I remember writing about this a year ago, but I deleted the blog, so I would like to write about this again: the relationship between comprehensibility and significance. From a strictly logical point of view, there should be no logical relationship between the two. You cannot infer that something is unimportant from the fact that you cannot understand it at all and vice versa. But considering arguments on the Internet or what colleagues of my graduate school say, not a few people seem to assume there is. Especially, they tend to think what others say is of no consequence just because they make no sense of it, though there is a reasonable possibility that it is on account of their stupidity that they don't understand it.
There is a Japanese philosopher who I have known for almost ten years. He says in one of his books that to do philosophy is to say yes. That is, philosophy is about understanding what other people think and not dismissing any part of it no matter how incomprehensible it seems or how trivial it appears. In other words, It is about trusting them. Nowadays, it looks like the ability to criticize others is deemed to be a sign of intelligence. But considering the tendency described in the previous paragraph, that ability is perhaps not a sign of intelligence but a sign of a bad attitude. I propose that the attitude of trusting others and trying at first to make sense of them be respected and assumed by more people.