Analysis Of Problems And Promise In Pluralism By Annalee R. Ward

Stephen Prothero’s “God Is Not One” is a survey of world religions, comprising vital information on a vast array of different sets of belief. As someone who has never studied religion before, nor belongs to a particular faith, the variability within these religions is staggering. One might be satisfied to define religion as “how a person goes about believing in God,” but soon finds that even that definition has its holes. Thankfully, “God Is Not One” does an amazing job of cluing its reader into the nuances that are sometimes forgotten about the religions it approaches.

The next heresy that we must cover is that of “pluralism”. Religious pluralism is the belief that all roads lead to heaven. This belief has been propagated by such prominent figures such as, Barack Obama, Oprah Winfrey, Joel Osteen, and Pope Francis. This is a toxic idea that upon reaching its conclusion, destroys truth. If everything is true, then why believe anything at all? Now we must move to the final heresy plaguing America.

In the United States, pluralism is pertinent and very significant for the government because the government itself is distributed with various powers given to the states. These states then give powers to their local governments, which continues to distribute the power. In the government system, there are levels of that consist of branches that control the many different parts of the system, so that no one person or group is given too much power. The United States has a system of checks and balances, which is pertinent to the power system and the pluralist theory ("What is a pluralist theory of government?" 2017).

According to our text, Huston Smith believed that all religions were essentially the same, whereas Stephen Prothero believes that they are all fundamentally different. These two differing opinions can be looked at further by comparing two of the world religions: Christianity and Buddhism. I believe that all religions are a mixture of both; religions are essentially the same and are also fundamentally different. Christianity and Buddhism both have similar aspects within them, and they have different aspects as well. In order to make sense of the world, one needs to have knowledge of religion and the implications it has on society (Prothero).

Differences in culture, history, geography, and collective temperament all make for diverse starting points. . . . But beyond these differences, the same goal beckons” (Prothero 1). This is a great approach because it puts the differences in religions in perspective while still showing they all show a common goal. The second scholarly approach is the ‘4 Step Process’ which is also by Stephen Prothero. First, there must be a problem. Second, there must be a solution to this problem, which also serves as a religious goal. Third, there must be a technique for moving from this problem to this solution. Fourth, there must be an exemplar who chart this path from problem to solution. This is a great approach because it helps to point out the differences across and inside religious traditions. The third scholarly approach is the ‘Question of Ultimate Meaning’. William Portiers approach deals with the deep or great questions about the human condition that we can only answer ourselves. “Why are we here? What becomes of us in the end? What is our final purpose? What is a human being and how ought we to behave toward one another?” (Portier 17). This is a great approach because it makes you personally come up with answers to those questions and to answer those questions, you must look at many different religious traditions. The fourth scholarly approach also written by William Portier deals with ‘The Dialectical

This will be based on the chapter 4 Religion as "Truth-Claims", posted on Blackboard. First of all, Dianne L. Oliver makes a preface about her writings saying that religions claim to get the truth, and followers of diverse religions say that their truth is the only one true, and cannot be compare with any other. Also, she remarks that many of those religion followers use violence to uphold their own version of truth. Moreover, she let us know that she is going to consider the "True-Claims" of different religions, and show how those claims can influence the practices, behaviors, and ideas of religion followers. Next to the introduction, she considers that religion is very essential for understanding the fundamental questions in our daily lives.

Pluralism is the freedom of having many faiths accepted, while post pluralism is in a sense the new faiths that come about after time of taking in and observing other distinct religious practices and adding to one’s belief in order to shape something new and different. The author may feel that America has a oneness of religion because it seems as if even though there is no exact way everyone views and expresses religion it all still manages to come around to the same basic concept of looking up to a higher power and following a certain procedure or rituals to reach out to that higher power and express ones culture or religion. I personally have got in the routine of giving thanks every day, and in a way at times I do feel there is an oneness

Buddhism from India, Christianity from the Roman Empire, Hinduism from India, Islam from Saudi Arabia, Sikhism from India, Judaism from Israel . Should they all gave the rights and freedom to practice what and how they want even if they are not in their country? According to the First Amendment in the U.S constitution its states freedom of religion which is the right to practice whatever religion one chooses. Sadly, episodes of vandalism, fire related crime, and even physical viciousness have likewise once in a while been coordinated against these new religious focuses and the groups that call them home. In the article “From Diversity to Pluralism” Eck define pluralism as “the engagement that creates a common society from all that diversity”.

Professor Niebuhr views interfaith dialogue as a means to overpower the “absolutism” of fundamentalism in all faith traditions. And yet, these are exactly the people who are the most reluctant to participate in discussion with those of other faiths or even other Christian denominations.

In this concluding section, I shall develop a Schellingian account of the purpose of interreligious dialogue, and thus why engaging in interreligious dialogue might serve the best interests of religious communities. As mentioned above, religious systems are linked to religious communities. Thus, each religious system develops in the complex social and physical environment in which its community is located. In other words, each religious tradition is a part of an environment and potentially in contact with other traditions inhabiting that environment. Moreover, religions are connected not just on the historical level, but also from a metaphysical and eternal point of view. As God, according to Schelling, is the deepest root of all religions, "actual religion cannot be [metaphysically] separated from actual religion" as to do so would create separation in God himself.

The topic I choose for my final project is pluralism – a condition or system in which two or more states, groups, principles, sources of authority coexist. In other words, pluralism represents a condition or system in which diversity is highly valued, making itself a very important view to the knowledge of human beings.

Quiz on Patterns of Pluralism 1. Briefly describe the three patterns of pluralism and give one example of each. Ans: The three patterns of pluralism are as follow; Domination, Power Sharing, and Integrations. Domination: it is also known as the pattern of interethnic relation in which one can inspire the ethnic community.

Pluralism is a belief or a situation in which people of different religions, social classes and races are living together in a society but they continue their own traditional culture. The first strength of pluralist view is that it clearly states about the reality of the diversity between different groups of people in the political context. It gave an opportunity to both small and large groups to participate and compete according to their interest. The second strength of pluralist view is that it encourages small groups to develop their own strategies and methods by maintaining their

I defend the uniqueness and irreducibility of religious forms of life from rationalistic criticisms. I argue that such a defense of religion affirms the fact of incommensurability between differing forms of life. Put differently, such a defense tacitly affirms ineradicable pluralism as well as cultural diversity. I contend that the defender of religion who argues from the incommensurability of this form of life must also give up all traces of "worldview exclusivism," the dogmatic claim to possess the one truth about the world. Finally, I argue that if we are to move into a future of peace, we must acknowledge that various forms of life are lived on a level playing field. That is, all forms have important contributions to make, and none

In his book The Intra-religious Dialogue, Raimon Panikkar seeks to tap into our daily humanistic encounters through teachings, discussion, questions and exploration as a basis of religious dialogue. Panikkar sets forth a guidebook of sorts in which the reader can better understand his/her set of beliefs and faiths as well as set out on a personal mission to encounter the religious practices of people around the world without prejudice or preconceived notions. I think the main issue set forth by Panikkar is to guide us along the path towards the “realization of human destiny” and provide us with the tools to higher comprehension of all faiths and beliefs.