Religion

'''Religion'''—sometimes used interchangeably with faith or belief system—is commonly defined as belief concerning the supernatural, sacred, or divine, and the moral codes, practices and institutions associated with such belief. In its broadest sense some have defined it as the sum total of answers given to explain humankind's relationship with the universe. In the course of the development of religion, it has taken a huge number of forms in various cultures and individuals. Occasionally, the word "religion" is used to designate what should be more properly described as a "religious organization" – that is, an organization of people that supports the exercise of some religion, often taking the form of a legal entity (see religion-supporting organization). [[Borobudur, a Buddhist stupa built between 750 and 850]] Fishers of men; Oil on panel by [[Adriaen van de Venne (1614)]]

The nature and content of religion

Etymology

The word religion is thought to derive from one of two combinations of Latin roots. The first is re + legio or "re-reading," a meaning attributed by Cicero to describe the repetition of scripture. The second interpretation, favoured by more modern scholars such as Tom Harpur, is re + ligio or "reconnection." However, some take the Latin term "ligio" (as in ligament) in the sense of "bind" rather than "connect," hence interpreting "religion" as "returning to bondage."

Defining "religion"

Beyond the above, very broad definition of religion, there are a variety of uses and meanings for the word "religion." Some of the approaches are as follows: For a more complete discussion, see approaches to distinguishing religion from non-religion.

Questions that religions address

Jesus Christ, oil painting by Roland Walleij. Religions are systems of belief which typically seek to answer questions about the following issues: Generally, the different religions and the non-religious all have different answers for the above concerns, and many religions provide a range of answers to each question.

Religious practices

Practices based upon religious beliefs typically include: 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.

Contrasts among religions

Religions diverge widely with regard in the answers they provide to the questions listed above, and the practices of the religious faithful. For example:

Number of gods

The syllable [[Aum or ॐ is the primordial mantra in Vedic tradition.]]

Gender of gods

Main article: God and gender.

Sources of authority

[[12th century Andalusian Qur'an]]

Organizational structure

Ethical focus

(It should be noted that, to one degree or another, most religions draw from all types of ethics; however, most traditionally emphasize one over the others)

Afterlife

Approaches to relating to the beliefs of others

Adherents of particular religions deal with the differing doctrines and practices espoused by other religions in a variety ways. All strains of thought appear in different segments of all major world religions.

Exclusivism

People with exclusivist beliefs typically explain other religions as either in error, or as corruptions or counterfeits of the true faith. Examples include: 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 include: Lord Krishna

Pluralism

Main article: Religious pluralism People with pluralist beliefs make no distinction between faith systems, viewing each one as valid within a particular culture. Examples include:

Syncretism

Main article: 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. Unitarian-Universalism is an example of a syncretistic faith.

Religion and spirituality

It is common to distinguish the concept of "religion" from the concept of "spirituality." Individuals who ascribe to this distinction see spirituality as a belief in ideas of religious significance (such as God, the Soul, or Heaven) without being bound to the bureaucratic structure and creeds of a particular organized religion. They choose the term spirituality rather than religion to describe their form of belief, perhaps reflecting a large-scale disillusionment with organized religion that is occurring in much of the Western world (see Religion in modernity), and a movement towards a more "modern" — more tolerant, and more intuitive — form of religion. Many members of organized religion, of course, see no significant difference between the two terms, because they see spirituality at the heart of their religion, and see the church organization as a means of preserving that spirituality. Many of them associate themselves with an organized religion because they see the religious community as a means of maintaining and strengthening their Faith in fellowship with other believers. They see amorphous "spirituality" movements as "religions of convenience," in which individuals can choose whatever beliefs make them feel comfortable at the time, without being bound to any external standard of accountability. Finally, it should be noted that many individuals, while still associating themselves with an organized religion, see a distinction between the mundane, earthly aspects of their religion and the spiritual dimension. They note that people may take part in organized religion purely for mundane reasons, for example, gaining security from such things as regular attendance at churches or temples, or the social comfort of fervently agreeing with other believers; they note that this sometimes is done without a corresponding spiritual dimension. They then conclude that such behavior is "religious" without being "spiritual." Further, some aspects of religion (for example, the Catholic Inquisition or Islamic Terrorism), are seen as completely contrary to the teachings of the religions' founders, who many believe taught tolerance and love. In support of this belief that religions may "lose their way," many cite things such as Jesus' criticism of the Pharisees, who represented organized religion in his context. As a result, many who consider themselves deeply involved with the Divine may have come to reject much of the recognised aspects of established religion, in an effort to free themselves of the mundane trappings or perceived corruption of "religion."

Religion and science

Generally speaking, religion and science use different methods in their effort to ascertain Truth and knowledge. Religion utilises methods that are based upon subjective interpretation of personal intuition or experience, and/or on the authority of a perceived prophet or a sacred text, through revelation. Science, on the other hand, uses the scientific method; an objective process of investigation based upon physical evidence, subject only to observable and verifiable phenomena. Secularists see religion as a form of Superstition. Similarly, there are two types of questions which religion and science attempt to answer: questions of observable and verifiable phenomena (such as the laws of physics, or human behaviour), and questions of unobservable phenomena and value judgments (such as how the laws of physics came to be, and what is "good" and "bad"). People apply the two methods to the two categories of questions in a variety of ways.

Religion and myth

Shrine of the Bab in [[Haifa, Israel]] The word "myth" has two meanings, according to the Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary: # a person or thing having only an imaginary or unverifiable existence # a usually traditional story of ostensibly historical events that serves to unfold part of the world view of a people or explain a practice, belief, or natural phenomenon

Myth as "mere story"

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.

Myth as defining and explaining belief

The term myth in sociology, however has a non-pejorative meaning, defined as stories that are important for the group and not necessarily untrue. Examples include the death and resurrection of Jesus (which, to Christians, explains the means by which they are freed from sin, as well as being ostensibly historical).

Religion and Occam's Razor

Occam's Razor is the principle that one should not take more assumptions than needed. When multiple explanations are available for a phenomenon, the simplest version is preferred. When deciding between two models which make equivalent predictions, choose the simpler one. Gravity, while more complicated in some ways than a magic stone, has predictive powers that are lacking in a theory of a magic stone causing things to fall and the planets to move in the sky. Thus a magic stone being a simpler theory is irrelevant because it doesn't make equivelently accurate and complete predictions. Some, such as atheists, secular humanists, and agnostics assert that Occam's Razor makes belief in divine intervention unreasonable. This is because some religions require an individual to make many more assumptions regarding causes in the natural world than Atheistic and Naturalistic explanations require. For instance, some religious beliefs require the believer to assume that an invisible God created the universe, is concerned with our moral behavior for some reason, yet does not reveal himself, and will judge us after death for decisions we made in relative ignorance, sending us to either an assumed Heaven or an assumed Hell. Atheists conclude that such beliefs require myriad assumptions, while naturalistic explanations require significantly fewer assumptions and that the religious beliefs are therefore less reasonable than naturalistic ones. It is important to understand that all predictive knowledge is being refered to here. It does no good to have fewer assumptions in each of a hundred areas of knowledge, yet more assumptions altogether. Also information of a nonpredictive or nonobjective kind is not the kind of knowledge dealt with here. A personal judgement that belief in God is the best way to make sense of the voice in one's head is both subjective and mostly of little predictive power. William of Occam was a Christian and Franciscan friar who used Occam's Razor to pare away various religious elements other than God around 1300 A.D., way before science had any reasonable theory to explain the existence of life, mind, or conciousness. Needless to say, knowledge has advanced since then, and what William's use of this principle named for him would be today is anyone's guess.

Approaches to the study of individual religions

Methods of studying religion subjectively (in relation to one's own beliefs)

These include efforts to determine the meaning and application of "sacred" texts and beliefs in the context of the student's personal worldview. This generally takes one of three forms:

Methods of studying religion objectively (in a scientific and religiously neutral fashion)

There are a variety of methods employed to study religion which seek to be scientifically neutral. One's interpretation of these methods depends on one's approach to the relationship between religion and science, as discussed above. :Critics note that historical, archeological, and literary approaches are scientific insofar as they uncover the facts of ancient religions, and seek to understand and interpret those facts within their context. They assert that the approaches are unscientific, however, insofar as they make value judgments as to which parts of ancient religions are "bright" and which are "dark," because value judgments are beyond the realm of the verifiable phenomena of science. :The term "religion" is extremely problematic for anthropologists, and approaches to the subject are quite varied within the discipline. Some anthropologists (along with many other academics) take the view that religion, particularly in less technically complex cultures, is a form of proto-science--a primitive attempt to explain & predict phenomena in the natural world, similar to modern science but less advanced. :However, many (if not most) modern anthropologists reject this view (a form of social evolutionism) as antiquated, over-simplified, ethnically and intellectually chauvinistic, and unsupported by cross-cultural evidence. Science has very specific methods and aims, while the term "religion" encompasses a huge spectrum of practices, goals, and social functions. In addition to explaining the world (natural or otherwise), religions may also provide mechanisms for maintaining social & psychological well-being, and the foundations of moral/ethical, economic, and political reasoning. :While many early anthropologists attempted to catalogue and universalize these functions and their origins, modern researchers have tended to back away from such speculation, preferring a more holistic approach: The object of study is the meaning of religious traditions & practices for the practitioners themselves--religion in context--rather than formalized theories about religion in general. :Critics note that this approach is relativistic, informal, and primarily descriptive--possibly putting it outside the realm of science. Anthropologists themselves remain divided on the issue. : Critics note that the sociological approaches are scientific insofar as they note that the three "stages" are empirically observable, but unscientific insofar as it makes the value judgment that any one is superior to another, because value judgments are beyond the realm of the verifiable phenomena of science. : Critics assert that while philosophical approaches are competent insofar as they logically systematize and compare sets of a priori fundamental values, they are incompetent insofar as they attempt to assert those a priori fundamental values. : 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. Similarly, evolutionary psychology approaches consider the survival advantages that religion might have given to a community of hunter-gatherers, such as unifying them within a coherent social group. : Critics assert that while neuroscientific and evolutionary approaches are scientific insofar as they note the practical advantages religions provide their adherents, it is unscientific insofar as it asserts that people subscribe to religions merely in order to take advantage of those advantages, and exclude the religion's purported attraction: closer experience with Truth and God. :Critics assert that cognitive psychological approaches are unfalsifiable pseudoscience, because they assert that religious experience is a "side-effect" of another cognitive faculty without showing any actual connection between the two, and without providing any way to falsify the cognitive psychological explanation by showing the religious experience to be genuine. For a discussion of the struggle to attain objectivity in the scientific study of religion, see Total Truth by Nancy Pearcey ( Order: ISBN 1581344589), who argues that some studies performed pursuant to these methods make claims beyond the realm of observable and verifiable phenomena, and are therefore neither scientific nor religiously neutral.

Development of religion

Main Article: Development of religion There are several models for understanding how religions develop.

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 Christian 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 reaction against the exclusivist claims and religious wars waged by many religious groups. 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. 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 the growth of religion in these areas include disillusionment with the perceived failures of secular western ideologies to provide an ethical and moral framework. Believers point to perceived terrors such as Naziism, Communism, Colonialism, Secular Humanism, and Materialism, and the havoc wreaked by such movements around the world. Particularly vehement in this regard are Islamic fundamentalists, who view Western secularism as a serious threat to morality itself. They point to perceived 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 reasons for adherence to religion

Typical reasons for adherence to religion include the following:

Modern reasons for rejecting religion

Typical reasons for rejection of religion include the following: According to people who share this view, this can take forms such as: people looking down on others based on their non-adherance, to people preaching that others need something the religion can provide, all the way to global war. External Link

See also

Comparing Eastern and Western religious traditions

Compare with

Category:Core issues in ethics af:Religie ar:دين an:Relichión ast:Relixón bg:Религия be:Рэлігія bs:Vjera br:Relijion ca:Religió cs:Náboženství cy:Crefydd da:Religion de:Religion et:Religioon el:Θρησκεία es:Religión eo:Religio eu:Erlijio fa:دین fo:Átrúnađur fr:Religion fy:Religy ga:Creideamh ko:종교 hi:धर्म hr:Religija io:Religio id:Agama ia:Religion is:Trúarbrögđ it:Religione he:דת jv:Agama sw:Dini la:Religio lv:Reliģija lt:Religija lb:Relioun li:Religie hu:Vallás nah:Religión nl:Religie nds:Religion ja:宗教 nb:Religion nn:Religion pl:Religia pt:Religiăo ro:Religie ru:Религия simple:Religion sl:Verstvo sr:Религија fi:Uskonto sv:Religion tl:Relihiyon th:ศาสนา vi:Tôn giáo tpi:Lotu tr:Din uk:Релігія vo:Rel wa:Rilidjons zh:宗教

Search box



Released under GNU FDL
Uses material from Wikipedia