Scan barcode
A review by shivani_maurya
Islam and the Future of Tolerance: A Dialogue by Maajid Nawaz, Sam Harris
4.0
I was binge watching old episodes of Politically Incorrect and Real Time when I stumbled upon Sam Harris and Maajid Nawaz as Bill's interviewees and panelists. And their brief appearances were enough to convince me to embark on the hunt for more dialogues and debates featuring the two. Undeniably, it has been a rewarding week so far. Having watched some of their discussions online, it became easier to approach this book. For me the main takeaway is summed up by Maajid's belief that :
And the dialogue adheres to it in spirit. Coming from two opposite ends on the faith spectrum, Sam and Maajid steer clear of their differences and instead focus on addressing the failure of constructive discussions on Islam and the reforms required to purge the extremists from the Islamic community. To this end they discuss their approaches to Islam as a religion and the parts of its scriptures that are vacuously interpreted by Jihadists and Islamists to further their nefarious ends. They enunciate the impediments to integration of Islam with modern secularist world view, based heavily on human rights and their guarantee. Yes, their inherent beliefs do emerge in this dialogue..but not to drown each other out. Rather they try to fill the gaps in each other's views and reach a common ground. They advocate for freedom of speech via criticism, they discuss the salience of plurality in interpretation of scriptures, they denounce the violence committed by extremist groups and chide the liberal left for its failure in stopping faith based atrocities in the name of cultural tolerance. It is a remarkable discussion, the likes of which we don't come across very often.
The dialogue has made me eager to check out other Muslim and non-Muslim speakers, in order to explore the real time reckoning of a religion with the secularist and liberal world view. I wish all religions were under just as strict a scrutiny as Islam. After all no religion is free from fundamentalism and violence in the name of faith. But all in good time I suppose. For now the intellectual battle lines are drawn over the need for reforms and the fundamentalist push back to it. I hope to learn more from such discussions and internalize them irrespective of the religion under scrutiny. At the end of the day, it is a battle of ideas. May the best one prevail.
No idea is above scrutiny and no people are beneath dignity.
And the dialogue adheres to it in spirit. Coming from two opposite ends on the faith spectrum, Sam and Maajid steer clear of their differences and instead focus on addressing the failure of constructive discussions on Islam and the reforms required to purge the extremists from the Islamic community. To this end they discuss their approaches to Islam as a religion and the parts of its scriptures that are vacuously interpreted by Jihadists and Islamists to further their nefarious ends. They enunciate the impediments to integration of Islam with modern secularist world view, based heavily on human rights and their guarantee. Yes, their inherent beliefs do emerge in this dialogue..but not to drown each other out. Rather they try to fill the gaps in each other's views and reach a common ground. They advocate for freedom of speech via criticism, they discuss the salience of plurality in interpretation of scriptures, they denounce the violence committed by extremist groups and chide the liberal left for its failure in stopping faith based atrocities in the name of cultural tolerance. It is a remarkable discussion, the likes of which we don't come across very often.
The dialogue has made me eager to check out other Muslim and non-Muslim speakers, in order to explore the real time reckoning of a religion with the secularist and liberal world view. I wish all religions were under just as strict a scrutiny as Islam. After all no religion is free from fundamentalism and violence in the name of faith. But all in good time I suppose. For now the intellectual battle lines are drawn over the need for reforms and the fundamentalist push back to it. I hope to learn more from such discussions and internalize them irrespective of the religion under scrutiny. At the end of the day, it is a battle of ideas. May the best one prevail.