4 ms·
All ideas should be up for criticism, yes. But not all ideas should be criticized. The difference being that some criticisms are productive (presumably fresh,
by Styx- 10y ago
All ideas should be up for criticism, yes. But not all ideas should be criticized.
The difference being that some criticisms are productive (presumably fresh, creative takes on thinking about something) and some simply serve the purpose of making the critic feel good about himself.
In what way do we benefit to hear a criticism of religion for the umpteen-millionth time and on the internet of all places? No one is refining their thought processes, no one is benefiting.
- PKop 10y agoNo one? The data flat out refutes that claim: http://religionnews.com/2014/08/01/five-signs-great-decline-religion-america-gallup-graphs-church/ http://religionnews.com/2014/08/01/five-signs-great-decline-... Looks like many have been refining their thought process. Perhaps it's from all of the criticism on the internet? Just because all minds won't be swayed doesn't mean some won't be. I do think criticizing the idea is more valid than criticizing the person who believes in that idea. It sounds like what you mean to say is not all ideas need to be criticized always and everywhere they are present. Makes sense. If you mean that religion should not be criticized anymore we've done it enough.... I don't see how this is not that same as saying religion is an idea that should not be up for criticism. Why is it special?
- Styx- 10y agoThere is a time and place. An article about Dr. Heimlich in which some senior citizen invokes an age old remark isn't it. Once you can show me the data on the benefit from that single remark, and that it doesn't correlate with the concept of 'diminishing returns' strongly, then I'll concede.