Comparative Religious Ethics Unit
In keeping with the 2025 presidential theme of “freedom,” the Comparative Religious Ethics Unit seeks proposals from scholars representing a wide range of disciplines and subfields of religion to address questions relating to ethical aspects of freedom in a comparative context. We interpret “comparison” broadly to include any inquiry that brings together diverse examples, cases, concepts, traditions, etc., for analysis; we also invite both descriptive and constructive studies.
We welcome proposals on any topic related to comparative religious ethics. Topics and themes on which we especially encourage proposals include:
- Liberation: How is liberation interpreted in various religious and moral contexts? What are some of the various forms liberation theology takes? What role does the concept of liberation play in religiously motivated ethical reflection and activism?
- Reproductive freedom: What kinds of religious and/or ethical arguments are being made in favor of reproductive freedom? How does the concept of freedom itself play a significant role in arguments for access to abortion and other reproductive care? How are religious communities and activists responding to the Dobbs ruling?
- Freedom and non-humans: What resources does comparative ethics have to offer to emerging questions around freedom for non-humans (including other animal species, plant species, and/or future artificially intelligent beings)? How are specific religious communities addressing these questions in the context of environmental ethics, bioethics, technology ethics, or other conversations?
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.
| Chair | Dates | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Shannon Dunn | dunns@gonzaga.edu | - | View |
| Rosemary Kellison, University of West Georgia | rmb07@fsu.edu | - | View |