Abstract
According to the ‘religious choice case’ for compulsory religious education, pupils have a right to be made aware of the religious and irreligious paths open to them and equipped with the wherewithal to choose between them. A familiar objection to this argument is that the idea of religious choice reduces religion to a matter of taste. I argue, first, that this familiar objection fails and, second, that we nevertheless have good reason to reject the religious choice case. Religious and irreligious views have a core cognitive dimension that makes it inappropriate to talk of choosing between them. What I have elsewhere called the ‘possibility-of-truth case’ remains the strongest justification for compulsory religious education.
Original language | English |
---|---|
Pages (from-to) | 31-39 |
Number of pages | 9 |
Journal | Journal of Beliefs and Values |
Volume | 36 |
Issue number | 1 |
Early online date | 20 Apr 2015 |
DOIs | |
Publication status | Published - Jun 2015 |