The vital art of talking to strangers • Hacker News Board

Re: The vital art of talking to strangers

#131

Post by nate_meurer » Wed, Jul 14, 2021, 8:21 PM UTC

iammisc wrote: post #124

nate_meurer wrote: post #117

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ok, allow me to amend my statement: The SBC was and remains the largest protestant organization in the US, and it was founded for the express purpose of defending slavery. If you dismiss such things as mere "picking and choosing", you're unlikely to to be able to understand viewpoints to which you're inclined to disagree.

> If you dismiss such things as mere "picking and choosing", you're unlikely to to be able to understand viewpoints to which you're inclined to disagree. You said the SBC was the largest Christian denomination. Then, when that was false, you changed it to 'largest Protestant organization'. I mean, you can restrict things down to anything to prove a point. Did you know my McDonalds down the block has the highest sales…

Right, I acknowledge your correction, so I responded with an amended statement, with emphasis on the part that I'd gotten wrong. Let me know if you'd like something more, like a written apology or something.

If your argument mainly focuses on whether the SBC is the first or second largest American religious organization, then I guess you win. Congratulations!

It pains me to point out something so obvious, but the SBC was only one of the large mainstream Christian denominations to actively support slavery, and to later actively oppose civil rights for non-whites. But if you're able to dismiss the entire tortured and complicated historical relationship between American Christianity and racial oppression with a handy comparison to a neighborhood restaurant, then I guess you win again.

Re: The vital art of talking to strangers

#132

Post by Kye » Wed, Jul 14, 2021, 8:22 PM UTC

munificent wrote: post #67

deregulateMed wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That sounds like fun. Although I hope you are ready to meet lots of Christians and a few alcoholics every year. Just remember that the 90% doesn't like talking about their jobs. Hope you know the latest sportsball news... That being said, there's usually other commonalities to discuss.

I've met lots and lots of Christians and a decent number of alcoholics. Most are very nice folks, just like all the non-Christians and non-alcoholics.

People can be very nice and polite while saying horrible things. I've heard plenty along the lines of "I'll be your friend, but I'm going to miss you after we die since you're going to burn in hell." Said with the kindest, gentlest tone you've ever heard.

Re: The vital art of talking to strangers

#133

Post by coding123 » Wed, Jul 14, 2021, 8:25 PM UTC

alisonatwork wrote: post #113

squeaky-clean wrote: post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have at least 3 friends who were kicked out of their homes as teenagers for coming out to their parents. It's far more common than you'd think.

It's a little bit different when it's outside the family, though. Inside the family, a homophobic parent might feel emasculated, or like a failure, if their kid turns out to be gay. But when meeting an adult gay couple at a social function, or working with a gay colleague, the same person will probably at least remain cordial, if not explicitly supportive.

don't search for "angry public" on youtube, it may change your perception of the world.

99% of my problems in the world are related to the random public, not my family.

Re: The vital art of talking to strangers

#134

Post by ceilingcorner » Wed, Jul 14, 2021, 8:29 PM UTC

edmundsauto wrote: post #129

nine_k wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not about religion per se, but about a common religion which has rituals that make people meet each other more, piercing their bubble of like-mindedness (smaller than the religion). It's like going to a supermarket makes you see people more varied than your family circle and your chosen TV show characters. (It does not nudge you to talk to these people, though.)

I am not a religious person or church goer, but are the perspectives really that different? To me, it looks like a church is a self selected group of geographically proximate people who tend to look alike and dress alike. You don't usually see much ethnic diversity in a church photo. It's more diverse than sitting at home, but I think exposure to a few TV shows has more diversity of thought, ethnicity, sexuality, etc…

The Catholic Church is probably the single most ethnically diverse organization on the face of the earth.

https://www.pewforum.org/2013/02/13/the-global-catholic-popu...

Re: The vital art of talking to strangers

#135

Post by iammisc » Wed, Jul 14, 2021, 8:31 PM UTC

nate_meurer wrote: post #131

iammisc wrote: post #124

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If you dismiss such things as mere "picking and choosing", you're unlikely to to be able to understand viewpoints to which you're inclined to disagree. You said the SBC was the largest Christian denomination. Then, when that was false, you changed it to 'largest Protestant organization'. I mean, you can restrict things down to anything to prove a point. Did you know my McDonalds down the block has the highest sales…

Right, I acknowledge your correction, so I responded with an amended statement, with emphasis on the part that I'd gotten wrong. Let me know if you'd like something more, like a written apology or something. If your argument mainly focuses on whether the SBC is the first or second largest American religious organization, then I guess you win. Congratulations! It pains me to point out something so obvious, but the SBC…

SBC is not only not the first largest, it's a different order of magnitude.

And my point was that it's a mixed bag. While a lot of support for slavery was nominally Christian, so was a lot of opposition.

For example, the Battle Hymn of the Republic is just that -- a hymn -- and its words on slavery are absolutely brutal. You can say 'christianity was a force for slavery' but you can't say that while not also acknowledging christianity was behind abolition as well.

Re: The vital art of talking to strangers

#136

Post by ceilingcorner » Wed, Jul 14, 2021, 8:31 PM UTC

jvalencia wrote: post #127

munificent wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> This already assumes people are good and get along and are high trust. It does assume most people are good, but that is something I believe deeply in my bones. (A simple logical argument is this: if people were on average harmful, we would all choose to be hermits. Since we don't, it implies that in aggregate our human interactions are a net benefit to us personally.) It does assumes that people can choose whether…

The problem is that it only takes a small percent to ruin it for all. If one in 10 people is awful, and you have 10 meetings with an even random distribution, then everyone will have a story about how they got swindled.

But the other 9 uniting against the 1’s craziness might actually be more effective than having 10/10 good people.

“We just need an alien invasion to unite humanity.”

Re: The vital art of talking to strangers

#137

Post by abeyer » Wed, Jul 14, 2021, 8:41 PM UTC

iammisc wrote: post #123

abeyer wrote: post #120

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I still show up for the community. Always have, and likely always will. Just stick around. Why would I choose to do this somewhere that the leadership rejects me and tells me I will burn in hell? I know that many individuals within the church may not agree, but plenty will, and culture is set from the top. It's not like there aren't more social/community options than I could possibly find the time to participate in…

> Why would I choose to do this somewhere that the leadership rejects me and tells me I will burn in hell? Because of the people in the church? Because of the fact that 'the leadership' is just the guy preaching, whereas the actual community is run by everyday people (well in my experience it is). > It's not like there aren't more social/community options than I could possibly find the time to participate in that _do…

You seem to be simultaneously arguing that it's ok to ignore the religious trappings and just treat the church as a social club, but also that the church is better than just any social club because of the religious trappings.

Re: The vital art of talking to strangers

#138

Post by hluska » Wed, Jul 14, 2021, 8:44 PM UTC

deregulateMed wrote: post #90

hluska wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are you sure you want to say that people who like comic books are hedonists? That’s an overly cut and dried argument and people aren’t nearly that simple. Isn’t it more charitable and accurate to suggest that people like what they like? I like running obscenely long distances. First, what business is it of yours how others spend their time? Second, what possibly qualifies you to claim people are hedonists because the…

Hedonist is the proper name for the philosophy. Maybe I read too much philosophy because I was merely saying the proper term in the dichotomy between virtue ethics and pleasure ethics. Maybe I should stick to talking sportsball.

Or maybe just read more about hedonism? By your definition, you’re a hedonist as well because intellectual pleasure is still pleasure.

Instead, I argue that that is a loaded term, we’re all individuals and we like what we like. It’s really nobody’s business and certainly nobody’s place to add a term (especially one with such negative pop connotations) to people who like what they like.

Re: The vital art of talking to strangers

#139

Post by nicoburns » Wed, Jul 14, 2021, 8:47 PM UTC

iammisc wrote: post #48

munificent wrote: post #15

I have a hypothesis that almost all of the US's current cultural problems would be solved if once a month we all cooked and shared a meal with another randomly chosen family.

We used to call this going to church. When literally everyone of all political stripes attended the same churches, going to a church potluck was basically being paired randomly. However large political factions have made church membership out to be undesirable. We are reaping the rewards. I realized yesterday reading about cornel west, that even though I disagree with his politics, I see from his Christianity we have…

It's religion not politics that makes church-attendance undesirable for most non-church-goers. Having said that, I agree that we are missing something that modern secular society is missing something that used to take place in churches.

I'm not so convinced as you that the religious aspect is required to make it work. Shared purpose maybe, but there are lots of ways of creating that. In another comment you mentioned "might as well be a community centre", which I think is interesting because community centres are one of the other places I've this sense of well... community.

One thing that churches have other than religion which I think often gets overlooked is money (in particular they generally own the building they use). I've seen more than one excellent community centre closed down because they ran out of funding and couldn't afford to keep paying the rent. I would love to see a concerted effort at government funded secular churches designed to serve a parish-sized community.

Re: The vital art of talking to strangers

#140

Post by foobarian » Wed, Jul 14, 2021, 8:49 PM UTC

munificent wrote: post #15

I have a hypothesis that almost all of the US's current cultural problems would be solved if once a month we all cooked and shared a meal with another randomly chosen family.

Earlier on I had hopes that Facebook would implement "random friends" or "guest friends" in order to make the social graph denser and more diverse, thus making the world a better place. Not the direction things went I guess...