From: Wim Nusselder (wim.nusselder@antenna.nl)
Date: Fri Mar 12 2004 - 07:30:40 GMT
Dear Sam and others interested in an 'Idols'-like competition between
religions,
You wrote 11 Mar 2004 07:46:05 -0000:
'What an intriguing idea. I'm game - although I suspect it'll be a volcanic
sort of debate ...'
Great, I already hoped that you would want to find the time to participate.
I don't understand at all those fears for 'volcanic debates' etc.. Did you
notice that (music) 'Idols' competitors end up as friends? At least Dutch TV
shows very moving pictures of fraternization every weekly round when someone
is voted out of the comptetion again... It must be because everyone is
equally dependent on hardly influencable votes from an anonymous public.
That may of course be a bit different if we enact a 'religion Idols
competition' only in this maling list.
You suggested 'without having any expectation of generating agreement':
'Firstly we (rapidly) agree some sort of criteria by which we can make
assessments.'
I don't agree. (-; As I wrote 11 Mar 2004 08:32:13 +0100:
'The interesting thing about the "Idols"-model is, that the voters don't
need to agree on a definition of music/religion, nor on the criteria for
good/better/best... Exchanging definitions and criteria IS useful, but only
as a way to influence other people's votes (and as a model to present one's
favourite religion, but everyone presenting a religion is free to
choosehis/her own model). In the end both "music"/"religion" and the "idol"
(the
"best") are simply defined by the number of votes.'
My idea is that someone starts presenting a religion as soon as we think
that enough people on this list may be interested to present their favourite
religion as potential 'idol' and to vote on it.
For the presentation you can use the criteria (and definitions) already
mentioned (see my 10 Mar 2004 23:32:28 +0100 summary of the preceding
discussion plus your 'what religion best fosters or enables the evolutionary
expression of Quality in human life, or, what best fosters the drive of
Dynamic Quality in partnership with human static patterns'). E.g.: "For me
religion X is good, because it fosters Quality in way Y." (On second
thoughts these presentations better not state "religion X is best for me".
Everyone should ideally submit to the 'final' decision of the voters. A few
mistakes in this respect won't seriously harm the process, though.) You are
completely free to ignore a few and introduce new criteria when presenting
your religion, however.
Those who react to this first presentation can choose to either present
their own favourite religion or to question the one who made the first
presentation. "How does your favourite religion perform on this criterium of
mine?" (Disputing other people's words on how their favourite religion
performs on a specific criterium is counterproductive. Indeed 'we should
allow each religion to wear its best clothes, be seen in its best light as
demonstrated by its best adherents', as you wrote. In reply to a doubtful
claim that religion X performs in way Y, one CAN refine the criterium
however and reformulate the question "How does ...?" in another way.)
When we seem to have exhausted presentations and (constructive)
questionings, we can start voting.
In short: I see three main phases and two moments in which we need to reach
some sort of consensus.
First phase: enlisting participants
Second phase: presentations and questionings
Third phase: voting
The second phase starts when we agree that (it seems as if) enough people
are interested to participate.
The third phase starts when we agree that we have more or less exhausted
presentations and (constructive) questionings.
With friendly greetings,
Wim
MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
Mail Archives:
Aug '98 - Oct '02 - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
Nov '02 Onward - http://www.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/summary.html
MD Queries - horse@darkstar.uk.net
To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:
http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Mar 12 2004 - 07:29:50 GMT