Suchergebnisse

"Religious Nationalism and Religious Influence" published on by Oxford University Press.

"Religious Regulation: Discrimination Against Religious Minorities" published on by Oxford University Press.

Introduction -- Overview of religious realism -- A realist interpretation of religious diversity -- Religious exclusivism : the problem of being arbitrary -- Overview of religious irrealism -- Religious non-realism : neither realist nor anti-realist -- Religious non-realism pushed beyond its limits -- Conclusion

For more than a decade, sociologists of religion have been debating the answer to a basic question: What is the relationship between religious pluralism and religious vitality? The old wisdom was that the relationship was negative, that pluralism undermines vitality. This view has been challenged by advocates of a supply-side model of religious vitality. They argue that the relationship is positive—that pluralism increases vitality—and this empirical claim has become foundational to the larger project of applying economic theory to religion. We review the relevant evidence and reach a straightforward conclusion: The empirical evidence does not support the claim that religious pluralism is positively associated with religious participation in any general sense. We discuss this conclusion's theoretical implications, and we identify potentially productive directions for future research on religious pluralism, church-state relations, and religious competition.It appears that North Americans are religious in spite of, not because of, religious pluralism. ( Olson 1998a :761).[R]eligious practice is strongly and positively associated with pluralism. ( Finke & Stark 1998 :762)

Abstract
Despite significant advances in our understanding of the politics of religious ideology and identity across time and space, scholars disagree on how to conceptualize "religious" conflicts and "religious" actors, and how to infer religious motivations from actors' behavior. This Forum brings together scholars with diverse research agendas to weigh in on conceptual, methodological, and ethical questions surrounding the study of contemporary religious conflicts. We ask: How do we know when individuals and groups are acting on religious, as opposed to other, motivations? To what extent can analysts rely on actors' own claims about their motivations? How does the "secular bias" affect scholarly research on religion and conflict? Is there a bias over which conflicts and actors come to be labeled and coded as "religious" by scholars, policymakers, and the media? The Forum fosters a debate aimed at identifying gaps within and between academic research and policy as well as media analyses on religion and political violence. The contributors examine contradictory conclusions by academics and policy analysts rooted in diverging assumptions and arguments about "religious" actors, "religious" motivations, and "religious" conflicts. The Forum proposes some ways for scholars to overcome these challenges as well as offers implications for policymakers and journalists who shape the public discourse.

The author goes back to the roots of religious radicalism in the Islamic world and charts the ways it can be opposed. Having analyzed the Western political, economic, and cultural impact on the Muslim civilization he concludes that the Muslim countries stand a chance of joining the globalization process on an equal footing with others if they are able to reform public consciousness.