Cultural and religious differences are the two major characteristics of the contemporary society. Muhammed Fethullah Gülen, a Turkish Muslim scholar and peace advocate, proposes the use of dialogue to promote social and cultural integration. According to the prominent opinion leader, dialogue is an essential element in the establishment of firm relations between different faiths across the world. Gulen’s interfaith dialogue is centered on his perception of human distinctiveness (Sleap & Sener, 2014). These personality character traits are nurtured and developed through interactions with other religious beliefs and practices. The White Paper issued by the Council of Europe, on the other hand, suggests that the collective future of humans is highly reliant on the development of democracy, the rule of law, and protection of mutual understanding. It proposes the intercultural approach as the appropriate way of embracing and managing differences in the society (Council of Europe, 2010). Notably, both sources advocate for mutual understanding and the use of dialogue to establish a common ground between different cultures and religions.
The White Paper is centered on the importance of dialogue in
facilitating the achievement of the core objectives of the Council of Europe.
The document provides that intercultural approach is the appropriate strategy
of addressing cultural diversity and ensuring that a nation is united towards
achieving common goals (Council of Europe, 2010). The document was designed
after it had become apparent that the society comprised of diverse cultures
that undermined the unity of the people. According to the White Paper, dialogue facilitates the exchange of information and
eradicates the development of stereotyped perceptions which might adversely
affect the achievement of cultural coherence in the society. It proposes a
concept based on the importance of embracing personal identity and shared
destiny among people in the community. Further, the document clarifies that the
European identity can only be attained through the development of common
values, respect for diversity, and promotion of dignity and equality. Since
intercultural dialogue cannot be enforced by law, the White Paper provides a conceptual framework meant to guide
policymakers in developing initiatives that sustain social cohesion.
On the other hand, dialogue, for
Gulen, is essential for identity development and self-enrichment. Though some
of the religions significantly differ in beliefs and practices, the application
of diplomacy can assist in establishing mutuality, hence reducing enmity
between the cultures. Gulen has been a demonstrable example of the use of
dialogue and peaceful negotiations, which is evident in his visits to religious
and ethnic leaders including the Patriarch of the Turkish Orthodox community
and the Pope (Sleap & Sener, 2014). Moreover, as per the scholar, dialogue
is an essential element embedded in the foundation of the Islam faith. It is a
religious duty that every Muslim must perform. The Qur’an significantly encourages diplomatic relations as they
reflect its values and commands. God created humanity in an essential character
that substantially relies on dialogue for association. Besides its political
use, Gulen asserts that the application of the approach is enshrined in the Islamic
religious scripts; therefore, it should be used in fostering religious and
cultural integration in the society. The main argument here is that dialogue is
essential in the promotion of the Muslim beliefs as well as in the
establishment of relationships between Islam and other religions.
Both articles critiqued in this study
center on the importance of dialogue in promoting cultural diversity and
fostering unity in the society. Gulen explores its significance from a
religious perspective, whereby he propounds that the Islam faith advocates for
the boundless use of the approach. Principally, communication nurtures
religious identity and increases tolerance. The White Paper is anchored on the use of dialogue from a cultural
perspective. It highlights that diversity is inevitable in the society, and the
only way to address it is through establishing mutual understanding and working
towards the achievement of common national goals (Council of Europe, 2010).
Democracy and rule of law can only be achieved if respect for the differences
exist between the people. Therefore, dialogue is a crucial element in the
development of coherence between different cultures and religions.
Response
The two articles primarily discuss
the importance of dialogue in the promotion of unity and coherence. The authors
present themes that substantially contribute to the topic of living
inter-faithfully. They both note that dialogue facilitates mutual understanding
between people with different worldviews. One of the elements that interest me
is the argument presented by Gulen regarding the use of this approach to
nurture identity. I believe that the author highlights an essential aspect of
exchanges. One can only be conscious of their identity when exposed to
different cultural practices and beliefs (Sleap & Sener, 2014).
Appreciation of the differences that naturally occur in the society stems from
interactions that clear some of the misconceptions, facilitating mutual
understanding. The White Paper
presents a similar argument regarding the embrace of cultural diversity. In my
opinion, all people are different, and the dissimilarity should not affect their
unity and ability to reason together in matters that require mutual
contribution. In this regard, I strongly support the arguments presented in
both articles. Though Gulen concentrates on a religious perspective, he
highlights themes that resonate with the cultural elements explored by the White Paper.
Globalization and technological
improvement have broken the communication barriers that initially prevented the
establishment of productive dialogue between people. Currently, wide variety of
platforms exists that can be used to communicate and discuss issues of a
substantial impact on cultural and religious diversity. The use of current
information communication technologies has promoted the application of dialogue
in the society. The arguments presented in the White Paper outline that democracy and equality entail confronting
people with diverse opinions and cultural practices. Though humans may at times
attempt to minimize contact with people who have different beliefs for the fear
that the latter will erode the culture of the former, isolation is not the
solution (Council of Europe, 2010). The two articles suggest that societies
should develop the capacity to dialogue and establish relationships with
communities and cultures that have divergent worldview and practices.
Interaction facilitates the development of resonance with each other, hence
promoting joint efforts in handling common challenges in the society.
Gülen has been an Imam and
inspirational speaker for a long time and has championed dialogue as an
essential element in the contemporary society. Principally, his argument in
favor of this method has triggered the contribution of other authors on the
issue. He highlights crucial problems which have not been widely discussed in
the past. I believe that most of people are not comfortable with diversity in
the society, whichin most cases results in isolation. The White Paper is against the seclusion of people due to cultural or
other differences. Instead, it pivots on developing a society where individuals
respect the differences and develop mutual relationships that are culturally
inclusive. More importantly, dialogue enhances self-discovery and helps in
enduring daily human challenges (Council of Europe, 2010). Essential elements
in the society such as democracy and equality are also significantly promoted
by the establishment of discussions between the affected parties. In my
opinion, both authors have explicitly explained the importance of dialogue,
pointing out to how it can be applied to achieve a culturally, religiously, and
politically accommodative society.
Personal
Arguments and Insights
An analysis of the two articles
reveals that they both discuss similar issues. While Gulen’s focal point is on
the significance of dialogue with regards to the Islamic faith, the White Paper is centered on the use of the
approach to promote cultural diversity. Besides using dialogue to develop a
personal identity and establish mutual interpersonal relationships, both
articles deliberate on the significance of the method in government and
religious institutions. The arguments presented in both reports can be grouped
into many primary themes. One of the main ideas evident in both is the inherent
human value and moral dignity. According to Gulen, social value is defined by
the Islam religion as the ability to portray character traits that adhere to
the teachings of the Qur’an (Sleap
& Sener, 2014). Personally, I believe that humans are created in a way that
compels them to be kind, compassionate, and caring. Dialogue provides a
platform through which these critical elements can be expressed. On the other
hand, the White Paper advocates for
the protection of human identities and dignity. It asserts that people need to
embrace their differences and use dialogue to develop a common understanding of
their distinctive traits.
The other element that I consider the
two articles attempt to expound is the essence of freedom of thought. A person
has the right to have different views and opinions on an issue in the society.
Similarly, cultural and religious diversity is inevitable in the society, as
everyone has the freedom of thought which manifests through reasoning and
choice. Therefore, the social and political structures should embrace these
differences and promote freedoms that respect the different identities of
members of the society (Council of Europe, 2010). According to Gulen, the most
effective dialogue should be open and action-oriented. In this regard, it
should spark actions that unite people to fight their everyday challenges.
Conclusion
Overall, diversity is unavoidable in
the society. Therefore, dialogue can effectively be used to initiate
understanding between different cultures and religions. Development of
religious identities unites people who hold the same view, while interacting
with different religions molds the already developed personality. Religion is a
spiritual home that allows people to venture out and return enriched with
elements attained out of interfaith interactions. Furthermore, dialogue
promotes cooperation and achievement of lasting solutions to issues that
threaten the unity of a nation. In my opinion, the approach is an essential
factor that enhances the development of a political culture which values
diversity and promotes human rights and fundamental freedoms as well as citizen
participation.