Re: How to free Pakistani society from Mullahs
No, what is being discussed endlessly, and completely unnecessarily on your part, is whether ‘all’ Mullahs are ‘fake’. You say ‘here’ the discussion merges. Unfortunately you are the one who goes on that specific diversion, on your own, and you will do once again. I’ll point out when that happens.
Fake means that they are non-representative of the whole class, where whether they are representative of Mullay is the question to be addressed. Its called begging the question. Anyway, so long as this point is clear, that in calling them fake I in no way acknowledge that they do not represent the Mullah class, im fine with fake/counterfeit/knocked off/made in china whatever.
I dont intend to prove to you ‘that these fake ones are so common’. All I intend to say is that unless a qualifier is given, a comment about a category of people addresses the typical representative of that class, instead of a ‘minority of minority’ or an anomaly within that class. That is how language works, even poetic language, absent convention or metaphor. Therefore Allama Iqbal was addressing the typical mullah in his many poems referencing them, not the outlier or the anomaly or the minority of minority. To prove that Mullas who deserve Iqbal’s characterization are infact so common would go into the realm of speculation. And I, unlike you, do not speculate.
Ofcourse nobody in the world knows statistics except for you. With your glorious definitions of symmetric curve (median will be 50%!), Im perfectly confident that you have now caught the nat geo researchers unawares that there is someone who truly understands statistics, as it was meant to be, still alive.
Nevertheless, the example is just to say that what is ‘typical’ may not form an overall majority. Seven balls, three red, 2 green 1 blue 1 black. Typical ball: red. Majority of balls: not-red.
Hah. This is the most telling response. You completely ignore Iqbal’s poetry, damning of mullay and their influence, and insist that simply stating his poetry, without ANY speculative interpretation by me is a problem. I have produced many poems of his that bash mullay, you have produced nothing. I am using the conventional interpretation any language speaker would use, you are arguing, without basis, that HE intended as YOU see the world i.e. addressing a ‘minority of minoritys’. You offer no reasoning for that except that you dont think there are that many fake mullas. Well Im sorry, but Iqbal didnt think with your brain, or we would have far more poems on how the bell curve’s average must always be one, how the central limit theorem is really wrong etc etc.
Just produce some evidence that Iqbal intended to praise the good mullay and condemned the bad ones, and that he believed only a minority of a minority were fake. A little shairy on why people should listen to the majority of mullay please 
Thats what you believe where the fake mullay lie. This is where you make your mistake, you believe that Iqbal must have been using your thought process. The evidence for typicality comes not from any fictional distribution of mullay on some curve in your head. The evidence for typicality comes from: this is how people talk. When they talk about a class of people they refer to what typifies the class, not what is anomalous in it. Unless there is basis to assume so, which you only give from your own opinion of mullay, something I dont believe Iqbal ever had access to.
Just as you were self-centered when you thought I was posting that misra because I was responding to whatever point you were making, you are self-centered when you believe because they conflict with how you see mullay, Iqbal’s words could not mean what someone speaking those exact words on the street would mean, what someone writing those words anywhere would mean, what someone thinking those exact words would mean. Im sorry, but the world does not revolve around you, Iqbal was not constrained to think with your worldview, and many would feel that is a great blessing.
You mean the whole shair. This is from the three posts where talked about the first part:
if you read shikwa, he did believe that kafir, broadly speaking western kafir, did have ascendancy and were leading in spheres of thought.
I agree to the extent that intellectual and technological endeavour is in the hands of those whom Iqbal would regard as ‘kafir’. I am more of a fan of the second misra, has a real ring of truth to it.
Nevertheless, if you had any grounding in Urdu you would know that it is perfectly alrite to quote misray instead of complete shairs. ‘bari dair kardi mehrbaan atay atay’ etc.