Theology at Universities?

[Brownie]

Ippy, as long as your posts can be understood, the spelling is not so important.  There are a lot of intelligent people who have difficulty spelling.

Bluehillside, I honestly don't know the answer to that one but it does happen.  I suppose if someone goes so far with a subject, they feel as though they might as well complete it and get their degree.  If they really hated it as opposed to losing faith, they'd probably take time out and/or change to something else but not every situation is so extreme.   

Thinking about it, it must be quite depressing and there will be people telling them that they are being tested, everyone has periods in the wilderness, etc.

After their degree they can go off somewhere and decide what they want to do with their life, their hard work at uni won't be wasted.

[Hope]

😆
Funny thing about spelling you'd think practice would in some way improve the bad spelling, not in my case.

Poor spelling can be as much about being dyslexic or various other learning difficulties as being lazy, ippy.  Many extremely bright people have the former.

[Hope]

Wouldn't it be about the right place for divinity/theology positioned as a footnote to philosophy?

ippy

No doubt that would hold ippy, if the same applied to, say, chemistry as being a footnote to biology.  However, the latter doesn't and nor does it for theology/philosophy.  Yes there are elements of theology that cross-over into philosophy, in the same way that there are elements of chemistry that cross over into biology, but all 4 subjects are distinct in themselves.

[ippy]

Poor spelling can be as much about being dyslexic or various other learning difficulties as being lazy, ippy.  Many extremely bright people have the former.

I don't enjoy this lifelong inability of mine but I have come to terms with it and now feel sorry for those that have nothing better to do than pick up on spelling, rather than the things I have written.

I have noticed that your spelling has suffered since I believe you had an event a while back, much as I dislike a lot of your general outlook, I genuinly wish you well.

ippy

[Hope]

I have noticed that your spelling has suffered since I believe you had an event a while back, much as I dislike a lot of your general outlook, I genuinly wish you well.

ippy

Thanks for that, ippy.  I think that my hand-eye coordination has suffered slightly and I'm not as precise with my finger- to-keyboard positioning.  As an English teacher, I get annoyed with myself when this happens and I don't pick it up before sending the post.  The advantage with a site like this is that, whilst we may disagree with each other over a variety of issues, we can still support and encourage each other when more fundamental issues seem to go pear-shaped - such as health and well-being.

[ippy]

No doubt that would hold ippy, if the same applied to, say, chemistry as being a footnote to biology.  However, the latter doesn't and nor does it for theology/philosophy.  Yes there are elements of theology that cross-over into philosophy, in the same way that there are elements of chemistry that cross over into biology, but all 4 subjects are distinct in themselves.

Yes in your opinion Hope, chemistry is a subject where the elements and processes evidentially exist, likewise, well more or less, the same would apply to biology.

Philosophy is a legitimate subject on its own, once the woo is removed from theology it could be worth giving it a mention in the odd few places where it might be of some use.

Theology is no longer taken as seriously as it once was and the woo of it is for certain on its way out, but there are historical parts of theology that might be of use, well, what would be the problem finding out.

It's about time  theology as a subject for university students was taken off of the front foot, even if you don't like it Hope, these old beliefs are no longer due any particular prescense, they're  no longer as important as they once were, so back to the previous paragraph.

Slipping theology into the philosophy slot doesn't mean get rid of.

ippy

[bluehillside Retd.]

Hi Ipster,

Yes in your opinion Hope, chemistry is a subject where the elements and processes evidentially exist, likewise, well more or les, the same would apply to biology.

Philosophy is a legitimate subject on its own, once the woo is removed from theology it could be worth giving it a mention in the odd few places where it might be of some use.

Theology is no longer taken as seriously as it once was and the woo of it is for certain on its way out, but there are historical parts of theology that might be of use, well, what would be the problem finding out.

It's about time  theology as a subject for university students was taken off of the front foot, even if you don't like it Hope, these old beliefs are no longer due any particular prescense, they're  no longer as important as they once were, so back to the previous paragraph.

Slipping theology into the philosophy slot doesn't mean get rid of.

I really think your target should be Divinity here rather than Theology. Religious belief (of many types) is a global phenomenon that has changed and continues to affect the lives of billions, and it would be perverse not to study it as if that wasn’t the case. I don’t think there’s much philosophy in it either by the way – it’s essentially more sophisticated RE.

Divinity on the other hand is a different matter, and here the content is taught as factually true albeit that any pretensions to a philosophical underpinning are thin gruel. Indeed, putting “faith” front and centre is itself a negation of philosophy – what need have you of rational argument when faith does the heavy lifting for you?

[ippy]

Hi Ipster,

I really think your target should be Divinity here rather than Theology. Religious belief (of many types) is a global phenomenon that has changed and continues to affect the lives of billions, and it would be perverse not to study it as if that wasn’t the case. I don’t think there’s much philosophy in it either by the way – it’s essentially more sophisticated RE.

Divinity on the other hand is a different matter, and here the content is taught as factually true albeit that any pretensions to a philosophical underpinning are thin gruel. Indeed, putting “faith” front and centre is itself a negation of philosophy – what need have you of rational argument when faith does the heavy lifting for you?

Well yes, yes but, the divinity bit would, I'm sure, would be found crouching down behind the theology sign, therfore taking a subttle approach with a 15inch naval gun it would be necessary to make your aim and let off a couple of shells at theology to knock out divinity.

It's a tad embaressing to me when I see theology put forward by our universities as a serious subject on offer for study and as I have allready said on this thread why not astrology or homeopothy too.

On reading through the posts, some compare theology to a grown up's version of R E and others refer to historical content that can be of use and it appears that there is some crossover with philosophy, this input made sense to me but didn't do anything to dispell divinity's and theology's lack of substance.

Your targeting of divinity, well of course other than, it's place in history and the need to understand those that chose to get involved with it, it would be best for all if it was reserved and passed back to the seminaries away from our unies.

Considering that we are now in the early years of the 21st century I also think, not only because of the lack of factual content in rather vacuous subjects like theology and divinity, it would be more reflective of our present age to still use the knowledge contained within these subjects where necessary, but include them under the more fitting, acceptable title of philosophy.

ippy

[SusanDoris]

Ippy #182

Well said. I was trying to think yesterday evening of how to say, i.e. simply!, that if the title Divinity replaced the too vague title Theology, then more potential students would realise that the teachers of this subject were talking about something supposedly real but in fact entirely without evidence, unlike any other subject. There would, therefore, be a much faster realisation that all god stories are fiction and that the emperor did indeed have no clothes.

[Rhiannon]

I agree - there's either divinity or comparative religion.

[Harrowby Hall]

It's a tad embaressing (sic) to me when I see theology put forward by our universities as a serious subject on offer for study and as I have allready (sic) said on this thread why not astrology or homeopothy (sic) too.

In an earlier post, I provided my considered opinion that the purpose of higher education is to develop high level cognitive skills in students which will enable them to work constructively at high levels in organisations. The subject studied to achieve development of these skills is irrelevant. The subject area is the context within which these skills can be developed.

What you think this context should be is not relevant. What is important is what the students themselves wish to study. The university's role then is to ensure that within this context high levels skills can be developed.

The fact that you have no interest in a particular subject or have objections to its existence and so would deny others the freedom to choose that subject is little short of totalitarian censorship. It reminds me a a story some years ago when some students in the USA were campaigning  to end the study of the fiction of Dead White Europeans (generally - English Literature).

..... theology's lack of substance.

What is substance?
.....................

I know that I am making myself a hostage to fortune by identifying your orthographical errors, but are you not undermining your own argument by permitting your post to contain what might be considered to be examples of sloppy scholarship? You have my permission to comment on my spelling and grammar. 



Edited to correct orthographical errors.

[SusanDoris]

HH

Yes of course students should, by the time they leave further education, be better able to think clearly, to view information more impartially, to have studied what they chose to study, to have the confidence to know when they are wrong and how to search for information better backed up by independent, verified research. If they end up with a degree in Theology , still believing that an invisible, unmeasurable, untestable something exists, which apparently requires worship, a feeling of unworthiness in its presence, prayers and rituals involving expense, other than solely in the minds of humans, then somewhere along the line they have put blinkers on. This will be, I suppose, because the teachers themselves with whom they have studied believe this god/god/entity has a real existence. Such a pity, when they are, in the opinion of many, missing out on the most exciting thing of all in life and that is that humans thought it all up themselves and thus they spend their whole lives believing a myth. 

[Anchorman]

I have a certificate in Divinity (gained as a part of recent blood, sweat and attempts at sleep) toward my OLM course. Whilst not the full blown shebang students go through when they go for the whole four year degree course (in Scotland, anyway), the subject is much wider in scope than theology, dealing with the nuts and bolta of ministry of Word and Sacrement, and legal matters related to various aspects of ministerial work such as marriage,. funerals, child protection, etc - not to mention the almost soul destroying Church law stuff.

[Harrowby Hall]

HH

Yes of course students should, by the time they leave further education, be better able to think clearly, to view information more impartially, to have studied what they chose to study, to have the confidence to know when they are wrong and how to search for information better backed up by independent, verified research. If they end up with a degree in Theology , still believing that an invisible, unmeasurable, untestable something exists, which apparently requires worship, a feeling of unworthiness in its presence, prayers and rituals involving expense, other than solely in the minds of humans, then somewhere along the line they have put blinkers on. This will be, I suppose, because the teachers themselves with whom they have studied believe this god/god/entity has a real existence. Such a pity, when they are, in the opinion of many, missing out on the most exciting thing of all in life and that is that humans thought it all up themselves and thus they spend their whole lives believing a myth.

A couple of points, SD:

First of all, I am not considering further education but higher education.

Secondly, I am considering higher level, transferable, cognitive skills. Perhaps the best known characterisation of such skills is that of Benjamin Bloom, whose higher level skills are analysing, evaluating and creating. Note that these skills are transferable - not subject specific. The skills may be learned in one situation but applied in many others.

You appear to think that studying theology requires a belief in the subject matter being delivered. Does this mean that an English Literature student reading Macbeth must believe in witches? There is no requirement for anyone studying Theology (or teaching it, for that matter) to hold any beliefs - and many don't.

Others have already listed the very wide range of topics likely to be encountered in a Theology degree so I will not do so again.

I have no interest in Theology at all, but I defend the right for it to be taught, studied and researched in British universities. To deny freedom of access to this subject area to others purely because you do not value it is an action of dictatorship.

[SusanDoris]

I think I've got the qquote tags wrong - I'll see if I can sort them out.

A couple of points, SD:

First of all, I am not considering further education but higher education.

Thank you, HH. I used the word 'further' to include all  levels of education beyond school years. I should have made that clear.

Secondly, I am considering higher level, transferable, cognitive skills. Perhaps the best known characterisation of such skills is that of Benjamin Bloom, whose higher level skills are analysing, evaluating and creating. Note that these skills are transferable - not subject specific. The skills may be learned in one situation but applied in many others.

Okay - thank you.

You appear to think that studying theology requires a belief in the subject matter being delivered.

No, that is not so and I have tried to word my posts so that they cannot be misconstrued in that way. There should be no problems about understanding that all the works, ideas, facts about historical and present beliefs can be shown to originate with people. However, as soon as someone on such a course says - and I have no idea whether this happens - 'these are the words of God', or 'God said/wrote these words', then warning bells should ring all over the place.

Does this mean that an English Literature student reading Macbeth must believe in witches?

Of course not, since I can't imagine any uni student studying English literature would believe that all or any characters must be real, that would be ridiculous.

There is no requirement for anyone studying Theology (or teaching it, for that matter) to hold any beliefs - and many don't.

Fine, but I imagine that such theology courses must include mention and discussion of God/god/s connected with the subject?

Others have already listed the very wide range of topics likely to be encountered in a Theology degree so I will not do so again.

I have no interest in Theology at all, but I defend the right for it to be taught, studied and researched in British universities. To deny freedom of access to this subject area to others purely because you do not value it is an action of dictatorship.

As I said to NS some posts back, I did not memorise all of the OP, but took its content and meaning as something that, at its basic origins, lacks the one thing on which it grew and from which it developed.

I think I’ve got the tags right …the last sentence needs improvement though ….
Hmmm, not quite sure about the quote tags.

[ippy]

I have a certificate in Divinity (gained as a part of recent blood, sweat and attempts at sleep) toward my OLM course. Whilst not the full blown shebang students go through when they go for the whole four year degree course (in Scotland, anyway), the subject is much wider in scope than theology, dealing with the nuts and bolta of ministry of Word and Sacrement, and legal matters related to various aspects of ministerial work such as marriage,. funerals, child protection, etc - not to mention the almost soul destroying Church law stuff.

Does this type of certificate deal with how to overcome the, not so minor difficulty, of the complete lack of evidence that could back up, the magical, mystical and superstition based parts of these beliefs that people like yoursef adhere to?

ippy

[Harrowby Hall]

Hi SD

Thank you for your comprehensive reply. I couldn't see any problems with any tags, so I guess you managed OK.

[ippy]

In an earlier post, I provided my considered opinion that the purpose of higher education is to develop high level cognitive skills in students which will enable them to work constructively at high levels in organisations. The subject studied to achieve development of these skills is irrelevant. The subject area is the context within which these skills can be developed.

What you think this context should be is not relevant. What is important is what the students themselves wish to study. The university's role then is to ensure that within this context high levels skills can be developed.

The fact that you have no interest in a particular subject or have objections to its existence and so would deny others the freedom to choose that subject is little short of totalitarian censorship. It reminds me a a story some years ago when some students in the USA were campaigning  to end the study of the fiction of Dead White Europeans (generally, 0- English Literature).


What is substance?
.....................

I know that I am making myself a hostage to fortune by identifying your orthographical errors, but are you not undermining your own argument by permitting your post to contain what might be considered to be examples of sloppy scholarship? You have my permission to comment on my spelling and grammar. 



Edited to correct orthographical errors.

 No I don't like this post of yours and I don't feel phased by it either.

I have, as I see it, good reasons for my point of view, presenting theology and divinity as subjects for study by our universities is a continuance of lending these subjects in particular, lending them far more importance than I feel is due to them.

We now live, whether you like it or not, in a country where less than a half of the current population follow any of these theistic beliefs and we've had centuries of having them pushed at us, placed on front foot most of the time, I want an end to theism  having the front foot position, in the same way society here in the U K is demonstrating by the way they are directing their feet

Why you think I want to prevent these subjects being taught at uni?

Theology and divinity can come under an umbrella of philosophy, unlike things as they are at present where philosophy gets grouped in with those two ecclesiastical, magical, mystical superstitional based subjects and I don't see why philosophy sould be lending of it's dignity to theology and divinity any more, those days should be over.

I think we all understand the need for education to produce the next well rounded generation, that's something that understood easily even by those of us without a degree.

Any of the parts of theology or divinity that make sense can be taught along with philosophy, as opposed to dropping them, including the place they have played in our history.

Censorship? What's that all about?

I don't really want to get into semantics, I'll leave that to you, mind if you read something you don't want to understand.

ippy

[SusanDoris]

 Ippy

I wonder if there are statistics which show whether the number of students on Theology courses is gradually decreasing.
I think there is quite often confusion between (a) teaching a subject  ; and (b) teaching about it, especially as the only subject which implies the existence of some great power/god/etc is Theology. not one other subject includes such a thing as any supernatural power. 

[ippy]

Ippy

I wonder if there are statistics which show whether the number of students on Theology courses is gradually decreasing.
I think there is quite often confusion between (a) teaching a subject  ; and (b) teaching about it, especially as the only subject which implies the existence of some great power/god/etc is Theology. not one other subject includes such a thing as any supernatural power.

I don't know about the numbers but I don't think it would be surprising if the figures reflect the general trend of declining numbers of people taking up superstitious beliefs here in the U K.

The religious and their organizations want the hubris they think they gain from rubbing themselves up against anything they see as an intellectual persuit, probably thinking this action lends credibility to the incredible claims they continue to make when expressing their beliefs, if we can take this away from them it'll help, in the long term, stop them spreading their nonsense on to future generations.

Admittedly it's more distastefull where the religious believers spread their nonsense on to young children than spreading their stuff to university age students; having said that is it such a small move to put theology and divinity as uni subjects, into a sub divisional part of philosophy studdies?

Regards ippy

[SusanDoris]

Ippy

There is though a caveat I would make with regard to the violent versions of Islam because an absence of Christianity would leave a gap which such dangerous groups would seek to fill.

[ippy]

Ippy

There is though a caveat I would make with regard to the violent versions of Islam because an absence of Christianity would leave a gap which such dangerous groups would seek to fill.

I hadn't thought of that but when thinking about that, it is an area that any other religious view than theirs has to be on guard 24/7.

I try to avoid making comments in that direction, being the devout coward I am.

Regards ippy 

[SusanDoris]

I hadn't thought of that but when thinking about that, it is an area that any other religious view than theirs has to be on guard 24/7.

I try to avoid making comments in that direction, being the devout coward I am.

Regards ippy

Save that until you're nearly 81 like me!!

[Walter]

Save that until you're nearly 81 like me!!

You tell 'em Su, 

[ippy]

Save that until you're nearly 81 like me!!

Free T V licence later this year, does that make me a mere spring chicken?

ippy