Red Pill & the Praxeology Hustle

One of the talking points of Rolo Tomasi that gets parroted by his acolytes among the Tomasiene is that red pill theory is not an ideology, it is a Praxology. It's a study of human behavior and human action and so on. So the Tomasin will defend Muslims studying red pill the same way that they'll defend studying engineering or science or chemistry or what have you. They'll say it's neither Islamic nor un Islamic. It's just the study of human behavior and we can benefit from studying it.

Okay. Here's the thing. Red pill is not an academic discipline. The study of human iour occurs in the social sciences and none of these are what anyone could call hard sciences. They are soft sciences at best and their limitations, flaws, and shortcomings are relatively well known and recognized even by the people who study them.

They are only called sciences because they do employ a form of data collection and experimentation to prove hypotheses, but ideology and culture are infused into their processes to a much greater extent than they are in the hard sciences. They rely on inductive reasoning, extrapolation, and predictive probabilities rather than on real existing realities. For example, a survey of 100 people will be used to extrapolate conclusions about an entire population, whereas a more strict interpretation, more scientific interpretation, would be that the conclusion or the results of a study of 100 people tells you only something about that 100 people, and maybe not even them. So the social sciences have a lot of problems. They are not entirely useless, and they are at least a genuine academic discipline.

Red Pill is not even a social science. Red Pillars and Tomassian cherry picked data from studies carried out in the social sciences just to validate their pre existing conclusions about the motivations of human behavior. In other words, not only is red pill not a social science, but they misuse the studies carried out in the social sciences just to rationalize their preexisting unscientific, non academic, unresearched biases and opinions. It is all ideology. Let me just give you one obvious example that I've seen used by the seeing.

Now they claim that there's no difference between Muslims and non Muslims with regards to the applicability of red pill theories because red pill theories deal with human nature and human nature is universal. Now I've already explained in a previous video why this position is unacceptable and offensive for us as Muslims, so I won't repeat it all here. But suffice it to say, the human nature, the fitra, is Islam and non Muslims have mangled that fitra. So what applies to them cannot apply to us. One of the studies used by the Tamassian to allege that there is no difference between Muslims and non Muslims is a 2012 study carried out by the American Sociological Association called religion and sexual behaviors.

I'll leave a link in the description. This study claims that sixty percent of Muslims have engaged in premarital or extramarital sex, zinah. And this is the only thing that the Tomas an took from this study because it's all they wanted to hear. And they used this one cherry picked data point from the study to defame Muslim women and to allege that there's essentially no difference between Muslims and Kufar in terms of our morality and our sexual behavior. Now what the study actually hypothesized and proved was that Islam has an overwhelming influence on decreasing the probability of people committing zina.

The study showed that the likelihood of even non Muslims engaging in sex outside of marriage decreases in measurable proportion to the size of the Muslim community in that country. In other words, when there are more Muslims in a country, zina is less likely even amongst the Kufar. The study also showed that restrictions on women's mobility and freedom of movement in Muslim majority countries does not significantly impact the likelihood or otherwise of sex outside of marriage. That is to say, with or without restrictions on their movement, Muslim women's sexual behavior remains more conservative than any other group. Indeed, the study found that Muslims overall have the lowest incidence of zina of any social or religious population.

So you see, the Tomasin used this study to make an allegation that the study itself disproves. Now with regard to that sixty percent figure, this is where we see the severe flaws in the social sciences. Here are the countries that they surveyed in that study. As you can see, there's not one Arab country nor is the largest Muslim population country in the world, Indonesia listed, nor Malaysia, nor Pakistan. And the country listed with the highest percentage of Muslims population is Azerbaijan, which is 85% Shia and was oppressed by state imposed atheism for seventy years under the Soviet Union.

Many of the other countries polled are West African nations where various forms of Sufism dominate the Islamic beliefs and practices of the people. So that 60% figure is a predictive probability based on the selected polling groups responses. It is an extrapolation about the Muslim population as a whole using a control group of participants from countries where the Islamic beliefs and practices are significantly different from the beliefs and practices of most of the Muslim world. Yet even with these considerable problems, the study still finds that the sexual behavior of Muslims is massively more conservative than non Muslims, and they explicitly attribute this difference to Islam. The study unambiguously affirms that Muslims and non Muslims are radically divergent in their morals and behavior.

Yet the Tomasin used this study to allege the opposite because quite simply, they are not interested in reality. They are interested in promoting their ideology. So look, there's no harm in Muslims considering the studies carried out through the social sciences as long as we are cognizant of their shortcomings, their flaws, and their limitations, and as long as we regard their conclusions with a healthy dose of skepticism and critical thinking. But there is imminent harm in Muslims taking on the ideological manipulation, misinterpretation, and rank dishonesty of red pillars, biased readings of these studies and their findings. Red pillars lie.

Tomasayin lie. So if you're interested in these topics, read the studies yourself and use Islam as your guide in understanding what they mean, and don't rely on red pillars to interpret the findings for you.