The second part is obvious but the first bewilders me. Is he trying to say that gallows have an atheistic perspective or that the disbelieved (hanged because they failed to persuade) had some gallows-like perspective/view? I don’t get it, grammatically, looks too formal to me.
Is the word ‘disbelieved’ correctly quoted?
I’d treat it like follows: For those who lost any faith\grounds to continue their lives, it doesn’t make much difference whether you’re being hanged as… or… (‘From the gallows perspective’ = with the gallows looming on the horizon)
What should be meant by the incorrect term ‘disbelieved’ has been made clear and your guess does adequate justice to the probable idea expressed by the poster. But, Eugene, why is ‘looming on the horizon’? Do you visualize the speaker as a non-believer convict awaiting execution?
Those who are not believed know that they will be punished whatever happens, so it really doesn’t matter to them whether they are not believed because people think they are foolish or whether they are not believed because people think they are wicked.
Not so literally. ‘The gallows humour’ isn’t restricted to those awaiting to be hanged–those whose defeat is inevitable, a lost cause.
You can refer to ‘gallows perspective’ as a premonition something bad is about to happen when you lose faith and go the wrong ways\stop fighting for your life. Broader context would clarify it.
Bev’s interpretation (=those who people have given up on) could be correct too.
For me, ‘the gallows perspective’ is too strong in that case. Not everyone whom people reject ends up that way.
Well, on (even further) consideration, I believe Bev was correct.
It’s akin to ‘Give a dog a bad name and hang him’ [no matter for what].
Discredit a person and when they are disbelieved, you can claim they’re a fool or a knave.
“Don’t discuss yourself, for you are bound to lose; if you belittle yourself, you are believed; if you praise yourself, you are disbelieved.”