- Jun 4, 2011
- 33,567
- 7,077
- 1,130
I see the quality of open-mindedness as being able to see the other side of an argument and discussing it in those terms, not as giving both sides of an argument equal weight. For example, I can discuss anything with anyone as long as they do not resort to dogmatic statements such as "the bible says no" or claim moral or intellectual superiority on the basis of unquestioning acceptance of someone else's philosophy or belief system. If someone cannot explain their beliefs in rational terms or tolerate another questioning those beliefs rationally then they may rightly be called closed minded.
That's a fair statement. But, to me, saying "I can discuss anything as long as nobody makes statements like "the Bible says so" sounds like (conversation-based) religious discrimination.
I'm not saying it's right or wrong. But isn't it a bit unfair to look down on the religious beliefs of others?
Not when it is used as an answer to a fair question, I have no problem with religion but such answers are nothing more than slamming the door on uncomfortable concepts and questions. If someone has never questioned their belief system any further than to think anyone would be satisfied with such cop-outs as that then are they not close-minded? It does not even have to be religious based, check out some of the statements made concerning taxes or the economy for a good example of thoughtless free market dogma that plagues any discussion on the subject.
Actually you have projected and really described liberalism to a tea.....GOOD JOB!