This weekly roundup thread is intended for all culture war posts. 'Culture war' is vaguely defined, but it basically means controversial issues that fall along set tribal lines. Arguments over culture war issues generate a lot of heat and little light, and few deeply entrenched people ever change their minds. This thread is for voicing opinions and analyzing the state of the discussion while trying to optimize for light over heat.
Optimistically, we think that engaging with people you disagree with is worth your time, and so is being nice! Pessimistically, there are many dynamics that can lead discussions on Culture War topics to become unproductive. There's a human tendency to divide along tribal lines, praising your ingroup and vilifying your outgroup - and if you think you find it easy to criticize your ingroup, then it may be that your outgroup is not who you think it is. Extremists with opposing positions can feed off each other, highlighting each other's worst points to justify their own angry rhetoric, which becomes in turn a new example of bad behavior for the other side to highlight.
We would like to avoid these negative dynamics. Accordingly, we ask that you do not use this thread for waging the Culture War. Examples of waging the Culture War:
-
Shaming.
-
Attempting to 'build consensus' or enforce ideological conformity.
-
Making sweeping generalizations to vilify a group you dislike.
-
Recruiting for a cause.
-
Posting links that could be summarized as 'Boo outgroup!' Basically, if your content is 'Can you believe what Those People did this week?' then you should either refrain from posting, or do some very patient work to contextualize and/or steel-man the relevant viewpoint.
In general, you should argue to understand, not to win. This thread is not territory to be claimed by one group or another; indeed, the aim is to have many different viewpoints represented here. Thus, we also ask that you follow some guidelines:
-
Speak plainly. Avoid sarcasm and mockery. When disagreeing with someone, state your objections explicitly.
-
Be as precise and charitable as you can. Don't paraphrase unflatteringly.
-
Don't imply that someone said something they did not say, even if you think it follows from what they said.
-
Write like everyone is reading and you want them to be included in the discussion.
On an ad hoc basis, the mods will try to compile a list of the best posts/comments from the previous week, posted in Quality Contribution threads and archived at /r/TheThread. You may nominate a comment for this list by clicking on 'report' at the bottom of the post and typing 'Actually a quality contribution' as the report reason.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Notes -
Answering the question you asked, I think it's in part because the unfamiliar is seen as exotic and interesting and exciting and novel, whereas what we grew up with, even if it was just in the background, is the same old boring thing. Part of it is the Exotic Wisdom Of The East notion and the lure of something that can be presented to be five thousand years old, and which is easier to get into than Judaism (which makes similar claims to antiquity and constant tradition to the present day).
Part of it is intellectual curiosity which means you want to be well-read and familiar with world cultures, and that in turn can devolve into the cherry-picking amongst westernised versions of Buddhism and other traditions. I think part of it could also be down to the efforts of ISKCON to introduce Krishna-devotion to the West; the Bhagavad Gita is a source text for that.
Part of it is that it doesn't make demands in the same way your natal or ancestral traditions do; you know what you have to do even if you're a fallen-away Christian (or Jew or Muslim) and if you fell away because you don't like the rules and the whole idea of sin and the rest of it, then you're not going back. But adopting a Westernised version of Hinduism or Buddhism leaves you free to pick and choose: you don't have to perform the faith as the natives would do it, you can pluck out the philosophy and the parts that appeal to you (look at how yoga has been treated). You can be spiritual but not religious. You can talk about karma and the rest of it, but it's not the same as sin and salvation; at the worst, you will be reborn in an earthly body to do it all over again and learn the lessons you need to learn (there's not much, if any, talk of the Buddhist hells or the Hindu afterlife of punishment in Western versions, even if those are not eternal as in Christianity). Moksha/liberation is also appealing because it's impersonal: no facing a personal God to answer for your sins in the afterlife, just merging into the cosmic energy of the universe.
I'm not saying there aren't sincere Western converts to Buddhism/Hinduism, but the pop culture version of these is what most people who'd toss off the "I am become Death" quote know.
I’ve found Hindu religious literature maddening to read. Its poeticism and lack of doctrinal, formal structure to it makes it like trying to hold sand in your hands. It’s also difficult to find some sort of definitive, religious entry point for learning about it. Most westerners I know, are more attracted to the visual displays of its practices than the intellectual philosophy of it.
But there are plenty of practices to leave people more than intrigued about the religion.
There's a lot of dense, what I would call in other contexts, theology for various sects and movements within Hinduism, but a surface level engagement with it is not going to introduce you to that. I've tootled around on various Wikipedia pages to find out "okay, so this guy is meant to be a guru and saint in a particular movement that taught - what, exactly?" when it comes to characters in biographical/religious movies.
There is also a strong devotional strain where exact theology and structure isn't important, what is important is being totally devoted and given over to God. See this person, for instance.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link