Tip #55 We're In the Room
Mar. 20th, 2016 10:30 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
wingedbeastIt's occurred to me that there might be some reasonable objection to my use of Christian movies for examples for these tips. Their primary audiences are, after all, other Christians and usually other conservative Christians who already believe what the movies have to say at that. The notion that nonbelievers will watch these movies and become convinced is, even in intent, more fantasy than reality.
After all, in the 70s, the rapture movie, A Thief in the Night, was primarily watched in church basements on movie night. It was a part of a conversation among believers, not a part of attempting to convince non-believers. Why wouldn't more recent movies be the same?
Let's assume they are. During the 2012 Presidential campaign, Mitt Romney thought the room included only supporters who were both ardent and wealthy when he made his infamous 47% comment.
The internet has changed the world. Whenever you talk about somebody, effectively that somebody is in the room to hear and to respond. In some ways that's positive. People can't look around the room to be clear that the subject of a bigoted joke will not hear.
In your case, the effect is somewhat similar. What you say, sure in the knowledge that nonbelievers will not either hear you or be able to respond to, is now to a room that can, potentially, include the whole world.
You can see this on blogs like http://www.patheos.com/blogs/lovejoyfeminism/ and http://www.patheos.com/blogs/friendlyatheist/ which comment on things said by people of faith, regardless of whether or not the context was that of imagining those without faith ever hearing.
I'm not saying to edit yourself. I am saying that you can't separate what you say to nonbelievers to their faces from what you say behind closed doors.
After all, in the 70s, the rapture movie, A Thief in the Night, was primarily watched in church basements on movie night. It was a part of a conversation among believers, not a part of attempting to convince non-believers. Why wouldn't more recent movies be the same?
Let's assume they are. During the 2012 Presidential campaign, Mitt Romney thought the room included only supporters who were both ardent and wealthy when he made his infamous 47% comment.
The internet has changed the world. Whenever you talk about somebody, effectively that somebody is in the room to hear and to respond. In some ways that's positive. People can't look around the room to be clear that the subject of a bigoted joke will not hear.
In your case, the effect is somewhat similar. What you say, sure in the knowledge that nonbelievers will not either hear you or be able to respond to, is now to a room that can, potentially, include the whole world.
You can see this on blogs like http://www.patheos.com/blogs/lovejoyfeminism/ and http://www.patheos.com/blogs/friendlyatheist/ which comment on things said by people of faith, regardless of whether or not the context was that of imagining those without faith ever hearing.
I'm not saying to edit yourself. I am saying that you can't separate what you say to nonbelievers to their faces from what you say behind closed doors.
