Conversation

Notices

1. Embed this notice
   Church of Jeff (jeffowski@mastodon.world)'s status on Saturday, 22-Jun-2024 14:37:58 JST Church of Jeff

   #religionispoison

   • Embed this notice
     Tokyo Outsider (337ppm) (tokyo_0@mas.to)'s status on Sunday, 23-Jun-2024 16:43:27 JST Tokyo Outsider (337ppm)

     in reply to

     • Moritz Bartl

     @jeffowski @gamambel That hashtag is a pretty offensive and unhelpful over-generalisation.

   • Embed this notice
     Tokyo Outsider (337ppm) (tokyo_0@mas.to)'s status on Sunday, 23-Jun-2024 17:09:18 JST Tokyo Outsider (337ppm)

     in reply to

     • Moritz Bartl

     @gamambel @jeffowski It's easy to say things like this if you a) don't have a control absent of religion to compare against b) are misrepresenting all religion and all religious practice as the same and c) are selling your own repackaging of several thousand years of religious thought beneath a thin veneer of secularism to reach the broadest market possible. I encourage you to listen to more of Sadhguru's materials before you quote him.

   • Embed this notice
     Moritz Bartl (gamambel@social.tchncs.de)'s status on Sunday, 23-Jun-2024 17:09:20 JST Moritz Bartl

     in reply to

     • Tokyo Outsider (337ppm)

     @tokyo_0 @jeffowski

     "The moment man became religious, it should have been the end of all conflict. Unfortunately, religion has become the main source of conflict everywhere in the world. It has taken the maximum number of lives and caused the maximum amount of pain on the planet for thousands of years. This is because a religion is essentially coming from a set of belief systems. […]"

     https://isha.sadhguru.org/en/wisdom/article/spirituality-vs-religion

   • Embed this notice
     Tokyo Outsider (337ppm) (tokyo_0@mas.to)'s status on Sunday, 23-Jun-2024 17:09:27 JST Tokyo Outsider (337ppm)

     in reply to

     • Moritz Bartl

     @gamambel @jeffowski Just as there are cases where religious ideas have been abused to further hate, and nonreligous people have done good, there are also ample examples of cruelties and atrocities being committed in the absence of religion, and ample examples of kindness and compassion being exercised because of it.

     The problem isn't religion, it's hate, division, toxicity, lack of self-awareness, and our lack of collective strength to face the universal fallabilities of human nature.

   • Embed this notice
     Tokyo Outsider (337ppm) (tokyo_0@mas.to)'s status on Sunday, 23-Jun-2024 17:33:07 JST Tokyo Outsider (337ppm)

     in reply to

     • Moritz Bartl

     @gamambel @jeffowski Perhaps so. I think "religion" as a term refers to much broader things than the prescriptive "narrow church" religious organisations you seem to be describing here.

   • Embed this notice
     Moritz Bartl (gamambel@social.tchncs.de)'s status on Sunday, 23-Jun-2024 17:33:08 JST Moritz Bartl

     in reply to

     • Tokyo Outsider (337ppm)

     @tokyo_0 @jeffowski In "religion", you are either "with us", or "against us", a "non-believer". Religion, as an organized form that you can either "join" or not, is by definition authoritatian, and must be.

     It sounds like you are operating from a broader definition, which is where this disagreement may stem from, when in fact we probably agree on which elements are "dangerous" and which ones are not.

   • Embed this notice
     Moritz Bartl (gamambel@social.tchncs.de)'s status on Sunday, 23-Jun-2024 17:33:09 JST Moritz Bartl

     in reply to

     • Tokyo Outsider (337ppm)

     @tokyo_0 @jeffowski I think what is happening here is that we have a different definition in mind of what is "religion" and what is "spirituality". Which is also why I refered to that site, as one of many possible articles that try to make that distinction.

     It's exactly that the moment spirituality becomes religion that it implies division. In that definition, religion simply cannot exist without it, because you are either part of it or you are not. You believe, or you do not.

   • Embed this notice
     Tokyo Outsider (337ppm) (tokyo_0@mas.to)'s status on Sunday, 23-Jun-2024 17:36:57 JST Tokyo Outsider (337ppm)

     in reply to

     • Moritz Bartl

     @gamambel @jeffowski That's reasonable enough. The only problem is that when we're communicating our ideas with other people, it's necessary to use words in a way that is consistent with the meaning that will be understood (https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/religion). So I can see how the hashtag might have read as reasonable to you, given your definition of "religion". But given what the word is understood to mean more commonly, it becomes problematic.

   • Embed this notice
     Moritz Bartl (gamambel@social.tchncs.de)'s status on Sunday, 23-Jun-2024 17:36:58 JST Moritz Bartl

     in reply to

     • Tokyo Outsider (337ppm)

     @tokyo_0 @jeffowski For a long time I was not really that interested in narrowing down on my own definition, but over time, I found it helpful to adopt this definition. I understand that there are many.

   • Embed this notice
     Tokyo Outsider (337ppm) (tokyo_0@mas.to)'s status on Sunday, 23-Jun-2024 17:43:22 JST Tokyo Outsider (337ppm)

     in reply to

     • Moritz Bartl

     @gamambel @jeffowski Your post here https://social.tchncs.de/@gamambel/112664995960377960 gave the impression you were referring to institutional religion where someone else decides whether or not you are part of it, which is indeed part of that dictionary definition but definitely not all of it. I think you'll find some religions are more flexible in what they expect than others. This might be where the differing views stem from.

   • Embed this notice
     Moritz Bartl (gamambel@social.tchncs.de)'s status on Sunday, 23-Jun-2024 17:43:23 JST Moritz Bartl

     in reply to

     • Tokyo Outsider (337ppm)

     @tokyo_0 @jeffowski I do not see "my" definition as contrary to the possible definitions that Merriam Webster offers? Religion as a set of beliefs. Which automatically means any belief that is contrary to that set is outside of it. And a belief is by definition something you cannot know for certain, you just *think* it is true. So you are introducing separation, between those that believe that, and those that believe otherwise.

   • Embed this notice
     Tokyo Outsider (337ppm) (tokyo_0@mas.to)'s status on Sunday, 23-Jun-2024 17:46:18 JST Tokyo Outsider (337ppm)

     in reply to

     • Moritz Bartl

     @gamambel @jeffowski Since you picked out Sadhguru, let's take Hinduism as an example. Do you believe that god created the world but is separate from it? Or do you believe that he is part of everything? Under what you've just written here these would be two different beliefs, and believing one of the two would exclude you from being part of that "religion". But both schools of thought exist within Hinduism, and all the people could be described as Hindu. Whichever you choose, you're still Hindu.

   • Embed this notice
     Tokyo Outsider (337ppm) (tokyo_0@mas.to)'s status on Sunday, 23-Jun-2024 17:49:17 JST Tokyo Outsider (337ppm)

     in reply to

     • Moritz Bartl

     @gamambel @jeffowski So what you're saying is that it's acceptable to claim all religion is "poison" because the existence of an idea that can't be established as true or false forces people to choose, themselves, whether or not they believe it, and this is authoritarian and so is inescapably poison? 🤔

     So science is poison as well, isn't it. Because the practice of science is to form a hypothesis not yet known to be true or false, and use one's ideas about it to test that hypothesis.

   • Embed this notice
     Moritz Bartl (gamambel@social.tchncs.de)'s status on Sunday, 23-Jun-2024 17:49:18 JST Moritz Bartl

     in reply to

     • Tokyo Outsider (337ppm)

     @tokyo_0 @jeffowski Ah. It's not that someone else decides you are part of it or not. YOUR belief makes YOU decide whether you are part of something discriminating or not. But that belief comes from somewhere external, not your own knowledge of facts. Which is what Sadghuru lays out in that article. On facts we can agree, if we both share the experience. A belief is just an idea. A possibility. The moment is is known to be true it stops being a belief, it becomes a fact.

   • Embed this notice
     Tokyo Outsider (337ppm) (tokyo_0@mas.to)'s status on Sunday, 23-Jun-2024 17:50:43 JST Tokyo Outsider (337ppm)

     in reply to

     • Moritz Bartl

     @gamambel @jeffowski In fact, the very nature of the human experience relies on us having, ourselves, or hearing about ideas and forming a view of whether they are true or false, almost always without the full information one might require to establish to a broadly acceptable level of proof whether that idea is correct. So being human is also poison. Society is poison. Existence is poison. Are we headed in a good direction?

   • Embed this notice
     Tokyo Outsider (337ppm) (tokyo_0@mas.to)'s status on Sunday, 23-Jun-2024 17:53:07 JST Tokyo Outsider (337ppm)

     in reply to

     • Moritz Bartl

     @gamambel @jeffowski I don't think it's possible to say how "careful" all religious people are without indulging in mind-reading or projection—your argument here is at risk of relying on the fact that you think it's the case and so have made assumptions that all the people whose ideas you disagree with must be thinking in a way you disagree with.

   • Embed this notice
     Moritz Bartl (gamambel@social.tchncs.de)'s status on Sunday, 23-Jun-2024 17:53:08 JST Moritz Bartl

     in reply to

     • Tokyo Outsider (337ppm)

     @tokyo_0 @jeffowski We move to the most important step! In religion, you believe a belief to be true! In science, you are very careful about this distinction. It is the moment where you judge a hypothesis to be true where it becomes dangerous, which is all that is being pointed out in the article, nothing else?

   • Embed this notice
     Tokyo Outsider (337ppm) (tokyo_0@mas.to)'s status on Sunday, 23-Jun-2024 17:57:53 JST Tokyo Outsider (337ppm)

     in reply to

     • Moritz Bartl

     @gamambel @jeffowski Yes, perhaps. But again, definitions matter when someone is broadcasting an idea like "X thing (that probably at least half the world considers sacred) is poison"

   • Embed this notice
     Moritz Bartl (gamambel@social.tchncs.de)'s status on Sunday, 23-Jun-2024 17:57:55 JST Moritz Bartl

     in reply to

     • Tokyo Outsider (337ppm)

     @tokyo_0 @jeffowski Again, it seems to be a mere difference in definition, not an actual disagreement?

   • Embed this notice
     Tokyo Outsider (337ppm) (tokyo_0@mas.to)'s status on Sunday, 23-Jun-2024 18:34:21 JST Tokyo Outsider (337ppm)

     in reply to

     • Moritz Bartl

     @gamambel @jeffowski There's nothing wrong with thinking an opinion or sharing an opinion. If you put it here in a public space intended for discussion and connection, there's also nothing wrong with me pointing out the issues with it.

     You're free to offend whoever you please. You're not free of the consequences of your actions. And you're not free of their right, in turn, to say what they think about it.

   • Embed this notice
     Moritz Bartl (gamambel@social.tchncs.de)'s status on Sunday, 23-Jun-2024 18:34:23 JST Moritz Bartl

     in reply to

     • Tokyo Outsider (337ppm)

     @tokyo_0 @jeffowski If we define religion as "set of beliefs", and being part of a religion as "subscribing to this particular set of beliefs", why is it then not okay for somebody to be of the opinion that that is already and generally "poison"?

     You may not agree with it, but that should be ok, in the space of hypotheses, to have different opinions?

     Interesting, how you introduced "sacred" into this! We could probably talk for days about what "sacred" means and implies... ;-)

   • Embed this notice
     Tokyo Outsider (337ppm) (tokyo_0@mas.to)'s status on Sunday, 23-Jun-2024 19:16:51 JST Tokyo Outsider (337ppm)

     in reply to

     • Moritz Bartl

     @gamambel @jeffowski What I see is that someone isn't interested at all in the effect their words have on the people reading them. And to be honest, that's enough for me to stop reading. 👋

   • Embed this notice
     Moritz Bartl (gamambel@social.tchncs.de)'s status on Sunday, 23-Jun-2024 19:16:53 JST Moritz Bartl

     in reply to

     • Tokyo Outsider (337ppm)

     @tokyo_0 @jeffowski

     Don't you see how you feeling offended by it is exactly the point that is being made in the article, that it creates pain, because your belief system makes you think it is wrong, and not only "a different equally valid opinion"?

     The core idea here is to not merely "tolerate the pain of difference", but "dissolve the pain" by realizing how the only thing that causes the pain in the first place is the belief that one belief is wrong and the other is right.

     Q.E.D.?

   • Embed this notice
     Tokyo Outsider (337ppm) (tokyo_0@mas.to)'s status on Sunday, 23-Jun-2024 19:20:42 JST Tokyo Outsider (337ppm)

     in reply to

     • Moritz Bartl

     @gamambel @jeffowski You keep telling yourself that's what happened here, Moritz 😂

   • Embed this notice
     Moritz Bartl (gamambel@social.tchncs.de)'s status on Sunday, 23-Jun-2024 19:20:44 JST Moritz Bartl

     in reply to

     • Tokyo Outsider (337ppm)

     @tokyo_0 @jeffowski So your pain that comes from your own judgment makes it so that you think the other person is not interested in it, and then in your reality that becomes a fact. Isn't it more that you *believe* the other is not interested, and that becomes an insinuation rather than an assumption to verify? Isn't it only the other that can know if they are interested or not?

   • Embed this notice
     Tokyo Outsider (337ppm) (tokyo_0@mas.to)'s status on Sunday, 23-Jun-2024 19:22:11 JST Tokyo Outsider (337ppm)

     in reply to

     • Moritz Bartl

     @gamambel @jeffowski Do you think this is benefitting you in some way?

   • Embed this notice
     Moritz Bartl (gamambel@social.tchncs.de)'s status on Sunday, 23-Jun-2024 19:22:13 JST Moritz Bartl

     in reply to

     • Tokyo Outsider (337ppm)

     @tokyo_0 @jeffowski

     Which is where we have different beliefs, which to me does not separate us, whereas "religion" would ;-)

   • Embed this notice
     Tokyo Outsider (337ppm) (tokyo_0@mas.to)'s status on Sunday, 23-Jun-2024 19:23:02 JST Tokyo Outsider (337ppm)

     in reply to

     • Moritz Bartl

     @gamambel @jeffowski That's interesting. I disagree, so we can just add that to the list, can't we.

   • Embed this notice
     Moritz Bartl (gamambel@social.tchncs.de)'s status on Sunday, 23-Jun-2024 19:23:03 JST Moritz Bartl

     in reply to

     • Tokyo Outsider (337ppm)

     @tokyo_0 @jeffowski

     This discussion? No, I do not believe that. I know that it is.

   • Embed this notice
     Tokyo Outsider (337ppm) (tokyo_0@mas.to)'s status on Sunday, 23-Jun-2024 19:24:32 JST Tokyo Outsider (337ppm)

     in reply to

     • Moritz Bartl

     @gamambel @jeffowski What is it you're getting from this?

   • Embed this notice
     Moritz Bartl (gamambel@social.tchncs.de)'s status on Sunday, 23-Jun-2024 19:24:33 JST Moritz Bartl

     in reply to

     • Tokyo Outsider (337ppm)

     @tokyo_0 @jeffowski

     Wait. So you think you can determine whether something is something that I benefit from? Isn't that inherently something I can decide only for myself?

   • Embed this notice
     Tokyo Outsider (337ppm) (tokyo_0@mas.to)'s status on Sunday, 23-Jun-2024 19:51:58 JST Tokyo Outsider (337ppm)

     in reply to

     • Moritz Bartl

     @gamambel @jeffowski Ok, well I think it's worth considering whether whoever you're having these debates is on board with digging into the same kind of deep, broad-ranging philosophical debate as you're trying to have. I think it could come across as a search for more and more convoluted intellectual gymnastics to tell someone their legitimate concern over something they feel is likely to cause offence is invalid.

   • Embed this notice
     Moritz Bartl (gamambel@social.tchncs.de)'s status on Sunday, 23-Jun-2024 19:52:00 JST Moritz Bartl

     in reply to

     • Tokyo Outsider (337ppm)

     @tokyo_0 @jeffowski

     For me, it is an exercise in communication, in various ways. I enjoy such exercises.

     It is also a distraction from other things, which brings relaxation.

     Contact, intellectual stimulation, personal development/growth, relaxation. Probably more.

     It is not my intention to cause pain, it is my intention to experiment and improve upon having intellectual debates about emotionally charged topics such as "religion" or "sacret". I am deeply interested in such exchanges.

   • Embed this notice
     Tokyo Outsider (337ppm) (tokyo_0@mas.to)'s status on Sunday, 23-Jun-2024 19:52:07 JST Tokyo Outsider (337ppm)

     in reply to

     • Moritz Bartl

     @gamambel @jeffowski Whether or not someone agrees with it or disagrees, it's not hard to recognise that "religion is poison" is a contentious viewpoint likely to offend a significant number of people.

   • Embed this notice
     Tokyo Outsider (337ppm) (tokyo_0@mas.to)'s status on Sunday, 23-Jun-2024 19:54:21 JST Tokyo Outsider (337ppm)

     in reply to

     • Moritz Bartl

     @gamambel @jeffowski Well I wanted to bring it to your attention, because in the past you'd shared some psychology materials I found particularly helpful and seeing that you'd boosted that idea seemed very much at odds with the impression I had of you as someone who was interested in people's wellbeing. And rather than just hit the "unfollow" button when I saw it, I thought it was worth having a conversation with you first to see if some shared understanding could be found.

   • Embed this notice
     Moritz Bartl (gamambel@social.tchncs.de)'s status on Sunday, 23-Jun-2024 19:54:22 JST Moritz Bartl

     in reply to

     • Tokyo Outsider (337ppm)

     @tokyo_0 @jeffowski I mean, you started it, in some way. Or Jeff started it. Or I started it by retooting a picture, without evening reading or identifying with the tag. I did not even necessarily express my own opinion, I was just trying to narrow down on why somebody might say "religion is poison" and why others might have a different opinion or even feel offended about that statement. What did you want to express? That you simply disagree, or that you don't like him to say that?

   • Embed this notice
     Tokyo Outsider (337ppm) (tokyo_0@mas.to)'s status on Sunday, 23-Jun-2024 20:02:17 JST Tokyo Outsider (337ppm)

     in reply to

     • Moritz Bartl

     @gamambel @jeffowski Ok, well personally I think the way you're going about it will probably prove to be a net loss for you overall, because you're approaching the debate in a way that is going to damage your relationships with the people you're having that debate with. But I wish you all the best with having these kinds of debates you say are so important to you, with other people.

   • Embed this notice
     Moritz Bartl (gamambel@social.tchncs.de)'s status on Sunday, 23-Jun-2024 20:02:19 JST Moritz Bartl

     in reply to

     • Tokyo Outsider (337ppm)

     @tokyo_0 @jeffowski

     And you think it is important not to state anything that somebody else may find offensive, even if you didn't mean it as an attack against another human? Doesn't it involve a tradeoff between honesty, sharing my opinion, and pointing out what the author sees as a source of pain, a poison?

     I also see elements of gymnastics, but that doesn't take away anything from how I find it important. For me, these are highly relevant and very practical discussions, not merely abstract.

   • Embed this notice
     Tokyo Outsider (337ppm) (tokyo_0@mas.to)'s status on Sunday, 23-Jun-2024 20:03:47 JST Tokyo Outsider (337ppm)

     in reply to

     • Moritz Bartl

     @gamambel @jeffowski Yeah, that's just not how communication works, though. We don't get to make statements we know might offend people and then when they're offended come back with "well actually I didn't mean the generally understood meaning of those words when I said that thing" and then take up hours of people's time schooling them on our own personal definition of the world. I mean, you can try. But I don't think it'll work out well for you.

   • Embed this notice
     Moritz Bartl (gamambel@social.tchncs.de)'s status on Sunday, 23-Jun-2024 20:03:49 JST Moritz Bartl

     in reply to

     • Tokyo Outsider (337ppm)

     @tokyo_0 @jeffowski

     If I say I agree with the statement "religion is poison", you may want to know how I define religion in this context, and what I mean by that critisism. As I was trying to lay out, I can see the validity behind such a statement, when you assume religion to be a (pre)defined set of beliefs, and separating people into those that belong to a religion and those that don't, based on how they happen to subscribe to a different set of beliefs or even no particular set of beliefs.

   • Embed this notice
     Tokyo Outsider (337ppm) (tokyo_0@mas.to)'s status on Sunday, 23-Jun-2024 20:11:15 JST Tokyo Outsider (337ppm)

     in reply to

     • Moritz Bartl

     @gamambel @jeffowski I never said anything about being offended myself. What I said (here👉https://mas.to/@tokyo_0/112664812257064797, 3 hours ago) was that it was an offensive and unhelpful over-generalisation.

     It's clear expressing an idea like that is going to cause a significant number of people offence. Whether the author accurately communicated their own ideas is their responsibility. It's a very straightforward statement. I don't think any "reading into it" is necessary to recognise that it's contentious.

   • Embed this notice
     Moritz Bartl (gamambel@social.tchncs.de)'s status on Sunday, 23-Jun-2024 20:11:17 JST Moritz Bartl

     in reply to

     • Tokyo Outsider (337ppm)

     @tokyo_0 @jeffowski I still don't understand whether you feeling offended is based on what the author of it MAY have been trying to communicate with that, or based on what YOU read into it. There is a huge difference between these two things.

     I also didn't mean to "school" you about "my" definition, but rather in collaboration agree on one definition for the sake of the discussion, to see what might be a potential intepretation of the statement? I did not care which one we pick.

   • Embed this notice
     Tokyo Outsider (337ppm) (tokyo_0@mas.to)'s status on Sunday, 23-Jun-2024 20:34:32 JST Tokyo Outsider (337ppm)

     in reply to

     • Moritz Bartl

     @gamambel @jeffowski There are some other things I need to do, so I think it would be best if we conclude our conversation here.

   • Embed this notice
     Moritz Bartl (gamambel@social.tchncs.de)'s status on Sunday, 23-Jun-2024 20:34:33 JST Moritz Bartl

     in reply to

     • Tokyo Outsider (337ppm)

     @tokyo_0 @jeffowski I was about to write a longer response, because I see several dimensions here that I consider of relevance, but I am hesitant to open up even more areas, since I am not sure you would enjoy it right now, and not only see it as somebody trying to school you or play mental gymnastics. If you like, I would take the time to elaborate on where I think our disagreements lie? It sounds more like you would like to stop it for now? Which is fine for me also.

   • Embed this notice
     Tokyo Outsider (337ppm) (tokyo_0@mas.to)'s status on Monday, 24-Jun-2024 01:26:16 JST Tokyo Outsider (337ppm)

     in reply to

     • Moritz Bartl

     @gamambel @jeffowski I don't think you're in danger of that here. But I do think we're done, for good. I reached out to you because I appreciated the valuable insights you'd shared in the past and thought you were someone who would understand some basic ideas that are important to me. You've shown me you are not. Thanks for taking the time to do that. But this is a boundary—please respect it. All the best. 👋

   • Embed this notice
     Moritz Bartl (gamambel@social.tchncs.de)'s status on Monday, 24-Jun-2024 01:26:18 JST Moritz Bartl

     in reply to

     • Tokyo Outsider (337ppm)

     @tokyo_0 @jeffowski (One of the even larger discussions would be "Should I limit my speech to things that do cause anyone to feel offended", with which I *strongly* disagree. I think that is one of the biggest dangers to society. In my blog, I call it the "Fahrenheit 451 argument". )

   • Embed this notice
     Moritz Bartl (gamambel@social.tchncs.de)'s status on Monday, 24-Jun-2024 01:26:19 JST Moritz Bartl

     in reply to

     • Tokyo Outsider (337ppm)

     @tokyo_0 @jeffowski OK! Thanks. I did enjoy this, even though I think we failed in a few areas to communicate, but overall it was a good experience for me still, and helpful. Have a good Sunday!

   • Embed this notice
     Tokyo Outsider (337ppm) (tokyo_0@mas.to)'s status on Monday, 24-Jun-2024 02:40:15 JST Tokyo Outsider (337ppm)

     in reply to

     • Moritz Bartl

     @gamambel @jeffowski You had opportunities to do all those things already. You spent those opportunities doing something else instead. That was your choice. The world doesn't owe you repeated opportunities. No one owes you their time or engagement — that sense of entitlement is misplaced. People are within their rights to choose whether they engage with you. Goodbye. 👋

   • Embed this notice
     Moritz Bartl (gamambel@social.tchncs.de)'s status on Monday, 24-Jun-2024 02:40:16 JST Moritz Bartl

     in reply to

     • Tokyo Outsider (337ppm)

     @tokyo_0 @jeffowski I take offense in this insinuation: You are not even *allowing* me to be interested in understanding what is important for you, or which point you were trying to make. You are falling into the trap of making assumptions about my interests, and are taking and presenting them as fact, and *then* you are offended by that -- by your own judgement of the situation. This is where a major confusion lies. You are presenting something that is simply *wrong*, and then cutting me off.