Experts Inaugurate Institute for Study of Secularism
http://www.trinitytripod.com/media/paper520/news/2005/11/08/News/Experts.Inaugurate.Institute.For.Study.Of.Secularism-1049890.shtml?page=1
Your shorter link is: http://makeashorterlink.com/?L3725232C
Experts Inaugurate Institute for Study of Secularism
By San-Eou Lan
Published: Tuesday, November 8, 2005
Scholars speak on secularism and its place in academia.
Media Credit: Will Cyphers
Scholars speak on secularism and its place in academia.
Trinity College began a series of public events inaugurate the Institute
for the Study of Secularism in Society and Culture (ISSSC) on Wednesday.
The institute was funded by a grant from the Posen Foundation, under the
direction of Professor Barry Kosmin. The institute is dedicated to the
study of secularism and its influence both abroad and domestically.
Each year for the next five years, a selected group of Trinity faculty
fellows will develop new courses based on a common theme from a range of
academic disciplines. The themes are: The Roots of the Secular Tradition in
the West, The Secular Tradition and Foundations of the Natural Sciences,
The Heritage of the Enlightenment, The Global Impact of Secular Values, and
The Secular Tradition in General Education.
The events included two panel presentations featuring various field
experts. The first panel, entitled "Secularism in American Public Life,"
included commentary from several authors and journalists. The panel
featured Christopher Hitchens, a columnist from Vanity Fair, Susan Jacoby,
author of Freethinkers: A History of American Secularism, Peter Steinfels,
a religion columnist for The New York Times, and Mark Silk, the moderator
and director of the Trinity Program on Public Values.
During the first panel presentation, each of the panelists offered their
expertise on secularism in American public life. The first speaker, Susan
Jacoby, discussed the issue of treating secularism as a religion.
"Secularism is not a religion, because faith is based on something that
cannot be proven," Jacoby commented. "However, Secularism has no beliefs
that cannot be proven." She went on to provide the Stalinist regime as an
example of a group treating secularism as a religion.
The next speaker, Peter Steinfels, talked about the growing trend of
secularism and its results. He explained that "hard secularism" is when
"religious beliefs will cease to exist when humanity outgrows its
superstitious childhood." He went on to describe "soft secularism," which
is when religion disappears from the public arena, however, it still holds
weight in the private arena. He stated that hard secularism has a small
place in American life, but soft secularism is a greater force in the
United States. Christopher Hitchens, the last speaker, offered a distinct
definition between secularism and atheism. He said, "Secularism is someone
who believes that religious liberties should still be protected". He went
on to discuss the problems that come about when individuals confuse
secularism with atheism.
After each member of the first panel offered his or her opinions, the floor
became open to the audience to ask questions. Due to time constraints,
however, only a few questions were asked. A student offered the question,
"How should political parties appeal to voters of the 'red states.'" Susan
Jacoby rose to the occasion and provided an answer. She believed that the
"worst idea is to fight with values of the religious left." She went on to
discuss that these "dueling theologies" is un-American. She believed that
political parties should not appeal to religious faith, but rather should
believe in separation of church and state, which would protect religious
institutions. She went on to say that political parties should not elicit
support for a policy in "the name of God." Another student asked, "Can
secularism and religion coexist with one another?" Peter Steinfels
responded, saying, "As long as people are partially rational, or
imperfectly evolved creatures, we will continue to be religious."
The second panel focused on secularism in the academy. It included Eileen
Barker, a professor from the London School of Economics, Michael Ruse, a
professor from Florida State University, and David Hollinger, a professor
from the University of California: Berkeley. President Jimmy Jones served
as the moderator for this panel. Eileen Barker spoke first, and she
discussed the different forms of secularism, believing that "religion is
slowly dying from generation to generation." She went on to talk about the
different state levels of secularism, the first level being state imposed
secularism. The second level is a secular state, but not very secular, and
she offered Turkey as an example. The third level would be a separation of
church and state, much like the United States, going to say "this level of
secularism is what makes this country both very religious and very secular
at the same time." The fourth level would be a state religion, such as the
situation in England; however, the state religion would not hold a
tremendous bearing on the public arena. The final stage would be a
theocracy, such as the one in Iran. She argued that traditional religions
are losing to different directions: soft secularism, hard secularism,
apathetic secularism, spirituality without membership in a traditional
religious institution and fundamentalism.
Michael Russe, as the second speaker, offered his opinion on science and
the academy. He believed science is identified with secularism because
individuals have put a secularist twist to many scientific theories. For
example, Darwin's theory of evolution sought to reconcile science with
religion; however, following generations put their mark on his beliefs, and
spread their version of Darwin's theory through the channels of education.
Michael Russe believed that "the organic model of the world was becoming a
mechanical model," going on to state that scientific innovation made the
trend of secularization possible; however, he added, "Science made it all
possible."
The final speaker, David Hollinger, discussed the reconciliation of
religion and secular beliefs. He believes one of the major issues is that
"many secularists do not see the difference between religion and atheism,
dismissing liberal religions as the problem, and not part of the solution."
He went on to elaborate, saying that there should be more open and candid
discussion between secularists and liberal religious institutions. In
conclusion, he believed that "we should confront religious ideology, and
discuss them openly." Jones closed the event with hopes that the
institution will provoke student's minds. "Young people today need to be
knowledgeable about these ideologies, so they may be better leaders of
tomorrow."
*****************************************************************
Posting and reading from alt.politics.usa.constitution OR alt.education
You are invited to check out the following:
The Rise of the Theocratic States of America
http://members.tripod.com/~candst/theocracy.htm
American Theocrats - Past and Present
http://members.tripod.com/~candst/theocrats.htm
The Constitutional Principle: Separation of Church and State
http://members.tripod.com/~candst/index.html
[and to join the discussion group for the above site and/or Separation of
Church and State in general, listed below]
HRSepCnS · Hampton Roads [Virginia] SepChurch&State
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HRSepCnS/
[Its not just Hampton Roads folks who are members, there are members from
all over the U.S. and a couple from overseas as well]
***************************************************************
.. . . You can't understand a phrase such as "Congress shall make no law
respecting an establishment of religion" by syllogistic reasoning. Words
take their meaning from social as well as textual contexts, which is why "a
page of history is worth a volume of logic." New York Trust Co. v. Eisner,
256 U.S. 345, 349, 41 S.Ct. 506, 507, 65 L.Ed. 963 (1921) (Holmes, J.).
Sherman v. Community Consol. Dist. 21, 980 F.2d 437, 445 (7th Cir. 1992)
.. . .
****************************************************************
THE CONSTITUTIONAL PRINCIPLE:
SEPARATION OF CHURCH AND STATE
http://members.tripod.com/~candst/index.html
****************************************************************
.
|
