Whatever the conditions may be, a believer should not go out of the frame of good manners, civility, and decency, for others ascribe all of their actions to faith. Thus, even in the face of the most grave situations or unyielding cases, believers should not swerve from their direction. Examining the life of the Prophet Muhammad, peace and blessings be upon him, we see that he never changed his manners, even at times when he was challenged by Abu Jahl, the man who did all possible evil to oppose the Prophet.

There is occasionally a bitter tone in some of the Qur’anic passages as far as unbelief and unbelievers are concerned. However, we should clarify here that this harsh style is for devious thoughts and ideas, not for individuals. The Qur’anic message does not position any individual as an opponent just because of who they are. It is profane thoughts and views of denial – which are not unique to certain individuals but which have always existed and will continue to exist – that the Qur’an deals with rather harshly. This is a lesson believers should learn from the Qur’an in their engagement with others.

This is an attitude to be adopted not among people only, but among states, too. Let us reify the concept by an example from the Qur’an. God’s message to Moses, peace be upon him, concerning his encounter with the Pharaoh was, “but speak to him with gentle words, so that he might reflect and be mindful or feel some awe (of me, and behave with humility)” (Ta Ha 20:44). Speaking with gentle words and softly, even if it is the Pharaoh you are going to deal with – the Pharaoh who afflicted you and your nation with all possible oppression and violence. Another remarkable point here is that the Qur’an binds reflection and God-consciousness to “gentle words.” By a reverse conceptualization, we could induce the meaning that “in case you advance towards him in virulence, he shall neither reflect nor stand in awe.” So, benignity and tolerance are indispensable articles to communicate a message, whoever the addressee is.

That is, a believer always has to stand in the climate of a gentle attitude, gentle state, gentle heart, gentle conscience, and gentle words, so that they can serve others with true guidance. Otherwise, all the states and attitudes of those who have not been softened, melted, and molded in this Prophetic spirit will be artificial and theatrical. Such insincere people may smile for a while, but they will expose their teeth and present their genuine nature when their tails are stepped upon. Indeed, for how long could a firefly deceive astronomers that it is a star?

In the light of these criteria, it is also possible to read the descent of the Messiah on earth in the latter times with a message of being “without a hand to those who beat you, without a speech to those who curse you, and no hearts for those who break hearts,” even if some may consider this out of balance.

The example of Bediuzzaman, the sufferer of the age, is unique. Even towards those who had been his most merciless, inhumane torturers he managed to communicate the truths of faith and was never offended. Indeed, have believers not exerted every single effort to shine the inspirations of their souls to those who dug ditches and pushed them in?¹

Communicating with someone, or spreading a message, is impossible by raving or clamoring, violence or anger. Maybe violence was once a method or tool; but time has invalidated it. Today, the principle of persuasion is, and will be, dominant ever after. Today’s devotees of love should reach the level framed above, and should make abundant practices about that.

As as pointed out above, in the latter times, the Messiah will surely descend on earth in order to fulfill that significant mission, even, say, if he is in the remotest corner of the Hereafter. But this descent is dependent upon the meaning and spirit within your representative, collective body. Yes, he will descend to be the mold for that meaning. If that spirit is missing, I think, his corporeal descent will not mean anything. To conclude, we should know that a resurrection in the latter times will be realized by the reviving breaths of the heroes of love who represent gentle states, gentle attitudes, gentle hearts, and gentle words.

1- See 85:4 in the Qur’an for the short passage on tyrants who dug ditches of fire and killed believers.

What is multicultural education?

A good place to start is with a workable definition of what is meant by the terms “multiculturalism” and “multicultural education.” Multicultural education is a progressive approach for transforming education which holistically critiques and addresses current shortcomings, failings, and discriminatory practices in education² It is based on social justice, educational equity, and respect for thought. More specifically, the components required in ensuring a multicultural education are: content integration, the knowledge construction process, prejudice reduction, equity pedagogy, and an empowering school culture and social culture³ It seems apparent that each element, somehow, is related to the others, and each requires considerable attention, particularly when thinking about the efforts of conflict resolution in the world. In this paradigm, to be tolerant in social interactions, to give value to every opinion, and to not criticize and object to others seems to be the distinguishing features of a multicultural society. When people are overly harsh the result is destruction, while people who are trying to be constructive bring richness and reflection⁴ The idea of “if you do not like something, make a better one” fits very well with the idea of multicultural education, in which the main task is to reduce the form, stereotypes, prejudices, and discrimination between in-groups and out-groups.

Why do we need multicultural education?

We live in a world in which interracial conflicts and tensions seem to have become an inevitable phenomenon of daily life. On the positive side however, the last millennium has made us more knowledgeable about the nature of global acceptance, the equal-status situation, and mutual expectations. In today’s society, as we enter the 21st century, the deepening ethnic background of nations, diversity within societies, and an increasing percentage of people who speak a second language have made multicultural education crucial. Multicultural education is seen as an opportunity to improve race relations and to help all students gain the knowledge, attitudes, and skills needed to take part in cross-cultural interactions. Children learn the difference when playing with one another⁵ The same is true in education, as teaching has become a multicultural experience. Instead of fearing or ignoring the diversity in the classroom (and society), teachers can use diversity to enrich instruction. Multicultural education helps teachers to use diversity as a resource that can bring more meaning, tolerance, and opportunity to multicultural classroom. Both teachers and students belong to diverse groups distinguished by variables such as age, social class, gender, race, and ethnicity.

Multicultural education for a changing world

In American public schools and colleges, about 46% of the student population comes from students from different ethnicity with 14 % of school age youth living in homes in which English is not the native language⁶ Today, most classroom teachers are likely to have students from diverse ethnic and cultural backgrounds. This brings its own problem in that many students are assimilated in social interaction, and are faced with cultural assimilation. To overcome these difficulties, educators keep looking for more creative, thoughtful, and meaningful educational reform movements. In this sense, multicultural education is able to help students develop a sympathy and understanding towards each group’s perception and point of view. Dewey repeatedly stresses the importance of interaction in education. This interaction is an ongoing process between the individual and the subjects and other people. Dewey talks about a person who tries to build a castle in the air; even when he tries to do that, he interacts with the objects which he constructs in his imagination. As a human being, however, we are more complex creatures than animals. Each human being is a special creature, composed of different feelings and characteristics. Dewey’s ongoing interaction between the individual and other persons becomes essentially important when thinking about the existence of cultures with their uniqueness and distinctiveness. In this sense, school is a place of social interaction between teachers and students. Teaching and learning in a school environment mostly occurs through social interactions in groups. Helping students to develop a sense of reflective and positive identification with their cultural groups does not mean that it is not possible to establish an intercultural exchange between different groups. It means that through developing and clarifying the boundaries of cultural identifications, optimistically students will acquire more positive attitudes towards their neighborhoods and communities.

The rise of multicultural education

Democratic changes in nations contribute and stimulate the growth of multicultural education. Providing people with the freedom to function beyond their ethnic and cultural boundaries keeps societies more democratic and free. Using dimensions of multicultural education (e.g., prejudice reduction) can help students to develop more democratic values and attitudes. Improving dialogue efforts and tolerance in this kind of education might help students to understand, investigate and determine how equal opportunities could be gained by giving everyone a voice. Educators today face unusual challenges and want rapid solutions to educational problems. In particular, problems associated with racism, ethnicity, and prejudice make the situation intolerable, because of the high public expectations. In this sense, multicultural education can be a promising factor in implementing intercultural exchange and in helping students to gain democratic values and attitudes. One of the most effective ways to teach respect for diversity is to eliminate unawareness. If we want to understand other cultures, whether they be superficial or insightful, we had better gain a sense of perception that allows us to distinguish things more clearly and with less bias⁷ For that reason, establishing cultural exchange programs has proven to be successful in improving understanding, insight, and eventually tolerance into the classroom. Teaching lessons that either directly or indirectly address the issues of multicultural communities in the classroom, neighborhood, and nation is another important tactic that teachers can adopt when trying to help children and young adults understand the importance of respect for diversity. Teachers who bring their healthy values and virtues to the classroom can strongly influence the attitudes of their students.

Conclusion

Multicultural education is a new trend and it will become incorporated into most school curriculums in future years. Several prestigious universities in the world today require students to take classes in social studies. Thus, by using multicultural education, teachers, in particular, can help children value the significance of treating all people with self-esteem and not judging groups of people for the actions of a few. More importantly, teachers must model tolerance and compassion in their words and behavior. They should also encourage children to explore their feelings about prejudice and hatred. In doing this, the society will secure a better chance to stop any further destruction and will be able to present potentially powerful opportunities for the next generation to learn and integrate respect and dignity for all people.

Many people today, even those who already live in a multi-cultural society, have problems dealing with “others,” and blame each other for certain issues or follow a different way⁸ Blaming each other because of our origins or culture is not the solution. Rather, trying to understand and analyze people for their personal values and cultural diversity will help to mobilize and construct a caring society. As a matter of fact, religion teaches us to tolerate others and accept that people live in different groups and societies. The beauty and uniqueness of diversity is expressed in the Holy Qur’an and in the New Testament:

O mankind! Surely We have created you from a single (pair of) male and female, and made you into tribes and families so that you may know one another (and so build mutuality and co-operative relationships, not so that you may take pride in your differences of race or social rank, and breed enmities). Surely the noblest, most honorable of you in God’s sight is the one best in piety, righteousness, and reverence for God. Surely God is All-Knowing, All-Aware. (Hujurat 49:13)

You have heard that it was said, you shall love your neighbor and hate your enemy. But I say to you, love your enemies, bless those who curse you, do good to those who hate you, and pray for those who spitefully use you and persecute you. (Matthew, 5:43-44)

Notes

1. Dewey, J., Democracy and Education, Southern Illinois University Press Carbondale and Edwardsville, 1916.
2. Gorski, P, Multicultural education and the internet: Intersections and integrations, McGraw-Hill, Boston, MA:2000.
3. Banks, J., Educating Citizens in a Multicultural Society, Teachers College Press: New York and London:1997.
4. Gulen, F., Pearls of Wisdom, The Fountain, 2001.
5. Dewey, J., Experience and Education, the Kappa Delta Pi Lecture Series Simon Schuster, 1938.
6. http://www.census.gov/apsd/www/statbrief/ (U.S. Bureau of the Census)
7. http://www.ncela.gwu.edu/practice/tolerance/3_stereotypes.htm
8. http://www.rumiforum.org/

Collective responsibility

But just acknowledging this shared responsibility is not enough. Frequently, the real problem is group inaction, for harm can be prevented if enough people form a group to prevent it. Collective responsibility often can be ascribed to those people who have the ability to form such groups but do not do so. To the extent that this is the case, they are collectively responsible for their collective inaction.

Members of the dominant Western culture may consider it overly severe to assert that all of us are collectively responsible for our failure to do something about the world’s many problems. While not saying that people who do not form groups are guilty due to their inaction, I do feel that our inaction should provoke a sense of shame within us.

Goodin describes his approach as putting consequences to the fore, meaning that consequences quickly take up the whole stage, not just its front and center. He preserves a central link between responsibility and causality, and claims to make better sense of our present practices of responsibility. Larry May sets out to expand significantly our sense of responsibility within groups. The keystone of moral responsibility here is that for who one chooses to be. Attitudes and habits, states of mind and character, roles and affiliations, and the professional, institutional, and social climates shaping our interests, perceptions, and values are reviewed even as we continue to shape them.

A welcome but difficult result is that we are responsible for failures of awareness and insensitivity, as well as unexamined habits, traits, allegiances, and identifications that predispose us to moral failure. Another result is that people should see themselves as responsible for certain harmful events occurring within their communities, even if they are not direct participants or cannot prevent them. We are”and should feel”accountable for tolerating our own morally flawed character, contributing to a morally irresponsible attitudinal climate, or failing to reckon adequately with our institutional roles. These enriched bases of responsibility are not intended as new bases for subjecting people to punishment. I suggest that shame and taint, not just guilt, are appropriate individual reactions to expanded responsibility.

My concern is the collectivities, attitudinal climates, and expectation of groups that shape what people think is up to them and what they become used to ignoring. This has implications for all people who function within institutions where the most significant outcomes are the work of many minds and hands. A group’s responsibility is a fundamental moral issue. Therefore, groups are responsible for events and should be held responsible for them.

Shared responsibility

People should see themselves as sharing responsibility for the harm experienced by their communities far more often than they do. There is a distinction between shared responsibility and collective responsibility. Collective responsibility applies to a group as such (not necessarily to individual members), whereas shared responsibility applies to individuals within groups because of their membership relation with the group. We live in a world of groups. Groups affect our daily life, attitudes, and character, and greatly increase our power to act. Individuals receive great benefits from group membership. Those increased benefits and power should come with increased responsibility. Yet, although groups cause more and greater harm than individuals and have a greater capacity to correct large-scale social problems, individuals typically identify less with harm caused by groups and less often assume responsibility for them.

People share responsibility for harm done by groups, including those that result from omission. More harm occurs collectively than individually, and yet people take less responsibility for it for two reasons: Groups break problems into pieces, responsibility gets diffused, and groups allow individuals to assume that someone else will”or at least could”act. An expanded notion of moral negligence, the idea that since individuals within groups and the group’s structure and policies influence one another, and since group membership structures its members’ values and tends to desensitize them, individual members should be aware of this and responsible for reducing the risk of harm perpetrated by their group. Since there is a duty to act, the failure to do so may constitute negligence. This makes group members responsible for group values and, derivatively, for whatever harm the group does.

Shared responsibility is particularly appropriate for the value transformations that occur within groups. Since people affect one another’s conduct more, and attitudes are more closely shared, people should feel a heightened sense of responsibility to offset any risks associated with misconduct, including negligent omission or inaction. Of course, there is always the problem of defining the scope of negligence. This problem can be handled by using a reasonable person standard to ascertain what our roles would commit us to. We are not negatively responsible for all of the world’s failures, but only what a reasonable group of fellow citizens would expect of someone in our circumstances. Recognizing negative responsibility, including responsibility for omis-sions that allow an unreasonable risk of group harm, helps people lead lives that are more integrated with their moral values, because that involves both acts and omissions. To be in harmony with ourselves, we need to integrate principles with behavior that promotes moral integrity.

Conclusion

Shared responsibility, by focusing the issues of responsibility in a different light, provides us with the beginning of an account of how people, as moral agents, are connected to and function within groups and institutions. This analysis also provides a picture of the nature of informal groups and social relations. Most human relations influence the daily life, attitudes, assumptions, aspirations, and acts of individuals everywhere, such as in voluntary associations. We should remember the team’s perception of the Challenger space shuttle disaster: It is time to take your engineer’s cap off and put on your manager’s cap.1 An aggregate approach or something like it is necessary here, making shared and vicarious responsibility particularly appropriate. 

Footnote

1. Amy Gutnam and Dennis Thompson, Ethics and Politics: Cases and Comments, 3d ed. (Chicago: Nelson-Hall Publishers, 1997), 189.

References

• Goodin, Robert E. Utilitarianism as a Public Philosophy. New York: Cambridge University Press, 1995.
• Gutnam, Amy and Dennis Thompson. Ethics and Politics: Cases and Comments, 3d ed. Chicago: Nelson-Hall Publishers, 1997.
• May, Larry. Sharing Responsibility. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1992.
• Thampson, Dennis E. Political Ethics and Public Office. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1987.

Western culture throughout the centuries has taught fear and contempt of racially and culturally ‘different’ people and in its languages has retained derogatory terms for these ‘others’. By contrast, the history of the Islamic civilization shows little evidence of racism. However, in recent times, some Muslims, under the impress of the Western example, have begun to develop feelings of racial prejudice. Following the retreat of Western imperial powers, Muslims have the opportunity to develop away from Western attitudes and ideologies. God willing, more Muslims will rediscover their Islamic heritage, and racist feelings will be removed from their hearts.

We must remember that in the days before Islam racism and slavery existed, but Islam effectively abolished the inferiority associated with slavery and integrated people of various ethnic origins into a single civilization. Muslims are one ummah and Islam is their culture and allegiance. God says in the Qur’an: Verily this brotherhood of yours is a single brotherhood (21.92). God has created us different so that we may know and distinguish one another: worth lies not in belonging to this or that nation but in belonging to God, in taqwa or consciousness of Him. Getting on with the differences in creation is a part of the trials of this life, a test of our kindliness and humanity towards those who are ‘other’.

Do you not see that God sends down rain from the sky? With it We then bring out produce of various colours. And in the mountains are tracts white and red, of various shades of colour, and intense black in hue. Similarly, among men, and crawling creatures, and cattle, they are of various colours (35.27-8).

We should rejoice in the variety of mankind and try to learn about the cultures and languages of others. We enjoy fruits of diverse kinds, and take pleasure in the differences in nature, so why not also take pleasure in the differences between peoples?

The Muslim world has never been afflicted with the intense problems which still affect the Western world. There still exist in the US groups of white supremacists who want to bring back racial apartheid and even slavery. Then, besides the problems of race, there are also problems arising from the discrimination of the rich against the poor. However, God does not judge human beings on the basis of their race or nationality or social class, but on the basis of their quality of worship and their actions.

In the first days of Islam, the pagan Arabs practised slavery. Many slaves liked the message of equality and, attracted to the truth of Islam, converted. The behaviour of the first Muslims tells us that they did not uphold racist attitudes. For instance, Abu Bakr rescued Bilal from torture by buying and then freeing him. Bilal was then honoured with the dignity of being appointed to make the call to prayer: he was the first muezzin. God commands in the Qur’an that to express remorse for certain sins a Muslim should emancipate a slave if financially able to do so. If a slave woman bore a child she was immediately considered free. Also, Islamic law provided legal means to enable slaves to purchase their freedom. Islam was thus the first civilization to gradually abolish slavery and, much more important, the attitudes of racial and cultural superiority which, in non-Muslim societies, have kept the descendants of slaves-even after a hundred years of emancipation-in positions of inferiority. In Islamic societies, slaves were considered a part of the household and fully integrated into the community, many attaining positions of great eminence- Harun al-Rashid was the son of a slave.

It is of the highest importance that Muslims should avoid becoming infected by Western ideologies. The Western nations have nowhere created a successful, stable plural society. Even between nations there is not so much peaceful co-existence as a cynical balance of power. Only Islam has ever succeeded in establishing and sustaining a feeling of common humanity among different peoples and cultures. Many verses of the Qur’an and the ahadith of the Prophet, upon him be peace, reiterate that all people are equal. A hadith qudsi related by Abu Dharr al-Ghifari records the words: ‘0 my servants, I have forbidden oppression for Myself and have made it forbidden amongst you, so do not oppress one another’ (Muslim). In another hadith in the Sahih of Muslim, Abu Huraira related that the Prophet said:

Do not envy one another; do not inflate prices one to another; do not hate one another; do not turn away from one another; and do not undercut one another; but be you, 0 servants of God, brothers. A Muslim is the brother of a Muslim: he neither oppresses him nor does he fail him, he neither lies to him nor does he hold him in contempt. Piety is right here-and he pointed to his breast three times. It is evil enough for a man to hold his brother Muslim in contempt. The whole of a Muslim for another Muslim is inviolable: his blood, his property, and his honour.’

As long as Muslims hold to the Qur’an and Sunna and make these sources a part of their lives, they shall be spared the social evil of this age. But, having practised what they have heard preached, Muslims must have the conviction to commend (by example as well as by word) Islam to others. Unless the Western peoples come to respect Islam and learn from it, they will end up destroying themselves because of their national and cultural separatism. Muslims need to work at getting rid of the racism in the world and promoting brotherhood and peace instead.

Individualism is a philosophy which, like Nietzsche’s nihilism and Kroptkin’s anarchism, encourages people to turn away from religious values. It rejects divine authority altogether and any kind of religion-based command. It regards human beings as creators and human intelligence as the only guide in life.

A study, done in the United States and Germany between 1984 and 1986, produced remarkable findings about the social and economic characteristics of people living alone in these countries:

The numbers of such people have increased from 6.9 million to 20.6 m. in the United States and from 4 m. to 8.8 m. in Germany. Similar increases can also be observed in the other European countries.

Other research studies named SOP (Sozio Economisches Panel) and SIPP (Survey of Income and Program Participation) give the general reasons for this increase as follows:

a- Life conditions have become easier due to economic and technological development

b- Women have moved into different occupations and stations in life

c- New methods of contraception

d- Changes in social norms and values, in particular a decline in family life

e- Desire to live free of responsibilities

According to the SOP survey rest homes in Germany were overfilled after the Second World War with war widows and a generation of people made hopeless and desperate by the unfavourable psychological effects of the war. Marriage rates fell over the same period. The same research states that the young unemployed in many European countries account for an average fifty percent of the number of those who have chosen solitude.

The individual, who has lost all attachment to the society in which he or she lives, and has no feeling of responsibility to that society, abandons all links with its cultural values and symbols and its norms of behaviour: the individual becomes alienated and, probably, anti-social.

Sociologists suggest that this trend is eroding societies. If the bases on which social orientation is built have been weakened, if, in other words, there is no longer any trust among the members of a society, then that society will begin to disintegrate. Durkheim calls this collapse ‘anomie’. Suicides, homicides and general disorder are inevitable since so many individuals do not have a sufficient reason to respect life, not even their own.

This kind of survival or persistence in a life of which the individual can no longer make much sense turns around mere calculation of advantages, difficulties and, if any, of pleasures. The isolated individual is, because of isolation, over-attached to personal advantages, too alone to deal effectively with the difficulties that inevitably arise, and too self-oriented in the pleasures available to him or her. Life is thus reduced to a mere shadow of what, deep down, the individual knows it ought to be, and the envy. loneliness and selfishness which the individual feels makes the situation ever more painful and hopeless.

Lack of religious education and a near absence of devotional and contemplative habits are the background condition which urge people into a form of self-limitation and self-imprisonment. Their moral imagination atrophies so that they do not know of, or if they know, they do not much care about, the suffering and hardships that others endure. It is all too obvious that modern Western individualism has brought unhappiness, depression and disorder into many human lives and societies. Nor can the deterioration be reversed until people return in sufficient numbers and with sufficient sincerity and wisdom to the true faith.