Religion and Law: John Witte

Buddhism and Violence

One of Malik’s conclusions is especially important, having implications beyond Buddhism. He argues that despite the prominent role of religious identity as an important variable in these violent conflicts,

“it would be as wrong to see many, perhaps most, of these conflicts as purely religious confrontations as it would be to see the anti-Rohingya pogroms as a religious war. Many have, like the confrontations in Myanmar and Sri Lanka, complex social and political roots, as groups vying for political power have exploited religion and religious identities to gain support. The importance of religion in these conflicts is often less in creating the tensions than in helping establish the chauvinist identities through which certain groups are demonized and one’s own actions justified.”

- See more at: http://www.religiousleftlaw.com/2013/11/when-buddhists-resort-to-violence.html#sthash.KmUaCpSq.dpuf

One of Malik’s conclusions is especially important, having implications beyond Buddhism. He argues that despite the prominent role of religious identity as an important variable in these violent conflicts,

“it would be as wrong to see many, perhaps most, of these conflicts as purely religious confrontations as it would be to see the anti-Rohingya pogroms as a religious war. Many have, like the confrontations in Myanmar and Sri Lanka, complex social and political roots, as groups vying for political power have exploited religion and religious identities to gain support. The importance of religion in these conflicts is often less in creating the tensions than in helping establish the chauvinist identities through which certain groups are demonized and one’s own actions justified.”

It is no doubt true that many “New Age,” “liberal,” and even “secular” Buddhists have romanticized and idealized Buddhism generally, succumbing to Orientalist illusions (most vividly perhaps in the case of Tibetan Buddhism) or fantasies that prevent them from coming to grips with the darker realities of “Buddhism on the ground” in countries like Myanmar, Sri Lanka, and Thailand. I suppose we might find some consolation in the fact that Buddhist groups and organizations like the Buddhist Peace Fellowship and the International Network of Engaged Buddhists have taken on the task of educating themselves and others about the Buddhist resort to violence in the contemporary world.

- See more at: http://www.religiousleftlaw.com/2013/11/when-buddhists-resort-to-violence.html#sthash.KmUaCpSq.dpuf

One of Malik’s conclusions is especially important, having implications beyond Buddhism. He argues that despite the prominent role of religious identity as an important variable in these violent conflicts,

“it would be as wrong to see many, perhaps most, of these conflicts as purely religious confrontations as it would be to see the anti-Rohingya pogroms as a religious war. Many have, like the confrontations in Myanmar and Sri Lanka, complex social and political roots, as groups vying for political power have exploited religion and religious identities to gain support. The importance of religion in these conflicts is often less in creating the tensions than in helping establish the chauvinist identities through which certain groups are demonized and one’s own actions justified.”

It is no doubt true that many “New Age,” “liberal,” and even “secular” Buddhists have romanticized and idealized Buddhism generally, succumbing to Orientalist illusions (most vividly perhaps in the case of Tibetan Buddhism) or fantasies that prevent them from coming to grips with the darker realities of “Buddhism on the ground” in countries like Myanmar, Sri Lanka, and Thailand. I suppose we might find some consolation in the fact that Buddhist groups and organizations like the Buddhist Peace Fellowship and the International Network of Engaged Buddhists have taken on the task of educating themselves and others about the Buddhist resort to violence in the contemporary world.

- See more at: http://www.religiousleftlaw.com/2013/11/when-buddhists-resort-to-violence.html#sthash.KmUaCpSq.dpuf

 "it would be as wrong to see many, perhaps most, of these conflicts as purely religious confrontations as it would be to see the anti-Rohingya pogroms as a religious war. Many have, like the confrontations in Myanmar and Sri lanka, complex social and political roots, as groups vying for political power have exploited religion and religious identities to gain support. The importance of religion in these conflicts is often less in creating the tensions than in helping establish the chauvinist identities through which certain groups are demonized and one's own actions justified."

http://www.religiousleftlaw.com/2013/11/when-buddhists-resort-to-violence.html


(American) Buddhism and social justice:
http://religiondispatches.org/american-buddhism-beyond-the-search-for-inner-peace/

One of Malik’s conclusions is especially important, having implications beyond Buddhism. He argues that despite the prominent role of religious identity as an important variable in these violent conflicts,

“it would be as wrong to see many, perhaps most, of these conflicts as purely religious confrontations as it would be to see the anti-Rohingya pogroms as a religious war. Many have, like the confrontations in Myanmar and Sri Lanka, complex social and political roots, as groups vying for political power have exploited religion and religious identities to gain support. The importance of religion in these conflicts is often less in creating the tensions than in helping establish the chauvinist identities through which certain groups are demonized and one’s own actions justified.”

It is no doubt true that many “New Age,” “liberal,” and even “secular” Buddhists have romanticized and idealized Buddhism generally, succumbing to Orientalist illusions (most vividly perhaps in the case of Tibetan Buddhism) or fantasies that prevent them from coming to grips with the darker realities of “Buddhism on the ground” in countries like Myanmar, Sri Lanka, and Thailand. I suppose we might find some consolation in the fact that Buddhist groups and organizations like the Buddhist Peace Fellowship and the International Network of Engaged Buddhists have taken on the task of educating themselves and others about the Buddhist resort to violence in the contemporary world.

- See more at: http://www.religiousleftlaw.com/2013/11/when-buddhists-resort-to-violence.html#sthash.Mjjr5TNF.dpuf

One of Malik’s conclusions is especially important, having implications beyond Buddhism. He argues that despite the prominent role of religious identity as an important variable in these violent conflicts,

“it would be as wrong to see many, perhaps most, of these conflicts as purely religious confrontations as it would be to see the anti-Rohingya pogroms as a religious war. Many have, like the confrontations in Myanmar and Sri Lanka, complex social and political roots, as groups vying for political power have exploited religion and religious identities to gain support. The importance of religion in these conflicts is often less in creating the tensions than in helping establish the chauvinist identities through which certain groups are demonized and one’s own actions justified.”

It is no doubt true that many “New Age,” “liberal,” and even “secular” Buddhists have romanticized and idealized Buddhism generally, succumbing to Orientalist illusions (most vividly perhaps in the case of Tibetan Buddhism) or fantasies that prevent them from coming to grips with the darker realities of “Buddhism on the ground” in countries like Myanmar, Sri Lanka, and Thailand. I suppose we might find some consolation in the fact that Buddhist groups and organizations like the Buddhist Peace Fellowship and the International Network of Engaged Buddhists have taken on the task of educating themselves and others about the Buddhist resort to violence in the contemporary world.

- See more at: http://www.religiousleftlaw.com/2013/11/when-buddhists-resort-to-violence.html#sthash.Mjjr5TNF.dpuf

One of Malik’s conclusions is especially important, having implications beyond Buddhism. He argues that despite the prominent role of religious identity as an important variable in these violent conflicts,

“it would be as wrong to see many, perhaps most, of these conflicts as purely religious confrontations as it would be to see the anti-Rohingya pogroms as a religious war. Many have, like the confrontations in Myanmar and Sri Lanka, complex social and political roots, as groups vying for political power have exploited religion and religious identities to gain support. The importance of religion in these conflicts is often less in creating the tensions than in helping establish the chauvinist identities through which certain groups are demonized and one’s own actions justified.”

It is no doubt true that many “New Age,” “liberal,” and even “secular” Buddhists have romanticized and idealized Buddhism generally, succumbing to Orientalist illusions (most vividly perhaps in the case of Tibetan Buddhism) or fantasies that prevent them from coming to grips with the darker realities of “Buddhism on the ground” in countries like Myanmar, Sri Lanka, and Thailand. I suppose we might find some consolation in the fact that Buddhist groups and organizations like the Buddhist Peace Fellowship and the International Network of Engaged Buddhists have taken on the task of educating themselves and others about the Buddhist resort to violence in the contemporary world.

- See more at: http://www.religiousleftlaw.com/2013/11/when-buddhists-resort-to-violence.html#sthash.Mjjr5TNF.dpuf

One of Malik’s conclusions is especially important, having implications beyond Buddhism. He argues that despite the prominent role of religious identity as an important variable in these violent conflicts,

“it would be as wrong to see many, perhaps most, of these conflicts as purely religious confrontations as it would be to see the anti-Rohingya pogroms as a religious war. Many have, like the confrontations in Myanmar and Sri Lanka, complex social and political roots, as groups vying for political power have exploited religion and religious identities to gain support. The importance of religion in these conflicts is often less in creating the tensions than in helping establish the chauvinist identities through which certain groups are demonized and one’s own actions justified.”

It is no doubt true that many “New Age,” “liberal,” and even “secular” Buddhists have romanticized and idealized Buddhism generally, succumbing to Orientalist illusions (most vividly perhaps in the case of Tibetan Buddhism) or fantasies that prevent them from coming to grips with the darker realities of “Buddhism on the ground” in countries like Myanmar, Sri Lanka, and Thailand. I suppose we might find some consolation in the fact that Buddhist groups and organizations like the Buddhist Peace Fellowship and the International Network of Engaged Buddhists have taken on the task of educating themselves and others about the Buddhist resort to violence in the contemporary world.

- See more at: http://www.religiousleftlaw.com/2013/11/when-buddhists-resort-to-violence.html#sthash.Mjjr5TNF.dpuf

One of Malik’s conclusions is especially important, having implications beyond Buddhism. He argues that despite the prominent role of religious identity as an important variable in these violent conflicts,

“it would be as wrong to see many, perhaps most, of these conflicts as purely religious confrontations as it would be to see the anti-Rohingya pogroms as a religious war. Many have, like the confrontations in Myanmar and Sri Lanka, complex social and political roots, as groups vying for political power have exploited religion and religious identities to gain support. The importance of religion in these conflicts is often less in creating the tensions than in helping establish the chauvinist identities through which certain groups are demonized and one’s own actions justified.”

It is no doubt true that many “New Age,” “liberal,” and even “secular” Buddhists have romanticized and idealized Buddhism generally, succumbing to Orientalist illusions (most vividly perhaps in the case of Tibetan Buddhism) or fantasies that prevent them from coming to grips with the darker realities of “Buddhism on the ground” in countries like Myanmar, Sri Lanka, and Thailand. I suppose we might find some consolation in the fact that Buddhist groups and organizations like the Buddhist Peace Fellowship and the International Network of Engaged Buddhists have taken on the task of educating themselves and others about the Buddhist resort to violence in the contemporary world.

- See more at: http://www.religiousleftlaw.com/2013/11/when-buddhists-resort-to-violence.html#sthash.Mjjr5TNF.dpuf

*"High and Lifted Up"

I went to a little discussion/seminar the other day held by St. Chad's college here at Durham University that aimed to engage in a discussion between Studdert Kennedy (aka Woodbine Willy) and Albert Schweitzer. The event featured Prof. Douglas Davies - who would introduce the two historical figures and talk about Albert Schweitzer (1875-1965) - as well as Revd. Dr. Peter Sedgwick who would talk about Studdert Kennedy (1883-1929). There was also someone who gave a great reading of a poem by Studdert Kennedy called 'High and Lifted Up,' which I've pasted below. 

The talk revolved around Schweitzer's phrase: 'Reverence for Life' and the theological position of Kennedy (as Military Chaplain) emphasizing suffering rather than glory. Both figures would struggle with cognitive dissonance about death and what so many have termed, "the problem of evil." In other words, how can we have an ethics and praise for God when there is death and suffering. The existence of God and benevolence is discrepant with war, disease, and death. Both would struggle with this tension and would have certainly felt the negative affect (dissonance) from the discrepancy. Kennedy would draw this out in his poem:

Seated on the throne of power with a sceptre in Thine hand,
While a host of eager angels ready for Thy Service stand.
So it was the prophet saw Thee, in his agony of prayer,
While the sound of many waters swelled in music on the air,
Swelled until it burst like thunder in a shout of perfect praise,
“Holy, Holy, Holy Father, Potentate of years and days.
Thine the Kingdom, Thine the glory, Thine the splendour of the sun,
Thine the wisdom, Thine the honour, Thine the crown of victory won.”
So it was the prophet saw Thee,so this artist saw Thee too,
Flung his vision into colour, mystery of gold and blue.
But I stand in woe and wonder; God my God, I cannot see,
Darkness deep and deeper darkness – all the world is dark to me.
Where is Power? Where is Glory? Where is any victory won?
Where is wisdom? Where is honour? Where the splendour of the sun?
God, I hate this splendid vision – all its splendour is a lie,
Splendid fools see splendid folly, splendid mirage born to die.
As imaginary waters to an agony of thirst,
As the vision of a banquet to a body hunger-cursed,
As the thought of anaesthetic to a soldier mad with pain,
While his torn and tortured body turns and twists and writhes again,
So this splendid lying vision turns within my doubting heart,
Like a bit of rusty bayonet in a torn and festering part.
Preachers give it me for comfort, and I curse them to their face,
Puny, petty-minded priestlings prate to me of power and grace;
Prate of power and boundless wisdom that takes count of little birds,
Sentimental poisoned sugar in a sickening stream of words.
Platitudinously pious far beyond all doubts and fears,
They will patter of God’s mercy that can wipe away our tears.
All their speech is drowned in sobbing, and I hear the great world groan,
As I see a million mothers sitting weeping all alone,
See a host of English maidens making pictures in the fire,
While a host of broken bodies quiver still on German wire.
And I hate the God of Power on His hellish heavenly throne,
Looking down on rape and murder, hearing little children moan.
Though a million angels hail Thee King of kings, yet cannot I.
There is nought can break the silence of my sorrow save the cry,
“Thou who rul’st this world of sinners with Thy heavy iron rod,
Was there ever any sinner who has sinned the sin of God?
Was there ever any dastard who would stand and watch a Hun
Ram his bayonet through the bowels of a baby just for fun?
Praise to God in Heaven’s highest and in all the depths be praise,
Who in all His works is brutal,like a beast in all His ways.”
God, the God I love and worship, reigns in sorrow on the Tree,
Broken, bleeding, but unconquered, very God of God to me.
All that showy pomp of splendour, all that sheen of angel wings,
Was but borrowed from the baubles that surround our earthly kings.
Thought is weak and speech is weaker, and the vision that he sees
Strikes with dumbness any preacher, brings him humbly to his knees.
But the Word that Thou hast spoken borrows nought from kings and thrones,
Vain to rack a royal palace for the echo of Thy tones.
In a manger, in a cottage, in an honest workman’s shed,
In the homes of humble peasants, and the simple lifes they led,
In the life of one an outcast and a vagabond on earth,
In the common things He valued, and proclaimed of priceless worth,
And above all in the horror of the cruel death He died,
Thou hast bid us seek Thy glory, in a criminal crucified.
And we find it – for Thy glory is the glory of Love’s loss,
And Thou hast no other splendour but the splendour of the Cross.
For in Christ I see the martyrs and the beauty of their pain,
And in Him I hear the promise that my dead shall rise again.
High and lifted up, I see Him on the eternal Calvary,
And two piercèd hands are stretching east and west o’er land and sea.
On my knees I fall and worship that great Cross that shines above,
For the very God of Heaven is not Power, but Power of Love.

-Studdert Kennedy

Kennedy, after stumbling over a dead German boy in the war, saw the image of the crucified Christ and afterwards continued to see the crucifix in the dead. Upon returning from the war, Kennedy would work with the unemployed and those in poverty. For Kennedy, the dissonance was resolved by working with the "less fortunate," the unemployed and in poverty. The focus on suffering and the "power of love" resolved his own position of holding the existence of God and the "problem of evil." In effect this approach provided him with the ethics to work with those "less fortunate." Schweitzer, as he too struggled with the image of death as a trained medical doctor in Africa, had difficulty finding an ethics that would translate to the "real world." The phrase that struck him, as he was on a boat moving through a herd of hippos, was 'Reverence for Life.'

In one sense, these two arrive at different conclusions in reducing their deep-rooted, and philosophically/theologically driven, dissonance. However, to me, I think the message is quite similar. An emphasis on suffering and the marginalized is to have a reverence for life. Drawing on the first noble truth in Buddhism: life is suffering. Without a reverence for life it would not be possible to work with the poor and unemployed and the sick. While Buddhism asks us to remove desire as a path to resolving suffering, the reverence for life and attention to suffering intensified a desire to mitigate the problem of evil. While we can certainly make the connection of how this kind of attitude relates to practises of charity, NGOs, human rights, and so on, as well as Zizek's notion of "First as tragedy and then as Farce," there is nothing farcical about committing to a cause.While a commitment to a singular drive is certainly not the answer to the problems of the world, it does illustrate that the determination these two persons had in their approach to ethics and actions were not in the pursuit of moral vanity in the face of their peers but rather a greater concern. In this sense, we can make the connection to Paul Tillich's concept of religion and society as one's 'Ultimate Concern,'  which demands an existential stance towards the ways of the world (in what ever way one may construe it). As Howard Zinn put it: you can't be neutral on a moving train.

*naturally, there is much more that can be discussed but I'll just leave it here.

"You have your whole life ahead of you"

"If this life be not a real fight, in which something is eternally gained for the universe by success, it is not better than a game  [of private theatricals] from which one may withdraw at will. But it feels like a real fight,–as if there were something really wild in the universe which we, with all our idealities and faithfulnesses, are needed to redeem….For such a half-wild, half-saved universe our nature is adapted."

-William James 'Is Life Worth Living?'

Taken from a commencement address by my old supervisor/mentor at BU in which he tows a line about 'possibility' - the romantic and the tragic - contained in the phrase "you have your whole life ahead of you." He remarks on the parallels between parents and professors.
  

Tim Ingold: On Human Correspondence

*Charity: Of course, it has a Christian twang!

Went to a seminar a while back featuring a Theology professor talking about how the contemporary paradigm of charity and international development is based on Comte's theory of positivism and his proposal for a religion of humanity. While Comte's theory are considerably out of fashion and his brand of positivism far from compelling in the philosophy of science, it would seem - or so the man would argue - that the model for NGOs and humanitarian aid is a form of worshipping humanity.

He goes on to talk about Comte's life and how he came to develop his religion of humanity. As a theologian, the speaker, wanted to argue against this form of praise and that nothing should be placed before 'God' (*of course I'm thinking what kind of 'God' he wants to posit and whether a "worship of God" as the central tenet for humanitarian aid is not a confrontational stance towards non-Christians and how it would be any different from an ephasis on humanity - if we play a Durkheimian card). There is automatic suspicion in many parts of the world when something is being done in the name of 'God' or in the spirit of 'God.' Moreover, a Christian stance to humanitarian aid or an explicit stance is not going to be favourable towards, at least now, the people of Islam. This immediately raises questions regarding religious discourse in the public sphere (debated by Habermas and Taylor - among many others). It would seem that a focus on certain values that find commonality across religions would be a better intellectual and practical move in the international arena. But this isn't really what I wanted to get at; tangent.

The speaker talked about how Comte's religion of humanity seems very much like Christianity transposed in a secular framework, which I would certainly agree. In this regard, he thought it ironic that much of those who worked on the Human Rights discourse and the development of international aid is within a Christian paradigm. To me, this is just strikingly obvious. Putting the notion of Human Rights and international development into perspective, the whole program was very much born out of western Europe and the U.S. This means, irrespective of whether it is explicitly Christian it will have similar themes and motifs that propagate it. It is extremely difficult to separate the history of Christianity from the history of western intellectual thought - philosophical or theological. You really can't have one without the other. Just as it would be difficult to separate the influence of Ancient Greek philosophy in that trajectory as well.  

If all the hubble of WWI and WWII did not happen in Europe and the U.S. did not step in to take a powerful stake in the international arena, and global power was concentrated in China you would see a Neo-Confucian or Buddhist framework to Human Rights and international development. Although what that would like is subject to question.

If I may humbly suggest that thinkers stop considering the world in terms of western intellectual development and that all problems and answers lie within this framework. The approaches to national/international development need not be an either/or distinction between a "religion of humanity" within a "secular sphere" and "Christianity," which are related to one another (see Talal Asad's talk on the Origin of Human Rights) There are alternative models of charity that are working out there as well as alternative models for constructing what it means to be human and thereby developing a horizontal international framework rather than one based on past habits of hegemonic regulation.

The speaker did, correctly in my mind, point out the ridiculousness of contemporary NGOs who go into third world countries with volunteers and build something only to have local persons come back at night to reconstruct it because the volunteers built it wrong; sorry, good intentions without a proper skill set does not build houses. This was also pointed out by Gayatri Spivak in her talk - much aid effort becomes a vanity project of moral capital but don't really do much in the way of help (which I comment on here). However, it would be incorrect to conflate this type of action and neo-liberal framework with Comte's 'religion of humanity' and thereby use this as a reason to argue that we return to 'God' as the central concept from which policies should develop. I find this unhelpful. If anything Christian missions equally fall into the same habits. I will say that he passingly noted how we should empower local churches. I certainly agree with empowering local persons to develop their own communities but am reluctant to fully endorse church only led action. This potentially creates political tensions in multireligious countries or where competing political parties utilize religion as a mobilizing banner. I was a bit saddened, but of course shouldn't expect him to, from his failure to mention the role of the anthropologists and how academia should study and engage in their communities more - theology being no exception. 


 

Weber on Protestantism and Capitalism

00:00 - Chapter 1. Similarities and Differences Among Marx, Nietzsche, Freud and Weber
10:22 - Chapter 2. Weber in a Historical Context
26:37 - Chapter 3. "The Protestant Ethic and The Spirit of Capitalism": The Marx-Weber Debate
32:23 - Chapter 4. The Correlation between Capitalism and Protestantism
34:11 - Chapter 5. What is the Spirit of Capitalism?
39:21 - Chapter 6. Luther's Conception of Calling
43:31 - Chapter 7. Religious Foundation of Worldly Asceticism
46:59 - Chapter 8. Asceticism and the Spirit of Capitalism

Complete course materials are available at the Open Yale Courses website:
http://open.yale.edu/courses

This course was recorded in Fall 2009.

*First impression of the podcast 'Serial'

So a good friend of mine just turned me on to this podcast called Serial. I had never heard about it until last night and he didn't tell me much other than "I think you'll like it." So I click on the link and take a look. Lo and behold...what... in the world... did I just come in to? As I peruse the pages and get a jist of what the podcast was, I get agitated. My first inclination is to play identity politics. This is the stage:

In 1999 a Korean-American girl is alleged to have been murdered by a Pakistani-American boy in Baltimore. Both of them in high school. Both very smart students. Both from immigrant families, neither of which would have approved dating the other. It begins to start sounding like a 21st century Romeo & Juliet. But instead of taking place in "fair Verona," we have Baltimore. Instead of family enemies, we have ethnic minorities who don't know much about each other. With the story taking place in a Baltimore high school, it would be safe to assume that African-Americans or Black-Americans will invariably come into the picture. In this sense, the stage is set for a Shakespearean tragedy with dubious plots and characters - who can the audience trust? The show already begins to look like an entertaining drama reminiscent of Truman Capote's In Cold Blood.

Now, I used to dislike constructing this kind of picture because it can be very superficial pointing out the colour of a person and noting behaviour. But I've come to draw on this method again because I think it's useful in bringing out systemic issues and the analysis is useful insofar as it brings out that underlying contour. So what is it about this picture? For one, I think the timing of this podcast is worth noting. It's 2014, a time in which the Muslim image is being amended (and rightly so) from the damage it suffered over the past decade since 9/11. This podcast fits this era of political correctness. And indeed it is noble that this white woman has taken it upon herself to dig into this case after receiving a call for help. A white knight in shining armour. So she dives in with the intention of uncovering the truth behind what happened and aims to bring justice to the victim - the potentially framed boy (not really the murdered Korean girl). I think this is exactly what is problematic. By publicizing this case, she is effectively capitalizing on it: at the expense of ethnic America, "moral capital" is given to the white voice who navigates the case history as protagonist and arbiter of morality and justice. This kind of media perpetuates the image of the white saviour with her good intentions and naivete. It also furthers the association that the normative voice for the representation and arbitration of objectivity, truth, and justice continues to be painted in white. This is a systemic concern. When all American voices screaming for justice are drowned out over and over and over again, this other white woman comes along with a podcast and all of a sudden America has ears to listen. In other words, there is a broader issue regarding public credibility, media, and representation with respect to the social issues of justice and morality. 

After listening to the first episode, my thoughts haven't changed. She's still doing what I think she's doing - albeit naively. And there are certainly a few things about how she represents the Korean and Pakistani families (some of which is noted here) using implicit language of creating "otherness" in their very teenage American lives. But putting this to the side, she does raise some interesting questions about discerning a person's character and knowing the 'beliefs' or intentions of another person. She also notes the significance of time and the very real issue of working memory, memory storage and how unreliable memory can be in the absence of a significant event or emotion. I certainly don't remember what I did 6 weeks ago on a Friday. The issue becomes even more pressing when it comes to legal issues and judicial concerns of putting a person away in jail for a very long time. Her investigation addresses issues of inconsistency and how the process of testimonial evidence is treated. Moreover, the narrator raises questions about money and the malpractice of criminal defense attornies. All of these things point to structural and cultural flaws in the justice system and law enforcement. Simultaneously, the podcast itself raises the question about responsibility and quite possibly about the role of the majority in bringing about social change. 

Like I said, this is only my first impression so I'll continue to listen when time permits before planting this impression into the ground. I'm sure other interesting topics will arise as she discusses what happened 15 years ago in a Baltimore high school. 

 

From a review of Scott Atran's 'Talking to the Enemy'

I'm still in the middle of reading this book but thought I'd post a few things from a review in the guardian:

"Scott Atran, an American anthropologist, believes he has some of the answers. Terrorists, he tells us, are social beings influenced by social connections and values familiar to all of us. They are members of school clubs, sports teams or community organisations; they are proud fathers and difficult teenagers. They do not, Atran maintains, die for a cause; they die for each other.

...

Similar thinking came from Marc Sageman, a clinical psychologist and former CIA officer, who argued provocatively that "jihad" was leaderless. For all these analysts, it was the process of radicalisation itself that was important. Terrorists are not mad – there is no evidence of higher levels of psychological illness among them – nor poor – the link with poverty is indirect, if there is one at all – nor do they necessarily feel humiliated. Atran draws on his own research to show how personal humiliation, such as that suffered daily by Palestinians at Israeli checkpoints, in fact decreases the likelihood that any individual will act violently. On the other hand, the perception that others with whom one feels a common bond are being humiliated can be a powerful driver for action, Atran says. It is in the existence of a sense of community, whether that be a group of local friends or the ummah (the global nation of Muslim believers), that he believes the roots of violence can be found.

Atran deploys his formidable knowledge of social anthropology to dissect the various dynamics that have helped form human individuals into groups, warbands, hunting parties or armies over the millennia. Although this historical background is mostly fascinating, even more impressive is Atran's field research, in places ranging from Palestine and Spain to Tétouan in northern Morocco and remote Indonesian islands. It is this research that underpins his vision of radical Islamic militancy as an adaptive social movement. The 2002 Bali bombs, he writes, "were largely planned and executed through local networks of friends, of kin, neighbours and schoolmates who radicalised one another until all were eager and able to kill perfect strangers for an abstract cause". Terrorist networks, he points out, are "generally no different than the ordinary kinds of social networks that guide people's career paths. It's the terrorist career itself that is the most remarkable, not the mostly normal individuals who become terrorists."

...

Atran lists four key elements of the "organised anarchy" that he suggests typifies modern violent Islamic activism: goals are constantly ambiguous and inconsistent; modes of action are decided pragmatically on the basis of trial and error or based on the residue of learning from accidents of past experience; the boundaries of the group constantly change; and the degree of involvement of members varies over time. The result is not a hierarchic, centrally commanded terrorist organisation but a decentralised and constantly evolving network based on contingent adaptations to unpredictable events."

read the rest here


Atran responds to a review by Jeremy Harding:

In his review of my book, Talking to the Enemy, Jeremy Harding states that by informing the US authorities of my meeting with Ramadan Shallah, general secretary of Palestinian Islamic Jihad, in Damascus in December 2009 , I became ‘a no-nonsense telltale’, but that ‘being a bit of an insider, [I] perhaps didn’t qualify for the reward money’ (LRB, 17 February). Harding further implies that my talks with jihadis were undertaken at the behest of the US government.

For the most part, my talks with political leaders were self-financed. In the case of Syria, the World Federation of Scientists was invited by the government of Syria to discuss scientific initiatives in the region, including political barriers to such initiatives. Meetings were arranged with several leading political personalities through the offices of the president and foreign minister of Syria. The meeting with Shallah came as a surprise to us. When I checked on the internet and found that he was on the FBI’s list of most wanted terrorists, I and another American in the WFS delegation were obliged under US law to inform the US government of our meeting. Not to have done so could have meant prosecution, and an end to years of multidisciplinary, multinational research. The contents of the meeting were made public, with the approval of Shallah, who indicated that all of his remarks were on the record. At no time did we pass on any information concerning Shallah’s whereabouts or anything else that did not pertain to the content of our talks.

We were given US government funding exclusively for theoretical studies (surveys, interviews, experiments) concerning the limits of rational choice and the role of sacred or transcendent values in encouraging or discouraging political violence. The results of these studies have been published in peer-reviewed journals, including the Proceedings of the Royal Society – B.

The ‘support from the US air force, navy and army research offices’ that Harding cites involved only so-called ‘6.1 level funding’ (for peer-reviewed theoretical research). The Army Research Office and Office of Naval Research follow many of the same academic guidelines as the National Science Foundation (our main source of funding), including rigorous oversight by universities and host countries on protection of human subjects. This is done regardless of the researchers’ political persuasion or support for US defence policies. For example, ONR has long supported Noam Chomsky’s work in theoretical linguistics without regard to his concerted criticism of the US defence establishment.

Reviewing the 'Religious Studies' journal

So I randomly decided to do a search on the journal Religious Studies through the Cambridge Journals database. The journal has been in print since 1966 and gives the following description:

"Religious Studies is an international journal devoted to the problems of the philosophy of religion as they arise out of classical and contemporary discussions and from varied religious traditions."

My search was motivated by the aim to consider the extent to which the 'philosophy of religion' has focused predominantly on Christian traditions. I used the search bar and focused on "this journal" and put in various search terms to provide an index to the discipline. The results were as follows:

'Christ' yielded 819 articles and book reviews
'Christianity' yielded 2074
'Christian' = 2075

'Islam' = 389
'Muslim' = 220

'Judaism' = 389
'Jew' = 220
'Jewish' = 427

'Buddha' = 153
'Buddhist' = 352
'Buddhism' = 367

'Hindu' = 302
'Hinduism' = 212

'Sikh' = 28

'Confucian' = 46

'Tao' = 34
'Taoism' = 33
'Taoist' = 25

Quite obviously the focus is overwhelmingly in favour of the Christian philosophical tradition. No other "religious tradition" breaks 500 articles or book reviews over the past 50 years despite their rich philosophical history.

Inverting the "other"

African ethnologist in Germany

Strangers Abroad - Everything is relatives: William Halse Rivers (1864-1922)

"William Rivers, trained as a doctor, administered psychological tests to the islanders of the Torres Straits north of Australia and discovered the importance of relatives in their society. His work as a psychologist and medical researcher enabled him to bring something new to anthropology: a scientific approach. His field study with a hill tribe in southern India, the Todas, ultimately set the trend for anthropologists to go and visit the cultures in which they were interested, rather than staying at home and theorizing.

In the 1980s, Bruce Dakowski and Andre Singer collaborated on a series of video documentary portraits intended to introduce six founders of "social anthropology." The project was sponsored and supported by the Royal Anthropological Institute. The six selected "pioneers" were Sir Walter Baldwin Spencer (1860-1929), William Rivers (1864-1922), Franz Boas (1858-1942), Bronislaw Malinowski (1884-1942), Sir Edward Evans-Pritchard (1902-1973), and Margaret Mead (1901-1978)."

An Ode to A Flower

Do the questions that arise from looking more specifically at 'religion' add to the awe and mystery of religion? Is the 'negative' connotation of reductionism misleading?

*Thought experiment for anthropology students: Christmas

(Or in my case 'study of religions' students)

What if a Martian anthropologist, named Marvin, decided to do fieldwork in your town. Marvin knows very little about the people in your town and finds it all so very fascinating and exotic. Marvin decides to do fieldwork on Christmas in your town. What would Marvin see and what would he be told? What kind of sense would he make about people in your town during Christmas? 

Marvin might ask:
Why do people give gifts? Why do you wrap the gift? Why so much red during this time? What are all the lights for? What's the significance of the pine tree? Why is there a star or an angel on the top of the tree? What is Santa Claus? How many elves does he have? Does he feed all of them? Where do they live? Do they receive compensation for their work? Do the elves have families? Why the south pole? Why reindeer? Why eight? How come the leader has a red nose? How does Santa know who's been "naughty or nice"? Is there a criteria for naughty and nice? Is Santa omniscient? What does the coal represent? Why stockings? Why milk and cookies? What's nutmeg? Why do you drink it? How does Santa Claus travel all over the world in one night? Why a sleigh? Why do people dress up like Santa Claus and swing a bell? What is that box in front of him for? What is charity? Why do you give charity? What does it all represent? How does Santa Claus structure the functioning of your society? Is Santa real? What's the purpose of celebrating Christmas? What social need does it fulfil? 

What is the etymology of 'Christmas'? Oh, what's Jesus? What's God? How do you know Jesus was born on this day? Do you celebrate the anniversary of Mary and Joseph? What's the relationship between Jesus and Santa Claus? If it's Jesus' birthday, why do you receive and give gifts (according to birthday customs the guests don't receive gifts but give them to the birthday person)? Why do you open gifts on this particular day? What is Christmas dinner? Why ham? Why cranberry sauce? Does the family only get together on this day? Why do you like Christmas? Why do some people dislike Christmas? What kinds of emotions do you feel during Christmas? Why are some people so stressed out by Christmas? Why does this happen in your town? Why...

*Marvin is very curious

Well...

that really depends on your definitions of 'perception' and 'human nature'...



 

Thousand Hands Guan Yin (Dance)

"In 1987, the China Disabled People’s Performing Arts Troupe was formed. They are a professional performing arts troupe made up of 106 performers with hearing and/or visual impairments or physical disabilities. For the next 20 years, the 106 performers worked hard to turn professional in 2000. By 2004, they gave up their government allowance, began supporting themselves… and started raising money for charities! So beautiful no matter what angle you look at it from. 
 
Aged between 14-19, they slowly-but-steadily learned the art of dancing through sign language with other trainers. To make up for the lack of one or more of their senses, they put in more time, effort and have immense determination. Determination is the key for all success for anyone."

source
 

Heaven's Gate initiation

Philosophical Psychology ought to:

(According to philosopher Owen Flanagan)
philosophical psychology ought to answer questions such as these:

• What, if anything, are humans like deep down inside beneath the clothes of culture?

• What, if any, features of mind-world interaction, and thus of the human predicament, are universal?

• Is there any end state or goal(s) that all humans seek because they are wired to seek it (or them), or what is different, ought to seek because it is—or, they are—worthy?

• If there is a common natural orientation toward some end state(s), for example, pleasure, friendship, community, truth, beauty, goodness, intellectual contemplation, are these ends mutually consistent? If not, must one choose a single dominant end? Does our nature not only provide the end(s), but also a way of ordering and prioritizing them, as well as a preferred ratio among them that produces some sort of equilibrium?

• How conducive is following our nature to actually producing what we naturally seek, or what is different, sensibly ought to seek? Could it be that not everything we seek—not even pleasant experiences or truth—is good for us?

• What is the relation between our first nature, our given human nature, and our second nature, our cultured nature?

• Does first nature continue in contemporary worlds, in new ecologies, to achieve its original ends? If so, is first nature also well suited to achieving new, culturally discovered, or what is different, created ends

• Is second nature constructed precisely for the achievement of variable, culturally discovered or created ends that first nature is ill-equipped to achieve?

• Do different societies construct/develop second nature in order to enhance first nature and/or to moderate and modify, possibly to eliminate, certain seeds in our first nature that can work against that very (first) nature and/or against our second nature and our cultured ends, which our second nature is intended to help us achieve?

Errors in these questions of the city state or class:

• The Problem Of Universalism: One Ness vs Individual, Family, tribe, race and corporation.(Doolittle) Which is reducible to a hierarchy of desires (needs). And they cannot be equally met.

source

Talal Asad: Reflections on the Origins of Human Rights

Decline in Religion Faculty jobs

"The last academic year has been a difficult one for those seeking jobs in the field of religion. A joint report by the American Academy of Religion and Society of Biblical Literature -- released Tuesday -- found that 452 positions were listed with the two organizations during the 2013-14 academic year, down from 548 the year before. While not all religion faculty jobs are listed with the two groups, their listings are considered a good general measure of the health of the academic job market. The latest figures are well below the 652 listings in the 2007-8 year, the last one before the economic downturn hit."

from IHE

Binary Intensification (just a thought)

The use of binary discourse in the public sphere, it seems, has a tendency to intensify a position and its associated identity...

which really doesn't help; the game becomes a polemics of loyalty...

The Social Life of Money - Nigel Dodd; response: Keith Hart

Supplement: Thomas Piketty and David Graeber have a discussion here

I'm fascinated in this too...

“Throughout my academic career I have been fascinated by the capacity of holders of very strong attitudes to resist persuasive attempt at change. Public figures and ordinary folk alike often cling tenaciously to beliefs and attitudes that we, as know-it-all academics, are convinced are wrong-headed. Whether the attitudes concern life after death, gay rights, a perceived conspiracy to take over New Jersey, or whatever, we can argue until blue-faced without budging our State Representative or our Uncle Walter an inch.”

-Robert P. Abelson (1995: 25-26) 

Rodney Needham interview

source

the morality of reproducing culture

"structured structures" acting as "structuring structures" perpetuate the (implicit) biases you think you don't have. 

Heidegger and Thai Buddhist Monk Bhikku

"In the second part of the interview (read a transcript here), Bhikku Maha Mani asks Heidegger what he thinks about the contradictory Western tendency to identify people without religion as “communists” and those who live “according to religious rules” as insane. Heidegger responds that religion, in its most radical sense, simply means “a bonding-back to powers, forces and laws, that supersede human capability.” In this respect, he says, “no human being is without religion,” whether it be “the belief in science” of communists or “an atheistic religion, namely Buddhism, that knows no God.” Heidegger goes on to explain why he sees little possibility of “immediate and simple understanding” between people of different religions, philosophies, and political groups. While it may be tempting to view Heidegger’s work—and that of other phenomenological, existential, or skeptical philosophers—as working in tandem with much Eastern thought, as perhaps “the” German philosopher himself would caution, the differences are significant. In the interview above, Heidegger largely faults Germany and “all of Europe in general” for a general lack of human harmony: “We do not have any clear, common and simple relation to reality and to ourselves,” he says. “That is the big problem of the Western world.” source