World religions
It was designed to broaden the study of religion away from its heavy focus on Christianity by taking into account other large religious traditions around the world.
The paradigm is often used by lecturers instructing undergraduate students in the study of religion and is also the framework used by school teachers in the United Kingdom and other countries.
The paradigm's emphasis on viewing these religious movements as distinct and mutually exclusive entities has also had a wider impact on the categorisation of religion—for instance in censuses—in both Western countries and elsewhere.
[5] Similarly, it does not fit into the list if the groups are defined by a desire to spread internationally, because Judaism historically has been a non-proselytizing religion.
[13] This idea of mutually exclusive religious identities is not only a Western phenomenon, but can also be found in other socio-cultural contexts; Hindu nationalists for instance often endorse the idea that Hinduism and Buddhism are mutually exclusive categories despite the fact that many people in South Asia mix Hindu and Buddhist practices.
[13] The scholars of religion Tara Baldrick-Morrone, Michael Graziano, and Brad Stoddard stated that "the WRP is neither neutral nor natural, but its social authority derives from appearing as both.
"[17] A "world religion" is a tradition that has achieved sufficient power and numbers to enter our history to form it, interact with it, or thwart it.
He noted that the only religions that get included in it are those which have "achieved sufficient power and numbers to enter our [i.e. Western] history, either to form it, interact with it, or to thwart it" and represent "important geo-political entities with which we must deal.
[4] Some scholars have argued for the rejection of the world religions paradigm altogether; Cotter and Robertson presented the argument that "the continued uncritical use of the WRP fosters a breeding ground for relativistic navel-gazing which has no place in the contemporary research university".
[29] Owen noted that, in her experience, many students display an "initial resistance to alternatives" as they are expecting the world religions paradigm.
She cited the example of her introductory course at Leeds Trinity University College, which was constructed on thematic lines rather than according to the world religions paradigm, and which induced feelings of panic among many undergraduates.
[8] Many scholars who are critical of the world religions paradigm find themselves having to teach it as part of introductory courses for undergraduate students.
[8] Some scholars have suggested that even when students are taught using the world religions paradigm, it could be a good means of encouraging them to think critically about category formation.
[30] The scholar Steven W. Ramey for instance advocated teaching the paradigm in a manner that makes it clear that it is a "constructed discourse".
[31] Similarly, Baldrick-Morrone, Graziano, and Stoddard suggested that teaching undergraduates about the world religious paradigm helps to explain to students how "classification is a social act".
