Tag Archives: rant

Belief Equality Dichotomy

I have noticed a common response to criticism, of  belief systems of a  religious, philosophical or ideological origin,  is to assert  that the beliefs is equal to or just as valued as any other type  and is therefore protected from scrutiny.

Protection: 

Advocating protection of the belief systems will ensure a more peaceful and non intrusive society to live in. Beliefs themselves do not harm people, harm is the responsibility of the individual carrying it out. Extreme beliefs are just that, extreme and cannot be used to criticize similar or connected views. Attacking beliefs causes offence. Tolerance is only achieved though respecting ones beliefs. Intolerance of beliefs equals intolerance of said person. A persons beliefs are personal and therefore cannot be criticized without harm to the person. Challenging ones beliefs usually entrenches them deeper  into it.

Criticism:

It is possible to examine ones beliefs without attacking the person. Beliefs influence a persons bias and actions when interacting with others. A persons beliefs can be objectively judged as harmful. Respect is reserved for a people but not always their beliefs.  Dogmatic following of  beliefs, without evidence stunts personal growth. Challenging a person or group beliefs may cause others in society to examine their own.  Having a personal belief does not protect one from being criticized for partaking in a negative action.

Opinion:

I personally am a strong proponent of challenging religious, philosophical and ideological beliefs (including my own). If a belief is to be deemed valid, it is only fair to examine that belief as objectively as possible. Accepting a majority or tolerating an aggressive belief out of respect, is intellectually dishonest and only protects people with a unchallenged agenda that is enabled by our passivity. (an extreme example) Through critical thinking and debate, we have an open market for society to choose our values.  Instead of unchallenged and  uncritical acceptance of beliefs that, if were adopted, might take that right away or deem it unquestionable.

Advertisements

Talk Radio Manipulations and Self Review

Today, as I flipped through my local AM station, (yes I listen to AM sometimes!), I caught a rant from a ‘conservative’ host about Americans obsession with government provided medications and having some sort of neurosis. I am not including their name since I can not remember the exact words used but the main implication is commonly spouted by their ilk. They use this strawman to represent the weak minded, sheep like fools, lining up to receive their unneeded medication (your paying for! )and imaginary mental illness.
Of course people like this exist, or at least we perceive them that way. We see them in grocery stores, department stores and using public parks and hospitals. Our common response is to categorize them as the ‘different’ or ‘opposite’ to you. People like our above mentioned host, use this disconnect to scapegoat and blame our common political and social problems on this character. Drawing a accusatory narrative to them as supporters of whatever target issue or politician they deem unacceptable. The juxtaposition of common sense to obvious corruption is clear as the host echoes your own sentiment on the matter.
This manipulation is clearly an inflation of our fears, paranoia and primal instincts. If this mirage of truth was true, where does the tax paying workers come from? If we were truly overrun with these leeches of society, it would fall from the overwhelming weight of running the infrastructure.

Full Disclosure:
I fully admit this is an assertion driven rant on my part so let me point out some weaknesses in the blog.
1. I pick on conservatives and liberals are just as guilty.
2. Accused this to be a common tactic. I imagine some of them are sincere.
3. I assume people like this are spotted by sight and that people pay attention to things like that so I can make a point.
4. I imply that ‘common sense’ and ‘obvious corruption’ are dichotomous when they could happen inclusively.
5. My conclusion lacks hard data and draws from a ‘false premise’.
Being as skeptical with yourself is just as important as you are with others.

Written while listening to Tool


%d bloggers like this: