When you begin expressing your opinion on a divisive topic like #politics or #religion, do you want a dialogue or to give a speech? Are you open to differing opinions? Are you using language that encourages someone else to participate? I believe one of the primary impediments to dialogue today is that many participants don't want it. #CriticalThinking #CogtitiveDissonance
@broVbro
Why is it divisive? Who decided to be divisive? Why? What are the benefits of division? Are the opinions reactions or responses? Do people know the difference between a reaction and a response? Is it reasonable to expect a distinction between faith and reason? How unreasonable is it?
@paninid take a look around and you will see that many people put constraints on when and where politics or religion are discussed. If you look at news sources you will see that apart from actual conflict, the topics of religion or politics create some of the most divisive commentary. Your opinion may be more inclusive and nuanced, but that is not the norm today.

@broVbro
Why isn’t fomenting inclusivity and nuance the objective of politics or religion?

Why do people put constraints on politics and religion to make them exclusive and simplistic, when people are inclusive and nuanced?

@paninid I understand your question, but I think you are idealistic to expect religion and politics to be inclusive. All practicing religions today (that I am aware of) claim to be the superior belief system over all other religions and multi-party policitical systems are inherently adversarial because the parties are in competition. I am having a difficult time imagining the possibility of any other way given their intent and beliefs.
@broVbro
Maybe the intent and beliefs of exclusivity and simplicity are just wrong and unhelpful?
@broVbro
also, when did idealism become a net-bad thing?