Exploring religious diversity in higher education

[newcriminal]

By Bradley Nystrom and Jeffrey Brodd
March 7th 2018

In his recent post, “Declining Exposure to Religious Diversity” (24 January), Jeremy Bauer-Wolf notes some striking results of a survey conducted by the Interfaith Youth Core of more than 7,000 students at 122 American colleges and universities. The ongoing Interfaith Diversity Experiences and Attitudes Longitudinal Survey (IDEALS) is tracking this cohort of students from their first day on campus in fall 2015 until their graduation in the spring of 2019. The survey measures the extent of their interfaith experiences on campus, and tracks developments in their attitudes toward religious diversity.

The IDEALS data relating to students’ experiences in their first year of college point to some noteworthy findings. There are significant declines in discussion of “religious or spiritual topics with teachers” (43% to 25%), working “together with people of other religious or nonreligious perspectives on a service project” (49% to 32%), attending “religious services for a religious tradition that is not your own” (37% to 20%), and discussing “religious diversity in at least one of your high school courses / general education courses” (52% to 40%). There are less pronounced declines in attending “an interfaith prayer vigil/memorial” (18% to 13%) and participating in “an interfaith dialogue” (20% to 16%). These data identify challenges for the Interfaith Youth Core and other organizations committed to cultivating interreligious dialogue and the benefits it can bring to society.

The academic study of religion offers a different approach to understanding religious diversity, one that also offers benefits to society and complements interfaith dialogue. While interfaith dialogue emphasizes the undeniable value of personal engagement with others whose worldviews and ways of life are different from one’s own, the academic study of religion—also commonly known as religious studies or comparative religion—intentionally avoids the personal and the subjective. A sound religious studies approach, like those of other academic disciplines, depends on critical assessment of empirical data and not on subjective truth claims. At the same time, religious studies demands empathy and fair-mindedness, avoiding judgmental attitudes and biases.

As Bauer-Wolf points out, about “91% of the students indicated in the survey that they respect people who have religious perspectives different from their own—85% said they admire people of other faiths and beliefs.” Bauer-Wolf also notes that students’ exposure “to different religions through more informal channels—such as studying or socializing with somebody of another faith—was reported more widely” (up from 66% to 79%). These data bode very well for the efficacy of the academic study of religions. Courses on religion offer ideal platforms for learning from a more distanced or objective perspective about the religions of the world. Such learning depends on the sort of empathy and fair-mindedness that the survey suggests is alive and well among first-year students. Moreover, it provides precious opportunities for learning about the other—both other individuals and other cultures—without requiring that the student relate directly with the other in a personal manner.

https://blog.oup.com/2018/03/religious-diversity-higher-education/

[longship]

1. All except non-religious culture...

The religions get together to agree that religion is okee-dokee.

The problem which has plagued humankind since time immemorial: They somehow miss the fact that it is religion that's the problem.

Just leave us non-religious people alone. Nope! They cannot do that.

[newcriminal]

2. Non-religious culture?

That puts a lie to the notion that the only attribute of atheism is nonbelief in a god(s).

Perhaps an anthropologist should investigate.

[Act_of_Reparation]

3. I think the anthropologist's time would be better spent...

...investigating the culture of pedantry endemic among very serious people.

[newcriminal]

4. There is one who would be a good subject, I think.

But it is only my opinion.

[longship]

5. Perhaps anthropologists should ignore religious apologists.

Non-religion is not religion. Period!!!

The lie is that some how non-belief is a kind of belief. That's what it is. A lie. Or maybe one could say "bearing false witness."

[newcriminal]

6. But you say it is a culture.

A worthy subject of study.

[longship]

7. Culture???

Are you barking mad?

Science isn't culture. It's data, parsimony, and reproduction of experiments to validate theory. Religion is the ignorance of all those things.

That's why NOMA is rubbish. Religion never ever treads into those spheres, except that is what they always do. It's all about faith, something science knows nothing about.

[newcriminal]

8. Yes, "non-religious culture...", as you put it.

Have you lost the thread of the discussion?

[longship]

10. Religion is cultural, I agree.

However, I also think that it is utterly poisonous culture.

If you don't agree with me, may you spend eternity in Hell Fire!

That reminds me of an anecdote of Drumpf going to Hell.

He is next in line crossing the river Styx. Satan is ushering each person across the river to their eternal doom.

The guy in front of Drumpf is asked by Satan, "Welcome to Hell. What will it be? Death? Or Chi-Chi?"

He chooses Chi-Chi, where upon he is shoved into a burning barrel, rolled down a mountain, while being raped by rabid chimpanzees, into a boiling lake of shit.

It then becomes Drumpf's turn. Satan says, "Welcome to Hell. What will it be? Death? Or Chi-Chi?"

Seeing how bad Chi-Chi is, Drumpf chooses death.

Satan responds, "Death it is! But first... Chi-Chi!"



Ridicule is the sole rational response to religion.

[Jim__]

9. If one of the goals of higher education is to make us better informed citizens of the world ...

... exploring religious diversity does have a role to play.

[newcriminal]

11. I agree.