Insider's Theory Of Religion

In his book, A Critical Introduction to the Study of World Religions, Craig Martin aims to introduce undergraduate students to a socio-functional approach in exposing the methods in which religion disrupts class equality. He succeeds by using intelligible explanations, arguments, and examples to skeptically understand how man is shaped by religion.

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.

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

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.

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.

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

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 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

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

First of all, Boyer put on his writings many points of view about religion making me go sometimes confused and of course feel different concepts about religion. Additionally, Boyer is able to present a very dense network of theories which not only explains many religious phenomena but also sets them in relation to each other. The integration of cognitive science research leads to a very realistic model of how religious concepts are processed and communicated. Also, Boyer's account of the natural basis of religion explains very well the persistence and re-emergence of religion even in a secularized environment, as well as the tensions between official and folk religion. In addition

The Detached Within approach allows the person to understand the faith through the believer’s eyes instead of their own. Smith states that, “All we can do is try to listen carefully and with full attention to each voice in turn as it addresses the divine” (9). He establishes the fact that he and the audience must not read this book with their own previous judgment but view it in the follower’s perspective. The Detached-Within also describe the person not giving away his belief which allows for no comparison. Smith gives no indication of his belief and believes no religion beats the other since he is not comparing (13). This gives him the opportunity to give an unbiased account of the different

There are several important ideas and most interesting thoughts that are poised by Smith that communicated to me directly. Some of the most important ideas that Smith depicted were a result of events that he experienced. He was able to observe traits from others who believed they “knew” a religion and he was actually able to explain to them the difference in sentences and phrases that one was able to understand and comprehend. It is important for one to not only study a religion and practice it but for one to be devoted to the religion. Religion is a part of life, and to live you must have religion in your life. In his article he continuously states that he is not defining the religion although he may not realize that he actually is. He is defining the religion as a concept in which an outside reader is able to understand. “The man of religious faith lives in this world. He is subject to its pressures, limited within its imperfections, particularized within one or another of its always-varying

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

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.

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