I haven't claimed here that religions are prone to 'single-minded motivations, nor that that would necessarily be a mark against them. Are those claims that you'd like to make?

These are the claims I am trying to make:

1. Some claims are easier to build consensus around than others.
2. Some claims are almost hopelessly difficult to build consensus around.
3. Claims that do build consensus tend to share common traits and qualities - it's not just random (e.g. many people can witness or deduce them for themselves).
4. Likewise, claims that resist consensus tend to share common traits and qualities - it's not just random (e.g. people can't witness or deduce them for themselves, but instead have to trust a prophet or authority figure).
5. Claims that do build consensus tend to aid in communication and collaboration.
6. Claims that resist consensus tend to hinder or thwart communication and collaboration.
7. Communication and collaboration are generally very good things - and their lack are often very bad.
8. Whether a claim builds or resists consensus is not a benign question - it can have good or bad consequences.
9. It's therefore irresponsible to make claims without at least some consideration on whether it is the type of claim that is likely to build or to resist consensus.

Do you agree with any of those claims? Which do you agree with and which do you disagree with?