RESULTADOS

For participants in this research, religion was most often understood as belief, which was in turn thought to consist of propositional statements. But a few participants also used the language of faith when talking about religion.

As part of their criticism of studies of non-Christian religious traditions that privilege the concept of belief, Smith (1991;1998) and the anthropologist Malcolm Ruel (1982) have both sought to demonstrate the value of studying the etymology of ‘faith’ and ‘belief’ when seeking to understand the nature of religion more generally. In his commentary on the Hebrew Bible, the biblical scholar Daniel Schowalter notes

that the forms of the noun ’emuna or the verb ’mn are usually translated as ‘faith’ or

‘having faith/believing’ and that this can be expressed towards God or to another

human being. In addition, the Hebrew Bible makes use of the verb btḥ, which

conveys ‘trust’ or ‘confidence’ rather than ‘to have faith’ (Schowalter 1993:222). This understanding of faith as ‘trust’ or ‘confidence’ differs from how faith is

understood by New Testament writers such as Paul, where the Greek term pistis

takes on a new meaning that is closer to what might now be thought of as

‘conviction’ or belief. The older renderings of the Hebrew ’mn and the Greek

pisteuo as ‘to trust’ or ‘to have faith/believe in’ differ from the notion of belief as acceptance of propositions, or what is sometimes described as ‘belief that’. This distinction has also been noted by philosophers of religion, who see value in how the term ‘faith’ signals the ‘fiduciary element, trust’ (Helm 2000:4). Alongside belief in

187 the intentional object of the ‘broadly cognitive component’ of religion, there is an affective state or feeling of confidence or trust. As Richard Swinburne writes, ‘the person of faith does not merely believe that there is a God (and believe certain propositions about him) – he trusts him and commits himself to him’ (2005:142). But there is also what John Bishop calls the ‘volitional’ dimension to faith, which is the decision to commit to some action or activity (2010:n.p.). Faith involves a practical commitment to trust or trust in God, and this affective dimension or ‘belief in’ element of faith is a significant complement to the cognitive or ‘belief that’ dimension.

Although it was not used to describe their own or others’ relationships with God or religion, some participants did use the language of trust, as already noted. They talked about important relationships of trust, formed with family and friends (Ellie, Joanne, Ben, William), with pets who were trusting and could be trusted not to act from ulterior motives (Alice) and with social workers who could be trusted to understand problems and the keep confidentialities (Rachel). Ben stressed the importance of engaging in activities that developed trust with others and, when asked about the supernatural, said that he would only believe the personal experience or testimony of someone who is trustworthy: ‘It would have to be someone I trusted, who wouldn’t lie to me’. But Henry used the language of both faith and trust when

telling me about the teachers that he felt he couldn’t trust, saying, ‘there’s no point in

trusting them or putting faith in them’ because they had not helped him when he was being bullied.

Other participants used the language of faith in relation to religion. Nick recounted that his religious friends often say that ‘one must have faith’. But, to him, faith was ‘like believing in something which you don’t know’. Here, Nick opposed

188 faith and knowledge, equating the former with an uncertain belief that falls short of

the certainty of the latter. For him, faith remained belief that rather than belief in.

Others talked about the faith that religious people put in God. Laura told me how she

thought that the faith that her Mum put in God to help her through difficult times in her life was ‘comforting’:

I don’t have any things that I think God has helped me through, um, but I know people who have, so it makes me think that if they believe God’s helped them through things, that He could help me through some things, if I encountered difficulty in my life, so I think having that faith, it’s comforting. But Alice found it ‘scary’ that Christians ‘put all their faith into’ God when they also admit that it is not possible to fully comprehend him. ‘Well, you don’t understand’, she said, ‘you don’t know what he’s like, you could be completely wrong and you just blindly believe in him’.

While some participants used the term ‘faith’ as a way of talking about

religious people’s belief in God, ‘belief’ remained primarily understood as ‘belief

that’ statements which were to be either accepted or rejected on the basis of their truth or falsity. However, this was not always the case. A few of the participants talked about religious belief in ways that suggested it might be possible to conceive of belief in broader terms than an affirmation or denial of propositional statements. Although some of these young people expressed degrees of both belief and disbelief in those metaphysical or ethical beliefs with which they associated religion, they sometimes appeared to adopt a more ambiguous stance towards these religious beliefs, expressing attitudes towards religion that seemed to fall between the dichotomy of belief and disbelief. This tendency points to the ways in which what

189 function of belief, particularly during moments when they reflected not only on the role religious beliefs play in the lives of people who belong to religious traditions but

also on the nature of belief itself and its place in their own lives as young people of

no religion. This is discussed in more detail in Chapter Nine. Conclusion

The majority of these young nones reflected a common understanding of religion as primarily concerned with propositional, individualised belief of a metaphysical or ethical nature. The subjective ‘turn towards life lived by reference to one’s own subjective experiences’ (Heelas & Woodhead 2005:2) means that enjoying the freedom to think for ourselves and to live our lives without the need for guidance from external sources of authority has become particularly important. For participants, a vital part of leading authentic and meaningful lives involved forming and maintaining close relationships with family and friends. But it was also important to be free to make their own decisions, to discover and learn about the world and experience as much as possible, and to rely on their consciences to guide them through life. This often meant that religion was not only dismissed because it was thought to limit this freedom; it was also considered to be redundant. As it was possible to lead authentic and meaningful lives in which they depended on themselves and their families and friends, a construction of religion that was primarily concerned with beliefs about the existence of God, or that limited their freedom to decide for themselves how they wanted to live their lives, was of little significance to them.

However, the majority continued to find value in certain concepts, beliefs, or practices that they adapted from different religious traditions, and the next chapter explores what this means for our understanding of young people of no religion as

190 well as for the concept of ‘non-religion’. This chapter’s thematic analysis of participants’ constructions of religion as belief is therefore fundamental to an examination of participants’ relationships of difference to religion (Chapter Seven) and to an exploration of their reasons for choosing to report no religion (Chapter Eight). Taken together, Chapters Six, Seven and Eight pave the way for a fuller discussion of the function of belief in participants’ lives (Chapter Nine) and of how RE might better engage young people who have been influenced by an understanding of religion that is primarily concerned with the content of propositional beliefs (Conclusion).

191

Chapter Seven: Relationships of Difference

Introduction

By ticking the ‘no religion’ box, all of the young people who participated in this research chose to indicate their difference from the religions listed on the

questionnaire. Lee defines non-religion as ‘anything which is primarily defined by a

relationship of difference to religion’ (2012a:131). Exploring the concept of ‘non- religion’ in the context of this study of young people of no religion involves a ‘bottom-up’ approach (Quack 2014:463) in order to determine what ‘religion’ means to participants and to understand how and why they differentiate themselves from such constructions. Many participants said that religion was primarily concerned with believing in a creator God and accepting literal accounts of miraculous events described in the Bible and other religious texts as true. In order to be religious, one had to accept such beliefs even though there was not enough evidence to support them. Religious people were also thought to be bound by ethical beliefs that restricted their ability to fully experience life. As participants rejected these beliefs, they chose to report no religion in ‘contradistinction’ to their constructions of religion (Lee 2014:479). But the majority of the young people also believed in some form of afterlife and some also described experiences of praying to God or deceased relatives. Participants sought to differentiate themselves from their constructions of religion but also held a variety of beliefs associated with life, the end of life, life after death, the supernatural and prayer. This chapter treats these beliefs as case studies that illustrate how broadening the scope of enquiry to include matters of importance enables us to understand how beliefs adapted from religious traditions function in participants’ lives, instead of focusing on the incoherent content of these beliefs or the inconsistent way in which they are held.

192 Participants placed significance on living authentically and being free to experience life, as well as on the need for stability and security, which then enabled them to express how they were different and unique. They also constructed narratives from, for example, stories about positive past experiences, not repeating mistakes, and building a good life in the future. In particular, the narrative of self-improvement helped them to make sense of their past experiences and their anticipated futures as well as their present lives. This chapter begins with thematic analysis of the interview data, illustrating how what they considered important in life was reflected in their beliefs about God, life after death, the supernatural and prayer. It details some of the participants’ beliefs about these phenomena, as well some of the beliefs about life and its end held by young people who rejected belief in God, the afterlife and all forms of supernaturalism. This is followed by an examination of how similar beliefs held by people living in modern western societies have been interpreted by some scholars of religion. These scholars suggest that such beliefs are incoherent, inconsistent and lack salience for the individuals who hold them. However, as is demonstrated in the sections that follow and expanded upon in Chapter Nine, these interpretations of the data seem to be more concerned with the content of such beliefs rather than how they function in people’s lives. This chapter therefore forms a much closer analysis and interpretation of how both belief and disbelief in God, the afterlife, and the supernatural functioned in the lives of the young people who participated in this research.

The question of how these beliefs relate to the concept of ‘non-religion’

involves examining why these beliefs were understood by participants to be different

from those beliefs considered to be definitive of their constructions of religion and identifying the nature of this relationship of difference. This chapter therefore also

193

constitutes an examination of the variety of relationships to religion that can be

discerned in participants’ self-interpretations, while Chapter Eight explores in more detail the question of whether, in ticking the ‘no religion’ box, these young people

were reporting a non-religious identity.