Balancing our need for Autonomy with our need for Belonging...

Culture has a real, inextricable presence within the religious community. They are both tightly woven threads in the tapestry of humankind. The geographical sprawl of religion often causes cultural identity tension at the borders of the expansion. However, technology has given religious communities a different way of sprawling.

Technological sprawl looks much different than geographical sprawl. One of the differences is that religious and cultural identities converge deeper within and throughout the global group. Previously, undue tensions were resolved at the geographical borderline; however, technological sprawl means large groups must learn to mediate tensions rising up virtually (!) anywhere.

Now that technology is bringing the ends of the world into such close proximity, how do members of a religious group that are from a minority culture identity relieve the pressure and tension between themselves and the dominant cultural identity that is often (always?) tightly woven into religion?

It seems to me that people who join a group (i.e. religious) with a much different dominant culture will do one of two things to cope with the tension. They will find or create a subculture that reflects/aligns with their cultural identity, or they will adopt the dominant culture as their own.

My question is this: Why do humans have such a difficult time belonging to a like-minded group (ex: religious beliefs), while espousing a personal identity that does not necessarily conflict with this group, but also does not align with that group's dominant expression of identity?

Is it simply because we are social creatures with such a strong need to bond with fellow humans that we would rather sacrifice independence personal expression at the altar of group cohesion?

A thought on peaceful relations...

Following Buber's injunction to let the Other be integrally themselves brings us closest to discovering those points of resemblance and convergence between us.

Rather than dismiss or despise the distinctions that
flow away from our points of convergence, look first at these cross-points. Do they not provide a mutual point of agreement to begin from?

Finding the courage to come towards each other- to pass over this bridge (i.e. crossing point), both sides have the best chance of genuinely understanding the other through growing knowledge of one another.

Though each one may remain in disagreement over much, perhaps both may find that fear and disdain have utterly departed. Besides, familiarity ensures the discovery of similarities amidst the differences.

Just as darkness cannot reside with light, ignorance cannot remain alongside knowledge.

Overcoming the darkness between "I and Thou" occurs not only by accepting our differences, but by accepting the existence of ourselves in the Other.

That is love.

Written by Paula R. Howell, April 30, 2011

David Christian: Big history | Video on TED.com

David Christian: Big history | Video on TED.com

Ong (Orality and Literacy) spoke of the importance of human language, and the distinction of literacy in particular. Literacy is integral to "collective learning". Thus far, there hasn't been another species to exhibit this *powerful* ability. It makes us astonishingly different-- distinct from every other intelligent life form that we have discovered. But a trait can be terrible or terrific....
If you can't find 17 minutes for Christian's lecture- skip to minute 13... Find out more.