= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
orthonormal comments on Offense versus harm minimization - Less Wrong
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
= 783df68a0f980790206b9ea87794c5b6)
Loading…= b715d02e85f7b3b4ae65ca3d3e450868)
Subscribe to RSS Feed
Powered by Reddit
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d)
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
Comments (417)
I ask sincerely: why do you believe this?
I've known quite a few people who've left religion (among them, myself) or started to take it less seriously, and I can't think of a single case where the process was helped along by "exposure therapy" (e.g. atheists trying to offend their sensibilities). In fact, it's mostly the opposite.
I'm referring specifically to the angry emotional reactions to perceived slights, not what causes people to leave their religions.
I'm trying to think of the last time anything offended western Christians as much as the Mohammed drawings (apparently) offended Muslims in the middle-east. The anger over Piss Christ was mostly because that project was partially government funded by the NEA. There was no serious attempt to legally censor it. And of course, there were no riots and no one was harmed during that brief controversy.
I think that the difference is not primarily theological but rather cultural. In America, Christians have their beliefs mocked pretty regularly in popular culture. That largely inoculates them to outrage. My guess is that the difference between American Christians and Muslims in Afghanistan is not inherent in their religions, but a matter of exposure. Afghan Muslims have always had governments and strict cultural rules that insulated them from offensive treatments of Islam. With modern telecommunications they will be exposed to things that offend them, even if those things happen in Florida or Denmark. Either they will change or the rest of the world will change for them.
agreed
perhaps
You certainly have a point, but I'm not persuaded that you've identified the core of the difference. My guess is that at least one other component is the context in which the exposure takes place. In America, there is a fairly strong norm to at least pay lip service to freedom of speech, and anyone growing up here who has a religion, and who has heard it mocked, will probably also have heard that this mockery is defended by another national norm. Exposure to equivalent mockery in Afghanistan may not have equivalent effects.
Print of Piss Christ destroyed by Christians in France
Also, "It was vandalised in Australia, and neo-Nazis ransacked a Serrano show in Sweden in 2007."
Yes, the anger it created was real, and that reaction was why I chose it as an example.
It still falls orders of magnitude below the Jyllands-Posten cartoon riots, in which more than 100 people died.
Also now that other religious groups are noticing how much success Muslims are having with their tactic of violent rioting, what do you think they're going to do?
I suspect that this is an over-simplification, and expect that there will not be a significant effect on the number or intensity of violent Christian riots. (For one thing, I expect Christians to value appearing more civilized than violent Muslims.)
Some will, some won't. Unfortunately, under current conditions the ones willing to embrace violence will be more successful.
Would you know if it did? People's stated reasons are often different than their actual reasons.
No one ever says "I changed religious beliefs for reasons completely other than the truth of the religion", even though one of the biggest predictors is the belief of their social circle.
Like I said, including me. And I am talking about social reasons.
Mocking religion can probably turn some agnostics into atheists, but in most cases it makes religious people more rigid in their beliefs- you're offering them the "choice" between their religion being true and them being an idiot.
The claim was that they would become thicker-skinned, not that they would become atheists.
Mockery of my religion helped me to change my mind, but I doubt it would have helped if I was not already suspecting those beliefs were wrong.
I think you're missing the point by ignoring the last part of knb's post. The specific instance of offensive behavior is not going to convince anyone. But being in a society where it is permitted is a huge difference from one where it is not. seeing that you can live your life without being constrained by silly commandments and still be happy and respected by your friends can make a huge difference.
I can disagree with one of his claims without bothering about the argument's bottom line.