*categorizing people among any singular line of distinction (particularely religious ones, as has become fashinable in recent times) is nothing else than a voluntary and arbitrary undertaking. there is no reason whatsoever why any particular line of distinctiveness among individuals should trump all others.
* the question whether the world’s different civilizations (primarily categorized along religious lines) must inevitably clash rests on the premiss that there are such clearcut civilizations and that a categorization among religious lines is of higher importance than the countless other possible lines of distinctions along which humans could potentially be classified (profession, musical taste, gender, political outlooks, academic interests…).
*categorizing people along one particular line has two basic flaws. (i) it diminishes the immense diversity and plurality to which each individual is subject and (ii) draws heavily on simplifying historical and contemporary interconnections and cultural exchanges.
*the (well intentioned) idea of mittigating between different communities is in so far misplaced and counterproductive, as it supports the premisse that there are such predominant distinctions. instead, we should start seeing individuals as having multiple idendities and focussing on the interconnectedness that these foster between people.
Fabian Gunzinger 