- This topic is empty.
-
Posts
-
In my schoolwork on culture in organizations, it’s clear that strong shared values tend to attract certain people, and repel others. When a group of people, whether religious or not, have a set of values that are widely known and shared by the vast majority, people who do not follow those values (even non-gospel ones) tend to stick out like a sore thumb. They often experience ostracization although their behavior does not violate bedrock principles — only the style of the organization. Is it possible to have all the benefits of strong culture, without ostracization for people on the fringes? Or is that a case of “having your cake and eating it too”?
Does it exist? Not really? Is it possible? I believe in a society that wouldn’t use various propaganda techniques to reinforce black and white or us versus them tribal thinking. And we’re also taught the psychological effects of such thinking into others and ourselves then it time yes, but our brain is still naturally doing what was so essential for our survival thousands if years ago. Our brains will have to in time collectively evolve so That’s not automatic behavior anymore. It will take time, proper education and a lack of propaganda to reinforce that basic survival instinct to accomplish that. Religion or teaching or besides the point because nearly all authority uses this kind of propaganda to promote their agenda of what ever they see as the greater good or mission thru want to accomplish. That does have that nasty dude effect however, which is why I dislike tribes or clans.
Yes, it’s possible – but it takes a level of maturity that also, ironically, tends to blunt a lot of what makes any organization united and unique. It’s hard to be both accepting of differing opinions AND dedicated to shared uniqueness – to be fulfilling for both settlers AND explorers – and I really believe most of the tendency toward ostracism is a simple function of that natural tension. If we look closely at the early LDS Church, there were examples of very strong personalities with conflicting opinions, and sometimes it worked and went forward without major upheaval. (I’m thinking especially of Brigham Young and the Pratt brothers.) Sometimes, however, it didn’t work and caused major schisms. (Joseph Smith and quite a few early leaders, Brigham Young and competing apostles after Joseph’s death, etc.) It resurfaced in the mid-1900’s, and we now are coming out of that time of entrenchment.
I see it as fundamentally cyclical. It’s hard to strike the perfect balance, so we end up with a pendulum effect – sometimes minor and sometimes severe. Local areas tend to move glacially or with lightning speed, based almost exclusively on the personalities of the local leaders when leadership changes, while the global leadership tends to follow a more natural rate of change that is too slow for progressives and too fast for traditionalists. That is frustrating for many, but it generally is the safest speed for the institution as a whole. (There are obvious exceptions of change happening way too quickly and way too slowly, but, generally speaking, the rate of change is more moderate than extreme in either direction.)
I think which people are on the “fringes” is very subjective to the group doing the judging. One solution is to simply stop caring too much about being accepted. That brings its own form of peace. Forge relationships outside of the church with new groups of people where the norms are not ostracizing… I don’t have the time at the moment. But it’s interesting you possed dish a question since many world renowned sociologist, psychologist and other scientific leaders are talking about this very issue at the moment. You can read up on it? I’ll try to provide links later. The conscience is that it does more harm then good it is the result of our societies and civilization evolving much more quickly them out brain has and the DNA involved with this is going to be targeted and treated as bad tissue. Something that helped us a lot in early civilization and survival but is mostly cussing more ha them good now. However they did also note a balance to evolve our thinking and treat this physiologically and medically but with a balance to preserve some or enough of this survival instinct which is the root of this behavior. In a related note, many religions especially fundalmentalist religions or religions with various teachings where they see it causing more harm them good are being discused for treatment as a psychological disorder. There is a growing cons envious with this ongoing top officials especially in Europe. I’ll try to provide links later.
Hi SD. Yes that dies help a lot. At least for me andany I know. A lot has to do with the facial recognition part of our brain as well as the RTPJ and TMS, you can look up that study about the part of our brain that effects judgment. I actually married my wife with that in mind which is why I didn’t marry American. So I would accustom myself to different faces and different ways of thinking without marrying someone reinforcing. My long held views of things. But to always have a fresh perspective. I enjoy many friends inside and outside lds with different nationalists and backgrounds as well. It has helped me to remain balanced and not so unbalanced passtionitly or favor to strongly one side or the other. I try to remain balanced and without as much confirmation bias or tribal loyalty as possible. I am loyal to my own conscious as opposed to a group or land set of principles set aside or proclaimed by someone else. It helps to lessen the self loving nature of tribal groups or ideas.
Isn’t it ironic that at church there is so much ostracizing in the first place? What about not judging others? The constant judging of others who are not LDS or less “active” is one of the hard parts of church for me. As someone who grew up attending a Protestant sect, there was less judgment of others and more of an emphasis on yourself being Christ like. I really miss that. Forgotten_Charity wrote:Is it possible? I believe in a society that wouldn’t use various propaganda techniques to reinforce black and white or us versus them tribal thinking.
I don’t believe in a lot of black and white type thinking. In my opinion, there is a great deal of grey area.
Hi angrymormon. It isn’t just this church, or even just churches in general. The “judging” is in a particaular part of the brain called the RTPJ. Exclusive judgement comes from using that part or “exercising” that part of the brain because we are taught to do so in various tribes or cultures. Exercising it to much leads it to become over active and by default you become automatically judge mental and or severaly or not severaly judgmental depending on the degree you exercised this part of the brain. A lot of it revolves around this part if the brain prejudging intent. The intent of someone. Excessive use of this part causes people to judge the intent very harshly or negatively.
Unfortunately some teachings in various societies especially “tribes” leads to exercising to much and judging the intent of others not in the tribe as harsh. When that part of the brain was deactivated by TMS temporarily, people judged people less harshly because they perceived the intent as not malicious. I see it very commonly among tribes or communities who send to much time together with too little or not enough time with those outside their tribe. It very common here with ultra Orthodox Jews, it very common in parts of Japan which I believe is still 97% Japanese etc.
too much time around ones own tribe or culture actives a part of our brain that judges others not of our tribe, the fight or flight, black and white survival part to protect us from possible outside “threats” sound familer?
Scientist now sees this as part of our brain that hasn’t and needs to evolve in order to progress in a positive way as a world society.
The problem in a nut shell is that this part of the brain is producing way to many false positives or false negatives and seeing way to many patterns “patternicity” where there are non or seeing no patterns where there are some. It hasn’t evolved enough yet. It’s still very primitive by today’s needs as a global society.
AngryMormon wrote:Forgotten_Charity wrote:Is it possible? I believe in a society that wouldn’t use various propaganda techniques to reinforce black and white or us versus them tribal thinking.
I don’t believe in a lot of black and white type thinking. In my opinion, there is a great deal of grey area.
Ya that’s just an outdated software part of our brain from our primitive tribal years. It’s still useful to the degree it gets filtered by our logical or nuanced side. The black and white part of our brain can’t see or think in any nuance whatsoever. It isn’t capable of it biologically at the moment, which is why it sees things in black and white. The unfortunate side effect of evolving as a society as a world culture faster then our DNA could keep up to adjust for the change. Look it up, there are many articles on it by various neurologist.
I think it’s possible, provided the organization makes it a cultural value to show tolerance. HOwever, this requires a lot of work. In a previous thread, Ray mentioned the top leadership have preached changes to certain cultural values, and now it’s the local leaders who need to take the reigns. Regrettably, I don’t buy into this. Changing culture takes a LOT OF WORK. It has to embed itself into the day-to-day policies of the organization, in its habits, and it its systems and even in the structure of the organization. Members need to be taught skills.
For example, the concept of obedience is firm in our culture. Why? Talks on it in church, lessons in the manual, emphasis in our scriptures. It figures in training talks from the leaders at SLC. There is enforcement of policy through hand-book reading and handbook “thumping”. We preach the handbook a lot.
So, mere talks by the top leadership, although a good start, are really only the tip of the iceberg. If they really want a value like internal tolerance, it needs to be integrated into the lesson schedules, manuals, repeated world wide training, local Bishop’s training, HP and EQ training. There needs to be a section in the CHI on it, and there needs to be conscious implementation at the local level. Perhaps it even needs to be written into the job descriptions of various leaders in the various handbooks.
I don’t see that coming although I appreciate some of the comments like JB Worthlin who have broached the subject.
I do think it’s possible, however there is a huge problem with orthodoxy or the system of orthodoxy that is inherent in it’s system or design. It doesn’t care about individual needs or adaptation to rules or ways other them it’s own. It’s designed with a basic flawed principle that everyone can adhere to the same rules and principles and be happy. This just doesn’t work, because its not true. What makes one person happy can make another sad, living one way or rule can help one person achieve balance in life while putting endless torment and frustration to work within limited rules and thinking within another. This isn’t a religios thing.
I’ve listened to various experts talk about the problems the world faces with resources and the new thinking of ideas they need to solve them. However they aren’t getting them because as a school university or society we have a fixed curiculum that doesn’t encourage new ideas or creative thinking. It just teaches people how to think the same. How to follow questions and examples. As a society we don’t actually teach true thinking or probl solving.
There is a huge push to try to change curriculum in schools because it has become way outdated since its inception during the industrial revolution. It helped during that time period because its what we needed.
Now it’s hurting us but we aren’t changing course yet.
Bottom line, the world needs huge amounts of creative thinking but orthodoxy teaching and adherence to it is stiff along creative thinking and exploration to come up with the new ideas we need to deal with current problems.
I can see a very similar problem going on in Japanese culture, which once helped Japan achieve success is now holding it back, it’s orthodoxy. I can see a similar problem with us in our traditions and adherence and fear to free think question and bend the lines to find new answers to new problems. I can see it in the ultra orthodox Jewish community I live in.
Forcing or using community pressure to adhere to guidelines is stiffs long creativity and is actually sniffling growth of our brains not bring exercising in that way, which is limiting the answers and solutions we are coming up with facing problems of today. I’ll try to find a link to it. It’s very interesting.
The goal is not to limit your thinking and feel free to go outside the box no matter how society or others see you… The worlds needs it as sure as it needs firefighters and doctors working on Sunday.
SD, I don’t disagree with what you said, and I agree with FC. I said the top leadership is starting to preach it, not that it’s gotten down to our manuals and throughout the local congregations. However, even with the current manuals, the message is being preached actively by some apostles – and the local leadership needs to hear and accept those messages.
SilentDawning wrote:In my schoolwork on culture in organizations, it’s clear that strong shared values tend to attract certain people, and repel others.When a group of people, whether religious or not, have a set of values that are widely known and shared by the vast majority, people who do not follow those values (even non-gospel ones) tend to stick out like a sore thumb. They often experience ostracization although their behavior does not violate bedrock principles — only the style of the organization… Is it possible to have all the benefits of strong culture, without ostracization for people on the fringes? Or is that a case of “having your cake and eating it too”?I definitely don’t think the Church would lose anything truly worthwhile if it stopped being quite so strict and unfriendly toward so many members/investigators that don’t quite fit the current active and obedient TBM profile for one reason or another. To be honest I don’t believe the strong LDS culture is all that beneficial overall to begin with, personally I think it is too strong for the Church’s own good because it has become harsh and overbearing and the current results are very mixed at best with a strong downside to take away from whatever positive influence most of the individual doctrines have. One problem is that the “fringe” of the LDS Church includes so many completely ordinary but also perfectly decent people and being so strict about so many specific rules and beliefs currently appeals to such a small minority of people that the Church has basically put itself on the fringe and mostly outside of and often in direct opposition to the mainstream culture.
Furthermore, most of the practical benefits of doctrines like the WoW, tithing, chastity, testimony, etc. could already be achieved simply by focusing on the spirit of the law without needing to be so strict about them; in fact the Church could probably influence far more people that way because preventing unnecessary harm and a reasonable amount of unselfishness, loyalty, etc. naturally appeal to many if not the majority of people. However, by putting so much emphasis on and trying to enforce such a strict and specific definition of the letter of the law for these same doctrines they have become some of the most common deal-breakers for large numbers of investigators and existing members. Intentionally alienating and excluding so many people over details like this is especially counterproductive when the Church depends so much on families remaining active from one generation to the next to maintain support.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.