Many of my readers will be familiar with a YouTube video that has recently gone viral. I am referring here to the Jesus>Religion video. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1IAhDGYlpqY
The video was not shocking to me in the least bit. Perhaps it is because of my protestant influence, but I understood what the man was talking about. The real shock to me came from experiencing all the criticisms that the video provoked.
I think a great deal of the criticisms stem from a desire for a logical argument. The appalling lack of rationality enrages the philosophy student in me. A great deal of the critics misunderstand the original intention and purpose of the video. As a result, these authors set themselves up as enemies of the video which I see as a great mistake.
The difference between what the critics want and what the author provided was the difference between logos and pathos. To put it simply, the author’s definition of religion is different than the critic’s. The author takes everything bad about the church and lumps it into a category which he then labels as ‘Religion’. The purpose of the video is not to logically prove all these bad things, but to empathize with the audience that such bad things exist and need to be remedied. This is very bad logically, but very effective emotionally.
The problem of the video is that specific words have specific meanings. Religion has a specific meaning and one can’t simply redefine it. Yet redefining this word makes it semi-scandalous, and is what has made the video viral. From an author’s standpoint, it really is a brilliant stratagem.
If you don’t hate something about Christianity I don’t think you are paying very close attention. If you can’t relate to this video, I don’t think I can relate very well to you. It doesn’t take very long on the web to come across religious content that is incredibly frustrating and depressing. If you need some ‘Religion’ to be upset about, check this out:
No comments:
Post a Comment