A religion’s violence depends on context, not inherent character

Evidence

The entire argument in this book can be summarized in eight interrelated principles. … 2. Religion is more in the situation than in the person. … 5. Religious actions speak louder than words. … 8. Religious groups cooperate in order to compete. — Norenzayan, Ara, Big gods - how religion transformed…, 19 (#corroborates, via linked claim)

It followed from this that Islam, as defined by its classical texts, was the key lens through which Muslim-majority societies could be understood. If women were oppressed it was because of the teachings of the Koran; if Muslims supposedly lacked an entrepreneurial spirit it was due to “Islamic tradition”; if modernization was rejected, again the Koran was to blame. In short, a whole host of characteristics associated with the West but allegedly absent from the “Muslim world” could be explained by recourse to religious texts and the mentalities they supposedly created. In this book, the term “Muslim world” has been put in quotation marks precisely to challenge the notion that Islam is the single most important factor in defining the people who live in the Middle East, North Africa, and elsewhere, or that there is a single undifferentiated entity called the “Muslim world.” — Deepa Kumar, Islamophobia and the Politics of Empire, 123 (#corroborates, via linked claim)

Categorization

  • XREF: connects to: Religion factors into most wars but rarely causes them — Norenzayan, Ara, Big gods - how religion transformed…, 512; Popular blame of religious belief for violence remains scientifically untested; Religion bundles separable traits whose conflict roles must be disaggregated (+15 more)

Broader Connections