Empathy is the best tool

[Forever Sophist]

Logic and reason were key for many of us in our deconversion journeys, but I think there’s an even more powerful tool: empathy.

Atheists are often stereotyped as loud, proud, arrogant, and unwilling to listen. When you feel like you’ve been lied to your whole life and you uncover what you believe is the truth (i.e. the lack of historical credibility in the Bible, the delayed authorship of resurrection accounts, or the moral contradictions in the idea of an all-good deity) it’s natural to want to shout it from the rooftops.

But in my experience, what actually gets people to listen, if they ever will, is showing empathy for where they’re coming from.

Think about something simple like buying a car. Most people won’t go with the most logical or well-reasoned salesperson. They’ll go with the one who made them feel heard and understood, someone they trust.

The great thing about secularism is that it doesn’t rely on fear, conversion quotas, or hidden agendas. It’s grounded in intellectual honesty. That gives us the space to have real conversations with people about understanding themselves and reflecting more deeply.

When I left religion, I spent time on both Christian and atheist forums. It wasn’t the endless rebuttals or snarky takedowns from atheists that swayed me. It was a Christian who once told me, “If you’re lost in your faith and in darkness, explore that darkness.” He was being sincere and empathetic. Ironically, that was what helped lead me out of religion. But it happened because he understood my position and gave me the space to question things honestly.

If you’re secular, you don’t have a divine command telling you how to treat others. You probably ground your ethics in humanism, empathy, or some kind of utilitarian concern. That means the way you communicate matters. Being right isn’t enough. Being understood is more powerful, and that starts by making others feel understood first.

If you were once religious, you know what it’s like to believe. Don’t forget what it felt like to be in their shoes.

Forever Sophist

[Thumpalumpacus]

Empathy matters no matter why you deploy it. As an atheist, I don't take issue with religionists unless and until they get aggro, and at that point I still don't argue against their views -- but rather, against their approach. So long as they stay out of my face, I'm cool. Get in my face and I still won't argue your beliefs, I'll just tell you to leave me the fuck alone.

Surprisingly, I don't see that much here in Texas personally, though it is prevalent culturally. They'd rather rent a billboard than actually have to lecture someone who may not buy into it.

[AFTT47]

You're on the right track.

I've been involved in this since the Usenet days of the internet. Google it if you're not familiar with it. In those early discussions, it slowly sunk into us that emotion was far more important to theists than logic. Eventually, we realized it is more important to everybody. It's just the way our brains are wired. Every bit of information that reaches the logical part of our brain first goes through an emotional filter. It's why I was an atheist at 5-years-old - long before I had the capability to logically evaluate an argument. It is generally accepted that we acquire that ability at around age 12. I had an emotional aversion to theism - at least to the Catholic take on Christianity which is what I was exposed to.

If I had been exposed at a young age to some of the New Age thought like Earth itself as divine, I might have been snagged because that is emotionally appealing to me.

[BrianSoddingBoru4]

@Forever Sophist

If you’re secular, you don’t have a divine command telling you how to treat others. You probably ground your ethics in humanism, empathy, or some kind of utilitarian concern.

I don't see that this bit matters much at all. I'm not terribly concerned if a believer is empathic because of Matthew 7:12, or an atheist is empathic because of Bentham's utilitarianism. I'll take empathy, no matter the source.
Boru

[Belacqua]

That means the way you communicate matters. Being right isn’t enough. Being understood is more powerful, and that starts by making others feel understood first.

This sounds like a good idea to me. But in practice, I'm afraid, it appears to be extremely difficult to stick to. 

We all think empathy is great. Then we all see that it's about the easiest thing in the world to switch off. Once it is discovered that someone falls outside the range of the locally acceptable ideology, then that person will almost certainly stop receiving empathy. 

For example, if you were to start a thread on this forum expressing the opinion that Donald Trump is good for the country, or that trans women aren't really women, you would not find that people respond by making you feel understood. No one will say, "I get where you're coming from, but [sympathetically expressed attempt to persuade]." 

I suspect people will argue that such opinions are so far out of the realm of acceptability that no empathy should be given to the person who holds them. Which means that empathy fails to cover a very wide range of disagreement.

[Paleophyte]

That means the way you communicate matters. Being right isn’t enough. Being understood is more powerful, and that starts by making others feel understood first.

This sounds like a good idea to me. But in practice, I'm afraid, it appears to be extremely difficult to stick to. 

We all think empathy is great. Then we all see that it's about the easiest thing in the world to switch off. Once it is discovered that someone falls outside the range of the locally acceptable ideology, then that person will almost certainly stop receiving empathy. 

For example, if you were to start a thread on this forum expressing the opinion that Donald Trump is good for the country, or that trans women aren't really women, you would not find that people respond by making you feel understood. No one will say, "I get where you're coming from, but [sympathetically expressed attempt to persuade]." 

I suspect people will argue that such opinions are so far out of the realm of acceptability that no empathy should be given to the person who holds them. Which means that empathy fails to cover a very wide range of disagreement.

I don't see why it's particularly surprising to you. Empathy is an evolved behavior in a social species, and as such it doesn't tend to cover the out-group much. I'm willing to bet that if I showed up at your church and started expounding on the differences between Darwinian Evolution and Punctuated Equilibrium that I'd get the cold shoulder. Empathy has its limits and if you go beyond social norms you get less of it.

[Ahriman]

This sounds like a good idea to me. But in practice, I'm afraid, it appears to be extremely difficult to stick to. 

We all think empathy is great. Then we all see that it's about the easiest thing in the world to switch off. Once it is discovered that someone falls outside the range of the locally acceptable ideology, then that person will almost certainly stop receiving empathy. 

For example, if you were to start a thread on this forum expressing the opinion that Donald Trump is good for the country, or that trans women aren't really women, you would not find that people respond by making you feel understood. No one will say, "I get where you're coming from, but [sympathetically expressed attempt to persuade]." 

I suspect people will argue that such opinions are so far out of the realm of acceptability that no empathy should be given to the person who holds them. Which means that empathy fails to cover a very wide range of disagreement.

I don't see why it's particularly surprising to you. Empathy is an evolved behavior in a social species, and as such it doesn't tend to cover the out-group much. I'm willing to bet that if I showed up at your church and started expounding on the differences between Darwinian Evolution and Punctuated Equilibrium that I'd get the cold shoulder. Empathy has its limits and if you go beyond social norms you get less of it.

That hasn't been my experience. I'm an absolute miscreant in real life and people still treat me fairly.

[Paleophyte]

I don't see why it's particularly surprising to you. Empathy is an evolved behavior in a social species, and as such it doesn't tend to cover the out-group much. I'm willing to bet that if I showed up at your church and started expounding on the differences between Darwinian Evolution and Punctuated Equilibrium that I'd get the cold shoulder. Empathy has its limits and if you go beyond social norms you get less of it.

That hasn't been my experience. I'm an absolute miscreant in real life and people still treat me fairly.

Either they're suckers for punishment or you aren't as much of a miscreant as you think. Possibly both.

[BrianSoddingBoru4]

Actually, I think a speed square is the best tool.

Boru

[The Grand Nudger]

If you're secular you may not have a divine command telling you to do or not do this or that - but it's pretty easy to observe that even people who believe they do don't listen.