PAPERS Resources

AAR Annual Meeting
Denver, CO
November 17-20, 2018

To return to the Welcome Page, please click here.

Program Book (PDF)
Annual Meeting Venue Floorplans (PDF)
Annual Meeting Exhibit Hall (PDF)
Program Book Advertisements (PDF)

For questions or support, email support@aarweb.org.

To return to the AAR website, click here.

Comparative Religious Ethics Unit

Statement of Purpose: 

While comparative assessment of the ethics of different religious groups is an ancient and widespread pursuit, the modern field of comparative religious ethics arguably dates from the founding of the Journal of Religious Ethics in 1973. (For the purposes of this statement, “ethics” as a subject will refer to reflection about how best to live as human beings; an “ethic” is one more or less determinate position on the best mode(s) of life.) While there have been a variety of motivations for the attempt to study “religious ethics” rather than or in addition to “Christian ethics,” one animating idea has been the growing recognition that people from numerous religions propound sophisticated and powerful moral visions, which possess intriguing similarities and differences and are not easily reducible to a common denominator. In addition, the variety and particular characteristics of such visions are historically and politically significant in the modern era of increasingly pervasive globalization. Indeed, comparative ethics may be desperately needed in our contemporary context of global interdependence, misunderstanding, and mutual mistrust. There are thus ample grounds, both social and purely intellectual, to suggest that this ethical variety needs to be engaged directly via rigorous comparison. Comparative ethics makes such diversity central to its analysis, which includes three main aspects:

• Describes and interprets particular ethics on the basis of historical, anthropological, or other data
• Compares such ethics and requires searching reflection on the methods and tools of inquiry
• Engages in normative argument on the basis of such studies, and may thereby speak to contemporary concerns about overlapping identities, cultural complexity and plurality, universalism and relativism, and political problems regarding the coexistence of divergent social groups, as well as particular moral controversies

Ideally, each of these aspects enriches the others; for example, comparison across traditions helps generate more insightful interpretations of particular figures and themes. This self-conscious sophistication about differing ethical vocabularies and the analytical practices necessary to grapple with them is what makes comparative ethics distinctive within broader conversations in religious and philosophical ethics. Comparative ethics as envisioned here induces conversation across typical area studies boundaries by involving scholars of different religions; all sessions in this Unit are constructed with this goal in mind, so that data from multiple traditions will be brought to bear on any comparative theme.

Call for Papers: 

This group encourages the submission of any individual paper, papers session, and roundtable proposals that make cultural and moral diversity central to ethical analysis. Themes especially welcome this year include:

• Urban Migration and Religious Ethics
For a co-sponsored panel with the Comparative Religious Ethics Unit and the Religion and Cities Unit, we are looking for papers that focus on urban migration and religious ethics. We would like to consider how diverse religious traditions have viewed cities and urban migration. How does the wave of recent global urban migration enhance or challenge religious ethics? We invite papers that address how religious ethics be utilized to respond to crises associated with mass urbanization.

• Comparative Moral Perspectives on Genocide and Ethnic Cleansing

• Political Argument and Religious Ethics

• The Ethics of Rebellion and Protest Across Traditions

• Comparative Perspectives on Human Dignity: Conceptions, Grounds, and Challenges

• Revisiting the Classics of Comparative Religious Ethics

• The Anthropology of Ethics

• Comparative Notions of Moral Naturalism: Deriving Moral Norms from Naturalistic Facts

Method: 
PAPERS
Process: 
Proposer names are visible to chairs but anonymous to steering committee members
Leadership: 
ChairSteering Committee