Tolerance as a substitute for religion?
Dec. 2nd, 2010 10:59 am![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
erratio Here's an interesting pattern:
Generation 1: Highly religious, highly insular. People who aren't part of the faith are inferior/damned/the enemy. Possibly all three simultaneously.
Generation 2: Moderately religious, highly insular. People who aren't part of the faith aren't 'one of us' but they have some good points, I guess. Just don't go marrying one of them.
Generation 3: Moderately to non-religious, moderately insular. Other people can believe whatever they want, but people like us should still identify with each other and our religion more than with outsiders.
Generation 4: Mostly non-religious, moderately to non-insular. Belief is a personal thing and largely taboo to talk about. People shouldn't choose who they associate with on the basis of their religion.
Generation 5: Woah, you still care about religion? What a weirdo.
What I'm wondering here is:
* Is that pattern actually correct? Or at least largely correct. My own family has Gen 2 in my grandmother, Gen 2.5 in my mother, and Gen 4 in me (Gen 5 is my sister)
* Did the rise of tolerance cause the weakening religious ties or is it another factor controlling both, like increased personal prosperity or greater multiculturalism?
* Regardless of the historical cause of the decline of religion, can teaching tolerance weaken religious ties? It seems like it might, since the 'everyone's belief is personal' meme implies that religion shouldn't be taken any more seriously than any other subjective opinion about the world. And unlike political opinions we don't have to make regular semi-important choices based on our religious affiliation.
Generation 1: Highly religious, highly insular. People who aren't part of the faith are inferior/damned/the enemy. Possibly all three simultaneously.
Generation 2: Moderately religious, highly insular. People who aren't part of the faith aren't 'one of us' but they have some good points, I guess. Just don't go marrying one of them.
Generation 3: Moderately to non-religious, moderately insular. Other people can believe whatever they want, but people like us should still identify with each other and our religion more than with outsiders.
Generation 4: Mostly non-religious, moderately to non-insular. Belief is a personal thing and largely taboo to talk about. People shouldn't choose who they associate with on the basis of their religion.
Generation 5: Woah, you still care about religion? What a weirdo.
What I'm wondering here is:
* Is that pattern actually correct? Or at least largely correct. My own family has Gen 2 in my grandmother, Gen 2.5 in my mother, and Gen 4 in me (Gen 5 is my sister)
* Did the rise of tolerance cause the weakening religious ties or is it another factor controlling both, like increased personal prosperity or greater multiculturalism?
* Regardless of the historical cause of the decline of religion, can teaching tolerance weaken religious ties? It seems like it might, since the 'everyone's belief is personal' meme implies that religion shouldn't be taken any more seriously than any other subjective opinion about the world. And unlike political opinions we don't have to make regular semi-important choices based on our religious affiliation.
