by Theo » Thu Oct 31, 2019 3:42 pm
> uneducated on religion or smart on it
Increasingly, more and more people in Europe and the US are raised in irreligious households. It's become much more common for parents to raise their children in a secular manner because the parents themselves are not very religious in the first place (see here for some studies on how much parenting impacts the religiosity of children - it plays a huge role). We don't really expect a secular family to raise their child with religion, and thus don't expect said child to grow up with religion in the household.
In addition, for the US (and I presume also for Europe, but I can't comment definitively), STEM is continuously taking over the Liberal Arts since college is now seen as a gateway into a career, rather than as a tool for deep learning. High schools and colleges are consistently cutting liberal arts programs, going so far as to remove entire History departments all together. Some of the most prestigious American Liberal Arts colleges, like Amherst College (which is ranked as one of the best liberal arts colleges in all of America), are now suffering from a loss of interest from students and thus are struggling to stay financially afloat. Every year, several liberal arts colleges across the US will announce that they are having money woes or their closure.
How is this related to your question? It means that there are no areas for your typical Gen-Z or Millenial to learn about religion in a meaningful sense. They won't learn it in the household because their parents won't teach them. Their primary school won't teach it because almost no US states require religion as part of a mandatory curriculum (and those that offer classes are typically only available as electives or advanced classes). And students who are increasingly seeking STEM degrees for sake of the a good paycheck (which they can't be blamed for, of course) won't generally receive a great Liberal Arts education alongside their STEM degree. Yes, they'll take a history course or two as required by the school, but nothing more advanced than that, generally.
Therefore, for the average non-religious individual, the only way for them to get a religious education is through self-education. They have to study it on their own because no one else will teach them. Ergo, most non-religious (atheists, Nones, agnostics) will be ignorant of the Bible and of religion more broadly. True, they might know the very basics like Jesus being the Messiah, Muslims having the Quran, and Jews celebrating Hanukkah, but we generally wouldn't expect much else because these individuals are, quite obviously, too busy with life to teach themselves religion in any meaningful sense.
This ignorance on the non-religious persons' part is not their fault, which I would like to strongly emphasize. They have no control over how their parents raise them or what classes are offered at the high school and college level. They have no control over the secular culture they inherit.
Now, you might counter, "but people are searching up all these religious argumentations online. But I think you have to take a step back and ponder on how your average individual is using the Internet in general. For example, look at the top selling apps in the Apple App Store or Google Play Store. What are they, generally? Games and social media or other forms of entertainment. The top selling apps aren't anything educational (on religion or otherwise), but are Facebook, Instagram, YouTube, and a few games like Candy Crush. Your average person isn't reading a lengthy peer-reviewed paper on their phone as they lay in bed at night: they're flicking through their Twitter or Reddit feed, or maybe watching Netflix. Just compare the view counts to the latest music video on YouTube to any popular atheist vs. theist debate. The difference is staggering: billions compared to a maybe a million. Go on YouTube and look up lectures posted by actual religious studies academics who actually know what they're talking about and are employed by Harvard, Yale, or similar ivy league schools: the view counts tend to be less than 10,000, if even that.
Run a quick search on popular atheist forums for some of the most well known philosophers of religion - William James, Charles Taylor, Max Weber, Whitehead, Hegel, Plato, Aquinas etc - you'll generally come up empty, even though these are exactly the type of individuals anyone interested in learning religion maturely (academically) should study
So, what I'm trying to get at is that is true the majority of the populace is not well versed on religion in any meaningful (keyword: meaningful) sense, no more than your average person walking around the streets is well versed on Quantum Theory or the history of their own country. Yes, they know the basics they learned in first grade, but after that? Probably not anything substantial.
All that being said: I believe our environment shapes our understanding of ourselves, and that our consciousness is informed by those we interact with, and that our ideas aren't "our" ideas because we inherit them from others, much like Hegel argued. The relevance here is that the majority of non-religious have their irreligiousity informed by their environment - that is, we live in a "secular age," and most of those who are secular became such because the culture they live in is individualist, secular, consumerist, etc. That is, they don't actually choose to be secular, but simply become such due to the milieux they inhabit. I don't necessarily blame them for that.
> uneducated on religion or smart on it
Increasingly, more and more people in Europe and the US are raised in irreligious households. It's become much more common for parents to raise their children in a secular manner because the parents themselves are not very religious in the first place (see here for some studies on how much parenting impacts the religiosity of children - it plays a huge role). We don't really expect a secular family to raise their child with religion, and thus don't expect said child to grow up with religion in the household.
In addition, for the US (and I presume also for Europe, but I can't comment definitively), STEM is continuously taking over the Liberal Arts since college is now seen as a gateway into a career, rather than as a tool for deep learning. High schools and colleges are consistently cutting liberal arts programs, going so far as to remove entire History departments all together. Some of the most prestigious American Liberal Arts colleges, like Amherst College (which is ranked as one of the best liberal arts colleges in all of America), are now suffering from a loss of interest from students and thus are struggling to stay financially afloat. Every year, several liberal arts colleges across the US will announce that they are having money woes or their closure.
How is this related to your question? It means that there are no areas for your typical Gen-Z or Millenial to learn about religion in a meaningful sense. They won't learn it in the household because their parents won't teach them. Their primary school won't teach it because almost no US states require religion as part of a mandatory curriculum (and those that offer classes are typically only available as electives or advanced classes). And students who are increasingly seeking STEM degrees for sake of the a good paycheck (which they can't be blamed for, of course) won't generally receive a great Liberal Arts education alongside their STEM degree. Yes, they'll take a history course or two as required by the school, but nothing more advanced than that, generally.
Therefore, for the average non-religious individual, the only way for them to get a religious education is through self-education. They have to study it on their own because no one else will teach them. Ergo, most non-religious (atheists, Nones, agnostics) will be ignorant of the Bible and of religion more broadly. True, they might know the very basics like Jesus being the Messiah, Muslims having the Quran, and Jews celebrating Hanukkah, but we generally wouldn't expect much else because these individuals are, quite obviously, too busy with life to teach themselves religion in any meaningful sense.
This ignorance on the non-religious persons' part is not their fault, which I would like to strongly emphasize. They have no control over how their parents raise them or what classes are offered at the high school and college level. They have no control over the secular culture they inherit.
Now, you might counter, "but people are searching up all these religious argumentations online. But I think you have to take a step back and ponder on how your average individual is using the Internet in general. For example, look at the top selling apps in the Apple App Store or Google Play Store. What are they, generally? Games and social media or other forms of entertainment. The top selling apps aren't anything educational (on religion or otherwise), but are Facebook, Instagram, YouTube, and a few games like Candy Crush. Your average person isn't reading a lengthy peer-reviewed paper on their phone as they lay in bed at night: they're flicking through their Twitter or Reddit feed, or maybe watching Netflix. Just compare the view counts to the latest music video on YouTube to any popular atheist vs. theist debate. The difference is staggering: billions compared to a maybe a million. Go on YouTube and look up lectures posted by actual religious studies academics who actually know what they're talking about and are employed by Harvard, Yale, or similar ivy league schools: the view counts tend to be less than 10,000, if even that.
Run a quick search on popular atheist forums for some of the most well known philosophers of religion - William James, Charles Taylor, Max Weber, Whitehead, Hegel, Plato, Aquinas etc - you'll generally come up empty, even though these are exactly the type of individuals anyone interested in learning religion maturely (academically) should study
So, what I'm trying to get at is that is true the majority of the populace is not well versed on religion in any meaningful (keyword: meaningful) sense, no more than your average person walking around the streets is well versed on Quantum Theory or the history of their own country. Yes, they know the basics they learned in first grade, but after that? Probably not anything substantial.
All that being said: I believe our environment shapes our understanding of ourselves, and that our consciousness is informed by those we interact with, and that our ideas aren't "our" ideas because we inherit them from others, much like Hegel argued. The relevance here is that the majority of non-religious have their irreligiousity informed by their environment - that is, we live in a "secular age," and most of those who are secular became such because the culture they live in is individualist, secular, consumerist, etc. That is, they don't actually choose to be secular, but simply become such due to the milieux they inhabit. I don't necessarily blame them for that.