thread: 2011-07-11 : Hooray for Religion
On 2011-07-12, C Luke Mula wrote:
I'm going to edit your wording in your paragraphs a bit to make my point about beliefs being a core.
First off, Pentecostalism (which I grew up in) instead of Mormonism...
It seems to me that religion has to make sense even when practices don't. Like, Pentecostal Christianity doesn't disappear even though some of the practices Pentecostals have are plain nonsense, and it doesn't disappear even though Pentecostals don't always believe the nonsensical things they practice, and it doesn't even disappear when Pentecostals have diverse and contradictory practices (which of course they do).
Does that mean that practices evaporate and belief remains as the core?
And then relating religion to roleplaying games again...
It seems to me that roleplaying games have to make sense even when SIS doesn't. Like, D&D doesn't disappear even though some of the SIS that D&D gamers explore is plain nonsense, and it doesn't disappear even though D&D gamers don't usually explore all of its nonsensical SIS, and it doesn't even disappear when D&D gamers explore diverse and contradictory SIS (which of course they do).
It seems to me that under scrutiny, SIS evaporates anyway. We tell ourselves stories in our heads about why we've done what we've done, and how we think the game world works, but they're just stories. We don't really have good access to our own decision-making, and roleplaying has to make sense anyway.
Does any of this make the SIS unimportant to roleplaying?
Here's what I say: There is religion without apparent practice in just the same way that there is religion without apparent belief. It's more or less a matter of emphasis.
Also, do you see how the people practicing "without belief" actually must be holding beliefs as to why they're practicing what they're practicing? Yes, their beliefs may be completely naturalistic and may not reflect the symbols of the traditional religion at all, but they are still beliefs.
A final note about beliefs. Even if the beliefs aren't "real" or don't reflect reality in any way doesn't mean that they are not a significant part of religious experience. We all suspend disbelief in order to experience fiction, temporarily believing what we're reading or watching or playing, and that gives us a real experience of the fiction. That same suspension of disbelief is all that is needed for any religious experience.
Sorry if it seems I'm belaboring my point, but I know a lot of people who would be personally offended by the idea of equating religion with practices or observances, when much of what they do is simply engaging in beliefs with no obvious practices. Kind of like freeform has no obvious techniques, and the emphasis certainly is on SIS over them.
And if you couldn't tell yet, I really like this topic. Looking forward to what'll come out of this discussion!
