Browsing by Author "Tom, Joshua C."
Now showing 1 - 2 of 2
- Results Per Page
- Sort Options
Item Religion and interracial marriage.(2015-07-24) Tom, Joshua C.; Froese, Paul.The history of racial intermarriage in the United States intersects with its religious history. Religious people, beliefs and institutions have both supported and opposed social and legal boundaries regarding the marriage of people from different races. Despite this history we have little knowledge about how religion relates to the current stage of interracial marriage. This project examines the ways that religion has changed in its effects on attitudes towards interracial marriage, religion is expressed in the lives of people who marry interracially, and religion affects the stability of those relationships. I find that, consistent with the diverse history of religion and race in the United States, the effects of religion on interracial marriage in the current era are varied, and may both support and undermine those relationships depending on the social conditions surrounding them.Item Social origins of scientific deviance.(2012-08-08) Tom, Joshua C.; Froese, Paul.; Sociology.; Baylor University. Dept. of Sociology.Scientific communities enjoy nearly unchallenged authority on matters related to the natural world; however, there are instances where significant portions of the population hold beliefs contrary to the scientific consensus. These beliefs have generally been studied as the product of scientific illiteracy. This project reframes the issue as one of social deviance from the consensus of scientific communities. Using young-earth creationism and global warming skepticism as case studies, I introduce consensus perception to the study of scientific deviance and explore its utility. Having an improper perception of a scientific consensus on an issue turns out to be one of the most important factors in predicting scientifically deviant beliefs. Still, a significant number of individuals who properly understand the scientific consensus can refuse to accept this consensus on issues which are religiously or political controversial, suggesting that education alone does not determine scientific deviance.