Tolerance.ca's Panel Discussion at Vanier College Diversity of Values and Religious Beliefs on Campus : Enrichment or Source of Conflict?
By
Neil CaplanPh.D., London School of Economics and Political Science, Member of Tolerance.ca
®
Photo by Gunther Gamper.
*
Dr Neil Caplan is the Humanities Coordinator at Vanier College.
What better way to mark International Day for the Elimination of Racial Discrimination than to hold a panel discussion on the diversity of values and religious beliefs? Sponsored by the Humanities Department of Vanier College in association with Tolerance.ca, the panel featured Liberal Arts student Fariduddin Rifai, Humanities teacher Maureen Jones, and Humanities/Religious-Studies teacher Sevak Manjikian, also a member of Tolerance.ca
Fariduddin Rifai is a student active in both the campus-wide Vanier College Students’ Association (VCSA) and the Vanier Islamic Students’ Association (VISA). He stated that in his experience, the policy of allowing religious clubs to establish themselves on campus worked relatively well. In his personal approach, religion is not a negative force that only subjects people to burdens or dogma. Rather, religion for him is an integral part of everyday life, fostering piety, humility and compassion—hence promoting tolerance rather than its opposite. He expressed satisfaction that, as an institution, Vanier College provides a decent climate; it does not attempt to aggressively dictate policies and lay down injunctions. He believes that by allowing religious clubs like VISA and Hillel to be established on campus, educational institutions allow religious students to practice their faith with independence—which contributes to feelings of comfort and social stability. “We may not have a utopia of tolerance,” Mr. Rifai concluded, “but I think this policy has been able to sustain an environment of amity between different groups. It's a long-term policy.”
Maureen Jones, speaking from the perspective of a Humanities teacher, made a strong case for including the academic study of religion within the curriculum of a humanistic education—as the Ministère de l’Éducation has mandated colleges to do in General Studies courses. Appreciating and respecting the “faith” aspect of all religions and spiritual movements—even when teaching about them, as we do, from outside the faith—are essential to Humanities courses’ goals, which include fostering cultural literacy and helping create an informed citizenry. After providing some historical background on the role of religion in Quebec and Canada, Professor Jones noted efforts to throw off the yoke of “superstition” of religion and the authoritarianism of the organized Church. In contrast to the connection often made between religion and oppression, she pointed to the religious inspiration behind many progressive social movements. “The study of religion in a publicly funded school is necessary and even desirable,” she argued. “Studying religion from an academic perspective helps us guard against not only religious intolerance, but also the anti-religion intolerance – under-appreciated but very real – that is sometimes a by-product of an overzealous secularism. To learn about religion is to learn that it is not static or monolithic. There are many nuances and complexities to learn. Religions can be progressive, as well as regressive.”
Going beyond the veneer of tolerance
Photo by Gunther Gamper.
**
Canada and Quebec claim to be committed to the project of pluralism with regard to religions, cultures and ethnic groups. According to Professor Jones, to be a truly informed citizen and tolerant member of society, we must have knowledge of these different cultures and religions. She criticized the commonplace polite forms of tolerance. Many people think or say, “I don’t ‘get’ you; I don’t understand you—but I’ll tolerate you… because that’s what good people do, that’s how we deal with diversity in Canada (as a practical measure).” Of course, there is something to be said for this ethic, as it is undoubtedly better than the alternative, intolerance—“I won’t tolerate you because you are different.”
But without an attempt to go further in understanding people different from ourselves, this form of tolerance can actually cloak and breed intolerance. It can shut down conversations rather than opening them up. This kind of tolerance can be a form of avoidance—avoiding asking questions, learning about ourselves and others. Sometimes we are afraid to ask questions because we think we will look ignorant or appear to be judging the other person. So everyone just sticks with being silent and polite—with a veneer of tolerance. As a result we learn nothing and walk away unchanged.
In contrast, Professor Jones said, she feels that understanding is a worthier goal. This quest involves active dialogue with others, asking questions that test our perceptions of other people, their religious practices, way of dress, etc. We must ask, “’Does this mean what I think it means?’” Instead of quickly summing people up, defining them for ourselves, we have to actually dialogue with them to learn about them on their own terms. Of course, this does not mean we will automatically agree with them, but it makes it a whole lot more difficult to “other” them (label them as “others”). The tolerance born of this sort of understanding goes beyond a polite veneer. Learning about different religions in Cégep and at university can become a great transformative activity promoting true understanding and deeper tolerance.
Taking religion outside the box
The last presentation was given by Sevak Manjikian. In teaching his Humanities and Religious Studies courses, he has found it artificial and misleading to treat “religion” as a separate compartment. Along with social class, gender, race and ethnicity, religion must be recognized for the role it plays in shaping our identity, values and worldviews. Rather than studying each religion on its own, Professor Manjikian’s courses reveal the many fusions and interconnections between societies, cultural traditions and religious communities. Nothing could be more absurd than the notion that all people of the same religion are the same; in reality, various moral, ethical, and political issues can be approached differently by people espousing the same religion.
Like the previous panelist, Professor Manjikian examined the evident discomfort our school systems have in dealing with religion. Some of this is due to our secularist and rationalist presumptions. Despite the fact that religion influences the way people deal with issues and has survived many challenges of modernity, it remains an unseen and hard-to-quantify phenomenon. We can’t see God; we can’t measure the power of God on a scale or scientifically prove the existence of God. So we tend to relegate religion to some invisible or private world that is difficult to study academically without resorting to the “parade” approach of studying comparative religions, one at a time, each in its own “box.”
A second reason for avoiding religious studies in the curriculum has been a fear that learning about religions would lead to studying religious conflict. This, in turn, would tend to deepen frictions among the followers of various religious traditions. Even non-believing or non-practising students might draw the unpleasant conclusion (in contrast to the philosophy of “The World is a Nice Place”) that some religious people are capable of having negative and chauvinistic world views.
Another factor working against religion on campus is the presumption that modern, progressive, “rational” people have no need for religion. Consumers make rational choices to maximize their material well-being as a basis for their happiness, whereas only “irrational” or “superstitious” people have the time or need to seek spirituality. If, as Freud argued, religion was merely a response to our deepest, darkest fears, then in a perfect world in which we conquer those fears we should have no need for religion.
Appreciating religion and spirituality
Photo by Gunther Gamper.
***
According to Professor Manjikian, our educational milieu provides opportunities to go beyond this position, which he considers narrow and misguided. Along with math and science and innovation, we can use the General Studies curriculum to help instill a greater appreciation for religion and spirituality, and ultimately, the values of love, critical thinking, and respect for all human creation and nature. He gave examples of how developing respect for religion and spirituality can minimize the possibility of dehumanizing others. We must not fall into the trap of thinking that liberalism and secularism are the only legitimate perspectives through which to interpret our world.
Most of all, he concluded, we must reject the simplistic and false argument that religion only causes violence and splits people apart. In our interconnected world, we inevitably interact with people of various faiths. “We might as well learn a bit about each other’s beliefs so as to make a civic dialogue possible,” he said. That would allow us to truly appreciate the many ways in which religion and “the supernatural” can motivate people—to express their religious or spiritual feelings, to organize their private and communal lives around religious ideals, and to draw on religion to help explain the world to themselves and their neighbours.
Tolerance.ca organized a second panel discussion on the same theme at la Maison des écrivains, in Montreal. Read more on the subject. Click here !
The panel discussion on Diversity of Values and Religious Beliefs on Campus : Enrichment or Source of Conflict? was held at Vanier College, in Montreal, on March 16, 2006 and was organized as part of the series on diversity of values and religious beliefs in colleges and universities, made possible with the financial contribution of
* Prof. Sevak Manjikian addresses students. Behind him is Liberal Arts student and discussant, Fariduddin Rifai.
** L to R: Student panelist Fariduddin Rifai, Professors Sevak Manjikian, Neil Caplan and Maureen Jones, outside Vanier College following their March 16 presentation.
*** Vanier College students in Religious Studies course taught by Prof. Sevak Manjikian, on right.