|
|
Religion and ethnocentrismBenjamin Spatz (bspatz@BRONZE.LCS.MIT.EDU)Sun, 14 Apr 1996 13:02:14 -0400
> This same argument could be made for liguistic diversity, ethnic diversity and all the other things which have been used as the basis of "us-vs.-them" views of the world. I would suggest that perhaps there IS an "us" and a "them". Is this a bad thing? Yes, it can be used for ill, as you point out, but this is a kind of "slippery slope" arguement that argues a view suggesting... In other words, your arguement doesn't really suggest that there is something inherent in the world religions that necessitates intolerance for other ethnic groups. Particularly once we move away from an essentializing notion of ethnicity. > I completely agree that the same argument could be applied to linguistic and ethnic diversity. The difference, though, as I see it, is that I know of no program which was founded on the basis of enjoyment of multiculturalism or celebration of divirsity which then went on to commit evil, intolerant acts. I think the reason for this is that such acts would go against the precepts which are the backbone of such programs. Religion, on the other hand, uses backbone principles which have little do to with such things, which I think makes it easier for them to commit evil acts based on the "us and them" mentality, and thereby makes them more dangerous. This can easily be seen in a survey of the major violent acts of history, none of which (as far as I know) were supported by multiculturalism or divisity, but many of which were supported by religion. BENJAMIN ______________________________________________________________________________ bspatz@bronze.lcs.mit.edu Ben Spatz Cambridge, MA (617) 661-2430 ______________________________________________________________________________ "Infelicity is is involved in our corporeal nature." - Samuel Johnson "Which way I fly is hell. Myself am hell." - John Milton "Look within. Be still." - the Buddha
|