On Changing Minds

[Legion]

It seems clear to me that there are times when it is not only appropriate for us to try and change other people's minds, it is also a duty. I think here of things like education and mental health. But I wanted to open this for discussion.

 

When should we attempt to change people's minds and why? When should we refrain from the effort and why? If we decide that a change is in order, then what means should we use, and why?

[Shyone]

It seems clear to me that there are times when it is not only appropriate for us to try and change other people's minds, it is also a duty. I think here of things like education and mental health. But I wanted to open this for discussion.

 

When should we attempt to change people's minds and why? When should we refrain from the effort and why? If we decide that a change is in order, then what means should we use, and why?

Normally I'm nonconfrontational. I believe in live and let live. Let others think what they will.

 

There are times, though, when beliefs affect behavior in bad ways. Churches no longer burn witches. Have we finally reached a truce between church and state?

 

I think not. Religion is absolutist by nature. The apparently extreme position of Islam is a mirror image of the "subission to God" of Christianity.

 

Clearly, we should fight religious encroachment on liberties. The problem is that the beliefs exist and perpetuate, and religious encroachment is potentially just a vote away. The more people question whether religion is "good", the safer are our liberties. Education, in some broad sense, is therefore good.

 

Should we enter the churches with megaphones and try to reason? Should we adopt the church's abandoned techniques of torture? No, and no because they are contrary to the mission and a violation of what we ultimately need - unforced critical thinking.

 

Should we refrain? Ever? In another thread, I expressed my thought that we are not so special. Ideas are not weapons or dangerous. It doesn't hurt to expose anyone to a different philosophy, or even suggest that "when it's over, it's over."

 

I see nothing wrong with public advertisements, radio or tv discussions, magazine articles, or even one to one discussions.

[Legion]

Ideas are not weapons or dangerous.

Shyone please forgive me. I singled this out because it is so patently absurd to me that it damages your credibility on this topic, in my eyes.

 

Ideas are frequently used as weapons. Propaganda is proof. And deception is the essence of warfare.

[Shyone]

Ideas are not weapons or dangerous.

Shyone please forgive me. I singled this out because it is so patently absurd to me that it damages your credibility on this topic, in my eyes.

 

Ideas are frequently used as weapons. Propaganda is proof. And deception is the essence of warfare.

You have laid the groundwork for suppressing speech. We can't have opposing ideas if they are dangerous. Debate would be warfare.

 

It is not the ideas that are the weapons, but the deception. Even free speech does not allow slander or libel which are untrue by definition.

 

If the world changes so much that we can't entertain the ideas of others, then we have a world different than the one we think we have.

[Guest end3]

It seems clear to me that there are times when it is not only appropriate for us to try and change other people's minds, it is also a duty. I think here of things like education and mental health. But I wanted to open this for discussion.

 

When should we attempt to change people's minds and why? When should we refrain from the effort and why? If we decide that a change is in order, then what means should we use, and why?

 

I would enjoy the reasoning from you Legion, that mind changing is a duty as you have stated. Thanks

[Phanta]

When should we attempt to change people's minds and why?

 

I have a thought, but I'm going to modify your language.

 

I think we may have the opportunity to influence some people's thinking at times when they are open to hearing it, but we have little control over how they receive that information.

 

What makes people open? To a real change of mind...? Usually, trust. Patience. Openness.

 

Sometimes hitting rock bottom. More often, trust. And not just trust in you, but trust in your thoughts in that area.

 

Phanta

[Phanta]

It seems clear to me that there are times when it is not only appropriate for us to try and change other people's minds, it is also a duty. I think here of things like education and mental health. But I wanted to open this for discussion.

 

When should we attempt to change people's minds and why? When should we refrain from the effort and why? If we decide that a change is in order, then what means should we use, and why?

 

I would enjoy the reasoning from you Legion, that mind changing is a duty as you have stated. Thanks

 

How's that working for you, End?

 

Phanta

[Shyone]

When should we attempt to change people's minds and why?

 

I have a thought, but I'm going to modify your language.

 

I think we may have the opportunity to influence some people's thinking at times when they are open to hearing it, but we have little control over how they receive that information.

 

What makes people open? To a real change of mind...? Usually, trust. Patience. Openness.

 

Sometimes hitting rock bottom. More often, trust. And not just trust in you, but trust in your thoughts in that area.

 

Phanta

Makes perfect sense to me. One has to be receptive to receive.

 

Have you ever seen those optical illusions where a portrait of a young girl, when thought of differently, becomes a portrait of an old woman?

 

While you can still see the young girl, you can't really ever forget that the old lady is there.

 

And I'm not really sure why I brought that up. It just seemed to fit.

[Guest end3]

It seems clear to me that there are times when it is not only appropriate for us to try and change other people's minds, it is also a duty. I think here of things like education and mental health. But I wanted to open this for discussion.

 

When should we attempt to change people's minds and why? When should we refrain from the effort and why? If we decide that a change is in order, then what means should we use, and why?

 

I would enjoy the reasoning from you Legion, that mind changing is a duty as you have stated. Thanks

 

How's that working for you, End?

 

Phanta

I am waiting for his reponse about duty. I am hoping he has substance behind the duty statement...no pun intended. The answer for me, as Shyone states, is seemingly absolute, as I have accepted the belief to promote life. I don't know that I should ever refrain from the effort to promote changing people's minds with respect to this specific view.

 

But, as I have clearly witnessed, it appears that some have been so thoroughly foobarred from prior attempts, that mercy is likely best by just leaving well enough alone, or being acutely aware of the circumstances.....something that I am working on...slowly.

[Legion]

I would enjoy the reasoning from you Legion, that mind changing is a duty as you have stated. Thanks

End I think it's a duty when we enter into a contract to do so. For instance, teachers are charged with changing minds. But even there, the scope of their influence is circumscribed. Mental health professionals are also contracted to change minds, ideally from disordered to healthy. Shyone gave another good one in my opinion. If I contract with someone to market a product or service, then my duty becomes to influence people's thinking.

 

This is to give examples that there are some circumstances when changing minds becomes a duty.

[Legion]

I don't know that I should ever refrain from the effort to promote changing people's minds with respect to this specific view.

Well this is really a big problem as I see it End. You feel duty bound to change minds, all the time. You are not alone. All kinds of people have all kinds of causes that they use to justify or rationalize their efforts to change other people's minds. And the result, in my view, is a kind of perpetual low grade war.

[Guest end3]

I don't know that I should ever refrain from the effort to promote changing people's minds with respect to this specific view.

Well this is really a big problem as I see it End. You feel duty bound to change minds, all the time. You are not alone. All kinds of people have all kinds of causes that they use to justify or rationalize their efforts to change other people's minds. And the result, in my view, is a kind of perpetual low grade war.

 

Teachers are not in a low grade war with ignorance...can you call them a teacher if they pursue it only half heartedly?

 

Salesmen if the don't ring the cash register?

 

Christians if they don't follow Christ?

 

I don't guess I understand why you would consider zeal a big problem...if I am understanding you correctly.

[Phanta]

It seems clear to me that there are times when it is not only appropriate for us to try and change other people's minds, it is also a duty. I think here of things like education and mental health. But I wanted to open this for discussion.

 

When should we attempt to change people's minds and why? When should we refrain from the effort and why? If we decide that a change is in order, then what means should we use, and why?

 

I would enjoy the reasoning from you Legion, that mind changing is a duty as you have stated. Thanks

 

How's that working for you, End?

 

Phanta

I am waiting for his reponse about duty. I am hoping he has substance behind the duty statement...no pun intended. The answer for me, as Shyone states, is seemingly absolute, as I have accepted the belief to promote life. I don't know that I should ever refrain from the effort to promote changing people's minds with respect to this specific view.

 

But, as I have clearly witnessed, it appears that some have been so thoroughly foobarred from prior attempts, that mercy is likely best by just leaving well enough alone, or being acutely aware of the circumstances.....something that I am working on...slowly.

 

Thanks for sharing, End.

 

Phanta

[Phanta]

When should we attempt to change people's minds and why?

 

I have a thought, but I'm going to modify your language.

 

I think we may have the opportunity to influence some people's thinking at times when they are open to hearing it, but we have little control over how they receive that information.

 

What makes people open? To a real change of mind...? Usually, trust. Patience. Openness.

 

Sometimes hitting rock bottom. More often, trust. And not just trust in you, but trust in your thoughts in that area.

 

Phanta

Makes perfect sense to me. One has to be receptive to receive.

 

Have you ever seen those optical illusions where a portrait of a young girl, when thought of differently, becomes a portrait of an old woman?

 

While you can still see the young girl, you can't really ever forget that the old lady is there.

 

And I'm not really sure why I brought that up. It just seemed to fit.

 

I have seen that!

 

http://www.teachnet.com/powertools/entertain/puzzles/001907illusions/illusion1.html

 

Phanta

[Legion]

Teachers are not in a low grade war with ignorance...

Well End I could see the view that teachers actually are at war with lazy and uncritical thought. And I appreciate pashionate teachers who inspire creativity and rigor.

 

Christians if they don't follow Christ?

 

I don't guess I understand why you would consider zeal a big problem...if I am understanding you correctly.

It's not pashion that is the problem; it's the fact that many people often don't see the invasiveness of constantly attempting to change other people's minds.

 

As a Christian you have been commanded to be invasive End. Go forth and share the Good News with zeal.

[Guest end3]

Teachers are not in a low grade war with ignorance...

Well End I could see the view that teachers actually are at war with lazy and uncritical thought. And I appreciate pashionate teachers who inspire creativity and rigor.

 

Christians if they don't follow Christ?

 

I don't guess I understand why you would consider zeal a big problem...if I am understanding you correctly.

It's not pashion that is the problem; it's the fact that many people often don't see the invasiveness of constantly attempting to change other people's minds.

 

As a Christian you have been commanded to be invasive End. Go forth and share the Good News with zeal.

 

I still don't see that that excludes the other groups mentioned. Telemarketers "ring" to mind. I think you are biased when it comes to Christianity. It inspires some like your appreciation for passionate teachers.

[Legion]

I think you are biased when it comes to Christianity. It inspires some like your appreciation for passionate teachers.

Yes, naturally I'm biased against Christianity. I rejected it. If some others are inspired by it, and derive some benefit then so be it. But Christians strike me as performance artists who have forgotten that they are pretending.

[oddbird1963]

I think the nature of the "duty" that Legion speaks of in his OP is that of a moral duty. By moral duty I mean the reasonable response of a person who is interested in reducing the harm that could come to one or more people immediately or in the foreseeable future.

 

There are at least two areas where I think the "average" citizen (whatever that means) is morally bound to employ their powers of persuasion:

 

1) if a person is making statements about harming or killing themselves or others. It would be immoral to encourage a person to do away with themselves or cut themselves. I also think it would be immoral if a person kept quiet if someone within their sphere of influence were threatening to harm themselves or other people.

 

2) if a person is advocating that parents not get their children vaccinated. It would lead to potential harm for the child and potential spreading of disease into the greater community should parents become "anti-vaxers."

 

There are other areas that I think might be candidates for an obligatory attempt to change another person's mind, such as opposition to ideas that would limit free speech or freedom of and freedom from religion. But I'm not certain , at this point, how much of a moral obligation there is to oppose anti-first amendment ideas.

[Franko47]

I agree with Oddbird that our foremost duty to change people's minds is when we see that they could be harming themselves or others in a real and literal way. Otherwise, I'm a social libertarian. Course, when someone falls on their sword, so to speak, and now is looking for answers, like, I'm there for them.

 

By the way, I don't have a problem with people flaunting their "cause", whether it be Jesus or Greenpeace. Just don't get upset when I shatter your little world with "mind-changing" arguments and discussion. I believe that the moment that a person engages me in conversation with the purpose of attempting to "affect my thinking", I have the same right to respond in kind. This can lead to tremendous discussion and discovery, or it can lead to someone walking away shaking their fist at me.

 

"Conversation is just warfare concealed" Khan Noonian Singh

[chefranden]

Ideas are not weapons or dangerous.

Shyone please forgive me. I singled this out because it is so patently absurd to me that it damages your credibility on this topic, in my eyes.

 

Ideas are frequently used as weapons. Propaganda is proof. And deception is the essence of warfare.

 

Where's the beef? How are you going to change minds without propaganda -- especially in a world in which propaganda is the life's blood of commerce. It's the real thing.

[Guest end3]

I think you are biased when it comes to Christianity. It inspires some like your appreciation for passionate teachers.

Yes, naturally I'm biased against Christianity. I rejected it. If some others are inspired by it, and derive some benefit then so be it. But Christians strike me as performance artists who have forgotten that they are pretending.

 

For the child in my Wednesday night class considering suicide because the world has worked so well for them, (and there are some), I will just tell them I am pretending, and furthermore, shit happens.

 

For a bright man Legion, sometimes brother....

[StevoMuso]

For the child in my Wednesday night class considering suicide because the world has worked so well for them, (and there are some), I will just tell them I am pretending, and furthermore, shit happens.

And feeding this poor person another hopeless lie makes you more honest than someone who would assist him/her with truth? Why do Christians always associate the terrible injustices in "the world" with atheism. At least a logic-based realistic solution to that person's anguish would be better than giving them false hope in an invisible and impossible God.

 

Legion wanted to know when it would be appropriate to speak out? This is one instance where I could not keep quiet. I find it shocking that well-meaning people like End3 are offering false hope to desperate people. The sincerity is there, no doubt, but the solution is not.

[Guest end3]

For the child in my Wednesday night class considering suicide because the world has worked so well for them, (and there are some), I will just tell them I am pretending, and furthermore, shit happens.

And feeding this poor person another hopeless lie makes you more honest than someone who would assist him/her with truth? Why do Christians always associate the terrible injustices in "the world" with atheism. At least a logic-based realistic solution to that person's anguish would be better than giving them false hope in an invisible and impossible God.

 

Legion wanted to know when it would be appropriate to speak out? This is one instance where I could not keep quiet. I find it shocking that well-meaning people like End3 are offering false hope to desperate people. The sincerity is there, no doubt, but the solution is not.

 

So tell me Steve, what is it that makes me go help? And the logical organization that will help her...oh, which one are you describing, the one she can afford...or the one that's not there?

[bdp]

Christians strike me as performance artists who have forgotten that they are pretending.

 

 

Absolutely brilliant.

[NotBlinded]

For the child in my Wednesday night class considering suicide because the world has worked so well for them, (and there are some), I will just tell them I am pretending, and furthermore, shit happens.

And feeding this poor person another hopeless lie makes you more honest than someone who would assist him/her with truth? Why do Christians always associate the terrible injustices in "the world" with atheism. At least a logic-based realistic solution to that person's anguish would be better than giving them false hope in an invisible and impossible God.

 

Legion wanted to know when it would be appropriate to speak out? This is one instance where I could not keep quiet. I find it shocking that well-meaning people like End3 are offering false hope to desperate people. The sincerity is there, no doubt, but the solution is not.

 

So tell me Steve, what is it that makes me go help? And the logical organization that will help her...oh, which one are you describing, the one she can afford...or the one that's not there?

There is nothing wrong with helping her end. Religion doesn't need to play a part in helping someone, although it has for centuries filled people with hope...temporarily. A lasting help would be, well, more helpful, IMO.