The unique dynamism of lived religion--its distinctive patterns of interaction not only with secular, nationalist, ethnic, and other elements of political or personal identity but also with its own sacred past-- means, among other things, that religious behavior cannot be confidently predicted merely on the basis of an individual's or group's affiliation with a specific religious tradition, especially if that tradition is conceptualized in the abstract. In this sense there is no "Islam," no "Christianity," no "Buddhism"--- only Muslims, Christians, and Buddhists living in specific contingent contexts, possessed of multiple and mixed motives, each of which might contribute to a particular action or decision taken.In other words, I've never met Christianity or Islam, but I have met Christians and Muslims living in the world and making decisions (even what they view as purely religious ones) based upon multiple factors. How they understand and apply the teachings of their religion can be shaped by personality, family environment, national identity and many other factors. This shouldn't be surprising. Isn't this how I make all my other decisions? Even as I try to make the most rational or just decision, my perception of what is rational or just is influenced by my past experiences, my values, and the attitudes of the communities that I live in.
As human beings, we necessarily have a subjective view of the world. Our decisions are influenced by the social groups that we live in, but ultimately it is with the sum of our personal experiences and values that we make our choices.
Therefore, to really understand an act of religious violence, it is necessary to observe not only the religious beliefs in play, but also the social and political factors that may be affecting these individual choices. I feel that it's still too early in the course for me to posit any real solutions or preventative actions against religious violence, but it seems to me that such solutions are to be found by taking a holistic view of the causes of religious violence while remembering that ultimately the decision is set before an individual who must make the choice between life and death.
Now how to tip the balance in the way of life?
I completely agree with you. Religious violence involves analyzing the individual as well as the cause that made him/her engage in these acts. Sometimes I feel as those looking for answers ignore how socio-economic conditions affect certain decision-making processes in individuals.
ReplyDeleteThis is a very good insight which tries to identify the notion that in order to understand religious violence, it must be seen from many perspectives, such as socio-economic perspectives and not simply religious perspectives. I agree with the point that on many occasions the religion by itself is not the main culprit for religious violence, but many other variables also affect the intensity of religious violence. However, it must also be acknowledged that there are occasions when people who have done acts of terror do not show any symptoms of erratic or wavering behavior and in more of the cases they had pretty decent lives before dying in the name of God. I can explain this paradox to myself in the following way: although many religions claim to be peaceful religions, if one interprets the texts from Judaism and Christianity, one will be surprised to see the amount of violence and hatred in these texts. This leads to different interpretations of the scriptures depending on what the goal is. If it is to wage terror on innocent people, then the violent parts of the texts will be preached and stressed upon and people who are emotionally unstable will start believing in them. That is where I think the whole problem with religious violence is – there are many people who devoted themselves to “protecting” their religion without realizing that in doing so they actually harm innocent people in the name of their deity. In most of the cases these are some extremist or fundamental groups which are against imperialism, namely the US, and social order the way it is. Although socio-economic conditions may aggravate the state of certain religious conflicts, I reckon that in most cases religion by itself is also deeply engrained in the minds of people as the sole reason for conflicts. As for how to tip the balance in the way of life, I think that this is an individual choice and an answer which is very hard to understand as well as to answer constructively without being biased.
ReplyDeleteI agree that individual choices are products of "the sum of our personal experiences and values," thus it is crucial to examine social and political factors that may be influencing decisions. On a larger scale, however, I would say that in order to understand religious conflict, we need to not just examine influences of of specific actions and mentalities, but social factors that arise from religious cultures. We can discuss what outside factors preceeded every specific act of religious conflict, but to get to the base of the trend that is violence rooted in religion, we must also look at the social factors of religion itself.
ReplyDelete