Note: HCSV Board elections will occur on this date before this Forum begins.
Each of us has probably taken part in a number of persuasive arguments that have only resulted in hurt feelings and disturbed relationships but no further understanding or learning on anyone’s part. We have also probably found ourselves on both sides of those failed arguments. How can we do better?
In this forum, Humanist Community member Laura Mappin will take a look at several scholars’ views on this subject and then facilitate a group discussion on this topic. Audience members will consider real life argument examples provided by attendees and crowd-source possible responses. (This Forum will not be videotaped to allow for a freer discussion.)
Relational Intelligence: Human beings are social animals, we live in systems of relationships, with nature, other people, objects, etc.
In this talk we will focus on 5 key relationships for human beings. We will also focus on the role of language and conversations in creating and maintaining effective relationships. Conversations for creating relationships, conversations for exploring possibilities, and conversations for effective coordination of actions. We will also look into the systemic relationship between emotions and conversations, and the emotion of love as the foundation to human relations.
Manga is the director of the Center for Evolutionary Leadership, which develops leaders for building a just, flourishing, and sustainable world. He is also a leadership coach and organizational consultant.
Center for Evolutionary Leadership: www.evolutionleader.com. “Homo sapiens-ethicus evolutivo: being ethical & choosing to bring forth relational systems that are loving, just, flourishing, & sustainable.”
Bridging the God Gap:
How to Find Common Ground with Theistic Friends and Family Members
Dr. Chris Schriner
September 29, 2013
Dr. Chris Schriner
Did you know that atheists are the minority group most Americans are least willing to allow their children to marry? According to a recent study, they are “seen as a threat to the American way of life.” The authors of a study of North American atheists were “astonished” that so many had paid a heavy price for disbelief. “Even in the San Francisco area – arguably the most tolerant part of the United States – [about half] reported that being a nonbeliever had produced difficulty with relatives and friends” (Hunsberger and Altemeyer, Atheists: A Groundbreaking Study of America’s Nonbelievers, p. 55). As one atheist commented, “. . . I keep quiet about it. People assume you are heartless, shallow, amoral, and it calls their own beliefs into question. Atheism greatly disturbs people” (p. 47).
No wonder it’s such a challenge for believers and non-believers to talk about religion!
Dr. Chris Schriner is Minister Emeritus of Mission Peak Unitarian Universalist Congregation in Fremont and a retired psychotherapist. Unitarian Universalism includes both theists and atheists, and Chris has emphasized positive communication between theistic and atheistic members of his congregations. He is the author of five books, including Bridging the God Gap: Finding Common Ground Among Believers, Atheists and Agnostics.
Bridging the God Gap strongly affirms the legitimacy of secular humanism, and Chris will suggest ways of helping people see atheism as a valid and potentially positive life stance. He will also describe techniques for discussing theology without coming to blows, and ways of finding conceptual common ground with some liberal theists.
————–
Dr. Schriner’s handout at the Forum:
Practicing Positive Communication
Here are seven strategies that help disarm difficult conversations about theology, based upon Bridging the God Gap: Finding Common Ground Among Believers, Atheists and Agnostics, by Roger Christan Schriner, available at Amazon.com. For more information contact Chris at cschriner@uuma.org, or access his blogs:
Theists & Atheists: Communication & Common Ground, http://theistsandatheists.wordpress.com
Did God Really Say THAT!? A Blog about the Bible, http://didgodreallysaythat.wordpress.com
1. Pre-communicate. Talk about what you’re going to talk about. Say what you hope to accomplish. “There’s a distance between us because of our religious beliefs. I would like to take a little step toward bridging that gap.” You may want to frankly acknowledge that one discussion won’t fix everything.
2. Once you begin, keep your main goals in mind. Concentrate on the most important items instead of getting lost in a dust-storm of details. State one or two central points, and repeat them so that they stand out. Resist the temptation to veer off onto trivial tangents to make an impressive point.
3. Throughout the conversation, try to stay connected, heart to heart. Without knowing it we may approach a dialogue about religion as if we’ve entered a physical fight. When we smite someone on the forehead with a particularly weighty argument, we may expect this poor benighted soul to bow down in surrender, grateful for having been shown the light. How disappointing when people just resent us for making them look stupid.
Attitude is crucial. If you are sincerely interested in connecting with another human being, he or she will probably feel safe enough to open up. Even if you stumble and stammer, your good intentions will come across. But if your goal is to attack, debate, or dominate, it’s hard to conceal this agenda with handy-dandy communication techniques.
When you start to lose personal connection, you might say, “I can feel myself starting to treat this like a battle. But I care about you and I want to treat you right.” Be especially careful if you find yourself getting flustered. Do not blurt things out while you are upset. Take a breath, and remember that your goal is to reach out, not put down.
To help stay connected, be big-hearted about criticism. Refrain from firing back impulsively, shooting from the hip. When attacked, listen and reflect before responding. After pausing to regain clarity – and charity – show your critic that you can see how it looks from his or her viewpoint, even if you don’t agree. Then say what you believe.
4. Listen well, and ask to be heard in return. Think of talk radio as an example of how not to speak and listen respectfully. Be honest with yourself about your own conversational faults. Do you resort to sarcasm? Personal attacks? Name-calling? A condescending tone of voice or facial expression? If you catch yourself being hostile or demeaning you can admit it and apologize. People appreciate such candor and humility.
5. Treat this talk as an opportunity to practice clear awareness. Raise your antennae, and tune in to more than the obvious. Communication isn’t just kicking words around like a soccer ball. We also send messages with our tone of voice, how fast or loud we are talking, and what we do not say. Be aware also of posture, body position, facial expressions, movements, gestures, and eye contact (or the lack of it).
Talking about religion is an exercise in empathetic imagination. We communicate best when we notice what the other person is feeling and thinking, and what we will sometimes sense is pain. People are distressed when their religious views are questioned. When we become distressed we need to talk it out, to diminish the pressure we feel inside. Then we are able to think more clearly.
6. Practice meta-communication, communication about communication. Comment occasionally about how this chat is progressing. Express appreciation for what’s working well. Mention ways that you are trying to be constructive and ways your friend seems to be doing the same. Be gracious about admitting glitches and commit yourself to doing better.
7. Practice post-communication. After you say something important, check to see if your message was received. It has been said that the main problem with communication is the illusion that it has been accomplished. Don’t just make noises in the direction of your friend and assume that your message is getting through. Find out what he or she is hearing. “The main thing I’m trying to say is ______ Do you see what I’m driving at?” And make sure you are hearing clearly: “Basically, you are saying ______. Is that right?” “Are you saying ____ or are you saying ____?”
Before parting, thank your friend for sharing something personal and significant.
Few rules are absolute, and any set of guidelines can backfire under certain circumstances. Let each situation guide your actions. But these seven time-tested principles usually work just fine.
Theism and Atheism: A Matter of Degree
Both theists and atheists may think of reality in personal terms. Theists usually apply personal descriptions more literally, but there is no clear dividing line between literal and metaphorical language. Poetry and factual description shade off into each other:
God is a person who looks like us . . .
God is a person but does not have a human body . . .
Calling God a person is a human way of speaking
about something far beyond our understanding . . .
Ultimate Reality is trans-personal, but
we can metaphorically think of it as a Thou . . .
The universe is physical but it has personal qualities . . .
The universe does not actually have such qualities,
but we can speak poetically as if it does . . .
The universe, and whatever caused or created
the universe, should never be thought of as personal.
People often slide up or down this continuum with changing moods and social contexts.
——————-
For more on Dr. Schriner’s views see his two blogs:
Each of us has probably taken part in a number of persuasive arguments that have only resulted in hurt feelings and disturbed relationships but no further understanding or learning on anyone’s part. We have also probably found ourselves on both sides of those failed arguments. How can we do better?
