Can disagreements between different traditions be resolved?

Over the past few years here at zaadz-then-gaia, one of the things I've had the most interest in observing is how the proponents of the various traditions of “enlightenment” and religion and such treat each other and interact.

There are of course exceptions, but by and large it seems pretty cliqueish and tribal. People stick to their own, and while they are often quick to critique other systems, shy away or react negatively to critique of their favored system. This cliqueishness could be a really fertile thing to take a closer look at, some time in the future.

There's another way to look at it tho, which is, people filter themselves out into groups based on a sense of “what works best”, or “what works better for me”.

Kind of a pc vs. mac self organization - disagreements based on different views of the optimum “operating system”. The disagreements can become tribal, much like the pc vs mac wars, but they are based on utility and economics, on real factors, not just the randomness of having been, for instance, exposed to mystical christianity before being exposed to mystical buddhism, and therefore preferring the former to the latter, as an 'artifact of fate and personal history'.

But I wonder a lot if there can be a way to think about this, and talk about it, that avoids that effect of “being quick to critique other systems, but slow to critique their favored system”.

Ahhhh, probably not, it's probably all religion after all, a long struggle for mental territory.

What do you think? Has gaia been able to get the schools talking to each other?

Re: Can disagreements between different traditions be resolved?

Thought provoking question, Bill. This may be useful in approaching some sort of clarity.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Johari_window

Re: Can disagreements between different traditions be resolved?

Dave, read Bills story again it is good. The link refers to personal problems in relation to others. Bill's story seem more of a conceptual questioning of human behaviour/reasoning.

Re: Can disagreements between different traditions be resolved?

Dave >>> This may be useful in approaching some sort of clarity.

Hey, that johari/nohari window tool looks fascinating. I've heard of them before, but hadn't thought about them in any depth.

What a wonderful gift that would be, to be able to give and get johari windows.

Dang, I want one, hahahahahhaha! I'll be studying the tools at the bottom of that wiki page.

I'm not sure how I would apply that tool to the problem I was musing about - but it's fascinating to try to imagine how a tool could be made that might facilitate the varying school/tradition lines talking more effectively to each other.

Hmmmm - maybe make joharis as if the school system was an individual?

Re: Can disagreements between different traditions be resolved?

Yes, It is indeed a tendency. A very good observation indeed.
I just don't have real right of speaking probably. I have no affinity with religion, never had one and never will. (If I do, please tell me and force me to read my older work)

So I can only speak from a similar story in science.

The eternal fight between hidden-variable theories, and non-linear theories. (Quantum theories that is) (I am disregarding many worlds theory for the ease of reasoning)

They are both a different theory, to the same part of science. Quantum science.
The Famous Bell called it metaphysical experimentation. For two different theories rightly describing all existing knowledge (back then) only based upon different assumptions (one determinism, the other indeterminism). But they can be tested!

A change in the world as we knew it, when we could test philosphical concepts with experiments…
Anyways,
These two theories are alike Bill described before. But there is a catch. Once you include for instance many-worlds theory. One must conclude that there are appearently 3 correct ways to look at the world.

Let this sink in for a while: There are multiple correct ways to view and understand the world.

Or in short, by experiment, one can make strong that not one truth is necessary the only one. And this answer the origin to the problem.

People cannot criticize their own believes, cliquish behaviour or statements. If they think in black and white, right and wrong. Criticizing themselves would mean saying they are wrong. (remember, not maybe anything, just black and white) If they are wrong, all they believe was wrong. And their world collapses.
There are so many people that cling to truths as if it means the world to them.

There is no finite one truth. There is no single way of explaining things. There is no single best way to walk your lives. It is nature and reality itself that proves that to us. And as long as you cannot construct your own logically consistent truth out of already existing concepts and experiences. We are unable to successfully criticize ourselves and learn from it.

at least, that is how I see it.

Re: Can disagreements between different traditions be resolved?

Ahhh, yes, comparing the problem I described to competing models at the edge of scientific theories seems very appropriate.

The big difference being, in science there is a relatively well agreed on protocol for how models should compete, and a shared sense of the methods with which the models can be tested.

And I think what I'm asking can be restated like this - ” Will it ever be possible for people studying “enlightenment” to invent and use a universal method, something like the scientific method, that they can use to talk to each other?”.

—

I like your “multiple models may ALL be at least partly correct” suggestion. I think I use something like that myself, by talking about the different “types of enlightenment”, and trying to make the point that “enlightenment” doesn't look like one single thing, but instead looks like a cluster of related things.

>>> We are unable to successfully criticize ourselves and learn from it.

I'm not sure exactly what you mean here. Perhaps it's an emotional fixation on my part, because I WANT to hold onto the hope that we humans CAN learn to criticize ourselves and learn from that critique.

Admittedly, I don't see a lot of evidence that that learning is happening very fast - and as a group, humans do seem to be endlessly 'reinventing the wheel', and starting over, without learning much from the past.

And religious gullibility does seem to be as vast as the universe.

Re: Can disagreements between different traditions be resolved?

It goes beyond partly. They are all in whole a correct answer to explaining the world. Enlightenment is of course something else, but the idea is about the same, as you express (and I follow it) in your third paragraph.

You can then wonder two things: as you say, parts must be correct. And the truth is some form of cluster. Or, what in the case of the theory is more likely (since their prime assumptions contradict one another) That all three can be derived from a more universal axiomatic relation. One that seems, dauntingly difficult to perceive. (and I am working on it :P) one could wonder if this has to do with the nature of reality. Or with the process of thinking. However there is apparently some connections between humans and reality that makes such a thing happen.

Ow don't get me wrong, humans can indeed criticize themselves! remember the sentence before hand 'And as long as you cannot construct your own logically consistent truth out of already existing concepts and experiences.' I call it the 'thinker' argument. If you can think for yourself, and basically do not blindly assume everything your peers tell you (including your parents) You can criticize the world (as a beginning) and following from the realisation that you are part of the world, a criticizing oneself.
I think many people do it, but it just isn't mainstream.

how can you learn people to think for themselves? I don't know what came first, the self criticism or refusing to be gullible. I wouldn't know. It is an interesting question however.

Perhaps if people learn how to discover answer by themselves without them being told. (and without them asking someone (!! person !!) for it. It might happen.

Re: Can disagreements between different traditions be resolved?

goodnight btw

Re: Can disagreements between different traditions be resolved?

'Ahhhh, probably not, it's probably all religion after all, a long struggle for mental territory.'

i think you answered your own question bill.

organized religion is a 'a long struggle for mental territory' - yours and mine. not to mention the percs for those in command - money, sex, and power etc, etc
religion is not any of the above..

ps buddha was not a buddhist. christ was not a christian.

Re: Can disagreements between different traditions be resolved?

basho >>> organized religion is a 'a long struggle for mental territory' - yours and mine. not to mention the percs for those in command - money, sex, and power etc, etc
religion is not any of the above..

Hmmmmm, how so, how are you modeling the difference between the two?

What's the relationship between 'organized religion' and 'religion'?

Can you give a few examples?

Re: Can disagreements between different traditions be resolved?

Hi Bill. I haven't been here long enough to know about GAIA, but as a social networking devotee :-) , I think that it would be consistant with human nature. The general tendency to want to win the victory about Truth is a global issue.  

From my observations, it's always going to be divided, if people think that God is OUT THERE, and some say it's IN HERE (pointing to the heart), people are actually talking about two totally different thing.  It is challenging for people that hold God on a pedestal and wringle through life feeling smaller.  However I guess, occassionally people that take Ramakrishna's view “I'd rather taste the sugar, than be the sugar”, will be a bit gentler about it, because they know the other version, but the stay where he are enjoying the sweetness of the Beloved.  And then those that see God inside are often going to do things that do not resemble things the GOD WITHIN would actually do, so the people around them remind them that must be human because they are not living up to what people think GOD IS.  

It's a difficult one really, and I think we always need to come back to ourselves and see th world as it is; unity in diversity is a great thing to aspire to, occassionally we see snippets of it, but for now my GOD is bigger and funkier han your god.   :-)

May all people have pure water

Re: Can disagreements between different traditions be resolved?

How funny, Tony, we are bumping into one another all over.

Re pure water, I just discovered Michael Pritchard's TED talk about his LifeSaver water filtration invention for “all people.” Have you heard of it?
http://www.ted.com/talks/michael_pritchard_invents_a_water_filter.html

Appreciated your wise words here.

Blissings, OM Bastet

Re: Can disagreements between different traditions be resolved?

Rev Om 

Yes I'm familiar with that, on my IT network I aggregate the TED Blog

Thanks

Tony

Re: Can disagreements between different traditions be resolved?

Religion will always be chaotic and divisive because that’s the nature of the world, its got nothing to do with the nature of religion. The only thing that will solve religious divisions is to change the world.
People internalize their religion and then it becomes a reflection of the inner ethnocentrism inside them
The antidote to this is detachment
One should join a religion that they don’t feel any attachment to, or emotionality toward it.

Re: Can disagreements between different traditions be resolved?

I don't think the nature of the world is chaotic and divisive. Neither that of religion. Determinism (which is all monotheism's) implies that there is only one truth. However everyone has his or her own truth, therefore the order of thought implies contradiction between humans. However determinism isn't the only way of thought in the world. You can have indeterminists, or even multi-determinists.
They do not live in chaos. But in tranquillity. At least the indeterminists do. Except the first :S