9 ms·
> but any method of grouping is equally or more susceptible to this same problem Not really. If you are looking to group people into what group they identify w
by argumentum 12y ago
> but any method of grouping is equally or more susceptible to this same problem
Not really. If you are looking to group people into what group they identify with (which is what this poll actually was), the only way to do it would be to ask them, individually.
> Any grouping will necessarily group together people who don't share identical beliefs.
Huh, anyone who self-identifies as "Christian" believes that category describes them better than any other. You can't go into everyone's head and determine what constitutes the totality of their religion or philosophy. It's just not possible.
> I think the most pragmatically important feature of a religious group isn't the name of the group or the name they use for their deities, but rather who they consider to be orthodox.
I think the only pragmatically important feature of a religious group is who considers themselves to be a part of it.
- baddox 12y ago> Huh, anyone who self-identifies as "Christian" believes that category describes them better than any other. Yes, but most would probably also self-identify with more specific groups, like "Lutheran," more vague groups, like "spiritual," and overlapping groups, like "fundamentalist" or "evangelical." My proposal would not group a person into a group with which they do not self-identify. > I think the only pragmatically important feature of a religious group is who considers themselves to be a part of it. Again, I'm not disagreeing with that. I was just assuming that no groupings would go against any member's self-identification, because that seems very obvious.