Sofist

4.6K posts

Sofist banner
Sofist

Sofist

@sakibuloni

Bosnia and Herzegovina Katılım Temmuz 2020
488 Takip Edilen332 Takipçiler
Sofist
Sofist@sakibuloni·
@Arminhodzi @progresivni Nevezano o bilo čijem stavu vezano za bilo koji sukob, nemoguce je nijekat da svaka država kontroliše javne servise.
1
0
1
13
Sofist
Sofist@sakibuloni·
@Arminhodzi @progresivni Na BBC-ju imaju regulative kako prenositi vijesti sa svjetskih ratišta. Baš je aktualno bilo kako su pravili rečenice u pasivu kad je riječ o palestinskim žrtvama, a u aktivu kad je riječ o izraelskim.
2
0
1
26
Sofist
Sofist@sakibuloni·
@Arminhodzi @progresivni Drzavni je medij, nije pritisak na privatni. Sta je nedemokratski u suzbijanju promidžbe putem javnog servisa oblika ponašanja koje većina stanovnštva smatra nemoralnim. Valjda bi trebao javni servis bit neutralan?
1
0
1
15
Sofist
Sofist@sakibuloni·
@aaomarokheda @KhalilAndani what do I, a Bosnian, have to do with random low class behaviour of a certain number of Pakistanis in The UK? We dont have rape gangs in my society.
English
2
0
3
76
Div
Div@aaomarokheda·
@KhalilAndani Because they failed to contain extremists. Isis enslaved yazidi and destroyed their communities. Why should non Muslim communities suffer for failure of Islamic society? Pakistani rapists in uk came from normal families. Why should British girls suffer from them?
English
1
0
0
160
Sofist
Sofist@sakibuloni·
@nowistomorrow0 Najveceg kriticara vehabija na bosanskom twitteru zovu vehabija HAHAHAHAH
0
0
0
269
Sofist
Sofist@sakibuloni·
@Criter10n @dzundub bilo bi dobro da se pozabavimo ilmihalom ikako, a kamoli naprednijim materijalom
0
0
1
13
𝗖𝗿𝗶𝘁𝗲𝗿𝗶𝗼𝗻🏴🔻
@dzundub Pogotovo našim bi preporučio da se zabave sa fikhom džihada iz henefijskog mezheba. Ali iskreno bi se ljudi šlagirali kad bi saznali da prvobitno ne ubijamo djecu i žene zato što su ratni plijen.
1
0
1
158
Džundub
Džundub@dzundub·
Pogrešno razumijevanje islama kod velikog broja naših ljudi potiče iz prostog razloga što se kod nas islam ne uči, već naslijeđuje kao tradicija i folklor. Idite na predavanja, čitajte Kur'an, tefsir, zbirke hadisa i druge knjige, učite islam. Vijećete koliko fulamo i ne znamo.
4
0
17
823
Sofist
Sofist@sakibuloni·
@turkic_facts This guy is not a historian but a geologist who is known for his strange takes.
English
2
0
4
2.4K
Sofist
Sofist@sakibuloni·
@mobiusdisk Foudeh is a good polemicist, not a great theologian.
English
2
0
7
1.7K
أميرة بنت يوسف
The Prophet ﷺ clenching and opening his hand was not meant to show how Allah grasps the earth. As Qadi Iyad explained
أميرة بنت يوسف tweet media
Català
5
0
15
2.1K
Andalus
Andalus@Hanbali2024·
@sakibuloni @bahlul_majnun @safwanSpiker7 When did I mention Aristotles theory retard? How many times are you going to @ me and respond to stuff I didn’t even say? Did I mention Aristotle? You’re just addressing things no one even cared about
English
1
0
2
51
Safwan
Safwan@safwanSpiker7·
. If God’s decree is pre-eternal and unchanging (p), then it is inconceivable for Him to act freely in libertarian sense (q). . p is true. Hence, q is true (as well). The classical Ash’ari wants to safeguard his creed so he affirms that God’s decree/will is perfectly 🧵
English
8
2
20
10.8K
Sofist
Sofist@sakibuloni·
@Hanbali2024 @bahlul_majnun @safwanSpiker7 Sufficient conditions for the emergence of the effect at the moment of the emergence of the condition which completes the cause - this is the causal theory of the falasifah that you seemingly subscribe to.
English
1
0
0
42
Andalus
Andalus@Hanbali2024·
When did anyone mention it must be simultaneous to the effect? I’ve granted this entire time it’s done from eternity which is why the falasifa who are consistent say the world is eternal. You didn’t bother responding to what your account of causation is, nor the point about sufficient conditions. Youre adding stuff into the convo that isn’t even relevant. It’s pretty easy to motivate why causes would have to be temporal and not done from eternity. You didn’t even bother touching up on the point about sufficient conditions
English
1
0
2
36
Sofist
Sofist@sakibuloni·
@bahlul_majnun @Hanbali2024 @safwanSpiker7 How those who keep throwing accusations upon the blessed Ash`aris of following Aristotle seem to be blindly obedient to his theories of causation and cannot think outside of it.
English
2
0
1
70
Sofist
Sofist@sakibuloni·
@Hanbali2024 you keep mentioning propositions as if the only theory regarding the ontology of knowledge were that knowledge is the inherence of the form in the intellect (representation in the mind). Why should that be accepted in the first place?
English
1
0
1
39
Andalus
Andalus@Hanbali2024·
These guys will say look Ibn Taymiyyah said such and such and act like you can’t possibly deny it, but when you give them their sultan of the Mutakalimeen they’re so quick to toss him under the bus. Also, no one ever claimed ‘Razi said therefore true’. But notice how he insulted his own sheikh. Lol now the issue is that he needs to deal with is he thinks that this world is not necessary. The problem is, God knows in his view that he can be alone, Can create another world, and knows he did create this world. Well, can the truth value change? If there’s variability there, then his knowledge would also change. If God NECESSARILY knows he creates this world (not conditionally necessary), then he must do so. There would be no other world. Him saying it isn’t a real contingent inside of God isn’t really doing anything since even under Quines view of metaontology it wouldn’t even matter. Al Razi gives a similar argument and he just isn’t dealing with it. Simply saying it doesn’t exist therefore no contingency isn’t very satisfying. Even his own contemporaries say there’s a non-existent relation that explains the universe coming into being. However, what does this even mean? A non-existent relation brings about the universe? How can they say God is the one who caused it? Absurd view to hold to all around. We want actual answers.
Andalus tweet mediaAndalus tweet media
English
2
1
16
1.2K
Sofist
Sofist@sakibuloni·
@Hanbali2024 @bahlul_majnun @safwanSpiker7 illah is a strict term refering to the aristotelian theory of causation you are appealing to. Allah is not a cause in that strict sense you are taking it to be. Why should we follow Aristotle`s theories?
English
1
0
0
47
Andalus
Andalus@Hanbali2024·
@sakibuloni @bahlul_majnun @safwanSpiker7 💀💀💀💀 what even are you saying rn legit bottom of the barrel. Does Allah have causal efficacy in your view even? 💀 how does that mean he is a cause itself. If I ask you if you caused the water bottle to fall, you wouldn’t tell me ‘oh I’m not an illah’ 💀💀💀💀💀
English
1
0
2
54