7min 21sec clip - Why the world is going crazy—and how to win back our minds | Jamie Wheal | Big Think

2min 38sec @TheEconomist clip - #Religion, #faith and the role they play today

Text from youtube "Religion and faith are an integral part of people’s lives worldwide. But in many countries the number of people who believe in God is in decline. We examine the changing role of religion around the world

The majority of Americans believe in God. But it’s a different story in Britain where, in 2009, people of no religion outnumbered Christian’s for the first time. And it’s not the only country where religion is in decline.

In Israel, only 39% of the population consider themselves a religious person. In Norway it’s 30%, in Japan just 13%. But China surpasses them all.

Only 9% of Chinese people report themselves as being religious and the majority say they are committed atheists, making China the least religious country in the world. But how reliable are the polls in China? The communist government is officially atheist and religious freedom is restricted in the country. So it’s likely that many Chinese people, who hold religious beliefs, do not report it.

But, globally the picture is very different. 

84% of the world’s population say they are affiliated to a religious group. Around 7% are Buddhist. 15% are Hindu. 24% are Muslim. But the largest religious group are Christian, making up nearly a third of the world’s 7.5 billion people.

But this is set to change. It’s predicted there will be almost as many Muslim’s as Christians by 2050. This is because Muslims on average are younger than members of other religions, and they have more children. This has made Islam the fastest growing religion in the world.

The religious profile of the world is changing, but even in areas where religious affiliation is declining, spirituality is not.

America has become less religious in recent years, but the percentage of non-religious Americans who say they often feel spiritual has risen.

Globally 15% of atheists believe in life after death - So if faith deserts you here, there’s always the hereafter.

2min 38sec @theeconomist clip - Religion, faith and the role they play today

Religion has been described as designed to ...

1min 10sec @wef clip - which #religions are #growing the fastest

10 useful links (no. 19) - online museums, courses, sign builder, endangered sounds and more ...

earth & the moon from mars

links to the previous 18 lists are at the foot of this post

12 World-Class Museums You Can Visit Online - found via mentalfloss

power searching courses with google

a tool to search twitter - via a tweet from @readywriting found via @jess1ecat

facebook for non profits - found via steven.fogg

13 cheap or free digital skill courses

bbc academy - short instructional video clips on journalism, tv

chrome sign builder - found via church communications fb group

Gmailify, a new service that provides Gmail features to non-Gmail email accounts - found via laughing squid

museum of endangered sounds

free online courses - world religions through their scriptures

Previous 10 Useful Links posts 

No.'s 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18

everybody else is #wrong - or not

found via @StBridesLpool

It looks like this generation of #politicians "do religion"

Back in 2003 the Telegraph reported that "Alastair Campbell, Tony Blair's director of strategy and communications, intervened in a recent interview to prevent the Prime Minister from answering a question about his Christianity. "We don't do God," Mr Campbell interrupted".

But the times they appear to be changing - at least if you look at the various political party leaders' easter messages below.

Now it might be a sign of old age but I can't remember this level of Easter messaging going on before from UK political parties.  Which  - if true - raises the obvious question of what has changed? - some possible answers are ....

A) the next election is going to be very tight - religious affiliation is higher amongst older voters whose turnout rates at elections to vote is higher than younger people

B) the political parties have finally worked out that atheists are not a significant % of the population whereas agnostics or faith professing individuals are

C) like much else our politics is becoming americanized



whatever you think here are those happy easter messages

1st we had David Cameron's 9/4/14 happy easter message

then there was Nick Clegg's 14/4/14 happy easter message



then there was Ed Milliband's 18/4/14 Easter message  (I couldn't find a too camera piece)

then there was Nigel Farage on ITV's Daybreak saying Cameron was mimicking what Ukip had been saying for years (Telegraph article here),

#10 things you may not know about #Voting & #Values & #Religion in #Britain

ht microsoft clipart for the image

This excellent @theosthinktank report - Voting & Values in Britain - Does Religion Count? by Ben Spender and Nick Clements has just come out and an Executive Summary is online to download on their research page 

In summary what it says is:



1) Self-identifying Anglicans are more likely to vote Conservative;

2) Self-identifying Catholics prefer to vote Labour;

3) Self-identifying Non-Conformists have a marginally stronger association with the 3rd party;

4) The Muslim vote favoured Labour;

5) The Jewish vote was more Conservative;

6) The Hindu vote tended to Labour but in 2010 was more balanced;

7) The Sikh vote was evenly split between the 2 main parties;

8) The Buddhist vote was disproportionately for the Liberal Democrats;

9) Values voting issues like sexuality, abortion or family were mentioned by few respondents;

10) Public opinion is: firmly against more tax and spend; more authoritarian than libertarian; moving away from welfarism to individualism.



For the various caveats and nuances around these statements please see the Executive Summary

#science, #religion and #bigbang

via brainpickings

london mayor candidates on religion

what limits to religious freedom?

why I hate religion, but love jesus by jefferson-bethke

What if I told you, Jesus came to abolish religion?

What if I told you getting you to vote republican, really wasn’t his mission?

Because republican doesn’t automatically mean Christian,

And just because you call some people blind, doesn’t automatically give you vision.

If religion is so great, why has it started so many wars?

Why does it build huge churches, but fails to feed the poor?

Tells single moms God doesn’t love them if they’ve ever been divorced

Yet God in the Old Testament actually calls the religious people whores

Religion preaches grace, but another thing they practice,

Tend to ridicule Gods people, they did it to John the Baptist,

Cant fix their problems, so they try to mask it,

Not realizing that’s just like sprayin perfume on a casket

Because the problem with religion is that it never gets to the core,

It’s just behavior modification, like a long list of chores.

Let’s dress up the outside, make things look nice and neat,

Its funny that’s what they do to mummies, while the corpse rots underneath,

Now I ain’t judging I’m just saying be careful of putting on a fake look,

Because there’s a problem if people only know that you’re a Christian by that little section on your facebook

In every other aspect of life you know that logics unworthy

Its like saying you play for the lakers just because you bought a jersey

But see I played this game too; no one seemed to be on to me,

I was acting like church kid, while addicted to pornography.

I’d go to church on Sunday, but on saturday getting faded,

Acting as if I was simply created to have sex and get wasted.

Spend my whole life putting on this façade of neatness,

But now that I know Jesus, I boast in my weakness.

If grace is water, then the church should be an ocean,

Cuz its not a museum for good people, it’s a hospital for the broken

I no longer have to hide my failures I don’t have to hide my sin,

Because my salvation doesn’t depend on me, it depends on him.

because when I was Gods enemy and certainly not a fan,

God looked down on me and said, “I want that man!”

Which is so different from religious people, and why Jesus called em fools

Don’t you see hes so much better than just following some rules?

Now let me clarify, I love the church, I love the bible, and I believe in sin

But my question, is if Jesus were here today, would your church let Him in?

Remember He was called a drunkard and a glutton by  “religious men”

The Son of God not supported self-righteousness, not now, not then.

Now back to the topic, one thing I think is vital to mention,

How Jesus and religion are on opposite spectrums,

One is the work of God one is a man made invention,

One is the cure and one is the infection.

Because Religion says do, Jesus says done.

Religion says slave, Jesus says son,

Religion puts you in shackles but Jesus sets you free.

Religion makes you blind, but Jesus lets you see.

This is what makes religion and Jesus two different clans,

Religion is man searching for God, but Christianity is God searching for man.

Which is why salvation is freely mine, forgiveness is my own,

Not based on my efforts, but Christ’s obedience alone.

Because he took the crown of thorns, and blood that dripped down his face

He took what we all deserved, that’s why we call it grace.

While being murdered he yelled “father forgive them, they know not what they do”,

Because when he was dangling on that cross, he was thinking of you

He paid for all your sin, and then buried it in the tomb,

Which is why im kneeling at the cross now saying come on there’s room

So know I hate religion, in fact I literally resent it,

Because when Jesus cried It is finished, I believe He meant it.


jeff's thoughts on all this following the clip being viewed 19 million times

religion matters

at least according to this  ipsos mori poll it does 

in summary the poll says:

 - 7 in 10 people say they have a religion & most see it as important in their lives; 

- 94% of those with a religion in primarily muslim counties say it's important in their lives (66% in christian majority countries;

- 3 in 10 people with a religion/faith say that religion motivates them to give their time or money to people in need. 

so it looks as though understanding something about religion might be an important step for politicians or other leaders who want to represent their communities

(here are the slides)

do religious people do all citizenish things better than secular people?

according to this article robert putnam, harvard professor of public policy, thinks religious people do citizenish things better than secular people, from giving, to voting, to volunteering. moreover, they offer their money and time to everyone, regardless of whether they belong to their religious group.
he believes the relationship is causal, not just a correlation and it's not to do with belief, but with being part of a community of belief.



he doesn't know what makes faith communities civically exceptional. not even networks of environmentalists, that share interests beyond themselves too, score so well.

putnam thinks that the evidence shows the link between civic engagement and religiosity in the uk is pretty much the same as in the US, notwithstanding that british religiosity is obviously far less pronounced

(sadly what isn't linked to in the article is the source material that leads robert to these conclusions - although the biog link above does say he is currently working on three major empirical projects: (1) the changing role of religion in contemporary America, (2) the effects of workplace practices on family and community life, and (3) practical strategies for civic renewal in the US in the context of immigration and social and ethnic diversity)

found via respublica.org.uk

science and religion

this article by martin rees on the new statesman website (found via john brockman ) is interesting  

in it martin rees explains how he focuses on the big questions (via cosmology) unlike many scientists who focus on "bite-sized" problems that are timely and tractable (but they then run the risk of losing sight of the big picture) 

he goes on to say that we should all oppose - as darwin did - views manifestly in conflict with the evidence, such as creationism, but that he thinks the debate between science and religion should be constructive rather than antagonistic.  

he takes this view partly because we should all be dubious of any claim to have achieved more than a very incomplete and metaphorical insight into any profound aspect of our existence.

religion and the internet conference

i attended  this RSA/tony blair faith foundation/durham university event in london today. many thanks to them for organising a thought provoking event, - generally a no. of speakers mentioned the need for better robust research to test the arguments being put forward on this subject.

other summary and reflections on the day and the subject

pmphilips  - director of research, CODEC

twitter  - search for the hashtag #faith2point0

RSA - material is here

digitalnun - reflections on the day

boldcreative's - report on the conference is here

the guardian newspaper - has an article on this issue

tallskinnykiwi - has a summary

vitually islamic  - round up

sara batts - summary

dr john sentamu - on should christians use the internet

krish kandiah - 10 questions for exploring the implications of social media

a post on experimental theology muses on the spirituality of iphones, mobile computing and web2 generally

a post by marika rose on religious-ness of our relationship to technology

davidhousholder's post on open source church
a post from me - on reflections from a how human are robots rsa lecture
vatican bloggers conference - from blue eyed ennis' view

my attempt @ a summary from my perspective and my partial notes is below ......

identity - points made

– several speakers touched on whether there are differences (i think at least 2 speakers actually saw very close similarities) between our online and offline identities in terms of the words we use, the groups we join, and whether we only interact with those similar to ourselves.

- one speaker pointed out that many of us have multiple online identities    (different email/bank/website accounts) “i am many things but they are all me”. perhaps these can be seen as “cultural expressions of me”. 

- even after death our online identity remains – dorian grey like.

- on the internet the individual tends to be at the centre, not the group or organisation hierarchy.

- what is done online was seen to impact offline identity and vice-versa. a story was told of the impact of one partner bringing their mobile device into their and their partners bedroom.

- is it right to remain anonymous (or pseudonymous taking a churchmouse tweet) or should we link our other identities to the real us?

- anonymity is an advantage in certain almost confessional online interfaces.

- individual’s values are what drives people’s behaviours – often learnt in communities.

characteristics of the internet medium  - points made

– it has the power we give it.

- non verbal signals are not present.

- the internet was seen to focus voices and amplify the extreme.

- public discussions can sanitize what is said (point from q&a).

- sites do seek to maximise their search ranking – so high ranking is an indicator of their success at that – not trustworthiness.

 - in the Q&A somebody made a point that commercially motivated organisations provide the tools we use on the internet and so their focus is on monetising our usage in some manner, which affects the medium and interface.

- it has the characteristics of a space (how enter, access, where allowed, public, private, what is the norm, what is allowed etc. etc.).

- much of what is put online remains online as a record. 

- people say things online they would not do face to face. 

- an e.g. was given of younger people @ a restaurant physically together but all interacting with their internet networks via phones.

- internet heightens reflexivity and generally acts as a catalyst or accelerator.

- whilst its inherent individualism and globilisation perspectives subtly alter those who use it (the e.g. of diaspora was used).

-. there was also discussion about whether our typically linear way of thinking could utilise the internet’s lateral capabilities.

- information is not knowledge or faith yet often those who google research think they have understanding without having done any solid homework.

- websites have 15 seconds to catch our attention.

- an example of the use of avatars in a virtual world was given, where interfaces between avatars had the advantage of recorded conversation (so misunderstandings could be corrected factually) plus no chance of physical violence.

- the individualism focus can lead to an inward ghetto focus for groups,

- it is easy to stereotype certain groups.  an e.g. of this was how the last session on extremism panned out - limited time and the subject guidance given to speakers plus no muslim panelist due to sickness led to a lack of nuance and breadth in the characterisation of islam presented  - plus no extremism examples from other faiths – this was not what was intended by the presenters, but it plainly managed to offend a number of people in the audience (my observation – how similar is this shortness of time in both presenting messages and considering them a characteristic also of internet interactions?)

 

community, group and authority  - points made

- internet doesn’t create communities – people do.

 - faith has become more influential (not less as predicted in 70’s/80’s).

- is internet a community destroyer or just networked individualism?

- the individualism focus of the internet can lead to an inward facing self conversational focus for groups.

- the internet has a flattening effect on hierarchies (the e.g. was given of patients self diagnosing via google and then inputting that to their conversation with their medical dr.) 

- in the usa mega churches use virtual mortar to joins multi site congregations.

- there were also several conversations of how younger people’s multi-tasking was seen as lack of attention/respect by those older (my observation – maybe the parents of those born in the 60's would say their children could multi-task - watch tv and chat - so maybe teenagers today just have a more advanced version of that ability learnt through their childhood interactions?).

– in many religions authority is with those in positions of power and knowledge with resources (so typically religions have used expensive buildings as part of their identity). 

- the internet allows faith groups to form without them needing as much power, knowledge or resources as doing such in the offline world needs.

- it also allows individuals to more easily challenge, question and push at the boundaries that their particular faith group might have – or to re-align with those within such faith groups who share such challenges.

- cohesion doesn’t mean sameness.

 - the stereotypical presentation of faith groups may contain some truths – but what we share is our common humanity (under god for monotheistic religions).

- different levels of closeness exist in an cloistered community dependent on commitment levels (from novice upwards) and replicating such in the level of internet access given to such communities was given as an e.g.

- the internet can be used to capture and curate tradition and older community members wisdom.

- an e.g. was given of london’s east end community cohesiveness coming from the fact that the area’s multi-faith communities mean many people are members of a faith group and so used to belonging to something.

- the virtual is better than nothing at all for those alone.

- real community and god can’t be escaped – unlike the virtual world.