Is it ever appropriate to mock or insult people because of their beliefs?

Don't forget, the fundies mock skeptics too.

IME mockery has very little utility except as a sort of rally for the mockers and a bit of humor. It has almost no use for convincing someone that they're wrong though.
 
Ossai said:
How?
Click to expand...
As I explained, he is not insulting them just because he has a different belief and follows it. Then they would be insulting him just as much.

There are literally millions of Christians and Muslims alive today that would disagree.
Click to expand...
Well, let's say the tables are turned. The "doctor" is now Jesus or another person who can heal by the powers that they believe in. If a person turns up and wants help with a burst appendix, but the person's family wants the healer to operate (a method contrary to the healer's belief), would these millions of Christians and Muslims agree that it would be a "insult to the family's belief" not to try an operation, instead of using the holy powers of God to heal his poor patient?
If not, how can the opposite be an insult to them?

Operating and removing the appendix is an insult to their beliefs. If the doctor respected their belief, the doc would do nothing but sit back and watch the person die, out of respect for their belief.
Click to expand...
All it takes for the family to understand the doctor is a little, little, little bit of empathy. The doctor is doing what he thinks will save the patient. They are doing what they think will save their family member. If the doctor says: "I do not share your belief, I believe in another method, and I will do everything I can to help your family member by the method that I think will work" - is that an insult? The doctor is simply stating that he
1. Does not share their belief - which he can't help, really.
2. Cares more about the person than about their belief. I don't think it's an insult to say that you value the life of someone's family member higher than a belief that you do not share.

I took respect to mean ‘give some credence to’ not ‘acknowledge different belief’.

Ossai
Click to expand...
I don't think not giving credence to a belief is the same thing as insulting it.
 
Rufo hit it, but I don't see why the two are mutually exclusive.

You can both pray and operate, therefore both the doctor and the family would be doing what they think will help. It would be dangerous and ignorant not do anything you think would help.

Yes I know there are Christians who take no medicine whatsoever because of their faith. Yes, I think this is dangerous and ignorant.
 
saizai said:
IME mockery has very little utility except as a sort of rally for the mockers and a bit of humor. It has almost no use for convincing someone that they're wrong though.
Click to expand...


True enough, but when a person believes that the Earth is ~6000 years old, there is virtually nothing that will convince him that he is wrong. In fact, once a person reaches that point, mocking probably serves to reinforce the belief - "Jesus said that we would be attacked for our beliefs, so this mocking is proof that I am right."
 
Rufo
Well, let's say the tables are turned. The "doctor" is now Jesus or another person who can heal by the powers that they believe in. If a person turns up and wants help with a burst appendix, but the person's family wants the healer to operate (a method contrary to the healer's belief), would these millions of Christians and Muslims agree that it would be a "insult to the family's belief" not to try an operation, instead of using the holy powers of God to heal his poor patient?
Click to expand...
Without specifying what the healing power is, both groups mentioned would probably think the healing power was an insult to their religion if it wasn’t specified as Christian healing or Muslim healing. The patient’s belief wouldn’t matter to either group.
Now if you specify a healer of faith A and the rest of the family from faith B, then the family may realize that by forcing the patient to seek conventional medical help that they are insulting the patients faith.
Or to put it another way, most of the religious people I interact with can’t or won’t see a situation from any perspective but their own.

If not, how can the opposite be an insult to them?
Click to expand...
Just because a group of people don’t realize something is an insult doesn’t mean it’s not an insult to someone else. How about Hollywood going back to blackface.

The doctor is simply stating that he
1. Does not share their belief - which he can't help, really.
2. Cares more about the person than about their belief. I don't think it's an insult to say that you value the life of someone's family member higher than a belief that you do not share.
Click to expand...
As I stated earlier, there are millions of irrational people (people of faith) that would take that as an insult.

Ossai
 
Ossai said:
Without specifying what the healing power is, both groups mentioned would probably think the healing power was an insult to their religion if it wasn’t specified as Christian healing or Muslim healing. The patient’s belief wouldn’t matter to either group.
Now if you specify a healer of faith A and the rest of the family from faith B, then the family may realize that by forcing the patient to seek conventional medical help that they are insulting the patients faith.
Click to expand...
I don't really understand this answer. Maybe I didn't express the hypothetical situation clearly: The healer is Christian/Muslim (whichever is relevant for the person we are trying to reason with) and can by his faith healing/prayer methods evidently repair/remove a burst appendix. The family is not Christian/Muslim but atheists - or just scientifically oriented in general - and they are convinced that an operation is what is needed to cure their family member of this illness. However, the healer chooses to use his faith healing/praying methods instead, because he believes those will cure the person. The question to these people who feel insulted by the doctor in your example is: Have the healer in my example insulted the atheist/scientific family's belief by saving their family member by the power of God? I don't believe they would answer that he does.

Or to put it another way, most of the religious people I interact with can’t or won’t see a situation from any perspective but their own.
Click to expand...
Now that answer I understand. But honestly, I think that behavior is reason enough to 'insult' them if needed. But in that case, what qualifies them for being an insult is not their belief but their lack of empathy. They cannot expect someone to have more respect for their belief than they have for others'.

Just because a group of people don’t realize something is an insult doesn’t mean it’s not an insult to someone else. How about Hollywood going back to blackface.
Click to expand...
You do have a point - and if this was about something more petty than a human life I would suggest you avoid insulting the other person even though you don't realize why the behavior they complain about would be insulting to them. But this is a life or death situation, and I think they need a reason for experiencing this as insulting before anyone would accept it.

(Though I don't understand why you use blackface as an example - I have no problem understanding why that is insulting, and I'm not black.)

As I stated earlier, there are millions of irrational people (people of faith) that would take that as an insult.

Ossai
Click to expand...
How do they explain it?
 
As others have pointed out, it is almost impossible to hold a religious discussion with some people, without having them feel they are being mocked. They are so sensitive about their beliefs that they cannot bear a comparison between, oh, say Jesus and Muhammad without claiming that they are being "mocked". And if any real sarcasm is used (which I consider a valid tool of debate) then they lose it completely.

But at the risk of digressing, I must go back to what Darat said:
Darat said:
As a general comment I think it is "OK" to mock the idea or the opinion itself but not the person.
Click to expand...
Sounds like good sense, but if we analyze it, then it is not so easy. After all, what is a "person"? I would argue that a "person" is the combination of their beliefs, emotions, thoughts, character traits etc. Your beliefs are a very big part of your personhood. That implies that it is impossible to "mock" beliefs without mocking the person. I would agree that it is a good goal, in an amicable discussion, to limit the discussion to the belief(s) being discussed, but in practice, discussions tend to wander. A look at the topic drift in any long thread here will confirm that.

For myself, I simply decide not to be insulted by anything anyone has to say. They can mock all they like. I feel that I am capable of defending my beliefs if it comes to that. Those who most resent mocking are those who cannot reply in substance to analogies, "putting the shoe on the other foot" or situation reversal. Their "mockusations" (if I may coin a word) are their only defense.
 
Ossai said:
Ladewig

Change the scope of the question from religion to say the medical field. The answer should be an obvious ‘Yes’.

Person A has a burst appendix. They and their family believe that praying over it will cure the condition.
A doctor will operate, even though to do so insult their belief.

Was it correct for the doctor to operate and save the person’s life?

Ossai
Click to expand...

Your analogy is a poor one since, in practice, it would not be correct for the doctor to operate and save the person's life. Indeed, in many places, it would cost the doctor their job and license and probably result in substantial financial damages and possibly a prison sentence.

A doctor cannot over ride the wishes of a capable person (that is someone who can understand and retain information pertinent to the situation and use that information to reach and communicate a decision) simply because they believe the reason for that person's choice to be unwise.
 
Rufo
The healer is Christian/Muslim (whichever is relevant for the person we are trying to reason with) and can by his faith healing/prayer methods evidently repair/remove a burst appendix. The family is not Christian/Muslim but atheists - or just scientifically oriented in general - and they are convinced that an operation is what is needed to cure their family member of this illness. However, the healer chooses to use his faith healing/praying methods instead, because he believes those will cure the person. The question to these people who feel insulted by the doctor in your example is: Have the healer in my example insulted the atheist/scientific family's belief by saving their family member by the power of God? I don't believe they would answer that he does.
Click to expand...
Isn’t it rather odd that you have to bring in magic healing for your example.
Considering that atheist/scientific is a lack of belief, I don’t see how you can insult a lack of belief. Now my question, is the healer charged with murder for deliberately withholding a known and proven means of treatment or simply involuntary manslaughter?

How do they explain it?
Click to expand...
Ask them not me. I work with one person that gets upset if it’s even hinted that the bible isn’t 100% literal. (I try and avoid this person at work.)

Ossai
 
Camillus
Your analogy is a poor one since, in practice, it would not be correct for the doctor to operate and save the person's life. Indeed, in many places, it would cost the doctor their job and license and probably result in substantial financial damages and possibly a prison sentence.
Click to expand...
Correct, however in certain circumstances (underage child) the doctor will operate with the support of the law.

Ossai
 
Ossai said:
Isn’t it rather odd that you have to bring in magic healing for your example.
Click to expand...
I don't think so. Of course, it gets a bit ridiculous since operation evidently works while magic healing does not, but my entire point was trying to reverse the situation, and to do that the most direct way possible I resorted to using magic healing as an example.

Considering that atheist/scientific is a lack of belief, I don’t see how you can insult a lack of belief.
Click to expand...
I don't understand why it would be much different from insulting a belief. Believers frequently mock/insult atheism as well as science (there are examples posted earlier in this thread), and though "belief in" (knowledge of) common scientific medical practice, such as operations, is not the same as belief in religious practices, it can be mocked and insulted just the same. At least that is the impression I've got.

Now my question, is the healer charged with murder for deliberately withholding a known and proven means of treatment or simply involuntary manslaughter?
Click to expand...
I am not sure I understand how this is connected to what we're discussing. Also, are you asking me what I think he should be charged with or what he actually would be charged with in the real world?

I think he should be charged with involuntary manslaughter, provided he was actually completely convinced he would be able to cure the patient by supernatural means. Murder implies he was intending to kill the person, which he wasn't.

Ask them not me. I work with one person that gets upset if it’s even hinted that the bible isn’t 100% literal. (I try and avoid this person at work.)

Ossai
Click to expand...
Well, that is a problem, because I don't know any people who has expressed that opinion. I don't doubt that they exist, but I can not ask one myself. I'll try to remember the question if I meet someone.
 
few points:
A) Mockery and insult are likely the expressions of contempt and hatred. So are we asking whether it is ever appropriate to contemn and hate someone?
B) What is the purpose of mockery and insult? Is it a form of argument? Or is it an admission on the part of the donor that he cannot come up with anything valuable to offer?
C) I do not believe it is appropriate to mock even "Young Earth Creationists" for their beliefs. I believe you have the right to present rational argument, from premises these folks will grant (eg. biblical, everyday life experience, maybe the constitution if they are American)
 
If you choose to mock someone because of their beliefs, this shows something about the type of person you are and what you think of other people who don't share your beliefs.
 
In reality there's no way to mock a belief without offending the belief holder. It doesn't matter how tactfully it's done. The only way to convince someone is by providing overwhelming (sufficient) evidence for the opposing view.
 
Last edited:
stillthinkin said:
few points:
A) Mockery and insult are likely the expressions of contempt and hatred. So are we asking whether it is ever appropriate to contemn and hate someone?
Click to expand...
Sure, we can ask that. The answer's yes.

B) What is the purpose of mockery and insult?
Click to expand...
Personal amusement.


Dogdoctor said:
If you choose to mock someone because of their beliefs, this shows something about the type of person you are and what you think of other people who don't share your beliefs.
Click to expand...
Right. It shows that I think they're wrong. If I thought they were right, I'd share their beliefs.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom