During our last meeting, we decided to make “religion” an upcoming discussion topic. Rather than hammering out the details at the meeting, we agreed to work them out here at the blog.
So. . .
What are some of the ways we could approach the subject of religion? What issues would you like to see addressed? It looks like we’ll be splitting into two or more groups next time, so would anyone like to be a discussion facilitator? The ideal discussion topic needs to be concise enough to unpack in 90 minutes. (In theory, we could even do TWO topics, one for each small group.)
Since religion is such a personal and contentious subject, I just want to reiterate again that ThinkTank is a non-partisan, non-sectarian organization. That means two things: 1. Our discussion topic should be as inclusive as possible, and 2. we should feel free to speak openly and forthrightly about our beliefs, while doing so with respect for the opinions of others.
Anyway, just jump into the comments and let us know what you think!
9 Comments
March 28, 2009 at 1:24 am
Ummm. . . I’ll break the ice on this. I’m still skittish talking about religion, even though I feel comfortable with the group of people who have been meeting for ThinkTank. It is such a strong cultural construction to avoid religion in conversation, unless you are around those who believe similarly.
A discussion related to religion was suggested at the last meeting. . . but narrowing down the topic? Hmmm. . .
I took a few interesting religion-related classes last summer and fall, including Psychology of Religion, World Religions in the US, and the Old Testament as Literature. (The last was the most disappointing. . .)
We could spend a few weeks discussing the main points of various religions, as they present themselves in the US. Like one week discuss Christianity (Protestant, Catholic; Historic, Modern), another week discuss Judaism, another week Islam (Sunni, Shiite, U.S-manifistations and maybe include Bahai?), another week discuss Buddhism and Confucianism, another week Hinduism? Of course, that would be months and months of discussions. . .
Or, maybe we could narrow down the topic to discuss what motivates one to identify as theistic, atheistic or agnostic? Or, what are the benefits of skepticism and what are the benefits of belief?
Just opening a can of worms. . . err, I mean, the discussion.
March 31, 2009 at 3:51 pm
This is wide discussion. But perhaps we could look at the affect of religion on relationships/community or even technology or vice versa. The affect of technology on religion, since we already discussed technology on relationships last time.
Another idea may the be bumper sticker “Co-exist.” What does that mean? What does that look like? Is that ideal possible? For folks of radically different religions, is it possible to co-exist without affirming that the other one is equally as valid? Can we disagree fundamentally with another’s worldview as expressed in his/her religion and still and still live at peace (co-exist, if that’s that that means) with him/her?
Another question: Politics and religion are generally agreed upon as THE two things you don’t discuss in public or anytime. Is this a good thing? How then can our ideas be sharpened? Is there anything more public than religion and politics? And if one political party possessing a completely differing ideology can agree to disagree and still respect the other, should this inform our religious discussions. I mean can two people who believe eternal destinies are at stake still live with, discuss, and love his/her neighbors?
Just some thoughts I’ve had before and would be willing to discuss.
March 31, 2009 at 6:57 pm
I like what I see so far on the comments. A point I would like to talk about is the default and subconscious mindset that most self-professed atheists and agnostics don’t admit to possessing. We were all raised in a predominantly Christian United States with its belief in Jesus as the Son of God who died on a cross for our sins to be forgiven. Most of the atheists and agnostics I know started out as Christians and made a choice to leave. I don’t think I’ve met one who was either not a Christian at one point or grew up in an entirely atheistic society.
Additionally, the entirety of Western Civilization was directed with announced Christian intentions, actions, and thoughts from about 500 C.E. to as recently as 1900 C.E. Can any atheist/agnostic really say, then, that he/she is “untainted” by Christian thought and that his/her non-belief/skepticism is entirely organic?
April 1, 2009 at 2:58 pm
Interesting thoughts Patrick. Are you saying that even within the atheistic and agnostic framework is there is some remnant of Christian or God-conscious thought? Sounds like a cool thing to discuss.
By the way Patrick, sorry about Xavier. I was pulling hard for them man!
April 2, 2009 at 12:14 pm
“Most of the atheists and agnostics I know started out as Christians and made a choice to leave. . .
. . .Can any atheist/agnostic really say, then, that he/she is “untainted” by Christian thought and that his/her non-belief/skepticism is entirely organic?”
I think this would be an interesting line of inquiry. . . though, I wonder whether it would tend to put some people on the defensive?
April 2, 2009 at 3:36 pm
Hrm. I like several of these lines of thought.
Off the top of my head, here are a few ideas:
1. What is the proper role of religion in a pluralistic society? (This is similar to Geoff’s idea.)
2. What are some widely-held conceptions of God in America? How do these differ; how are they similar? Individuals in the group could discuss why they hold the particular views they do.
3. We could also talk about belief vs. unbelief — what are the advantages/disadvantages of each. What reasons do we have for our respective faiths or lack of faith? (Patrick’s question could be comfortably included in this discussion.)
4. How have modernity and postmodernity affected how we approach religion? Should they affect it?
April 2, 2009 at 3:37 pm
Oh, so we have anyone interested in leading the second group this Weds? I think it’s time for group mitosis. . .
April 7, 2009 at 1:50 am
TulipGirl,
I did mean for my comment to put some people on the defensive. Not anyone specifically, but I truly believe that a defensive reaction means that a complete faith in whatever belief one holds reveals a degree of uncertainty about that belief’s definitiveness. I really just want people to think long and hard about what they think they believe before they start doing things based on that belief. Like strapping on a vest of dynamite. Or volunteering at a soup kitchen. Or expressing “love” to one’s neighbor.
Looking at a different thread in this tapestry, I’ll admit that if an alien looked up in the dictionary the definitions for “religion” and “worship” and then tried to draw conclusions about my life based on my actions, that alien would say “a;Fålkdn¶fkmc/vaàw.e” (He worships money). Money directs 99% of my actions and thoughts. I’d like to change that, but I need some money to do it!
April 7, 2009 at 2:10 am
“Money directs 99% of my actions and thoughts. I’d like to change that, but I need some money to do it!”
*L*
True though, huh? At least, probably for most of us. . .
Comments are closed.