Greta Christina on atheism and persuasion

[ciphergoth]

How Dare You Atheists Make Your Case, Round 2: Persuasion Equals Intolerance

Where does this idea come from that persuasion is a mean and bad thing to do?

[...] Of all the pieces of armor in religion's armory, this one is uniquely effective. [...] How do you make a case with someone who thinks that the very act of making a case makes you a bad person?

[...] I think that within this circle of ecumenical, "all religions are getting at the truth in their own way," "we're fine with people of different faiths as long as they're fine with our faith" believers, the main context they have for people outside that circle is intolerant fundamentalism and theocracy. The main context they have for people who criticize other people's religions and argue that they're mistaken is the religious right in America, and Islamic extremists in the Muslim world, and so on. They just don't have a context for people who think that other people's religions are mistaken... and are nevertheless passionate about the right to religious freedom. They just don't have a context for people who spend a significant amount of time and energy trying to convince others to change their religious beliefs... and are trying to do it, not by law, not by force, not by bribery or intimidation, but by reason and evidence and persuasion, in public forums devoted to debate, and in private conversations with people who have expressed an interest.

So atheists -- or at least atheist activists, atheists who make arguments against religion and try to persuade people that it's mistaken -- automatically get slotted into the "intolerant fundamentalists who want to force everyone to be just like them" camp. That's the only context the ecumenical New Agers have for people who strongly disagree with other people's religions. So that's the context we get stuck in.

Here's Round One.

It does give me real pause for thought that so many of my intelligent and thoughtful friends have quite a different view on this one, and on this as on so many things, I mean to be open to persuasion :-)

Comments

[valkyriekaren.livejournal.com]

I'm not actually sure that respect is the right word here, really - I don't have a lot of truck with the 'you have to respect someone's (religious, spiritual) beliefs', any more than I would if someone said I had to respect someone else's political or moral opinion. I think there's a difference between respecting someone's right to hold a belief, and respecting the belief itself.

[wight1984.livejournal.com]

I'd agree in general but I think it gets complex if you're looking for meaningful and open discussion/debate.

If you're seeking to make a persuasive argument with someone then it tends to be good to at least act in a respectful manner and try to keep the lack of respect a bit more private. If a person starts to feel from what you've written/said and your tone that you don't respect their position then it can lead to them feeling defensive or insulted.

Which is fine if that's what you want (and it is probably appropriate sometimes) but in general it can be good to fake it :oP

I think that applies across the board. I'm sure everyone here has had friends who occasionally say things that seem to us a bit dim and perhaps stupid to us. If so, we don't have to respect the odd things they come out with and we don't have to leave the statement unchallenged but it's generally best to not rub it in their face that we don't respect their opinions :o)

[yoyoangel.livejournal.com]

Yes, this.