You Don't Need to be Religious to Study Religion
Вставка
- Опубліковано 23 сер 2024
- You don't need to be religious to study religion. This might sound really obvious to you...but from my experience, lots of people assume this.
Patreon: www.patreon.com/religionforbreakfast
Twitter: @andrewmarkhenry
Facebook: religionforbreakfast
Blog: www.religionforbreakfast
AAR teaching guidelines: www.aarweb.org...
Thanks to our patrons on Patreon for voting on this topic!:
Brian B
Cassandra C
Daniel D
Derek K
Kalei W
Quinn N
Rende D
Roee S
Megan B
Tuuli H
Alex B
Dan H
Esther B
The_Lich_Queen
Adil A
Mason A
Mark H
Alice C
Wilson
I've often seen the reverse perspective to be true as well: when I tell religious folks that I studied religion at a state school before attending seminary, many of them assume that my professors were all atheists bent on destroying faith when in actuality my professors represented a wide spectrum of religious belief and practice.
Edit: I also run in to similar concerns from some Christians when they learn where I went to seminary. There's a wide a swath of Christians for whom any sort of critical engagement with modern academic approaches constitutes an assault on faith, whether it's presented in a secular university or a school of theology.
Everytime I tell someone I study religion they seem to get ready to get into a argument with me XD
+Notorax1 Yeah, it is an unfortunate side effect of studying religion.
@The Stammering Dunce in my experience there is two sides
The missionary: people assume that people who study religion that they are studying 'your own' religion and want to push the religion, I personally think it's from the schooling system that if a school had a religious studies class it was often in a religious school that taught JUST that religion (I know that was the case with the Catholic School I went too)
The denier: some people also think that we are our to get their religion and to prove it wrong
(although I get the former more than the latter if I say I study religion, but if I say my actual degree which is archeology with an interest in religion and culture I often get the denier assumption, neither of which are true)
@@ReligionForBreakfast That is because you don't talk about the impact of living under the yoke of a dogmatic religious upbringing. That means the fervency, the fanaticism and the imposition on those who have no choice but to adhere. For many of us, this is our religious experience. So it becomes tiresome and even infuriating when ivory tower academics launch their sanitized pleasantries about various religious practices and doctrines while leaving out the ugly side of religion that we in the real world experience.
A good example of this is your video about exorcisms where you deliberately neglected to mention the suffering, abuse and damage experienced by it's many victims. All I can say is... shame on you, because you don't teach what happens to those of us on the receiving end. And that is an unfortunate side effect of your academic approach.
I definitely had that misunderstanding. Then I took a Buddhism class in university and it made more sense that you could study something while simultaneously not believing in it. Good video!
Kyle Marshall absolutely! Most of my second major consisted of ideas I didn't agree with...
So many Buddhist monks study world religions.
I grew up in the religions studies community because of professors in my family.
The idea that studying buddhism opened you to the knowledge of studying other religions in a non religious way would make so many I know smile.
I was a biology major but for some reason, everyone thought I was a life form even though identifying stop signs has been really hard for me.
It is funny. I was a Religious Studies minor and the only devout Christian in many of my classes. I focused on the animistic religions of the African diaspora, animism and Hinduism. It's always funny the assumptions that I get. I actually made a UA-cam video walking around a local Buddhist temple explaining why I study religions and what my beliefs are so I could show it to people who were critical. Lol also, people always thought I was converting because I was studying Hindi and Urdu (in secular settings) but as soon as people see a different alphabet they think you have converted...
You got a new subscriber then!
yes lots of people do think like that. I'm an agnostic atheist yet I do study religion because I want to understand its differences and how it affects people
Awesome. Curiosity for the win.
yes that's right
Hello, I don't understand. Either you are an agnostic or an atheist, but I don't think that you can be both. It is like saying I am skinny and fat. ^^ Except if "agnostic atheist" is really a thing, I don't understand it.
Accurate roast. I get as annoyed when other atheists claim that the world would be better without religion along the religious people who claim that atheism must be destroyed.
@@hellofellowhumanbeings They address different questions. Agnosticism (gnost) addresses knowledge... theism or atheism address belief. They are not mutually exclusive. You can disbelieve or doubt without claiming it as absolute knowledge. Just like you can believe in a god without claiming to know with any certainty.
as a christian, it is so important to study your own religion, as well as other religions. history is so incredibly important
I'm religious and sometimes I need to differentiate what I would call devotional study from historical study to my religious friends. They might get upset when I talk about, say, the Gnostics or the idea of the Christ myth, thinking I'm making theological assertions, as opposed to discussing historical ideas I find interesting
What a contortion.
You do some really important work to the world with this channel. Through years of sporadic researching, I've been surprised that it was so hard to find easily digestible material to understand religion deeper than just faith - but It's a complex matter to teach in a way that people can relate and not get offended - but you do it quite impressively. Keep up the good work.
As long as this "academic exploration" is honest and willing to explore all aspects of religion including the negative side, then okay. But in most PC climates, for example UK's RE in publics schools, they typically focus on sanitized positive portrayals that highlight only religion's positives while the horrors, the oppression and irrational side of mankind's religions is completely ignored or gets lip service at best.
What would be taught in primary and secondary education is not what scholars do.
I might join you in a criticism of the "sanitized" information on religions given in the UK RE curriculum (if I knew more specifics).
However, I would just point out that the kind of history and literature curriculum that gets taught in primary and secondary education in many (all?) Western schools is always necessarily simplified and, yes, you do leave out some details based on judgement-calls of age-appropriateness and even fear of parental backlash. I don't recall my French Revolution lessons containing exquisitely detailed expositions on the nuances of the guillotine - though this IS something you can find in scholarly historical studies of the Revolution. Or, how much detail do you give a 12 year old on the Massacre/Rape of Nanking? The Holocaust? The Rwandan genocide? Equally, do we assign the Story of O in literature class to teenagers? No.
Extreme examples? Yes, but just to make the point that teachers and curriculum-designers have to make judgement calls about what details get left out when simplifying course content for each learning-level. The same goes for religious studies at a younger age.
I would say one more thing: Teachers are not preachers. You don't need to tell children that chattel slavery was cruel and awful. You simply tell them the facts and they come to their own (invariably moral) conclusions. It wouldn't be productive to try to turn the RE classroom into a deconversion clinic, even if that's what we think would be ideal for society.
I love your videos, they've really helped me find my passion
I would love to go into religious studies, along with ancient cultures on top of already having started in psychology. The only reason I wouldn't is because no one believes that studying religions is a viable path. Even when I tell them that I would be using it for a specific purpose, people say to go into something else, anything else. This mindset is completely off, and thank you for giving a little insight into what it's like to actually work in the field!
I love and appreciate the fact that in all your videos, I honestly cannot determine your personal religious beliefs. It makes me actually trust you.
You don't have to be female to take a woman's studies class.
@@ayosup5326 sexist
Smug Jones Take one
@@mdc47 :D :D :D so funny how everything is sexist . Especially in Britain and America. You are sexistfobics.
Alright I know this happened along time ago but I sincerely apologise for what I said and I take it back
Smug Jones Good on you for admitting your mistake!
One of my favorite online bloggers is a Gardnerian Wiccan high priestess who was also in a graduate program for religious studies. She chose to specialize in evangelical Christianity I assume to avoid bias but found her own religion too fascinating not to specialize in. She consulted her adviser about it and they were supportive. Do you think studying your own religion in an academic sense could be dangerous in terms of remaining objective?
Love your channel by the way!
Lots of people choose to study their own religion, and I think that's great. I don't think it inherently leads to biased research, though the researcher needs to be aware of their own biases as they study it.
@@ReligionForBreakfast Same as the sociology or anthropology student who works on topics involving an identity or cultural group they are part of. Personally, I need distance from my topic, but I'm a historian.
In russian-speaking space we have special name for such discipline "Религиоведение". It is widely accepted that it means academic study of religions by means of scientific methodology.
Excellent teaching Andrew! I have been studying and was first exposed to religion as a deep and fascinating topical subject as well as personal for almost 60 years now. Thank you for your wonderful teachings!
I have heard that before from several people. People find it hard to distinguished between academic study of religious traditions and devotional studies. For example, I love studying religions, one time I was studying Quranism (the branch of Islam that only uses the Quran alone, and rejects the Hadith literature), and one of my friends assumed that I was interested in converting to Islam. I had to explain to them that no I wasn't interested in converting, but was studying Quranism from a non devotional, "academic," way, because of it's similarities to Karaite Judaism, the version of Judaism I adhere too. It took a bit, but they eventually got it.
Actually it would be interesting to learn about Quranism, as Quranists are often mocked by the wider Muslim community. Yet having learnt about the principles and practice of Islam, and the role of hadith in the Shari'a, I find that controversy usually doesn't come from the Quran but from the scholarly interpretations of hadith which are then used to justify the rulings of the madhabs.
most people hear religious anything and suddenly they think church. to me religious study is the history of mankind. I love history and people faith is apart of history. they get bible study and religious studies confused.
Exactly. I think it would be even more confusing to say you study "biblical studies," even though anyone can study the Bible as a work of literature.
I would add, you can't even make sense of human history without religious study...
I am totally not relgious, but i find religion one of the most facinating toppics
Coming from someone outside of the humanities -- I study medicine -- there isn't a lot of ambiguity when it comes to telling people what my focus is outside of whether or not I'm a doctor yet. However, with some of the other professions within healthcare (such as CRNA, PA, MA, etc.) there is definitely some difficulty in explaining what their job entails simply due to lack of contact with it and some over-generalizations from popular media. Now while I think you're right that religion has vastly different biases, maybe at some level it's a lack of familiarity with your profession. This channel does a great job in removing some of the mystery of what it is you study and helps prime people to expect an academic scholar as opposed to a theologian. But I'm not gonna lie -- I think you'll be living down these sorts of interactions for years to come. Thanks for the great content and I hope your scripted sales pitch doesn't grate you too much!
Thanks for your thoughts! I agree that I think I'll be getting confusion about this discipline for the rest of my life. But I guess I'm used to it.
I think you have made this distinction very clear from the first time I watched your channel. And, I think you have done a good job of concealing your personal viewpoints and presenting diverse thinking across the spectrum of religious and non-religious approaches to the various topics you discuss. People can study music without being a musician (i.e. Musicology). People can study societal roles (Gender Studies) without being biased in a particular mode of thinking. Actually, just about anything can be rigorously examined and studied academically without personally and emotionally committing oneself. The general population who have not experienced the rigor of academic research methodology will generally not understand the process because they have no basis for understanding. The information revealed by the rigorous application of unbiased academic research will reveal much greater detail and nuance for the "unwashed" to add to their knowledge base...if they choose to accept the findings. I think your channel and your approach is adding to the collective knowledge base of us all in a positive way. Thanks and keep up the good work.
A very good point Andrew and I love your work. But I would like to add that as someone who studies political science many people do assume that I want to be a politician. Worse than that assumption are the interactions I have with people who want to hold me accountable for recent political events they view unfavorability as if I have control over vast political forces.
But are you religious?
Just for curiosity, of course. I'm Christian, but I prefer studying my own religion with scholars instead of theologians.
He doesn't answer these questions, but in my honest opinion, he's probably an agnostic or a weird salad mix of some sort, lol.
Brom Ponie yeah
Lol at the other 3 responses...I am religious and study other religions academically...
He’s probably a deist.
Same. I never understood someone who could blindly follow a belief without questions or real research.
Not sure if it's a problem linked with the term Religious Studies in particular since the german Religionswissenschaft and the french Histoire/Science des Religions seem to face the same reception, but it is indeed a widespread assumption!
Ok, that's good to know. If French and German speakers have the same confusion, it must be more than just the word "religious" studies.
I think a part of it comes from the fallacy that a lot of people, especially in the academic world, have that people who are religious are simple minded. Such as "they don't believe in science", or "he must separate his beliefs from his research in his head" or "those suckers believe in lies, but we're too smart to fall for it." This fallacy not only leads to people believing that religious people can't be analytical, but also that religion and academics are wholly separate. Which makes the idea of an academic who makes an unbiased study of religion something impossible in their heads, if at least unconsciously.
+Mitch Brown Yeah that is an unfortunate fallacy. That stereotype about religious people might be shared among a certain type of scientist (or public scientific figure such as Neil Degrasse Tyson), but I've found religious studies scholars to be surprisingly empathetic to religious people. Many have their own religious convictions too.
@transylvanian I think you are equating "religion" with "Christianity" or any other specific religion that fights science. Not all religions are like that. Many religions embrace science at another way to explore divinity or creation.
@transylvanian "To embrace science doesn't just mean accepting scientific facts, it means rejecting un-scientific thinking"
Your idea of "embracing science" seems to go far beyond accepting science as an effective method for studying the natural world. I"m sure plenty of people would regard themselves as "embracers" of science without feeling beholden to adopt a strict naturalist philosophy along with it, instead invoking something akin to Stephen Jay Gould's NOMA concept.
@transylvanian Cowardice is not a scientific concept. It's a value judgment. The scientific method cannot make value judgments. Thus, there are things the scientific method cannot address.
@transylvanian I suppose it is a fact that some atheists have basic social skills, yes.
You could use "Cultural Studies" in social situations. I mean, it's pretty difficult to study a culture without learning about their religious practices. Art, Anthropology & History is why I got interested in religion/mythology/folklore. It's such a big part of being human & has shaped so much of our history,
Very sensible advice
In my experience, most folks mistake the study of religion for theology.
Q: Have I ever met some who has made this fundamental error? YUP, me! I am learning so much from your channel Andrew, thanks!
You've mentioned a lot that your discipline is misunderstood and hard to summarize quickly. Can I make a suggestion for an elevator pitch?
"I study religion the same way an archaeologist studies an old stone tool: The goal isn't to understand the tool, it's to understand the people who made that tool."
I came up with this phrasing while helping an aspiring musicologist, it's worked well for her and hopefully it's helpful to you.
Amen! Thank you for the AAR guidelines. I can now better articulate my response to that annoying question. I have taken courses in religion, but it was not my major. It's just a personal interest and I do enjoy discussing it. But, the question of whether I am religious must always come up.
What you are speaking about is something I experienced all of the time while I was an associate professor and when I was a graduate student. During the women's liberation movement in the 70s and 80s I experienced all of the time. Thank you for speaking about it! Peace!
Hi. I’ve been binging on your channel for the last 2/3 months. I’m also interested in religions. I’ve been like that since I was a kid and have explored a wide range of religious traditions - Buddhism (the faith I grew up in), Christianity (for around 2/3 years), Islam (for a short period), Hinduism and Taoism. I’ve always been very interested in how religions function in the political, social and cultural sphere. I actually wanted to go study religion back as early as 2010, when I had to decide on my major in college, but being from Singapore, the fear was that I’d never be able to get a job, plus none of the universities in Singapore offer a Religious Studies major. I considered South East Asian studies and Sociology, but eventually settled for Psychology. I’m still so interested in religion tho. I especially would like to research Asian religions like Hinduism and Buddhism - especially how Buddhist art and religious practice in the waning days of Buddhism in India expresses the anxieties of Buddhist religious communities as Islam and Hinduism gained ascendency. I would like to find out 2 things:
a) Can you find a job with a religious studies major?
b) Which university would you recommend that I apply to if I’m interested in Religious Studies (whether within the US or outside of it).
Thanks! And keep up the excellent videos !
Great content, it’s hard to explain simple things to fundamentalist people.
Your work is light on the pathway.
"Oh, you're studying animal studies! You must be an animal!" - "Oink."
I mean, technically all zoologists are animals.
But only because we all are. 😝
😂😂😂😂 wow I didn't see it coming
Humans are technically animals
I know this is an older video but I wanted to comment anyhow. I'm not religious but I love studying the ancient people, religions and how they influenced each other.... Along with small bits of the languages. I have a series problem of wanting to know all the languages, so, I have to limit myself in order to have a life and a job. Thank you for your great channel!
Great video. I don't think I have met someone like that, though :). And yes, in high school/"gymnasium" (not a gym! :D) we, I think, did have a Jewish visit. Not an imam, though, Islam is not widespread around here :).
And when I announced that I'll be applying for Religious Studies, no one asked me if I am religious, and I didn't talk about my personal beliefs :).
Pretty cool, eh?
haha you're lucky! I've met a lot of people like this.
(I am assuming you are German because of your mention of "Ein Gymnasium".)
It doesn't surprise me that Germans would have a better understanding of what Religious Studies would be... But, tell me, what is the official word in German for "Religious Studies" now? Might the word itself have something to do with these (better) reactions?
Kann auch Deutsch...
To be fair, if someone told me they studied art history, I would definitely think they're an artist
I was "raised Christian" but in my 30's I started a comparative religion study that has lasted all my life (I'm 70.) For the last 10 years I have followed the philosophy of Tao. This is hard to talk about because most people don't know that the religion was started 600 years after the Tao was written. I only realized there was a religion attached to the philosophy when I Googled it, after 10 years of study! I hesitate talking about it because most people think I am denigrating Christianity or they think I practice an eastern form of religion. The eastern religions that are known for ringing bells, chanting and burning candles...sounds like Catholicism to me!
"And as Jesus passed by, he saw a man which was blind from his birth.
And his disciples asked him, saying, Master, who did sin, this man, or his parents, that he was born blind?
Jesus answered, Neither hath this man sinned, nor his parents: but that the works of God should be made manifest in him.
I must work the works of him that sent me, while it is day: the night cometh, when no man can work.
As long as I am in the world, I am the light of the world.
When he had thus spoken, he spat on the ground, and made clay of the spittle, and he anointed the eyes of the blind man with the clay,
And said unto him, Go, wash in the pool of Siloam, (which is by interpretation, Sent.) He went his way therefore, and washed, and came seeing.
The neighbours therefore, and they which before had seen him that he was blind, said, Is not this he that sat and begged?
Some said, This is he: others said, He is like him: but he said, I am he.
Therefore said they unto him, How were thine eyes opened?
He answered and said, A man that is called Jesus made clay, and anointed mine eyes, and said unto me, Go to the pool of Siloam, and wash: and I went and washed, and I received sight.
Then said they unto him, Where is he? He said, I know not.
They brought to the Pharisees him that aforetime was blind.
And it was the sabbath day when Jesus made the clay, and opened his eyes.
Then again the Pharisees also asked him how he had received his sight. He said unto them, He put clay upon mine eyes, and I washed, and do see.
Therefore said some of the Pharisees, This man is not of God, because he keepeth not the sabbath day. Others said, How can a man that is a sinner do such miracles? And there was a division among them.
They say unto the blind man again, What sayest thou of him, that he hath opened thine eyes? He said, He is a prophet.
But the Jews did not believe concerning him, that he had been blind, and received his sight, until they called the parents of him that had received his sight.
And they asked them, saying, Is this your son, who ye say was born blind? how then doth he now see?
His parents answered them and said, We know that this is our son, and that he was born blind:
But by what means he now seeth, we know not; or who hath opened his eyes, we know not: he is of age; ask him: he shall speak for himself.
These words spake his parents, because they feared the Jews: for the Jews had agreed already, that if any man did confess that he was Christ, he should be put out of the synagogue.
Therefore said his parents, He is of age; ask him.
Then again called they the man that was blind, and said unto him, Give God the praise: we know that this man is a sinner.
He answered and said, Whether he be a sinner or no, I know not: one thing I know, that, whereas I was blind, now I see.
Then said they to him again, What did he to thee? how opened he thine eyes?
He answered them, I have told you already, and ye did not hear: wherefore would ye hear it again? will ye also be his disciples?
Then they reviled him, and said, Thou art his disciple; but we are Moses' disciples.
We know that God spake unto Moses: as for this fellow, we know not from whence he is.
The man answered and said unto them, Why herein is a marvellous thing, that ye know not from whence he is, and yet he hath opened mine eyes.
Now we know that God heareth not sinners: but if any man be a worshipper of God, and doeth his will, him he heareth.
Since the world began was it not heard that any man opened the eyes of one that was born blind.
If this man were not of God, he could do nothing.
They answered and said unto him, Thou wast altogether born in sins, and dost thou teach us? And they cast him out.
Jesus heard that they had cast him out; and when he had found him, he said unto him, Dost thou believe on the Son of God?
He answered and said, Who is he, Lord, that I might believe on him?
And Jesus said unto him, Thou hast both seen him, and it is he that talketh with thee.
And he said, Lord, I believe. And he worshipped him.
And Jesus said, For judgment I am come into this world, that they which see not might see; and that they which see might be made blind.
And some of the Pharisees which were with him heard these words, and said unto him, Are we blind also?
Jesus said unto them, If ye were blind, ye should have no sin: but now ye say, We see; therefore your sin remaineth."- John chapter 9 verses 1 to 41.
Believe in Jesus Christ and you shall have everlasting life! Jesus loves you! Get a king james bible and believe.
Read Matthew.
Read 1 John chapter 4.
Read 2 Peter chapter 2,3.
Fantastic video! Out of curiosity, do you write a script for these "fireside chat" style videos? Or do you mostly ad-lib?
For these more informal videos, I write out what I want to say and then riff on it. So that is probably why I appear less polished here.
I go to a Church of England school, so Religious Studies is a mandatory subject, which I’m good at. I’m not religious myself, even though I do sometimes say I’m a pagan simply as an excuse to wear Viking jewellery. My friend, who is an Anglican, assumed that me being good at religious studies yet not being religious was an oxymoron.
I've found the same in Native/Indigenous Studies. Now, as it happens, I am Indigenous (Metis). But it's weird that people assume the program is only for and of interest to an Aboriginal audience.
In this case, there is a history to such programs. As you probably know, since the 1970s, universities have been persuaded that not only should there be greater diversity in academia, but many have argued (some quite forcefully) that personal knowledge stemming from one's background or identity is an asset. When I was in graduate school, there were still some in the African-American Studies program debating the then controversial notion that only black voices should be speaking on such topics. That was the position in its most extreme form, of course - voiced more by younger students than full scholars, to be honest. But, as these things go, you can see it reverberate in the broader culture to the present day.
I think the assumptions you run into might be one part stereotyping (sigh) and one part stemming from this history.
Personally, and I'm sure you'd agree as most people do these days, it seems obvious to me that someone who is indigenous would bring certain knowledge, skills and insights into an Indigenous Studies program that provide a foundation for ultimately producing valuable new scholarship - but it's no guarantee of success and any student, regardless of identity, could do the same if they have the dedication and integrity for doing a good job.
Nice piece. Very informative. I'm on board!
I recently got an MA in Religious Studies and am working on another degree, with the idea of focusing on religious communications. I run across this problem all the time.
Yeah I think it is widespread, even among fellow academics.
Religious Studies or the Study of Religions is different from Theology. Part of Religious Studies or the Study of Religions would be the "History of Religions" or the "Comparative Study of Religions" or the "Phenomenology of Religions". Theology is necessarily faith-based, and that springs from the conviction that faith is epistemologically/gnoseologically relevant...
I often have to explain this to people. I am actively religious in my practice and I actively study a lot of religions. I like knowing why people do what they do and believe what they believe.
I had this debate with a coworker of mine once; she attended a religious school in the UK and was less than unbiased when it came to voicing her opinions on whether or not kids should learn about religions in school. I disagreed, and tried to explain to her the difference between studying a faith-based and a religious studies-based classroom environment, but alas, I didn't have the proper language to fully articulate that idea, and I just kinda trailed off out into shameful silence. If only I had watched this video before then!
One thing, an advantage to your perspective is that you are less likely to be bias towards a specific doctrine since you wouldn't have religious leanings one way or another on it.
people confuse my study of Religion as a theological Pursuit or that I am religious. I usually clarify where that I study comparative religion or religion as a social science.
Yeah, "comparative religion" is a good phrase. I should probably use it more.
The English adjective "religious" in "religious studies" has impact in this missunderstanding. The German word "Religionswissenschaft" or "sciemce of religion" causes less missunderstanding in German language.
Yeah I’m envious of the German scholars in that respect.
I often also get it that when I have spoke to people about religion, that people assume I'm not religious because of how detached I am. To the point that some friends believe I'm an atheist who pretends to identify with a particular religion vs entertain the idea that a religious person could be academic in their religious understanding.
Well said and more importantly well done with this channel. You, sir, have captured what I've been trying to do for five years with my channel. And I humbly admit, you definitely do it better. Keep it up.
Thanks man. I've been at this for over two years myself. Growth is slow but steady.
I am very interested in lots of different religions, even though I am agnostic about whether these Great questions will ever be able to be answered.
I used to base my entire understanding of reality on religious ideas as a teenager, and my worldview would shift dramatically every once in a while making me exhausted with the change in my mental landscape.
I eventually gave up on trying to answer these Great questions by postulating that no one on Earth has a definitive answer, and if you investigate the claims of those claiming to have definitive answers they always fall short on logic and/or evidence.
Thanks for sharing Thomas. I tend to agree that these universal questions can never be answered, but I enjoy wrestling with them nonetheless.
Could you make a video about ancient Greek and Roman mystery religions? I have been reading Bertrand Russel's history of western philosophy and he said that Pythagoras and Plato had a lot of Mystery religion influences in their teachings.
Given how influential Plato was on Aristotle, and how influential Aristotle and Plato were during the middle ages and renaissance on philosophy and Christian thought it would be very interesting to see if there are parts of these mystery religions that have seeped into our modern way of thinking.
I think it's because of a big dichotomy which people tend to create between religious and non-religious people. Many people assume that someone who is not religious would have no interest whatsoever in anything to do with religion. Whereas for politics and art it's more widely understood that they are meant for politicians/artists as well as those who aren't.
I also think it has a large part to do with the fact that unlike something like anthropology, religion has traditionally been studied internally in the west in the form of theology. That's probably why when you hear about some guy studying Buddhism more people will think of academic, anthropological study whereas someone studying Christianity or Islam will tend to draw up images of theologians for most people. The implied distance of certain religions and cultures makes them seem more scholarly than the ones which have traditionally held more prominent positions in our society. Many see religion as highly personal and some even as something inherently unscholarly.
People have made the word "Religion" into somewhat of a boogie man. So once you say anything in reference to it, an array of xenophobic, misogynistic, and oppressive thoughts floods a person mind, and automatically reject into even having a conversation about it. Unfortunately that kind of thinking has limited our ability to have productive conversations about it.
I am not “religious” and I have been interested in religious ideas and texts for years. I personally am spiritual, As above so below ... , but this has taken years to develop. I’ve gone through everything from atheist to satanist (LaVey) all the way to where I am now, where I study Hermeticism and the Occult Arts. But my book shelf contains everything from the Bible to Norse mythology, I watch channels like this one, documentaries of Gnostics, Kabbala, Greco-Roman & Ancient Egyptian religions, etc etc etc. Religion and everything in that world is a fascinating subject and such a huge part of the human experience.
Facts! More people need to understand this
Maybe it would be more helpful if we did call it "the Study OF Religion" rather than "Religious Studies". "Religious Studies" can sound like "Sunday school" to some folks - especially if they went to a religious school when they were growing up where they would have had "religion" class along with "history" and "English" class, etc. In that context "religious studies" or "religion class" WOULD have been a matter of studying their OWN religion from the theological perspective with the intent to deepen personal faith.
100% agree with this. I've gotten into the habit of calling it "study of religion."
I get this all the time and it’s really annoying. People don’t understand that I can study religion, be religious, and still study Christian culture from an academic perspective.
I’ve always been atheist and I’ve always been interested in religions.
I was at a bowling alley and I was talking to one of the workers. He asked me what I wanted to go to college for and I said that I wanted to study marine biology, English literature Education, or Religion and Philosophy. When he heard the last part he asked if I was going to be a pastor or priest and at that moment we were both confused. I am an atheist.
Notice how he didn't ask if you wanted to be a dolphin when you said "marine biology."
lol right.
When I say I study religion (in Norway), people often asks if I'm gonna be a pastor.
ive never given it much thought but i am now! thanks!
I always had the opposite view in the past, that because religious studies are about analyzing religions in an academic way people who believes in those religions wouldn't go to this subject, and also... Many religious people where I live are against studying religion in an analytic way...
I'm a librarian. To most people a librarian is anyone who works in a library, not a person who has spent 3-6 years studying one or more degrees to learn a research-based profession. Tbh, most people I come in contact with think I must read a lot while atwork. I don't have the heart to tell them that there are times when I don't even see a book. For weeks or even months in my job.
However I'm unemployed right now thanks to COVID-19 and have all the time in the world to read lol.
Niche, the college ranking platform, doesn't seem to understand the difference. Their rankings for schools with strong religious studies programs lists a bunch of schools that offer theology, and don't have religious studies majors at all. I emailed Niche to see if they could correct and they said that they lump the two fields together…
I'm an atheistic agnostic who takes an interest in all religions around the world, because, like it or not, religion influences the world around us, and by understanding religions throughout the world, I can better understand the world that I live in.
I’m an atheist but I believe that this sort of content is important. I took many courses on religion and religious history at university because I found them interesting.
I am actually in college right now for religious studies. A lot of people think I am talking about Christianity, which often leads to me to into detail about my studies. Although it is this misconception that has taught me how to carefully word my introduction to my studies.
I study religion too and I have the same problem, here in Brazil so many people don't even know that this course exist in university.
I understood it to mean you actually study global religions in varying different contexts, now and in the past
I’m a devout Christian who also loves the academic study of religion.
I personally was drawn to religious studies in college due to my own desire to understand my own faith better. Ironically the more I learned the more I found my religious beliefs changing overtime and my understanding is my experience is definitely not unique among those who decided study religion from an academic perspective. Looking at you Bart Ehrman.
I used to be a hardcore atheist, but then I got into ancient history (bronze age & classical era are my favourites). I then noticed how people came to believe in these religions. I am now a non-caring atheist because I now like looking into the history of religion.
You don't have to be an atheist to study science.
I am a theologian, pastor actually, so I am aware of the differences. I can imagine though. As soon as I tell people I am a pastor, people assume a lót about me. ‘How heavily religious are you then?’ Is a question I get. Which sééms to mean: how seriously do you take faith in Christ, but it actually means: how judgmental are you exactly.
To me, studying religion is a way to study humanity itself, and myself, in interlaced ways across time.
There is a reason we invented religion, even why the idea of religion itself is contentious, though we may never know why. Studying and asking why teaches us much though.
Point taken about religious studies being conflated with seminary, but I wouldn't say that's the only field it happens in. When I say I'm a musicologist, the follow-up questions are, more often than not, about what instrument I play, and especially in like social gatherings I've been asked more than once to provide extemporaneous entertainment. Like, please don't do that, unless your idea of entertainment is me lecturing you on the relationship between music and political power in North Korea, because THAT's what I do. And of course I'm saying this in solidarity with your position, not discounting it :)
Oh man, I never thought about musicology. Point taken as well! Though I wouldn't mind a lecture about the power dynamics of music in North Korea... ;)
ReligionForBreakfast North Korea is fascinating to me, so I would love a lecture on that. But it would have to be in layman style for me...
Maybe, from the examples used in the video, not so much art _history_, as the "history" part makes it quite clear that it's not contemporary.
But I think that a lot of fields that study a particular human activity suffer from that problem. Even in a not strictly academic context - it's often assumed (or brought up as an accusation) that someone who reviews books, should be a decent writer. Or an art critic should be an artist. Or that an expert on a certain culture should be a native of that culture.
That may be more pronounced with Religious Studies - it's quite obvious to more people that those writing book reviews aren't the authors themselves. In the field of religion, people are usually almost exclusively confronted with those who study the religion as practitioners - pastors, preachers, imams, and so on. In the rare cases where that isn't true - school, mostly - the notion gets quietly (or explicitly) reinforced by that "the Rabbi teaches us about Judaism" approach.
There are simply too few scholars of religion in everyday life. :D
P.S. Incidentally, while looking up how someone within the field of Religious Studies is called in English, I ran into a lenghty discussion in my preferred German-English online dictionary about how a "Religionswissenschaftler" is _not_ a "Theologe", with some claiming that they're synonymous. No, it's not only English. :D
P.P.S. How _is_ someone called in your field of studies? :D
I think that the reason this misconception is so common is because the originators of the religious studies were practitioner of religion
It's even better i argue. At least as long as you're able to accept that everyone even oneself has beliefs, moral codes and rituals etc.
I'm pretty firmly atheistic, but I'm currently writing historical fiction. Because of that, I've gotten quite far into secular academia on religion, simply because the cultural impact of religion is utterly undeniable. It's curious the places you can find yourself in pursuit of your interests.
Cool to hear it. And yeah, a lot of fiction authors have delved into the academic study of religion. It's one of the reasons that "mana," the magical power we see in video games today, is such a common trope. Sci-fi and fantasy authors of the 70s borrowed it from religion scholars of the 60s who borrowed it from Oceanic cultures in the late 1800s.
@@ReligionForBreakfast Yeah, I remember digging into that a bit myself. I stumbled across some fairly interesting stuff proposing a strong historical link between mana and animism, which is actually fairly similar to the stuff you talked about in your animism video (down to sharing some similar baseless assumptions as that chart ^^;). It was really cool seeing that covered.
Learning about all these ideas that have gone through so much exploration and refinement in religions over the centuries makes for some really great brain food. I can't claim to be doing anything more than piggybacking off other people's hard work in that regard though. I don't think the academic study of it gets nearly as much respect as it deserves.
Bit late to the party but I call the discipline "Comparative Religions" as I'm looking to compare and contrast different beliefs. Also: I've found it helps to have a broader ecumenical language. One person's angel may or may not be another's Valkyrie, f'rinstance.
I cannot think of anybody that I met in person who made this mistake, but I can think of the Fox News host who argued with a self-identified Muslim who studied Christianity - she could not get over why a non-Christian would study Christianity.
Now, whether Reza Aslan actually possessed the credentials he claimed (that has been an issue debated among secularists, agnostics and atheists) is another question but she just focused on his religion and just kept focusing on the fact he was not a Christian.
My first impression of religious studies was quite the opposite: that you are all anti-theists. And I still find it very hard to fathom how someone can study the world's religions and still believe in one.
I thought that too. But I guess that knowing the process of how the religion came to be and how it became as widespread as it is today, doesn't disprove whether or not the original prophet was being truthful. So religious scholars can still believe in it, even after they for instance find out the pagan origin of many traditions.
To me there is a fundamental difference between religion and divinity. You can be 100% theist and 100% exceptical about religion(s).
Easy... they engage in something called compartmentalization. They employ skepticism and scrutiny in fields of study but they keep their personal beliefs free from that skepticism. We see it even in scientists. It's how there can be PHD biologists who are also a young earth creationists. Unfathomable for most of us but not impossible for someone deeply indoctrinated.
You hear similar confusion between Theology and Religious Studies or study of Religion. You also have misconceptions about the point of History, oh I didn't grow up in Italy, therefore studies of ancient Rome are not relevant to my existence...and I clearly don't need to explain that one. When in Rome, all roads lead to Rome, etc. We also need to have that differentiation to help prevent misconceptions of religions to perpetuate or new misunderstandings forming as time goes on. Christianity's course changed dramatically and irrevocably since Constantine, in a direction that was not intended by the historical Jesus I will postulate. The objectivity of study of religion could provide a context to renewing religion in a way certain religions cannot do on their own, perhaps an even more authentic return, but they must be separate. I think the name should be changed to History of Religion to differentiate from theology/apologetics, while still leaving room for contemporary examination.
I hear "religious studies" and think "that's weird, sign me up. Gonna get me some head scarves".
That woman who didn't get it probably just had a limited vocabulary. "Non-sectarian" and "religious literacy" are both terms that have limited currency in the common culture. Even "academic" is widely misunderstood.
What if they were to call it 'Religion Studies' ? I feel the difference in "Religion'' vs "Religious" makes you think of it more as a subject of study rather than your peraonal study of your belief.
Just a thought.
I worked in a college where some of the instructors made that mistake.
To be fair, "religious studies" kind of imply that the study will be religious? Not that the study will be about religion itself. I think you guys should change the name to something less ambiguous... By the way, love the channel!
No I never thought one had to be religious to study religion. It’s good to understand others and your background though. I can understand where people might get studying religion and being religious confused . Right now , due to my aminos and changing my religion, I’m covering both the Catholic and satanic beliefs because I’m curator of both Catholic and satanic aminos plus I recently joined TST so it’s all new .
I’m a Christian but I also like studying about the history of religion and about other religions yet Im not Buddist. or Islamic or Shinto.
Im new and Im wondering if you cover Native American faiths / beliefs? Like for us religon and faith is different and it makes people scratch their heads.
Believe in Jesus Christ and you shall have everlasting life! Neither is there salvation in any other! Get a king james bible and believe.
Read Matthew.
ua-cam.com/video/bkmEUTYzNfE/v-deo.html&app=desktop
You're a religion nerd. I love that ish.
I actually became much more interested, especially in the New Testament and JC himself, after I became non-religious.
cynical view, but I think it's accurate: most people are just ignorant about topics that either don't directly affect their career or their personal interests. I don't expect the average person, especially American, to know much about science, history, religion, etc. I wish they did pay attention, or at least respected religious studies, but that's just not how a lot of people were raised
It seems like in America the people who want to take the time to study something enough to get a degree at least care about that thing more than others. Many people who study become more of a convert the longer/ deeper they go in. Religion being a nation wide and sensitive topic makes other think it must be your jam if you are bringing it up and not complaining about it.
My father, a rock-hard atheist, is extremely worried because I show an interest in studing religion, magic and ritual.
Good content.
Because people generally do not like to give deep thought and make quick simple decision.They quickly make a stereotypical connection between one point to another in their mind without being always true.
For example, I am ethnically Indian but I was born in France and I have french nationality and I speak fluently french. So I am technically french. Now I live in the UK. If people ask me where I come from or what's my nationality and I respond to them I am from France. Then for some people, it's like I blew their mind up. For some, they can't accept the idea that I am french because of my ethnicity. They would just assume that I come from Indian.
If someone ask me where I am from, then I would give a quite long explanation that my parents were from Sri Lanka who moved to France, then I said to them I was born and been to France for most of my youth then later I moved to UK. Sometimes I couldn't bother to answer and just say that I am from Sri Lanka.
Maybe it does not relate to your issue. But if I was you, I would say firstly that I have a diploma in religious study. Then people would incline to think that you study religion for a living. But if you say firstly that you study religion, then they would quickly assume that there is no beneficial reason of studying religion that for devotion of the religious belief. Basically, mention first that you have a diploma or study in an university.
That's a really good analogy about nationality and ethnicity. And you're right, perhaps leading with "I have a degree in this..." might help. I always thought saying "academic" and "non-sectarian" in my pitch was good enough. But not always.
keep in mind that discussion of religion in academic or corporate is either explicitly or by proxy not allowed by law. you cannot have a religious discussion in these places without skating dangerously close to , or overtly , breaking the law
Yeah, I wish more people had religious liberty education. Public school teachers have a lot of leeway as long as they are talking about religion from an academic perspective as part of culture.
Sooo... where should I start if I wanted to study religion? The holy book(s) I assume?
I would say a general textbook on comparative religion at high school or undergraduate college level, depending on how hard a read you want. Please keep in mind some religions do not have sacred texts.