"Religion, a medieval form of unreason, when combined with modern weaponry becomes a real threat to our freedoms" ~ Salman Rushdie.
I wrote a book called The Virus of Faith [1]. Religious beliefs were analyzed in this book from the point of view of modern memetics, not a huge work or something basic. Mim and memetics have created a lively context for ongoing research since Richard Dawkins' shellfish gene came on the market in the 1970s. In the last few years, a number of popular science books have been published in academia in the Western world. But unfortunately there was no book on this in Bangla. One of my endeavors was to introduce readers to recent research through this book. That was the motivation to write the book. I don't know how successful I have been, but in a month's time, multiple editions of the book have been published, and the response from readers has made many curious about the book, perhaps even more so. In addition to curiosity and admiration, I feel that some people have become disgusted with the book. Among the disgruntled people are some well-known sick fundamentalists, as well as a couple of left-wing progressive people. The first group joined the march to ban my book by threatening online book-marketing companies like Rokmari, and the second group tagged as 'Salafi secular' for writing against religious terrorism, even if they did not directly engage in jihad.
I have nothing new to say about the first group. Because they do not accept the argument, they want to answer by throwing weapons or signature way. They think that they have a heavenly right to kill anyone who criticizes religion and its preachers. Although they are living in the modern 21st century, it seems that they have left their conscience, intellect and thinking hostage in the 7th century. There is no point in writing anything about them. Because they are unable to think outside of jihad and slaughter. The second group, however, is not like that. They spoke on behalf of the oppressed people. They are sensitive to social politics and people. He writes thoughtful articles in blogs and magazines. So their statements have a special significance to me. Parvez Alam is such a thoughtful writer. In addition to writing on the blog, he has two enlightening books on 'Muslim epistemology' and 'Shahbag's state project'. I have been enterprising, collected the two books, read them, and encouraged others at one time. Gentleman Arj Ali Matubbar is associated with the library movement. The writing of such a person undoubtedly demands extra attention. The incident started last September. At the time I was writing an article in English, primarily at the request of an internationally recognized free-thinking magazine. At the time, the media was embroiled in controversy over the beheading of American and British journalists by ISIS. My writing naturally had some criticism of all those barbaric acts by ISIS, and I saw it as an epidemic of the ‘virus of faith’. Contrary to this, Parvez wrote an article on the Istishan blog tagging me as 'Salafi Secular'. He even gave the title of his article ‘Why did Abhijit Roy become a Salafi secularist?’. But the funny thing is, he didn't show the courtesy of reading my book even though he was involved in such purposeful tags. But even though he did not read the book, he wrote against me. Either way, no one vowed to read everything. Many times we also learn from the ongoing debate between the pros and cons and update ourselves. It was because of this controversy at that time that we received two well-written writings on the religion of Muhammad Golam Sarwar and the Atheist. Especially the atheist's theology has to be said separately. He wrote an excellent essay on me and Parvez's writing, showing some flaws on both sides (although unfortunately he didn't read my book either). Although he was not interested in meme and memetics (which he acknowledged in his writings), he threw out some seemingly important questions by questioning the notion of the ‘virus of faith’ in the text. Although I made a comment at the bottom of the article at the time (besides me, Abhishek Rahman made some excellent points) I did not have the time and opportunity to answer in a wide range. Parvez, however, wrote several articles, the last of which was titled 'I wrote against Abhijit Roy in the interest of Bangladesh'. I am not giving any such title in this article. I decided that what I really needed to do was learn how to do it right. And the goal of this writing is not only Pervez, I have had the good fortune or bad luck to see the Facebook status and discussions of some important people who are relevant after some recent events. I also have some opinions about them. I hope this will be my last post.
A number of tragic incidents have taken place. The beheading of ISIS infidels has been going on for a long time, and I have seen in the news that they have killed 150 women of the same caste because these women refused to marry the jihadi jihadists of Islam [2]. Boko Haram's massacre is going on in Nigeria as well. About 2,000 people have been killed in the name of Islam. In other news, I saw an Iranian girl named Rehana being raped, and again she was hanged after being tried under Sharia law. In Saudi Arabia, meanwhile, a muezzin has fired a "crazy" servant for delaying the call to prayer. A few days later, a middle-aged young man carrying the ISIS flag took people hostage in a cafe in Sydney, Australia. In another tragedy, the Pakistani Taliban opened fire on a school in Peshawar, Pakistan, killing at least 140 students. Not only that, in the aftermath of this brutal massacre, the Pak Taliban, with reference to Sahih Bukhari, said that their massacre in Peshawar was supported by a biography of Muhammad and a hadith. What they have done in Peshawar is Islamic ‘Sunnat’ [4]. The tragedy of Shirley Abdo in France happened before the blood of Peshawar's brutality dried up. The media brawled over the recent incident again. Jihadists, wounded by "religious sentiment" for drawing "satirical" cartoons about the Prophet Muhammad, stormed the office of the French newspaper Shirley Abdo. Killed 12 cartoonists with "Allahu Akbar". During the killing mission, the terrorist came out with his mouth - ‘The prophet has been avenged’. After the tragedy of Peshawar and Shirley Abdo, I just thought that if anyone had any doubts about the 'virus of faith' after such a barbaric attack, it should be dispelled. The brains of 140 innocent schoolchildren who have not been able to shake their hands, who have been overwhelmed by guns and bombs to respond to little cartoons, have been infected with viruses! That ever-old ‘virus of faith’!
In fact, whether we admit it or not, the spread and survival of religion works a lot like a virus. The Tagudi slaves of the religion proved it time and time again. Like a virus, a ‘host’ is needed for reproduction, for self-propagation, for religion to survive, it needs a bunch of loyal servants and servants, in whose bosom religion survives. Not only that, just as a germ competes with another germ to protect itself, so does one belief compete with another. Wants to protect himself from other beliefs. It is inculcated in the minds of believers - 'Do not listen to unbelievers or infidels, faith will be ruined.' As the virus spreads the infection by copying itself with its eyes closed, each religious belief replaces other beliefs and only copies its own. It goes exactly the same way. This is how faith-based empires spread. Muhammad Golam Sarwar, a physician by profession and a well-known author, has very nicely explained why religion is as contagious as a virus. [5] He cited the physical structure of the virus, the performance of the virus and its type of function, the harmful aspects of the virus, and even the strong compatibility of the virus with religion in the treatment of the virus. From there I have to mention a few points -
1 - The physical structure of the virus
A virus is a type of germ that cannot make its own food, it cannot reproduce unless they are inside a different animal body, that is, the virus is a solid inanimate substance outside a host or animal body. Some books on microbiology have compared the virus outside the host body to an inert substance, which in English is called inert substance. In other words, it is not possible for the virus to do anything without entering the body of another. He has to find a host for his own existence and growth.
Now let's read what he wrote in the words of Hazrat Ali in the writings of Parvez Alam -
During the battle of Siffin, when the Kharijites began to oppose Ali with slogans such as "There is no ruler but Allah" and "There is no judge without the Qur'an", there is a story of Ali's argument with them. Ali placed a Qur'an in front of the people and told them to explain the law of Allah to the people. The Qur'an can not speak, how will he answer Ali's question? After the people raised this question, Ali said with a sigh, "The Qur'an is paper and ink, the Qur'an cannot say anything by itself." Only the man can interpret the law from the Qur'an, according to his own understanding. "
Pervez, your story is a perfect example that the Qur'an or any other book is a kind of solid inanimate substance, which has no independent function of its own, which has to ride on the shoulders of others to be active, that is, it needs a host to be active, right The virus is needed. That is, a host of the Qur'an or any scripture is needed, for its own growth, for its own expansion. The Hostless Qur'an or the Bible is a harmless book like three thousand other books on the bookshelf. But when the scriptures get a host, then? He then takes control of his host and at one point the host loses his own identity and becomes a slave to religion, which is run under the name of "religious discipline". This discipline makes people Muslims, Hindus, Sikhs and then makes one stand against the other. That is, religion takes control of the place of normal human thought. Let's see how the virus works -
2 - The performance of the virus and its type of work
When a virus enters a host cell, it is responsible for the reproduction and other metabolic functions of that host cell. The virus stops the normal functioning of the cell, that is, it stops the normal functioning of a normal cell and starts working like him. Then the cell can no longer follow its own work routines or rules, the virus that is infected by T works exactly according to its regime. At one stage the virus begins to reproduce inside human or animal cells, millions of new viruses invade millions more cells and at one time shut down the normal functioning of a particular system in the human body. At the end of it all, the host cell or even the host animal dies. Just as religion captures a person's natural social sense and imposes the discipline of religion. Man then becomes driven by the dictation of religion, not by science or human sense.
3 - Harmful aspects of the virus and the type of attack
Infected animals or humans or hosts can be of two types. First - the virus is infected and in which the active disease has occurred (Virus infected with disease menifestation). Second - infected with the virus but not infected (Carrier without active infection or disease), some hosts or people can live without the manifestation of any disease throughout his life. While they are carriers of the virus, they are called carriers.
- The first group of people are infected and whose symptoms manifest as Infected with Active Disease! In most cases the infected person suffers for a certain period of time or even dies. This suffering can range from the slightest cold - cough - flu to the deadly AIDS.
- The host of the second group is the carrier, that is, they carry the germ without any symptoms. Hosts in this category have two problems -
First of all, since they are carriers but not safaris, they think that they are healthy and in fact their infections are seldom or too late to be caught, as they have no symptoms or complaints. Some of them do not show symptoms throughout their lives.
Second, even though they have survived the onslaught of the disease, they have spread the virus to other people in the community without anyone noticing. In other words, even though the career hosts or people are seemingly risk-free, they spread the virus among everyone in the society without anyone noticing. When the body's immune system is weakened, these carriers or carriers can become infected. So even though the carriers of the virus are apparently asymptomatic, they are the ones who spread the virus and infect thousands of hosts and may infect themselves one day.
Surprisingly, it is true that there are billions of people in the world who carry a variety of viruses without any symptoms. Many are even carrying the deadly HIV virus without any symptoms. This means that the absence of the virus is not confirmed unless the symptoms appear. Carrying the virus of religion but not being involved in any kind of terrorist activities, Parvez calls the people of this tribe "peace loving" meaning those who carry religious or religious beliefs but are not involved in any kind of terrorist activities. So Parvez is asking the question -
"But the question arises as to why all Muslims in the world are not infected with the virus or even if they are infected, it is not manifesting itself in the workplace."
Can Parvez's question be explained by the "carrier" concept of the virus?
Parvez called the absence of symptoms "peace-loving" but haven't we seen in our lifetimes that even these "peace-loving" people who carry religious beliefs sometimes become terrible? Religion sometimes makes them active and then apathetic - roleless. That is why the majority Hindus in Gujarat cannot save the murder of a Muslim child, that is why in a village in Bangladesh where there are millions of Muslim "peace-loving" people, they cannot save 5-10 Hindu families. That is why it is seen that only 30 Muslim terrorists may have sent 300 Hindu families to India but 30,000 people in the village looked on. Because the vital mechanisms in the brains of these thousands of people are occupied by a virus called religion. People here are dictated or governed by the "religion".
Examples of some parasitic infections from biology
However, the book Viruses of Faith discusses not only bioviruses, but also examples of some parasitic infections. Let me give you a favorite example. The example has been given many times before. The scientific philosopher Daniel Dennett used the example in his famous book Breaking the Spell [6]. Many of us have seen some ants - all day long they climb from the bottom of the grass to the grass or from the rocks, then they fall down again, then they climb again. Naturally, the question arises - is the ant gaining such usefulness by working as hard as the bulls in this idiot, that this habit has survived? There is no point in wasting time and energy doing this meaningless work all day long without any additional utility. In fact, the ant is not getting any additional benefit from this work, but the opposite is true. Studies have shown that ants are responsible for a type of parasite called Lancet fluke in the brain. This parasite can breed only when a cow or goat chews it with grass and eats it. As a result, the parasite can safely enter the stomach of the cow and breed. The whole thing is now as clear as water - the ups and downs of the grass to draw attention to how the ant can get into the cow's stomach. In fact, the grasshopper is not doing any good for the ants, but the lancet fluke is acting as a kind of virus - as a result of which the ants are unknowingly being driven by it, whether they understand it or not.

Image: The ants' brains are infected by a parasite called the Lancet fluke, when the ants simply close their eyes and climb up and down the rocks. Are religious beliefs a parasite for humans?
Some more examples of this kind can be presented from biology. E.g.,
- We are all more or less familiar with rabies. When a mad dog bites and does not get proper treatment, the germs of rabies take over the brain. As a result, the behavior of the affected brain becomes like that of a mad dog. The infected person also goes to bite the other. That is, the brain loses control of the virus infection.
- A parasite infection called Lancet fluke causes ants to move up and down grass or rocks. This is because these parasites can reproduce only when a cow or goat chews it on grass. As a result, the parasite can safely enter the cow's stomach and breed.
The above examples are all more or less known. These examples are not the end. There are many such examples in nature. National Geographic magazine published an important feature article on parasitic infections at a time when the virus of faith was being debated on various blogs, which may have escaped the attention of many in the Damadol crowd. In this article, I would like to bring some examples from that article. The article was written by popular science writer Carl Jhimer. The title of the article in the latest issue of 2014 (Volume 228, Issue 5; November Issue) is ‘Mind Suckers’ [7]. Some more interesting examples from that article -
- There is a type of crab (sheep crab), which is attacked by a type of parasite called parasitic barnacle, the crabs become 'feminized'. The growth of their claw stops. As their stomachs grow, they become more like 'wombs', allowing parasitic barnacles to take refuge there. From there, more and more new babies are born to Bernacle, ready to infect new hosts.
- Toxoplasma gondii (Toxoplasma gondii) is a type of parasite that infects the brains of rats when the unfortunate rats lose their natural ability to scare cats. Cats do not run away, so they become easy prey for cats. When a cat bites a rat, the parasites find refuge in the cat's stomach and breed there.
- When snails are infected with a type of parasite called Leucochloridium paradoxum, they also develop a suicidal tendency. As they climb trees, their trunks move in such a way that birds mistakenly call them delicious insects and sting them. The parasites go into the bird's stomach and lay eggs, breed, then come out with the bird's droppings and become food for other snails, and thus find new hosts. Complete bike! Let's watch a nice video here -
httpv: //www.youtube.com/watch? v = 6o5OjV2VLfY
- Beetles. Which are very commonly called ‘Lady Bugs’ in English. When a type of wasp stings the name Dinocampus coccinellae, the beetles become the bodyguards of the wasps. It has been observed that some eggs are also laid inside the beetle during the wasp sting. When the larvae hatch from that egg, the beetles protect them and even allow their own bodies to use them as food for the larvae.
- Even common malaria germs (Plasmodium parasite) use mosquitoes as a kind of host. Inside the mosquito, these parasites complete the initial life cycle, then when a mosquito bites a healthy person, it spreads the disease to its body.
Carl Zimmer gives many more interesting examples of this in his article Mind Soccers.
I already knew some of the examples given by Jhima, so it was not very important to me. But the thing that seemed important to me was that the author said something important about Dawkins' 'selfish gene' and 'extended phenotype'. The author explains how parasites can take over other organisms with the help of shellfish genes and extended phenotypes. Carl Jhimer says that when Dawkins wrote a book on the extended phenotype in 1982, the book was a pioneer in terms of time. Scientists did not have so many examples then. But even then, scientists knew that if Dawkins' idea was correct, the parasite must contain some genes that would replace or alter the genes that control the host's identifying functions. Thirty-two years later, scientists have finally been able to unravel the mystery of this blackbox. And needless to say, it reinforces Dawkins' idea, which he has been saying since 198. Jhimar says,
How mutations and natural selection could give rise to such creepy powers is a particularly intriguing puzzle for evolutionary biologists. One useful concept for thinking about it comes from biologist Richard Dawkins, author of the landmark book The Selfish Gene.
In that book Dawkins argued that genes evolve to make copies of themselves more successfully. Our bodies may be important to us, but from our genes ’point of view, they are nothing more than vehicles to get themselves intact into the next generation. The entire collection of the genes that make up you or me is called our genotype. The sum total of all the bodily parts and functions that our genotype creates to advance its cause — you or me — is called our phenotype.
Dawkins first developed these ideas in his 1982 book The Extended Phenotype. In many respects it was a book far ahead of its time. In the 1980s scientists had carefully studied only a few examples of parasites manipulating their hosts ’behavior. But if the hypothesis was correct, there had to be genes within the parasites that trumped the genes in the hosts themselves that normally controlled their actions.
Thirty-two years later, scientists are finally opening the black box of parasite mind control. Frederic Libersat of Ben-Gurion University and his colleagues, for example, are dissecting the sinister attacks of the jewel wasp, Ampulex compressa. The wasp stings a cockroach, transforming it into a passive zombie. The wasp can then walk its drugged victim into a burrow by the roach’s antenna, like a dog on a leash. The roach is perfectly capable of movement. It just lacks any motivation to move on its own behalf. The wasp lays an egg on the roach’s underside, and the roach simply stands there as the wasp larva emerges from the egg and digs into its abdomen.
What is the secret hold that the wasp has over its victim? Libersat and his colleagues have found that the wasp delicately snakes its stinger into the roach’s brain, sensing its way to the regions that initiate movements. The wasp douses the neurons with a cocktail of neurotransmitters, which work like psychoactive drugs. Libersat’s experiments suggest that they tamp down the activity of neurons that normally respond to danger by prompting the cockroach to escape.
For those who think that what Dawkins wrote in the book Selfish Genes is just an idea, a myth, or more or less just an academic theory, I would ask them to read the articles published here (here and here) by National Geographic. Evidence of Dawkins' groundbreaking ideas that scientists are beginning to get their hands on is clear from these articles. The reason I am discussing this is because my book, The Virus of Faith, was also based on Richard Dawkins' concept of mathematics and extended phenotype. For relevant reasons, the issue of religious beliefs has also been verified by leaving it in the framework. I know that many people get angry when they compare faith with a virus, but it is not a lie that the virus has a strong connection with faith. Rather, it is important to understand the matter. And importantly, scientists working with MIM and MIMPlex are writing research papers on this, publishing popular books. Susan Blackmore's 'Meme Machine' [8], Daniel Dennett's 'Breaking the Spell' [9], Richard Brody's 'Virus of Mind' [10] or Darrell Ray's 'The God Virus' [11] or Craig James's 'The Religion' Books entitled 'Virus' [12] bear witness to that. My book is not a fantasy, nor is it anything new, but it is based on the meditative ideas, hard-earned knowledge and evidence of modern scientists.

Image: Recently, a number of researchers, scientists and writers have found the association of ‘virus’ and ‘memplex’ with extremist religious beliefs.
The virus of faith
I asked in my book, don't long-standing traditional beliefs work like a virus? The fanatical servants of religion, like many parasitic zombies, die to defend their faith, kill infidels, attack the Twin Towers, burn chaste women, and stone foreign girls. These are the things we see in society all the time. I saw this video yesterday from a post shared by a gentleman. The army of the neighboring country has arrested a suicide terrorist. The bomber-terrorist has been asked if he would kill people again through terrorism if he was released. The terrorist replied, "Yes, God willing, he will go to jihad again." Will attack people. He does not think it is wrong to kill ordinary people in the name of jihad. Even to kill a child, his chest does not tremble. He has the right to bomb all those who do not support jihad. The questioner was once compelled to ask the bomber if his mother and sister were at home, if he was married, and so on. What the jihadi bomber said in response is absolutely gem-free. He made it clear that he did not need to get married.


T.
I feel better all day long
Very urgent
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
.
.
.
9.
Proof.



...
...









Related Posts

Gallery
2 Comments

Gallery

Gallery
2 Comments
2 Comments
33 Comments


🙁









Thank you! 🙂




Thank you.



“















Comment
Search
Search for:
Log in
Username
Password
Recent Comments
