on talking about religion
there are a number of reasons it's difficult to talk about religion. imho, there are a few conditions that (imho) need to be met for a safe and open discussion of such.
1. opinions are good; agendas are not. if you want an open discussion, don't expect there to be somewhere it's going. likewise, it's okay to have beliefs and opinions, but a discussion is not the place for evangelization. don't force your beliefs on others.
2. be open minded. come in with the belief that to some of these questions, there are no right answers--or at very least, respect others' abilities to hold that opinion/other dissenting opinions.
3. be willing to think about these things. if you just spout off what you've been told, what good are you doing for yourself or others? what is it really that you believe?
4. be honest with yourself, even if you don't open up to others. if you don't like to think about these things, admit it. if you don't have an open mind, admit it.
it's often difficult for religious people (by which most of the time i mean christians because that's what i know, but i think it applies to others as well) to have these kinds of open discussions because many of them have not critically analyzed their own beliefs and/or are unaware/whatever of the criticisms and issues nonbelievers have in their belief system. in christianity, a lot of the answers to such are "oh, but people are flawed and that's not what the real belief/religion/ideal believer is about" or "but the bible says in [passage] that [evidence]" or "that's one of the things that we can't know because we're only human" and none of these really address the fundamental flaw when believers are addressing nonbelievers, which is simply that they're nonbelievers. which may seem obvious, but there are a lot of assumptions (some more thoroughly based than others) that nonbelievers just don't hold-- the veracity/validity/literal truth of the bible, for one.
and many of those who have thought through their beliefs are incapable of having an open discussion. from the believer's perspective, the unbeliever's soul is in mortal danger and needs to be saved by believing in the one true way. from the unbeliever's perspective, the unbeliever is doing perfectly fine and the believer needs to take a chill pill. believers often, instead of saying "oh, you disagree, and i think you're wrong" go to "oh, you disagree, and i know you're wrong, and you're going to go to hell/eternal damnation and that's just too bad." which is mostly reasonably by their belief system, but from the unbeliever's perspective it's incredibly arrogant--the believer is stating not just their belief but what they decide is an absolute fact about the state of the world/another person's soul/etc, and expecting other people to believe the same thing.
there's more to this, but it's way too late and i have a long day of classes ahead. more later, if i can figure out where i was going.
1. opinions are good; agendas are not. if you want an open discussion, don't expect there to be somewhere it's going. likewise, it's okay to have beliefs and opinions, but a discussion is not the place for evangelization. don't force your beliefs on others.
2. be open minded. come in with the belief that to some of these questions, there are no right answers--or at very least, respect others' abilities to hold that opinion/other dissenting opinions.
3. be willing to think about these things. if you just spout off what you've been told, what good are you doing for yourself or others? what is it really that you believe?
4. be honest with yourself, even if you don't open up to others. if you don't like to think about these things, admit it. if you don't have an open mind, admit it.
it's often difficult for religious people (by which most of the time i mean christians because that's what i know, but i think it applies to others as well) to have these kinds of open discussions because many of them have not critically analyzed their own beliefs and/or are unaware/whatever of the criticisms and issues nonbelievers have in their belief system. in christianity, a lot of the answers to such are "oh, but people are flawed and that's not what the real belief/religion/ideal believer is about" or "but the bible says in [passage] that [evidence]" or "that's one of the things that we can't know because we're only human" and none of these really address the fundamental flaw when believers are addressing nonbelievers, which is simply that they're nonbelievers. which may seem obvious, but there are a lot of assumptions (some more thoroughly based than others) that nonbelievers just don't hold-- the veracity/validity/literal truth of the bible, for one.
and many of those who have thought through their beliefs are incapable of having an open discussion. from the believer's perspective, the unbeliever's soul is in mortal danger and needs to be saved by believing in the one true way. from the unbeliever's perspective, the unbeliever is doing perfectly fine and the believer needs to take a chill pill. believers often, instead of saying "oh, you disagree, and i think you're wrong" go to "oh, you disagree, and i know you're wrong, and you're going to go to hell/eternal damnation and that's just too bad." which is mostly reasonably by their belief system, but from the unbeliever's perspective it's incredibly arrogant--the believer is stating not just their belief but what they decide is an absolute fact about the state of the world/another person's soul/etc, and expecting other people to believe the same thing.
there's more to this, but it's way too late and i have a long day of classes ahead. more later, if i can figure out where i was going.