The 3 legs of taking theism seriously

[luckyme]

Theists express outrage/frustration about not being taken seriously, in a philosophical sense. There seems to be three legs to consider.

1) theism as a cause of action in the world. All effects, health, education, civil liberties, justice, political/military, social, whatever, good or bad.

2) theism as a philosophical position.

3) the theist, as a person, the guy next door.

The effects of theism (1) IS treated very seriously and is the issue raised by all the books, articles, documentaries we're seeing. For the most part it's the only interesting aspect of theism that non-theists ( or other-theists) would normally be concerned about.

Theism as a philosophy (2) is often not treated seriously. Nor are other strange beliefs such as in the FSM or pyramid power, astrology or flat earth. Even though there are a lot of weird philosophies around, ones that start with "first you take this leap of faith ..." or even more clearly "your only entry to this philosophy is by a leap of faith..." can be analyzed rationally just as any premised position "if frogs had fur" or "yes, if Bush were a genius then ....." but it's more as a brain-teaser than anything else.

Dealing with the theist (3) would be a non-issue if theists had the effect on the world that the idealized tibetan monks would. ( but not the real ones). 2 flows into 3 since understanding your neighbor starts with "Given that he believes 2 ...".

For non-theists ( or even other-theists) the need to combat/control #1 usually includes not granting #2 ( else why would #1 be a problem if it were true) which raises the question of how to handle #3.

I'm not sure that the pressing need to contain the damage #1 causes can be achieved without some offense to #3, at the least. Some may argue that ridicule may be a main way to keep the non-committed from slipping into theism because it seems universally accepted. People that believe in pyramid power must at least start the morning off with, " I know people think I'm crazy, but.."

It seems a tricky balance to me, but I'm interested in what other atheists think about the the issue of 'feigned acceptance' or 'open rejection' or anything in between. I suspect opinion will swing depending on a persons view of #1. ( a lot of theists would start with 'whats the problem').

luckyme