Is it unacceptable to hold certain views?

[Quintessence]

Is it unacceptable for a person to hold certain views? Why or why not?

This thread was inspired by reading an article commentating on a survey that was done on a taboo topic. The commentary made some interesting assumptions related to this question, so I thought it might be fun to explore a bit.

 

[Orbit]

"Murdering people is ok if I disagree with them politically" is an unacceptable view. "Dark skin means a person is subhuman" is an unacceptable view. We all make moral decisions, and these are mine.

 

[Jainarayan]

It depends... what is “unacceptable? Having views or thoughts is like emotions, it’s what you do with them, and what they prompt. We can start straying into thought-police territory.

 

[crossfire]

There are certainly unacceptable actions motivated by sketchy views.

 

[PureX]

Is it unacceptable for a person to hold certain views? Why or why not?

It's an irrelevant question in that no one can't possibly control the views of another. Many of us don't even know that we can control their own views. So there is no purpose to be gained from passing judgment on the views of others, except to see what to avoid, ourselves.

 

[Altfish]

You can hold what ever views you want, no matter how repulsive they are.
But don't be surprised if you express those views and consequences follow.

 

[Brickjectivity]

Is it unacceptable for a person to hold certain views? Why or why not?

This thread was inspired by reading an article commentating on a survey that was done on a taboo topic. The commentary made some interesting assumptions related to this question, so I thought it might be fun to explore a bit.

You could say that the success of Logic attests to the unthinkable or the unacceptable. This is where I think logic comes from. I think the philosophers (realizing that people have difficulty finding agreement) sought to find the minimum components people could agree on, so that they could build a commonly agreed upon belief structure out of that -- probably in hopes of peace or something. Small commonly held agreements were hard to find or couldn't be used as building blocks alone. I think therefore that instead of using small agreements they built their system, logic, out of things we commonly reject. Instead of "Eggs are somewhat like spheres agreed?": logic is based upon "eggs are not perfect spheres." and sets us up to reject rather than to accept by using if->then propositions. Its easier, because we can agree by common rejection. Rejection requires less effort than creation, is often easier to argue. We reject ideas more readily than accepting them.

 

[Vinayaka]

I don't know how we can survive as a species if we allowed all views and actions. Isn't law and law enforcement because of our collective non-acceptance of certain views?

 

[ChristineM]

Views are personal, the moment unacceptable views are made public is when the fat hits the shin

 

[janesix]

Is it unacceptable for a person to hold certain views? Why or why not?

This thread was inspired by reading an article commentating on a survey that was done on a taboo topic. The commentary made some interesting assumptions related to this question, so I thought it might be fun to explore a bit.

It is NOT unacceptable to hold any view. It can be unacceptable to act on certain views.

 

[epronovost]

It depends... what is “unacceptable? Having views or thoughts is like emotions, it’s what you do with them, and what they prompt. We can start straying into thought-police territory.

Agreed. What's between a person's hears is theirs and theirs alone. You can be as racist, sexist and selfish as you want in your thought as long as I don't see a it, and suffer from it, in your behavior and policies.

 

[Father Heathen]

I believe in the autonomy of the mind. Beliefs can certainly be irrational, toxic, problematic, etc. but the concern should be on if and how people will act upon them, especially if in a way that victimizes and violates the rights of others.
Trying to police people's thoughts is orwellian and sets a dangerous precedent.

 

[Twilight Hue]

Is it unacceptable for a person to hold certain views? Why or why not?

This thread was inspired by reading an article commentating on a survey that was done on a taboo topic. The commentary made some interesting assumptions related to this question, so I thought it might be fun to explore a bit.

I don't think its unacceptable for anyone to hold their views. Problem is the level of censorship and bias involved whenever a person expresses their views.

Its unacceptable like others have mentioned if people act and harm others in a terrible way.

 

[sun rise]

It depends... what is “unacceptable? Having views or thoughts is like emotions, it’s what you do with them, and what they prompt. We can start straying into thought-police territory.

I changed my vote after reading this to 'unsure' because it depends, as you noted, on what someone does.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Is it unacceptable for a person to hold certain views? Why or why not?

This thread was inspired by reading an article commentating on a survey that was done on a taboo topic. The commentary made some interesting assumptions related to this question, so I thought it might be fun to explore a bit.

Depends what you mean by "unacceptable."

I'm not in favour of throwing people in jail for thoughtcrime, but there are certain opinions that, if I found out a person held them, I wouldn't pursue a friendship with them.

 

[Quintessence]

Depends what you mean by "unacceptable."

The survey I was looking at didn't really specify, as surveys usually won't. They leave it up to participant interpretation. That's one of the challenges of interpreting survey results - is the question you are asking really painting a picture of what you are trying to learn? That's part of why surveys up to academic standards use a battery of questions in an attempt to assess something instead of a single question. It helps correct for that.

This particular survey was asking about holding to something widely regarded as a prejudiced or bigoted view of certain groups of people. The writer commenting on the results of the survey expressed disdain at what to them felt like an unacceptably high percent of folks saying it was an acceptable view. Yet is that really the problem? Isn't behavior the problem? A view in of itself does nothing until translated into behavior, right?

I recall back in college I participated in a philosophical and religious discussion group. We were a really diverse group and in spite of the liberal-minded nature of this group, we totally had an Evangelical Christian who regularly attended. They would straight up say to the couple Pagan members (one was me) that we were wrong, mislead by Satan, and going to hell. Unacceptable view if there ever was one for me, right? But this view of theirs didn't translate into trying to convert me or treating me poorly. Holding a view doesn't always map onto behavior in a straightforward way, as I've learned.

 

[Father Heathen]

Depends what you mean by "unacceptable."

I'm not in favour of throwing people in jail for thoughtcrime, but there are certain opinions that, if I found out a person held them, I wouldn't pursue a friendship with them.

Right. It certainly reflects upon character, but shouldn't necessitate legal intervention.

 

[exchemist]

Is it unacceptable for a person to hold certain views? Why or why not?

This thread was inspired by reading an article commentating on a survey that was done on a taboo topic. The commentary made some interesting assumptions related to this question, so I thought it might be fun to explore a bit.

What do you mean by "unacceptable"? Who is it who accepts or rejects?

 

[ADigitalArtist]

There are views that are unacceptable to me. But I can accept that other people have them. There are views other people have, and I accept they have, which would lead me to avoid forming relationships with them, or want them representing me in politics.
Taboo subjects are interesting. And there's a lot that I think can reasonably fall outside of 'something to be discussed in polite company.' But there's also a lot of things that I think are taboo to talk about in situations when they shouldn't be.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

The survey I was looking at didn't really specify, as surveys usually won't. They leave it up to participant interpretation. That's one of the challenges of interpreting survey results - is the question you are asking really painting a picture of what you are trying to learn? That's part of why surveys up to academic standards use a battery of questions in an attempt to assess something instead of a single question. It helps correct for that.

This particular survey was asking about holding to something widely regarded as a prejudiced or bigoted view of certain groups of people. The writer commenting on the results of the survey expressed disdain at what to them felt like an unacceptably high percent of folks saying it was an acceptable view. Yet is that really the problem? Isn't behavior the problem? A view in of itself does nothing until translated into behavior, right?

Behaviour matters, but - at least for me - it isn't all that matters.

For instance, I wouldn't count someone I knew to be a racist as my friend, even if their racism didn't result in any negative actions toward people of other races.