Working with idolaters, infidels, and the impious: can interfaith discourse work?

[cellio]

I've seen interfaith dialogue work really well, kind of ineptly, and really, really badly.1 I've noticed some things that make a difference in where on the spectrum an effort is likely to fall. So, some observations.
To people who are interested in it at all, religion is generally an important

Comments

Interesting thoughts!

[meiravberale]

I think a huge factor is that everyone has to be committed to the purpose, to be clearly signed up for something I'd define as: discussion without attempting to persuade. And I think this is something that doesn't come naturally to most people - if you feel strongly about something, it's very natural to want to persuade others. I know how much self restraint I've sometimes had to exercise in online conversations where, for one reason or another, I was determined not to try and persuade others of my point of view. Leaving aside faith for a moment, I'd say it's easy to calmly "agree to disagree" with someone about, say, whether or not pastrami goes well with avocado, but not so easy to stay calm and detached when you're talking to someone who expresses a belief that it's perfectly ok to cook babies and eat them with carrots and mash. Once you have a major emotional reaction to what someone says - that's when it gets much harder to keep calm and not try desperately to show them the error of their ways. (I had one of those conversations online last night and had to just walk away from it for a while.) (not about cooking babies, I hasten to add...)

Also, those who mix mostly with people who believe the same as them - I think for them it's more difficult to appreciate the subtle nuances of how what they're saying may come across to someone who believes differently. Maybe that's one of the things those people need to learn from interfaith dialogue.

So yes, I think good, robust moderation is a must for this sort of thing to work as an ongoing thing. And I loved what you said about being willing to call out the people who are right too - this has been one of the challenges I've faced as a blogger, where at times I had to call out people who share my beliefs (who were commenting on my blog) because they were expressing it inappropriately and I felt they were killing the possibility of open and constructive dialogue with those who don't. I guess this would be easier on a discussion forum which has been specifically defined as a forum for a specific purpose, with ground rules and guidelines - on my blog it's a lot more fluid and messy.

Re: Interesting thoughts!

[dvarin]

Also, those who mix mostly with people who believe the same as them - I think for them it's more difficult to appreciate the subtle nuances of how what they're saying may come across to someone who believes differently.

Oh man, not religion, but in The Other Horrible Land-Mine Topic of Politics this seems to happen at work moderately frequently since certain companies attract certain political views. So I get to encounter D.C. clients who are way Red, west-coast contractors who are way Blue, entrepreneur coworkers who are... uh, what's the color for Hardcore Libertarian? But you have to work with them so you just speak circumspectly and just smile and nod if it gets too heated.

And this more or less works, because everyone involved loses if the metaphorical boat tips over. Does this translate into an interfaith forum at all? Maybe what it could use is some way that everyone loses if there's a problem, not just the 'losers' of the argument who get driven off. I have no idea how to implement that though.