Insider's Theory Of Religion

Religion, as one of the components of the social system, not only depends on the existence of the whole social system but also play an important role on the various components of the social system. Thus, people should be well versed in a group's religious affiliation, if they want to integrate into the society of this group.

Most of the human ‘Homo sapiens’ is born into a religion. That religion could be Muslim, Hindu, Jewish, Christian or Atheism, etc, a set of beliefs which someone inherits from his family, and till the death, that man will likely stay with his or her religion because almost every human has tendency to be religious. On the other hand, the reality of the religion does not matter to him unless someone conducts any investigation to get to the religious truth. In the essay ‘Homo religiosus,’ Karen Armstrong says that, today’s religious followers accept the religion into which they were born, without doing the hard work required. This means that someone follows his ancestor’s religion from the beginning for his life and he or she is not able to prove his ancestors were wrong because he or she has faith in his own religion. Faith is the main concept of the religion because people have deep faith in their own religion. In addition, faith is nothing but mere fantasy and faith has no basis in reality. Therefore, people have no ability to conduct investigations to find out the religious truth. In addition, elements and places of religion vary from religion to religion. Religion is one of the most prehistoric institutions which have been noticed to practice in any society past and present even in the ancient world where cave paintings were popular. Institutions, like politics and entertainments, have been greatly influenced by the religious faith. The truth of religion might give

In the study of religion, one can quickly discern that there are two major differentiations between the anthropological definition of religion, and that of religion in the context of belief systems. Religion, in the context of anthropology, can often be related to social institutions. On the other hand, religion in the context of belief systems indicate faith in something or someone...such as oneself, a god, or object. As identified by scholar Clifford Geertz, the anthropological definition of religion is “a system of symbols which acts to (1) establish powerful, pervasive, and long-lasting moods and motivations in men by (2) formulating conceptions of a general order of existence and (3) clothing these conceptions with such an aura of factuality

In the article, The Meaning and End of Religion, by Wilfred Cantwell Smith writes about his idea of the concept of religion explaining it to be a universally valid category as it is theorized but is truly a European creation. Throughout the article Smith conveys his ideas of religion. In his piece, there are several interesting ideas and most important thoughts that he tries to communicate to the reader. In response, the reader can respond to some of the important questions posited by Smith.

Karen Armstrong, author of “Homo Religiosus,” claimed that without the physical rituals and traditions, religion morphed into a belief. Simply put, Armstrong argued that religion requires not only blind faith but also customs and practices that affect one’s physical and mental behaviors. It is through these rituals and taboos that the religions grows and forms, and yet also changes when deemed necessary. Additionally, Armstrong constantly compares religion to different art forms. She does this to convey the message that much like art, one must focus and study religion for lengthy periods of time to be properly understood. However, this connection also suggests that art and religion can perform an analogous role to humankind when required, as they both evolve and change when a society 's infrastructure does. Throughout her essay “Homo Religiosus,” Armstrong focuses on the similar role that both art and religion play in society to discuss her claim that religion is not just a belief, but rather has to do with changes in physical and mental behaviors that in return create change in society and the religion one needs.

Martin uses a functionalistic approach to understand the role religion plays in society, exploring each object with hermeneutical suspicion, believing, for the sake of this study, that any supernatural claims are false. By exploring such concepts as classification, structured society, and habitus, Martin explains how “we, as humans, are a product of society”. He focuses on answering questions such as “what’s going on” and “whose interests are served” by skeptically looking at the way in which people use legitimation, authority, and authenticity to push their own agendas.

The conversation of assimilation into a discourse community has been a long standing presence in academic conversation. Especially if a religious community is given the title of a discourse community. Typical methods of assimilating new members into a desired religion usually standout. For example, representatives of a religious organization go door to door to give out information about the religion is common practice, it a simply direct. Daniel Olson states in his research that smaller religious groups find more committed members through leaving and joining the group, compared to larger religious groups (359). Although Rahsaan Maxwell and Erik Bleich uses Muslims as his topic, presents relatable assimilation reasoning that Muslims who were

On occasion, authors approach cultural subjects as historians. However, Huston Smith limits the historical facts to stay focus on the values of the religions (Smith 10,12). Having an history filled book can cause readers to lose interests in his discussion. To keep the numbers down, Smith picks the religions that most people acknowledge and would share the most common themes in their life (11). He is passionate about his studies, and he wants the audience to find their own appreciation for religion. To accomplish this, Smith simply states that,”This is a book about values”(12). Some books describe a certain faith’s good and bad qualities and can sometimes put more emphasis on the bad if the

However, there is another side to religion, one that is quite contrary to idea of unification and acceptance. When looking through the scope of history, we can also see religion as an exclusionary tool, often used to differentiate groups of people on an innate level. As many of these idealogies attempt to assert

First of all, Pascal Boyer begins by giving common explanations of religion, all of them have some logic and good understanding. Also, he introduces by saying that psychology, anthropology, and neuroscience offer more empirical approach in acquiring and representing religious concepts. In fact, he gives a table represented by Do's and Don'ts in the study of religion, apparently what he wants us to say and not say. He keeps saying the important that is our understanding of why religion is easy to acquire and transmit by giving us what he thinks are the two main points of this statement, religion does not activate particular capacity in the mind and religion and no religion are parts of our mental equipment. He starts arguing that people defend their beliefs according to his view in what he call sleep of reason interpretation. However, Boyer is not satisfactory at all with the sleep of reason because some pieces of that information will have effect in some people but not others, and he express that he could make up hundreds of such interesting and irrefutable beliefs that no one would ever consider as a possible belief. Through the reading Pascal differs that all human beings do not have full access to the way

In summary, there are many benefits and drawback to the academic study of religion from the outsider’s point of view. Benefits can include factors such as gaining a new understanding of a religion or being able to gain an unbiased perspective. Drawbacks, however, include factors such as an ethnocentric point of view of an individual or simply missing minute details in a belief of religion. When everything has been said and done, I do believe that the outsider’s perspective on the study of religion is very important and something that should always be

In this essay I will be looking at the theories of Edward Burnett Tylor and Émile Durkheim, and comparing them to see which theory I think gives a better explanation about what religion is, or whether religion is actually definable. On the one hand we have Tylor’s theory that tells us that religion is belief in spiritual beings and that religion is just a step on the way to reaching full evolutionary potential. Durkheim’s theory, however, says that religion is very much a social aspect of life, and something can only be religious or “sacred” if it is something public (Durkheim 1965:52). Ultimately these theories do not give us an outright explanation about what ‘religion’ is, but there are aspects of the theory that can be used to gain an understanding or idea.

Religion emerges from the human susceptibility for protection and use it as a tool for liberation from the bitter realities and perplexities of the world. “Religious ideas are teachings and pronouncements about facts and states of external (or internal) reality that convey something one has not discovered for oneself and which assert the right to be believed” (Freud 88). We must object to religious claims because there is no proof to substantiate them and merely ideas we follow for generations. Religious ideas are beyond the control of reasoning, as if we don’t validate our beliefs and behave that our beliefs have a substantial basis of support. Religious ideas are teachings, not the thought that

The meaning of religion is something that scholars, along with society at large, have attempted to define for centuries. Although the term cannot truly have one solid meaning, it is clear that religion is much more than a set of beliefs and practices. In Religion: The Basics, author Mallory Nye discusses his approach to studying religion. In arguing that culture and religion strongly influence each other, he explains that those studying religion must make people and culture their focus, as variations even within the same religions exist and must be considered. Moreover, Nye explains how religion is, essentially, a universal concept, as it takes form in an array of shapes across the globe. With Nye’s argument, I have developed new insights

Within philosophy, there has long been a question about the relationship between science and religion. These two systems of human experience have undoubtedly had a lot of influence in the course of mankind’s development. The philosopher Ian Barbour created a taxonomy regarding science and religion that has become widely influential. His taxonomy postulates that there are four ways in which science and religion are thought to interact. The four categories are: conflict, independence, dialogue, and integration. By using articles from a select few philosophers, theologians, and scientists, it is clear to see the ways in which these two systems of human experience are categorized in the four categories presented by Ian barbour. However, it will be apparent that the category of conflict may be seen as the most dominant in regard to the interaction between science and religion.