Luis Gutierrez wrote:
> So we agree that hair splitting on numbers from various sources is not
> worthwhile ... so let's focus on the big picture ...
I think we might agree that grounding the discussion in empirical data
would help us picture the issues and keep them in focus.
I was prompted by Jame's Annan's comment that "religion is obviously
relevant" to global change. After briefly wondering if it were so, I
recognized one potential pathway: the impact of religion on
reproductive decision-making, since population growth is widely
regarded as an important driver of global change, and birth rates are
known to vary by religion. For example, in Canada, 2001:
Muslim 2.41 children per woman in 2001
Hindus 2.0,
Buddhists, 1.34
Orthodox Christians 1.35
no religion 1.41
Protestants and Roman Catholics 1.57.
> > [dl] (how do you measure "patriarchal mind set" and does it vary
> > by religion as birth rates vary by religion?)
>
> On a scale from zero to one, where zero is perfect gender balance and
> one is perfect patriarchal imbalance, which of the following religions
> is the most patriarchal? Which is the least patriarchal?
>
> A. Bahai
> B. Evangelical Christianity
> C. Hindi
> D. Islam
> E. Roman Catholic
You have introduced the concept of "patriarchal mind set" into this
discussion as an important influence on reproductive decision making -
more important than religion. Can you tell us more about this - for
example, does "patriarchal mind set" vary by religion? Does it explain
why people of some relgions have higher or lower birth rates than
people of other religions? Have you (or anyone else) measured it, or
measured its relation to birth rates or religious affiliation, and if
so, what are the findings?
>
> > You focus on religious institutions, but have you ruled out a competing
> > hypothesis: poverty?
>
> As I have stated, I have not ruled out any other factors, including
> poverty ... I am simply focusing on religious violence because it is a
> factor that is seldom considered.
Seldom considered, perhaps because any measurable influence it may have
is explained by other factors?
Violence may influence death rates too, but it is not a major influence
- and religious violence even less than violence from all causes.
Population is certainly not the only factor in global change: the
effect of population on environment is mediated by organization and
technology. Religion's influence on the adoption and diffusion of
technical innovation may be an important factor in global change, for
example, as regards birth control technology or uranium enrichment
technology.
Since you are interested in discussing religious violence as an
overlooked factor in global change, perhaps you could suggest some ways
that may be observed, and what your observations are?
Thank you,
-dl
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
Global Change ("globalchange") newsgroup. Global Change is a public, moderated
venue for discussion of science, technology, economics and policy dimensions of
global environmental change.
Posts will be admitted to the list if and only if any moderator finds the
submission to be constructive and/or interesting, on topic, and not
gratuitously rude.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/globalchange
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
