More From This User
Related Docuements
The Academic Study of Religion
A well developed study guide. - Visit notehall.com for more great study guide...
From Notehall
Two Traditions in the Study of Religion
Robert Wuthnow
Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion
, Vol. 20, No. 1. (Mar., 1981), pp. 16-32.
Stable URL:http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0021-8294%28198103%2920%3A1%3C16%3ATTITSO%3E2.0.CO%3B2-H
Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion
is currently published by Society for the Scientific Study of Religion.Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available athttp://www.jstor.org/about/terms.html. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless you have obtainedprior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you may use content inthe JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use.Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained athttp://www.jstor.org/journals/sssr.html.Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printedpage of such transmission.The JSTOR Archive is a trusted digital repository providing for long-term preservation and access to leading academic journals and scholarly literature from around the world. The Archive is supported by libraries, scholarly societies, publishers,and foundations. It is an initiative of JSTOR, a not-for-profit organization with a mission to help the scholarly community takeadvantage of advances in technology. For more information regarding JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.http://www.jstor.orgWed Jul 4 23:59:33 2007
JOURNAL FOR THE SCIENTIFIC STUDY OF RELIGIONREFERENCESBainbridge, William Sims1978 Satan'sPowec Ethnography of a Deviantin "Towards a theory of religion: ReligiousPsychotherapy Cult Berkeley: Universitypress a commitment." Journal for the Scientificof California Press.Study of Religion.Bainbridge, William Sims and Rodney Starkin "Networks of faith: Interpersonal bondsin"Sectarian tension." Review of Religiouspress b and recruitment to cults and sects."press ResearchAmerican Journal of Sociology.1979 "Cult formation: Three compatibleStark, Rodney, William Sims Bainbridge andmodels." Sociological Analysis 40:Daniel Doyle283-295.1979 "Cults of America: A reconnaissance inGlock, Charles Y. and Robert N. Bellahspace and time." Sociological Analysis 40:1976 The New Religious Consciousness.347-359.Berkeley: University of California Press.Stark, Rodney, Daniel P. Doyle, and Lori KentLofland, John and Rodney Starkforth-"Rediscovering Moral Communities:1965 "Becoming a world saver: A theory ofcoming Church membership and crime."conversion to a deviant perspective."Wuthnow, RobertAmerican Sociological Review 30: 862-875.1976 The Consciousness Reformation Berkeley:Stark, Rodney and William Sims Bainbridge University of California Press.1979 "Of churches, sects, and cults: Preliminary1978 Experimentation in American Religionconcepts for a theory of religiousBerkeley: University of California Press.movements." Journal for the ScientificStudy of Religion 18: 117-131.
Two Traditions in the Study of Religion
ROBERT WUTHNOW*
Bainbridge and Stark's essay on The Consciousness Reformation illustrates conceptual andtheoretical ambiguities characteristic of research in the scientific study of religion more generally.This paper traces these ambiguities to the presence of two competing, but poorly differentiated,epistemological traditions. An examination of the assumptions implicit within each of thesetraditions provides a basis for clarifying the distinction between religious symbolism and religiousbelief, the concept of meaning, the difference between consistency as an attribute of belief andcoherence as an attribute of reality, and the role of interpersonal bonds in maintaining theplausibility of religious symbolism. An emerging third perspective that appears to circumvent someof the limitations of the two major epistemological traditions is also discussed.
For much of its recent history the scientific study of religion has been divided bycompeting intellectual presuppositions. Often the subject of discussion
in
the journalsand at professional meetings, these divisions continue to influence the selection ofresearch problems, the conceptualization of variables, and even the decision of which
'Robert Wuthnow is Associate Professor of Sociology at Princeton University and Director of Princeton'sProgram in Science in Human Affairs.
O
Journal for the Scientific Study ofReligion,
1981,20 11): 1632
17
WO TRADITIONS OF RELIGIOUS STUDIES
variables to employ in research. They also inform the selection of methodologicalstyles, the application of statistical techniques, and the interpretation of researchresults.Of itself, intellectual disagreement is not an unhealthy state of affairs. It is thefailure to understand the assumptions underlying these disagreements that producesambiguity and conceptual confusion. In the scientific study of religion such confusionand ambiguity has been much in evidence. The existence of intellectual disagreementshas been widely admitted, but little has been accomplished toward clarifying thenature, sources, and implications of these disagreements. As a result, it is notnecessary to search far in order to find examples of strikingly discrepant conclusionsbeing drawn from the same data or from similar sets of empirical observations.The BainbridgeStark essay contains much that is worthy of comment. It alsoillustrates the deeper conceptual and theoretical ambiguity that currently pervadesresearch in the scientific study of religion. Rather than responding only to questions ofmethod and interpretation, therefore, I shall direct my remarks primarily to the deeperpresuppositions that underlie these ambiguities. I shall outline several broaddevelopments in the history of the scientific study of religion that have, in my view,contributed significantly
to
the present state of affairs. This approach
will
allow issuesto be addressed that go well beyond the specific points raised by Bainbridge and Stark.I shall argue, contrary to a widely held view, that the main lines of division in thestudy of religion do not correspond to the cleavage between quantitative andqualitative methods. Nor do they coincide with the disjuncture between scientific andhumanistic perspectives. Close examination of the history of the field reveals insteadthat it has been divided principally by two competing epistemological orientations. Thefirst, derived from Cartesian dualism, dominated the field during its initialdevelopment and maturation. The second, a wholistic epistemology that came
to
bearticulated primarily in phenomenology and in textual hermeneutics, emerged inresponse to problems that became increasingly apparent in the dualistic conception asthe field evolved. The wholistic approach was not entirely successful at resolving theseproblems, however. For at least the past two decades both orientations have beenrepresented in varying degrees in the major theoretical and empirical formulations thathave guided work in the field. Although the resultant admixture has frequently beenproductive, it has also left a heavy residue of terminological ambiguity which, in turn,has contributed to misunderstanding in the conduct and interpretation of research.Only by sorting out the presuppositions inherent in the two epistemological traditionsthat have shaped the study of religion does it appear possible
to
advance beyond thecurrent conceptual confusion.In the early phases of its development, the scientific study of religion was unifiedby a common epistemological outlook, even though several distinct theoreticalperspectives came into being during this period. This epistemological outlook was aderivative ultimately of Cartesian dualism. At the heart of the dualistic conception ofreality was the idea that a perplexing gulf existed between the self, acting as a thinking
of 00
Wuthnow - Two Traditions in the Study of Religion
424 Reads
Info and Rating
| Category: | Uncategorized. |
| Rating: | |
| Upload Date: | 09/30/2009 |
| Copyright: | Attribution Non-commercial |
| Tags: |
Leave a Comment