What does "respecting other people's beliefs" actually mean?

[Hakluyt]

I am often told I should - and I have been told that I haven't. But I genuinely don't know what it means.

I am a great believer in good manners, and I would always be polite if I was attending some sort of faith based event. I never go on prayer threads. I do try never to be rude. But the threshold for "disrespect" seems extraordinarily low- sometimes mere disagreement seems unacceptable.

Also, what constitutes a "belief"? The major world religions- OK- I get that. But do I also have to respect "new" religions made up in the 1970s/80s? Kabbalah? Is homeopathy a belief? If I say, for example "homeopathy is discredited bollocks and this is why" is that a public service or disrespecting someone's beliefs? Is astrology a "belief"?

Atheism isn't a belief system, obviously, but am I entitled to be offended and report the post if someone says that atheists lead empty lives devoid of joy? Or if someone says that science is evil and devoted to hiding the evidence for the paranormal/ the cure for cancer/whatever for it's own selfish ends?

I am an atheist. That means that as far as I am concerned, the is no God. It is not a matter of belief- any more than I believe that water is wet or th sun will come up tomorrow.

If somebody produces evidence which challenges any of this statements, I will look at it, and decide whether it is strong enough to cause me to change my world view. But none of these statements require any belief. They require looking at the world as it is.

hak can you explain to me why the fact you think god doesn't exist is a fact and not a belief, just like water is wet?
Or do you mean that for you it's a fact but you are open to the idea this can be different for someone else? And would then be considered as a belief but all the non atheists?

Big lots of preconceived ideas about religious people on your cartoon though.
What makes you think that all people who have a religion (not all of them with a god btw) will be acting like this?
Or are you trying to say that all religions are unreasonable and can't prove a thing so will always use force to impose their beliefs?

"hak can you explain to me why the fact you think god doesn't exist is a fact and not a belief, just like water is wet?"

Because there is no evidence for his existence. And those who do think he exists have to have faith (by definition) that he does, despite the lack of evidence.

Water being wet is a bad example- it's easily proved one way or the other - I retract it. I know that if I cut myself deeply enough I will bleed. I know that the sun will come up in the east tomorrow. I know that there are no unicorns. I know that there are no mermaids. I know there is no god. None of these statements require belief or faith.

You see I think that saying something doesn't exist because at the moment we have no way to verify it doesn't mean it doesn't exist as such.
A bit like, in the medieval age, electrons would have looked like things that don't exist but they actually did. It's just they didn't have the right tools to see them.

So in the absence if 'proof', I prefer to talk about believe in a No god world just as I would believe in a god present world.

"A bit like, in the medieval age, electrons would have looked like things that don't exist but they actually did. It's just they didn't have the right tools to see them. "

But electrons still do whatever electrons do whether people could see them, or believed in them or knew about them or not. The evidence for elections was there.

That is not true of God. He demonstrably doesn't do any of the stuff he is quoted as saying he will do.

"in the medieval age, electrons would have looked like things that don't exist but they actually did"

In the medieval age, your hair would still rise if you rubbed a cloth and held it against your head. You wouldn't know why but it would happen.

Then electrons were discovered and now we know why that happens.

I can think of nothing of that sort re God.

Like, for example, at a sacred place, laws of physics are reversed / there is a blessed light day and night that comes from nowhere and everywhere / everyone who goes there without exception feels changed etc. Something we can attribute to a divine presence.

"why the fact you think god doesn't exist is a fact and not a belief, just like water is wet"

Water isn't wet. What we call 'wet' are objects with water on them.

DORRIT: So you acknowledge that there's a difference? Good. We're getting somewhere.

Actually I don't see the difference between how I worded it the first time and how I reworded it. It means the same thing.

You're trying to get people to prove a negative again. I'm pretty sure that you know as well as everyone else that that is not possible.
Didn't someone say it was a FACT?

You are the one making the claim that there is evidence, I'm afraid that by all logic it is up to you to provide that evidence.
And what post are you referring to, pray tell? Please cut and paste it here so I can see it for myself.

Hakluyt - That is not true of God. He demonstrably doesn't do any of the stuff he is quoted as saying he will do.
What quotes do you refer to?

Hakluyt - re "I am an atheist. That means that as far as I am concerned, the is no God. It is not a matter of belief- any more than I believe that water is wet or th sun will come up tomorrow"

OK, I'm going to step over the fence for one moment and say that, actually, that is a belief without proof and it is not the same thing as "sun will come up tomorrow" which has ample proof and sound theory behind it. You have no proof that the universe was not created on purpose by a sentient being, therefore your belief that there is no God is as much a belief-without-proof as belief in God.

(More reasoned than religious faith, but still a belief. Sorry.)

A better way of saying that is "...which has ample evidence in the form of repeated past occurrences - i.e. sun has always come up, every single morning."

Agree cote

My example of the electrons was probably not the best one.
It seems that quite a few people who do research on astronomy/bing band theory etc are actually saying that the chance for world to have even existed is tiny. That some of the constant in their equations gave to be extremely precise as otherwise things would have ended completely different. And that that could be taken as a sign that god exists as the chances for that happening are minuscule.

Well said Cote

One thing that always makes me think is the idea of a soul.
Yes I know about the brain and the cells but the fact the cells can communicate and act together to create a though us, for me, nothing short of formidable.
Then you add the fact we have some concours thoughts and have the ability to understand the world etc.
this always amazes me.

And I can see why you would think this is not possible wo an 'outside entity' such as the soul, spirit or whatever you want to call it (personally I don't like that word as it has too much religious connotation)

But could we prove it's there? Not at the moment.
Can we say it's just cells and molecules etc? Well probably but how amazing and formidable would it be to be just that? To create conscience and intelligence out if a few atoms and lots of empty space.
Sometimes, the fact that it looks so impossible to happen makes a belief in something as intangible as a spirit more likely.

"quite a few people who do research on astronomy/bing band theory etc are actually saying that the chance for world to have even existed is tiny. That some of the constant in their equations gave to be extremely precise as otherwise things would have ended completely different. And that that could be taken as a sign that god exists as the chances for that happening are minuscule."

You must have misunderstood something.

There are zillions of planets. There are also quite a few that are in the "Goldilocks zone" around their suns - far enough not to burn but close enough to nurture life. Like this one or this one.

Côte - do you really think they're close enough to nurture life though? One of your articles says "don't take your masks off if you land there" because Co2 is thought to be extremely high and the other article said it's too hot to live there.

cote I agree- the chances of life not existeing elsewhere in the Universe is pretty slim.

LumieresForMe- maybe you need to understand csience a little better. Then you will understand how some complex precesses lead to the "miracles" you describe. Self replicating DNA, even establishing "life" in a laboratory is pretty well understood.

You could describe the workings on an iphone as a "miracle"- sending messages around the world in the twinkling of an eye.
We know better than to describe the wonders of silicon technology as something spiritual.

Got - Too hot for humans or atmosphere humans haven't evolved to breathe don't mean that their own life can't evolve, adapted to those planets.

We can't breathe under water, either, but fish do.

Errr sorry but I am sure I know what I am talking about.

I am talking about the equations that have been 'proven' to explain the way the Universe has been created. Not about the fact life can exist on another planet .
And these are not my ideas but the ones of people who are working on the creation if the universe..
If they said there are some constant in the equation that have to be extremely precise and it is very unlikely that we found ourselves exactly in that configuration, who am I to say it's not the case?

I am also a bit at loss re the DNA etc... We might have an idea if how things can work but it shouldn't stop us to be amazed that some atoms put together can create intelligent beings like you and me.
It's bit because we have the beginning of an explanation that we should be amazed.

I am amazed by my iPhone when I think about what it can do. It IS amazing even if I know roughly what are the principles behind it.
I am also amazed at the life around me, the way trees seem to know when days are getting longer and a lot of other things.
I think it's good to remember how special it all is. (I'm not talking on a religious pov there)

We cannot say with 100% certainty that the sun will come up tomorrow, we can not say that all swans are white just because every swan we have seen has been white. This is inductive reasoning, not upon certainty but on probability. It is not based upon fact.

Most of the truths in medicine are based on probabilities though.
We have studied x number of people and y number has got better doing this treatment therefore this treatment works.

That of course them creates issues on how you use these numbers and all the problems linked with statistics.
But they will be taken as a truth. At least until another study shows something different.

At least with the sun, the number of repetition is such that you can expect things to happen

"I did not do my homework because I couldn't say that the sun would come up tomorrow with 100% certainty…"