(.......A software engineer analyzed the Quran and the Bible to see which was more violent — here's what he found ... The Bible scored higher for anger and lower for trust than the Quran. An analysis into whether the Quran is more violent than the Bible found that killing and destruction occur more frequently in the Christian texts than the Islamic. Investigating whether the Quran really is more violent than its Judeo-Christian counterparts, software engineer Tom Anderson processed the text of the Holy books to find which contained the most violence. In a blog post, Mr Anderson explains: "The project was inspired by the ongoing public debate around whether or not terrorism connected with Islamic fundamentalism reflects something inherently and distinctly violent about Islam compared to other major religions." Using text analytics software he had developed, named Odin Text, he analysed both the New International Version of both the Old and New Testaments as well as an English-language version of the Quran from 1957. It took just two minutes for his software to read and analyse the three books.......) http://www.businessinsider.com/some...he-bible-to-see-which-was-more-violent-2016-2
Text Analyses by a guy not named Daryl Moray http://odintext.com/blog/text-analysis-answers-is-the-quran-really-more-violent-than-the-bible/
Thomas Jefferson was a Muslim....! ".... ...In the smear campaign before the election for the presidency of the United States, one candidate was accused by his opponents of being a closet Muslim. Some Christians “viewed all Muslims as agents of religious error and a foreign threat.” The United States faced a hostage crisis, as many Americans were taken hostage by Muslim powers and freed only after a ransom was paid. In one country alone, “more than one hundred Americans had been captured and imprisoned.” Accounts of these captivities, even forced conversions, were often bestselling books. Piracy off the coasts of North Africa was a major problem for American cargo ships. A “social Christian,” hoping to preserve “a purely Protestant Christian America,” was worried that aliens might take over the reins of power in the country and opined that “the few ... Jews, Mahomedans, Atheists or Deists among us” must, in the name of prudence and justice, be excluded “fromour publick offices.” https://newrepublic.com/article/117173/thomas-jeffersons-quran-denise-spellberg-reviewed
*commence random geekout* This is a somewhat inelegant application of really powerful software concepts, though I'd be interested in seeing their source code. I can't help but think Watson is mixing and matching best-in-kind in natural language processing and machine learning to, just as an example, scan through millions of pages of cutting-edge medical literature to diagnose cancer two times better than human specialists while this OdinText thing seems to pander to the very worst of marketing instincts to simplify beyond all reason (really, how do you index emotionality so cleanly so as to produce a 10 point Likert scale?). That's a personal bias, so that already strikes me that they'd do analysis that is perhaps very very oversimplified. From what I can see they either lemmatize or stem (probably the former if it's a commercial solution) to deal with morphological forms and then take dictionaries of terms labelled with each emotion (according to what criterion we will never know I suppose--for example, does the word detest really fall into disgust? or is it anger? or is it fear? is it a weighted sum of the three? who decides? etc.) and apply a counter to the number of dictionary terms found throughout the text. Perhaps they then look for common contextual correlations to determine probabilities that a word is being used in a certain context (ex: "I detest hate" should actually register as love--or some variant thereof). That doesn't lend super well to a cross-cultural context of texts crafted 2000 years ago, or one that is not comprehensive of all ideas stemming from these texts. They themselves admit major methodological flaws in what they do. ex: yeah, but you're going to weight the Quran as 2 times more forgiving because somebody thought it necessary to add superfluous descriptors to a word that basically floods a text? *finish random geekout* ----- I'd pose two challenges if you will, to this thread and its premise (more out of intellectual masturbation more than anything else) 1) What does it say about the interpretation of these texts and not the texts themselves? 2) A comparison between two religious texts tells us a bit but assumes the same old tired trope that one religion is somehow "superior or inferior" to another. Why not do something a bit more involved if you're going to do somewhat trivial/high-level simplified analysis, and compare religious texts with non-religious texts? Why do we associate so much weight to texts crafted centuries ago, built in a drastically different culture? and it should be said, texts which have very little pragmatism when it comes to dealing with the future. What if somebody draws more inspiration from the Constitution than from the Bible? What if somebody draws more inspiration from a Kundera novel than from the Bible? not saying I'd like to see that, but I feel like this was a over-simplified analysis that really was looking to generate controversy and clicks and not probe at any deeper questions. but, fair game, kudos to them for getting on BI and doing just that.
I don't think it would surprise anyone that the O.T. is pretty violent. You want a lopsided result? Compare it to the Pali Canon.
Missing the point. 1. Christians can easily use the "We abide by the New Testament" rhetoric 2. Islam is not only the Quran. It is the hadith and sunnah of Muhammad. A large part of Islam is mimicking the life of the prophet, the same prophet who raided villages for not agreeing with his new dogma, held sex slaves, married a 6 year old girl, ordered the assassination and execution of various political dissenters and poets that satired him and more.
Thank you for putting a well thought solid argument . I agree with you on many points ,interpretation vary on many subjects and solely effected by culture ,time and circumstances or even politics. As you stated ,Societies in general drafted their own constitution which should be an easier task to follow ,but for example ,the Egyptians constitution is based on French constitution and for many decades it was identical but how it applied is way way different . I actually felt this study was't completed ,good as a pilot or interesting read and needs further development ,this why I added a "project" next to Odin Text
Point 1: There is no easy rhetoric about it. Christian teaching implies you follow the teachings of Christ. There is nothing "Christian" about the OT and if one carefully reads the texts, Christ himself explicitly states to turn away from the OT. If a Christian starts with OT dogma, I immediately disregard them. For Christians, the OT is nothing but a history book. Point 2: Sometimes I'd like to learn more about the Quran, but it seems most Muslims are just as biased as most Christians. Point 3: This is a Bible vs Quran topic, not so much Christian vs Muslim.
Everyone I have met from the Watson team were pretty much complete morons. Don't drink their Kool-Aid. They have something, but a lot of it is pure marketing hype. I know several IBM customers who were like...wtf...that's it?
The story of Mohamed is far more violent than the story of Jesus. Mohamed laid siege to a town, attacked it's inhabitants, left only the women alive to be sold in to slavery, and repeated this from town to town. However, upon conquering Mecca he decided not to execute all the men, and thus was seen as a hero. Also, he never conquered Jeddah - "Islam" conquered Jeddah.
Bible Body Count- <table style="width:100%"><tr><td></td><td>numbered killings</td> <td>estimated total killings</td></tr> <tr><td>God</td><td>2,476,633</td><td>25million</td></tr> <tr><td>Satan</td><td>10</td><td>60</td></tr></table>
This is the equivalent of Matt Maloney telling us all he is 7 feet tall. Islam's prophet was violent, and there is a window in their religious texts that many followers use to justify violence.
A computer seems to be wholly unqualified to do an analysis of which holy book is more violent. Only an engineer would think this was an appropriate approach.
Are you serious! ...I mean you have good info regarding many political movements : Qutb,MB and such so how can you be this misinformed about how Islam progressed !.. The main difference between Jesus and Mohammed is that Jesus was a born as a prophet and performed miracles and displayed unique gifts . Mohammed became a prophet in his 40s and all he had to show to his people is Quran.Read,Think then Believes was the approach . And unlike Jews where they felt special and chosen , it's common concept among Arab that God sent prophets to the worst people of their time , he was beaten ,starved ,abused and had to fled from his own people to many places . At one point he insisted to force people to become Muslim, and directly a verse in Quran came as "my modest translation " ...( you deliver the message ,you don't force them to believe it, if God wanted all people would had became believers ...) Txtony: my favourite nation is Korea , I 'v a great admiration of their culture,religion and attitudes.
