- Local time
- Today, 04:28
- Aug 20, 2016
I phrased it like that because I suspect there isn't exactly a readily accessible peer-reviewed study to support me. I hesitate to make statements that I can't definitively back up, because it's an integrity thing for me.when people say systemic, they're just referring to a collection of behaviours and thought-patterns individuals hold
you don't get to handwave things that happen at a systemic level and be like
"it seems like there's a trend where the actions of individuals are seen for what they are instead of institutional"
as if there's some mystical humans who are somehow not human and influenced by the institutions they're raised in, believe in, spend time in, deliberately become part of
Humans are fallible, and human qualities exist independent of institutional boundaries. Pedophilia and the sort are human qualities in this context, not universal by any means, or defining, but I’d expect them to arise in humans independently of institutions. If those statements are true, then if we find differences in the manifestation of indiscretions or the damage they cause between institutions of different structures, they are a result of differences in institutional structure and some structures are clearly enabling. It only follows then, that a change in structure could produce a change in manifestation.
I suspect the loosely organized structures of liberal quakerism and universalism might result in fewer and/or less severe moral indescretions, to the point where there’s no difference between what’s seen in religious vs nonreligious groups or the general populace, or where they even compare favorably. Any of those should compare favorably to strongly hierarchical religious groups. Do you have any evidence that disproves this?