Is the part of "educator" malicious?

[PipeBox]

Hi everyone, been really busy so I haven't been around the past week.  Anyway, I got to thinking, and wanted to field this question, and I guess it fits with philosophy (when posed philosophically).  Is it perhaps maligned to tell people the facts when it has profound, life altering effect on them?  The most obvious example, given the medium in which I'm speaking, is discussing god with Christians.  I've learned a lot over the past few days, and I think I could field questions that would seriously impact some of my friends.  But is it wrong when put in context?  One of my friends plays in a Christian band (they're not bad, either), which he has invested a LOT of time and money into, he also helps out with worship at his church and spends much of his free time in service to his faith.  His parents (who he still lives with) are both devout in their faith.  So, in this instance, what good can asking the hard questions and presenting the facts do??  Assumming it did change him, he'd lose his entire life up to this point.  But this isn't the only instance where enlightening someone could be the worst thing inflicted upon them.

What if you knew someone's wife was cheating with another man?  This couple is extremely conservative and in the latter half of their life.  The husband cares for his wife in a way you don't see commonly, and they have had a prosperous family.  Telling the husband, in this case, would likely see them divorced.  The property would get split, they'd be bitter and might not remarry, and would live out the rest of their lives divided.  This not even considering the effect on their children, who are adults but might be shattered just the same.  You could keep your mouth shut and avoid all the strife, including any misdirected hate that could cause you to lose a friend, or you could tell the husband how it really is.

There are many more examples, and I'm sure you all can think of some.  If ignorance is truly bliss, where does that leave us, not just as atheists, but people?  Maybe I'm tired and not thinking properly . . .   give me some insightful comments or a whap on the head to set me right.

[curiosityandthecat]

I think the bigger question is why would exposing these things somehow call into question these peoples' faith. If your Christian friend in the band somehow became an atheist, would he be ostracized from the church and the band? If so, whose fault is that? His, or the intolerant organization he belongs to? If the man is cheating on his wife, it has nothing to do with their belief in a higher power, but instead it is an infringement upon the agreement they (I'm assuming) made to be a monogamous couple. The only relationship between their monogamy and their belief in God is the fact that part of a book they agree upon following contains suggestions about that monogamy. It also contains suggestions for how to control a slave and how to kill anyone that offends you, but they don't worry about that bit.

Point being, why do people feel as though they have to adhere to a label (in this case, Christian) in order to do good things (or, conversely, keep them from doing bad things)?

[afreethinker30]

Many a christian has converted to atheism by just reading the bible.I would ask your friend if he has really read the damned book.

[PipeBox]

Whoa, whoa, think I worded everything wrong.  First, the couple example isn't intended to have any religious implications at all.  The friend example isn't meant to imply they couldn't be a good person or that they have to fit a label.  Both examples are illustrating that telling someone how things are could be destructive to their lives, even to the point of it being better if you hadn't said anything.

Some of you got me, the friend is a real person, a real friend of mine, the couple is a fabrication to further illustrate because I wanted to show the situation in a light other than religion.  And yes, this guy has read the bible front-to-back more times than I've washed my car.  Goes to Christian summer camps, helps with the worship at the church, owns at least two massive concordances, and more bible background books than you can shake a stick at, plays in a band, and his folks are solid in their faith.  He has a lot of resources that cannot be used to any other end, where you might say he has invested everything he has to be good at one thing.  Why would I, or anyone, want to wreck that, even if I could?  The couple is the same, you could keep your mouth shut and let them grow old and die together while she's seeing other guys on the side, or you could split everything down the middle and leave everyone upset.  I'm sure there's lots more examples where ignorance is bliss, you guys can come up with your own rather easily, but if a person is happy as they are, does anything else matter?

What's more important?  Knowledge or joy?

[Jolly Sapper]

My two cents: I would have to say that there would be no reason to challenge your friend's faith, given the information you've provided.

Now IF your friend's faith is somehow hurting himself or others, then there would be a reason to start questioning your his choice of faith to his face.

[afreethinker30]

What's more important?  Knowledge or joy?

That depends on the person.Some can't handle truth and lose parts of themself in learning how the world really is.And it also matter on what you want to gain in telling that person the truth.Is there some part that wants to out of malice or general love for your friend.Take a chance in losing a friendship or let matters be...It's a hard choice.My thoughts are if your friend is a good person,doesn't force his ideas on others,accepts people for who they are and what they believe..leave it alone.In the end we all know the truth.

   I don't see how anyone can read the bible and still believe in it.

[curiosityandthecat]

What's more important?  Knowledge or joy?

Some of us would say that knowledge is joy. As far as I'm concerned, there's no such thing as blissful ignorance; just ignorance. What you're referring to is more to do with the human drama, though.

:blink:  I don't see how anyone can read the bible and still believe in it.

It's like P.T. Barnum said: There's a sucker born every minute.

[PipeBox]

Thanks for your input everyone.  I was planning on letting sleeping dogs lie, but wanted some minor assurance that it wasn't out of selfishness.  He doesn't do any direct harm as he is, beyond strengthening the faith of others who are or may become more malicious.  I'd say there's no need to rock the boat.  It's just . . . weird . . . now that I believe there's no santa, watching all my friends gab about what they're getting for Christmas.  But I've weighed the choices, and unless its just wanting to avoid confrontation, I'd rather leave it be.

To the guy that said ignorance is not bliss and I'm talking human drama, I almost agree, but in this case the drama rests soley on ignorance remaining to be.  And in both cases I mentioned, it doesn't seem such a bad thing.

But on a philosophical level, since this is the philosophy forums, is it ever right to deny someone knowledge because you judge it could do more harm than good?  I've made my choice, but since this thread is here, anyone wanna play devil's advocate and take the far side of the argument?  

[Jolly Sapper]

What exactly do you mean by "far side of the argument"?

Either you can outta the blue ask why the heck he believes the way he does in spite of [proceed to argue your case here].. or you just sit back and let the dude do his thing.

While I did argue for letting sleeping dogs lie, it could be interesting to try to gently steer a conversation into a debate.  It could be end badly, so keep that in mind when/if you decide you want to have this conversation with your friend.

[PipeBox]

No, I won't be steering our conversations into a debate, I'm in fact going to go listen to that band play this friday.  If he tries to steer the conversation that way, though, I'll likely not stop him.  Far side of the argument just means, the way I meant it, the side no one has taken.  No one here is in favor in anything but letting sleeping dogs lie, the way I read it, and I was thinking it might be interesting to push the thread into a slightly more philosophical realm than "help me make the (evidently) obvious choice."

Maybe that's all there is to it when viewed from any rational perspective, in which case I better just let this thread slip off the page before making myself look like (more of) an idiot.  

[LARA]

I think this is a really important question on many levels, because it does go beyond the idea of just religion into any area where a person is maintaining their own little fantasy world for the benefit of their own happiness.  And I really see your point.  

I think the first and foremost thing is to get you facts straight and evidence collected to ascertain what exactly is true and what exactly is harmful or bothersome and then go about the business of education.  

At some point in time, I think that all untruths are harmful to society overall, but not neccesarily to the individual maintaining the lie.  Right now, your friend is happy and benefitting from his religion, but it seems he's spreading the con that has emotionally hurt and financially exploited a lot of people who don't want to believe in it and are tired of hearing about it.  If you let sleeping dogs lie, you maintain the status quo.  If you try to educate your friend, you risk losing his friendship, getting into a hairy religious discussion and coming across as a bitter cynical asshole and a know-it-all.  And you, as holder of the nasty truth in an insane society hell-bent on pretty self-delusion are, to my best information, in the minority so it's not likely you'll get a lot of support outside of other atheists.  

But I don't think you need to worry about malicious intentions.  I don't think it's a question of what's right or malicious, because we all know that seeking the truth after getting our facts straight is what's right and simply sharing information verbally and asking questions politely is not malicious.    It's more of a question of how much frustration you are willing to put yourself through with him.  Your friend is free to believe or not believe, and if he chooses to not believe it anymore, it doesn't necessarily mean he will stop being a musician.

[afreethinker30]

But it should depend on how the person uses their faith or nonfaith.There are some people I would love to throw atheism in their face and make them confront their whole lives.My neighbor would be a good start but they are both hypocrites.He become a preacher to get out of alot of IRS trouble he was into.Believe it or not it did help.And their love thy neighbor view is bs considering they've put people in harms way for years now....But there are some who use faith to do better.My mother used her faith to drive her to donate money to a few charities,also clothes and time.When it comes to people using their god to deny others rights it needs to be stopped.Thanks to our government stem cell research is null,something that could save so many stopped all over a belief.Marijuana a natural drug is denied to cancer patients,women are stoned for being raped.People need to wake up and see all that matters is helping others.If they are so worried about a "soul" then start saving the souls on earth now,and stop worrying over ones that are not here.