ibn Harm

Blog

  • On the Soul #2

    Since we have discussed Jewishness in the previous study it seems fitting to continue our investigations by returning our eyes to the soul.

    The soul is the topic that is perhaps most interesting but also most occult in the investigations of the habitas of humans.

    The soul is ineffable in so far that it is not a physical entity which can be touched by hands. However since the topic of the soul can be discussed through speech it seems that the soul is not non-existent.

    After all how can we state that a thing does not exist if it already exists in the bounded world of our mind. Does such a thing then not have a high probability of existing in the world outside the body which is vastly more extended than the inner world of the mind?

    One objection that can be dispersed to this argument for the existence of the soul is that it can be said to apply to any concept. Artists might concurr and follow the intuition that yes any concept that can be thought of can be said to exist.

    This leaves the topic of the existence of God then one that should be approached with love.

  • On Jewishness

    Without a doubt it is possible to say that Judaism has won the battle of the soul. Since Jewish identity is automatically gained through the line of the mother the hierarchal pattern is established. Furthermore choice stays intact because it is established that one can be Jewish without works of faith. The only possible critique one can have is aestetical.

  • On the Arabic “kafara”

    Kafara is the Arabic word describing “unbelief,” it is the noun form (form 1). It describes a state of mind of unreflectiveness and an unwillingness to take responsibility.

    Serendipitously in the Dutch language you have a verb “kafferen” which has meanings of “to complain, to swear” which is interesting since Arabic is not one of the primary languages in Holland.

    There are more cases like these and we will discuss them in time God-willing.

  • On contingency

    I am writing this quick because fajr is starting so dont mind errors.

    Ibn Sina differentiated between the necessary being (al wajib al wujud) and contingent beings. The necessary being is necessary since without a causal factor contingent beings would not have come into being i.e. if a being exists contingentally there must have been a primus movens that determined that the contingent being actually came into existence rather than stay in the imaginalis mundis.

    In sha Allah we will continue this topic in later entries.

  • The problem of translation

    Today we start with investigating language d.v.

    The problem of translation concerns tje problem of not knowing how the mind lf the reader will receive the message that the translator transmits.

    It is unknown what words have which associations to the mind of the reader so that a translator who wants to convey a clear translation also is able to do so if he understands the psyche of the reader.

    Only through repeated experiences will the translator come to know the mind of his audience so that he might choose words more carefully in order that etc.

    Or the audience should respond in the only possible way that does not leave room for doxa.

  • Short thought on Bayes vs. Frequentists

    If you deny Bayes you deny probabilistic thinking beyond “the chance is 50/50 because event M happens or it does not happen”

    Comment if you disagree

    ps.

    Also if you agree

  • Intersectionality

    Coming up in sha Allah

  • On conservatism

    Conservatism can be loosely defined as an attitude towards statesmenship that seeks to defend tradition whatever that might be as opposed to being reactive.

    As with most concepts the spectrum between progressives (liberal in the USA) and conservatism is a spectrum and not a binary. Karl Marx would perhaps scoff at this characterization but in the post-cold war world people cannot even distinguish German from Dutch food anymore so the secular turn in political thought seems entirely queer.

  • On exaggeration

    In both theistic and non-theistic perspectives speech is ultimately between human beings since no praise would be “too much” for God.

  • Reason #2

    Small addendum to reason #1

    It is also possible to imagine oneself in a certain post and make decisions based on this deja vu