Islamic Sophistry: probably the worst reason we are losing civilization

Not long after the invention of the modern Internet and tools like search engines and YouTube became practical, it occurred to me that schools should probably be eliminated more or less altogether and replaced with teaching children up to about the age of 14, the use of logic, reason, and determining the value and validity of information and then cutting them loose to learn on their own from materials online.

As the educational system becomes more and more captured by enemies of civilization, that idea is more and more appealing. Trump was right to eliminate the Dept. of Education, if indeed he did, and as Stephen Coughlin asserts, Ronald Raegan’s greatest failure was not keeping his promise to eliminate the dept. of education. In Canada at this point we fully replaced education with indoctrination.

The clip below is from 2012 and is a phenomenal example of Islamic sophistry. I posted it to the VTB Substack and asked people to treat it like a game and point out some of the fallacies he used. I will post the responses so far, which are very good, under the video. First my text:

For anyone who may have read G. K, Chesterton’s stellar work on the Islamic dominance of Great Britain in 1914, yes 111 years ago, they would have noticed Chesterton’s phenomenal grasp of Islamic sophistry. The kind of pretzel logic Muslims often use to sell the unsellable to the rationally challenged.

This video is so chock-a-block full of logical fallacy one could make a board game out of it. ‘See how many you can spot’ sort of thing.

I’ll start you off with a few examples. But see if you can pick off any yourselves and put them in the comments.

This example may not exactly be sophistry but it certainly speaks to classic Islamic deception.

The imam claims that both men and women would be stoned to death for the crime of adultery, and therefore, it is equal rights for men and women in a manner of fashion.

But men can have 4 wives and take as many infidel sex slaves as he wants and would not be guilty of adultery, whereas a woman who has any form of sex whatsoever with anyone not the designated husband (I say designated husband because quite often in Islam, marriage is forced on women) is guilty of this capital offence.

So the statement is in itself ludicrous. Personally I am not aware of any situation in which a man was killed by any means for adultery under sharia law. But one might see a situation where had he had sex, voluntary or rape of a Muslim woman, he could be considered guilty, however in Islam, the woman is always to blame for tempting the man.

More the pity the panel debating this Imam had no clue about any of the actual epistemology of Islam as a whole.

See how many you can catch. There are a lot. Would love to read your observations in the comments.

One great answer: