“…all cultures are partial and benefit from the insights of others [resulting in a genuine global universalism that] can be arrived at only by means of an uncoerced and equal intercultural [or inter-civilizational] dialogue.” Bhikkhu Parekh

Whatever is ill and unjust does not feign amid a world social construction. The awareness and moral action of youth are malleable forces within societies, and these form through educational processes. Dialogue can additionally enrich the character of youth, encouraging them to participate effectively within society to affect the moral nature of humanity. Such constructive effort teaches youth the importance of a deliberative approach to dialog, helping them learn better to manage conflicts and differences. Although the ability to control the inner self and moral makeup of individuals is impossible, constructing a social norm of moral ethos is not. Emile Durkheim has related that hegemony lays the foundation for social norms. His tenets reveal that ruling ideologies derive a majority social consensus that reflects the popular sentiments of society.

These sentiments, however good or bad, however ignorant or educated, are maintained within the parameters of whatever is popular belief. If individuals submit to a holistic approach that analyzes an entire system of beliefs rather than its single components, then a common ground for dialogue transpires.   A holistic understanding of good maintained by a recognizable constitution of global ethos can perfect a new hegemony. A formative education, inclusive of dialogue, can reduce stereotypes that prevent humanity from establishing commonalities among nations, cultures, or religions. This construct empowers individuals to rise above typical hegemonic devices and manufacture a transformative awareness toward global tolerance.

Knowledge, a culmination of educational processes, establishes the means to confront the significant and real issues of divisiveness while encouraging dialogue as a venue toward a more peaceful and safer world (Carroll 2007: ii). Within a renewed civil society, a “golden generation” of morally educated individuals, founded within a diverse and tolerant world, can affect the fundamental change needed to rejuvenate thinking and action. As we inhabit a world of shrinking space, a lesson in responsibility teaches us that respect for cultures and religions is imperative. Enlightening the ingrained mindset of adults is often difficult, as change does not come easily. Increasing the analytical skills and the thinking ability of youth enables a better examination of issues according to an inclusive and tolerant worldview. Education, in this capacity, embraces youth wherever the opportunity is available.

Social values and character building programs in schools in the U.S. and other nations are ineffective if they are not inclusive or diverse enough to reflect the global perspectives of diverse populations, religions, and cultures. Mediation processes, peace negotiations, and character programs alone are not enough. There must be a plan to expose youth to the foundations of various faiths and their cultural practices and origins. This kind of education has much social value since today’s diverse populations inhabit educational systems calling for a need for these skills. This educational practice does not mandate the teaching of religion, although culture and religion mesh, but it does suggest religious understanding. Being tolerant does not mean accepting what someone does or does not believe, as long as their beliefs do not affect any other individual. This type of tolerance perpetuates ignorance. Schools have a deeper responsibility toward teaching tolerance and dialogue to students, to move them toward a new era of relationships. Active learning works by asking questions and receiving answers, and this leads to progress. It is also a religious, political, and economic tool to be used in analytical discussions and real life applications. Gaining such knowledge and skills make education a creative and malleable force geared for ethical thinking.

A new history, written after 9/11, reveals that religion can create a socio-political statement, whether the message reflects minority malevolent intent or the misconstrued message of the majority. Tremendous efforts to seek truth, understanding, and awareness for greater dialogue among the religions of the world, especially between Christianity and Islam, have arisen because of this. Scholars work to obtain a global ethos that maintains a universal understanding of right and wrong, including a comprehensive agenda to direct humanitarian efforts toward common goals. David Smock, Vice President of the U.S. Institute of Peace and director of the Religion and Peacemaking Program, states his imperative for religious understanding and its political and diplomatic influence. He explains:

No major religion has been exempt from complicity in violent conflict. Yet we need to beware of an almost universal propensity to oversimplify the role that religion plays in international affairs. Religion is not usually the sole or even primary cause of conflict. With so much emphasis on religion as a source of conflict, the role of religion as a force in peacemaking is usually overlooked. Religious leaders and institutions can mediate in conflict situations, serve as communication links between opposing sides, and organize interfaith dialogue (Rumi Forum, 2009).
This type of informative academic material enriches the knowledge of civil society and can help people learn to distinguish what constitutes mainstream beliefs from extremists of varied religious backgrounds and faiths. Such was the misconception prior and just after 9/11.
The educational vision held by Fethullah Gülen takes an inclusive and holistic approach to interfaith understanding that enables youth to understand and engage with other cultures and faiths; such an approach benefits all of civil society. Jill Carroll quotes Mr. Gülen saying that his idea involves not only schools, but families, communities, and media. All major components of society must align the effort of educating youth in all beneficial knowledge. All social institutions must cultivate or “educate” people’s innate capacities for higher [human awareness]… (Carroll 2007:74).

Educating youth and adults to understand the value of interfaith dialogue and tolerance is one route to greater global coexistence.
This education also affects all levels and functions of civil society. It is a collective yet individualized method of gaining human connection. A new era of world vision encompasses a diverse global society, and therefore, the worldview must acknowledge that the world’s systems inevitably fail, and individuals must respond.

This initiative rests at the threshold of a world without racism, without subjugation, and without divisiveness. Power, religion, and modernity accomplish more through understanding. A great gift to this world would be a higher existence on earth. A diverse yet inclusive world grants temperance as a foundation for building a better tomorrow.

Social education is a fundamental means for reconstructing existing hegemonic social norms. It also incorporates interfaith dialogue as a fundamental part of the social foundation. No society reaches its fullest potential without education, and Jill Carrol explains that “[Fethullah] Gülen sees education as the means by which people become the true beings God created them to be; thus, to become educated in life’s most important task” (Carroll 2007: 72). From her book, A Dialogue of Civilizations: Gülen’s Islamic Ideals and Humanistic Discourse, she also quotes Mr. Gülen saying:

The main duty and purpose of human life is to seek understanding. The effort of doing so, known as education, is a perfecting process through which we earn, in the spiritual, intellectual, and physical dimensions of our beings, the rank appointed for us as the perfect pattern of creation… perfecting our thinking, perceptions, and belief (Carroll 2007: 72).

There is much power in this educational theory, enough to sustain a global vision and move humans toward greater understanding. It merges religious and cultural commonalities despite differences.

Educational processes that support dialogue transcend normative social, religious, and cultural understandings and allow spiritual awareness to influence outcomes. Theologian Hans Küng stated during the opening presentation at the Exhibit on the World’s Religions at Santa Clara University that
The world’s religions are very, very different and have very different bases. It would be illusionary to think that you can just unify the religions. But, I hope for peace among the religions, and that is a very realistic hope. … There will be no peace among the nations without peace among the religions. There will be no peace among the religions without dialogue among the religions (Küng 2005).

His hope, too, is for a real community of nations – and that begins with peaceful coexistence and tolerance among faiths. This message stresses the need for a greater understanding and compassion among religions and encouragement for the world to recognize the valuable role of dialogue in the social educational system. To become ideally human is to incorporate the use of all that is human and use it to perfect the self through education of mind and spirit, whereby the soul recognizes the capacity to determine right action.

This educational empowerment assists global social change and is the beginning of a promising initiative to educate responsible global citizens. No better investment or place to start exists than with the youth of this world. Progress begins with a valuable investment in the youth of the world in hopes that they in turn manifest a new attitude that embraces dialogue, the tenets of a global ethos, good citizenship, and the will to strive for righteousness on behalf of humankind.

Recognizing that the great religions of the world have spiritual messages and visions that affirm ethical traditions is to realize that from these divergent paths, voices, languages, cultures, and heritages, we can find moral commonalities. The confirmation of an impassioned love for life and the divineness of mysteries unite humankind within an elevated existence. The acknowledgement and agreement of the existence of something beyond man’s earthly comprehension is encompassing. We can hope that educational programs will provide knowledge of diverse beliefs, faiths, and spiritual traditions and will one day nurture mutual understanding, respect, and cooperation among people.

Bibliography

Carroll, Jill B. 2007.   A Dialogue of Civilizations: Gülen’s Islamic Ideals and Humanistic Discourse. Somerset, NJ: The Light Publishing Company.

Küng, Hans. 2005. “The World’s Religions: Common Ethical Values”, presented at the opening of The Exhibit on the World’s Religions at Santa Clara University accessed on 5/16/2009 from http://www.scu.edu/ethics/practicing/focusareas/global_ethics/laughlin-lectures/kung-world-religions.html.

Smock, David. 2009. Religion in World Affairs: Its Role in Conflict and Peace. Rumi Forum, Georgetown University, Washington, D.C., presented June 18, 2009.

In order to maintain the effective use of power resources to reach a target, researchers divide them into various subgroups according to different criteria. For instance, capital is categorized into such groups as material, emotional, morality and virtue, intellectual, knowledge (know-how), and consciousness of opportunity and favor. Each one is highlighted by being given a separate name. In addition, various scientific concepts are used as metaphors to imprint on people’s minds the importance of those factors that help a community or nation develop. This is done because the human brain can think more easily through metaphors and understand a fresh and novel point of view.

The definition of social capital draws attention to an important – but often ignored or underemphasized – source of wealth for national development. This concept expounds why developing countries cannot achieve Western standards of development. While financial power and knowledge (intellectual capital) constitute the fuel and mechanical parts of the car of progress, social capital functions as its lubricant and oil. An old car that lacks lubrication cannot take you very far, just as a nation whose social capital has been exhausted or broken cannot progress.

So just what is social capital? Which national riches can be seen more clearly through the lens of social capital?

Defining social capital

Social capital is defined as the individual’s capacity and ability to benefit from and take advantage of public and private institutions through membership. Social capital forms bonds between neighbors, families, individuals, and communities. The society’s civil organizations need social capital to coordinate their existing resources more effectively. The sense of belonging to a society and a nation, and the people’s ability to make use of their various capacities, are involved in social capital. At each society’s base of interpersonal relationships and institutions, all of a person’s opportunities and duties comprise social capital.

Being a member of a social group brings both responsibilities and advantages. Social capital is formed by social structures and institutional characteristics (e.g., reliability, norms, networks of relationships, and systems of facilitating coordinated actions). It facilitates some actions within the structure and makes some benefits available, such as the material gains that accrue with group membership opportunities and chances, as well as the support brought about by relationships within the organization.

If the essence of a relationship is mutual trust and reliance, a system containing expectations and responsibilities arises. This mutual trust and reliance between the members of a civil organization oils the wheels of socioeconomic interactions, reduces costs, maintains the circulation of confidential information among group members, and enhances the availability of chances offered by the group. All of the values and norms needed to erect and maintain a healthy society can be defined as social capital.

Social capital also can be defined as the existence of institutional and inter-institutional participation and cooperation that keeps the individuals grouped around a common purpose and which acts as an adhesive that makes it possible to construct a society or a team. Given that religion and moral education form such values as charity, self-sacrifice, trust, and reliability, it follows that religious and moral teachings play primary roles in constructing social capital. Social capital has yet another meaning: those norms that influence a society’s productivity and health and social networks, as well as interpersonal relationships, respect, trust and credibility. Social bonds can boost efficiency by reducing the cost of work and production and facilitating the coordination and cooperation needed for production and marketing.

Social capital, an indispensable component of society and progress on both the micro- and macrolevels, includes all of the norms that shape the quality and intensity of a society’s social interactions. In this respect, a large amount of social capital allows more resources and opportunities to be mobilized in the pursuit of common goals. Social capital, however, has both positive and negative sides. For example, social clubs exclude non-members from their services by forming an internal social capital. Thus, poor and rich social sectors have different social capitals. The social capital of poor people is built around trust and the exchange of goods or property. The critical point of social progress is making public opportunities and chances available to the poor by reducing the exclusivity of the social capital available to the rich. The Islamic institutions of zakat (the prescribed alms) and interest-free credit practices are quite significant here.

The social capital of socially harmful groups (e.g., drug cartels and corrupt people) prevent socioeconomic progress. In this respect, the social capital value of a society’s subgroups and civil organizations determines whether the net value of its social capital is positive or negative. The value of an institution’s social capital is determined by the levels and degrees of the following: the development of an institutional identity among staff members; the sense of belonging; the extent of common thoughts, visions, and goals; being informed of the chances and opportunities inside or outside the institution; staff members’ respectability in the institution and the institution’s respectability in society; its ability to offer equal opportunities without getting entangled in religious, ethnic, and socioeconomic differences. In addition, participation in managing a society’s institutions and establishments also strengthens social capital. Thus, we can say that social capital can be defined in many ways and represents the group of differences called capital.

We should distinguish the resources of social capital from its outcome. We can list the following among its outcomes: social control, preservation of family and kinship ties, preservation of the society’s unity and solidarity (both material and spiritual), and the capacity to put forward common ideas and targets due to the unity and harmony of society. All of these are vitally important for economic progress and sustained growth and development.

Social capital also makes an important contribution to forming a sociopolitical environment that allows certain norms and standards that shape society in order to improve it. Unlike economic capital, social capital cannot be bought from another community or nation; every society has to build it up with its own faith, tradition, and education system. Civil organizations play a major role in the rapid construction of positive social capital. The value of social capital directly affects the government’s functioning, as well as that of the justice system and the use of rights and freedoms. And, socioeconomic development is directly related to the common goals and principles determined by the social capital accumulations of subgroups

and institutions. As networks of relationships that are limited to a person’s family and neighbors have a small amount of social capital, they are deprived of chances and opportunities to improve themselves. Those with a larger network of relationships, due to their membership in civil organizations, as well as professional and social clubs, have more social capital and a better chance of enriching and making individual progress.

Social and other types of capital

Social capital is a means of investing in your future. People with a high social capital value are honest, trustworthy, possess professional honor, function as a member of a team, and are sought after in all sections of life. Individuals and institutions that maintain their social capital above a certain value can acquire knowledge, power, and opportunities of critical importance. A collective group identity that increases the capacity of collective action can be enhanced only by building up social capital. As material capital can be used for reaching various objectives, social capital can be used to access critical information or to receive sound advice. Certainly, the advantages of a person’s position within society or a group can be transformed into economic gain. Material capital, the most fluid and that with the highest value of convertibility among all types of capital, can be used to improve men and women, culture, and social capital. However, the convertibility of social capital to economic capital is lower, for social capital, which keeps the common values that make up the society together, is less transferable.

When necessary, social capital can function as other types of capital or can compensate for their absence. For instance, the lack of financial or human capital can be eliminated by introducing strong social relationships and connections. Furthermore, the efficiency of social capital can be raised by reducing operation costs. Research reveals that people with a lower social capital value are less reliable and less receptive to institutionalizing and organizing.

Social capital needs protection and continuity, just like physical (e.g., clean air, water, and environment) and human capital do. In other words, existing social ties among people need to be refreshed and confirmed periodically to maintain their efficiency. The value of social capital increases, instead of decreases, as we use it. For example, the social capital of people who rely on each other and inspire mutual trust increases daily. Thus, dialogues and interactions between different civil organizations and cultures, as well as interfaith dialogues, are important infrastructural activities that enable the construction of social capital.

Social capital, like physical capital, is advantageous for the public and requires that all people work to save and improve it. Such an understanding allows us to comprehend the wisdom of the Divine Order, which wills that every society contains a group that calls for good and prohibits evil. Fresh air and water decrease in proportion with their usage; social capital increases in proportion to its usage. Individuals equally run the risk of not making use of social capital’s potential in an equal manner. Social capital is usually constructed by its relationship to a club or a community. Thus, people who are not members cannot benefit from the opportunities.

Social capital is not held by a person or an institution, but emerges within the network of interpersonal or inter-institutional relationships, and continues to grow as long as the relationship lasts. In other words, the construction of social capital depends upon mutual trust, dialogue, and cooperation. Since social capital emerges within the network of social relationships, it cannot be transferred. Each society has its own methods of operating and achieving success.

All of the cultural elements that motivate a person, generate opportunities, or facilitate the utility of talents and capacities play a role in the construction of social capital.

Measuring social capital

Several criteria are used to measure the value of social capital: the degree of trust and respect for the state and its institutions, the level of people’s participation in making those decisions in which they have a role to play, the extent of their presence in civil organizations, and the average of monthly voluntary service hours, as well as the level of help, support, and self-sacrifice between individuals and neighbors. For example, social capital strengthened by the active support of local citizens and families enhances the quality of education, for students are more successful when teachers improve themselves, take their jobs seriously, and establish a good relationship with the students. Doctors and nurses who work in citizen-monitored and supported health institutions are sure to be more attentive in their jobs. Building a healthy society depends on social capital being rooted in interpersonal trust and assistance.

Social capital and social progress

Researchers have discovered that a nation’s ability to achieve healthy progress does not depend only on financial, structural and legal regulations. For example, the failure of the financial aid offered by the World Bank, as well as its advised structural reforms, to the developing countries raises the following question: What did we miss or undervalue? The resulting analyses and research so far have revealed that the interaction between labor and capital for progress is far more complicated than originally expected. Various types of capital were acknowledged (e.g., physical, geographical, human, cultural, moral, emotional, and social) and held to be significant for progress. Social capital was recognized as the primary prompter and sustainer of development and progress.

Recently, researchers have begun to focus on the need for developing countries to have social, rather than financial and labor, capital. They underline that existing corruption, bribery, and monopolies can be dealt with only by enhancing social capital. We hope that this article helps administrators, who are at the steering wheel of national ships, realize the contribution of our religious, moral, and cultural inheritance to establishing a high-quality social capital, and encourages them to consider social capital in their projects.

References

– Hwe P., and A. Shiell. “Social Capital and Health Promotion: Review.” Social Science and Medicine, no. 51 (2000): 855-871.

– www.worldbank.org./poverty/scapital/whatsc.htm.

A: Some critics of Islam have reviled the Prophet as a self-indulgent libertine. They have accused him of character failings that are hardly compatible with being of average virtue, let alone with being a Prophet and God’s last Messenger, as well as the best model for humanity to follow. However, based on the easily available scores of biographies and well-authenticated accounts of his sayings and actions, it is quite clear that he lived the most strictly disciplined life, and that his marriages were part of the numerous burdens he bore as God’s last Messenger.

The reasons for his multiple marriages vary. However, all of them were related to his role as leader of the Muslim community, and his responsibility to guide the new Muslims toward the norms and values of Islam.

Q: Can you be more specific?

A: When Muhammad was 25, before he was called to his future mission, he married Khadija, his first wife. Given the surrounding cultural environment, not to mention the climate and such other considerations as his youth, it is remarkable that he enjoyed a reputation for perfect chastity, integrity, and trustworthiness. As soon as he was called to Prophethood, he acquired enemies who did not hesitate to raise false calumnies against him, but not once did any of them dare invent something unbelievable about him. Khadija was 15 years his senior.

This marriage was very high and exceptional in the eyes of the Prophet and God. For 23 years, their life was a period of uninterrupted contentment in perfect fidelity. In the eighth year of Prophethood, however, she passed away, leaving the Prophet as the sole parent of their children for 4 or 5 years. Even his enemies are forced to admit that, during these years, they can find no flaw in his moral character. The Prophet took no other wife during Khadija’s lifetime, although public opinion would have allowed him to do so. When he began marrying other women, he was already past 55, when very little real interest and desire for marriage remains.

Q: How could a Prophet be polygamous?

A: People often ask how a Prophet can have more than one wife. This question is usually asked by those people who know next to nothing about Islam; their question is based either on genuine ignorance or the desire to spread doubt among believers.

Many of those who reproach the Prophet’s polygamous family life are usually involved in casual relations and liaisons with numerous sexual partners. Considering themselves free, they engage in what most societies consider to be immoral behavior. One wonders why believers of other religions attack the Prophet for his multiple marriages. Have they forgotten that the great Hebrew patriarchs, considered Prophets in the Bible and in the Qur’an and revered by Jews, Christians, and Muslims as exemplars of moral excellence, all practiced polygamy? Moreover, as in the case of Prophet Solomon, they had far more wives than Prophet Muhammad, upon him be peace. One wonders if they are moved more by their anti-Islam bias than genuine concern or interest.

Polygamy did not originate with the Muslims. Furthermore, in the case of the Prophet this practice has far more significance than people generally realize. In a sense, the Prophet had to be polygamous to transmit his Sunna (the statutes and norms of Islamic law). As Islam covers every part of one’s life, private spousal relations cannot remain untouched. Therefore, there must be women who can guide other women in these matters. There is no room for the allusive language of hints and innuendoes. The chaste and virtuous women of the Prophet’s household were responsible for explaining the norms and rules of such private spheres to other Muslims.

Q: How did the Prophet select his wives?

Some of the Prophet’s marriages were contracted for specific reasons:

Since his wives were young, middle-aged, and old, the requirements and norms of Islamic law could be exemplified in relation to their different life stages and experiences. These were learned and applied first within the Prophet’s household, and then passed on to other Muslims by his wives.

* Each wife was from a different clan or tribe, which allowed the Prophet to establish bonds of kinship and affinity throughout the rapidly expanding Muslim community. This also enabled a profound attachment to him to spread among all Muslims, thereby creating and securing equality and brotherhood in a most practical way and on the basis of religion.

* Each wife, both during and after the Prophet’s life, proved to be of great benefit and service to the cause of Islam. They conveyed his message and interpreted it to their clans: the outer and inward experience, and the qualities, manners, and faith of the man whose life was the embodiment of the Qur’an-Islam in practice. In this way, all Muslims learned about the Qur’an, hadith, Qur’anic interpretation and commentary, and Islamic jurisprudence, and so became fully aware of Islam’s essence and spirit.

* Through his marriages, the Prophet established ties of kinship throughout Arabia. This gave him the freedom to move and be accepted as a member in each family. Since they regarded him as one of their own, they felt they could go to him in person and ask him directly about this life and the Hereafter. The tribes also benefited collectively from their proximity to him: they considered themselves fortunate and took pride in that relationship, such as the Umayyads (through Umm Habiba), the Hashimites (through Zaynab bint Jahsh), and the Bani Makhzum (through Umm Salama).

Part of that discipline was providing each wife with the most meticulously observed justice, dividing equally whatever slender resources he allowed for their subsistence, accommodation, and allowance. He also divided his time with them equally, and regarded and treated them with equal friendship and respect. The fact that all of his wives got on well with each other is no small tribute to his genius for creating peace and harmony. With each of them, he was not only a provider but also a friend and companion.

Q: If a Muslim man is allowed only four wives, why did the Prophet have eleven?

A: The number of the Prophet’s wives was a dispensation unique to him. Some of the merits and wisdom of this dispensation, as we understand them, have been explained. All other Muslims are allowed a maximum of four wives at one time. When that Revelation restricting polygamy came, the Prophet’s marriages had already been contracted. Thereafter, he married no other women.