Jayson_Virissimo comments on Open Thread, March 1-15, 2013 - Less Wrong

3 Post author: Jayson_Virissimo 01 March 2013 12:00PM

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

Comments (237)

You are viewing a single comment's thread.

Comment author: Jayson_Virissimo 02 March 2013 10:16:16AM *  7 points [-]

I have been reading up on religious studies (yes, I ignored that generally sound advice never to study anything with the word 'studies' in the name) in order to better understand Chinese religion.

Unexpectedly, I have found the native concepts are useful (perhaps even more useful) outside the realm of religion. That is to say, distinctions like universalist/particularist, conversion/heritage, and concepts like orthodoxy, orthopraxy, reification, etc... are useful for thinking about apparently "non-religious" ideologies (including, to some extent, my own).

My first instinct when hearing a claim is to try and figure out if it is true, but I fear I have been missing the point (since much of the time, the truth of the claim is irrelevant to the speaker) and instead should focus more on the function a given (stated) belief plays in the life (especially the social life) of the person making the assertion (at least, on the margin).

Comment author: Ritalin 05 March 2013 12:26:14PM 2 points [-]

Any bibliography you would like to recommend?

Also, would you care to expand on how precisely you find it useful?

Comment author: ChristianKl 04 March 2013 04:56:51PM -1 points [-]

That is to say, distinctions like universalist/particularist, conversion/heritage, and concepts like orthodoxy, orthopraxy, reification, etc... are useful for thinking about apparently "non-religious" ideologies (including, to some extent, my own).

How do you know that it's useful? What evidence do you have to support that belief in addition to feeling that it's useful?