some really cool stuff... If some religious people believe they have a monopoly on truth, then are conversation and common ground possible? If so, what would be the difficulties and benefits of such a conversation? panelists
All religious people believe their religion has a monopoly on truth. And it's also BS to say "I personally don't have a monopoly on truth, but the religion I subscribe to is truth" Anyway, as I've mentioned before, tolerance is the most we can hope for from these "inter-faith conversations". At the end of the day, everyone still goes home thinking he's right. Especially since these conversations usually take place between so-called religious "leaders"
Coming to consensus on faith is an oxymoron. Truth is like gravity you don't have to prove it is absolute, nor do you have to claim you have exclusive knowledge of it. You just have to avoid falling more than 6 ft. onto your head. Discussing faith is like discussing who can hold their breath the longest, eventually everyone will have to breathe again and let the chips fall. When someone tells me they have the truth there are three questions I ask them. 1. If I were to ask your parents how honest and respectful you have been to them what would they tell me? 2. If I were to ask your wife or husband if you are a very unselfish person or you liked things your way what would they tell me? 3. If I were to ask your children if you always kept your promises and never got angry what would they tell me. Asking relationship questions is one simple way to find out how close opinions come to truth. genuine love and truth are twins in life and like gravity every action has a reaction.
i'm not sure how faith is different from any other topic, in that way. we have an entire forum right here...tons of concepts discussed...you can walk away from nearly every one of them with the sense that all sides to the discussion believe they have truth....and that tolerance of different ideas is all that can be sought.
That's why tolerance is so important, when you start forcing others to accept your view as the truth, that is when the real trouble starts. This is one of the biggest problem I see in most Muslim countries in the world.
Communication, Education, Indoctrination, Brainwashing, Intimidation/Threat, Torture.... various levels of influencing others. The idea of forcing others to accept your view as the truth implies that abusive force is the common means. Most would see abusive force as intimidation, threat or torture. Media can indoctrinate people to believe certain 'truths' Public education, Religious teaching, parental instructions are some of the stronest influences for what we believe as truth. We influence one another. Government 'spins' truth Enforcement influences truth. There are so many factors that 'force' us to a mindset of our own personal view of truth. Tolerance requires us to listen instead of react. We can listen to each other respectfully that is tolerance. Tolerance does not require us to find synthesis. Synthesis forces what one group believes upon another. It is group control. Respect for uniqueness and differences is tolerance, synthesis is the tyranny of majority opinion, the pressure of those leading and the manipulation of selective information which can be manipulated and controlled by all the influencers I listed. When it comes to forcing truth on others- don't forget the powerful influences of education, government, media and religion. It is not necessary to force an opinion or a truth if you are willing to exchange and share ideas. Communication is the valid vehicle for ideas. What I tolerate in my life you may not tolerate in your life. This diversity is valuable. Tolerance is best used to understand differences not eliminate them. Synthesis is a very dangerous means of forcing truths on others. I view D&D as a communication forum- debate doesn't change minds as much as it provides understanding.
