Challenges Of Religious Diversity Research Articles

Religion and Political Theory: Secularism, Accommodation and the New Challenges of Religious Diversity. Edited by Jonathan Seglow and Andrew Shorten

Religion and Political Theory: Secularism, Accommodation and the New Challenges of Religious Diversity. Edited by <i>Jonathan Seglow and Andrew Shorten</i>

Anecdotal Pluralism, Total Evidence and Religious Diversity

My main claim is that, contrary to the assumptions of mainstream literature, epistemic religious diversity is not a matter of an abstract comparison among the belief systems of different religions or denominations; rather, it is a relation arising from the epistemic encounter among individuals who adhere to different doxastic groups. Particularly, while epistemic symmetry inclines to treat our doxastic opponents as peers, epistemic peerhood is not the starting point of doctrinal comparisons, but the potential outcome of the epistemic process of the construal of shared evidence. A key point in my approach is that such a process is anecdotally constituted. My working plan is the following. In the first section I will introduce the challenge of religious diversity. In the next section, I will distinguish between two characterisations of the relation among seminal claims of doxastic groups, namely, beliefs which stand in a competing relation and beliefs which are merely alternative. I will provide a degree view of this distinction. The subsequent section consists in a overview of the outcomes from the epistemology of disagreement. In the fourth section, I will provide two basic motivations in support of TE. Finally, I will conclude by sketching how TE motivates the assumption of a schema for handling religious disagreements which I name anecdotal pluralism

Religious Education in Germany in Light of Religious Diversity: Constitutional Requirements for Religious Education

AbstractIn Article 7, paragraph 3, the German Constitution provides that religious education shall be a part of the curriculum of public school. This is one of the three approaches of dealing with religious education existing today. Originally, religious education as a regular subject at public schools in Germany was only offered by the two Christian Churches—Catholic and Protestant. As the number of Christians decreased and the number of Muslims increased, the demand for Islamic religious education at public schools grew. Therefore, the question arose whether the constitutional law concerning religion is capable of facing the new challenges of religious diversity. This Article tries to answer this question with regard to the introduction of Islamic religious education as a measure of adaptiveness. In the first step, the requirements of Article 7, paragraph 3 of the Constitution posed to religious education will be outlined in order to be able to examine in the second step whether Islamic religious education may be introduced at public schools as a regular subject. In this regard, the issue of the qualification of an umbrella association as a religious society and the constitutionality of the advisory board model will be discussed.

Solidarity in Diversity? State Responses to Religious Diversity in Liberal and Non-Liberal Perspectives

AbstractThis Article introduces the German Law Journal’s Special Issue on “Solidarity in Diversity? State Responses to Religious Diversity in Liberal and Non-Liberal Perspectives”. The major countries in comparative focus are Germany and Singapore, both self-avowedly secular countries that face the challenge of religious diversity: Singapore, from inception, and Germany, through more recent developments. A key issue the Article raises concerns liberal approaches towards regulating religion; it argues that the liberal model, taking Germany as an example, may serve as a productive starting point for comparative analysis, as the liberal focus on individual religious freedom impacts managing religious diversity, shapes national cultural identity, models of secularism and social solidarity. This is compared with non-liberal approaches, as exemplified in Singapore practice, where a more communitarian outlook underpin more interventionist approaches whereby public interests and the common good tend to be prioritized over individual freedom. The comparative angles offered in this Special Issue is furthermore buttressed in several articles in this Special Issue that make comparisons to other jurisdictions-United States and Canada. This introductory Article offers a brief overview to the various contributions to this Special Issue and identifies unifying themes.

Secularities, Diversities and Pluralities: Understanding the Challenges of Religious Diversity in Latin America

Latin America is experiencing today the greatest religious diversity in its entire history. However, it must also be noted that a large number of the growing religious minorities may be classified into types of Christianity with conservative overtones. In this paper we will suggest that the literature streams on multiple secularities in contemporary (Western) societies and religious diversity in Latin America do offer insightful perspectives yet fail to adequately convey the challenges raised by the religious across contemporary Latin America. Addressing Latin America’s historical background, we will distinguish conceptually and empirically among different degrees of secularities&lt;em&gt;, &lt;/em&gt;diversities&lt;em&gt; &lt;/em&gt;and&lt;em&gt; &lt;/em&gt;pluralities&lt;em&gt; &lt;/em&gt;and will construct with these distinctions a descriptive-normative model that can guide future analyses of secular and religious phenomena in Latin America. It is only through a comprehensive understanding of diversities, pluralities and secularities that the debates on those human rights crucial for social inclusion—from sexual and reproductive rights to gender and religious equality—can be fruitfully conducted in and beyond Latin America.

What the Community Religion Project can tell us about the study of religious diversity in the UK

The Community Religions Project at the University of Leeds ( http://arts.leeds.ac.uk/crp/ ) has been in existence for over 35 years and provides a unique model for observing development in the way religious diversity and pluralism have been conceptualised and studied in the UK. Many leading scholars of religion in the UK have produced monographs, research papers, or other work in conjunction with the CRP. The increasing engagement with concepts and challenges of religious diversity and pluralism are visible in the greater emphasis on interreligious relations, and religion(s) or ‘faith’ and the state; largely through sociological and policy studies, rather than ethnographic studies of discrete religious communities. Issues concerning religious categories and conflation of religious with national or ethnic identity are notable in early CRP studies, but are now more clearly articulated as a focus for study. The continuing focus on qualitative methods is revealing of prevailing UK models of study of religions, though the move from micro (very local) to macro (UK-wide) studies involves increasing use of secondary and quantitative date. Using the archive of the CRP, this paper will provide an intellectual history of study of religions in the UK which highlights the changing engagement with pluralism and diversity. Using example studies, issues concerning terminology, method and theory will be identified. The move to a focus on interreligious studies and religion and policy will also provide a framework for considering how study of religions in the UK is articulated in response to both academic and non-academic interests and concerns.

A Study of the Interaction of Confucianism Buddhism and Taosim in Chinese History, and its Relevance to Interfaith Dialogue

The 21st century is an era which faces political, economical and cultural and many other effects of globalization. Whether you like or dislike, accept or not accept it, it still is inevitable. Religion does also face the same problems with the changing and developing of the society. Contemporary religious issue of interfaith dialogue faces the challenge of religious diversity. It is not the simple understanding as we have known before and religious dialogue is not only some models as we know before as well. With the interaction between ideology and culture, the relations of each religion also undergo subtle changes. And these changes influence the harmony and development of the society. In ancient China, Confucianism, Buddhism and Taoism had a very drastic struggle with each other, but became harmony finally. It is really helpful in contemporary society to do religious dialogue without doubt. However, we cannot easily to copy all the historical experiences but also need a critical way to rethink of it and to try to find the good way for contemporary China and other countries. So the purpose of interfaith dialogue is not only reaching a consensus, seek common ground between religions while putting aside differences but by self-critical understanding by each through understanding the other for better cooperation and coexistence. This paper tries to use a critical and historical study of Chinese religious history to rethink how to make religions from conflict to harmony under the background of religious pluralism.

Addressing Religious Plurality: A Consideration of Four Models

This paper seeks to address the challenge of religious plurality by drawing upon political theory literature. It proceeds to review, but ultimately reject, three models for dealing with diversity of religious outlooks: (i) the model of public reason (primarily as articulated by John Rawls); (ii) refinements to the model of public reason from responses to and critiques of Rawls; and, (iii) the model of ‘religious transformation’. As an alternative, this paper will suggest a new, fourth, model called ‘justice as discourse’, which it will argue is a better framework for addressing the challenge of religious diversity and more conducive to social sustainability.

Addressing Religious Plurality: A Consideration of Four Models

This paper seeks to address the challenge of religious plurality by drawing upon political theory literature. It proceeds to review, but ultimately reject, three models for dealing with diversity of religious outlooks: (i) the model of public reason (primarily as articulated by John Rawls); (ii) refinements to the model of public reason from responses to and critiques of Rawls; and, (iii) the model of ‘religious transformation’. As an alternative, this paper will suggest a new, fourth, model called ‘justice as discourse’, which it will argue is a better framework for addressing the challenge of religious diversity and more conducive to social sustainability.

Public policies, interfaith associations and religious minorities: a new policy paradigm? Evidence from the case of Barcelona

Religious diversity is posing new and urgent challenges to local authorities and there is no solid foundation of expertise in dealing with this issue at the local level. In some European cities, interfaith platforms are providing local authorities with new governance tools to cope with the challenges of religious diversity and are generating new ways of framing and representing religion in the public sphere. The author takes the city of Barcelona as a case study with the aim of exploring the emergence of a new model for dealing with religious minority issues that goes beyond State–Church relations and the political legacies in this area.

America and the Challenges of Religious Diversity – By Robert Wuthnow

America and the Challenges of Religious Diversity – By Robert Wuthnow

America and the Challenge of Religious Diversity

America and the Challenge of Religious Diversity

America and the Challenge of Religious Diversity

America and the Challenge of Religious Diversity

Book Review: America and the Challenges of Religious Diversity, by Robert Wuthnow. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 2007. 416 pp. $18.95 (paperback)

Book Review: America and the Challenges of Religious Diversity, by Robert Wuthnow. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 2007. 416 pp. $18.95 (paperback)

Comptes rendus / Reviews of books: America and the Challenges of Religious Diversity

Comptes rendus / Reviews of books: America and the Challenges of Religious Diversity

America and the Challenges of Religious Diversity by Robert Wuthnow. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press, 2005, 391 pp.; $29.95 USD (cloth)

America and the Challenges of Religious Diversity by Robert Wuthnow. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press, 2005, 391 pp.; $29.95 USD (cloth)

Robert Wuthnow, . America and the Challenges of Religious Diversity. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 2005. xvii+391 pp. $29.95 (cloth).

Previous articleNext article No AccessBook ReviewRobert Wuthnow, . America and the Challenges of Religious Diversity. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 2005. xvii+391 pp. $29.95 (cloth).R. Scott HansonR. Scott HansonPhiladelphia University. Search for more articles by this author Philadelphia University.PDFPDF PLUSFull Text Add to favoritesDownload CitationTrack CitationsPermissionsReprints Share onFacebookTwitterLinkedInRedditEmail SectionsMoreDetailsFiguresReferencesCited by The Journal of Religion Volume 87, Number 1January 2007 Article DOIhttps://doi.org/10.1086/511366 Views: 28Total views on this site Citations: 1Citations are reported from Crossref PDF download Crossref reports the following articles citing this article:Alexander Yendell Robert Wuthnow: America and the Challenges of Religious Diversity (2005), (Jul 2019): 595–603.https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-15250-5_65

The Congregation Triumphant

The Congregation Triumphant

The Challenge of Religious Diversity and Revitalisation to the Secularity of Australian Universities

The Challenge of Religious Diversity and Revitalisation to the Secularity of Australian Universities

Philip Quinn's contribution to the epistemic challenge of religious diversity

In this essay I describe seven central characteristics of Philip Quinn's approach to the epistemic challenge of religious diversity as they surface in his responses to other contemporary approaches. In the process an assessment is given of Quinn's contribution, and continued relevance, to the contemporary discussions about this topic. The first three sections describe Quinn's confrontations with Alvin Plantinga, William Alston, and John Hick. The next section presents critical comments on Quinn's unique notion of thinning.