acrimonious debates

kimfelix · April 7, 2008

I am new comer to your group so please forgive me if I am speaking out of turn. There have been a couple of recent threads which on the one hand have included some very interesting discussions but have also got to be very heated and even abusive. Those holding the opposite view have been called 'morons' or 'idiots'.

My question is whether this type of verbal aggression is ever justified. For me, it seems incongruous that discussion of high spiritual matters should be conducted in this manner but I can see that where people feel passionately about their beliefs they will have their emotions aroused by opponents.

What do you think? Are there some occasions on which a very aggressive or even abusive line of discourse should be adopted? And if someone takes that sort of tone, how should one respond? My own feeling is that verbal aggression does nothing to benefit either the speaker or hearer; just the opposite. It also seems that the emotions aroused are not particularly spiritual but are based on a sense of personal self-esteem. But the point about how to conduct debates with different types of opponents is one that interests me and I would welcome the thoughts of others.

And as I said, some of the actual subjects that were being debated were very interesting, but I didn't feel like joining in with the rough boys. So I will start a new thread with another line of inquiry that came to mind.

Kulapavana · April 7, 2008

The way we debate and deal with opposing views says a lot about who we are. Some people here indeed act in a very unprofessional manner. Others believe in things that can only be described as absurd and try to shove their beliefs down other people's throats. I am not sure what is worse.

Anyway, it is an internet forum. Do not expect too much from the participants.

theist · April 7, 2008

This age of kali is characterized by quarrel and confusion. We here are not immune no matter how we may pretend to be above the fray of the world. We are mostly beginners no matter how many books we may know or how long we think we have been involved in spiritual study.

What we see here and elsewhere on the internet should not be called debatesIMO. They are arguments mostly which lack the sophistication of debates.

I have read that an honest debate in the vedic tradition held that the loser of the debate become a student of the winner. That takes immense humility. I have never seen any thing close to that. Generally we are reluctant to even admit we are wrong on a single point let alone submit to another for instruction.

A problem I have and bring to as such disccussions is I have never been a good listerner to the views of others. if someone has a problem in theirlife I am a great listerner but if they have a belief different from my own on spiritual matters I display little patience.

It's a deeply held problem that I am aware of and working on overcoming but it may take a couple more lifetimes at the rate I am going.

When two or more people like me get together and disagree well... :argue:

xexon · April 7, 2008

I treat everyone as an equal. All are welcome around my campfire. It makes no matter if our philosophies mesh or not. I celebrate differences. But to chase after God, you must peel the differences away until there is no difference. No difference between watcher and watched.

There is great drama in this peeling of layers.

God is ultimately an experience. All your brothers and sisters around the world are drawn to it but they know not why. They can't see too well just yet and walk around in a defensive posture, just in case something challenges them.

People who can see just walk around the obstacles.

One should listen to both the fool and the sage. If you can't see, you may not be able to tell them apart.

x

kimfelix · April 7, 2008

But is there ever a time when heavy criticism, even of a personal nature, is called for? I ask this because this kind of polemic is quite a common feature of religious discourse. Christian missionaries compare murti puja to devil worship. If one feels one's views represent the absolute revealed truth then anyone who presents an alternative view is arguing against God.

And what about atheists? Should they be called fools? And do the acharyas ever write in that way about their opponents?

xexon · April 7, 2008

If you pay attention to all the divisions that exist between people, where is the time for God? Pay attention to what really matters.

You must rise above the mundane even if others cannot. You must be the example if no other is present. A seeker is not really a follower but a leader. It is by their example that others find attraction or not, to the path. Be a good ambassador for whatever path you follow.

The only sword you need is a sharp tongue. The only battlefield is within the mind itself.

Only the weakest of men take it to a battlefield on earth.

x

theist · April 8, 2008

But is there ever a time when heavy criticism, even of a personal nature, is called for?

Yes if someone is being rude and offensive you can say something strong. Generally it is the guru job's to do the correcting.

I ask this because this kind of polemic is quite a common feature of religious discourse. Christian missionaries compare murti puja to devil worship. If one feels one's views represent the absolute revealed truth then anyone who presents an alternative view is arguing against God.

It's always best to avoid fanatics no matter what religious flag they may fly under. Best to not spend time arguing with opponents. On a forum like this one however anyone can say anything as the rules are somewhat whimsically applied and a person may interuppt threads with the same abusive nonsense time and time again and no action is taken by the moderators. Thus the participants have to try and police the board but with no real authority.