knb comments on Offense versus harm minimization - Less Wrong

60 Post author: Yvain 16 April 2011 01:06AM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Comments (417)

You are viewing a single comment's thread. Show more comments above.

Comment author: knb 16 April 2011 09:49:16PM 14 points [-]

I'm referring specifically to the angry emotional reactions to perceived slights, not what causes people to leave their religions.

I'm trying to think of the last time anything offended western Christians as much as the Mohammed drawings (apparently) offended Muslims in the middle-east. The anger over Piss Christ was mostly because that project was partially government funded by the NEA. There was no serious attempt to legally censor it. And of course, there were no riots and no one was harmed during that brief controversy.

I think that the difference is not primarily theological but rather cultural. In America, Christians have their beliefs mocked pretty regularly in popular culture. That largely inoculates them to outrage. My guess is that the difference between American Christians and Muslims in Afghanistan is not inherent in their religions, but a matter of exposure. Afghan Muslims have always had governments and strict cultural rules that insulated them from offensive treatments of Islam. With modern telecommunications they will be exposed to things that offend them, even if those things happen in Florida or Denmark. Either they will change or the rest of the world will change for them.

Comment author: soreff 17 April 2011 02:13:10AM *  1 point [-]

the difference between American Christians and Muslims in Afghanistan is not inherent in their religions

agreed

but a matter of exposure

perhaps

You certainly have a point, but I'm not persuaded that you've identified the core of the difference. My guess is that at least one other component is the context in which the exposure takes place. In America, there is a fairly strong norm to at least pay lip service to freedom of speech, and anyone growing up here who has a religion, and who has heard it mocked, will probably also have heard that this mockery is defended by another national norm. Exposure to equivalent mockery in Afghanistan may not have equivalent effects.

Comment author: NancyLebovitz 19 April 2011 04:37:17PM 0 points [-]

Print of Piss Christ destroyed by Christians in France

Also, "It was vandalised in Australia, and neo-Nazis ransacked a Serrano show in Sweden in 2007."

Comment author: knb 19 April 2011 05:27:03PM *  2 points [-]

Yes, the anger it created was real, and that reaction was why I chose it as an example.

It still falls orders of magnitude below the Jyllands-Posten cartoon riots, in which more than 100 people died.

Comment author: Eugine_Nier 19 April 2011 05:33:48PM 3 points [-]

Also now that other religious groups are noticing how much success Muslims are having with their tactic of violent rioting, what do you think they're going to do?

Comment author: CuSithBell 19 April 2011 08:36:48PM 0 points [-]

I suspect that this is an over-simplification, and expect that there will not be a significant effect on the number or intensity of violent Christian riots. (For one thing, I expect Christians to value appearing more civilized than violent Muslims.)

Comment author: Eugine_Nier 19 April 2011 09:43:58PM 2 points [-]

Some will, some won't. Unfortunately, under current conditions the ones willing to embrace violence will be more successful.