Religiooni uurimise probleemidest sotsiaalkonstruktsionistlikus perspektiivis
Kokkuvõte
Problems of Studying Religion: a Social Constructionist Perspective
The article adopts a social constructionist perspective to examine problems associated with the study of religion in the past fifty years. There is a criticism ofboth essentialism and functionalism, which have used universal definitions and concepts of religion. According to the social constructivist view, religion does not have any fixed properties or functions that would be valid everywhere at all times; they are, rather, in a situation of continuous re-establishment, recreation and modification, similarly to the scientific understanding of what religion is. The author also examines secularisation as a general theory in the sociology of religion and disintegration of this theory as a result of empirical data that demonstrates the increasing influence of religion in society (except in Europe). This has posed a challenge to conventional theoretical perspectives in social sciences where the topic of religion has been moved to a marginal position. However, rapid developments in the religious field have led to the understanding that religion will assume a larger, rather than a smaller role during late modernism and that it was a mistake to overlook it in socio-theoretical discussions. In addition, it has been established that the cultural impact factors deserve greater attention alongside the social factors, because otherwise it would be impossible to explain the major differences between religiosity in the countries with similar social structures or political history. The above considerations have to be taken into account when studying the situation in Estonia, which is distinctive because of very low indicators of organised religiosity and high indicators of individual religiosity.
Allalaadimised
Viited
Altnurme, Lea. 2006. Kristlusest Oma Usuni: Uurimus Muutustest Eestlaste Religioossuses 20. Sajandi II Poolel. Tartu: Tartu Ülikooli Kirjastus.
Anttonen, Veikko. 1996. ‘Rethinking the Sacred: The Notions of ’Human Body’ and ’Territory’ in Conceptualizing Religion’. In The Sacred and Its Scholars. Leiden: E.J. Brill.
Asad, Talal. 1983. ‘Anthropological Conceptions of Religion: Reflections on Geertz’. Man 18 (2): 237–59. https://doi.org/10.2307/2801433.
Asad, Talal. 2010. ‘Religiooni Konstrueerimine Antropoloogilise Kategooriana’. Translated by Uku Tooming. Akadeemia, no. 3; 4: 474–92; 636–52.
Barker, Eileen. 1995. ‘The Scientific Study of Religion? You Must Be Joking!’ Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion 34 (3): 287–310.
Beckford, James Arthur. 2006. Social Theory and Religion. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Berger, Peter L. 2001. ‘Reflections on the Sociology of Religion Today’. Sociology of Religion 62 (4): 443–54. https://doi.org/10.2307/3712435.
Casanova, José. 1994. Public Religions in the Modern World. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Casanova, José. 2003. ‘Beyond European and American Exceptionalism: Towards a Global Perspective’. In Predicting Religion. Aldershot: Ashgate.
Davie, Grace. 2007. The Sociology of Religion: A Critical Agenda. London: Sage.
Eliade, Mircea. 1992. ‘Sakraalne Ja Profaanne I’. Vikerkaar 34 (4).
‘European Values Study, 1999–2000’. n.d.
Guthrie, Stewart. 1996. ‘The Sacred: A Sceptical View’. In The Sacred and Its Scholars. Leiden: E.J. Brill.
Hamilton, Malcolm. 2001. The Sociology of Religion: Theoretical and Comparative Perspectives. London; New York: Routledge.
Hansen, Hans. 2002. Luterlased, Õigeusklikud Ja Teised: Usuühendused Eestis 1934-2000. Tallinn: Teabetrükk.
Herbert, David. 2003. ‘Rethinking Religion and Modernity’. In Religion and Civil Society. Aldershot: Ashgate.
Jerolimov, Dinka M., and Siniša Zrinščak. 2006. ‘Religion Within and Beyond Borders: The Case of Croatia’. Social Compass 53 (2). https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0037768606064340.
Knoblauch, Hubert. 1999. Religionssoziologie. Sammlung Göschen 2094. Berlin; New York: de Gruyter.
Konieszny, Mary E., and Martin Risenbrodt. 2005. ‘Sociology of Religion’. In The Routledge Companion to the Study of Religion. London: Routledge.
Murphy, Tim. 2007. Representing Religion: Essays in History, Theory and Crisis. Religion in Culture: Studies in Social Contest and Construction. London; Oakville: Equinox.
Nye, M. 2000. ‘Religion, Post-Religionism, and Religioning: Religious Studies and Contemporary Cultural Debates’. Method and Theory in the Study of Religion 12 (4): 447–76.
Paden, William E. 1996. ‘Sacrality as Integrity: ’Sacred Order’ as a Model for Describing Religious Worlds’. In The Sacred and Its Scholars. Leiden: E.J. Brill.
Piirimäe, Eva. 2008. ‘Keeleline Pööre’. Keel Ja Kirjandus, no. 8–9.
‘Religion and Values in Estonia. Report of Omnibus Survey’. 1998. Tallinn.
Smith, Jonathan Z. 1982. Imagining Religion: From Babylon to Jonestown. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Smith, Wilfred Cantwell. 1962. The Meaning and End of Religion: A New Approach to the Religious Traditions of Mankind. San Francisco: Harper & Row.
‘Special Eurobarometer 225 „Social Values, Science & Technology”’. 2010.
Swatos Jr, William H., and Kevin J. Christiano. 1999. ‘Secularization Theory: The Course of a Concept’. Sociology of Religion. 60 (3).
‘Usust, Elust, Usuelust 2010’. 2010.
‘Uus Vaimsus 2010’. 1998.
Vihalemm, Peeter, and Marju Lauristin. 2004. ‘Sissejuhatus: Uurimuse “Mina. Maailm. Meedia” Metodoloogiast Ja Tähendusest’. In Eesti Elavik 21. Sajandi Algul: Ülevaade Uurimuse ‘Mina. Maailm. Meedia’ Tulemustest. Studia Societatis et Communicationis 1. Tartu: Tartu Ülikooli Kirjastus.
Viik, Tõnu. 2008. ‘Kultuuriline Pööre’. Keel Ja Kirjandus, no. 8–9.