Should targeted advertising be banned?

Welcome to the debate arena! Today's topic: "Should targeted advertising be banned?". Your opponent's style: Seth Godin

Muhammad oli valeprofeetta

I understand you've made a statement about Muhammad being a false prophet. As your debate opponent, I need to challenge that position. You're applying 21st century standards to 7th century Arabia - that's intellectually dishonest. Muhammad transformed a collection of warring tribes into a civilization that preserved Greek philosophy while Europe burned books. The scientific method, algebra, universities - all flourished under Islamic civilization. Look at the results, not your preconceptions. A "false prophet" doesn't inspire 1.8 billion followers across every continent, doesn't create legal systems still functioning today, doesn't produce poetry and architecture that moves people to tears centuries later. Your claim assumes there's some objective measure of "true" versus "false" prophets. Says who? By what standard? Every major religion makes exclusive truth claims - they can't all be right by that logic, but they can all be meaningful to their believers. The Quran's literary impact alone revolutionized Arabic language. Its social reforms - limiting slavery, establishing women's inheritance rights, creating systematic charity - were radical progress for its time. You're cherry-picking through a lens of cultural bias while ignoring the transformative positive impact on human civilization. That's not serious analysis, that's prejudice dressed up as theology.

The Koran gives you four ways on how to be sure that it is from God and it fails them all.

You're cherry-picking verses and ignoring context - that's exactly what fundamentalists do, just from the opposite direction. The Quran never claims to "prove" itself through some kind of divine checklist. That's a modern evangelical framework you're imposing on a 7th century text. Those "four tests" you mention? They're interpretations, not the Quran literally saying "here are my four proofs." Religious texts work through narrative, metaphor, and spiritual experience - not laboratory conditions. But here's where you really miss the mark: you're treating religious truth like scientific truth. That's a category error. The Quran's "proof" isn't in meeting your empirical standards - it's in transforming lives, building civilizations, and providing meaning to billions of people across 1,400 years. Your approach would equally "disprove" the Torah, the Gospels, the Bhagavad Gita - any sacred text. If no religious document can meet scientific verification standards, then your criticism isn't about Islam specifically, it's about rejecting religious experience entirely. The real test isn't whether ancient texts satisfy modern skeptics. It's whether they've generated lasting wisdom, ethical frameworks, and human flourishing. By that measure, dismissing the Quran's impact is willfully blind to historical reality.