People don’t realise the extent of human irrationality. We are emotional creatures. Our emotions are a part of us. Our emotions shape us. Yes, we also have rationality, but emotion and subjective experience is not controlled by rationality. The interplay between the two is complex.
Much of human fighting and disconnectedness results from a lack of understanding of the Other’s perspectives. What one says, is not what the Other hears. Because we do not speak the same languages, even if we use the same vocabulary. What one word means to one group of people, is often something quite different from what it means to another. And this meaning? Is not always rational, is not dictionary definitions. Having the same definitions for words don’t lead to understanding. Because it isn’t words… It is feelings, it is emotional responses, it is the very sense of being. With a misunderstanding on that level, things can very quickly turn ugly.
Good communication requires empathy. It requires an understanding of the Other’s frame of reference, in order to understand what meaning the Other will attach to particular words or gestures. The meaning is found in the context of an entire Meh.
This post was not inspired by religion, it was inspired by something completely different, but it applies just as well: the meaning we attach to words, irrespective of our dictionary definitions, which we may agree on, can differ dramatically. In terms of “God”, what God means to the Believer, is not about the rational definitions, not about the words. So the battle is not about rational concepts, it is something touching deep inside. Abusing Tillich’s words, it touches your very Ground of Being.
Respect a person but disrespect their ideas? I’m sorry, sometimes people’s ideas are experienced as an essential part of them… I believe it shows a lack of understanding of humanity to think that disrespecting their ideas will not be experienced as a disrespect of their person. These things are too interwoven.
18 responses so far ↓
1 gerhard // Jun 29, 2008 at 2:36 am
yes, sounds rational. I just wonder how liberal one should be with respect.
I think its patronizing to humor someone ones clear delusional or psychotic behavior/ideas.
At least antagonism stirs the blood enough for debate or action sometimes. I definately would say, in that religion debate it did good, many atheists ended up writing (22+ books in th last couple ‘o years) and many publicly available debates between the many sides ,available in both book and video form, some even free.
it is great, we didn’t have this until now. it wasn’t even possible.
i think its great that we live in a free enough society where we can all voice our sides about the pangalactic gargleblasters honestly and with the right to equaly insult each other.
(some ideas disrespect other ideas naturally or systematically)
now if we could just grow up enough to talk openly about cultural boundrys and other such social taboos…. wouldnt we be living in a great place?
2 Ben-Jammin' // Jun 29, 2008 at 4:51 am
Everyone’s empathy is limited. There are plenty of people whose point of view is literally unimaginable to me.
Then people need to let go of the tribalism that causes them to identify with their ideas. Especially the wholly ridiculous ideas.
Hugo, I think you go overboard with this assigning of non-literal meaning to religious beliefs. IMO, they mean what they say more often than you think they do.
For example: http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2008/06/texas_court_approves_traumatic.php
3 Hugo // Jun 29, 2008 at 9:14 am
This time round I was talking only about myself really, rather than about other people and what they mean.
4 Hugo // Jun 29, 2008 at 9:26 am
It’s so difficult to talk about this stuff, because of the diversity and extremes of perspectives.
Talk about a moderate idea, and the atheists throw in an extreme example. Yes, sure, I know, but I’m not talking about that….
That I know very well as well. As I was writing this, and as I was thinking about similar ideas over the past day or two, I was also thinking specifically about you (Ben-Jammin’), having previously pointed out how impossible it can be to feel empathy for something that makes no sense to you. I drew from these thoughts as I was trying to explain something of what God represents to a theist, to an atheistic friend. It was a very difficult conversation, to break past that rational modernistic definition thing, and get to the “meaning”.
I never said we shouldn’t do something about the “wholly ridiculous ideas”. I’m just going for a better understanding of the roots of it all. PZ has his approach to addressing it, which aims more at legislation, and at people other than those he’d label “crazies”. I’m more interested in working directly with the roots of the idea. Instead of sending a friend’s recent email to the world and laughing at it explaining how stupid my friend is (what would that accomplish for my friend? drive him deeper into the bullshit and kill the friendship), I scratch my head and I think of my friend. Because I care. PZ Myers doesn’t care in that way.
5 Linda // Jun 29, 2008 at 11:21 pm
I am *so* relieved that someone else thinks these thoughts. I’ve often wondered about the difference between acceptance and tolerance… and also the difference between acceptance and respect, if any.
Yes, we do come across ideas and beliefs that seem so irrational (from our perspective) that makes communication extremely difficult. How, then, can we even fathom “respecting” those ideas?
I believe that when we continue to ask “why?” and attempt to uncover what lies beneath those ideas with genuine interest, we can begin to move toward understanding and, ultimately, respect.
I’ve commented somewhere else just recently that as long as the unspoken superiority complex and/or the elitist attitude remain in the minds of those on either side, I don’t see a change happening in the way we communicate.
6 Hugo // Jun 29, 2008 at 11:46 pm
Amen, Linda:
I am careful of climbing into respect though, many would point out that there are some things they will not respect. Which is why my comment:
…speaks of how the disrespect is experienced. I give no answers to the problem, there isn’t an easy answer. And there isn’t only one answer either… there are many.
My approach to the problem will be demonstrated in an upcoming blog post, “Abusing the Story of Job”, which I hope to finish before I go to bed. Mammoth task though: probably >5000 words. I pity anyone crazy enough to read it all, but this thing is personal, important to me personally.
Essentially, I agree with your approach as well. Ultimately, after asking enough why?’s, I’m at respect. But it is reserved respect, nuanced respect. I look for the good, I find the good, I respect that. But the unfortunate bad by-products, I don’t respect. Explicit disrespect I reserve for special occasions though. It is possible to not disrespect something, without having to respect it.
7 Hugo // Jun 30, 2008 at 8:28 am
Nope, not done yet. And already nearly at 8,000 words, so don’t hold your breath: it is too long for anyone to read. I write it for myself. Maybe I should eventually distill it down into smaller posts later.
8 Ben-Jammin' // Jun 30, 2008 at 5:21 pm
What gives you the indication that this is an extreme example?
9 Hugo // Jun 30, 2008 at 5:50 pm
I can’t remember what example I came up with when I wrote that (but I think I had a particular potential example in mind). This post was also not discussing religion exclusively, but I guess I “ask for it” if I drag in religion as an example.
My labelling of what I consider “extreme” and what not, is based on my (anecdotal?) experiences in South Africa. Which is very different from America. I also realise that even in South Africa I may be living in something of a fool’s paradise in believing what I choose to believe about religion, but I have enough friends of moderate persuasion.
But this comment, so far, is me responding to a passive interpretation of my own writing. My writing is not passive… I know I actively write “deluded” posts. I choose a perspective wherein I choose to believe I understand what people mean better than they do themselves. And I choose to believe that in the process of soul-searching, they might realise that this is actually where it all comes from, even if that is not where they currently are.
That is what I mean by passive/active: I don’t write to report on the state of things, I write to challenge the state of things. I write what I wish would be, wishful thinking then, I write to bring about that which I believe. If the reasonable man adapts himself to the world, and the unreasonable man insists on adapting the world to himself, then progress depends on the unreasonable man. From who did I steal that?
My choice of balance in my writing is then this: I am to upset and offend everyone equally. If atheists are completely happy with what I write, I need to swing more “theist”. If theists are completely happy with what I write, I need to swing more “atheist” in my language. I am a bridge builder. I serve to connect that which others believe are not connectible. Many of my bridges may collapse, but in my quixotic dreams I continue trying to build them.
When I deal with the extremes of fundamentalism, my writing will swing even more in that direction in order to reach out to them. Because they have such a hard time reaching out to others. My 9000 word blog post “Abusing the Story of Job” shows this attempt at bridge-building in action.
You may think I’m nuts, and that the extremes I go to in digging through to the roots of beliefs and context in order to make peace with my extended family’s well-meaning contributions are particularly deluded, but I write that with them in mind, that they may have a better understanding of how they are seen and experienced by outsiders. To explain that in a way that doesn’t simply reinforce their fundamentalism, I believe I need to connect to the truth and value in their words and actions to draw that out, and explain what it is that they find so valuable.
Hard to explain. If you have divine amounts of patience, and have way too little to do with your time, you can consider reading the 9000 word post. I hope that might help you understand somewhat better what I’m trying to do. It might lead to interesting conversations on how I really experienced it, on how much mental effort had to go into getting to the given point of peace.
Anyway, I want to head back to the hospital now. Laterz…
10 Ben-Jammin' // Jun 30, 2008 at 11:01 pm
Oh. I thought you were referring to the example I had provided.
11 Hugo // Jun 30, 2008 at 11:33 pm
/me looks back at Ben-Jammin’s post, prompted by…
Hmmm… *ponder*… could actually be. You might be right, sorry…
I’d love to plea for a “ok, something similar to that”, but lets look at that particular example:
So I endeavour to answer “in what ways is it not an extreme example?”… In South Africa exorcisms aren’t common in churches. I have heard that Fred May from Shofar here in Stellenbosch has performed exorcisms though.
It is an extreme example with reference to the kind of thing I was thinking about while writing the post. And so what I was thinking about and what I was writing was a little disconnected?
Oh, in South Africa we do still have witch doctors. Explicitly. I think some may have valuable knowledge that could be investigated by western science, but when they start making superstitious claims and claims about AIDS, it is a problem. I recall a story about “you’ll be cured if you have sex with a virgin”…
With regards to demonic possession, the mind is a powerful thing. If it believes in demons, it can exhibit such behaviour. Acceptance of science and lack of belief in demons are a wonderful way to avoid demonic possession, I would point out. I’ve come across beliefs that an acceptance of Jesus and belief in Jesus makes you uninhabitable for demons. That’s a cute idea in the positive, in that you no longer fear or believe in demons possessing you. But the flip-side is of course the fear of losing the necessary faith to keep you safe, and the impact on what you think about *other* people.
I am still very curious about Shofar’s teachings on demonic possession, I would love to pick them apart. But I doubt I will get access to the best bits. Their “inter-denominational Bible school” won’t go as wild as a small Shofar-only group might.
12 Hugo // Jun 30, 2008 at 11:58 pm
Actually, if I were to be confronted, face-to-face, with an exorcism or something, I’d probably grab Carl Sagan’s “The Demon-Haunted World”, call it my Bible, and start “Bible-bashing”…
Last year I practically begged that creationist quack that wrote “Alien Abduction” (complete with altar call in the end, ’cause “real, walk-the-walk Christians don’t get abducted”) to get a hold of Carl Sagan’s book. I doubt he did.
13 Ben-Jammin' // Jul 1, 2008 at 5:03 am
I’m in an especially snarky mood at the moment - I’ll explain why after the topical part of this comment.
The Texas case is about which takes precedence: the laws that make it illegal to restrain a minor against their will and abuse them or not disrespecting religious ideas about demons and exorcisms. Respecting religious ideas won. Reading your blog post again, though, you only point out how disrespecting ideas can seem to those who hold them.
I’m especially snarky because of recent events like: My meetup group wanted to get T-shirts made up. I contacted a local company, who quoted a price for the quantity we were ordering. He then told me to send the design to the art department. I did. At which point he broke off all communication. Apparently, the phrase “Capital Region Atheists & Agnostics” is too controversial a T-shirt to even discuss, and a customer who wishes to order one doesn’t even deserve a “sorry, we won’t print that.” Such a customer only deserves to have his communications ignored.
A local Cub Scout group put out an announcement that begins ” If you are a boy in first grade through fifth grade—or you’re 7 to 10 years old—then Cub Scouting is for you.” I contacted the leader and asked him to change his announcement to reflect the fact that Scouts are absolutely NOT open to all boys (unless he was quietly defying the policy, in which case I thanked him.) No change in the announcement and no reply to my email in 5 days. If you’re unfamiliar with U.S. scouts’ discrimination, see http://www.bsalegal.org/duty-to-god-cases-224.asp - note especially the Welsh v. BSA lawsuit where they went to court to exclude a 7-year old agnostic.
I am an un-person, apparently, as are atheists and agnostics of all ages, including grade school boys. And don’t give me any of this ‘when they say God they mean good morals and anti-nihilism’ crap. They don’t mean that, because they mention those other things in the other parts of the BSA oath.
@$#%@$#%@W$#%.
14 Hugo // Jul 1, 2008 at 10:16 am
Ben, my thoughts and sympathies are with you. I don’t know what I would have done if I lived in that environment. Or a generation earlier in this environment.
I don’t think we are at risk of following the US into fundamentalism like that. But feel free to keep the links and criticism coming. It reminds me why I stick to the battle, when I sometimes think of just letting it go.
My sister would rather say “yes, I’m a born again Christian” when prompted (this was at Speaker’s Corner in London) than face their rhetoric. She lives in Cape Town and has a very tolerant and diverse circle of friends. She thinks it would do me good to be in Europe and away from religious intolerance. I don’t really know how I want to wrap up this paragraph now… it is more about feelings than about particular rational ideas that I can write about. :-/
I hate that people encourage there being a closet. I don’t know if you read the 9000 word post. Only the first few paragraphs should already provide enough context for the following… or you can even simply deduce the context: I was shaking from rage. But I’m expected to calm down and let them express their world-views. And not upset the apple cart… or something. I hate the imbalance in the situation. And I scratch my head as to whether to send that post to my extended family, so that they know where I stand. Do I maybe owe it to them to be “honest”? To make it clear to them that their assumptions do not always apply?
Is remaining completely silent about it a clearly “dishonest” action? Or maybe they discover it. It is there for them to read. The easiest way for them to find it is via my Facebook notes, as I import my blog posts. And we’re linked. (Cousins.)
Now what about a seven year old boy? He could go about not wearing an “agnostic label”… but it was about the oath, wasn’t it? (/me checks the link)… OK, I’ve read that link again.
The question I typically ask myself in such situations, to try and connect to the problems in USA, is what would my I advice be if I had a son in that position? (And I’m not recommending that others do this, just thinking about the problem.)
They do allow diverse religious traditions. Now religious diversity does include religions with an impersonal “God”. (For example, if there were a good and “radical emerging church” in the area, that blurs the line between believer and non-believer, allowing quite a metaphorical understanding of God, as love and creativity etc, we could attend that as family, and have something of a “God concept”.) So I see a possibility of my “God means good morals and anti-nihilism” crap bridging that gap. EXCEPT… a friggen 7 year old kid. Kids aren’t into nuances and metaphors and world-view translations. Aren’t kids some of the most “honest” people in their approach to life? In their approach to thinking and talking about things? Until they learn to lie, of course, and that is definitely not something you’ll want to teach them, for the sake of joining a club?
I can imagine explaining to my children what God means to the strongly religious. That would be the strategy by which I would try to teach them tolerance and understanding. But I do realise it is probably completely unrealistic to expect of them to be able to translate world-views at age 7, considering humanism their religious tradition and the ideals of humanism a depersonified “God”.
Would a polytheistic Hindu be allowed to join the scouts? When they talk about “home, church, synagogue, mosque, or other religious community” - they cover the three Abrahamic monotheistic traditions, and then say “other religious community”. What falls under “other”? How about Buddhism? The non-theistic kind?
And there’s the John Shelby Spong kind…
And yes, Ben, I hate that all of this hoop jumping is necessary, but I’m thinking from a utilitarian perspective, and looking for ways to connect to the culture of my country/tribe. Useful for the kids to just be kids, and play together with Ze Germans, like playing soccer together on a Sunday in World War One. (Or is that a myth?) The grown-ups can then continue fighting in the trenches in the mean-time, in an attempt to find equality for the children of the next generation.
Establishing a “religious humanism” as a compromise, to help the children?
Your comments and feelings on these ideas, Ben?
15 Hugo // Jul 1, 2008 at 11:31 am
I just saw a fox-news clip on YouTube, about “Obama is a Muslim”. One caller talked about “the enemy”, wondering if Obama might think that “the terrorists” are not “the enemy”. (Neatly first equating Muslim with terrorist, in order to question if Obama thinks “terrorism is okay”…)
The mere existence of something like Faux News in my country would drive me bat-shit insane. And then I also realise that being a “non-theist” in a country like that… well…
I don’t know what strategy I would have followed in such a situation, what method of protest. Just know that I fully understand and appreciate the out campaign like I understand the “gay pride” movement.
I have just weighed my options in this country, in this context, and chosen a particular strategy in addressing a particular threat in our town. (Non-thinking.) The method and path I have chosen on which to make my contribution, requires that I don’t look at Faux News too often: it would also tip me into going all Jihad on their asses.
I need to maintain something of an ivory tower, slightly out of touch with the worst of the reality out there. It is the path I have chosen and committed to for the next few months or more — for a very particular contribution that I hope to make, depends on how long that takes.
16 Hugo // Jul 1, 2008 at 11:38 am
(And worst of all, that video clip was apparently uploaded, with the title “Muslim: ‘I am not a Muslim’.”, by someone that uploads Dr Who. Though I’m not dead certain, I don’t know exactly how YouTube profile pages work.
But the possibility that a Dr Who fan can be a bigoted fundie-Christian republican, just blows my mind. How is that even possible?!)
(Update: He may have uploaded the clip for ridiculing purposes, of course. But humour me here, in appreciating my bias in insisting all Dr Who fans must be cool people.
)
17 Ben-Jammin' // Jul 2, 2008 at 3:37 am
I did. Parts of it more than once, trying to get it. I hope everything goes as well as it can for your mom.
Actually, I would never have guessed that. I’m lucky that my family is generally not religious; I don’t know if I would handle it as well as you do.
I don’t know, and even if it were, dishonesty might be better than honesty. Family dynamics alone are tough enough.
I don’t know. The ‘art of the possible’ has so many variables…there are people who are good at deciding how best to influence people. I’m not one of them. The KISS principle is in my bones.
I try and ignore it as much as possible.
I’m feeling much less snarky today. Tomorrow, I’ll give the Cub Scouts leader a call. Who knows? Maybe the e-mail got caught in a spam filter. No assumptions.
For reference: http://atheistparents.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=16386 - includes the e-mail and a link to the offending announcement.
18 Marthelize // Jul 2, 2008 at 10:55 pm
What a topic… the whole respect vs tolerance vs acceptance… All concepts which involve both intellect and emotion. Very much Ying and Yang as far as I’m concerned.
I often find myself absolutely consumed with irritation bordering on rage when I’m faced with stupidity and ignorance. (Hugo used a term I quite like.. “Bat-shit crazy”. That sounds accurate…)
That’s still fine. Many people react that way. Irritated by stupidity and angered by the people who lovingly dedicate their lives to spreading it around.
Problem is, I am extremely judgmental when it comes to things. I have a fundamental inability to even attempt to understand the Other’s side of an argument if I am convinced that the Other is an idiot and I can feel my braincells dying from continued conversation with this fool.
I also tend to make these judgments within a few seconds mostly.
I have, with great effort, learned to keep my snap-judgments to myself (for a few moments more than I used to, at least). I try to adhere to the idea of respecting other people’s opinions. Or, if I can’t respect their ideas, at least tolerate the person.
Sadly, I am continually faced with monumental stupidity in daily life. In the news, on television etc (Who here has had the misfortune of hearing Bob Mugabe’s comment to the British Press… calling them idiots. Truly a well-spoken man… *cringe*)
What upsets me most is that I am faced with this stupidity in religion, which is a subject close to me.
Fundamentalists grind my gears. Creationists grate my cheese. If I had my way I’d stuff them all in a closed container and send them off to Mars, hoping they get abducted by aliens along the way.
But…. If I just dismiss them like that (however ridiculous their ideas might be), if I just stick fingers in my ears and sing loudly to myself to block out their drivel… Aren’t I then doing exactly what they do?
Frustrating. Isn’t it?
Leave a Comment