Do you agree with much or even any of my writings? If yes, so be it. If no, why? Do you (want to) disbelieve them because you dislike them* or do you (want to) dislike them because you disbelieve them**?
On the other hand, might disbelief and dislike be interchangeable? Perhaps disbelieving something is but a proxy for disliking it? In this sense, much of our argument and conflict could be over mere preferences, not over right and wrong.
It is very reasonable to ask the inverse as well.....do you (want to) believe "x" because you like "x" or do you (want to) like "x" because you believe "x"?
In this case, from what do we derive our moral justification for fighting and arguing over mere preferences?
On the other hand, might disbelief and dislike be interchangeable? Perhaps disbelieving something is but a proxy for disliking it? In this sense, much of our argument and conflict could be over mere preferences, not over right and wrong.
It is very reasonable to ask the inverse as well.....do you (want to) believe "x" because you like "x" or do you (want to) like "x" because you believe "x"?
In this case, from what do we derive our moral justification for fighting and arguing over mere preferences?
Notice this makes no attempt to discern what is actually true. Rather, it is merely an attempt to explain why one might choose to believe or disbelieve something.
*If you disbelieve them because you dislike them, this categorically denies what might be true simply because it is disliked. This is a decidedly subjective verdict, devoid of objectivity. Which brings us to a very critical crossroads.....do you seek to believe what your intellectual honesty can afford or what you want?
**If your disbelief in them inclines you to dislike them, this will inevitably lead to argument and conflict because disliking "x" has a way of making "x" wrong or bad. At which point the purported right/wrong dichotomy is fabricated to provide the moral justification for argument and conflict.
No comments:
Post a Comment