Reaver197
Smash Lord
- Joined
- Sep 30, 2006
- Messages
- 1,287
Link to original post: [drupal=2152]Of Beliefs and Respect[/drupal]
I'm writing this because, recently, I ran into some people who were incredulous over a person stating that there is no hell. These people claimed that this person was not showing enough "respect" for religion. As one of them said, they were respectful of people being atheists, and not believing in a god, but somehow these atheists have the audacity to, essentially, voice their opinion that these religious tenants are false, and, thus by extent, so is the religion as a whole.
It was a fascinatingly strange line of reasoning. They would claim that they respect these people's ability to not believe in a god, but, they could not criticize or say that the religion as a whole is untrue. I'm sure you can spot out the issue with this. If a person is an atheist, they don't believe in a god(s). Thus, the logical following of this belief is that religions built around the base assumption that there is a god have got it wrong. Yet, essentially, these people were saying that they can hold the belief that there is no god, but shouldn't be allowed to voice all the logical offshoots of that opinion.
This line that stating there is no god (or hell, or angels, or that eating crackers and drinking wine/grape juice is merely just that) is disrespectful of religious belief(s) is one that I've seen touted about a couple of times in other circumstances. Sure you can decide not to believe in god, but criticize the institutions or the reasonings of people who do believe in god, that is not allowed.
It's a silly argument. "I don't believe in your belief or opinion, but I shall not criticize it because I must respect it". No, that is not the case, nor should it be the case. People should respect other people's ability to state their own opinions and beliefs, and their ability to choose their own beliefs, but to claim that their beliefs should be beyond other people's ability to question or criticize is ridiculous, generally hypocritical, and most definitely not allowing people to exercise their full right of speech.
Not all opinions and beliefs are of equal weight and value. Not all beliefs deserve as much respect as others. Somehow insisting that all opinions and beliefs are equal and unassailable is fallacious. Does the opinion that the holocaust did not occur have equal weight and deserve equal respect of the opinion that it did? What about the belief that monsters live in lakes? That 2 + 2 = 5 rather than 4? Should we all just accept them and go "we can't criticize those beliefs, but rather must respect them?". I say no.
Criticism is an important part of life. It's important for learning, for understanding, living, working, and generally succeeding in life. Without criticism, how could we be sure our methods are sound, or improve our abilities? Critical thinking, the ability to take ideas and opinions, analyze them, and critique their truthfulness and effectiveness is an essential skill to learn. All of our financial, medical, scientific, and literary achievements and institutions would not be without the ability to think critically, without being able to postulate that maybe this idea or opinion is flawed or outright wrong.
To somehow claim that religion should be thus excluded from being criticized is completely arbitrary. Why should some ideas and postulations be open to being questioned, yet these other ones cannot?
For a belief or opinion to be respected and generally accepted, one would normally provide evidence that this belief is representative of reality. The belief in gravity is vindicated by the simple tossing of an object into the air. The belief that fire is hot can be attested to by touch or via thermometer. The belief that there are such things as protons, neutrons and electrons can be seen in the assembled data from various experiments, and the use and success of equipment and technology through out the world that depends upon the validity of the idea that such things exist and behave in certain ways.
Yet, somehow, religious beliefs are demanded to garner that same respect and acceptance with very little evidence or reasoning. Just because some book said so, or because your parents thought so, doesn't mean it's true or should garner your respect. At a time, Zeus and Poseidon were thought to be existing deities, yet, nowadays, they're thought of as myths and stories from a less developed past in human history. Why is it so horrible to consider the possibility that todays god(s) are just as much of a myth as the Greek gods?
History has shown that beliefs are a powerful and potent force. People's perceptions of the world can have profound and far reaching affects on their actions and other people's lives. People have killed and died in the name of their beliefs. 9/11 is such an example of how people's beliefs can lead them to do great and terrible things. The holocaust is another. For how powerful beliefs can be, and what they can lead people to do, all beliefs should be questioned and criticized, to ensure they are as truthful, honest, and reality based as possible.
I'm writing this because, recently, I ran into some people who were incredulous over a person stating that there is no hell. These people claimed that this person was not showing enough "respect" for religion. As one of them said, they were respectful of people being atheists, and not believing in a god, but somehow these atheists have the audacity to, essentially, voice their opinion that these religious tenants are false, and, thus by extent, so is the religion as a whole.
It was a fascinatingly strange line of reasoning. They would claim that they respect these people's ability to not believe in a god, but, they could not criticize or say that the religion as a whole is untrue. I'm sure you can spot out the issue with this. If a person is an atheist, they don't believe in a god(s). Thus, the logical following of this belief is that religions built around the base assumption that there is a god have got it wrong. Yet, essentially, these people were saying that they can hold the belief that there is no god, but shouldn't be allowed to voice all the logical offshoots of that opinion.
This line that stating there is no god (or hell, or angels, or that eating crackers and drinking wine/grape juice is merely just that) is disrespectful of religious belief(s) is one that I've seen touted about a couple of times in other circumstances. Sure you can decide not to believe in god, but criticize the institutions or the reasonings of people who do believe in god, that is not allowed.
It's a silly argument. "I don't believe in your belief or opinion, but I shall not criticize it because I must respect it". No, that is not the case, nor should it be the case. People should respect other people's ability to state their own opinions and beliefs, and their ability to choose their own beliefs, but to claim that their beliefs should be beyond other people's ability to question or criticize is ridiculous, generally hypocritical, and most definitely not allowing people to exercise their full right of speech.
Not all opinions and beliefs are of equal weight and value. Not all beliefs deserve as much respect as others. Somehow insisting that all opinions and beliefs are equal and unassailable is fallacious. Does the opinion that the holocaust did not occur have equal weight and deserve equal respect of the opinion that it did? What about the belief that monsters live in lakes? That 2 + 2 = 5 rather than 4? Should we all just accept them and go "we can't criticize those beliefs, but rather must respect them?". I say no.
Criticism is an important part of life. It's important for learning, for understanding, living, working, and generally succeeding in life. Without criticism, how could we be sure our methods are sound, or improve our abilities? Critical thinking, the ability to take ideas and opinions, analyze them, and critique their truthfulness and effectiveness is an essential skill to learn. All of our financial, medical, scientific, and literary achievements and institutions would not be without the ability to think critically, without being able to postulate that maybe this idea or opinion is flawed or outright wrong.
To somehow claim that religion should be thus excluded from being criticized is completely arbitrary. Why should some ideas and postulations be open to being questioned, yet these other ones cannot?
For a belief or opinion to be respected and generally accepted, one would normally provide evidence that this belief is representative of reality. The belief in gravity is vindicated by the simple tossing of an object into the air. The belief that fire is hot can be attested to by touch or via thermometer. The belief that there are such things as protons, neutrons and electrons can be seen in the assembled data from various experiments, and the use and success of equipment and technology through out the world that depends upon the validity of the idea that such things exist and behave in certain ways.
Yet, somehow, religious beliefs are demanded to garner that same respect and acceptance with very little evidence or reasoning. Just because some book said so, or because your parents thought so, doesn't mean it's true or should garner your respect. At a time, Zeus and Poseidon were thought to be existing deities, yet, nowadays, they're thought of as myths and stories from a less developed past in human history. Why is it so horrible to consider the possibility that todays god(s) are just as much of a myth as the Greek gods?
History has shown that beliefs are a powerful and potent force. People's perceptions of the world can have profound and far reaching affects on their actions and other people's lives. People have killed and died in the name of their beliefs. 9/11 is such an example of how people's beliefs can lead them to do great and terrible things. The holocaust is another. For how powerful beliefs can be, and what they can lead people to do, all beliefs should be questioned and criticized, to ensure they are as truthful, honest, and reality based as possible.
