he 
> demands of intellectual quality do not exclude compassion, 
> the capacity for forgiveness and it does not demand that we 
> be rude about it. It seems wrong to put it in terms of 
> personal acceptance.

that is an interesting point. I like the way
you describe it here. I remember debates
I had in the second grade cafeteria over
the existence of god. I was a staunch athiest
then. They weren't much fun. ha ha ha. 

I realize atheism doesn't exclude compassion
or forgiveness - 

I am thinking about your (or Bill Mahr's) statement: 
>"beliefs do not deserve respect just because 
> somebody believes it"

I can see that is true at one level - at an intellectual
level - beliefs that are well thought out hold water,
blind acceptance of organized religious dogma often
isn't well thought out - still there is something 
I can't quite put my finger on...

I think maybe it's this belief word - 
I can see it better if I re-write it: 
"Ideas do not deserve respect just because 
somebody believes them. "

Beliefs on the other hand (to me), are composites
of what a person has experienced up until 
that moment and their beliefs are very unique
to that individual. I think its too easy to say that just because
you can dance circles around someone intellectually
that your belief is superior/or has more quality than
theirs. 

If you can question someone's belief system
through some means - conversationally, in a classroom, through
a book - when a person is receptive
to want to have their system questioned (such as at
your dinner party) then yes, that is interesting - but what
if you are wrong? what if, with all your intellectual
hoops that you can jump through - you are still wrong? 
I've seen this to be the case also. All the intellect in
the world doesn't make some things correct.  

I have met people with different belief systems than I have
and that doesn't make them (or their beliefs) any less deserving
of respect from me - regardless of how well I am able to
express myself intellectually.

On the other hand - I do agree that, for example - there
are a lot of Southern Baptists where I live - many of them
are openly hostile to gay people. Most are just following
the party line of the religious dogma - it doesn't matter
if you sit down with them, with a bible and point out
inconsistencies in their logic. 

You know, it's interesting that humans have in their brain the
capacity to have multiple streams of thought happening
simultaneously that are all mutually exclusive. 
So a person sees (or maybe even doesn't see) get logic at all. 
That circuit will just never fire. 

Sometimes you can use all kinds of logical arguments and a person
can agree with you and yet refuse to change their belief system. 

Sometimes logic is an option. (and that can be both bad and good).

Of course, it disturbs me - the behavior of the Southern Baptists
toward my gay friends. 
But ultimately what I believe is:
"who am I to limit another person's experiences on the earth (provided
they don't attempt to limit mine)?"

So - even if I don't believe in what the Southern Baptists believe, 
for the most part - I think it's not my job to attempt to change
their way of thinking. It's my job to be a good person and maybe
my actions will have a more profound effect? 

you know, I'm an attractive white woman in america - I've basically
got it made - so it's easy for me to say things like this; I might
feel differently if I lived in a place where I was openly 
attacked every day by some facet of my being by some religious
zealot. 

who knows? 







> -----Original Message-----
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of 
> david buchanan
> Sent: Saturday, January 26, 2008 10:48 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: [MD] The End of Faith
> 
> 
> 
> Margaret said:
> ...Ultimately, what act has more quality? Telling someone 
> 'no, you are wrong' or saying, 'I disagree - but I can accept 
> you for who you are'.  The cream will always rise to the top anyway.
> 
> dmb says:
> I think this is just one of several false dilemmas. The 
> demands of intellectual quality do not exclude compassion, 
> the capacity for forgiveness and it does not demand that we 
> be rude about it. It seems wrong to put it in terms of 
> personal acceptance. It acts as a kind of emotional 
> censorship and the debate is just not about one person 
> granting approval to another anyway. That's more or less the 
> thing that prompted Sam Harris in the first place. I've heard 
> Bill Mahr joke about it once or twice too. The basic idea 
> here is that beliefs do not deserve respect just because 
> somebody believes it. That's just a species of the ad hominem 
> argument. Instead, the beliefs that deserve our respect are 
> the one's with intellectual quality. Why should a person be 
> hurt or offended when asked to justify their beliefs (in a 
> normal conversation, not in a courtroom) with some sort of 
> evidence and reason? The one who feels uncomfortable about 
> that is pretty darn likely to be skating on thin ice, belief 
> wise, if you ask me. It's been my experience that most people 
> very much enjoy such conversations and just the other day, at 
> a dinner party, I was flattered and thanked profusely for it 
> by a friend's neighbor. I realize that people can get hurt 
> when they're talking about their beliefs, but it's 
> soooooooooo worth it.
> 
> 
> 
> _________________________________________________________________
> Helping your favorite cause is as easy as instant messaging. 
> You IM, we give. 
> http://im.live.com/Messenger/IM/Home/?source=text_hotmail_join
> Moq_Discuss mailing list
> Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc. 
> http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org
> Archives: http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/
> http://moq.org.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/
> 
> No virus found in this incoming message.
> Checked by AVG Free Edition. 
> Version: 7.5.516 / Virus Database: 269.19.11/1244 - Release 
> Date: 1/25/2008 7:44 PM
>  
> 

No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition. 
Version: 7.5.516 / Virus Database: 269.19.11/1244 - Release Date: 1/25/2008
7:44 PM
 


Moq_Discuss mailing list
Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc.
http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org
Archives:
http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/
http://moq.org.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/

Reply via email to