Hello again Jackson,
Since no one else has decided to step up to the plate and respond to your post, I though I'd better. You seem to want both conventional intellectual criticism as well as English criticism, so I've attempted to offer both paragraph by paragraph. Before getting started however, allow me to point out that (as you're probably aware) you've written a very controversial essay. That's fine, but it means that many of your points require cited sources of information in order for most people to accept them as more than mere generalizations.
| According to Muslims, they are the most peaceful nation on this [omit "very"] earth, but I think every human being wants to live in peace except some so-called humans.[1] These days Islam and Muslims have two different ways to go. Islam is a good religion but a majority of [omit "the"] Muslims are educated illiterates.[2] Almost every religion is a philosophy, therefore it can only be understood by philosophical mind. Muslims cannot become good humans just by reading Qur'an and Hadith. It is a shame for Muslims that they don't even understand their religion. |
|
1. Your first problem is that you refer to Muslims collectively as a single "nation". Since that's not the general view, you should justify it. Perhaps you could reference the fact that Muslims typically divide the world into two spheres: Dar al-Islam, which literally means "house of submission" and refers to Muslim countries, and Dar al-Harb, which means "house of war" and refers to the rest of the world. Also, while I've often heard Muslims claim that their religion is both perfect and peaceful, I've never heard one claim that Muslims collectively make up "the most peaceful nation" in the world. You should also justify this assertion by providing some examples to illustrate that they do indeed feel this way.
Lastly, your use of the term "so-called humans" while not technically incorrect, sounds a bit awkward. You've established no prior criteria to being labeled a true human, and thus the distinction you're drawing is a bit confusing at first. This might be helped slightly by using "human beings" in place of "humans". The term "human being" is more often connected with notions of a higher (and therefore moral) lifeform than "human" alone. So as not to sound redundant, you probably also want to replace your initial use of "human being" earlier in the sentence with something like "person".
2. Again, if you're going to state something as controversial as the "majority of Muslims are educated illiterates", you have to back it up with some sources of information. Labeling them "educated illiterates" is also a contradiction that you never explain or elaborate on.
| Perhaps, Muslims will prosper someday but they can never be a good and civilized nation like the West.[1] No society can become civilized society unless it intellectually explores itself. Qur'an askes several times to do justice. But still Islamic countries have no law and order. The only thing which distinguishes West is its justice.[2] West has one of the best judicial system. Why do Muslims think to change the world? Why don't they first change themselves? I agree that not all Muslims are terrorists but sometimes it becomes hard to discern between terrorists and Muslims. Suppose [omit "if"] a certain family A has five members, and three members are gangsters but the remaining two are good [omit "ones"]. The general public will label the entire family A as family of gangsters. This is how the world works. |
|
1. It's best to define your notion of the "West". While it is a common term, definitions of it do vary (for instance, sometimes it includes eastern Europe and sometimes it does not) and it's best to clearly outline which one you are using. You might also wish to further illustrate why exactly you feel that the West is "good" and "civilized" as that's certainly not a universal point-of-view.
2. I think that both citizens of the West as well as other cultural regions of the world would contend with the notion that the only thing separating the two is justice. Perhaps you should state that justice is the "main" or "primary" thing which separates them.
| Muslims always blame West for any undesirable thing which happens in Muslim countries. The West has not nothing to do with those bad things.[1] Muslims do those bad acts themselves, no one forces them. Why don't they do anything for themselves?[2] They don't have physicists, biologists, scientists, etc. They can never prosper in science, and science is the ultimate path which leads any human to eternal truth.[3] Whatever Muslims do, they do it for money. In spite of all that they still say the West is greedy. In the West [omit the comma] people could spend their entire life on some scientific research and that research is for the welfare of entire mankind not just for the West.[4] You can never become a good human just by having a lot of academic degrees in your hand. It is your intellect which make you become good human. Their prophet was not a educated person, but still he did many things which were impossible in 7th century.[5] |
|
1. Again, you're making a lot of unsubstantiated claims. You ought to cite specific examples of Muslims blaming the West for their domestic problems, and then demonstrating how and why those problems are caused by Muslims themselves. You might also want to draw a contrast between the blame Muslims assign to Westerners and vice versa.
2. Do you mean to ask why they don't do anything else for themselves? That is, anything beyond causing domestic problems?
3. Once more, a lot of people would disagree with the statements you're making. In an effort to prevent yourself from over-generalizing a religious group which includes over 1.4 billion members, you really need to demonstrate how you reached the conclusions you did. In the short term, you could improve your statements by ceasing to make them absolutes. For example, instead of stating that Muslims "don't have physicists, biologists, scientists, etc." among them, you could say that they "have relatively few physicists, biologists, scientists, etc."
4. Instead of saying "...that research is for the welfare of entire makind...", which sounds awkward, I would say "...that research is for the welfare of all of mankind..."
5. If he did them, then they weren't impossible, right? I would change it to "...but still he did many things thought to be impossible..." or something similar.
| I know many Muslims personally. They do every bad thing which a real bad person can do. When Muslims find something offensive [omit "to themselves"], they say it's a conspiracy of Jews. Don't they?[1] No Muslim can ever become a good Muslim unless he is a good human. I do not say Muslims are fundamentalists because they are not. Being a fundamentalist is not a bad thing. No person can be a true believer unless he is fundamentalist whether he is Jew, Christian, Muslim, or Hindu, etc.[2] To deceive someone is forbidden in Islam but most of the Muslims are deceivers and they feel real proud in doing this. Feel proud of doing what? Fraud! I don't mean Muslims are the only nation who are not following their Book in true sense. In my opinion followers of all religions are getting away from their Books. But others like Christians or Jews don't say that they are the only true believers in this world, but Muslims always say very eloquently that they are the chosen people of God. Why? What [omit "thing"] makes them chosen people?[3] I don't know whether they are chosen people or not, but at least they must try first to become good humans. |
|
1. First, I would change the phrase "a conspiracy of Jews" to "a Jewish conspiracy", which is more clear. Your question "Don't they?" is an interesting choice. You are again making an unsubstantiated claim, and then asking the reader if they agree with you. That's a risky technique, especially if your reader has no firsthand experience with individual Muslims.
2. The last few sentences here leave the reader asking a lot of questions. You seem to be making the argument that religious fundamentalists are ultimately good because they follow the strict rules outlined by their religions. However, you do not consider most Muslims to be fundamentalists because they do not follow the moral and peaceful teachings of Islam. The two main questions these points raise are why then are terrorists and other violent Muslims so often labeled as fundamentalists, and is Islam a fundamentally peaceful religion?
3. You should probably delve into your last few points a bit deeper, and some of the distinction you're drawing between Muslims and Jews and Christians don't seem very accurate. Many Christians do in fact believe that the only means of entering Heaven is by accepting Jesus Christ as your personal savior. Jews, in turn, do believe themselves to be God's chosen people, although Heaven isn't necessarily limited to Jews.
Perhaps a better distinction to draw between Islam and the other two Abrahamic religions, is the emphasis placed on a literal reading of the Qur'an and Hadith, as well as the notion that Islam is a perfect religion. In essence, Christianity and Judaism leave lots of room open to interpretation of their various beliefs, and they've never addressed or mentioned any concept of perfection regarding religion. This has led to a continued evolution of beliefs and practices in these religions, and allowed their practitioners to adapt rather easily to changes in modern society. In contrast, Muslims see the ideal form of Islam as the one practiced by the very first Muslims. Thus Muslims concepts of morality and justice often seem out-dated to other cultures.
| Muslims always say all the bad things are happening in the West. But every bad thing which is happening in the West is also happening in so-called Islamic countries on much larger scale.[1] Although it's hard to find a Muslim with good knowledge, even if you find one then he will be so mean that he won't share his knowledge with you so that he can maintain his superiority. Islam doesn't teach that. Many times when something new is discovered particularly in scientific field, Muslims say the Qur'an also mentioned that. But why don't they try to find those scientific theories themselves which the Qur'an mentions, when they already have hints from God. Why are they so dependant upon the West? Everything which they use is from the West, whether it's mobile phones, computers, or books. I think every human has a brain. Tell me any constructive thing [omit "which"] Muslims have done for the welfare of mankind.[2] The most likely answer to this question from Muslims will be that in Cordoba there were two miles of public lighting in the streets when London was a village. But now this is the twenty-first century. |
|
1. Yet again, you're making a lot of generalizations with no support to back up your claims. I'm not going to label each one individually, but this paragraph is full of such claims, so be careful and try to offer examples of what you mean.
2. I would change this whole sentence to "Tell me one constructive thing Muslims have done for the benefit of mankind." Also, are you really going to try and argue that Muslims have never done anything good for mankind? You might want to again concentrate on making your statements less absolute, and instead offer a meaningful and specific comparison of the advancements the West and Islamic world have made in recent years.
| The Qur'an and Muslims are totally in total contrast.[1] Sunnis and Shiites fight like animals. The Iran-Iraq War was one of bloodiest wars of twentieth century. There are many doctors and engineers in Islamic countries, but they only have degrees; they know nothing about science. Having a beard doesn't mean you have got a permit to heaven. It is your deeds which decide your destiny in the hereafter. Muslims are full of hypocrisy. Corruption is thriving in every Muslim country. These days some Muslims think that Islam is main hurdle in the progress of their society. But their main hurdle to progress is their brains and their mullahs. Don't they feel ashamed of themselves when they read Qur'an, because everything they do, they do it for money and their personal pleasure?[2] To be born in Muslim family doesn't make you a true and peaceful believer. Adolf Hitler was a Christian but that doesn't necessarily mean he was a true believer.[3] |
|
1. Your main thesis seems to be that Muslims countries are experiencing a major moral and social decline, and one of the reasons is that they don't adhere to the morality outlined in the Qur'an. In essence, you don't seem to think that Islam itself is necessarily a hurdle for the progress of Islamic people. Reading your essay though, one has to wonder if that's true. If Muslim actions are so divergent from what the Qur'an teaches, you should provide excerpts from the Qur'an to demonstrate this.
2. Again, that's another one of many harsh generalizations you make with no examples.
* * * *
All in all, you have many interesting points, and certainly don't shy away from controversial opinions. However, your essay does come off as a bit of a rant as you provide little support or reasoning for some very divisive statments. You also seem to assume that your audience has had extensive personal experience in dealing with Muslims, and also that their experience with Muslims has been the same as yours. Regardless of topic, the best essays usually assume that the reader does not have much knowledge about the subjects being discussed and provide lots of research and examples to support their conclusions.
Anyway, I hope all that was helpful to you.