Alleged Right to Ignorance

[BadPoison]

The assertion that everyone has the right to believe whatever they want seems unexamined. So many people think that this is the case - yet they'll put limiters on the statement! "As long as you don't promote violence" or "As long as you don't force your beliefs on me"

Personally, I find the whole idea to be not only silly, but detrimental to humanities development!

I would guess, that the majority of the world's western population disagrees. Most of us want to minimize conflict, desire to get along, and don't like hurting people's feelings. We value individual rights so emphatically that most of us continue to look for more and more rights. We want to choose how we live our own lives, and we want unrelenting control over our own outlooks, beliefs, and moral standards. None of this is inherently wrong, yet in practical application, I think we fall short. We lie to ourselves about the nature of ideas, and sugarcoat each other and ourselves out of this innate want for minimal conflict, and individual sovereignty.

“Everyone has the right to believe whatever they want.”

No, you don’t. I don’t. And no one does. In fact, I would like to put forth, that it is our responsibility to each other to point this out. Your beliefs are the products of your experiences, your upbringing, and countless other factors that are outside of your control. You may think that you’ve made a conscious choice about what you currently believe, and indeed you have, but the journey that brought you to making that decision (along with genetics and whatever else) is what enables you to make such a decision. Certain options are never available for you to choose unless certain events have happened in your life. For example: a person who lives the first 20 years of their life a victim of extreme religious indoctrination will likely not have the ability to choose an option such as atheism the first day of their twentieth year. Something will have to happen, either internally or externally before their mind can think about religion more critically.

Back to the original question: Why does this person not have the right to continue his incorrect belief? Because it is unethical to allow him to continue to do so! By allowing someone to keep an outdated, incorrect belief, you yourself are hurting them. Ignorance is hurtful. It keeps society from developing, mankind from moving forward, and is divisive. The more divided we are, the more likely violence, dehumanization, and apathy will continue. We must criticize people’s false ideas, and encourage them to be more critical of their own because we (or at least I) care about the future of humanity.

There is no such thing as a false belief that affects no one but the believer. “You can believe whatever you want, as long as it doesn’t cause violence.” This sort of thinking is called “Religious tolerance.” The idea of “religious tolerance” should be updated. “Religious tolerance” â€" the assertion that by treating all religions with respect societies will be more likely to be understanding towards each other, discrimination will be lessened, and religious wars will be in fewer numbers â€" has the “right” idea. But “Religious tolerance” is not the best mean to accomplish this. Quite the contrary, “religious tolerance” is the very enabler that allows religions based on radical “holy” texts such as the bible, quran, and the hadiths, to continue practicing. Christianity isn’t based on a hateful book? Have you read the bible? Just because the majority of Christian denominations are not themselves violent, it doesn’t mean their interpretation of the bible is any less valid than those who use the same text to justify their “evil” behavior.

By viewing all religions with an equal contempt and promoting reason and critical thinking could greatly raise the level of consciousness in this world.


Thoughts, rebuttals?

[Will]

I've always had a problem with thought crimes. Until the crime comes to fruition, it's not harmful.

If someone wants to believe that the Earth is 6000 years old, I don't care. They can think the earth is 34 years old and made up entirely of old socks for all I care. It's when their insane belief starts to spread and hurt people that I will step up. That's when something needs to be done. Until that point, it's none of my business.

I figure it's the most pragmatic approach to live and let live. If someone is trying to force their crap on other people, I'll stop them. If someone is hurting someone else, I'll stop them. Their belief system alone, though, doesn't hurt people. Trying to force them out of their ignorance would be the same crap they do with other people and I don't want to stoop to their level. I mean we'd be right, but being right isn't enough reason to force wrong people out of their beliefs.

[DennisK]

I hear what you are saying, but who are we to impose our beliefs on anyone else?  What's the next step, implant chips to train someone to view the world from one group's perspective?  Don't get me wrong, the world would be a lot better place if everyone shared my way of thinking (in my mind, anyway).  I am sympathetic and empathetic to a number of people and peoples who I feel are wronged.  Does that give me a right to impose my beliefs on them or others if I can back it up with personal experience or perception?  Anger and conflict are part of who we are although it is an ugly notion.  To remove the emotion is impossible for one, but also denying who we are as an evolved being.   Besides, a great man once said, "All work and no play make Jack a dull boy.  All work and no play make Jack a dull boy.  All work and no play make Jack a dull boy.  All work and no play make Jack a dull boy..."  REDRUM!

edit:  Please note, I don't always practice what I preach.

[Wraitchel]

It is an interesting ideal, but I believe that the urge to make others accept your beliefs is fundamentally violent. I agree that we should be open, honest, and clear about what we believe and why. Beyond that, we must leave it to each person to follow their own path of discovery. I do not feel that I have any right to rob them of that important journey. Otherwise we risk being just like radical religious extremists who want to remake the world in their image, by force if necessary.

[SSY]

It's when their insane belief starts to spread and hurt people that I will step up.

Could it not be argued that their insane belief is hurting themselves?

Afterall, if someone insists "Je Suis Napoleon!" they commited and then nursed back to mental health.

[curiosityandthecat]

Afterall, if someone insists "Je Suis Napoleon!" they commited and then nursed back to mental health.

Unless you grew up in Texas, went to Harvard and can't pronounce nuclear. Then you're placed in the White House.  

[SSY]

[Sophus]

“Everyone has the right to believe whatever they want.”

No, you don’t. I don’t. And no one does. In fact, I would like to put forth, that it is our responsibility to each other to point this out.

While you can believe whatever you want you cannot necessarily do whatever it is your beliefs may suggest that you do. Not every theists belief in god leads them to do crazy things. How would you like it if someone said you don't have the right to not believe in a god? We don't choose our beliefs so we might as well be able to believe in anything.

I like the idea of right to remain ignorant. We should read them their "Theistic Rights" before entering debate from now on  

[Wraitchel]

You have the right to remain ignorant. Anything you say may be used to demonstrate how ignorant you are. You have the right to consult with God. He isn't listening anyway. If you can't think of a good argument for the existence of God, you will be flailed with logic until convinced.

[Will]

Could it not be argued that their insane belief is hurting themselves?

It could be argued, but demonstrating it as fact is another matter. Unless they pose a risk to themselves or anyone around them, any hurt that could be named would be a matter of opinion. You can't convict based on opinion.

[VanReal]

This is kind of what I was saying in the thread I started earlier today.  We live in a society of people and in order to function together there has to be tolerance of thought.  We are allowed to think anything we want, thought is not action and thought is personal.  Trying to convince someone that they are ignorant because of what they think just seems wrong to me, just like I don't want someone coming in my direction with their thoughts or beliefs trying to convince me that I'm ignorant.

Yes, people have the right to be as ingorant as they want.  Just like they have the right to be stupid, cowardly, introverts and extroverts.  There is no ultimate thought or "must think".  Trying to force people to change their thoughts is something we should all avoid because we certainly don't want them trying to convince us our thought process is ignorant.

Now, when I can't handle what I feel is the ignorance any longer I'll bundle up my books and companion animals and head to my hermit cave so I won't have to deal with it anymore.

[Kyuuketsuki]

I'd say you do as long as you keep it to yourself ... the moment you take that ignorance and expose it to others you then become subject to critical evaluation.

That's the basis for my "respect" model i.e. I respect everyone's right to believe what they wish but I do not necessarily respect the belief without good reason.

IOW I genuinely don't care what you believe, even if you believe kids are great in sandwiches, but the moment you say it then you open yourself up to criticism from others and should be held to account by society.

In terms of religion my stance is believe what you want, pray wherever you wish but DO NOT force it on me, DO NOT force it on others and don't frakking expect to use it as some kind get-out-of-jail free card or gain respect points from it for anything whatsoever ... if you're good you're good and you may get credit for it, if you're bad you're bad and you may get slammed for it and whatever hokey God you believe in is irrelevant.

Kyu

[AnnaM]

i have no 'responbilities' and no 'rights'.  its a mistake to use moralism to argue anything.  poor defenses are more dangerous than strong attacks.  people do have a 'right/might' to be ignorant, deal with it.  No ones owes you anything.

[Kyuuketsuki]

i have no 'responbilities' and no 'rights'.  its a mistake to use moralism to argue anything.  poor defenses are more dangerous than strong attacks.  people do have a 'right/might' to be ignorant, deal with it.  No ones owes you anything.

It's a different argument (one for a different thread) but yes you do ... as part of your society, someone who presumably takes part in the democratic process and takes from that society various services (education, health-care, security  etc. etc. ) you implicitly buy into that societies mores and become a part of it, therefore you have the implicit responsibility to ensure others get the same kind of breaks you did.

Kyu

[Loffler]

By viewing all religions with an equal contempt and promoting reason and critical thinking could greatly raise the level of consciousness in this world.

Could you explain what you mean by this? Do you mean you and I voluntarily choosing to express our atheist views publicly? I agree with that.