How often do you deliberately obtain and read books with which you know you will not agree?

[Navidad]

I read a post on Facebook this morning about the importance of not banning books. It made me think that perhaps it is equally as important to take time and resources to read books with which I know I will not agree, especially when I know it in advance. The motivation? To learn about the others in the world who are not me and who don't think like me. I tend to quite often read and like posts here with which I disagree because of how well they are written. For me that is the purpose of the "like" (or whatever it is called) button. I don't think the "like" button is meant to be an "agree" button! I hope that makes sense.

I also can learn from a well-written post whether I agree or not. I feel the same way about a well-presented sacrament or conference talk, sermon, or book!

I feel the same way about when my wife says something with which I don't agree! I better listen and learn! 😄

Edited July 8, 2023 by Navidad

[Calm]

Just now, Navidad said:

I tend to quite often read and like posts here with which I disagree because of how well they are written. For me that is the purpose of the "like" (or whatever it is called) button. I don't think the "like" button is meant to be an "agree" button! I hope that makes sense.

I do the same, especially if it provides new information with credible documentation. I think the extra effort to do it better than just making claims should be recognized.

[Chum]

For a book sized commitment, I prefer the open messiness of observations over pat conclusions.  I can do the latter in much smaller bites tho.

[CV75]

2 hours ago, Navidad said:

I read a post on Facebook this morning about the importance of not banning books. It made me think that perhaps it is equally as important to take time and resources to read books with which I know I will not agree, especially when I know it in advance. The motivation? To learn about the others in the world who are not me and who don't think like me. I tend to quite often read and like posts here with which I disagree because of how well they are written. For me that is the purpose of the "like" (or whatever it is called) button. I don't think the "like" button is meant to be an "agree" button! I hope that makes sense.

I also can learn from a well-written post whether I agree or not. I feel the same way about a well-presented sacrament, conference talk, sermon, or book!

I feel the same way about when my wife says something with which I don't agree! I better listen and learn! 😄

If I knew ahead of time whether I agree or disagree with a book's content, i.e., was aware of my bias, I must have made that determination previously on some other basis, the outcome of having an open mind to others and their ideas. The motives for listening and learning more from someone you don't agree with (perhaps better stated, haven't previously agreed with) are varied, and I would say most often not intellectual or data-driven, and never strictly intellectual or data driven. Considering the time and effort required for me to seek, obtain and read a book on a topic I am interested in, I find myself expanding my intellectual comfort zone more organically, by exchanging ideas directly with people.

ETA: Now if I were a scholar, academic or bibliophilist, I would spend about 1/3 of my book-reading time studying and researching opposing schools of thought.

Edited July 7, 2023 by CV75

[Chum]

Speaking specifically to your point of consuming content I don't agree with, I guess it depends on the process. I like being stretched but not being cudgeled. Being led somewhere unfamiliar is fun but not revisiting a deeply worn trench. (To this last, I can have aversion, even repulsion. Overly-heard music is torturous to me.) Traps are way past being novel.

I believe I'm welcoming of unconsidered notions that can challenge my beliefs.

[Rain]

"How often do you deliberately obtain and read books with which you know you will not agree?"

Never.  I never read them for that reason because what would be the point of taking my time for that? If I have determined I will already disagree with it then I am only reading it for debate and that is not where I want to spend my time. 

However, I often read things that I think might be different from my view point to help me understand all sides and see if there is anything I am missing.

That's probably what you were saying, but too often I find that when people approach things they know they will disagree with then their minds don't allow them to learn.

And yes, I find 3, at least, reasons for the upvote button.  One for I agree and 1 for it either being well written or making a good point. And another for just appreciating the involvement. The heart button is more of an "I am listening" or "I am there for you" thing - a kindness or friendship kind of thing.

Edited July 7, 2023 by Rain

[Tacenda]

I read a lot of books about the former US president, or listen to. And one of them I thought wasn't a glowing portrait to him, turned out was! I kept thinking I need to hear two sides if I'm truly going to not be bias. I think it's a good idea, but very difficult. 

Edited July 7, 2023 by Tacenda

[Kevin Christensen]

Very often.  And I've reviewed several of them very carefully and published on that disagreement.  And there are several things I've read that I did not know I would disagree with until I read them and have reviewed some of them also.  And I've read several things that I did not realize how important and enlightening and mind expanding I would find them until I read them.  Joseph Smith famously said, "By proving contrarieties, truth is made manifest."  So the wrestle is important.  Eugene England wrote some very good essays on that.  It it is important is to be prepared.  Don't jump into the deep end without knowing how to swim.   Back in California in the 80s, a person who had his faith absolutely shattered by reading the Tanner's stuff was astounded when he saw me read it and without being bothered in the slightest.  "How can you know what you know and believe what you believe?"  he asked.  I still think it was a very good question.  Most the essays that I have published over the years have been attempts to answer that question.  The parable of the Sower is the heart of my answer.  The same seeds (words), planted in different soils and conditions, nurtured in different ways, can yield vastly different harvests.  

"Know ye not this parable? and how then will ye know all parables?"  (Mark 4:13).  

And this observation from an art book is another essential key:

Quote

"Most of us tend to see parts of a form hierarchically. The parts that are important (that is, provide a lot of information), or the parts that we decide are larger, or the parts we think should be larger, we see as larger than they actually are. Conversely, parts that are unimportant, or that we decide are smaller, or that we think should be smaller, we see as being smaller than they actually are." (Betty Edwards, Drawing on the Right Side of the Brain, rev. ed. (Los Angeles: Tarcher, 1989), 134.

Othello was not objectively following the facts to their rational conclusion when he strangled Desdemona.  N.R. Hanson famously wrote "All data are theory-laden."   Facts don't speak for themselves, leading all reasonable observers to the same conclusion.  

Alma 32 explains that some of the ways you can tell a good seed are when it grows and the results of the experiment expands and enlightens your mind, and enlarges your soul.  If you don't make an effort to read things you might not agree with, you are not likely to experience much expansion of the mind, and enlargement of the soul.  Brigham Young once commented that "There is one principle I wish to urge upon the Saints in a way that it may remain with them--that is, to understand men and women as they are, and not understand them as you are."  (JD 8-37)  That is intimately connected to Jesus saying, "first cast out the beam out of thine own eye; and then shalt thou see clearly to cast out the mote out of thy brother’s eye." (Matt. 7:5)

FWIW,

Kevin Christensen

Canonsburg, PA

Edited July 7, 2023 by Kevin Christensen
typo

[bluebell]

12 minutes ago, Tacenda said:

I read a lot of books about the former US president, or listen to. And one of them I thought wasn't a glowing portrait to him, turned out was! I kept thinking I need to hear two sides if I'm truly going to not be bias. I think it's a good idea, but very difficult. 

This is kind of my thinking as well.

I don’t seek out books that I know are going to be very biased, regardless of the topic, because I know how easy it is to support your arguments when you can pick and choose what you’re going to include in your work. I tend not to trust really biased sources when they are the only source of information that I have on the subject so I don’t see a reason to spend time energy and sometimes money to read some thing that I am going to doubt or question the whole way through.

books or information that try to portray both sides, or those on topics where I’ve already read other sources and don’t have to rely on them as the only authority, I find very interesting.

[Tacenda]

11 minutes ago, bluebell said:

This is kind of my thinking as well.

I don’t seek out books that I know are going to be very biased, regardless of the topic, because I know how easy it is to support your arguments when you can pick and choose what you’re going to include in your work. I tend not to trust really biased sources when they are the only source of information that I have on the subject so I don’t see a reason to spend time energy and sometimes money to read some thing that I am going to doubt or question the whole way through.

books or information that try to portray both sides, or those on topics where I’ve already read other sources and don’t have to rely on them as the only authority, I find very interesting.

I wish I was more like that, something I need to work on, just as I wish others would do but I don't!

[MustardSeed]

I’m like rain. I would never read a book entitled “ proof that the holocaust never happened” or “ here’s why you should take essential oils instead of seeing a doctor when you have cancer“.  
 

But I do surround myself with people who think differently than I do with whom there’s a basis of trust. Just because somebody is written a book doesn’t mean that they are intelligent or interesting. These are my basic requirements for investing my time.

Edited July 7, 2023 by MustardSeed

[The Nehor]

Depends on the nature of the book. If it is a scientific or technical subject then sure but the book better be pretty exacting and technical. If it flies in the face of the agreement of experts in the field and isn’t very evidence based then I pass.

I avoid political books. They are often just published to legally funnel campaign contributions to individuals and are almost always terrible. The same for books talking about the next big threat to the nation or world.

In theology I will play a little. In history I find I have to upend what I know fairly regularly.

I am deeply skeptical of church books that seem to spend their time making hard scripture more palatable or teach one neat trick to get God to bless you or whatever. I used to read some apologist works but I find most of them boring or depressing now.

[mfbukowski]

How many times a day do any of us see something with which we do not agree, right here?

I don't find it necessary to read volumes of pages on ideas I have already found to be irrelevant to my progression.

 

[mfbukowski]

5 hours ago, Navidad said:

I feel the same way about a well-presented sacrament,....

Perhaps you could discuss this further, in the spirit of the thread.

What does the sacrament have to do with being "well presented"?

[Navidad]

16 minutes ago, mfbukowski said:

Perhaps you could discuss this further, in the spirit of the thread.

What does the sacrament have to do with being "well presented"?

Sorry, I meant sacrament or conference talk.

[pogi]

To answer the OP - about as often as I actively listen to full albums of music that I dislike...never!

I can see the benefit if one is actively engaged in a relationship with someone from that perspective and wants to understand them better, otherwise, I prefer to read material that I don't yet understand or think I might agree with. 

 

[rpn]

When I attended BYU  I was surprised at the group think I found there (1970's), and general ignorance of world affairs.     So I developed an FHE lesson that I gave to various FHE groups (I moved more than most, and was invited to give it when word got around).  I went looking for quotes that proclaimed truth from all sorts of people.    The FHE started with us reading quotes from unidentified radicals and atheists and unpopular public figures (Eldridge Cleaver (before he was baptized), Angela Davis, Karl Marx and a bunch of others AND citing the scriptures or conference talks that counseled/proclaimed more or less the same thing .   I talked about not needing to be afraid to confront and discuss words, and knowledge because we can always test it against truths we know.   We discussed the D&c  directive to study in all areas everything about the world, and the the Gospel of Jesus Christ incorporates all absolute truth (even if we don't yet know full absolute truths in many areas including scientific ones.  

  And THEN I told them who said all the things that they had confirmed as true.    They were indeed shocked (at least the ones who even paid enough attention to the news of the day to recognize the names some had never seen the point of being fully informed at all).   My lesson was reported to a bishop more than once, but many participants told me it had changed their view of the world and the expectations of discipleship.

Yes it is important to know opposing points of few.  Often it takes know something about the author/speakers own life and studies to fully understand where they are coming from.   And, at least from my experiences with those I met at BYU,  members don't do themselves any favors by acting like ostriches.

Edited July 7, 2023 by rpn

[InCognitus]

I read books or articles or published papers all the time that I don't agree with, but only if the book or article presents detailed reasoning attempting to back up the point of view.  Books or articles where opinions are stated as fact without providing any of their reasoning are worthless.  Understanding the other person's point of view is the only way to know if there is any merit to any of it, or where there may be weak points to it.

I try to do this for other religious views especially, because it is basically stupid to dismiss someone else's belief simply because you believe differently.  And in trying to understand the other person's point of view one can learn a ton of things about your own views that may not have been considered without it.  As Joseph Smith said, "By proving contraries, truth is made manifest".

Edited July 7, 2023 by InCognitus

[blackstrap]

47 minutes ago, rpn said:

least from my experiences with those I met at BYU,

If you have ever watched in the street interviews with college/university students, you will see uninformed folks are not just BYU students. Ignorance is rampant.

[Pyreaux]

I like to say I'm very selective about the books I read, I don't want to waste my time learning things that are useless. I select them based on the subject matter that I mostly already agree with or some other value, but not just the people I agree with, and I never agree with everything they say even if they are on my side.

Example, I was exposed to Michael Heiser's work from LDS Apologetic sources, I knew basically what he writes about, like the existence of plural "elohim" like in Psalm 82, and that an "el" is not a name but a noun that applies to other beings, I agree with most all of his work. However, I disagree with his attempted (though coherent) definition of an "elohim" as any being from the other side of exitance, including human spirits. Yes, the Spirit of Samuel was an "elohim", but not because he was from the other side, but it had more to do with the priestly/godly robe he was wearing and perhaps was an exalted spirit being as a prophet, I'd contend other such human spirits wouldn't be called an "elohim". The "elohims" are deemed so by being adopted as an '"el". That El adopted heavenly angel nation patrons as "sons" rendering them heavenly elim, some rebel and are deemed demons, so some elim are demons, and the Lord adopts human royalty and priests as sons, and these sons are also deemed elim. I think that is what Samual was.

I know I would never read something like the Book of Urantia. I'm not exactly afraid, I skim a little to assess its value to me, I listen to my friend telling all about it but I hate metaphysics, I don't like concepts like the trinity, let alone a triple-trinity. What is complicated and intellectually stimulating to him doesn't mean it's true. I expect nothing useful in it. Maybe one day... 

Edited July 7, 2023 by Pyreaux

[bsjkki]

I've read a lot of anti-literature about the church because I was trying to understand and research issues. I do like being aware of what is controversial or uncomfortable. It helps me as I converse with my family who have left the church to be fully aware of what is 'out there.' There is value in reading differing opinions and sorting it out. In the end, it has strengthened my faith.

On secular controversial topics, I think it is very valuable to read opposing viewpoints. Usually, the truth is somewhere in the middle. I will not read a book I know contains content I don't want to be exposed to if it contains vulgarity or pornography. I'm not going to read a novel on a topic or genre I don't enjoy. Why waste my time? 

[InCognitus]

1 hour ago, InCognitus said:

I try to do this for other religious views especially, because it is basically stupid to dismiss someone else's belief simply because you believe differently.  And in trying to understand the other person's point of view one can learn a ton of things about your own views that may not have been considered without it.  As Joseph Smith said, "By proving contraries, truth is made manifest".

After I posted the above, I looked deeper into the source of that quotation from Joseph Smith and I learned something interesting.

Joseph made that statement in a letter to Israel Daniel Rupp, 5 June 1844, and it was in response to him receiving a copy of the book that was sent to him, "He Pasa Ekklesia", a book to which he contributed to the content.  There's a digital copy of the book online in the Internet Archive:  He Pasa Ekklesia - An Original History of the Religious Denominations At Present Existing in The United States.

The table of contents has a big list of denominational views covered in the book, including Latter-day Saints.   So Joseph made that statement in the context of coming to understand other denominational views better.

 

Edited July 7, 2023 by InCognitus

[LoudmouthMormon]

Quote

How often do you deliberately obtain and read books with which you know you will not agree?

I've joined a bookclub populated largely by folks who are very radically different than me.  I'm the only conservative, and about the only practicing Christian. It's cool to have a bunch of folks on different sides of different fences, who are willing to have civil conversations about things. 

Most notable book was Kendi's "How to be an Anti-racist", read in 2021-22.  I attacked the thing with 3 colors of pens - one to indicate agreement, one for disagreement, one for "interesting, but I'm not convinced".  I scored each chapter, and discovered at the end that I agreed with slightly less than half of everything Kendi had to say in his book.  I disagreed with his core premise and half of his main points, chapter by chapter.  

Also notable, just plain reading that book got me out of jury duty.  The juror questionnaire had us list books we were reading, that was the only thing that had me stand out in any meaningful way.  I was placed 2nd to last in possibility of being chosen, which I took to indicate both the defense and the prosecution were happy with me being nowhere near their case.  😄

[manol]

10 hours ago, Navidad said:

I read a post on Facebook this morning about the importance of not banning books. It made me think that perhaps it is equally as important to take time and resources to read books with which I know I will not agree, especially when I know it in advance. The motivation? To learn about the others in the world who are not me and who don't think like me.

In my day job I do actively seek out peer-reviewed papers that, at a glance, seem to be something I would not agree with. 

In the context of belief systems I don't want to devote a lot of time to reading something if the expected return is little.  If I think something offers me a worthwhile opportunity for growth, I can usually get past having some disagreement with what I expect the content to be.

8 hours ago, Kevin Christensen said:

Alma 32 explains that some of the ways you can tell a good seed are when it grows and the results of the experiment expands and enlightens your mind, and enlarges your soul.  If you don't make an effort to read things you might not agree with, you are not likely to experience much expansion of the mind, and enlargement of the soul. 

A few years ago someone I have a great deal of respect for recommended a particular author to me, but unfortunately this author's work was well outside of my comfort zone:  His books are allegedly "channeled", and "channeling" is something I'm inherently skeptical of.   So it took me a while to make the decision to invest enough of my time and energy to conduct a fair "Alma Chapter 32" experiment on his first book. 

8 hours ago, Kevin Christensen said:

The same seeds (words), planted in different soils and conditions, nurtured in different ways, can yield vastly different harvests. 

Well said.  What speaks to one person may not be what speaks to someone else.

I have now read nine "channeled" books by the author alluded to above, and have nearly finished his tenth book.  I make no claims about how anyone else might respond to his writings, and can only speak for myself:  With apologies to Alma, thus far they taste good to my soul. 

Edited July 7, 2023 by manol

[Bill “Papa” Lee]

I love reading books, with content differing ideas.