__________________________________________________

Call for Papers

"Negotiating the Sacred IV:
Tolerance, Education and the Curriculum"
Cross-Disciplinary Conference
Research School of the Humanities,
Australian National University
Canberra (Australia)
1-2 September 2007

__________________________________________________


Negotiating the Sacred IV: Tolerance, Education and the Curriculum

A two-day conference and edited collection

A cross-disciplinary conference on the theme of Tolerance, Education  
and the Curriculum will be held on September 1-2, 2007, at the  
Research School of the Humanities, Australian National University. A  
publication associated with the conference, but not limited to papers  
presented at it, is also planned. Papers addressing the conference  
themes where the author cannot present are welcomed.

  Key note speakers:

Professor Susan Mendus, Political Philosophy, University of York, UK

Associate Professor Philip Cam, Philosophy, University of New South  
Wales, President, Asia-Pacific Philosophy Education Network for  
Democracy

  Conference themes:
In Intolerance, the Ecoli of the Mind, Donald Akenson argues that the  
education system was one of the main institutional structures that  
maintained sectarian intolerance within Ireland. According to  
Akenson, the creation of a secular education system was one of the  
great social experiments designed to break down these social  
divisions. One of the elements was administrative, involving non- 
denominational, or mixed, schools, and the other involved a  
centralised curriculum that had been approved by major religious  
groups and promoted civic virtue. Is a secular, non-denominational  
education system the best means of breaking down intolerance? Does  
this involve the provision of an environment that is free from all  
religious symbolism and doctrine? Should state education systems  
centralise the curriculum? This may be considered a form of justified  
paternalism in relation to education, but may it be equally  
considered an imposition of a specific form of materialism?

  What is the role of teaching history and comparative religions in  
promoting tolerance and liberal freedoms? Does the teaching of  
comparative religion lead to the idea that moral values are relative  
to culture and religion, and does relativism promote tolerance or  
undermine it? Is the point of comparative religion an exercise in  
providing students with a means of comparing and evaluating different  
value systems, and hence promoting individual choice and autonomy?  
Alternatively, is the point of teaching comparative religion to  
dispel prejudices that are the basis of intolerance?

  Liberal toleration is not a form of relativism because it requires  
'a ranking of ultimate values that supports the authority of peace,  
freedom, and public reasonableness' (Macedo, 1993: 625). According to  
Stephen Macedo, 'for a religious toleration and political co- 
operation to be stable, our shared values and aims must be more  
important than our disagreements' (626). Similarly, John Dewey  
considers the expression of common interests as a criterion for  
evaluating social life, and reliance upon recognition of mutual  
interests as a factor in social control (Cam, In-Suk Cha ed., 2000).  
Should the promotion of tolerance as a 'civic virtue' be a minimum  
requirement for public funding of religious schools? If tolerance is  
a virtue, can it be taught as a topic within the curriculum or does  
teaching it involve a kind of modelling or some other educational  
method for behaviour?

  In 2004, France banned students from wearing headscarves and other  
markers of religious identity in public schools. According to the  
French authorities, this was justified on the grounds that state  
institutions should be secular. On one interpretation, freedom of  
religion and state tolerance merely requires that religious groups  
are not persecuted. On another interpretation, however, freedom of  
religion requires that the state provide exemptions for religious  
groups that enable religious observance (Bou-Habib, 2006). What is  
the difference between the state using religious symbols, and its  
citizens using them? Should state schools be rigorously secular? If  
so, should they provide opportunities for religious education and  
worship, or is this a private, parental responsibility? Does the  
failure to provide facilities for religious worship within public  
schools and universities create unreasonable barriers to equal access  
to education?

  How responsive should schools be to pressure about the curriculum  
from religious and community groups? The issues that this question  
raises are highlighted by the debates over creationism within the  
school curriculum. In 1919, the World Christian Fundamentals  
Association was founded in the U.S.A. to oppose the teaching of  
evolution in public schools, and local schools and state boards of  
education were pressured to reject text books which included the  
theory. A ban on the teaching of evolutionism was considered in more  
than 20 state legislatures. It was not until 1968 when the U.S.  
Supreme Court found that state laws against evolutionism being taught  
were unconstitutional and that government powers could not be used to  
advance religious beliefs, that such bans were overturned. Since  
then, anti-evolutionists have sought for creationism to be taught  
along side evolutionary theory as an alternative scientific theory.  
There have also been calls for creationism to be taught in Australian  
schools. Should local schools be responsive to local pressure groups  
about what is included in the curriculum, and if so, should local  
groups be able to ban certain subjects from being taught?

  Submission dates:

Deadline for abstracts: 1 June 2007

Deadline for papers: 28 September 2007

Proposals for conference papers, including an abstract, and a short  
biographical description of the author should be submitted by 1 June  
2007. Papers of 5-6000 words should be submitted for the edited  
collection by 28 September. These should include an abstract, the  
paper, and a short biographical note. All proposals and papers should  
be sent to Dr Elizabeth Burns Coleman, email  
[email protected].

  Conveners:

Dr Elizabeth Burns Coleman, Faculty of Arts Postdoctoral Fellow,  
Monash University

Dr Kevin White, Reader in Sociology, Australian National University

  This is the fourth conference in series on the theme 'Negotiating  
the Sacred'. Previous conferences have included: Blasphemy and  
Sacrilege in a Multicultural Society (2004); Blasphemy and Sacrilege  
in the Arts (2005); and Religion, Medicine and the Body (2006). An  
edited collection based on the first conference can be viewed at:

http://epress.anu.edu.au/nts_citation.html


__________________________________________________

InterPhil List Administration:
http://interphil.polylog.org

Intercultural Philosophy Calendar:
http://cal.polylog.org

Reply via email to