8.0.12.1 Accepting this Way

Version 1.6 December 2016                                         (Previous Version)

Our core philosophy presented in Part 1 is not prescriptive.  It does not assert that certain choices must be made, or that there are certain beliefs or values that we should adopt.  It is more descriptive in that it explains the core choices that most people do in fact make, and the core choices that reasonable people, those who are socially aware and liberal, make.

●   Virtually all people actually believe that there is a shared reality out there and that it is possible at least in some circumstances to approach the truth.  Most people get upset when other people lie: expressing a thought that is inconsistent with our shared reality and apparently untrue.

●   Reasonable people, from all backgrounds, do value diversity to some extent.  Some tolerate irrational and hateful opinions.  Others tolerate a wide range of opinions provided they are not hateful or disrespectful.  Others tolerate a narrower range of opinions that are more or less consistent with their core beliefs and values.  Unreasonable people, unaware, uneducated or fanatical, are likely to be intolerant of difference, in appearance, behaviour, beliefs and values.

●   Most people do in fact publicly support life, love, beauty, responsibility, equality and hope.  The most fanatical terrorists, steeped in white supremacy or Hindu, Buddhist or Islamist ideology, risk their lives, and violently attack others, because in their minds they are protecting such values.  Such people believe they see the truth, that their group has been treated unfairly, killed or oppressed, and that the only responsible response is to fight back.  An Islamist will treat non-Muslims differently not because they are inherently unequal but because either they have wilfully chosen to not be Muslims or simply because they represent the enemy.  In contrast, white supremacists often believe that non-whites are inherently inferior.

Despite what many people assert, terrorists are more likely to be factually incorrect than evil, with a flawed understanding of history and science rather than being uncaring psychopaths. 

●   As we learn more about science and long term global history we realize that non-whites are neither inferior nor superior to whites. 

●   Though many groups have been treated poorly by the Christian West at various time through history, they themselves have also treated others, including their own, poorly. 

●   As we learn more about philosophy and religion, we realize that our choice of faith is difficult to justify, and it is unreasonable to oppress a person making a different choice.  If we adopt personal practices and political action that is consistent with our values and our understanding of science and history then we realize that violence is rarely effective and often does more harm than good, not just to the enemy but to our own cause.

Correcting the factual errors that we ourselves and other make is a matter of persuasion.  There can be no compulsion in personal beliefs.  Attempts to force belief fail because it will lead only to pretence.  There is compulsion in behaviour: reasonable laws prevent us from harming others, but do not require us to profess beliefs we do not hold or deny beliefs we do hold.

These pages explain the choices that are available to us in adopting beliefs and values.  They are intended to explain how we form reasonable beliefs and adopt reasonable values.  We do not begin with any assertions that must be accepted, because there is no authority to make such assertions.

Adopting this Way does not mean we need to accept as dogma all the conclusions presented here.  Each conclusion or recommendation for action must be evaluated and adopted on its merits.

Having made the choice to adopt this way, what commitment shall we make to the cause?