"Lee Daniel Crocker (none)" wrote:
> > Mutual tolerance --a wonderful thing, in view of the fact that none of
> > us really KNOW what we are talking about.
>
> Tolerance is an even greater obligation of listeners than it is
> of speakers. "Communication skills" cut both ways: if one takes
> offense or misinterprests a simple, honest, expression of opinion
> like "the idea of God is nonsense", then it is the listener whose
> ability to communicate is broken, not the speaker.
I find no reason to disagree with you on this. But this is only
because I am as blunt as you are. Others might regard the
responsibility for tolerance as reciprocal, in so far as the WAY
we express disagreement with others should indicate a respect
for their persons, an aspect of which is their viewpoints.
But, candid as I am, I might have said "no one has ever been
able to demonstrate a real referent for the concept of 'God'",
a falsifiable assertion. My objection to your statement is that
if the idea of "God" were really nonsense, no one would know
what you were talking about.
Bob
=======================
Robert M. Owen
Director
The Orion Institute
57 W. Morgan Street
Brevard, NC 28712-3659 USA
=======================
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Jul 27 2000 - 14:02:28 MDT