Quote:
Originally posted by chavos
why knock religion so much? is it so hard to beleive that sometimes religion is simply a group of spiritual people that have gathered in intentional community?
Social control? Lurkette...i have the greatest respect for you, but i think you've overstepped your case in this instance. Religion, as many people experience is NOT about social control. I know churches that are about the pecking order, and enforcing taboos and norms. But i'm also familiar with many that are simply about getting together once in a while to celebrate something we share. so...while you might want to claim that "many religions have a theme of social control" or "many forms of religious expression coincide with social control"....to claim that religion is by definition a method of social control is really i think a gross overgeneralization.
|
There's a difference between individuals' personal experiences of religion, and religion's de facto function in society. I think regardless of the intention behind it, religion like all social institutions (government, family, education, etc.) serves a function of social control. Maybe "control" is a bit strong...cohesion? They serve to stabilize society, and the flip side of that stability is the subtle enforcement of social norms. I think if you look at the anthropological roots of religion, it had two functions: 1. to explain unexplainable phenomena (birth, death, weather, natural disasters), 2. to enforce social norms to keep the tribe functioning (dietary restrictions, restrictions on behavior, health practices that kept the group healthy, etc.). I don't think the function of religion is that much different today. It just has a lot of other institutions to compete/cooperate with.
P.S. That religion is an institution of social control is pretty commonly accepted. It's elementary sociology.