In itself, there is nothing wrong with being extreme

[Infohawk]

I see people on both sides of the aisle say that extremists are bad. Well, being an extremist in itself is not bad. To suggest it is is to appeal to popularity by suggesting that people with more common beliefs are right.

There is no doubt that many extremists, like religious ones, are horrible. But they are not bad because they are extremists, but because of their beliefs, values, and actions.

There have been many "extremists" throughout history who have been right. American abolitionists were extremists in a time when many northerners were simply happy to let slavery be limited to the South. I'm sure we could find rhetoric describing Martin Luther King as an extremist. Jesus was an extremist. Let's face it, many societal shifts are commenced by extremists who become the status quo.

Extremists can be wrong or right.

Edit: the flip side of this is people who take pride in being moderate. It is simply pride in having a common position, which history shows can be quite silly.

 

[RabidMongoose]

That is true, but there are some extremists on opposite sides of the political spectrum that are 'bad'.

 

[Infohawk]

Originally posted by: RabidMongoose
That is true, but there are some extremists on opposite sides of the political spectrum that are 'bad'.

You'd have to show that on a case-by-case basis. But I would agree/say that today there would be dangerous bizarro leftists groups and many rightwing groups that are "bad."

 

[imported_Pedro69]

Extremists are only bad if they try to force their extreme views on others IMO.

 

[Infohawk]

Originally posted by: Pedro69
Extremists are only bad if they try to force their extreme views on others IMO.

Do you think it is bad if people with conventional ideas try to force their views on others?

 

[Rainsford]

Well I suppose it depends on how we define "extremist". If we take the notion, as the OP suggested, that the more popular views are "conventional" while the less popular views are "extreme", then I would agree that there is nothing wrong with being extreme. However, I look at it as an absolute scale, not a relative one. Especially specific views like ethics and morality, what is ethical or moral isn't determined by popularity.

Edit: To give examples, the Nazis were extremests even when only considering Germany and the terrorist's interpretation of Islam is extreme even in countries where it is quite popular. Groups like the KKK are extremests, and were extremesits even in the height of their popularity in the south.

 

[imported_Pedro69]

To force your opinion on others is never good. It shows that you are not bringing up convincing arguments to support your view/opinion, or your "oponent" is an extremist not willing to change his views at all even if you have convincing arguments.

 

[glenn1]

Having extremist views isn't necessarily bad. Having them divorced of any kind of reality feedback and reinforced by an echo-chamber of like-minded people is bad.

 

[shira]

The general problem with extremists is that they feel the need to force others to behave in the ways the extremists approve.

Right-wing sort-of-extremists in the U.S. want to prevent women from getting abortions or morning-after contraceptives, want to prevent same-sex couples from marrying or forming civil unions, want to prevent students from being exposed to sex-ed programs that teach other than abstinence, want to force students to listen to non-scientific beliefs disguised as "theories", want to force religion into the classrooms and courtrooms.

And these are the "mainstream" right-wing extremist beliefs. The far right's beliefs go much further. They want to bomb abortion clinics and murder abortion doctors. And fomer Alabamba Surpreme Court chief justice Roy S. Moore (the ex-Alabamba Supreme Court chief justice who was removed from office for defying his own court's order to remove the 10 Commandments display that he had installed on the grounds of the courthouse) stated in a ruling against a lesbian woman seeking custody of her child, that homosexuality was "abhorrent, immoral, detestable, a crime against nature", and went on to say that he believed the state had the power to punish homosexual behavior with "confinement and even execution."

Who but a true nutcase would think that executing someone for consensual sexual activity was acceptable? That belief system is right in line with that of those Afghani Muslims, widely reported in the national press, who stoned a young woman to death for adultery.

I'll acknowledge that there are some pretty worrisome rabid left-wingers out there, too. There's an element of PETA that would probably go to the same extremes as abortion clinic bombers, and I'm not so sure I entirely trust some of the Green Peace and anti-nuclear-power fringe elements, either.

But if you just look at the numbers, the far left in the U.S. doesn't pose nearly the threat to individual liberty that the far right does.

 

[Infohawk]

Originally posted by: shira
The general problem with extremists is that they feel the need to force others to behave in the ways the extremists approve.

This sounds like what Pedro was trying to get at but I'm not sure it's that useful of a complaint. I think everyone would prefer others to some degree to share their views. The thing is, people with moderate views are obviously already going to share their views with a lot of other people. I think the fact that extremists seem more vocal or agressive is incidental, it's incidental to the fact that they don't have a popular opinion.

Again, abolionists did kill some people and some seemed enraged (John Brown). Well, I think I would have been enraged too. (don't know about the killing part though I think fighting slavery is probably a good reason to kill people). So the mere fact that pro-lifers want to kill doctors isn't wrong, it's that they don't have a good reason to do it! In other words, religious zealots aren't annoying because they are vocal, but because they're views are silly.

 

[HombrePequeno]

Originally posted by: Infohawk
I see people on both sides of the aisle say that extremists are bad. Well, being an extremist in itself is not bad. To suggest it is is to appeal to popularity by suggesting that people with more common beliefs are right.

There is no doubt that many extremists, like religious ones, are horrible. But they are not bad because they are extremists, but because of their beliefs, values, and actions.

There have been many "extremists" throughout history who have been right. American abolitionists were extremists in a time when many northerners were simply happy to let slavery be limited to the South. I'm sure we could find rhetoric describing Martin Luther King as an extremist. Jesus was an extremist. Let's face it, many societal shifts are commenced by extremists who become the status quo.

Extremists can be wrong or right.

Of course it depends on what they're pushing to label them good or bad. Generally the good 'extremists' are the ones who push for more rights. Unfortunately for every good extremists there are 10 other ones that think people like Stalin, Hitler, etc. had the right idea (or at least partially). That's why extremists are generally labelled as bad because the bad extremists are the most visible and piss the most people off by advocating denial of rights.

 

[imported_Pedro69]

Originally posted by: shira
..want to prevent students from being exposed to sex-ed programs that teach other than abstinence, want to force students to listen to non-scientific beliefs disguised as "theories", want to force religion into the classrooms and courtrooms...

I heard about these things before, are they really an issue for you guys in the US?

I mean even considering creationism over evolution makes me feel like going back to the Dark ages.

 

[Infohawk]

Originally posted by: Pedro69
are they really an issue for you guys in the US?

Yes.

 

[Trevelyan]

I simply do not understand this notion that is so prevalent on AT P&N about people "forcing their beliefs on me" and how that is such a terrible thing. I swear, sometimes I think I would not be surprised to learn that everyone in P&N is 16 years old and "tired of all the crap their parents give them."

It seems that for many of you here, anyone telling you how to behave or what to do is simply unacceptable. Rather than being worried about WHAT they are telling you to do, or whether it is good advice, the quickest (and easiest) response is just to say that you have no right telling me what to do. Unfortunately, that is NOT how society works. This personal liberty we have is not something untouchable, but rather, for society to function we sacrifice certain "rights" and choices we could otherwise make in an attempt to make a society that is more beneficial to all members.

My point is, and I agree with Infohawk, that the belief or opinion needs to stand by itself, and be analyzed and critiqued for what it is. We are too quick to simply reject a person's opinion or belief for stupid reasons, like our view of that person, his/her right to tell me what to do, etc. Anytime you attempt to change the laws of country, you are "forcing your belief" on someone... this is NOT A BAD THING UNLESS THE BELIEF ITSELF IS WRONG.

I think if we would just logically debate topics, rather than degrade to personal flame wars, we could actually have progress. However, I think too many people, here especially, are so entrenched in their beliefs without solid reasons that to present any sort of evidence to the contrary will instantly result not in a logical discussion, but a personal attack on you.

That is extremism; at the heart there is an unwillingness to change even when presented with adequate reasons for doing so. When backed against a wall with reason, the extremist will not give up his views, but lash back because of a prideful, arrogant unwillingness to admit being wrong.

 

[Infohawk]

Originally posted by: Trevelyan
Anytime you attempt to change the laws of country, you are "forcing your belief" on someone... this is NOT A BAD THING UNLESS THE BELIEF ITSELF IS WRONG.

Well said.

That is extremism; at the heart there is an unwillingness to change even when presented with adequate reasons for doing so. When backed against a wall with reason, the extremist will not give up his views, but lash back because of a prideful, arrogant unwillingness to admit being wrong.

Of course it's all semantics but I would label that person a fanatic or a zealot.

 

[Trevelyan]

Originally posted by: Pedro69
I mean even considering creationism over evolution makes me feel like going back to the Dark ages.

That is a commonly held view, but unfortunately many of the people who hold this view are relying on second-hand knowledge without analyzing both sides for themselves. I'm speaking in general, not saying you are one of these people. That isn't just the case for evolution VS creationism, but there are certain labels assigned to people that I would argue are unfair.

For example, why do topics of creationism degrade so quickly here? Because, if you are labelled at the onset as a "fundamentalist whacko" then do you really think this person is going to rationally (even respectfully) listen to what you are saying? Of course not, they have already made up their mind and there is no convincing them. For those people, you can teach them nothing they haven't already heard. I mean no disrespect for people who believe in evolution, I am simply saying that there are people on both sides of the issue who hold their views for bad reasons.

Ignorance subscribes to no political party or religious view.

 

[Riprorin]

Originally posted by: Infohawk
I see people on both sides of the aisle say that extremists are bad. Well, being an extremist in itself is not bad. To suggest it is is to appeal to popularity by suggesting that people with more common beliefs are right.

There is no doubt that many extremists, like religious ones, are horrible. But they are not bad because they are extremists, but because of their beliefs, values, and actions.

There have been many "extremists" throughout history who have been right. American abolitionists were extremists in a time when many northerners were simply happy to let slavery be limited to the South. I'm sure we could find rhetoric describing Martin Luther King as an extremist. Jesus was an extremist. Let's face it, many societal shifts are commenced by extremists who become the status quo.

Extremists can be wrong or right.

Edit: the flip side of this is people who take pride in being moderate. It is simply pride in having a common position, which history shows can be quite silly.

Speaking of Martin Luther, I attend a Lutheran church.

Does subscribing to my church's statement of faith make me an "extremist"?

The Family of Hope
Statement of Faith

We believe in the Triune God - the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. We acknowledge one God in these three persons.

We believe that God the Father created the universe. He is holy and just, and also loving and compassionate. His deepest desire is to live in a close relationship with all people.

We believe that because of His desire to live in a relationship with us, He sent His own Son, Jesus Christ, who became a human being, born of a virgin. He is fully God and fully man. Through His death and resurrection, Jesus made it possible for all people to live in a relationship with God. We believe that Jesus Christ is the Way, the Truth, and the Life. Through Him, and Him alone, can people enter into a relationship with God.

We believe that the Holy Spirit is the presence of Jesus Christ in us. Through Him God loves us, empowers us and lives in us. The Spirit gives gifts to all believers. We encourage these gifts to be used in service to our God.

We believe that the Bible is the Word of God. Through it, God reveals Himself to us. The entire Bible is God-breathed and God-inspired. The Old and New Testaments are the norm and guide upon which we base our faith.

We believe that The Church, be it a local congregation or the world-wide fellowship of believers, is the Body of Christ. As His Body, we are called to worship with Him, serve Him, and be the instrument through which the Good News in its fullness is shared with the world.

We affirm and identify with the confessions of the Lutheran Church. We affirm the centrality of grace alone, faith alone, and the Word alone.

We believe in and practice the Sacraments of Baptism and Holy Communion. We believe that through the waters of Baptism, by the power of Word, God comes to us to adopt us as His children. Through Baptism, God gives the gift of new life. We affirm the baptism of all people, including children and infants.

We believe that through the Lord's Supper, God comes to share Himself with us and to love and forgive us. It is a meal of remembrance and renewal. Jesus is really present in the meal.

We believe in the worth and value of life and every human being. Created in God's image, humans matter to God. Their worth is dependent, not on accomplishments, but on God's love for them. Because God sees mankind as worth dying for, we affirm and acknowledge the dignity of every human being.

At the same time, we acknowledge that mankind is separated from God because of sin. We joyfully proclaim the Good News that because of Jesus Christ, forgiveness is possible through faith in Him. It is this forgiveness that restores fallen humanity's worth.

We believe in and anticipate the return of Jesus Christ. Though we do not know the day hour, we joyfully proclaim His soon return to encourage all people to make the most of life today, and to inspire us to share the Gospel with everyone as quickly as possible.

 

[WiseOldDude]

What about "Extreemly Stupid"

 

[Riprorin]

Originally posted by: WiseOldDude
What about "Extreemly Stupid"

So Lutherans are "extremely stupid"?

Ah.

 

[imported_Pedro69]

Originally posted by: Trevelyan

Originally posted by: Pedro69
I mean even considering creationism over evolution makes me feel like going back to the Dark ages.

That is a commonly held view, but unfortunately many of the people who hold this view are relying on second-hand knowledge without analyzing both sides for themselves.

Where do you get the idea of many people having second hand knowledge? I grew up with both knowledges at hand, and I not only decided to choose evolution over creationism I became an atheist. I don't judge people for what they believe or not, but I will judge them when they try to influence my child in school on religous beliefs.

 

[Tab]

Originally posted by: Riprorin

Originally posted by: WiseOldDude
What about "Extreemly Stupid"

So Lutherans are "extremely stupid"?

Ah.

Yes. All of them are.

 

[Riprorin]

Originally posted by: Tab

Originally posted by: Riprorin

Originally posted by: WiseOldDude
What about "Extreemly Stupid"

So Lutherans are "extremely stupid"?

Ah.

Yes. All of them are.

Don't you find that view rather, well, extreme?

 

[Steeplerot]

Intel sux, extreme sucks even more.



oops, wrong forum. :laugh:

 

[Dissipate]

I personally get a lot of flak for being an 'extremist.' I'm glad you brought this up.

 

[Riprorin]

Originally posted by: Infohawk
I see people on both sides of the aisle say that extremists are bad. Well, being an extremist in itself is not bad. To suggest it is is to appeal to popularity by suggesting that people with more common beliefs are right.

There is no doubt that many extremists, like religious ones, are horrible. But they are not bad because they are extremists, but because of their beliefs, values, and actions.

There have been many "extremists" throughout history who have been right. American abolitionists were extremists in a time when many northerners were simply happy to let slavery be limited to the South. I'm sure we could find rhetoric describing Martin Luther King as an extremist. Jesus was an extremist. Let's face it, many societal shifts are commenced by extremists who become the status quo.

Extremists can be wrong or right.

Edit: the flip side of this is people who take pride in being moderate. It is simply pride in having a common position, which history shows can be quite silly.

So basically, if you're convinced that you're right, it doesn't really matter what others think.

That's no great revelation, at least to me.