SCIENTIFIC AND RELIGIOUS APPROACHES TO MORALITY: AN ALTERNATIVE TO MUTUAL ANATHEMAS

Abstract Many people today believe that scientific and religious approaches to morality are mutually incompatible. Militant secularists claim scientific backing for their claim that the evolution of morality discredits religious conceptions of ethics. Some of their opponents respond with unhelpful apologetics based on fundamentalist views of revelation. This article attempts to provide an alternative option. It argues that public discussion has been excessively influenced by polemics generated by the new atheists. Religious writers have too often resorted to overly simplistic arguments rooted in literalist approaches to the Bible and the religious traditions. More historically conscious methods can avoid implausible claims about both religion and science.     

Religion and Whites’ Attitudes Toward Interracial Marriage with African Americans,Asians, and Latinos

Religious factors have been shown to influence whites’ attitudes toward interracial marriage, but this relationship has yet to be studied in depth. This study examines how religious affiliation, beliefs, practices, and congregational composition affect whites’ attitudes toward interracial marriage with African Americans, Asians, and Latinos. Employing data from Wave 2 of the Baylor Religion Survey, I estimate ordered logit regression models to examine the influence of religious factors on whites’ attitudes toward racial exogamy, net of sociodemographic controls. Analyses reveal that, relative to evangelicals, religiously unaffiliated whites report greater support of intermarriage with all minority groups. Biblical literalists are less likely to support interracial marriage to Asians and Latinos. However, whites who frequently engage in devotional religious practices are more likely to support interracial marriage with all racial groups, as are whites who attend multiracial congregations. My findings suggest that the relationship between religion and whites’ attitudes toward racial exogamy is more complex than previously thought and that the influence of religious practices and congregational composition should not be overlooked.     

Does the Bible Tell Me So? Weighing the Influence of Content versus Bias on Bible Interpretation Using Survey Experiments

Discussions of biblical interpretation often proceed under one of two assumptions. Readers’ interpretations are primarily formed (1) inductively, according to the Bible's objective content, or (2) through the lens of preformed ideologies and biases. We assessed the influence of these two factors using two survey experiments with undergraduates. In study 1 (N = 214), participants were randomly assigned one of two nearly identical translations of Ephesians 5:22-28 (a famous passage describing gendered marital submission), with the only difference being that one translation included verse 21 in which Christians are told to “submit to one another.” Participants did not perceive a different message about gendered submission between translations, nor were they more likely to interpret either as misogynistic. However, gender ideology and religious importance did predict interpretation. Study 2 (N = 217) essentially replicated study 1 (using different translations of Ephesians 5:21-28), but one version replaced all “subjection” language with “commitment” language. Participants were significantly more likely to perceive a complementarian message from the translation that referenced “subjection” and they were also more likely to perceive it as misogynistic. Again, gender ideology and religious characteristics predicted interpretation. Findings suggest bias shapes interpretation, but more extreme content modifications (e.g., removing/changing key terms) can also influence interpretation.     

RELIGIOUS LITERALISM AND SCIENCE‐RELATED ISSUES IN CONTEMPORARY ISLAM

The complex relations between Islam and modern science have so far mostly been examined by thinkers at the conceptual level. The wider interaction of religious scholars and preachers with the general public on science issues is an unexplored area that is worthy of examination, for it often is characterized by a literalistic approach. I first briefly review literalism in its various forms. The classical Islamic jurisprudential school of Zahirism, widely regarded as bearing the flag of juristic literalism, is also briefly presented. I then address specific science‐related issues currently being discussed in literalistic ways by many religious scholars and preachers in their general‐public discourse. I focus on the practical case of the determination of crescent‐based Islamic months and holy occasions, the conceptual issue of evolution (biological and human), and the rule for the consumption of meat by slaughter of animals. In the last part of the essay I propose a constructive alternative to the literalistic mode: the Maqasidi (objectives‐based) approach. This rather old method has seen some revival lately, mainly among Islamic jurists concerned with solving the new issues of modern times, especially for Muslims living in the West, but this approach has not yet been applied to science‐related issues. I present the main ideas of this method and show their relevance and usefulness to science‐related topics.