From my Academia.edu web page

Religion & Society in the Atlantic World edit delete

Friday, August 06, 2010

This book is being created from the ground up as an interactive, multi-media ebook.  I see writing as concentric spheres, overlapping and separate at other points that readers will surf through to think and comprehend, rather than merely understand. 

The intellectual foundation for this book length essay is a study of three particular concentric circles:

1. The interactions of religion - both institutional and the beliefs of followers - with the institutional structures of societies in the Atlantic world and their cultures (anthropologically defined).

2. A concept I label 'dis-integration' - the change from an integration of religion into daily life and its apparent (though this will be debated in the work) removal, or dis-integration in the present day.

3. A consideration of the place of the 'other' in the societies under consideration.

I list these as discrete points here, which serves to emphasize my contention that this is an inadequate technique for analysis of religion and society - that the use of interactive multimedia technology in the writing process will allow me to show the nuances and points of integration among these themes by using the technique of concentric, spheres populated with points of reference in the Atlantic world.

The book is mapped out in three dimensional form with preliminary secondary reading done, and intensive secondary reading begun. 

I hope to  hit the archives soon!

The Media and Religion and History

Last evening I caught bit and pieces of a story [I was going to say 'documentary', but as you will see, 'story', is a more accurate label] on CNN about the current Catholic Pope.  [To understand why I say 'Catholic Pope'  start with this link:  Coptic Pope ]

Journalism ideally is about presenting facts to the general public of a democracy so that citizens can then decide on issues of the day.  What journalism is in practice these days anyway is entertainment.  Journalists and their owners in television, radio, newspapers and the net present stories that will titillate, interest, entertain as many viewers as possible.  Fact and balance are employed only in the rare instances where these approaches might be entertaining, and usually with a superficial nod to balance by quick interviews with opposing viewpoints, buried far into the story, and passed over quickly.

As for history, this is usually omitted entirely, or utilised where it serves the purposes of increasing audience and thus advertising dollars.  The media, I might add parenthetically, is immune to the sorts of criticism it levels at others, because it will not train its guns on its own.

Why is it important to have an historical perspective on religion, as an issue?  Well, history provides depth - not just a three dimensional understanding of anything, but a four dimensional understanding.  I do not think it too egregious a claim to say that no concept, issue, event, thing in this world can be approached with any hope of a full and deep understanding without adding in history - that is, without showing how a concept, issue, event, thing came to be as they are in the present.

So, CNN.  Their report was, as is so sadly typical, a polemic and not a presentation of fact.  I will not go here into all the details that irritated, but alas, did not surprise me - but will note that any sense of  history was missing entirely from the report. The issue was presented as though the world had appeared roughly five minutes ago, fully formed as we see it now.

Ted

Wikipedia etc.

Earlier in this blog I posted an entry on the use of Wikipedia.. and in fact, all encyclopedias and dictionaries as sources for essays, and essay answers on exams..... I am going to repost it to the course sites for this term.  Wikipedia has a bad reputation among  most [but not all] scholars because it can be altered by anyone at any time.  But..... that does not mean it is unusable......

Ted

Name Change and new members to be welcomed

I have decided to change the name of this blog as I will invite members from the other two history of religion courses I teach currently.  So, welcome to students in the Fall semester of Hist2260DE Religion & Society in the Modern World at the U of Guelph, and students in AHSS2360  Judaism, Christianity & Islam at the University of Guelph/Humber.

Ted

Final post for this Term

Ok!  the final exam is submitted and what will be, will be now..... Che sera sera in the words of the 1956 song by Doris Day....   and here I will break my own rule and give you the wikipedia reference!

Que sera sera

I hope that 20 years from now some of you..  and possibly each of you will have gained some understanding of religion from this term's work.

I haven't managed to post much on the blog.. it was an idea I had late in the term.  But I will continue posting here as I am intending to improve and re-work much of the coursework for Hist2070DE. Future students will have the dubious delight of seeing me in videos .....  Anyone who wishes to stay here .. or to join the facebook group  History of Religion at the U of Guelph
may do so freely.  I am in the early stages writing a book on the relationship between religion and society - though restricted to the Atlantic world -- and will also post comments on that project as I proceed.

Good luck for the future....

ted

wikipedia, dictionary, encyclopedia

We are all tempted to use encyclopedias, dictionaries...... and yes, quelle horreur!!! ...even wikipedia when writing essays or posting to a discussion group.


So I thought I would say a few words on these resources.  Unlike many instructors I do not entirely disparage wikipedia... but the caution I will post here applies to it as well as more usual encyclopedias and dictionaries.  


All three of the resources are useful ONLY to give a you quick background into a topic which is unfamiliar... but none of them should be used to prove a point in an essay or in a discussion.  The reason for this has nothing to do with how rigorously the facts in each type of source are checked and double-checked.   The basic problem with them as source is they are syntheses of the work of many scholars... and often will give you only one version on a debatable topic - and you may not be able to trace which part of each article was written by which scholar.  Wikipedia has additional problems in that it is rarely double and triple checked and is only rarely produced by scholars who are trained to think carefully and speak only when they have checked as many sources as possible.  Wikipedia does have the strength that often it lists scholarly sources at the bottom of the article....


So use wikipedia!  Use standard encyclopedias!  Use dictionaries!  


BUT  only to give yourself a quick overview of a topic  - then go to scholarly sources for your essay or discussion posting.


Ted

Architecture and Religion

In the discussion just finished, I asked  if social and cultural differences can be seen in architecture and then rephrased this to ask if you can tell anything about a society from its religious architecture.... 

One student said "No"  (well, actually his answer was a bit longer than this one word..but the essence was 'No').

This is a fair answer.. and has caused me to think about the  role of architecture, indeed of material culture in general  plays in society - is it intrinsic, is it an emanation, an outgrowth of particular cultures... or is it merely different as a result of practical considerations - material available, the state of engineering knowledge, labour supply , and so on....

ted