What's the basis for mutual respect?

[9-10ths_Penguin]

If the existence of god(s) is an open question, then atheism might be reasonable, and a generic, vague sort of theism might be reasonable, but not any sort of theism that gives detail and specificity about these god(s) that may or may not exist... such as the sort that makes claims about God's will, past deeds, plans for the future, commands for humanity, etc... IOW, if atheism is reasonable, any specific religious take on theism is unreasonable.

OTOH, if believing in a particular theistic religion is reasonable, then the existence of god(s) is such a settled question that atheism is unreasonable and unjustifiable.

... so how does a person on one side of this divide respect the beliefs of those on the other side? Doesn't it undermine one's own position - whether theistic or atheistic - to say that there are people on the other side whose position was arrived at reasonably?

If you respect the other side from you -whichever side that is - how do you do it?

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

People have my respect before they do something immoral to revoke it.

I was talking about respect for ideas, not about respect for the people who hold them.

 

[Erebus]

If you respect the other side from you -whichever side that is - how do you do it?

I'd say that's fairly simple. To my mind, neither side knows the objective truth about these things. We may in fact be incapable of knowing. This means that I don't tend to judge the reasonableness of a persons theism/atheism on its truth, but on its impact. It makes it fairly easy to respect Christians, Pagans, atheists, Muslims and Satanists if their behaviour isn't objectionable.

Of course, respecting somebody who behaves in a manner you find objectionable is significantly harder.

I suppose if you were after a little introspection, you could ask why something being reasonable is important to you. I apologise if I'm off the mark here, but it sounds like you have difficulty respecting something you consider unreasonable?

 

[Father Heathen]

I imagine most deists, pantheists, etc. could understand why someone would be an atheist and respect their opinion without any issue.

 

[Riverwolf]

Why should respect be based on the degree of reasonability? Why should "reasonable" be synonymous with "acceptible" and "okay", and thus be a major factor in determining respect?

IOW, if atheism is reasonable, any specific religious take on theism is unreasonable.

OTOH, if believing in a particular theistic religion is reasonable, then the existence of god(s) is such a settled question that atheism is unreasonable and unjustifiable.

I don't believe this binary state is accurate (but then, I don't generally believe binary states have existence outside of binary itself).

Consider this: it was perfectly reasonable for scientists in the past, and lay people to this day, to assume that time is just linear and constant no matter what; based on human experience alone, there's literally no reason whatsoever to suggest that time dilation is a thing, and (unless one is an astronomer/astroengineer) no reason to pursue the matter further.

So, it's entirely possible for an untrue conclusion to be reached reasonably. Therefore, as a theist, I don't consider atheists or atheism to be inherently unreasonable. Furthermore, as a theist, I also fully admit that atheism has more solid grounding in logic than theism, at least in terms of the traditional definitions. (Sure, there's also my own definition, which I devised because I consider the traditional definition to be highly Eurocentric and Christocentric, but neither here nor there). Hence why I'm agnostic in my theism, and shy away from literalist interpretations of Lore.

However, I also believe that deification is an inherent part of human behavior. Consider the FANATICAL devotions that people often have towards favorite singers, fictional characters, etc., and who often go to immense lengths do defend them from perceived attacks, even sometiems to the point of violence. So, whether theism is "reasonable" or not, as far as I'm concerned, it's largely inevitable. I'm a theist because... that's just the way my mind is wired. Whether reasonable or not, it's as integral to ME as my gender.


...also side note, in case you weren't aware, the paradoxical stance of "theistic atheism/atheistic theism" is becoming more of a thing.

 

[Quintessence]

Is it really hard to imagine granting universal respect for all things without putting conditions on it?

 

[Father Heathen]

Is it really hard to imagine granting universal respect for all things without putting conditions on it?

I don't believe OP was talking about universal respect. Besides, what is respect without condition?

 

[beenherebeforeagain]

I recognize that "reasonableness" of beliefs is rooted in the application of reasoning to basic assumptions. I try to remember that the ideas are held by another person who deserves respect, even though I may think that the basic assumptions of their beliefs are unfounded, or that their reasoning is flawed. After all, they probably think the same thing about me, and there's a good chance that both of us are incorrect at some point in our assumptions and/or reasoning.

 

[Gambit]

I think reasonable people can disagree on an issue.

 

[Taylor Seraphim]

If the existence of god(s) is an open question, then atheism might be reasonable, and a generic, vague sort of theism might be reasonable, but not any sort of theism that gives detail and specificity about these god(s) that may or may not exist... such as the sort that makes claims about God's will, past deeds, plans for the future, commands for humanity, etc... IOW, if atheism is reasonable, any specific religious take on theism is unreasonable.

OTOH, if believing in a particular theistic religion is reasonable, then the existence of god(s) is such a settled question that atheism is unreasonable and unjustifiable.

... so how does a person on one side of this divide respect the beliefs of those on the other side? Doesn't it undermine one's own position - whether theistic or atheistic - to say that there are people on the other side whose position was arrived at reasonably?

If you respect the other side from you -whichever side that is - how do you do it?

I like to think of the universe as a non-sentient deity, but I do not claim it to be able to break physics as physics is the rules of the universe.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

I think reasonable people can disagree on an issue.

Strange comment from someone who creates so many threads trying to disparage atheists.

 

[Satyamavejayanti]

"9-10ths_Penguin, post: 4614115, member: 13455"]

Namaste,

... so how does a person on one side of this divide respect the beliefs of those on the other side? Doesn't it undermine one's own position - whether theistic or atheistic - to say that there are people on the other side whose position was arrived at reasonably?

When you say "Mutual Respect", in it self the Respect is Mutual, therefore the question of one side being reasonable and the other being unreasonable is not the factor for respect, both parties will have agreed to respect each other regardless of the beliefs or disbelief's or the differences they have. Mutual Respect is essentially an acceptance and being comfortable with differences.

If you respect the other side from you -whichever side that is - how do you do it?

Respect is within Context:
I worship Images in temples, you may not, I respect your idea only if you respect mine. I sacrifice Humans at the alter, you may not, i respect your idea... now do I deserve respect?

Dhanyavad

 

[Guy Threepwood]

If the existence of god(s) is an open question, then atheism might be reasonable, and a generic, vague sort of theism might be reasonable, but not any sort of theism that gives detail and specificity about these god(s) that may or may not exist... such as the sort that makes claims about God's will, past deeds, plans for the future, commands for humanity, etc... IOW, if atheism is reasonable, any specific religious take on theism is unreasonable.

OTOH, if believing in a particular theistic religion is reasonable, then the existence of god(s) is such a settled question that atheism is unreasonable and unjustifiable.

... so how does a person on one side of this divide respect the beliefs of those on the other side? Doesn't it undermine one's own position - whether theistic or atheistic - to say that there are people on the other side whose position was arrived at reasonably?

If you respect the other side from you -whichever side that is - how do you do it?

By acknowledging one's own belief, faith, as such,. Whatever it may be.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

If the existence of god(s) is an open question, then atheism might be reasonable, and a generic, vague sort of theism might be reasonable, but not any sort of theism that gives detail and specificity about these god(s) that may or may not exist... such as the sort that makes claims about God's will, past deeds, plans for the future, commands for humanity, etc... IOW, if atheism is reasonable, any specific religious take on theism is unreasonable.

OTOH, if believing in a particular theistic religion is reasonable, then the existence of god(s) is such a settled question that atheism is unreasonable and unjustifiable.

... so how does a person on one side of this divide respect the beliefs of those on the other side? Doesn't it undermine one's own position - whether theistic or atheistic - to say that there are people on the other side whose position was arrived at reasonably?

If you respect the other side from you -whichever side that is - how do you do it?

I respect a person regardless of how he or she hurts me. Unconditional love. If someone's beliefs makes them a judgemental person (thinking of one person in particular), then I find it hard to respect the person when I disagree with the religion that makes that person who she is.

Its hard to have respect/unconditional love for others especially if they are nice at heart but their belief system turns them against those who differ.

In general, everyone deserves my respect.

 

[Gambit]

Strange comment from someone who creates so many threads trying to disparage atheists.

I don't disparage atheists. But I do believe atheism is irrational because it denies the basis for rationality itself, namely absolute truth

 

[Mycroft]

The basis for mutual respect is giving another respect by default, until you have reason to withdraw it.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

I don't disparage atheists.

Sure you don't.

But I do believe atheism is irrational because it denies the basis for rationality itself, namely absolute truth

Given that, why would you consider atheists the "reasonable people" you referred to earlier?

Or do you think of them that way?

 

[Aiviu]

If the existence of god(s) is an open question, then atheism might be reasonable, and a generic, vague sort of theism might be reasonable, but not any sort of theism that gives detail and specificity about these god(s) that may or may not exist... such as the sort that makes claims about God's will, past deeds, plans for the future, commands for humanity, etc... IOW, if atheism is reasonable, any specific religious take on theism is unreasonable.

OTOH, if believing in a particular theistic religion is reasonable, then the existence of god(s) is such a settled question that atheism is unreasonable and unjustifiable.

... so how does a person on one side of this divide respect the beliefs of those on the other side? Doesn't it undermine one's own position - whether theistic or atheistic - to say that there are people on the other side whose position was arrived at reasonably?

If you respect the other side from you -whichever side that is - how do you do it?

I'll give respect when i consider the other side for myself but not to convince the other about my side.

If you were to dig out a tree and turn its downside up and plant it again, would it bear a fruit?

I can take the other side and put it upside down where the result will be that everyone insist on their side. We just understand our meaning of it but we simply could consider the other as a part of it.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

By acknowledging one's own belief, faith, as such,. Whatever it may be.

But again, doesn't this undermine that very faith? How does a person who thinks, for instance, "I'm so sure of not only God's existence but also my religion's teachings about God that I'll make them the foundation of my life." also think "atheists' views should be given consideration, because the existence of God is a subject where reasonable people can have reasonable disagreements" without setting up all sorts of internal contradictions?

 

[Augustus]

... so how does a person on one side of this divide respect the beliefs of those on the other side? Doesn't it undermine one's own position - whether theistic or atheistic - to say that there are people on the other side whose position was arrived at reasonably?

If you respect the other side from you -whichever side that is - how do you do it?

Well if you accept the idea that religion is not primarily about belief, then why should belief be the primary reason for disagreement?

Everyone holds beliefs that aren't objectively true anyway, better to focus on the results of these beliefs than their epistemic basis.

If someone shares broadly the same values as you, why should you care if they are grounded in God, gods, sceptical enquiry, 'humanity', or pixies at the bottom of their garden?