beastie wrote: Mormonism isn't just a religion, it's a life, a world-view, so when you flat out reject Mormonism, you have rejected THEM. I think this is why so many believers do not seem to be able to differentiate between criticizing the church and its leaders and criticizing the believer personally. They feel attacked when the church is criticized because they can't separate themselves from the church. So they attack back.
I have been trying to communicate this point for years. So, I am pleased to see that at least some people get it.
I wonder, though, if the critics see the same sensitivity in themselves--as a "culture" or group of critics, unbelievers, former members, or in terms of their current belief systems?
I have noticed over the years that criticism (including generic and non-personal) of certain criticism, or critics (particularly certain icons), or websites of critics, etc., tend to envoke no small level of defensiveness, protectivelness, and allegience. This occurs not only between the critics and the believing members who are counter-criticizing, but also between various faction of critics (as evinced by Vogel's recent experience on RFM).
Perhaps this is human nature, and a function of the way we humans may view the various types of relations (social, familial, intellectual, spiritual, etc.) we enter into--to one degree or another, it goes beyond simply feeling connected, to actually feeling apart of or sharing nature with the things we have relationships with. The relationships we develop, and things we tie ourselves to, become a part of us as well as we apart of them.
This, I believe, is important to understand when discussing with anyone about things involving those relationships. It may prove useful to take as much care and consideration in how one approaches criticism involving those relationships as one may take in discussing personal issues.
I think it also important to note that defensive reactions one may get when criticizing, may not just be about this sensativity to the relationship. It could be about the less than effective manner in which the criticism is delivered. I am not just referring to the blattant forms of belligerance and rancour, or other types of anti-social behavior, etc.. Sometimes it takes the form of talking and not really listening (when one is only willing to accept and respect their own point of view), presuming to know better what the person believes and says than the person themself, arrogance, condescention, and a noticable lack of charity, graciousness, empathy, and understanding, etc.. I know of whence I speak since I have recognized some of these traits in my own interactions, and I have seen how adversely it has affected others, even when my intent was otherwise.
Thanks, -Wade Englund-
Thanks, -Wade Englund-