Respect is for people, not ideas

Let’s talk about respect. For many people, college is the first time they find themselves amid a diverse population, expected to communicate their ideas in a meaningful way. The critical exchange of ideas is how we grow, and if respect is the compass with which we navigate these interactions, I think it is vital to take a closer look.

What is respect? For purposes of this discussion, let’s say respect is consideration for how one’s actions affect others, with intent to not cause harm or offense. Maybe that sounds like the bare minimum, but we’re looking for a broad definition, and this will suffice for our discussion.

When we say everyone deserves respect, what we mean is we should consider how our actions affect everyone else. At the very least we ought to act such that we don’t deliberately harm others. Civilization is founded on this principle. If we didn’t all agree not to hurt each other, we wouldn’t be able to live and work together.

This is pretty straightforward, so let’s take a look at the wrench in the gears. The demand for respect is often used as a shield by people who would rather not face criticism. Clearly some amount of respect is necessary. If you cannot discuss your ideas without hurting people, you have failed the basic qualification for being a member of society. So where is the problem?

The problem is in how we apply respect. If respect is simply an endeavor not to harm, respect itself cannot be destructive. The issue comes when we demand respect be extended not only to people, but to ideas.

Let’s be clear: People deserve respect; ideas do not.

We respect the feelings of others because we assume every person experiences life roughly as we do. We offer respect because we want respect and assume others feel the same way. Ideas and concepts do not have feelings. Ideas either have merit or they do not. To defend them on any other basis is absurd. An idea is a tool, and it does not matter how much a hammer means to you; if it doesn’t drive nails, you can’t build anything. You need another tool. To make any progress in this world, ideas cannot be precious.

Why is there so much controversy around the criticism of ideas? Because we make ideas part of our identity. When we feel we have a good approach to life, we consider it part of ourselves, and we blur the line between ourselves and our ideas. We demand respect for our ideas because we know that people deserve respect, and we feel that our deeply held beliefs are part of our person. But if tomorrow I were to prove that the moon was made of cheese, it wouldn’t matter what you believed; we would still be orbited by a big ball of gorgonzola, and every idea you have about moon rocks would still be useless.

Ideas do not have equal merit simply on the basis of being ideas. If your philosophy leads to the suffering of innocent people, it is worse than a philosophy that doesn’t. If your architectural theory creates buildings that collapse, it has failed. This is not a criticism of you as a person any more than pointing out a broken hammer is a criticism of the owner. Just like the hammer, your idea needs to be replaced. It’s the only way to keep building and one day create something great.

David Billig is a UF linguistics master’s student. His column appears on Wednesdays.