Meat Eater / Vegetarian / Vegan

[Zulu Romeo]

Why not? Ideas and beliefs are subject to critical thinking-- how else can we reject bad ones? Are you not judgmental of Nazis or Klansmen?

Ah. A Godwin moment. Funny, that.

I think the real problem is defining whose definition of "bad" is correct, and it is clear from the thread that this varies considerably. [Bra... vo [sarcastic hand-clapping] - everyone]

That's not really the point-- the point is that people should be judgmental of ideas and beliefs. It's only okay to be tolerant of ideas and beliefs that are not harmful. Godwin aside, we should not be tolerant of Nazis or Klansmen or anti-Gay crusaders or pedophiles or illegal downloading or whatever.

Which brings up back to deciding if eating meat is considered a harmful belief to declare an intolerance to it, and whether respect should be paid to those who do continue to believe in eating it as well as to those who choose not to.

Me, I say live and let live. Pun not intended.

 

[Jadzia]

Your mind is still closed to the ideas of others, though, no matter how backward those ideas may seem.

So how does one differentiate between: (i) a closed mind, and (ii) an open mind that listens to the ideas of others, gives careful and thoughtful consideration to them, and finally judges the ideas to be wrong.

Is that final act of judging forbidden in an open minded? Must open minded people be indecisive?

Not indecisive, but on the other hand not judgemental of others' ideas and beliefs either.

So what you're saying is that one cannot be both receptive and judgmental of others ideas?

If so, then I think you're confusing two separate dimensions of personality. It is quite possible to be both/either/neither.

For example, a school teacher is receptive of her pupils' creative writing, yet is judgmental of it.

The same combination of skills is relevant to many professions. In fact, to operate in any position of leadership, whether its in business, in education, in the military, in parliament, or wherever, a leader must be open minded and receptive of other's opinions, but also able and willing to cast judgement of them.

I can now see this is taking us back to our earlier discussion on the varying degrees of self confidence. Where people at the upper end of that scale can be perceived as arrogant, and people at the lower end of that scale exude humbleness, which I think is what your above quote mostly alludes to; and is not about open mindedness.

 

[Zulu Romeo]

So how does one differentiate between: (i) a closed mind, and (ii) an open mind that listens to the ideas of others, gives careful and thoughtful consideration to them, and finally judges the ideas to be wrong.

Is that final act of judging forbidden in an open minded? Must open minded people be indecisive?

Not indecisive, but on the other hand not judgemental of others' ideas and beliefs either.

So what you're saying is that one cannot be both receptive and judgmental of others ideas?

If so, then I think you're confusing two separate dimensions of personality. It is quite possible to be both/either/neither.

For example, a school teacher is receptive of her pupils' creative writing, yet is judgmental of it.

The same combination of skills is relevant to many professions. In fact, to operate in any position of leadership, whether its in business, in education, in the military, in parliament, or wherever, a leader must be open minded and receptive of other's opinions, but also able and willing to cast judgement of them.

Of course it is useful to have both qualities, but it is also a useful technique in showing tact and discretion in applying them, which is where so many people with often controversial opinions go wrong. I accept that people can formulate ideas and opinions that others disagree with, but sometimes it is wise to accept irreconcilable differences and try not to flaunt them in the faces of those that can be offended.

As I said above, live and let live. Pun intended now, perhaps.

I can now see this is taking us back to our earlier discussion on the varying degrees of self confidence. Where people at the upper end of that scale can be perceived as arrogant, and people at the lower end of that scale exude humbleness, which I think is what your above quote mostly alludes to; and is not about open mindedness.

No comment.

 

[Jadzia]

So what you're saying is that one cannot be both receptive and judgmental of others ideas?

If so, then I think you're confusing two separate dimensions of personality. It is quite possible to be both/either/neither.

Of course it is useful to have both qualities, but it is also a useful technique in showing tact and discretion in applying them

But it isn't a question of what is tactful. It is a question of the validity of your original suggestion, that being receptive of an idea (open minded) excludes being judgmental of it. You're now u-turning on that claim and saying it is useful to have both qualities, and I agree with you on that.

As an aside, I'd argue that tactfulness is an altogether separate dimension from being open minded and being judgmental.

In my earlier example of the school teacher, the pupils' work can be judged tactfully, or not, but the process of reviewing the creative writing would still be both receptive and judgmental. The teacher can choose to make either valued judgments, or critical judgments.

 

[Zulu Romeo]

But it isn't a question of what is tactful. It is a question of the validity of your original suggestion, that being receptive of an idea (open minded) excludes being judgmental of it. You're now u-turning on that claim and saying it is useful to have both qualities, and I agree with you on that.

As an aside, I'd argue that tactfulness is an altogether separate dimension from being open minded and being judgmental.

Looking back at what I said, I think you may have misinterpreted what I have said. Let me clarify if you will.

I did not intend to state that being judgemental and having an open mind were mutually exclusive (while you seen to take that fallacy literally, and run it into the ground) - perhaps a better word than judgemental would be "dismissive." My intention was that in the argument to which my statement applied, one shouldn't be bluntly dismissive and then use that judgement to apply a general rule by logic e.g. 1. Meat eating is wrong, 2. Wrong things should be against the law; therefore should meat eating be against the law? Thus my later statement that one should define first what exactly is "wrong" and, therefore, who decides what is wrong and what isn't.

There's nothing to U-turn on, really.

Yes, it all does also involve the dimension of agreeableness (something that is a important element of such discussions) as well as openness, and the two are almost certainly independent of each other.

 

[RJDiogenes]

Which brings up back to deciding if eating meat is considered a harmful belief to declare an intolerance to it, and whether respect should be paid to those who do continue to believe in eating it as well as to those who choose not to.

Sort of like allowing both Slave States and Free States? Whether an individual tolerates certain behaviors or not is up to them. That doesn't change the fact that no idea or belief is above scrutiny, criticism or rejection.

Me, I say live and let live. Pun not intended.

Until this ever-changing world in which we live in makes you give in and cry... live and let dieeee.

 

[scotpens]

Until this ever-changing world in which we live in makes you give in and cry... live and let dieeee.

That doesn't even make sense. The lyrics go:

But if this ever-changing world in which we're living
Makes you give in and cry,
Say live and let die.

Written by a vegetarian, by the way.

 

[CommanderRaytas]

Thank the Holy Cow!

As a Hindu I am deeply offended by this.

Hey, I said thank the Holy Cow, not eat the Holy Cow. The difference is sublte, but it's there.

 

[Mr. Laser Beam]

^ And Phil Rizzuto just said "HOLY COW!!!!"

 

[kimc]

Meat, veggies and fruit.

I like the idea of going vegetarian though. While I don't eat meat at every meal when I go days without it I start not feeling well.