There is simply no other religion on earth as ISLAM that draws
such sharp distinction between its own members and others, or spends as much time condemning and dehumanizing those who merely choose not to follow its dogma.
Bottom line is there is simply no other religion on earth that draws
such sharp distinction between its own members and others, or spends as much time condemning and dehumanizing those who merely choose not to follow its dogma.
It seems to me, however, that
such a sharp distinction is unrealistic, since one's epistemological perspective determines one's ontology.
Not exact matches
Whitehead nowhere in Process and Reality argues explicitly for
such intermediate entities, but it is interesting that he maintains a gradation of enduring objects, from the one extreme of the atomic material body to the opposite extreme of the presiding thread: «But just as the difference between living and non-living occasions is not
sharp, but more or less, so the
distinction between an enduring object which is an atomic material body and one which is not, is again more or less.»
In political and social thought, no Christian has ever written a more profound defense of the democratic idea and its component parts,
such as the dignity of the person, the
sharp distinction between society and the state, the role of practical wisdom, the common good, the transcendent anchoring of human rights, transcendent judgment upon societies, and the interplay of goodness and evil in human individuals and institutions.
The teacher praises the swift foot, the skilled hand, the
sharp eye, and the keen intellect of the student; while in the master's eye there are no
such distinctions.
Recent international humanitarian law
such as the Geneva conventions draw a
sharp distinction between international armed conflict (IAC) and non-international armed conflict (NIAC).