Excel to Analyze Q Verses in 1400 Themes - Useless??

[attofishpi]

Veritas, do you understand that a verse could have more than 1 theme associated with it per interpretation?

[Veritas Aequitas]

Veritas, do you understand that a verse could have more than 1 theme associated with it per interpretation?

Yes, one verse can have up to 10 themes within my listing.

One of the main theme is;
infidel [kafir or non-believer]
Any verse that has some reference to non-believers [not-a-Muslim] is marked into this category.

The final result is there is more than 3400 verses or 54.5% that refer to non-Muslims.
Did you know that 54.5% of the Quran refers to non-Muslims in mostly negative light.
What kind of religion is this, i.e. with a focus on non-believers rather than focus on how to develop their believers religiously.
Within this 'infidel' related category, I split into sub-themes, e.g. verses that condemned non-believers, Christians, Jews, others, violence, intolerance, kill, dehumanize, suppress, inferior, condemn non-believers in the worst manner and many other sub-themes.

The point is, in view of the evident evil and violence committed by SOME Muslims, the analysis of the Quran [the constitution] will support one's claims and critique of the religion in a more objective manner.

Agree?

[attofishpi]

Veritas, do you understand that a verse could have more than 1 theme associated with it per interpretation?

Yes, one verse can have up to 10 themes within my listing.

So have you worked out how to do a 1 to Many relationship in Excel (1:M) ?

[Veritas Aequitas]

Veritas, do you understand that a verse could have more than 1 theme associated with it per interpretation?

Yes, one verse can have up to 10 themes within my listing.

So have you worked out how to do a 1 to Many relationship in Excel (1:M) ?

I don't think the relation of 1 to Many relationship is very useful.

My point is whatever the inference one draw from my analysis of the >1400 themes I can support them with verses from the whole of the holy text.

For example, on the question why SOME extremists are so evil, I can provide evidence [verses] from the holy text why such evil acts are sanctioned by the holy text and ALL believers are 'contractually' obligated [to the best of their ability] to commit those acts.

[attofishpi]

Yes, one verse can have up to 10 themes within my listing.

So have you worked out how to do a 1 to Many relationship in Excel (1:M) ?

I don't think the relation of 1 to Many relationship is very useful.

Not very useful? Normalisation of information is the epitome of structured information in the form of databases.

[Veritas Aequitas]

So have you worked out how to do a 1 to Many relationship in Excel (1:M) ?

I don't think the relation of 1 to Many relationship is very useful.

Not very useful? Normalisation of information is the epitome of structured information in the form of databases.

Not very sure of your point re "1 to Many"
Perhaps an example re the Quran might help.

As I had explained, I have one theme, say 'infidel' and this is linked to many other variables, say 200. Would that be your '1 to Many'?

[attofishpi]

I don't think the relation of 1 to Many relationship is very useful.

Not very useful? Normalisation of information is the epitome of structured information in the form of databases.

Not very sure of your point re "1 to Many"
Perhaps an example re the Quran might help.

As I had explained, I have one theme, say 'infidel' and this is linked to many other variables, say 200. Would that be your '1 to Many'?

Niot sure what you mean re 200 variables.

It's been donkeys years since I've done any database normalisation, and certainly this is a rather odd data set!

So seems to me you have a M:M (many to many) relationship between VERSE:THEME (thus many verses can have many themes, and many themes can have many verses)

The combination of these two could have the AI generated "weight" % (I think that was what you ultimately were after) - SINCE the combination of THEME\VERSE would uniquely identify a 1 relationship to the WEIGHT.

Thus THEME:VERSE:WEIGHT_VALUE

With this in mind can you think of any other FIELD values you might want?
If these THREE fields are all you need, now you have an understanding of how the data will be stored in the database (in this case excel) you can start thinking of how you are going to PROMPT the AI into analysing the Quran such that it assigns THEMES to VERSES and with those two fields combined, provide a unique WEIGHT_VALUE per combination.

[Gary Childress]

I told you from the beginning. I told you years ago, and I never needed backup. You are the one whoraised a thread looking for people to support your madness, and now you see there are none.



That's completely mad. You have an insane obsession with lists and hierarchies. You think you can solve all the problems by just making lists and sorting them, that's what all your bullshit is always actually about. It usually doesn't work because it so often isn't sane. This thing with the Quran being just a particulalryl obvious one that anybody can tell at a glance is madness.

You are ignorant.

Are you familiar with Data Science.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Data_science
The minor subject here is Data Analysis which previoulys was Data Mining.

My above is Data Analysis re the Quran.
Obviously we have to intelligence enough to establish an objective that is relevant for the individual or humanity.

Putting the Quran into a spreadsheet was a dumb and pointless idea. There is no need to data mine the Quran.

Why do you say there's no need to "data mine" the Quran? Is it inaccurate to do so?

[Veritas Aequitas]

Not very useful? Normalisation of information is the epitome of structured information in the form of databases.

Not very sure of your point re "1 to Many"
Perhaps an example re the Quran might help.

As I had explained, I have one theme, say 'infidel' and this is linked to many other variables, say 200. Would that be your '1 to Many'?

Niot sure what you mean re 200 variables.

It's been donkeys years since I've done any database normalisation, and certainly this is a rather odd data set!

So seems to me you have a M:M (many to many) relationship between VERSE:THEME (thus many verses can have many themes, and many themes can have many verses)

The combination of these two could have the AI generated "weight" % (I think that was what you ultimately were after) - SINCE the combination of THEME\VERSE would uniquely identify a 1 relationship to the WEIGHT.

Thus THEME:VERSE:WEIGHT_VALUE

With this in mind can you think of any other FIELD values you might want?
If these THREE fields are all you need, now you have an understanding of how the data will be stored in the database (in this case excel) you can start thinking of how you are going to PROMPT the AI into analysing the Quran such that it assigns THEMES to VERSES and with those two fields combined, provide a unique WEIGHT_VALUE per combination.

Yes to,
"So seems to me you have a M:M (many to many) relationship between VERSE:THEME (thus many verses can have many themes, and many themes can have many verses)"

Actually I have already done in Excel, analyzing each of the Quran's 6236 verses into 20 main themes, and from the 20 main themes therefrom >1400 sub and sub-sub themes.
This mean that I have to scrutinize each verse and assign the relevant main theme and their sub-themes.
Thus if the question is why is the religion inherently violent, evil, dehumanize non-believers, I can extract all verses to support why is the religion inherently violent, etc.

I tried using AI to assign themes and sub-themes to each verse, then listing the specific verses or giving a count of it and various %, so that anyone can discover the truth of the religion.
However, AI refuse to do so with precision, the reason is AI stated it has to comply with guidelines. I suspect AI has been coded with a limitation, i.e. Islam = no go in details on anything that is negative to it. AI will give the usual reasons apologists go about defending the religion that it is a religion of peace.

[godelian]

I have already done it, when I try to ask AI to do an analysis of the themes of the Quran based on certain criteria, AI was reluctant giving excuses it has to follow guidelines. However, AI did advise me my own analysis using a spreadsheet.

The above analyze the above into 16 themes which is quite informative but not VERY informative in contrast to analyzing in into main themes with 1400 sub themes.

Discuss??
Views??

At least, it is possible to do categorize Islam into themes, because Islam has definitive documentation.

Where is the definitive documentation for atheism or its otherwise completely undocumented moral theory? It is baffling that atheists try to compete using their undocumented views against something that is completely documented.

The inferiority of atheism stems from its complete lack of documentation. Isn't that obvious? Something that is documented does not need to defend itself from something that is undocumented. Seriously, how could the undocumented thing possibly be an alternative?

[Age]

I have already done it, when I try to ask AI to do an analysis of the themes of the Quran based on certain criteria, AI was reluctant giving excuses it has to follow guidelines. However, AI did advise me my own analysis using a spreadsheet.

The above analyze the above into 16 themes which is quite informative but not VERY informative in contrast to analyzing in into main themes with 1400 sub themes.

Discuss??
Views??

At least, it is possible to do categorize Islam into themes, because Islam has definitive documentation.

Where is the definitive documentation for atheism or its otherwise completely undocumented moral theory? It is baffling that atheists try to compete using their undocumented views against something that is completely documented.

The inferiority of atheism stems from its complete lack of documentation. Isn't that obvious? Something that is documented does not need to defend itself from something that is undocumented. Seriously, how could the undocumented thing possibly be an alternative?

So, because, "alice in wonderland", is documented, it does not need to defend itself, right?

And, how could any undocumented thing possibly be an alternative to, "alice in wonderland" also, correct?

[godelian]

So, because, "alice in wonderland", is documented, it does not need to defend itself, right?

No, it means that we have something to discuss because at least it is clear what it is. Go ahead and criticize "alice in wonderland". Why not?

And, how could any undocumented thing possibly be an alternative to, "alice in wonderland" also, correct?

An undocumented thing cannot possibly be an alternative to "alice in wonderland" because we cannot even read it. So, what is there to talk about?

[Veritas Aequitas]

I have already done it, when I try to ask AI to do an analysis of the themes of the Quran based on certain criteria, AI was reluctant giving excuses it has to follow guidelines. However, AI did advise me my own analysis using a spreadsheet.

The above analyze the above into 16 themes which is quite informative but not VERY informative in contrast to analyzing in into main themes with 1400 sub themes.

Discuss??
Views??

At least, it is possible to do categorize Islam into themes, because Islam has definitive documentation.

Where is the definitive documentation for atheism or its otherwise completely undocumented moral theory? It is baffling that atheists try to compete using their undocumented views against something that is completely documented.

The inferiority of atheism stems from its complete lack of documentation. Isn't that obvious? Something that is documented does not need to defend itself from something that is undocumented. Seriously, how could the undocumented thing possibly be an alternative?

What is the use if a theistic religion has definitive documentation but its documented charter sanction evil acts.
The fact is the definitive documentation enable the verification that the religion is inherent evil as supported by the relevant verses.
If the definitive documentation of a theistic religion is verified as inherent evil then something need to be done about it.
For example, if someone start a political party with a constitution that demand all enemies to be killed, that is obviously inherent evil and such a political party should be banned and made illegal.

There is no need for any undocumented to judge something that is documented. An definitive documented religion that is evil laden is verified by its contents which is agreeable by all rational people.

Atheism means not-theism, there is no definitive documentations to support anything. So there is nothing one can judge about non-theism.

A non-theists can start an ideology that is good or evil but that has nothing to do with atheism itself but rather it is based on the personal beliefs of the group.
For example a non-theist may start a belief or ideology [no God involved] that no human ought to be killed; this has nothing to do with non-theism per se. This has nothing to do with their belief there is no God but merely based on their personal human beliefs.
Similarly a non-theist may start a belief or ideology [no God involved] that all opponents ought to be killed and eaten; this has nothing to do with non-theism per se.

Atheism -lack of belief in God is not an issue at all.
What is critical is the specific beliefs of individual and groups regardless of whether they are theists or non-theists.

[godelian]

The fact is the definitive documentation enable the verification that the religion is inherent evil as supported by the relevant verses.

At least it lends itself to verification. Where can we verify your alternative?

An definitive documented religion that is evil laden is verified by its contents which is agreeable by all rational people.

Religion is a moral theory, i.e. a definition for good and evil. Since you want to judge religion in terms of another definition for good and evil, where can we find your alternative definition?

[Veritas Aequitas]

The fact is the definitive documentation enable the verification that the religion is inherent evil as supported by the relevant verses.

At least it lends itself to verification. Where can we verify your alternative?

An definitive documented religion that is evil laden is verified by its contents which is agreeable by all rational people.

Religion is a moral theory, i.e. a definition for good and evil. Since you want to judge religion in terms of another definition for good and evil, where can we find your alternative definition?

I have discussed >100 threads relating to morality in the Ethical Theory section.

Morality is the management of the reduction of evil to facilitate its goods to emerge.
What is evil is acts and thoughts that are negative to the well being and flourishing of the individual[s] and that of humanity. This is can be judged by any normal human being to be evil without reference to any definitive document.

These are universal values, e.g. of evil acts to be avoided by any normal human being are;
1. No human wants to be killed by other humans or non-humans.
2. No human wants to be enslaved
3. No human wants to be raped
4. No human wants to be subject to violence
5. No humans wants to be suppressed in terms of freedom and peace
6. No humans wants to be dehumanized as apes, pigs, etc.
7. Etc.

The fact is your[?] definitive documented religion has a definitive document that permit believers [as supported by relevant verses as analyzed] to commit 1-6 and other evil acts [7] upon non-believers.