I think your first question is pretty important. Can I disagree with someone else's idea, and that idea still not be evil? I think it is absolutely true. Take an extremely simplified example: I believe peaches are the best fruit, but you may believe apples are. Differences in opinion aren't evil. I think the line can be distinguished in a few ways: 1) is the difference purely opinion with no effect on anyone else. In that case, I don't think it can be evil (e.g., best movie, best entree, best vacation spot, etc.) 2) A moral belief that impacts other people. In this second case, you run a very fine line between good and evil, I believe. I may think it's OK to go over someone's head for your personal gain as they should have been more careful, and you believe it's never OK to push someone down to lift yourself up. When an idea or moral belief begins to directly affect someone else, I think it becomes a much tougher distinction.
This one was a miss for me. I do not disagree with the points made in your essay, I think they are theoretically sound. However, given the current political climate, these disagreements are not an intellectual exercise but rather a matter of livelihood. This is a critical perspective that is missing from your essay. I think this discrepency between what I feel and what is presented in your essay is probably due to our differences in background.
Not all disagreements are equal. I disagree with someone's viewpoint. They disagree with my existence. The disagreement is over whether or not I deserve to have rights. I have no interest in understanding why that person believes I should not have rights, and yes I think it is evil. I recognize this is not the kind of disagreement you are talking about, but it is a glaring omission not to even mention it in the original post, because this is the reality that we live in.
Politics are a special case. I think your arguments are more applicable with respect to personal disagreements, but could be more nuanced. Let me share a personal anecdote: I have recently experienced a disagreement with someone with considerable power over me. I originally had the mindset that he was "wrong, but not evil," and felt that our relationship would eventually recover from this situation. Unfortunately, he decided to abuse his power over me, causing me significant distress.
I had originally shown him empathy, and had he reflected the sentiment of your essay and also shown me empathy, our relationship could have recovered from this temporary setback. Instead, he decided to go on a power trip which negatively impacted my mental well-being to the point that I was skipping class and not able to sleep because of the anxiety he caused. In my opinion, after I showed empathy the first time and he responded by abusing his power over me, I deemed him no longer worthy of my empathy. Again, this story does not contradict what you say in your essay, rather it fills in a critical gap.
My thoughts on this topic can be summarized by this: empathy is a finite resource and we should default to giving it, but some people are not deserving of our empathy.
Your article reminds me of the quote: “An enemy is someone whose story you have not heard.”
― Slavoj Žižek.
I think your first question is pretty important. Can I disagree with someone else's idea, and that idea still not be evil? I think it is absolutely true. Take an extremely simplified example: I believe peaches are the best fruit, but you may believe apples are. Differences in opinion aren't evil. I think the line can be distinguished in a few ways: 1) is the difference purely opinion with no effect on anyone else. In that case, I don't think it can be evil (e.g., best movie, best entree, best vacation spot, etc.) 2) A moral belief that impacts other people. In this second case, you run a very fine line between good and evil, I believe. I may think it's OK to go over someone's head for your personal gain as they should have been more careful, and you believe it's never OK to push someone down to lift yourself up. When an idea or moral belief begins to directly affect someone else, I think it becomes a much tougher distinction.
“What if instead of asking someone why they believe something, I instead asked them how they came to believe it?”
What a great reframe. It opens so many possibilities for learning and connecting, despite differences.
Thank you for sharing 🙏
Was that dig at tax collectors and pagans entirely called for ;)
This one was a miss for me. I do not disagree with the points made in your essay, I think they are theoretically sound. However, given the current political climate, these disagreements are not an intellectual exercise but rather a matter of livelihood. This is a critical perspective that is missing from your essay. I think this discrepency between what I feel and what is presented in your essay is probably due to our differences in background.
Not all disagreements are equal. I disagree with someone's viewpoint. They disagree with my existence. The disagreement is over whether or not I deserve to have rights. I have no interest in understanding why that person believes I should not have rights, and yes I think it is evil. I recognize this is not the kind of disagreement you are talking about, but it is a glaring omission not to even mention it in the original post, because this is the reality that we live in.
Politics are a special case. I think your arguments are more applicable with respect to personal disagreements, but could be more nuanced. Let me share a personal anecdote: I have recently experienced a disagreement with someone with considerable power over me. I originally had the mindset that he was "wrong, but not evil," and felt that our relationship would eventually recover from this situation. Unfortunately, he decided to abuse his power over me, causing me significant distress.
I had originally shown him empathy, and had he reflected the sentiment of your essay and also shown me empathy, our relationship could have recovered from this temporary setback. Instead, he decided to go on a power trip which negatively impacted my mental well-being to the point that I was skipping class and not able to sleep because of the anxiety he caused. In my opinion, after I showed empathy the first time and he responded by abusing his power over me, I deemed him no longer worthy of my empathy. Again, this story does not contradict what you say in your essay, rather it fills in a critical gap.
My thoughts on this topic can be summarized by this: empathy is a finite resource and we should default to giving it, but some people are not deserving of our empathy.
How do we get all decision makers to read your article?