Harvard Pluralism Project: What is (religious) pluralism?
This article, dated Sept. 20th 2014, Three Cheers for Pluralism Over Separatism, http://www.nytimes.com/2014/09/21/opinion/sunday/thomas-l-friedman-three-cheers-for-pluralism-over-separatism.html, by Thomas Friedman quotes views/understanding of Harvard's (religious) pluralism project. However, Friedman uses these views in a more political/social/ethnic pluralism context rather than religious pluralism, IMHO.
Harvard Prof. Diana L. Eck crisply defines her (and the Harvard pluralism project's) view of (religious) pluralism here: http://www.pluralism.org/pluralism/what_is_pluralism. I have copy-pasted the contents below along with some comments of mine:
What is Pluralism?
The plurality of religious traditions and cultures has come to characterize every part of the world today. But what is pluralism? Here are four points to begin our thinking:
First, pluralism is not diversity alone, but the energetic engagement with diversity. Diversity can and has meant the creation of religious ghettoes with little traffic between or among them. Today, religious diversity is a given, but pluralism is not a given; it is an achievement. Mere diversity without real encounter and relationship will yield increasing tensions in our societies.
[Ravi: That's very well said.]
Second, pluralism is not just tolerance, but the active seeking of understanding across lines of difference. Tolerance is a necessary public virtue, but it does not require Christians and Muslims, Hindus, Jews, and ardent secularists to know anything about one another. Tolerance is too thin a foundation for a world of religious difference and proximity. It does nothing to remove our ignorance of one another, and leaves in place the stereotype, the half-truth, the fears that underlie old patterns of division and violence. In the world in which we live today, our ignorance of one another will be increasingly costly.
[Ravi: I think the far more deeply interconnected and interdependent than ever before, world of today very much needs a deeper understanding of the beliefs and practices of different religious groups, including atheist & agnostic groups, in the world.]
Third, pluralism is not relativism, but the encounter of commitments. The new paradigm of pluralism does not require us to leave our identities and our commitments behind, for pluralism is the encounter of commitments. It means holding our deepest differences, even our religious differences, not in isolation, but in relationship to one another.
[Ravi: I did not understand this point well. What exactly is meant by commitment in this context? Maybe I need an example which may be available somewhere else on the website.]
Fourth, pluralism is based on dialogue. The language of pluralism is that of dialogue and encounter, give and take, criticism and self-criticism. Dialogue means both speaking and listening, and that process reveals both common understandings and real differences. Dialogue does not mean everyone at the “table” will agree with one another. Pluralism involves the commitment to being at the table -- with one’s commitments.
[Ravi: I fully support the dialogue part.]
—Diana L. Eck
--- end what_is_pluralism contents ---
Somewhere down the line I hope to read more about the Harvard pluralism project which seems to primarily deal with religious pluralism in the USA. Some of its initiatives, insights and experiences may be applicable, in a modified form perhaps, to other countries including India.
Harvard Prof. Diana L. Eck crisply defines her (and the Harvard pluralism project's) view of (religious) pluralism here: http://www.pluralism.org/pluralism/what_is_pluralism. I have copy-pasted the contents below along with some comments of mine:
What is Pluralism?
The plurality of religious traditions and cultures has come to characterize every part of the world today. But what is pluralism? Here are four points to begin our thinking:
First, pluralism is not diversity alone, but the energetic engagement with diversity. Diversity can and has meant the creation of religious ghettoes with little traffic between or among them. Today, religious diversity is a given, but pluralism is not a given; it is an achievement. Mere diversity without real encounter and relationship will yield increasing tensions in our societies.
[Ravi: That's very well said.]
Second, pluralism is not just tolerance, but the active seeking of understanding across lines of difference. Tolerance is a necessary public virtue, but it does not require Christians and Muslims, Hindus, Jews, and ardent secularists to know anything about one another. Tolerance is too thin a foundation for a world of religious difference and proximity. It does nothing to remove our ignorance of one another, and leaves in place the stereotype, the half-truth, the fears that underlie old patterns of division and violence. In the world in which we live today, our ignorance of one another will be increasingly costly.
[Ravi: I think the far more deeply interconnected and interdependent than ever before, world of today very much needs a deeper understanding of the beliefs and practices of different religious groups, including atheist & agnostic groups, in the world.]
Third, pluralism is not relativism, but the encounter of commitments. The new paradigm of pluralism does not require us to leave our identities and our commitments behind, for pluralism is the encounter of commitments. It means holding our deepest differences, even our religious differences, not in isolation, but in relationship to one another.
[Ravi: I did not understand this point well. What exactly is meant by commitment in this context? Maybe I need an example which may be available somewhere else on the website.]
Fourth, pluralism is based on dialogue. The language of pluralism is that of dialogue and encounter, give and take, criticism and self-criticism. Dialogue means both speaking and listening, and that process reveals both common understandings and real differences. Dialogue does not mean everyone at the “table” will agree with one another. Pluralism involves the commitment to being at the table -- with one’s commitments.
[Ravi: I fully support the dialogue part.]
—Diana L. Eck
--- end what_is_pluralism contents ---
Somewhere down the line I hope to read more about the Harvard pluralism project which seems to primarily deal with religious pluralism in the USA. Some of its initiatives, insights and experiences may be applicable, in a modified form perhaps, to other countries including India.
Comments
Post a Comment