Multiculturalism

Question 1

John Hick

Answer 1

• There is one objective reality, and each religion is a unique way of expressing that reality
• You have the noumenal (the world as it is really, distinct from sense perception) and the Phenomenal (the way in which the world is perceived
• Religions are just different ways of attempting to explain the noumenal, but it can’t, so it really is the Phenomenal —> “transcendent unity of religions”
• Therefore, no one religion is better than the other
• John Hick would vouch for multi-faith societies —> By accepting that they are equally valid peace and harmony can exist.
• All religions have the aim at transforming one from sel-centeredness to reality-centeredness →Through religion we can get closer to the noumenal →We would dismiss the adherence to one religion → it would woefully give us insufficient grasp on the reality of divine

Question 2

Criticisms of John Hick?

Answer 2

• How can religions work together
• Is Religious Pluralism truly pluralist? They reject exclusivist
• Epistemically arrogant → You do not have knowledge of every single religion —> We can see that Hick is doing what he was trying to escape from in the first place → Exclusivism —> Seems like a flawed ideology if you ask me

Question 3

Joseph Runzo?

Answer 3

• Religious Relativism
• This links to a social construct point of view
• He goes on step further by saying that truth is determined by culture —> THERE IS NO OBJECTIVE REALITY
• PROMOTES Multiculturalism → Way to challenge domestic norms
• Runzo’s understanding of multiculturalism is based on the recognition of the complexity and diversity of human cultures and identities.
• He argued that people have multiple identities that are shaped by various factors such as race, ethnicity, religion, gender, and social class.

Question 4

Criticisms of Trigg

Answer 4

• Trigg argues religious relativism is based on a mistaken view of culture. According to Trigg, cultural differences do not necessarily imply that all religious beliefs are equally valid.
• Instead, he argues that some cultural practices and beliefs may be better than others, and this can be determined by comparing them with objective standards of morality and rationality.

Question 5

Thomas Koukl:

Answer 5

• Religion is an unavoidable part of human life → It is not possible to be completely neutral —> We have to take a stance —> Two things can not be equally valid —> We can not take a multi faith, pluralist position
• He believes that religious beliefs can be determined rationally by using empirical evidence
• One set of religious beliefs is true, anything which contradicts this is false
• Exclusivists take their religious views to be objectively true
• Religious Differences are Real
• He describes exclusivist as the “intolerance of tolerance”
• Can you really live in a society in which the things you believe are abhorrent

Question 6

Criticisms of Exclusivism?

Answer 6

• Such a positions assumes that by assuming a multi-faith, pluralist position you are making a value judgement upon religions - this is not necessarily true
• Indeed, one can admit that ultimately it is possible for one religion to be correct and another false, however accepting that in the physical realm it is impossible to determine which, all should be tolerated - in this respect tolerance does not truly act as tolerance
• Is Koukl preoccupied with doctrines that are far more united than they are different?
• You don’t know which religion is correct
• It is not harmonious to exclude people in society