Wikipedia

Religion

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Philip J. Rayment (talk | contribs) at 01:55, 25 October 2004 (→Approaches to the study of religion). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Religion is commonly defined as belief concerning the supernatural, sacred, or divine, often resulting in worship, and possibly including related institutions and organizations.


Approaches to distinguishing "religion" from "non-religion"

Religion is subject to much discussion in the fields of theology, psychology, sociology, and anthropology. Specialists in these fields, as well as ordinary people— theists, atheists, and agnostics alike—often disagree about the fundamental nature of religion. Consequently, any discussion of religion must begin by answering certain "basic" questions such as "What is a religious belief?", "What is the difference between religious and secular beliefs?", "How do we recognize what are religious beliefs?", "Are religions individual or group activities?", and "What methodology shall we use to investigate these questions?". The answers to these questions and similar questions can then serve as a common ground upon which further discussion can be based.

If the conclusions of a discussion are to be accepted by people from diverse religious backgrounds, then that discussion must make as few assumptions as possible. However, all societies and this article start with the following a priori assumptions:

  • There are sets of beliefs that are "religious"
  • These beliefs are distinct from secular beliefs and recognizable as "religious"
  • The most controversial, there are ways to recognize which beliefs are "religious" and which are "secular"

The last one is most controversial because there are two main ways of looking at the world, each bringing with it certain a priori assumptions that are usually not recognized. While a study of a particular religion made by either viewpoint may come to many of the same conclusions, differences between the two approaches include what beliefs are to be considered religious and the effects of religions.

By function

One approach, sometimes referred to as "Hebrew thought", defines "religion" as any set of beliefs that fulfills certain functions in an individual’s life, especially answering questions about our origins, present existence and where are we going and how shall we get there?, thereby forming the individual's attitudes, values, morality and actions. Consequently, adherents of this approach regard any belief system which answers any of these questions as "religious", including such non-theistic belief systems as Communism, secular humanism, and biological evolution.

The main advantage of this approach is its ability to incorporate seamlessly all of the belief systems that are considered religious, including some of the agnostic forms of Hinduism and Buddhism; according to its advocates, another advantage is its recognition of the fact that the phenomenon usually perceived as conflict between “religion” and “anti-religion” is in fact competition between different fundamentalisms.

One difficulty in applying this approach is the fact that many individuals hold multiple belief systems, some of which may be contradictory, and some feigned; consequently, it is often difficult to recognize the effect that any particular belief system has on an individual. Another difficulty is that it tries to evaluate what act as the inner guiding principles within an individual, his "religion" as it were, by the fruits those principles produce in his attitudes, values, morality and actions. It does not necessarily consider those beliefs and associations he admits to in public. Though this is a difficulty, it can be used to identify those who truly are adherents to a particular religion versus those who merely join the organization for reasons other than belief.

When studying specific religions or comparative religions, a functional study typically starts with an analysis of the teachings of the belief system, which includes an analysis of the "sacred writings" connected with the belief system if they exist. In this analysis, attention is paid to internal consistency, to whether or not the belief system answers the basic functional questions of origins, ontology and teleology, how well it correlates to observation and how it guides an individual's attitudes, values, morality and actions, even how he thinks. It looks at how integrated the religion is with daily life: is it merely ritual that once acted upon can be forgotten as done, or is it a belief that should inform every action an individual does?

A functional study also looks at those who claim to follow the religion to see if they truly follow it or not, and why.

Questions concerning group beliefs, actions and institutions, though important, are secondary because they are a result of doctrine and individual response. They may actually represent cultural norms and institutions rather than individual belief and practice, so that though they may appear to be a religion, they really aren't.

By form

Also called "Greek thought", it is the method most widely used by far, listed secondly so it can serve as a segue to the rest of this article. It is almost universally used in academia and among sociologists, anthropologists and Western philosophers. It is the basis for the sections following this one.

Most people, particularly those influenced by "Western" culture, almost instinctively recognize which of their beliefs are to be called "religious" and which "secular". Usually unconsciously, they have already made a priori assumptions such as "There are beliefs that are 'religious'", "Religious beliefs are not the same as secular beliefs" and typical assumptions imparted by western culture to recognize "religious" beliefs include:

  • A belief is religious if it is labeled as "religion" by those who believe it.
  • A belief is religious if it deals with "spiritual" matters.
  • A belief is religious if it results in ritual practices designed to invoke a higher reality, examples include prayer and worship.
  • If a belief is agnostic or atheistic and does not result in ritual practices, it is "secular".
  • If a belief, organization and rituals associated with them are not intended to promote a "religious" teaching, then they are "secular". Secular political parties in secular government with their beliefs and rituals are examples of secular organizations.

When studying specific religions and comparative religions, discussions typically begin by answering questions about uncontroversial, easily verifiable facts, such as "What beliefs do different groups of people hold?", "What practices are inspired by these beliefs?", and "What institutions arise as a result of these beliefs and practices?". Hopefully, answering these questions will create a body of data upon which all further discourse, including the answers to the "basic" questions mentioned in the first paragraph of this section, can then be based.

One advantage of this method is that people who hold to agnostic and atheistic belief systems can decide for themselves whether or not what they believe is a religious or secular belief system. Another advantage is that it conforms to widely held societal and academic norms, aiding in communication. Thirdly, in that it conforms to societal and academic norms, it avoids misunderstanding and conflict that can arise when using minority approaches, such as the functional approach above.

In contrast to the functional approach, the use of Greek thought as the methodology to study religion, with its emphasis on the inherently uncontroversial statements about religion's external manifestations, its expressed statements and rituals, is far less controversial and easily recognizable, therefore are more readily accepted by people with widely differing views of religion. Consequently, most major thinkers prefer to begin by examining the easily observable external forms of religion; the rest of this article takes the approach based on form.

Approaches to the study of religion

In looking at the many religions of the world as defined by form or Greek thought, scholars have taken different approaches to determining what is true about "religion."

  • Theological approaches, which is listed first because religion is best understood on its own terms, include efforts to determine the meaning and application of sacred texts in the context of the student's personal worldview. This generally takes one of three forms:
  • efforts by believers to ascertain the meaning of their own sacred text, and to conform their thoughts and actions to the principles enunciated in the text. For most believers, this involves a lifetime process of study, analysis, and practice. Some faiths, such as Hassidic Judaism, emphasize adherence to a set of rules and rituals. Other faiths, such as Christianity, emphasize the internalization and application of a set of abstract principles, such as Love, Justice, or Faith. Some believers interpret their scriptures literally, and apply the text exactly it is written. Other believers try to interpret scripture through its context, to derive abstract principles which they may apply more directly to their lives and contexts.
  • efforts by believers of one belief system attempt to describe a different belief system in terms of their own beliefs. One example of this method is in David Strauss's 1835 The Life of Jesus. Strauss's theological approach strikes from the Biblical text the descriptions of angels and miracles which, due to his presupposition that supernatural events do not occur, he does not believe could have occurred. He then concludes that the stories must have been inserted by a "supernaturalist" merely trying to make an important story more convincing. In this course of his argument, Strauss argues that the supernaturalist who inserted the angels into the story of the birth of Christ borrowed the heathen doctrine of angels from the Babylonians who had held the Jews in captivity. That is, the New Testament's fabulous role for angels "is evidently a product of the influence of the Zend religion of the Persians on the Jewish mind." Due to his presumption that supernatural events do not occur, he dismisses the possibility that both cultures came to believe in angels independently, as a result of their own experiences and context.
  • efforts by believers of one belief system to understand the heart and meaning of another faith on its own terms. This very challenging approach to understanding religion presumes that each religion is a self-consistent system whereby a set of beliefs and actions depend upon each other for coherence, and can only be understood in relation to each other. This method requires the student to investigate the philosophical, emotional, religious, and social presuppositions that adherents of another religion develop and apply in their religious life, before applying their own biases, and evaluating the other faith. For instance, an individual who personally does not believe in miracles may attempt to understand why adherents of another religion believe in miracles, and then attempt to understand how the individual's belief in miracles affects their daily life. While the individual may still himself not believe in miracles, he may begin to develop an understanding of why people of other faiths choose to believe in them.
  • Historical, archeological, and literary approaches to religion include attempts to discover the sacred writings at the "dawn of humanity." For example, Max Müller in 1879 launched a project to translate the earliest sacred texts of Hinduism into English in the Sacred Books of the East. Müller's intent was to translate for the first time the "bright" as well as the "dark sides" of non-Christian religions into English. [1]
  • Anthropological approaches include attempts to lay out the principles of native tribes that have had little contact with modern technology as in John Lubbock's The Origin of Civilization and the Primitive Condition of Man. [2] Within an anthropological approach to religion, people want an explanation of where they came from and what they should be doing on earth. It is believed within an anthropological approach that religion, like science, is an early stage in the development of man's tools of "explanation;" while religion is satisfied with faith, science requires verifiability of the explanation. [3]
  • Sociological approaches include attempts to explain the development of the ideas of morality and law, as in for example, Auguste Comte's Cours de philosophie positive hypothesizing in 1842 that people go through stages of evolution 1) obeying supernatural beings, then 2) manipulating abstract unseen forces, and finally 3) exploring more or less scientifically the social laws and practical governmental structures that work in practice. Within a sociological approach, religion is but the earliest primitive stage of discovering what is morally right and wrong in a civilized society. It is the duty of intelligent men and women everywhere to take responsibility for shaping the society without appealing to a non-existent Divinity to discover empirically what moral concepts actually work in practice, and in the process, the shapers of society must take into account that there is no Divine authority to adjudicate between what are only the opinions of men and women. Comte wrote, in translation, "It can not be necessary to prove to anybody who reads this work that Ideas govern the world, or throw it into chaos; in other words, that all social mechanism rests upon Opinions. The great political and moral crisis that societies are now undergoing is shown by a rigid analysis to arise out of intellectual anarchy." The intellectual anarchy includes the warring oppositions among the world's religions. [4]
  • Psychological approaches include attempts to explain religious urges as invasions from the unconscious, as in William James's 1902 The Varieties of Religious Experience. The experience of God becomes the object of study even though other aspects of God are unknowable. And life after death can be approached empirically through case studies. James cumulates case studies of the experience of "religion" and categorizes the experiences, including Encounter with the divine, Healthy-mindedness, Sick soul, Divided-self and reunification, Conversion, Saintliness, Mysticism, Practice, Philosophy, Sacrifice, and Confession. [5]
  • Philosophical approaches include attempts to derive rational classifications of the views of the world that religions preach as in Immanuel Kant's 1788 Critique of Practical Reason. Within a philosophical approach, the reason for a religious belief should be more important than the emotional attachment to the belief. [6] And in attempting to provide a reasonable basis for morality, Kant proposed the categorical imperative: "Act only on that maxim through which you can at the same time will that it should become a universal law." [7]

What do most religions have in common?

The word religion probably derives from the Latin word ligare, meaning "to join", "to link" or to bind (although the OED describes this as uncertain). The prefix re- may mean "back" or "again", or may be an intensifier, so religion could be literally translated, variously, as "binding back", or as re-linking or re-joining, or as "binding strongly". According to the first interpretation, religion is understood by many modern English-speakers to mean the reconnection of human and the alleged divine. Accordingly, one might begin by defining religion as a system of beliefs based on humanity's attempt to explain the universe and natural phenomena, often involving one or more deities or other supernatural forces and also requiring or binding adherents to follow prescribed religious obligations. Such a system of beliefs can be distinguished from branches of philosophy, such as metaphysics, which seek to address many of the same questions. In ancient Greece and in the Judeo-Christian context, especially later on when Christianity became the backdrop of European thinkers, a distinct line was drawn between metaphysics and religion. In the Indian philosophic tradition, however, religion and philosophy were until very recently inseparable, especially in Hinduism and Buddhism. Whether or not the philosophy of religion is regarded as being part of metaphysics is basically relative to which faith system is being considered.

Two identifying features of religions are that to some extent they all (a) require faith and (b) seek to organize and influence the thoughts and actions of their adherents. Because of this, some contend that all religions are to some degree both unempirical and dogmatic and are therefore to be distrusted. A system of thought that is purely rational would be a science rather than a religion, and a system that is not in the least dogmatic would be unable to guide its adherents in any way. On the other hand, schools of thought within many religions strive to embody rationalism (for example, the Nyaya school of Hinduism), and many claim to use unimpeachable logic in defending their dogmatic ontological and moral concepts.

Religious practices

Practices based upon religious beliefs typically include:

  • Prayer
  • Worship
  • Regular assembly with other believers
  • A priesthood or clergy or some other religious functionary to lead and/or help the adherents of the religion
  • Ceremonies and/or traditions unique to the set of beliefs
  • A means of preserving adherence to the canonical beliefs and practice of that religion
  • Codes for behaviour in other aspects of life to ensure consistency with the set of beliefs, i.e., a moral code, like the ten yamas (restraints) of Hinduism or the Ten Commandments of the Old Testament, flowing from the beliefs rather than being defined by the beliefs, with the moral code often being elevated to the status of a legal code that is enforced by followers of that religion
  • Maintenance and study of scripture, or texts they hold as sacred uniquely different from other writings, and which records or is the basis of the basic beliefs of that religion

Adherents of a particular religion typically gather together to celebrate holy days, to recite or chant scripture, to pray, to worship, and provide spiritual assistance to each other. However, solitary practice of prayer and meditation is often seen to be just as important, as is living out religious convictions in secular activities when in the company of people who are not necessarily adherents to that religion. This is often a function of the religion in question.

Comparing religion to spirituality

Many Westerners prefer to use the term spirituality rather than religion to describe their form of belief. This may reflect a large-scale disillusionment with organized religion that is occurring in much of the Western world (see Religion in Modernity). However, proponents of some forms of spirituality may represent a movement towards a more "modern"—more tolerant, less counter-factual, and more intuitive—form of religion. This is evidenced by apparently greater religious pluralism and movements such as the ecumenical movement within and transcending Christian denominations. There are corresponding moderating movements within Islam and other religious traditions.

In the East, however, spirituality is viewed as inseparable from religion. The Indic religions (Hinduism, Buddhism, Sikhism and Jainism) have always incorporated into their very framework primary focuses on spirituality. Yoga, for example, is a section of Hindu philosophy and informed the spiritual traditions of both Hindu and Buddhist tantra. It is an extremely detailed, rational, and scientific approach to developing control of mind and body for the purpose of realizing spiritual truths such as uniting with the Divine. It built into the structure of scriptural injunctions and various cultural frameworks a universal understanding of the divinity of man. Thus, we see that spirituality has, in many Eastern religions, no separate existence.

Spirituality, in its Western comprehension, is religion cut loose from some of its bureaucratic trappings. The concept is neutral with regard to tolerance, etc. The same disillusionment often leads in the opposite direction, toward intolerance and violence. Many extreme sects lay claim to a higher spiritual basis. Some of those professing to have attained a higher spiritual plane are actually manipulative and intolerant.

It is possible, and perhaps advised, to keep in mind that there can be a rigid distinction between the mundane, earthly aspects of religion and the spiritual dimension. People can gain security from such things as regular attendance at churches or temples, deepening knowledge of religious scriptures, and the social comfort of fervently agreeing with other believers. This sometimes is done without a corresponding spiritual dimension. Some people see this as being distant from God, but very 'religious'. Conversely those who consider themselves deeply involved with the Divine may have come to reject much of the recognised aspects of established religion. Indeed, some would feel that this is central to the beliefs of the founders of some religions: for example, Jesus was very critical of traditional interpretations of the established Judaism, and the perceived hypocrisy of some of its adherents at the time.

People disagree about whether religions have a spiritual or supernatural basis; an example of this is the belief that the modern ceremonies and canons of the Church have almost completely grown away from, or even are contrary to, the presumed original Divine revelation or source. This belief has arisen throughout history. One example is found in pre-Reformation Christianity, when 'Indulgences' (excusal of sin) were for sale, and corruption was endemic in Church appointments. Today, some would hold that extreme religious practices such as some punishments under Sharia law, or the historical burning of heretics, was not at all what God intended. Others find those practices repugnant to the secular ethics of a modern liberal democracy.

Religion in certain faith-systems can therefore draw itself into disrepute through the weaknesses of its practitioners, while spirituality can be independently, but invisibly, strong and flourishing.

Religion in modernity

In the late 19th century and throughout most of the 20th century, the demographics of religion has changed a great deal.

Some historically Christian countries, particularly those in Europe, have experienced a significant decline in religion, shown by declining recruitment for priesthoods and monasteries, fast-diminishing attendance at churches, synagogues, etc. Explanations for this effect include disillusionment with ideology following the ravages of World War II, the materialistic philosophical influence of science, Marxism and Humanism, and a new-found interest in toleration that conflicts with exclusivist religious claims.

In the United States, Latin America, and Sub-Saharan Africa, by contrast, studies show that Christianity is strong and growing stronger, and many believe those areas to have become the new "heart" of Christianity. Islam is currently the fastest growing religion, and is nearly universal in many states stretching from West Africa to Indonesia, and has grown in world influence in the West. Hinduism, Buddhism, and Shintoism remain nearly universal in the Far East, and have greatly influenced spirituality, particularly in the United States. Explanations for this effect include disillusionment with the perceived failures of secular western ideologies (such as Naziism, Communism, Secular Humanism, and Materialism during the World Wars and following. Adherents to religion cite Western decadence, high rates of divorce, crime, depression, and suicide as evidence of Western social decline, which they believe is caused by the abandonment of Faith by the West.

Modern adherence to religion

Additional reasons for continuing adherence to mainstream religion include the following:

  • Moderation: Many religions have approaches that produce practices that place limitations on the behaviour of their adherents. This is seen by many as a positive influence, potentially protecting adherents from the destructive or even fatal excesses to which they might otherwise be susceptible. Many people from many faiths contend that their faith brings them fulfillment, peace, and joy, apart from worldly interests.
  • Authority: Most religions are authoritarian in nature, and thus provide their adherents with spiritual and moral role models, who they believe can bring highly positive influences both to adherents and society in general.
  • Moral Framework: Most religions see early childhood education in religion and spirituality as essential moral and spiritual formation, whereby individuals are given a proper grounding in ethics: instilling and internalizing moral discipline.
  • Cultural factors: Some "religious" individuals may have substantially secular viewpoint, but retain adherence to religious customs and viewpoints for cultural reasons, such as continuation of traditions and family unity. Judaism, for example, has a particularly strong tradition of "secular" adherents.
  • Supernatural connection: Most religions postulate a reality which include both the natural and the supernatural. Most adherents of religion consider this to be of critical importance, since it permits belief in unseen and otherwise potentially unknowable aspects of life, including hope of eternal life.
  • Majesty and tradition: People can form positive views of religion based on the visible manifestations of religion, e.g., ceremonies which appear majestic and reassuringly constant, and ornate cloth.
  • Community: Organized religions promote a sense of community. The combination of moral and cultural common ground often results in a variety of social and support networks.
  • Fulfillment: Most traditional religions require sacrifice of their followers, but, in turn, the followers may gain much from their membership therein. Thus, they come away from experiences with these religions with the feeling that their needs have been filled.
  • Experience or emotion: For many, the practice of a religion causes an emotional high that gives pleasure to them. Such emotional highs can come from the singing of traditional hymns to the trance-like states found in the practices of the Whirling Dervishes and Yoga, among others. People continue to associate with those practices that give pleasure and, in so far as it is connected with religion, join in religious organizations that provide those practices.
  • Rational Analysis: For some of those who profess a religion, their adherence is based on intellectual evaluation that has led them to the conclusion that the teachings of that religion most closely describe reality. Among Christians this basis for belief is often given by those influenced by C.S. Lewis and Francis Schaeffer, as well as some who teach young earth Creationism.

Modern causes for rejecting religion

As noted above, in much of the developed world, mainstream religions have been on the decline. This decline is apparently in parallel with increased prosperity and social well-being. It appears increasingly common for people to engage in far-ranging explorations, with many finding spiritual satisfaction outside of organized churches. This is a demographic group whose numbers are growing and whose future impact cannot be predicted. The people that reject religion often state the faults that they find in mainstream religions; these faults include the following:

  • Restrictiveness: Many religions have (or have had in the past) an approach that produces, or produced, practices that are considered by some people to be too restrictive, e.g., regulation of dress, and proscriptions on diet and activities on certain days of the week. Some feel that religion is the antithesis of prosperity, fun, enjoyment and pleasure. This causes them to reject it entirely, or to see it as only to be turned to in times of trouble.
  • Self-promotion: Some individuals place themselves in positions of power and privilege through promotion of specific religious views, e.g., the Bhagwan/Osho interlude, Reverend Moon of the Unification Church (sometimes called Moonie movement), and other controversial new religious movements pejoratively called cults. Such self-promotion has tended to reduce public confidence in many things that are called "religion." Similarly, highly publicized cases of abuse by the clergy of several religions have tended to reduce public confidence in the underlying message.
  • "Promotion of ignorance": Many atheists and agnostics see early childhood education in religion and spirituality as a form of brainwashing or social conditioning, essentially concurring with the Marxian view that "religion is the opiate of the masses", with addiction to it fostered when people are too young to choose.
  • Dulling the mind against dealing with reality: Hegel, Feuerbach, and Marx developed views that men and women of today have the capability of taking responsibility for their condition where there is no God to assist them. But dealing with reality is sometimes painful. And religion in modern times serves as an "opiate" that gives false hopes and a distorted view of reality with less pain. Perhaps, before the advent of science and the modern understanding of evolution, religion was a valid "stage of growth in human self-consciousness." But today the "opiate" of religion dulls the users' minds, leaves the users in an "opiate"-induced stupor, and makes the users incapable of fixing their "inhuman condition" where the harmful condition includes the addiction of "the masses" to religion. [8] Hence in 1844, in Contribution to the Critique of Hegel's 'Philosophy of Right', Marx said of religion, "It is the opium of the people." [9]
  • Unsuitable moral systems in mainstream religions: Some argue that simplistic absolutism taught by some religions impairs a child's moral capacity to deal with a world of complex and varied temptations in which, in reality, there is no God to inform or assist.
  • Unappealing forms of practice: People can form a negative view, based upon the manifestations of religion, e.g., ceremonies which appear pointless and repetitive, arcane clothing, and exclusiveness in membership requirements.
  • Mainstream religions violate "common sense": Some religions postulate a reality which may be seen as stretching credulity and logic, and even some believers may have difficulty accepting particular religious assertions about nature, the supernatural and the afterlife.
  • Irrational and unbelievable creeds: Some people believe the body of evidence available to humans to be insufficent to justify certain religious beliefs. They may thus disagree with religious interpretations of ethics and human purpose, and theistic views of creation. This reason has been abetted by an anti-intellectual reaction to "modernism" among many fundamentalist Christians.
  • Mainstream religions have a detrimental effect on government: Some religious adherents argue that all human endeavour, including government, is subordinate to "God's Law". Disillusionment with forms of theocratic government, such as practiced in Iran, can lead people to question the legitimacy of any religious beliefs used to justify non-secular government.
  • Mainstream religions have forsaken traditional practices and beliefs: Some modern religions have replaced traditional dogma with teachings, moral positions and practices perceived as so "modern" and liberal that followers may not be greatly distinguished from "non-religious" individuals. People with traditional views may lose confidence in the judgement of religious leaders who support such positions, leading them to lose confidence in their beliefs, seek alternative religions or look for organizations still teaching traditional dogma.
  • Tensions between proselytizing and secularizing: Increasingly secular beliefs have been steadily on the rise in many nations. An increasing acceptance of a secular worldview, combined with efforts to prevent "religious" beliefs from influencing society and government policy, may have led to a corresponding decline in religious belief, especially of more traditional forms.

Non-religious attempts to explain religion

All religions explain the reasons for their existence in their own terms. Modern scholarship, which may also be regarded as a self-contained system of explanation, brings its own tools to the task of accounting for the phenomenon of religious belief in naturalistic terms. Especially in the fields of neuroscience, neuropsychology, memetics and evolutionary psychology, new breakthroughs offer a hope of explaining religion in scientific terms.

Science seeks to explore the apparent similarities among religious views dominate in diverse cultures that have had little or no contact, why religion is found in almost every human group, and why humans often seem to accept counterfactual statements in the name of religion. In neuroscience, work by scientists such as Ramachandran and his colleagues from the University of California, San Diego [10] suggests evidence of brain circuitry in the temporal lobe associated with intense religious experiences. In sociology, Rodney Stark has looked at the social forces that have caused religions to grow and the features of religions that have been most successful. For example, Stark, who claims to be an agnostic, hypothesizes that, before Christianity became established as the state religion of Constantinople, Christianity grew rapidly because it provided a practical framework within which non-family members would provide help to other people in the community in a barter system of mutual assistance. In evolutionary psychology, scientists have considered the survival advantages that religion might have given to a community of hunter-gatherers, such as unifying them within a coherent social group.

Some cognitive psychologists, however, take a completely different approach to explaining religion. Foremost among them is Pascal Boyer, whose book, Religion Explained, lays out the basics of his theory, and attempts to refute several previous and more simple explanations for the phenomenon of religion. Essentially, Mr. Boyer claims that religion is a result of the misfunctioning or overfunctioning of certain subconscious intuitive mental faculties, which normally apply to physics (enabling prediction of the arc a football will take only seconds after its release, for example), and social networks (to keep track of other people's identity, history, loyalty, etc.), and a variety of others.

Many religious individuals view these non-religious explanations as potentially reductionistic, if misused. They argue that the questions of Religious Truth and Religious Functioning are entirely separate issues; that just as the scientific laws of sound cannot explain the message of a person's speech, science is competent to investigate how religions function, but is incompetent as to the Truth of a religion's message.

Differences between religions

Western religions typically focus on a relationship and worship between the person and their higher deity. Eastern religions typically focus on a process of living life for the next life or the here after. However, there exists a spectrum of religions and practices between the dichotomy of relationship and process.

While practitioners of the Abrahamic faiths or "people of the Book" (Christianity, Judaism, and Islam) each worship one all-powerful God, each of these religions has different beliefs. Many followers of each of these three religions openly oppose the idea that the three views point to the same God, pointing out the many areas of disagreement as to God's nature, character, deeds and overall plan with humanity.

Jews believe that their deity is the one and only God, who revealed his Torah (teachings) to Moses and other sages of Israel.

Christians accept this same God, but believe that the Christ has already appeared in the form of Jesus, in accordance to the Jewish Scriptures (such as in the books of Daniel and Isaiah). Unlike the Jewish belief of Christ, the Christians proclaim that He came to earth to set God's children free from sin, rather than from oppression. The central schism between the Roman Catholic and Protestant Churches is that in the latter good deeds cannot create or maintain a relationship with God. Virtuous deeds are supposed to simply flow from pure faith and a relationship with God through entering that relationship with Jesus.

Muslims, like the Jews, differ with the Christians as to the divinity and 'sonship' of Jesus, but accept the Virgin Birth as a miracle of God. The role of Jesus in Islam is one of a distinguished line of prophets, all of whom were sent by God as messengers to enlighten humankind. Muhammad was just another of these messengers, although believed to be the 'jewel' of the prophets. Many Muslims think he was the best and the last of the prophets, but the arabic word also means 'jewel'. The Five Pillars of Islam are the five required deeds or rituals needed to relate, through submission of the ego, to the one holy God. Jews and Christians often perceive the Muslim view of God as being different from their own view, in terms of nature and character, but this is an on-going debate.

Although there is a tendency, in the West especially, to speak about religion in terms of God not all religions believe in a creator god. For example, Jain cosmology is strongly atheistic and the original forms of Taoism and Buddhism are also non-theistic.

In contrast to other mainstream religions, Hinduism has not a single founder. Besides some scholars do not consider Hinduism a single religion but a group of related religions.

Questions that religions address

Religions are systems of belief which typically answer questions about the following concerns:

  • the divine, the sacred and the supernatural,
  • our purpose as beings, on earth, goals in this life and possible other states of being like heaven, nirvana, purgatory or hell,
  • what happens to us when we die and how to prepare for that,
  • the nature of Deity (or Deities) (cf God) and what She, He, They or It wants from us,
  • our relationships with the divine, the sacred, ancestors, other believers, nonbelievers, and the natural world around us; that is, how to behave properly in relation to others.

Generally, the different religions and the non-religious all have different answers for the above concerns. Hence, scholars can classify a religion according to the characteristic answer the religion gives for the above concerns.

Comparison of sources of authority

In addition, scholars can classify a religion according to the nature of the authority to which the religion refers.

  • Universal religions sometimes have no prophetic founder, although they may have had an early "champion" or crafter of that religious viewpoint. For example, Hinduism claims to be the science of the spirit. The various forms of God, e.g., Saguna Brahman (i.e., Vishnu or Shiva) of Hinduism are the projections of the One Reality(e.g., Nirguna Brahman) that transcends the subject/object split created by the analytic processes of the human mind.
  • Polytheistic religions involve many deities. Usually, each deity is considered a separate entity (as opposed, for instance, to Christianity which considers the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit as one). Polytheistic religions often flourish in less centralized societies, where each individual can adapt a portion of the religion as their own. This kind of religions gives more freedom to the practitioners who often hold to little dogma. Examples of polytheisms include the mythologies of ancient Greece and Egypt, and modern Pagan revivals such as Wicca orAsatru (see also Neopaganism).
  • Shamanistic religions are a broad category of religions based around worship of ancestors or spirits rather than "Gods." Shamanistic religions typically are limited to small geographical areas and rarely achieve national or international organization.
  • Pantheistic or natural religions see everything in nature an aspect of a spiritual plane. Such faiths include (to various degrees) Shintoism and several animistic traditions.
  • Some religions, alternatively termed spiritual philosophies, emphasize extensive practical teachings for achieving human happiness or equanimity in the natural world with a lesser focus on the supernatural. Examples: Buddhism, Taoism, and Confucianism. Others like Hinduism emphasize such beliefs but still do believe in a God or gods.
  • Communism is one example of a political philosophy with many of the characteristics of a religion. Those include "sacred" texts, rituals, and the near-deification of certain leaders. Its official policy is atheism, however, indicating that neither the belief in the supernatural nor the disbelief in it is a reliable indicator of religious character.

Generally while individual religions may differ in sources of authority, they share many common traits, such as ritual, concern with the afterlife, regulation of social behavior, and belief in the supernatural.

Dealing with others' religions

Adherents of particular religions deal with the differing doctrines and practices espoused by other religions in several ways.

Exclusivism

People with exclusivist beliefs typically explain other religions as either in error, or as corruptions or counterfeits of the true faith. Exclusivist views are more completely explored in chosen people.

Inclusivism

People with inclusivist beliefs recognize some truth in all faith systems, highlighting agreements and minimizing differences, but see their own faith as in some way ultimate. Examples of Inclusivist Views include:

  • A well-known Rig Vedic hymn stemming from Hinduism claims that "Truth is One, though the sages know it variously."
  • Jesus Christ, the founder of Christianity, said, "He who is not against me is for me." Mark 9:40. The belief is affirmed by the aphorism common in some Christian circles, affirming that "All Truth is God's Truth."
  • The Quran, revealed through Muhammed, states, "Those with iman, those who are Jews, and the Christians and Sabaeans, all who have iman in Allah and the Last Day and act rightly, will have their reward with their Lord. They will feel no fear and will know no sorrow." (Quran, Surat al-Baqara; 2:62)

Pluralism

People with pluralist beliefs make no distinction between faith systems, viewing each one as valid within a particular culture.

Syncretism

People with syncretistic views blend the views of a variety of different religions or traditional beliefs into a unique fusion which suits their particular experience and context. Examples of Syncretistic Views includes the following:

Inclusivistic, Exclusivistic, and Pluralistic streams of thought run through all faiths.

Role of charismatic figures

Many religions have been deeply influenced by charismatic leaders, such as Jesus Christ, Martin Luther, Saint Francis of Assisi, John Calvin, Joseph Smith, Adi Sankara, Ramakrishna Paramahamsa, Swami Vivekanada, Sai Baba, Muhammad, Gautama Buddha, etc. These leaders are either the central teacher and founder of the religion (e.g. Muhammad, Jesus, or Gautama) or reformers or prominent persons.

The historical or legendary founders of some of the major world religions include Abraham and Moses (Judaism), Zoroaster (Zoroastrianism), Siddartha Gautama (Buddhism), Jesus Christ (Christianity), Muhammad (Islam), and Bahá'u'lláh (Bahá'í).

Origin of religion

The origin of religion in general and for particular religions is controversial, since religions often claim to have been derived directly from actions of God or god(s) to a chosen human messenger or messenger(s). By definition, followers of a religion accept the claims, either literally or in a metaphorical, or partial fashion. Followers of a religion, although they may have strongly held beliefs, may also be interested in looking at possible human origins for religious events, together with non-religious enquirers.

Institutional religion came into being about 4000 years ago, roughly coincident with the invention of writing, and writing was long the exclusive preserve of the priestly classes, and as such served to preserve their power and privilege. Coincidentally, this corresponds with the writing of the Tanach (an acronym for the three Parts of the Jewish Scripture: the Torah (Instructions for the salvation of the soul and body), the Neviim/Prophets, a series of books written for our spirit, and the Ketuvim, a collection of books for our minds, which was dictated by the Jewish Elohim to His only wife (Jer.3:14), the Jewish People in Hebrew. However the New Testament is almost universally regarded among scholars to have been written in Greek, although some scholars belonging to Messianic Judaism argue that it was originally written in Hebrew [11].

However, Archeologists and historians debate whether religion was practised before the invention of writing. Non-believers hypothesize that religion may have originated in stories created to account for the great questions of life, for comfort, to keep records of a people's history, and/or for entertainment. It is also possible that atheists (those who hold to the tenets of scientific materialism and do not believe in any deities) or agnostics (those who believe we cannot know if there are any deities) always existed as well.

Recent advances in cognitive psychology and neuropsychology suggest that religion might have its origins in the workings of the brain itself. Pascal Boyer's book, Religion Explained, attempts to explain religion through cognitive psychology.

Physical evidence of origins of religion

Early human remains, art, and artifacts leave us clues as to their beliefs and practices, though interpretation of these archaeological remains is problematic. Early human prehistory has scattered physical evidence and no writings: for example, bones painted with red ochre may signify a color symbolizing life rather than a belief in an afterlife, covering the dead person's body with valuable possessions may derive from the belief that using the dead person's possessions will bring bad luck. Imagine a future archaeologist digging through the remains of a Star Wars fan's bedroom and consider the possible erroneous interpretations of such a find.

Later religious viewpoints, such as Christianity and Islam, point to a myriad of archeological evidence (i.e., comparisons between archeological findings and the cities and people mentioned in their holy books) and manuscripts of early writings of their religion. When archaeology was still in its early stages as a scientific discipline in the 19th century, many archeologists attempted to find evidence contrary to the Bible, for example, and some became instead forceful witnesses to its overall accuracy. These religious books are sometimes used to interpret archeological finds but are still considered by many to be an unreliable guide. For example, the James Ossuary was precisely dated by this method before it was determined to be a fake by some, though this is still debated.

Evidence from burial practices

Nevertheless, evidence for early civilizations' religious ideas can be found similarly in elaborate burial practices in which valuable objects were left with the deceased, intended for use in an afterlife or to appease the gods. This custom has clearer motives as it is usually accompanied by tomb paintings showing a belief of afterlife. It reached a spectacular form with the creation of the pyramids of Giza and the other great tombs of ancient Egypt; the Sumerian royal burials, and other prehistoric (pre-written records) monument builders.

Documentation of modern religions' beginnings

Religions created in modern times are often reasonably well documented (for example, Scientology). Minor religions have been, and still are, called cults, while many scholars use the term New Religious Movement (NRM). Reasons for the creation of religions are many, including a range from idealism to a desire to obtain wealth and power over others; the two may combine in interesting ways.

Religion and mental health

Maslow's research

Abraham Maslow's research after World War II showed that Holocaust survivors tended to be those who held strong religious beliefs (not necessarily temple attendance, etc), suggesting it helped people cope in extreme circumstances. Humanistic psychology went on to investigate how religious or spiritual identity may have correlations with longer lifespan and better health. Humans may particularly need religious ideas to serve various emotional needs such as the need to feel loved, the need to belong to homogenous groups, the need for understandable explanations and the need for a guarantee of ultimate justice.

The critical factors may involve sense of purpose, extreme beliefs in general, or other factors sometimes correlated with religious belief, and/or may be specific to Holocaust survivors. The very fact that religion was the primary selector for research subjects may also have introduced a bias.

Other research

A study of adolescents found that frequent church-goers with high spiritual support had the lowest scores on the Beck depression inventory (Wright et al., 1993).[12]

Practical benefits

Religions may sometimes provide breadth and scale for visionary inspirations in compassion, practical charity, and moral restraint.

Christianity is noted for the founding of many major universities, the creation of early hospitals, the provision of food and medical supplies to the needy, and the creation of orphanages and schools, amongst other charitable acts. Many other religions (and non-religious organisations and individuals, eg: humanistic Oxfam) have also performed equivalent or similar work.

Religion and mythology

Ancient polytheistic religions, such as those of ancient Greece, ancient Rome, the Vikings, etc., are often studied under the heading of mythology. Religions of pre-industrial peoples, or cultures in development to industrial conditions, are similarly observed by the anthropology of religion. Mythology can be a term used pejoratively by religious and non-religious people both, by defining another person's religious stories and beliefs as mythology. Here myths are treated as fantasies, or "mere" stories. The term myth in sociology, however has a non-pejorative meaning, defined as stories that are important for the group and not necessarily untrue. The study of religions, and the investigation of myths by psychology, not to mention how some myths turn out to have historical verification, has brought about a mixed, almost contradictory use of the term: some NRMs such as Neopaganism actively research and use myths from older religions, both those that still exist and those that have disappeared. Joseph Campbell, in The Power of Myth, held that myth was a universal human trait, and necessary to well-being. There is no essential difference between the myths of extinct religions and those of extant religions.

A few religious critics view the elevation of philosophy of science and "mathematical fetishism" as creating a mythology, and call that an error, naming these practices scientism. These are usually inseparable from debates about ethics in science.

Monotheism vs. polytheism

The dominance of monotheism among influential Western scholars of religion, and theologians, proposed a division into monotheistic and polytheistic faiths. The classification fails with a religion that places minute emphasis on gods but more importance on the individual's ability to understand the ineffable (like Buddhism and Vedanta strands of Hinduism, which both express this as "seeing things as they really are"). Also, it is an overly simplistic definition that often obscures the nature of a religion, such as Hinduism, that believes all is ultimately one, with gods, goddesses and even religious institutions all representing different facets of the single truth, or with Buddhism, which declines to comment on the nature of ultimate reality (or non-reality). This monism and quasi-atheist (unclassifiable) stance defy the clear-cut conventions of a singular creator-god, such as in Christianity, Islam or Judaism.Christianity claims to be monotheistic, although some writers find this idea problematic since Christian doctrine has developed a notion of God as one essence in three persons (Father, Son and Holy Spirit), explained in the doctrine of the Holy Trinity. The monotheism of Islam and Judaism is much more clear cut, although very early sources for Yahweh show signs of henotheistic or polytheistic origins or forerunners, which do not at all deny their sole Deity status once the religion became established. The Bahá'í faith is also monotheistic, teaching that several major world religions all originate with God; its acceptance of religions such as Buddhism and Hinduism is explained by the Bahá'í belief that these religions were originally monotheistic but later became corrupted by their followers. Ásatrú is strongly polytheistic, but many neopagan religions, such as Wicca, while appearing to be polytheistic, are difficult to classify neatly. While adherents worship a diverse pantheon of gods and goddesses, a great many of them believe those personalities to be facets of a single Deity, as in Bhakti (devotional) sects of Hinduism.

See also

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Religion&oldid=6840974"