Please enable JavaScript.
Coggle requires JavaScript to display documents.
Challenges to secularisation theory (:silhouette: Davie: Believing without…
Challenges to secularisation theory
:silhouette: Davie: Believing without belonging
Religion :red_cross: declining --> privatised
People more reluctant to belong to organisations but still hold religious beliefs
Vicarious religion: Spiritual health service
Religion practiced by an active minority on behalf of majority - experience RE second hand
Typical in Britain + Northern Ireland - low attendance but many identify with churches
In EU major national churches = 'Spiritual health service' like NHS
Church = rite of passage eg. baptism, wedding
There for everyones use when needed
Most people :no_entry: church/pray but they remain attached to church as institution that provides support + ritual
Criticism
:silhouettes: Voas + Crocket
Evidence shows attendance + belief in god <
If Davie were :check: we would see > belief
:silhouette: Bruce
If people :red_cross: willing to invest time in going to church reflects < strength of their beliefs
:silhouette: Day
Believe in belonging
Census 72% described themselves as christian. In interview they put it to show they belonged to a 'white english' ethnic group
:silhouette: Hervieu-Leger: Spiritual shopping
Cultural amnesia
the loss of a collective memory of what religious traditions and beliefs used to be like
Religion :red_cross: handed down from gen-gen so can decide what they want to believe
Traditional religion < + replaced by individual consumerism - more choice - become spiritual shoppers
2 new religious types emerging
Pilgrims: follow their own individual path to self discovery - eg. exploring New age spirituality
Converts: join religious groups that offer a strong sense of belonging eg. evangelical movements
< in trad religions
:silhouette: Lyon: Postmodern religion
Believing without belonging >
Due to shift from modern - postmodern soc
Globalisation + media = > access to idea + beliefs of religions
Religious ideas become disassembled - media lift out of physical churches + move them eg. Televangelism, 'electronic church'
de-industrialisation of religion
:silhouette: Helland
Religion online
Form of top down comm
electronic version of trad religion
Heirarchy
Online religion
Form of cyber religion
many-many form of comm
:red_cross: hierarchy
:silhouette: Cowan: eg. Pagans gained self-worth from feeling like they belonged to global network
Criticism
:silhouette: Hoover: in most cases online religion just supplement :red_cross: substitute for church based activities
RE consumerism: create own identity through what we consume
Supported by Hervieu-Leger - spiritual shopping
Lyon: RE relocated to sphere of consumption - not abandoned but become religious consumers choosing which elements of RE they find useful
Eg. Ammerman's study - 1 fam attended services at a methodist church while taking their kids to a diff church for daycare
:silhouette: Berger: wide range of diff RE beliefs weakens trad RE - no monopoly of truth. Thus, trad RE lose authority + decline
However, :silhouette: Lyon: RE not disappearing but evolving in form - people can construct own belief system
New age
Individualism
New age beliefs = 'self-spirituality'/'self-RE'
:red_cross: secularisation but change in form
Re-enchantment - criticism of Weber's disenchantment
:silhouette: Lyon: while RE < in EU, there is > vitality in non-trad RE elsewhere
:silhouettes: Heelas + Woodhead: New age spirituality has > due to change in culture from obeying authority + doing duty --> exploring ones inner self
Why trad churches are < and success of evangelical churches - same discipline demanded but also emphasis on spiritual haling + personal growth
Weakness of New Age
Socialisation of next Gen - for belief system to survive it must be passed down
In Kendal 32% of parents said their children shared their spiritual interests
:silhouettes: Glendinning + Bruce: weak commitment
Structural weakness - no hierarchy so no consensus about beliefs
New age forms of RE need to be on larger scale to fill gap of trad RE
:silhouettes: Stark + Bainbridge: RE market theory
criticisms of Sec theory
Eurocentric
no 'golden age' of RE in the past
2 assumptions:
People are naturally RE + RE meets human needs
its human nature to seek rewards + avoid costs
RE provides us with compensators (supernatural rewards)
eg. immortality = unobtainable but RE promises life after death
Cycle of renewal not continuous decline eg. churches decline leaves market gap for > in sects/cults
Sec theory = one sided - ignores the growth of new RE
RE competition --> improvements in quality of RE goods
America vs. Europe
RE thrives in US bcus there was never a RE monopoly
European countries mainly dominated by official state church which have monopoly - eg Church of Eng
No competition
Main factor influencing RE participation
Sec theory: demand
Market theory: supply
Supply led RE
:silhouette: Finke: Lifting of restriction on Asian immigration in US --> Asian RE (Hare Krishna) to set up permanently + asian faiths became another option that proved popular
Criticisms
:silhouette: Bruce
reject view that comp > demand for RE: stats - diversity accompanied by RE decline in EU + US
Stark + Bainbridge misrepresent sec theory. Does not claim there was a golden age nor imply that sec is universal
:silhouettes: Norris + Inglehart: high levels of RE participation exists in catholic countries where church has near monopoly (Ireland, Venezuela). In RE plural countries (Aus, Holland) often low levels of part
:silhouette: Beckford: theory = unsociological as it assumes people are naturally RE + fails to explain why people make the choices they do
:silhouettes: Norris + Inglehart: Existential theory
feeling if survival = secure --> RE < (rich societies) - not secure --> RE > (poor)
Links to Malinowski - psychological function
Thus, demand for RE :red_cross: constant (criticism of stark + Bainbridge)
Global pop growth undermines secularisation growth
Rich countries = <pop growth / poor = >growth
So, rich becoming more secular + majority becoming more RE
Europe vs. America
Europe = most equal of societies + well developed welfare (healthcare, social service, pension) - reduces poverty + protects those at bottom from insecurity. RE <
America = most unequal of rich societies - inadequate welfare + individualistic values creates poverty + insecurity --> RE >
America = RE by rick society standards - less RE than poor ones
reject RE market theory
only applies to US
Fails to explain variation of religiosity in diff societies
supported by :silhouettes: Norris + Inglehart
the more a country spend on welfare the > the lvl of religiousity
:silhouette: Vasquez (criticisms)
only use quantitative data about income levels - don't measure peoples own definitions of 'existential security'. Qualitative research needed.
only see RE as a negative response to deprivation. Ignore the positive reasons for RE participation on wealthy