The first principle was associated with Immanuel Kant who was a proponent of racism. Rev. Dr. Betancourt felt because of ties to Kant, the first principle should be dismissed rather than be open for discussion. I would doubt that reading that language would in no way promote racism. I believe that UUA and it's ministers are relishing the use of these fallacies to limit diversity of viewpoints
The problem (IMHO) is that social justice has become the cornerstone of the' faith' with the adoption of the revised, more political, Article II. In this framework, righteous anger is valued over dialogue and critical thinking. Working toward 'beloved community' has become the modern UU equivalent of salvation, and UUs don't seem to be interested in engaging with ideas that differ from this world-view.
I appreciate your thinking and thank you for your work.
Todd Ekoff's Gadfly was resented by the UUA partly for his use of logic against fallacies. Before the Seven Principles, Reason was one of the three legs of UUism.
Because of the passive aggressive nature of the culture I grew up in, it was hard to spot logical fallacies and even harder to prove it when they happened. As someone who uses logic for work, I tried to point them out and got gaslighted, because they weren’t easy to spot unless you spent a lot of time studying logic. I didn’t even realize that they could be doing it on purpose until I got myself out.
Thanks for continuing to make things clear, it helps me to realize that what I saw was real and not some projection of mine from the past, or something wrong with my ability to interpret social cues.
The first principle was associated with Immanuel Kant who was a proponent of racism. Rev. Dr. Betancourt felt because of ties to Kant, the first principle should be dismissed rather than be open for discussion. I would doubt that reading that language would in no way promote racism. I believe that UUA and it's ministers are relishing the use of these fallacies to limit diversity of viewpoints
The problem (IMHO) is that social justice has become the cornerstone of the' faith' with the adoption of the revised, more political, Article II. In this framework, righteous anger is valued over dialogue and critical thinking. Working toward 'beloved community' has become the modern UU equivalent of salvation, and UUs don't seem to be interested in engaging with ideas that differ from this world-view.
I appreciate your thinking and thank you for your work.
Todd Ekoff's Gadfly was resented by the UUA partly for his use of logic against fallacies. Before the Seven Principles, Reason was one of the three legs of UUism.
What an unhappy and confused religious organization. I love my friends there but I can’t make sense of it, which is what David seems to be saying.
Because of the passive aggressive nature of the culture I grew up in, it was hard to spot logical fallacies and even harder to prove it when they happened. As someone who uses logic for work, I tried to point them out and got gaslighted, because they weren’t easy to spot unless you spent a lot of time studying logic. I didn’t even realize that they could be doing it on purpose until I got myself out.
Thanks for continuing to make things clear, it helps me to realize that what I saw was real and not some projection of mine from the past, or something wrong with my ability to interpret social cues.