Announcements: Universe of the Month! » Finding Universes to Join (and making yours more visible!) » Guide To Universes On RPG » Starter Locations & Prompts for Newbies » RPG Chat — the official app » USERNAME CHANGES » Suggestions & Requests: THE MASTER THREAD »

Latest Discussions: Aphantasia » Skill Trees - Good, Bad & Ugly » In-Game Gods & Gameplay Impact » Cunningham's Law » The Tribalism of Religion » Lost Library » Game Theory » The Hidden Void » Removing CS From an Indy Universe : Solution » On the Matter of New Players and Orphaned Plays » STOP BLAMING US FOR RPG BEING SLOW! » Polytheism » The Game of Life » Just War » Science and Philosophy » The Bible as Literature » Humans in the MV. Questions and thoughts. » Surviving the post-holiday apocalypse. » SL: 1097 Bestiary of Monsters » What latest tech excites me? »

Players Wanted: A Fairytale World in Need of Heroes & Villains! » Are You a Crime Addict? » Wuxia RP » Looking for roleplayers » New Realistic Roleplay - Small World Life ٩( ´・ш・)و » Mentors Wanted » MV Recruiting Drive: sci-fi players wanted! » Veilbrand: The Revolution » Gonna do this anyway. » Looking for Kamen Rider Players » Elysium » Looking for roleplayers for a dystopian past! » Revamping Fantasy Adventure RPG, need new players » Here, At the End of the World (supernatural mystery drama) » Seeking Role Players for a TOG Based RP » so I made a Stranger Things RP idk why not come join » LFP - New Roleplay » Gifted/Mutant individuals escaping the gov » Spaceship Zero! A retro horror sci fi RP with rayguns :D » mahou shoujo rp »

The Tribalism of Religion

a topic in Discussion & Debate, a part of the RPG forum.

Moderators: dealing with it, Ambassadors

Talk about philosophy, politics, news & current events, or any other subject you're interested in!

The Tribalism of Religion

Tips: 0.00 INK Postby dealing with it on Wed Apr 07, 2021 5:15 pm

I find it curious that someone can easily be a Taoist, Buddhist, and Confucian all at the same time. The religions support one another.



In contrast, one can only really subscribe to a single Abramic religion, and sometimes even only a single sect of that religion, without coming into conflict. Jews, Christians, and Muslims disagree fundamentally, and have no method for selecting among the three.



It seems that Eastern religions are thus more likely to contain a shred of integrity. They can all be true, unlike Western religions where they cannot.

Tip jar: the author of this post has received 0.00 INK in return for their work.

User avatar
dealing with it
Groundskeeper
Groundskeeper
Member for 10 years
Contributor Conversation Starter Author Conversationalist Friendly Beginnings Donated! Greeter Beta Tester Tipworthy Concierge Lifegiver

Re: The Tribalism of Religion

Tips: 1.00 INK Postby Kohananinja on Wed Apr 07, 2021 8:34 pm

Yeah, the Abrahamic religions all have a mandate that is sort of set up for exclusivity to your chosen faith, though I think it’s important to understand that the schisms between the different sects of these religions, and in some case even the branches themselves, are generally rooted in conflict in a way you don’t really see in Eastern religions, and goes beyond the beginning fact that they have different answers to some of the same questions. The first schism in Christianity between the now Orthodox and Catholic churches, at the end of the day, came down to regionalism and power, and the second schism between Catholics and Protestants similarly was over control of practice, and later power dynamics between these opposed groups, which sometimes also came to be seen as a new layer feeding into existing conflicts based on ethnic or national identity. The Sunni Shia split in Islam similarly also came down to disputes in leadership during the early Caliphate period, though these divisions haven’t always been used to define and stoke conflict. During times of peace and under stable empires, particularly in the Middle East, religious tolerance between the Muslims, Jews, and Christians who lived there was pretty standard. Actually, during the early spread of Islam in the Caliphate period, Jews and Christians were tolerated as fellow monotheists who were not to be forced with violence to convert, as it was seen as insincere that way. It was actually the generous tax breaks Muslims citizens received that played a big role in convincing people, particularly the merchant class who ended up spreading Islam across Central and South East Asia, to do so. These religions, either from their inception, or rise to prominence, have also been inherently political in a way that I'd argue Taoism and Buddhism at least traditionally haven't been.

Generally, as is often the case I’m afraid, it’s when there is societal upheaval, and vicious competition for power, land, and resources distributed along cultural identity lines, which includes religion, that you tend to see extreme religious intolerance and violence. When you get down to it and look closely though, many of the fundamental beliefs of the three Abrahamic religions are the same, with similar mandates, central figures such as Abraham, Issac, Moses, and even Jesus, though his identity as either teacher, prophet, or Messiah is a matter of deep division between them. They all also worship the same God, though a distressing number of people seem unaware of this fact.

It’s also important to note that Taoism and Confucianism operate more like philosophical codes of behavior for people to follow, more than actual religions, and categorizing them as such is a matter of hot debate among academics who study religious traditions, so while I certainly find your point interesting and intriguing, it might not be fair to compare them and their relation to Buddhism on the same level as the interactions between the Abrahamic religions. Buddhism also is extremely flexible, with the Buddha, who was adamant that he was not a god and did not wish to be treated as one, becoming more of a fixed character within stories with the pantheon of gods in a region, who interacted with them. All were designed to meld easily with the traditional (often polytheistic) religions of the cultures they took root in, most notably China, and don’t fundamentally conflict with them, or concepts like the order of the world(the exception perhaps being Buddhism in India where it first developed, and the concept of Nirvana challenged Moksha and the caste system), or reincarnation. Buddhism has also had periods of being ostracized in China when that religion’s messaging did not line up with the Emperor’s goals or views of the time, so while all have held huge influence in China since the Han Dynasty, there have been periods where one has clearly had dominant sway.

Tip jar: the author of this post has received 1.00 INK in return for their work.

User avatar
Kohananinja
Member for 13 years
Promethean Conversation Starter Author Inspiration Conversationalist Friendly Beginnings Novelist Lifegiver Tipworthy Tipworthy Giver

Re: The Tribalism of Religion

Tips: 0.00 INK Postby Sepokku on Fri Apr 09, 2021 9:01 pm

dealing with it wrote:I find it curious that someone can easily be a Taoist, Buddhist, and Confucian all at the same time. The religions support one another.



In contrast, one can only really subscribe to a single Abramic religion, and sometimes even only a single sect of that religion, without coming into conflict. Jews, Christians, and Muslims disagree fundamentally and have no method for selecting among the three.



It seems that Eastern religions are thus more likely to contain a shred of integrity. They can all be true, unlike Western religions where they cannot.


This isn't true actually. One can be Mormon and Catholic and Christian without ever running into contradictions. Mormonism builds on Christianity/Catholicism, so it is inherently compatible. The only difference between catholicism and Christianity is your view on the Church. So it is possible to be all three without ever having conflicting beliefs. Moreover, even among the religions that differ extremely (Islam/Judaism/catholicism), they all contain the same core story. For example, the devil is always a spirit of fire (Seraph/djinn/shaitan) and he always refuses to kneel before Adam (because adam is made of dirt).

Conversely one CANNOT be both Buddhist and Taoist, or any of the Eastern religions. Buddhism says suffering is inherent to life. Taoism says suffering isn't. Buddhism believes that every human being is a God that will one day become Buddha. Taoism thinks that is silly. No human can become Tao, that's the whole point of the religion. There are HUGE differences in eastern religion that makes them not mesh well.

You bring up a good point, but it is in support of Abrahamic religion, not vice versa.

Image

Tip jar: the author of this post has received 0.00 INK in return for their work.

User avatar
Sepokku
Member for 8 years
Promethean Conversation Starter Author Inspiration Friendly Beginnings World Builder Visual Appeal Conversationalist Person of Interest Greeter Arc Warden Property Buyer Storyteller Completionist Novelist Group Theory Helmsman Concierge Salesman Lifegiver Tipworthy Giver Cult Leader Hordemaster

Re: The Tribalism of Religion

Tips: 0.00 INK Postby Lord Saethos on Mon Apr 12, 2021 6:45 pm

Sepokku wrote:This isn't true actually. One can be Mormon and Catholic and Christian without ever running into contradictions. Mormonism builds on Christianity/Catholicism, so it is inherently compatible. The only difference between catholicism and Christianity is your view on the Church. So it is possible to be all three without ever having conflicting beliefs. Moreover, even among the religions that differ extremely (Islam/Judaism/catholicism), they all contain the same core story. For example, the devil is always a spirit of fire (Seraph/djinn/shaitan) and he always refuses to kneel before Adam (because adam is made of dirt).

Conversely one CANNOT be both Buddhist and Taoist, or any of the Eastern religions. Buddhism says suffering is inherent to life. Taoism says suffering isn't. Buddhism believes that every human being is a God that will one day become Buddha. Taoism thinks that is silly. No human can become Tao, that's the whole point of the religion. There are HUGE differences in eastern religion that makes them not mesh well.

You bring up a good point, but it is in support of Abrahamic religion, not vice versa.

Image

I think another example could be Sikhism and Hinduism. I don't understand both religions that well, but my understanding of them is that Hinduism believes in many gods, and Sikhism believes exclusively in one.

Also, there's the whole crisis in Myanmar right now, with I think the Buddhist majority trying to kill off the Rohingya people (who are Muslims).

In my opinion, any religion can be made to "support each other", if you have a mindset where you want to see it that way (which we've seen with a lot of new age cults that combine aspects of Christianity with other religions). Likewise, any religion can also be exclusive and non-accepting of other views (this is where you get fundamentalist sects that refuse to acknowledge other sects of the same religion).

I also think that religions being able to "support each other" means they have more or less integrity than each other, and often the "integrity" we ascribe to a religion is entirely subjective. As a Christian, I'd obviously ascribe "integrity" to my faith, whereas someone of any other religion likely would not. And frankly I don't see that as an issue. I think whether or not people see my religion as "truthful", or whether I see other people's religions as "truthful", doesn't really determine how "tribalistic" we as individuals will be.

I think upbringing, politics, and a lot of other factors play into how dogmatic people will be with religion. There are plenty of Christians, Muslims, and Jews who think people should be able to believe whatever religion they want, and there are plenty of people of these three religions that think anyone who isn't of their religion is absolutely vile and needs to be forcibly converted. Likewise, there's plenty of Atheists who believe you should believe whatever religion you want, and plenty who think religion should be outright outlawed.

This is probably a whole other debate, but I'm strongly of the opinion that, with or without religion, human beings will pursue conflict, conquest, colonialism, etc. As an interesting point to consider, nearly every culture on Earth has had a religion or spiritual belief, but the majority of cultures that have pursued imperialism have had to achieve agrarian societies first.

From some of the Indigenous Studies courses I've taken, there's a lot of evidence and arguments that suggest First Nations peoples in North America didn't really pursue conquest or imperialism the way that agrarian cultures have. Yes there was conflict, but from what I've learned it doesn't sound like they ever resulted in some kind of "land ownership", like in agrarian cultures. Even with say the Aztecs or Mayans, they had in many ways achieved agrarian cultures, built up cities, a lot of the same features we see in ancient Europe, Africa, Asia, and the Middle East.

I think, based on this, religion isn't the cause of "Tribalism", but "Tribalism" does often seep into religion. Some people can be more resistant to this, but others (I think its fair to say) try to encourage it.

Tip jar: the author of this post has received 0.00 INK in return for their work.

User avatar
Lord Saethos
Member for 4 years
Friendly Beginnings Promethean World Builder Group Theory Tipworthy Conversationalist Author Inspiration Lifegiver Person of Interest Novelist


Post a reply

Make a Donation

$

Become a Patron!

RPG relies exclusively on user donations to support the platform.

Donors earn the "Contributor" achievement and are permanently recognized in the credits. Consider donating today!

 

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest