to isolate their children intellectually through homeschooling or enrolling them in religious private schools and Muslim colleges. Such children can reach adulthood without ever being challenged to think critically about their religious or political beliefs. These children will have very little chance of breaking free of the bonds of their neolithic enculturation. The Runnymede Trust has done these children and indeed all of Britain a disservice.
Stop saying Islamophobe regarding those who don't wish to accomodate a brutal regression, the neologism "Islamophobia" implies that Islam is not dangerous and the fear of it is irrational.

This claim is not supported rhetorically sound or agreed upon clinically. There are many logical arguments to posit the claim that Islam is dangerous. (click the link to read Neurilemma's brilliant and incisive article on the issue) Irrespective of whether the critics of Islam are right about Islam's danger, the term“phobic” implies that criticism has been already refuted and the irrationality of fear of Islamic threat has been established, that the apprehension is not a rational reaction but a mental disorder, a priori.
All ideologies have opponents. It is myopic and arrogant, to say the least, for criticism of any ideology to be characterized as phobia.

As Russell Blackford said in his recent article More on the Islamophobia question:
"Even where racism has been fueled by doctrinal disagreements, as with Christian anti-Semitism, it is possible to distinguish between doctrinal disagreement and racial hatred. Admittedly, some dislike of Islam, or impatience with Muslims and their spiritual leaders, may have a quasi-racist character, grounded in parochialism and xenophobia, and perhaps a dislike of Arabs in particular. But Islam also contains ideas, and in a liberal democracy these are fair targets for criticism or repudiation."
Kenneth
As a post script, I'd like to quote Miss Neurilemma:
"
And another thing, this whole bit about ooh "we mustn't criticise Islam because its, like you know, its a religion and we must respect that and we must show religious tolerance because... " Yes? "Well because, its a religion and somebody once said its just not nice to question someones beliefs." Really, that's the reason? "Yes, that's the reason. " Well, no, rhetorical device, no, that's a load of bull, actually. Why must I stop my critical thinking faculties at the door of the church /mosque /synagogue/ temple?

The answer is I shouldn't. But it seems some people think I should. People who do not think about things very deeply conflate racism with religion and are so scared that they will be called racist that they abandon their critical thinking abilities, if they have any, take what is written in the Press as their *bible*, no pun intended and follow the herd. So if the BBC says there is such a concept as Islamophobia, weak minded people will immediately switch off their brains, sink into the comfort zone of being told what to think and stop analysing exactly what constitutes Islam, over and above its claim to be the *uncreated word of *God* (as if that wasn't enough meat to get our teeth into right there, the *uncreated word of *God*, really?)"
Thank you, Emma-emma-emma.

Views: 71

Tags: Islam, Islamophobia

Comment

You need to be a member of Atheist Nexus to add comments!

Join Atheist Nexus

Comment by Kenneth M Lipp on November 28, 2010 at 9:58pm
@Prog Rock
Thank you, I'm glad you were able to get something out of it. I am recently moved ti the UK, and have been amazed at the proliferation of accommodationalism in British society for unreasonable practices. 20000 girls in England are at risk of suffering genital mutilation THIS YEAR in Muslim enclaves. My good friend, mentioned above, Emma, works in a legal capacity for the UK g'ment, and has encountered all manner of atrocities perpetrated on women.
Please let me know if you're interested in learning more, I could put the two of you in contact.
Peace
Comment by Kenneth M Lipp on November 28, 2010 at 9:54pm
@Glen
Excellent points, all. There are no moderate tenets of the Muslim faith; cetainly there are many moderates who claim Islam as their own, however they have not been arrested for murder--given their proximity to non-believers and the prescription of the Koran that such are to be killed (also not lived among), it is the moderates which portray a misapprehended conception if the orthodoxy, not the "extremists." I agree, entirely.
Comment by Prog Rock Girl on November 28, 2010 at 9:29pm
I really appreciate this post. I have heard the term "Islamophobia" quite a lot, even among atheists. People also stereotype Christians under the (not so unreasonable) assumption that Christians follow the commonly held beliefs of Christianity (exactly what is done by so-called Islamophobes), but I have never, ever heard anyone talk about "Christianophobia". The stereotyping and prejudices are exactly the same. The only difference is that Muslims are perceived as foreign, and thought of as one race (another form of stereotyping) even though Islam is just as racially diverse as Christianity.
Comment by Glen Rosenberg on November 28, 2010 at 8:20pm
Kenneth, It is reasonable to fear and to expose the tenets of Islam. To elaborate on my point Islam is extreme. When the press characterizes the destructiive actions of a few as loose-canon departure from the normalcy of a peaceful religion; the press has deflected the analytical light away from the cancer.
Furthermore faith based religions have always seen instances where splinter groups or sects deviate from the practices of the foundation religion. When faith is the basis of belief deviation is a necessary consequence. Calling those few bad actors extremists suggests that their actions are an aberration when history suggests that the aberration is within the fabric of the mother religion.
Comment by Kenneth M Lipp on November 28, 2010 at 6:50pm
Thanks Glen. All the name calling, it's ad hominem. It is reasonable to fear.
Comment by Glen Rosenberg on November 27, 2010 at 8:35pm
I agree and add "extremists" as a misnomer in the same class as Islamophobia.

Support Atheist Nexus

Donate Today

Donate

 

Help Nexus When You Buy From Amazon

Amazon

 

Latest Activity

John Jubinsky posted photos
17 minutes ago
Joan Denoo replied to Grinning Cat's discussion Greta Christina: Why Being Liberal Really Is Better Than Being Conservative in the group Politics, Economics, and Religion
2 hours ago
Tom Sarbeck replied to Grinning Cat's discussion Greta Christina: Why Being Liberal Really Is Better Than Being Conservative in the group Politics, Economics, and Religion
3 hours ago
Grinning Cat replied to Grinning Cat's discussion Greta Christina: Why Being Liberal Really Is Better Than Being Conservative in the group Politics, Economics, and Religion
3 hours ago
Luara replied to Daniel W's discussion Are same sex marriages more stable than so-called traditional marriages? in the group LGBTQI atheists, nontheists, and friends
3 hours ago
sk8eycat replied to Joan Denoo's discussion The Bible is not Great by Soren Sagan in the group ORIGINS: UNIVERSE, LIFE, HUMANKIND, AND DARWIN
3 hours ago
Joan Denoo replied to Grinning Cat's discussion Greta Christina on "Why Being Liberal Really Is Better Than Being Conservative" in the group Politics, Economics, and Religion
3 hours ago
Luara replied to Daniel W's discussion Are same sex marriages more stable than so-called traditional marriages? in the group LGBTQI atheists, nontheists, and friends
3 hours ago
sk8eycat replied to Joan Denoo's discussion The Bible is not Great by Soren Sagan in the group ORIGINS: UNIVERSE, LIFE, HUMANKIND, AND DARWIN
3 hours ago
Joan Denoo replied to Grinning Cat's discussion Greta Christina on "Why Being Liberal Really Is Better Than Being Conservative" in the group Politics, Economics, and Religion
3 hours ago
Tom Sarbeck commented on Loren Miller's blog post Is god good?
4 hours ago
Tom Sarbeck replied to jay H's discussion What the freakin hell is wrong with this country???
4 hours ago

© 2014   Atheist Nexus. All rights reserved. Admin: Richard Haynes.

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service