Wednesday, October 26, 2011
A brief theological insight...
Yesterday, I talked to the Lex Vitae group at UST about engaging in civil discourse about important issues.
Part of my regret about our current political discourse is that there is so little of it-- that is, real and worthwhile discussion about what is important. People tend to talk to those who agree with them, because it is too risky to discuss tough topics with those who may oppose (and castigate) us.
Intriguingly, Christ did not seem to shy from discussion with those who disagreed with him the most. Consider how many of his conversations were with the Pharisees, for example; he always answered their questions, and at times it seems like they were just walking around town together.
A good example?
Part of my regret about our current political discourse is that there is so little of it-- that is, real and worthwhile discussion about what is important. People tend to talk to those who agree with them, because it is too risky to discuss tough topics with those who may oppose (and castigate) us.
Intriguingly, Christ did not seem to shy from discussion with those who disagreed with him the most. Consider how many of his conversations were with the Pharisees, for example; he always answered their questions, and at times it seems like they were just walking around town together.
A good example?
Comments:
<< Home
Yes, a good question and a good example, but remember, in the end, the Pharisees do want to kill him.
Spot
Spot
# posted by 
: 9:31 AM
: 9:31 AM
The hyperindividualism of our country and its resulting "political discourse", if you want to call it that, leaves no room whatsoever for reasoned debate and the pursuit of the common good, let alone a more just, fair, or equitable nation.
You have to be extreme to get the microphone, you have to be extreme to get anyone to notice you on Youtube.
Extreme sells, moderation bores and compromise is viewed as perfidy.
When did compromise become equated with being a quisling?
Scott Davis
You have to be extreme to get the microphone, you have to be extreme to get anyone to notice you on Youtube.
Extreme sells, moderation bores and compromise is viewed as perfidy.
When did compromise become equated with being a quisling?
Scott Davis
# posted by : 9:37 AM
: 9:37 AM
My reflection on your talk yesterday is here:http://susanjoan.wordpress.com/2011/10/26/engaging-in-difficult-dialogue/
Civil discourse is only good as long as there is dialog. Dissenting views can be discussed and perspective can be achieved if good arguments are offered on both sides of the dissention. But good arguments in order to be convincing and effective have to be informed. A good argument takes work, a fair amount of tact and patience if one wants to reach across and elicit a counterpoint, a dialog. In other words civil discourse takes time and effort and in a climate of shortcuts and instant gratification, when people use leverage (political or monetary) not to offer a dissenting view but to force it across, well civil discourse is just not possible. Discourse becomes a monologue and argument becomes contention.
Since my theological knowledge is somewhat limited, a good example of civil discourse comes from Pericles’ Athens, the Golden Age…which incidentally ended when against public opinion and I’m pretty sure some uncivil discourse, they went to war.
Since my theological knowledge is somewhat limited, a good example of civil discourse comes from Pericles’ Athens, the Golden Age…which incidentally ended when against public opinion and I’m pretty sure some uncivil discourse, they went to war.
The Apology comes to mind when I think of what is truly needed in order to have sound discourse in this country of thought-to-be-infallible political participants (pundits, candidates and voters all included):
In the Apology Socrates will suggest that philosophy begins with a sincere admission of ignorance; he later clarifies this, dramatically stating that whatever wisdom he has, comes from his knowledge that he knows nothing.
But humility is probably too much to expect from them and has nothing to do with Jesus, right?
Post a Comment
In the Apology Socrates will suggest that philosophy begins with a sincere admission of ignorance; he later clarifies this, dramatically stating that whatever wisdom he has, comes from his knowledge that he knows nothing.
But humility is probably too much to expect from them and has nothing to do with Jesus, right?
<< Home
