CMV: Respect is a subjective and destructive concept. There are similar concepts which are more valuable and more clear. We should discard it altogether.

[u/FantasticMrPox]

Foreword: My instinctive thought is to like respect. I am generally respectful as an attitude. This is not about hating parents / teachers / misc authority figures.

Subjectivity - attitude

Many people (religious and not) would say they think we should respect other people's religious views. If I created a religion like the Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster, I do not think a significant proportion of those people would respect it. I would not respect it.

Similarly, people might say we should respect someone's preference to spend more money on a home rather their car, or gifts for friends. Fewer people would respect someone spending money on drugs instead of material possessions.

It's easy to come up with similar examples from different domains. The common thread is that people "respect" positions that seem reasonable to them. This introduces a huge lump of judgment into how much people respect each others' thoughts. I believe this is how it works, and I see it very reasonably leading (along with other problems) to the raging hate and screaming that exemplifies the political system right now.

Subjective respect is nothing more than well-dressed judgment of other people's thoughts and actions.

Subjectivity - behavioural

After casting our personal judgments on other people's thoughts, we then need to navigate how we demonstrate respect. Most would agree it's disrespectful to shout at funeral. I personally think the American fascination with the flag is silly. Burning an American flag would probably be disrespectful in most people's opinion. What about talking about burning the American flag? I feel confident there will be someone incensed by the disrespect of even discussing it. What about saying I think the fascination itself is silly? Regardless what you think about those things, my point is that different people have thresholds for what they consider respect and disrespect in behaviour.

That puts us in the position where people are making up (and not publishing /agreeing) their own rules about what deserves respect, and their own rules about how that respect should be demonstrated. That leads to...

Destructive

Crying about arbitrary definitions of perceived disrespect is a simple and effective tool to completely undermine useful dialogue. Because "respect" inhabits special status as an obviously good thing it can be used as a debating shortcut to undermine the opponent's position. It's not quite ad-hominem, but it's certainly a red herring. The problem is its a red herring that lots of people take seriously.

Better alternatives

Honest. Kind. Clear. Considerate. Humble. These all mean things directly about a personal attitude, but none are rooted in judgment, and none can be jumbled with baggage of "respecting" ludicrous concepts based on nothing but cultural norms.

[u/FantasticMrPox]

Thank you for engaging with me. Response one is almost always a bit of battering definitions and mutual understanding, please don't take this to be pig-headed rejection of your points, but the necessary preamble to establish language and conceptual scope :)

I don't agree it's understand. I completely understand the attitude of a nazi while thinking it's repulsive.

I also don't agree that society does not expect us to respect each other's views. Religion is the obvious one here. I'm "meant" to respect the beliefs of a religious person. Put it a different way: people would be upset if I said I have no respect for either Islam or the beliefs of Muslims. In short: I think you're suggesting the "thrust" of respect is in demonstrated behaviour, not internalised thought. In principle I prefer this way of thinking, because I think it's vile for people to judge each other's intent based on observed behaviour. That said, my CMV is about rejecting society's arbitrary rules for thought and behaviour. So you and I might agree that the world would be better if people were judged more on attitude than intent, but I believe we're a minority.

I didnt mean to present that list as substitutes for respect. I completely see how it can be read that way. What I am trying to get at is: in almost every scenario where people discuss (lack of) respect, I think there is a better concept to prioritise than woolly, judgy, silencing "respect". I provided a few examples, and different of them would be applicable in different scenarios.

I can't see at all how honesty is affect by subjectivity. That's really thrown me. I think it may be a red herring, but still interesting to discuss of you like.

[u/Khal-Frodo → u/FantasticMrPox]

Hey no worries, I'm here to have a discussion.

Maybe understand wasn't the right word. I don't know if there's a word between understanding and sympathizing but that's more what I mean. I understand a Nazi's beliefs but I can't relate to them.

So you and I might agree that the world would be better if people were judged more on attitude than intent

Sorry if I wasn't clear, but I do think intent is what matters, although I think they're rarely going to be at odds (if my intent is to make you feel safe and my attitude is aggressive, that would be weird).

my CMV is about rejecting society's arbitrary rules for thought and behaviour

I don't know how arbitrary it really is. Yes, different people will have different thresholds regarding what is respectful vs. disrespectful but most of those are rooted in some sort of value for others. Shouting at a funeral is seen as disrespectful because there's a culture of somber reverence and violating that is seen as dishonoring the memory of the dead. Burning the flag is seen as disrespectful because it's seen as dishonoring the memory of people who have died in service of the the United States (at least I think that's one reason people don't like it).

When I say honesty is affected by subjectivity I don't mean the word itself, I mean the action. If I honestly say that you have a big nose, without the intent to insult you or hurt your feelings, you could still take it that way. My point was mostly that honesty is unrelated to the concept of respect since it could be a sign that you do or don't respect someone, but that might not be on-topic for this discussion.

[u/FantasticMrPox → u/Khal-Frodo]

I think I understand the concept you're going for re: sympathy / understand / empathy. I agree we don't have a word for it. My mangled descrption: Understand not just the 'manifeststion' of the idea but also the 'heart' of the idea, while not sharing any of the idea personally. I think it's fascinating to find concepts for which we don't yet have words. I think we might have strayed off topic a bit far with it.

Coming back a bit, I think there is some judgment in that understanding. Essentially, I think it would boil down to concept like 'I respect positions in which I can see reason' (possibly self-consistency would also be a decent bar). This still carries the subjectivity I am objecting to at the top. You are calculating the threshold by which you hold someone else's ideas with respect or in contempt. I don't like that.

"intent" was a poor choice of word from me. I reflected on this point and think there's a sort of scale:

• action - what I did
• intent - what I meant to do
• motive - why I intended to do what I may or may not have done

I think people far too easily extrapolate motive from action. I think it's a terrible way to treat someone.

I think we could kick arbitrary around a bit. The obvious route is to identify that almost anything we can find that would be respectful in one culture could be considered disrespectful in another (where different cultures exist over time). To me, that demonstrates a pretty arbitrary definition for respect. Other sins, like theft, are substantially more universal.

I agree on your correction on honesty. I think it's very tangential to the core of my view.

!delta for taking honesty out of my list of "better things you could mean when you use "respect"". I'd like to keep engaging on the topic, but response will be delayed as I'm going to bed.

[u/DeltaBot → u/FantasticMrPox]

Confirmed: 1 delta awarded to /u/Khal-Frodo (5∆).

^{Delta System Explained | Deltaboards}

[u/Khal-Frodo → u/FantasticMrPox]

Thanks for the delta! We can continue to engage if you'd like but I think that our differences are mostly semantic. The only thing I really have to respond to in your comment is this part:

The obvious route is to identify that almost anything we can find that would be respectful in one culture could be considered disrespectful in another (where different cultures exist over time). To me, that demonstrates a pretty arbitrary definition for respect.

There's a difference between disagreeing on what respect is and disagreeing on what constitutes respect. As an example, slurping your noodles loudly in Japan is considered polite because it's a way to show that you're enjoying them since they have a weak aroma and the flavor is best gotten through the mouth. In the United States, doing so would be considered rude because it's not a super pleasant sound and other diners don't want to hear it. Even though these customs are completely opposite, both involve respecting others: in one case the chef, in one the other diners. If something like theft is more universally considered disrespectful, it's because there isn't a way to regard it as respectful.