Sure. That makes sense, and if it weren’t for my actual experience with people who do seem to get benefits from that group membership that they consider worthwhile, despite also being members of other communities, I would agree with this wholeheartedly.
Of course, it’s certainly possible that they’re all merely confused and not actually getting benefits they value, or that they could be getting all the same benefits from their other groups and somehow don’t realize it.
Ah—no—you miss what I was trying to say. They definitely get benefits—not at all confused. I’ll try and give an example to explain what I mean—and I’ll leave religion out of it for the moment.
Lets say that near to me is the local football club, and the local wildlife-walks group. both of them have a thriving community and are welcoming and interesting people. Thus if I join either one I will be assured of the benefits of belonging to a community.
But lets say that I happen to have absolutely no passion for football, but really enjoy wildlife walks.
So—the rational move for me would be to join the wildlife group, in favour over the football club. not because there are no benefits to the football club, but because I would get even more out of being in a group where I share the passions and interests with the majority of members.
This is kinda what I was driving at. There’s nothing wrong with an atheist joining a local christian group to gain the benefits of community… but if there’s another local group that has the same sense of community—but founded around a principle that the atheist actually shares… then they’ll probably get even more out of it.
If, in that situation, I observed you evaluating both groups and choosing to join the football club, that observation would increase my confidence that you are obtaining something of value from the football club that you aren’t getting elsewhere, even if I have no clue what that might be.
(nods) Me too. The impression I’ve gotten from conversations with my non-theist friends who belong to religious communities is that they provide a more close-knit and mutually committed community than their secular equivalents. This is especially relevant for those with children.
Yes, I’ve found that most (but not all) hobby-based communities tend to be fairly loosely constructed. People are expected to hang around for a few years, perhaps, but not really to contribute more than just some passing time.
Exceptions I’ve found to this rule are: ethnic/expat groups, parenting support groups, and (strangely) some geeky groups: SF/F (in certain cities), and the SCA.
The latter was my biggest surprise, when I joined. There a third-generation SCAdians… some of whom have a fourth generation on the way.
AKA an excuse to have fun dressing up and feasting the night away after a day of hand-to-hand fighting (if that’s your wont)… along with a zillion other interesting things to learn and do, with the only caveat being a well-meaning attempt at remaining within the time period of “fall of the roman empire up to and including the early renaissance” (oh, and don’t take “renn faire” as a good example… in the SCA everybody is a participant, not a spectator).
Yep—it brings in most of the (male) converts… whereas the feasting/dancing/singing/cooking is what usually tempts in us womenfolk… this means that it’s not only appealing to the geeky types… but actually has an amazingly good gender balance. It also means that you can bring your SO and they will actually have something to do. This is a benefit of community-building not to be overlooked. :)
Sure. That makes sense, and if it weren’t for my actual experience with people who do seem to get benefits from that group membership that they consider worthwhile, despite also being members of other communities, I would agree with this wholeheartedly.
Of course, it’s certainly possible that they’re all merely confused and not actually getting benefits they value, or that they could be getting all the same benefits from their other groups and somehow don’t realize it.
Ah—no—you miss what I was trying to say. They definitely get benefits—not at all confused. I’ll try and give an example to explain what I mean—and I’ll leave religion out of it for the moment.
Lets say that near to me is the local football club, and the local wildlife-walks group. both of them have a thriving community and are welcoming and interesting people. Thus if I join either one I will be assured of the benefits of belonging to a community.
But lets say that I happen to have absolutely no passion for football, but really enjoy wildlife walks.
So—the rational move for me would be to join the wildlife group, in favour over the football club. not because there are no benefits to the football club, but because I would get even more out of being in a group where I share the passions and interests with the majority of members.
This is kinda what I was driving at. There’s nothing wrong with an atheist joining a local christian group to gain the benefits of community… but if there’s another local group that has the same sense of community—but founded around a principle that the atheist actually shares… then they’ll probably get even more out of it.
If, in that situation, I observed you evaluating both groups and choosing to join the football club, that observation would increase my confidence that you are obtaining something of value from the football club that you aren’t getting elsewhere, even if I have no clue what that might be.
Yup, no argument here. I would be curious to know what it was.
(nods) Me too. The impression I’ve gotten from conversations with my non-theist friends who belong to religious communities is that they provide a more close-knit and mutually committed community than their secular equivalents. This is especially relevant for those with children.
Yes, I’ve found that most (but not all) hobby-based communities tend to be fairly loosely constructed. People are expected to hang around for a few years, perhaps, but not really to contribute more than just some passing time.
Exceptions I’ve found to this rule are: ethnic/expat groups, parenting support groups, and (strangely) some geeky groups: SF/F (in certain cities), and the SCA.
The latter was my biggest surprise, when I joined. There a third-generation SCAdians… some of whom have a fourth generation on the way.
SCA?
The Society for Creative Anachronism
AKA an excuse to have fun dressing up and feasting the night away after a day of hand-to-hand fighting (if that’s your wont)… along with a zillion other interesting things to learn and do, with the only caveat being a well-meaning attempt at remaining within the time period of “fall of the roman empire up to and including the early renaissance” (oh, and don’t take “renn faire” as a good example… in the SCA everybody is a participant, not a spectator).
The hand to hand combat is tempting.
Yep—it brings in most of the (male) converts… whereas the feasting/dancing/singing/cooking is what usually tempts in us womenfolk… this means that it’s not only appealing to the geeky types… but actually has an amazingly good gender balance. It also means that you can bring your SO and they will actually have something to do. This is a benefit of community-building not to be overlooked. :)
So, it’s kind of like anime conventions and cosplay then.
Obviously we need to work out how to integrate costumes or cooking into LessWrong meetups...
Nutrition?
:)
Obviously the costumes need integrated paperclips…
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Society_for_Creative_Anachronism