Conceptions of the Origins, Functions, and Changeability of Religious and Non-Religious Norms Among Hindu and Muslim Youth in India

• In Event: Reasoning about Religious Norms Across the Lifespan: Applications, Violations, and Alterations

Abstract

Religious youth encounter different kinds of norms, including religious norms emanating from religious authorities (e.g., fasting during Ramadan for Muslims), social conventions that coordinate social interactions (e.g., raising one’s hand before speaking), and moral norms that protect human welfare and rights (e.g., not hitting others). How and when do religious youth distinguish religious from non-religious norms? Some scholars have argued that religious people automatically accept religious norms, and do not distinguish religious from moral norms (Fiske & Rai, 2015). Alternatively, religious youth may recognize the distinct origins and functions of religious and non-religious norms, guiding their judgments about how good these norms are, how changeable they are, and whether they should be changed (Dahl & Waltzer, 2020). If a child understands that someone made a norm, they expectably view it as changeable. But if they think the norm serves a useful function, they may evaluate it positively and decline to change it. The ability distinguish the origins and functions of religious and non-religious norms may be especially crucial for reasoning about conflicting religious and non-religious norms in pluralistic societies.

We interviewed religious youth in Northwestern India about eight religious, moral, and conventional norms. The sample included 23 younger Hindus (M=10.6 years), 24 older Hindus (M=13.8 years), 25 younger Muslims (M=11.1 years), and 25 older Muslims (M=14.1 years). Participants were more likely to say that “someone” made the conventional norms (95%) than to say that someone made the religious (78%) or moral norms (61%), D(3)=90.11,p<.001. When participants said that someone made the norm, they often said that religious norms were made by religious authorities (85%), but rarely said the same for moral (44%) or conventional (2%) norms, D(3)=435.28, p<.001. Mirroring judgments about whether someone made the norm, older participants were far more likely to say that someone could change conventional norms than moral norms, with Hindu and Muslim norms falling in between, D(3)=76.79,p<.001. Younger participants differentiated less between the norm types with respect to their changeability judgments, D(3)=19.39,p<.001

Participants were less likely to say that religious norms were “good rules,” and more likely to say that they would remove the religious norms, compared to conventional and moral norms, Ds(3) > 20.20,ps<.001. A notable exception was that Muslim participants typically said that Muslim norms were “good” (94%) and rarely wanted to remove them (4%). Evaluations of norms appeared to be based on their perceived utility: participants were more likely to say that something “bad” would happen if a moral or conventional norm was removed (70-76%) than if a religious norm was removed (22-46%), Ds>83.47,ps<.001. Participants who said that something bad would happen when the norm was removed were also more likely to say that they would keep the rule if it were up to them, D(1)=8.77,p=.003.

This research demonstrates that, from childhood to adolescence, religious youth develop increasingly differentiated notions of the origins, function, and value of religious, moral and conventional norms. The ability to make such distinctions likely enable youth to negotiate religious and non-religious changes and conflicts in pluralistic societies.

Authors

• Audun Dahl, University of California - Santa Cruz
  Presenting Author

• Jehanita Jesuthasan, University of California, Berkeley
  Non-Presenting Author

• Jon Wehry, University of California - Berkeley
  Non-Presenting Author

• Mahesh Srinivasan, University of California - Berkeley
  Non-Presenting Author