Relativist And Absolute Philosophy

There are three potential conclusions that can be drawn regarding relativist and absolute theology. The first is that a relativist viewpoint is adopted, whereby it is accepted that everyone is right in their own way, and thus religious tolerance and respect draws upon a seemingly neutral stance where everyone is free to believe their own religion (as long as they accept that other people are right too). The difficulty with this argument is, as Cooling (2002) and Pike (2013) maintain, neutrality is not possible because approving “of a ‘vast range of lifestyles’ rather than advocating a particular way of life is a specific vision not a neutral one” (Pike, 2012, p111). The second option is that every religion is equally right but therefore
The possibility of “over-simplifying and indeed stereotyping” (Haydon, 2006, p467) is real when there is so much diversity within individual religions (Barnes, 2012), and the link between religion and terrorism can result in untrue generalisations; one headteacher found herself needing to help staff distinguish the difference between the two following the 2015 Paris attacks (Anonymous, 2015). To challenge such viewpoints amongst pupils and staff alike, teachers need to be able to engage in conversations confidently, which the National Union of Teachers (NUT) argues requires more training (NUT Press Association, 2015) (quoted in Richardson, R, 2015, p43). Even without the danger of linking religion and extremism, the complexities of religious views present challenges when teaching about religion; an alternative involves valuing the beliefs held by the children and parents (Pike, 2013, p38 quoting someone else). This model of “dialogue-orientated RE” (Sieg in Rüppell and Peter Schreiner (2003) refers to Weiße p118) promotes religious tolerance and respect and prevents the pantomime style of ‘I’m right you’re wrong’ teaching that Cooling (2002) warns