Robert Wright at the Parliament of the World's Religions

here we are at the end of the the parliament so what was your can you give some kind of General overall impression because you've been here for a week now you you had a chance to meet everyone you did your what's the kind of General overall impression as a of the parliament you know of your experience compared to your expectations I think it's a good thing it doesn't address the most fundamental problem which is the fundamentalists right they weren't here by and large right uh you know you um I guess you can imagine a parliament of fundamentalists and in fact they actually have a lot in common more than they realize maybe the world's different fundamentalist but still they they they they I don't they weren't here uh this year and I don't I don't think we can expect to see them uh gathering at at anything comparable anytime soon but I think it's a you know it's a Force for good um and it's a sign of where we are in history that that uh people in the all the world's religions recognize that that uh for the sake of everybody everybody needs to get together M um you interviewed a lot of different people was there anything that came out of the any particular thing that struck you from the kind of Kaleidoscope of different Traditions or people that you interviewed um that's a good question uh just just that it's an extraordinarily tolerant group of people it was very hard to get somebody to say something negative about anybody else is religion right which is a good thing and the hope is that it'll be contagious you know in some ways just it's impressive how much is happening how much work and good work by and large you know I guess that the people are doing in their own communities I mean there's so much happening um I was also struck when I when I asked people the question when I was interviewing people or speaking to people you know um about the urgency given our time frame which seems to be relatively short now to really make the kind of impact we need to make to move forward right most people's response was was you know some recognition of urgency and and but and generally they would tell me all the good things they were doing and the good things that were happening I wasn't sure how much the the kind of the reality of the of the of the time frame and that kind of the a certain kind of urgency had sunk in I was for different motivations for different reasons uh and um some of them were here because they think that there are world problems that have to be dressed in concert I think some of them were here um to advertise their faith as religious people have done uh for Millennia and and um and not necessarily to proze and try to convert in an aggressive way but uh but but just to try to you know Shine the Light so so I I certainly although although the the parliament is a sign of of you know globalization and the existence of more and more uh Collective problems for the world look conf front I don't think everyone was here uh with that kind of front and center of their Consciousness looking down 5 10 15 years where do you see uh Thea how do you see the Traditions evolving what and maybe the other part of that question is what do you think most needs to change about the Traditions if if we're going to you know make it through the next 20 or 30 year crucial time period yeah um well uh uh I think here you see a fair number of people adapting their world view their their religions uh I think you see a fair number of people adapting their religions to uh a scientific age here at the parliament but then again the people here at the parliament were among the best educated people of their denominations um so I don't know that that's necessarily uh um something that's that's widespread within their religions and I'm not sure whether it has to be anytime soon I mean I think uh your average uh member of your average Faith uh probably doesn't feel uh compelled to come up with some kind of precise reconciliation between their conception of God and a scientific worldview or anything like that but um there were certainly a fair number of people here who were um who I thought were were had a what you might call fairly modern liberal conception of God um so that's one sign of the times the the uh um and you probably expect to see more more of that you know at least within this stratum um uh you know on the question the other big thing that needs to happen is Interfaith tolerance and and that was completely abundant here but but again it unfortunately these people are not representative necessarily of their faith mhm um uh and the question becomes you know uh can they convince other people within their face can they moderate their face and it's not clear to me the answer is yes in any kind of straightforward or easy way yeah um right uh because you know I mean um fundamentalists uh tend not to communicate a lot with the moderates in their religions and and and may not have especially warm feelings for them so I I think although people think of this is an Interfaith uh Gathering or an attempt at Interfaith reconciliation I think in a way intrafaith communication is more of a challenge and more and and and maybe more important um these people you know and the question is can these people through sheer force of persuasion moderate uh exert a moderate influence on their face and and and spread an ethos of tolerance or do you know political and economic facts on the ground have to change before uh people of a more fundamentalist event are receptive to this kind of message we were at one panel where you could see just the effect of assama Bin lad and those the Muslims felt under siege you can see that you mean you could feel it in what there and there was a frustration with the media with all this with the west and with their portrayal and but but it was interesting because it felt like and this wasn't true across the board but they were they were feeling victimized and they were feeling under siege but their their anger and there was not being expressed at those who were the ultimate source of their persecution which is the assama bin Laden or the the the fundamentalists who are often kind of causing the the ill-conceived reputation of or you know of of the tradition the question I yeah I disagree on the question of ultimate causality in this situation I mean they can turn around and say well why what made Osama Bin Laden the way he is or what made his sympathizers the way they are and they would point to American political Behavior yeah no I I agree with you but I think I was thinking more of the intrafaith element the intra Faith intra Faith element because whatever the passionate response to the west or to the media or to their portrayal you you also want an equally passionate response somehow to the to their own tradition and to insisting on moderating their own tradition yeah um you do and I think the tendency is for for uh for some some Muslims to point to uh American political behavior and say until this changes you're going to have uh a Osama Bin Laden's going to have a receptive audience and and and maybe that's what you saw I don't know right how about the future of religion in general just looking at Trends as we go forward you do you well I don't think it's going away um and uh you know but I think if it doesn't if it doesn't adapt to globalization in the sense of becoming a a more uniformly tolerant thing um then we will all be in trouble and that's one of the big questions going forward you know um do you think we're going to see new new faiths arise a whole new religious tradition seeing that I mean you're seeing New Age stuff and and and you saw a certain amount of synthesis of that you know I I talked to a guy who described himself as a Christian SL Hindu um and you saw a certain amount of that here going to see more you know this globalization brings uh face together and out and out kind of newly invented religions and there were religions here that are of you know in the scheme of things relatively new the seek faith is only 500 years old as religions go that's pretty new I think it's a period of Fairly radical experimentation with spirituality and religion and a lot of people saying you know this whole I'm not religious but I'm spiritual the idea that that you know kind of religion has a bad name in some circles but people still feel a need for some sort of contact with something Transcendent or more than meets the eye um and there's a lot of kind of retro invention you know a lot of uh coming up with new fath but trying to ground them in ancient Traditions p neopaganism and and Neo Shamanism and so on right um I saw in one in one pammer where a guy said that science and the scientific age and secularism was a very much sh historically a response to religion it wasn't a neutral event it was a response to religion scientific age you know that what that he I think he saw the kind of the secular the enlightenment that that period was very kind of a respon it was that's the way he understood it so so it seems like we need to um to to to to develop some kind of faith that that is able to include both of them that's not reactive either either either a secular response that's reactive against religion or a religious response that it's now reactive against science which fundamentalism and all its various forms can sometimes be reactive against the encroachment of secularism and Science and Science and modernism yeah well I think it would certainly be nice at a minimum if religious people didn't find Science threatening and one thing that would be helpful there is if people in science quit talking as if uh they've empirically determined that all religion is invalid you know as some of them really almost do um and uh so that's what I'd hope for at a minimum I mean the enlightenment itself I I I would not say was uh strictly speaking you know anti-religious and in fact there there was um uh there was a kind of Enlightenment religion deism was it was was was one version of a kind of Enlightenment religion deism being the idea that a God had created the universe but then just let it go it was just a machine that worked on its own but it did have a purpose and a design and and so on so in other words they were dismissing miraculous intervention in the in the material world but we're hanging on to the idea of higher purpose and a Divinity so um you know the enlightenment itself was not anti-religious it it was a uh it was itself a kind of uh included a kind of reconciliation between religion and rationalism I don't you modern science uh as a kind of reaction against religion I can't think modern science was just a logical outcome of ongoing empirical investigation of the world and was kind of bound to happen but but they may mean you know you may mean something else that that certain forms of secularism or reactions against Rel which I think it's probably what he meant it seems like the fundamentalism that so many people are concerned about it this is is to some extent a response to to what to the what they feel is the encroachment of modernism that's that's making illegitimate people's face and if we and if there was a worldview that that was able to include the religious Soul if you will and the scientific age with with equal with equal power and you know organically include both yeah that there might not be that same reaction against against it that we you see now from from fundamental yeah I I think that would be helpful if if if people could could C out various you know varieties of reconciliations of Science and religion and I think there are varieties of of reconciliations possible um I I think when when people say fundamentalism is a is a reaction against modern modernism they can they can mean a couple of things they can mean the scientific worldview per se is threatening they can also mean that modernization and and and and the the pace at which it unsettles traditional ways and and leads migrations from you know rural to Urban and so on that's true that that is that causes F that that's kind of a different thing and doesn't doesn't have to do with science in the abstract even if science is is helping to drive the modernization yes whose disturbance of the world is fomenting fundamentalism right right and that's probably going to continue regardless anyway so yeah more or less I would say I mean there's things you can do to um to maybe moderate the pace of globalization a little but there are first of all valid questions as to whether you want to do them and secondly I think they're pretty limited effect 50 years down the line where do you see religion where do you see religion if you put in your think thinking cap your F all even among even with these people here who are kind of here to agree almost you you you still saw quite a variety um I ask a number of people you know what is God and some of them thought of it as a person a being and some of them thought of it as a force and some of them wouldn't even get that specific so even today among the people who are most in contact with other faiths uh and most amable to taking other faiths seriously even among this group there's really quite a bit of variety and I think there will continue to be I don't expect homogenization as a result of globalization because the these information technologies that are helping to drive globalization really permit uh very fine segmentation of communities um and and and so um I don't think you're going to have anything approaching one world religion or anything I don't think you need that I think all you all you need the only thing that really needs to be widespread in religions I think is an ethic of Tolerance um and it isn't yet that does not yet pervade all religions at all levels um I think that's all you need to really um hope for and I mean you might also hope that well you you might go further and hope that the good parts of religion can survive in a scientific age because religion can do good just as it can do bad and and uh it would it would be nice to to sustain those parts and and for that purpose uh uh you know I think maybe uh that's another reason to hope for some sort of reconciliation with with science both of the fundamentalists don't find religion threatening and so that religion in its healthier aspects can survive