SCM Core Text Sociology of Religion. Andrew Dawson

SCM Core Text Sociology of Religion

transit was much less likely). Given the nature of the data sought in respect of this issue, large-scale (quantitative) survey methods such as questionnaires lend themselves to the task.

If, however, one wanted to explore the implications of religious transit for the individuals doing the switching or the institutions acquiring or losing members, then other methods may prove more effective in acquiring and engaging the necessary data. Exploration of the personal motives behind switching and the impact of transit upon individual religiosity are best explored through methods geared towards obtaining data of a more intimate (qualitative) nature. In this instance, qualitative methods such as one-to-one interviews are particularly helpful. While interviews may also prove useful to the study of institutional responses to religious switching (as in respect of relaxation or tightening of membership rules), other methods of data acquisition will be required. The researcher may, for example, look for evidence of modified institutional behaviour expressed through changes in official publicity which seek to present a more inclusive or exclusive attitude in respect of would-be religious transients. The method of discourse analysis is one way of exploring changes in the presentational narratives of religious institutions. Alternatively, data evidencing the organizational impact of religious switching might be looked for through an examination of associational practices such as formal ritual activity or informal modes of interaction. First-hand engagement with the associational dimension of religion is a particular strength of the method commonly termed ‘participant observation’.

The pursuit, acquisition and interpretation of empirical data gathered through applied methods are directly informed by sociological theory. In the case of religious transit, for example, the concept of ‘individualization’ may be used to explain the ways in which modern society enables switching. Modern dynamics do this by progressively undermining individual–corporate allegiances (e.g. familial, religious, cultural), which were once thought to be fixed and exclusive (Beck and Beck-Gernsheim, 2002). In the same vein, the concept of ‘bricolage’ can be employed to explore the subjective implications of religious transit. It does so by engaging individual religiosity as it is fashioned through the subjective appropriation of practices, symbols and values from a variety of different, if not contrasting, contexts (Dawson, A., 2007, pp. 129–57). The institutional implications of religious switching might likewise be explored through the articulation of concepts relating to the public image which organizations project (such as ‘collective impression management’) and their ability to attract religious consumers through careful packaging of their spiritual goods (Finke, 1997, pp. 45–64).

Choice of applied methods and the concepts used to interpret the data they acquire are themselves subject to the overarching theoretical paradigm within which they sit. As noted in Chapter 1, sociologists conceptualize society, its dimensions and their respective interactions in a wide variety of ways. Add to this aforementioned disagreements in respect of how religion might be defined (and, by extension, where it is to be found and how it is to be engaged), and one can begin to appreciate something of the wonderfully variegated character of the sociology of religion. As with sociology in general, the most fruitful readings of the sociology of religion appreciate the implications of the definitions used, methods applied, hermeneutical concepts employed, and the overarching theoretical presuppositions which inform the what, the how and the why.

Shifting sands

Such has been the rapidity and scale of social change over the course of the modern era that Giddens suggests the image of a ‘juggernaut’ be used to sum it up. Modernity has become, in effect, ‘a runaway engine of enormous power which, collectively as human beings, we can drive to some extent but which also threatens to rush out of our control’ (1990, p. 139). By demanding the ongoing revision of social-scientific approaches, the scale and rapidity of modern social change have direct implications for the sociological study of religion. As will be seen in the forthcoming chapters, not only do sociologists continue to contest precisely what is signified by the term ‘religion’, some are calling for a much more restricted use of the word. Instead, they argue, terms such as ‘religiosity’, ‘mysticism’ or ‘spiritualities of life’ are better placed to conceptualize contemporary modes of religious belief and practice (Heelas, 2008). In the same vein, social scientists disagree as to where religion is now to be found and, therefore, how it is best to be looked for. Holding that religion is progressively assuming an increasingly non-traditional profile, some argue in favour of non-standard means or indirect methods of researching religion (Day, 2009, pp. 86–104). Others, however, continue to argue trenchantly in favour of retaining traditional methods of quantitative research (Bruce, 2009, pp. 7–28). At the same time, disputes escalate in respect of the most appropriate concepts and theories by which contemporary transformations of the religious sphere might best be comprehended. For example, are the spread of religious fundamentalism and perdurance of alternative religiosity to be understood in terms of modernity’s re-enchantment or as symptoms of its secularization (Bruce, 2000; Heelas, 1996)? Whether disputing definition, contesting context, arguing over method or disagreeing about theory, by situating religion amidst the warp and woof of ever-changing social processes, the discipline of sociology makes an invaluable contribution to the academic study of religious belief and practice.

Notes

1 Functional definitions of religion should not be confused with functionalist theories of society (see Chapters 1 and 3).

2 Spiritism/Kardecism is a separate phenomenon from the English speaking movement known as Spiritualism, which traces its roots back to events that took place in Hydesville, USA, in 1848.

3 For alternative conceptualizations of the differing dimensions of religion, see Stark and Glock (1968, pp. 11–21), Smart (1996) and Sharpe (1983, pp. 91–107).

      The Classical Legacy: Marx, Durkheim
       and Weber

      Introduction

Among the most formative thinkers of the sociological paradigm, Karl Marx, Émile Durkheim and Max Weber are fundamental reference points for the sociology of religion. Of course, the discipline of sociology calls upon far more than the foundational insights of these three men. In doing so, however, what is drawn upon and how it is employed is – to a greater or lesser extent – orchestrated by reference to vocabulary, themes, theories and methods bequeathed to sociology by these individuals. By no means the only features of the sociological landscape, the legacies of Marx, Durkheim and Weber nevertheless

Скачать книгу

SCM Core Text Sociology of Religion. Andrew Dawson