Debate with convert Donald Morgan part 7
ALI SINA’S ‘BACK UP’ PLAN
On page 70 in Ali Sina’s book he states the following, and I quote:
‘Narcissists do not directly promote themselves. They hide behind the veneer of modesty, while they elevate their god, ideology, cause or religion, which in reality is their own alter ego. They may present themselves as mere messengers, simple, humble, self-effacing heralds of this or that mighty and all-powerful deity, or all-encompassing cause, but they make it clear that they are the only ones who know the cause and are extremely intolerant and unforgiving of dissenters and recalcitrants’
This passage automatically set off ‘red flags’ for me when I read it. The reason it raised suspicion is because there was no footnote attached. This statement did not come from a reference or a ‘qualified’ resource. It didn’t even come from Dr. Sam Vaknin fake Ph.D. Where did this passage come from? If it came from some resource, Ali Sina would have listed it in a footnote! If this statement did not come from a reference or resource it must have come directly from Ali Sina himself. I asked myself again and again, why Ali Sina would place this in his book if it didn’t come from a qualified psychiatric professional. Then, like a ton of bricks, the answer hit me. This is Ali Sina’s ‘back up’ plan. This is the ‘backdoor’ by which Ali Sina can escape when confronted with overwhelming evidence. In a sense, this is the ‘cop out’ Ali Sina can use at his discretion when proof of Muhammad not suffering from NPD is brought to the table. It occurred to me that it doesn’t matter how many examples from the Hadith or the Quran, about Muhammad, that would disqualify him as being a NPD sufferer were brought to the table because in the end, Ali Sina could always use his ‘back up’ plan or ‘backdoor’ by saying:
‘Narcissists do not directly promote themselves. They hide behind
the veneer of modesty, while they elevate their god, ideology, cause or
religion, which in reality is their own alter ego.’ (pay close attention to the bold writing)
An example of how this ‘back up’ plan can be deployed when needed is the following hypothetical (made up) conversation:
Me: Ali Sina, Muhammad was offered status, money and keys to the Kabbah by the pagan Arabs in exchange for the immediate halt of his message of Islam. Muhammad replied saying that if they (pagan Arabs) were to place the moon in his left hand and the sun in his right hand, he would never give up the message (Islam), which was sent by God. If Muhammad had NPD, and NPD sufferers crave power and status, he would have taken this offer, as it gave him what every NPD sufferer craves, ‘Status’. The fact that he rejected this offer and took exile from Makkah as a result, shows he does not have NPD.
Ali Sina: Well Saadiq, you see, a narcissist hides behind the veneer of modesty, while they elevate their god, so this evidence you provide is no proof that Muhammad was not a narcissist.
Can you, the reader, see how this statement in Ali Sina’s book is nothing more than a dirty tactic he can use to get out of any conversation? The unbiased person who reads this can see it clearly!
This statement could be used to disqualify any evidence or proof that is brought up by myself or others. I know that by the end of this debate, Ali Sina will use this excuse, or one like it to wiggle his way out of the evidence I bring forth. All I ask is that the readers remember one thing. This statement about NPD did NOT come from a qualified professional! It is the workings and ideology of Ali Sina, who is NOT a qualified psychiatrist, nor an authority on the subject of mental disorders or narcissism. If the readers of this debate are able to see beyond this obvious deception, made by Ali Sina, they, like me, can say that this statement is worthless, as it did not come from a qualified reference or resource. Thus, it can’t be used in the argument.
How do you know I am or I am not a mental health professional? I have not spoken of my professional background. Did Gabriel whisper it in your ear this? Don’t trust that guy. He lied to Muhammad a lot and told him a lot of stupid things that we are now finding in the Quran. He could be deceiving you too.
Now as far as that statement, yes it is mine, but you are not qualified to opine on it unless you show your qualification. By the way you conducted yourself in writing this so called rebuttal and the logical fallacies that you used I doubt you have a university qualification. Unless you got your diploma from a university in an Islamic country most universities churn their graduated a lot more familiar with logics.
Yes that statement is true. Narcissists never promote themselves directly. They are always the champions of a cause, a belief, something bigger then themselves. I have shown examples of various famous narcissists, and their causes, and their cults in my book. Narcissists are not fool. They know how to manipulate people. No one would follow another person without a cause, but if you give them a cause, something big, something worthy to die for, you can have them in your hand like putty. This cause can be nationalism, communism, socialism, fascism, monotheism, or whatever, but not capitalisms because capitalism is individualistic. No one will want to sacrifice himself for capitalism. It defeats the purpose. But if you excite people about the causes that require one-for-all-and-all-for-one mentality, you can create a cult around yourself.
Nonetheless, I did not refute the silly claim that Meccans offered wealth to Muhammad to stop preaching with this logic because it is a stupid and false claim. It just goes against reason. Imagine the scenario that the wealthy people of Mecca gather and say, this lunatic Muhammad had gathered a few slaves and low life moron around himself and is insulting our gods. So let all of us dig into our pockets and make him the wealthiest man in Mecca. Isn’t that laughable? How much one must be stupid to believe in this nonsense? Two minutes of rational thinking would prove all the claims of Islam are false, but alas a billion Muslims rehash these stupidities for 1400 years and are incapable thinking.
Although this story is a ludicrous, the fact that narcissists are known to refuse offers to save their pride is a well known fact.
Narcissist are extremely careful about self preservation and are willing to burn the world in order to save their own august and important self. However, what really matters to a narcissist most is his pride. They will even accept death for their pride. Saddam Hussein was a good example. In the war of 2003, he was offered to take his stolen wealth and go and live in Russia, but surrender Iraq without dragging it into war. He refused. Partly because he was fooled by the French whom he thought would save him at the end and party because his pride was too important for him.
Hitler fought to the last minute a losing war and committed suicide before surrendering. All a narcissist has, is his pride. You take that away and nothing is left. For the narcissist, “death in dignity is better than life in dishonor,” These were the final words of Jim Jones when he goaded his followers to drink from the cyanide laced Cool Aid.
The problem with you Donald is that you chose a wrong subject to refute. You probably would have not made a complete ass of yourself had you chosen a subject you were more familiar with, like pedophilia, raid or rape. You don’t know anything about narcissism and there you are trying to discredit Sam Vaknin the man that many call one of the most authoritative people on the subject. You took a bite of something that was too big for your mouth. Hopefully, this experience will serve you as a lesson. Next time challenge someone of your own size. You don’t want to get your nose bloodied in the first round and become the laughing stock of the world.
The following is the recapitulation of this long drivel. Here is where Donald is beating his chest and celebrating his victory. I am not going to respond to it because it’s answered above.
Most people I have debated, over the years, have been Christian missionaries. I have to admit that my experience in debating ex-Muslims, turned atheists or Christians is limited. Since 9 11 we have seen an increase in the works of such people like Ali Sina and others like Irshad Manji. It is a responsibility for the Muslims to answer their call and expose their flawed logic and misrepresentation of Islam. In my investigation into this phenomena, I have found that people like Ali Sina base their argument on ‘cultural Islam’. In my travels throughout South East Asia, I have seen these how culture and innovation seep into the teachings of Islam, turning it into something that resembles true Islam. Some people can’t distinguish the difference between the taste of real sugar and fake sugar (sweetener), but for those of us who can, we taste the sweetness of true Islam, everyday in our lives!
The question of what was proven in my first half of the debate comes into question. Thus far, I was able to prove the following:
1. Ali Sina uses sources that are considered unqualified
2. Ali Sina injects his opinions, based on unqualified sources when speaking about narcissism or NPD.
3. Ali Sina uses half truths to prove his arguments
4. Show aspects from Muhammad’s life that are no typical traits of a person who suffers from NPD.
5. Show that the examples Ali Sina uses in the life of Muhammad to prove he had NPD are incorrect
In a court of law all the defense has to do to attain an acquittal of any charge is show reasonable doubt. I believe that in this first part of the debate, I have done just that. Not only was I able to prove reasonable doubt, I also proved that the prosecution (Ali Sina) has put into evidence articles that are grossly questionable and that he bases his case on faulty interpretation and discreditable witness testimony.
It is now up to Ali Sina to prove the following, if he wants to save face with his readers:
1. Prove that source (i.e Dr. Sam Vaknin) is a qualified psychiatrist or doctor in the field of mental disorders.
2. Prove that the examples I used from the life of Muhammad are fabricated (believe me he can’t).
3. Answer for the misleading information he uses from the Quran to prove his point (making a statement and then putting beside it a Quranic reference, refer to page 61 of his book)
4. Answer for the misleading information he says comes from the lips of Muhammad (says Muhammad said so-and-so but does not give a reference of footnote, refer to page 62 of his book)
I would like to end this part of my debate by quoting from the Quran and the Hadith.
‘Muhammad is no more than a messenger and indeed (many) messengers have passed away before him…’ (Surah 3, verse 144)
The prophet Muhammad said: ‘Do not exaggerate in praising me as the Christians exaggerated in their praise the son of Maryam(Jesus). For indeed I am a slave, so say, ‘The slave of Allah and His Messenger’
Such eloquent words to be found in the Quran and lips of Muhammad! Does this sound like a man who wants to be a God (as Ali Sina insists)? Are these the words of one who suffers from narcissistic personality disorder (NPD)? I leave the answer to these questions to the reader of this part of the debate.
Short URL: http://www.archive2012.faithfreedom.org/?p=5059