Re: BELIEF

On 8 Feb 2006 20:51:06 -0800, qqq123@xxxxx wrote:

From Wikipedia,

Respect is an attitude of acknowledging the feelings and interests of
another party in a relationship, and of treating as consequential for
the self the helping or harming of the other.

And respect is also earned in some instances, owed in others, and in
some cases not deserved but still insisted on.

You mensioned good education -

Yes, I did 'mention' it.

how can pupils be taught anything if
they do not respect their teacher;

By what, automatically kow-towing to them in every respect? I've had
one or two pretty awful teachers who were little more than bullies and
expected far more obedience than many might consider was called for.

Respect is a fine idea that can turn ugly when carried too far. Just
take, for example, what is going on throughout the Middle East due to
what they see as our lack of respect for their religion.

I, for one, would never argue that respect is owed to another's point
of view simply on the basis that they hold it.

further if they do not even respect
their fellow students, the class will be a a mess, even if there is
only one misbehaving student;

You seem to be referring to specific types of behavior here that in no
way encompasses all aspects of the word 'respect'.

therefore, as respect is defined above
the responsiblity of the teacher is to harm the misbehaving student (by
throwing him out of social intercourse of the class by throwing him/her
out of school) Other milder sanctions are also needed (so that you do
not throw everyone out of school)

Should we also show respect by adhering to what many might view as
draconian or needlessly restrictive dress codes? I know my own mother
would argue that wearing jeans to school shows a lack of respect for
the teacher. Of course she doesn't have the faintest idea what a non
sequitur is and loves to rationalize.

Must we acknowledge that all points of view are somehow deserving of
the same level of respect? Mind you, I'm not suggesting that there
isn't a proper place and time or proper ways of addressing conflicts,
but it is far too easy these days to say or do something that someone
else will find offensive.

You mensioned sound reasoning skills; the use of this is in debates; if
you do not respect your debating partner there won't be much of a
debate.

Honest debating should be about respecting the truth, not another
person's point of view. Being tactful may be the path of least
resistance, but with some people there is no amount of tact that won't
run into a wall of resistance. In the end, it is truth that should be
played to and respected and not necessarily some person's fragile ego.

The best example of this is a fundamental Christian or Muslem
that want to discuss with a scientist in t.o for example; The Christian
do not respect the scientist by not believing and respecting facts
which the community of scientists have presented. Therefore the basis
for reason to take place is respect.

If the topic that is being addressed is being presented as scientific,
then it is simply a matter of integrity or honesty to ensure that such
matters be addressed honestly with respect to science. It really
should not matter what religious baggage a party to the discussion is
carrying with them.

There are certainly ways that such a conversation can be carried out
so that feathers aren't unnecessarily ruffled, but in the end, it is
with truth that everyone should have respect for. If someone is
accused of having biases and this is completely germane to the topic
at hand, then people may end up getting pissed off. So be it. As
long as the person doing the pissing off approached the matter with
honesty and integrity then they should have nothing to be concerned
about.

The real problem with a lot of the fundies that come here isn't that
they might have fundamentalist or even simplistic religious views, but
that the have no respect for the truth (actual examinable facts, not
revealed 'truths') and do not engage in honest debate. IOW they do
not come here for an honest exchange of ideas.

You mensioned healthy dose of skeptisism. This is the same thing as
strongly respecting taking things for what they are; ie not respecting
fantasies of those in church for example. So this means both strong
respect and non-respect.

Honest skepticism is rooted in logic. If something doesn't even pass
the smell test then there is no reason why someone should be forced to
disrespect the truth under some sort of obligation to protect someone
else's fairy tales.

It may not be appropriate to walk into a church and start pointing out
falsehoods and contradictions in that religion (at least without an
invitation), but it is a completely different matter when it comes to
discussing the same subject matter in an academic environment or even
just on the street. As long as people are truly being honest as they
see it there should ideally be nobody crying foul and claiming that
they were being disrespected.

So maybe I should say that both respect and disrespect should be part
of what you believe to realize the mentioned 3 things.
Do you agree?

I believe in freedom of expression. I also believe in the right of me
or you to be wrong about things. As such, I see nothing wrong with
others having completely different points of views, such as a bunch of
Muslims who feel offended that someone else in a completely different
country from a completely different culture just happened to draw a
few cartoons that they didn't like.

I really don't give a damn that they are offended and they *shouldn't*
give a damn that I just don't care that they are upset. The problem
here in my view is that they seem to have some bizarre expectation
that everyone else around the world should kowtow to their point of
view. In doing so, they are indicating that they do not believe in
freedom of expression nor do they believe that others have the right
to be wrong about things.

The exact same holds true with the Evolution Vs. Creation debate or
any discussion concerning religion. If someone becomes offended at
something I say, the only proper recourse they should have is to point
out, through reason and *understanding* (not 'respect') looking at it
from my point of view, why I am wrong. Ultimately, the only thing
that is owed respect is the truth. No one is above that!

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Coming home from work
    ... It's a matter of religion - is my answer. ... Originally I was set in some plot for hiding the truth, ... Dylan, also being set in the plot of hiding the truth, it failed. ...
    (rec.music.dylan)
  • Re: Ot need info on sending money
    ... It doesn't matter what the situation is, it's still best to be honest ... Tell her the truth or have it bite ya in the ass later on. ...
    (rec.games.pinball)
  • Re: Kitzmiller v. Dover decision
    ... >I don't think that's the truth of it. ... Yes intelligent design promotes ... would also IMO promote religion. ... a group of uncommon people already decided the matter. ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: Is this a Religion?
    ... tell the truth. ... It wouldn't matter what I said. ... "no more or less wacky than any other religion". ... I find it funny that some people think scientology is stranger than any ...
    (rec.boats)
  • Re: OT: Racial superiority / Intelligent design was Re: OT:Thanksgiving
    ... Judson McClendon wrote in message ... Anybody who is honest and of a truly open mind would ... truth is something that works whether we want it to or not. ... no matter what we'd like it to be, and no matter that we've been assured by ...
    (comp.lang.cobol)