What if religion was taken more seriously during the Iranian revolution in 1979? There are scholars who argue that it would have made a difference in international relations. These so-called ‘religionists’ argue that religion has unfortunately been neglected by International Relations. In their view, religion has never disappeared and it could even be argued that religion has seen a resurgence since the late 1960s. Why, therefore, has religion not been incorporated into theories of international relations? This book provides a critical reconstruction of the position of these religionists. It investigates how Hans Morgenthau’s classical realism and Kenneth Waltz’s neorealism deal with religion. Do these theories indeed ignore religion? Do they ignore it for the reasons put forward by the religionists? The conclusion is that the religionists quite convincingly argue for the importance and relevance of religion in international relations. However, the reasons given do not do justice to Morgenthau's classical realism and Waltz's neorealism, as they overlook the theological inspiration (Augustine and Niebuhr) of political realism and the importance of theorizing. As a result of an evaluation of both positions, this book presents an alternative approach inspired by the Amsterdam School of Philosophy, called a new Christian political realism. It incorporates the theological inspiration of political realism and the necessity of theorizing while doing justice to the relevance and manifold manifestations of religion in international relations.
Reflecting on the link between religion and religious tradition(s) on the one hand and school and education on the other, and reflecting on the reasoning strategy to make sense of this link, people seem to tend strongly to think, argue and reflect in a deductive mode (this point is elaborated in par. 3). This part of the argument is followed by considering the religious claims people make concerning the impact of religion on the day-to-day educational practice, it is, empirically speaking. It is apparently wrong to take this deductive reasoning serious as a road to undisputable and unambiguous links between claims and practices (this point is elaborated in par. 4). Having identified deductive reasoning as wishful thinking or as a supposed but inadequate religious legitimatization of educational practices, which is demonstrated by the empirical educational praxis itself, the final part of the article deals with the question that arises again and anew, viz. how educational practices could be understood in their connection to religious beliefs (see par. 5). Here a paradigm-shift is needed.
Social workers nowadays are confronted with recurrent issues about religion and spirituality when in contact with diverse client groups. This was also the case in the beginning of the profession around 1900, in Europe as well as in the US. This study analyses the work of a Dutch pioneer in social work, Marie Muller-Lulofs (1854–1954) and presents the religious and worldview aspects of her reflections on social work. Her standard work Van mensch tot mensch (From person to person) of 1916 forms the basic text for theory-driven content analysis by applying the seven-dimension model of worldview of Ninian Smart: doctrine/philosophy, organisations, ethics, stories, experiences, rituals and materials. Results show that Muller-Lulofs makes a strong plea for a secular profession. Social-economic approaches are on the foreground. And yet, the methods, skills and professional attitudes she describes are substantially accounted for in religious and spiritual terms. This is mainly done by introducing narratives and metaphors derived from Christian and Buddhist traditions. It is concluded that Muller-Lulofs uses religion and spirituality in a non-dogmatic and non-prescriptive way, but as a source of inspiration to underpin the new profession. Her approach is relevant for current issues in social work in multicultural societies.
LINK
