Among the many insipid arguments one hears from believers (and sometimes even fellow non-believers) is that there is no harm in letting other people believe what they want to believe. The problem with this argument is that it is necessarily based on two mistakes: First, failure to consider all the evidence and, second, failure to consider the relative weight that should be given to actions that cause harm compared to those that are beneficial.
When someone makes such a statement, it is almost certain that it is based only on the person's own limited experience. The religious people he knows personally don't seem to be harming anyone. For example, the person's grandmother or mother take comfort from religion and seem completely harmless. I say that this has to be the basis for the argument because even a little bit of research or exposure to the wider world very quickly belies the assertion. A person who says such a thing absolutely must be relying only on his own experience because the experience of the wider world shows that religion is quite harmful.
Thus, I would suggest that a first part of the response to such an assertion should be to point this out:
"You must be thinking of the seemingly harmless religious people you know personally."
Then follow it up immediately with the assertion that the person needs to research this:
"If you would do the slightest bit of research on the harm done by religion outside of your friends and family, you would see that religion is quite harmful."
It would probably be best to break off the discussion at this point because the person has already shown an incredible ignorance of things outside his immediate circle of family and friends (or an inability to care about what happens outside that circle). He will not believe your assertions, whether they be vague or specific, and will attempt to provide innocuous examples of his own.
If you decide to follow him down this path, then the key to continuing is to remember that such an assertion can only be made by ignoring the relative gravity of the harm or good that come from religion. This is something they do not grasp. To them, the fact that religion causes people to give to charity or some other "good" act is enough to prove that it is a force for good. They either do not see or refuse to contemplate the fact that the harm caused far outweighs these good acts.
Religion Cannot Ever Be a Harmless Delusion
Religion Cannot Ever Be a Harmless Delusion II
When someone makes such a statement, it is almost certain that it is based only on the person's own limited experience. The religious people he knows personally don't seem to be harming anyone. For example, the person's grandmother or mother take comfort from religion and seem completely harmless. I say that this has to be the basis for the argument because even a little bit of research or exposure to the wider world very quickly belies the assertion. A person who says such a thing absolutely must be relying only on his own experience because the experience of the wider world shows that religion is quite harmful.
Thus, I would suggest that a first part of the response to such an assertion should be to point this out:
"You must be thinking of the seemingly harmless religious people you know personally."
Then follow it up immediately with the assertion that the person needs to research this:
"If you would do the slightest bit of research on the harm done by religion outside of your friends and family, you would see that religion is quite harmful."
It would probably be best to break off the discussion at this point because the person has already shown an incredible ignorance of things outside his immediate circle of family and friends (or an inability to care about what happens outside that circle). He will not believe your assertions, whether they be vague or specific, and will attempt to provide innocuous examples of his own.
If you decide to follow him down this path, then the key to continuing is to remember that such an assertion can only be made by ignoring the relative gravity of the harm or good that come from religion. This is something they do not grasp. To them, the fact that religion causes people to give to charity or some other "good" act is enough to prove that it is a force for good. They either do not see or refuse to contemplate the fact that the harm caused far outweighs these good acts.
Religion Cannot Ever Be a Harmless Delusion
Religion Cannot Ever Be a Harmless Delusion II
No comments:
Post a Comment