But still, Cofty, how would you characterize that person's belief? Respectable, or not?
Eden
On respect for the belief of others. Sorry for the long post
by StarTrekAngel 372 Replies latest watchtower bible
-
-
cofty
how would you characterize that person's belief
Superstitious nonsense
-
GrreatTeacher
Eden, are you conflating beliefs with actions?
Should beliefs stand on their own merits and actions on their own merits?
Or, because the actions are predicated on the beliefs, should they be judged as part and parcel of each other?
Might the same beliefs produce other actions that might be judged unsavory?
Might the same actions be caused by differeing beliefs?
-
Oubliette
EdenOne, you bring up an interesting, although false, dichotomy. The basic problem with your scenario is that it is very one-sided. You only tell the good, positive side of the story--the humanitarian believer--while ignoring the fact that there have also been many atrocities committed by religious zealots who acted according to their beliefs, often the very same set of beliefs as your good Samaritan.
In contrast, there have likewise been a great many good deeds done by nonbelievers, secular humanists (with or without that particular self-identification) that are simply altruistic by nature. That behavior can just as easily be explained through the lens of evolutionary biology.
This is why it is so essential to separate what a person does from what they believe. They are not--and I've attempted to make this point repeatedly on this thread--intrinsically linked.
In the words of Steven Weinberg, “With or without religion, you would have good people doing good things and evil people doing evil things. But for good people to do evil things, that takes religion.
-
EdenOne
Eden, are you conflating beliefs with actions?
That's not my intention. I'm merely offering an example of how a belief can be evaluated according to two different angles: How close it adheres to reality ; and how beneficial it may be to mankind.
You only tell the good, positive side of the story--the humanitarian believer--while ignoring the fact that there have also been many atrocities committed by religious zealots who acted according to their beliefs
My point with the example given isn't if Christianity in general is a belief system worthy of respect; rather, if the Christian-themed belief of that particular individual is worthy of respect or not. It's not even very relevant if his faith is Christian or of other religion. I only gave that example out of familiarity.
But for good people to do evil things, that takes religion.
As Cofty would say, "bullocks" - because, by the same token,conversely, it can be argued that for evil people to do good things, it takes religion.
Eden
-
Oubliette
EdenOne: My point [is] if the Christian-themed belief of that particular individual is worthy of respect or not.
I can easily respect the person and what they do without respecting their beliefs. Easily!
Two questions:
- Is it really in keeping with the meaning of the word "respect" to use it in connection with beliefs? (I've asked that question twice on this thread, even posting a dictionary definition of it). As far as I can tell, you nor anyone else has addressed that with the exception of Cofty, who expressed a similar sentiment as I.
- That being said, to which particular "Christian-themed belief of that particular individual" are you referring when you ask your question? Christianity is a collection of many different and often conflicting and internally incoherent beliefs. In point of fact, there is no way you could even come up with any definitive listing of what Christian beliefs are and are not.
-
If you carefully and thoughtfully ponder these two points I think you'll see what those of us that disagree with you have been trying to get you to consider.
Also, you must separate what a person does from what they believe.
Oubliette.
-
Oubliette
EdenOne: it can be argued that for evil people to do good things, it takes religion.
It could, but you would lose. There is simply too much evidence against that thesis.
But more importantly you are missing the central point which you yourself are trying to prove. That particular line of reasoning you proffered is just a red herring.
Focus.
-
EdenOne
It could, but you would lose. There is simply too much evidence against that thesis.
Agreed. The point I made was that Weinberg's statement is a gross oversimplification. And I responded with another one, that you could promptly pinpoint as invalid.
Is it really in keeping with the meaning of the word "respect" to use it in connection with beliefs?
In the context of this discussion, I will stick with this definition of "respect", from the Oxford dictionary: "Due regard for the feelings, wishes, or rights of others".
That being said, to which particular "Christian-themed belief of that particular individual" are you referring when you ask your question? Christianity is a collection of many different and often conflicting and internally incoherent beliefs. In point of fact, there is no way you could even come up with any definitive listing of what Christian beliefs are and are not.
Oub, I think you're missing my point with the example I gave. It's not a discussion about the merits of flaws of Christianity in general. Agreed, they're a set of incoherent beliefs. The point is about the particular belief of that individual, which can even be a uniquely particular interpretation of Christianity. The same irrational belief in Jesus and in heaven that doesn't adhere to reality (one angle of evaluation of its merit) is in fact the same belief that drives him to be a humanitarian (another different angle of evaluating the merit of his belief). So, my question remains. Is this man's belief worthy of RESPECT? (because that's the OP's original subject)
Eden
-
GrreatTeacher
Eden, but your definition of respect is " due regard for the feelings, wishes or rights of others."
Your definition excludes beliefs. No where does it say 'due regard for the beliefs of others."
-
EdenOne
I stressed due regard, because that's the core of the definition. It can be worded "due regard for the beliefs of others"; perhaps I should have been clearer. The definition doesn't include "property", for example; yet, 'respect' is also due regard for the property of others. Just because isn't included in the definition, it doesn't mean it's ruled out.
Eden