Crucial Experiment, Sociology of Religion and Critical Realism

Document Type : Review Article

Author

Research Institute of Imam Khomeini and Islamic Revolution

Abstract

The two dominant paradigm on sociology of religion since the late 20th century sparked a hot and heated controversy around the relationship between religious pluralism and religious participation. On the one hand, the secularization paradigm argued that the power and authority of a religion in society is in its monopoly; and religious pluralism causes the erosion of religious faith, and has a secular effect. On the other hand, the economic / market of religion’s paradigm argued that the diversity and free competition among different religions in a society not only does not lead to secularization, but rather contributes to increased religious participation and mobilization. These arguments, for empirical testing in social research, lead to two contradictory hypotheses: (1) Religious pluralism has a negative relationship with religious participation (the secularization paradigm); and (2) religious pluralism has a positive relationship with religious participation (the economic / market of religion’s paradigm). Nevertheless, a large set of sociological researches has yielded conflicting results; some empirical findings support the hypothesis of the secularization paradigm and imply rejection of the hypothesis of the paradigm of the economy / market of religion, while some others have supported the hypothesis of the paradigm of the economy / market of religion and implies rejecting the hypothesis of the paradigm of secularization. On this basis, a general problem was raised for the present article about the question of why the common pattern in the social sciences in general and sociology in particular is that multiple empirical studies on a single subject, produce contradictory results? To answer this question and to solve this problem, the arguments presented in the perspective of critical realism was used.

Keywords


  • باربور، ایان (1384)، «مدل‌ها و پارادایم‌ها در علم و دین»، ترجمة پیروز فطورچی، مجلة ذهن، شمارة 21-22: 145-192.
  • برگر، پیتر (1397)، سایبان مقدس، ترجمة ابوالفضل مرشدی، تهران: نشر ثالث.
  • بروس، استیو (1387)، مدل سکولارشدن غرب، ترجمة محمدمسعود سعیدی، تهران: نشر گام نو.
  • بکفورد، جیمز (1389)، دین و نظریة اجتماعی، مسعود آریایی نیا، تهران: دانشگاه امام صادق.
  • بنتون، تد و یان کرایب (1384) فلسفة علوم‌اجتماعی، ترجمة: شهناز مسمی‌پرست و محمود متحد، تهران: نشر آگه.
  • توحیدی‌نسب، زینب و مرضیه فروزنده (1392) رئالیسم انتقادی، تهران: مؤسسة بوستان کتاب.
  • فورشت، اینگر و پل رپستاد (1396) درآمدی بر جامعه‌شناسی دین، ترجمة مجید جعفریان، قم: دانشگاه ادیان و مذاهب.
  • همپل، کارل (1369) فلسفه علوم‌طبیعی، ترجمة حسین معصومی همدانی، تهران: مرکز نشر دانشگاهی
    • Archer, M. (1995), Realist Social Theory: The Morphogenetic Approach, Cambridge University Press.
    • Archer, M., & Others (1998), Critical Realism: Essential Readings, Routledge.
    • Benton, T. (2004), “Critical Realism”, in: Michael Lewisbeck; Alan Bryman and Tim Futing Liao, The SAGE Encyclopedia of Social Science Research Methods, No. 1: 221-223, Sage Publications Ltd.
    • Bhaskar , R. (1975), A Realist Theory of Science, Leeds: Leeds Books.
    • Bhaskar, R. (1997), A Realist Concept of Science, Verso.
    • Bhaskar, R.  (1998), Critical Realism, Routledge.
    • Bhaskar, R.  (2008), A Realist Theory of Science, Routledge.
    • Bruce, S. (2011), Secularization, Oxford University Press.
    • Chaves, M., and Phil G. (2001), “Religious Pluralism and Religious Participation”, Annual Review of Sociology, No. 27: 261-281.
    • Collier, A. (1994), Critical Realism: an Introduction to Roy Bhaskar’s Philosophy, Verso.
    • Danermark, B., Mats, E., Liselotte, J., and Jan Ch. K. (2002), Explaining Society: Critical Realism in the Social Sciences, Routledge.
    • De Graaf, N. D. (2013), “Secularization: Theoretical Controversies Generating Empirical Research”, In the Handbook of Rational Choice Social Research, edited by R. L. Wittek, T. A. B. Snijders and V. Nee, 322–354. Stanford: Stanford University Press.
    • Ekström, M. (1992), “Causal Explanation of Social Action: The Contribution of Max Weber and of Critical Realism to a Generative View of Causal Explanation in Social Science”, Acta Sociology, Vol. 35, No. 2: 107-122.
    • Elster, J. (1989), Nuts and Bolts for the Social Sciences, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    • Finke, R., and Rodney, S. (1988), “Religious Economies and Sacred Canopies: Religious Mobilization in American Cities”, American Sociological Review, No. 53: 41–49.
    • Finke, R., and Rodney, S. (1992), The Churching of America, 1776-1990. Rutgers University Press.
    • Harvey, D. (2002), “Agency and Community: A Critical Realist Perspective”, Journal for the Theory of Social Behavior, Vol. 32, No. 2: 163-94.
    • Hedström, P., and Richard, S. (1998), Social Mechanisms: An Analytical Approach to Social Theory, Cambridge University Press.
    • Hedstrom, P. (2005), Dissecting the Social: on the Principles of Analytical Sociology, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    • Hechter, M. (1997), “Religion and Rational Choice Theory”, In Rational Choice Theory and Religion, edited by L. A. Young, 147–60. NewYork: Routledge.
    • Hechter, M., and Satoshi, K. (1997), “Sociological Rational Choice Theory”, Annual Review of Sociology, No. 23: 191-214.
    • Iannaccone, L. (1991), “The Consequences of Religious Market Structure: Adam Smith and the Economics of Religion”, Rationality and Society, No. 3: 156–177.
    • Iannaccone, L., (1992), “Religious Markets and the Economics of Religion”, Social Compass, No. 39: 123–131.
    • Iannaccone, L., and William, S. B. (2010), “Economics of Religion” in the Routledge Companion to the Study of Religion, Edited by John Hinnells, 461-475, Routledge.
    • King Gary; R. Keohane  and Sidney Verba (1994), Designing Social Inquiry: Scientific Inference in Qualitative Research,Princeton University Press.
    • Lechner, F. (2007), “Rational Choice and Religious Economies” in the Sage Handbook of the Sociology of Religion, Edited by James Beckford and N. J. Demerath, 81-97, Sage Publications Ltd.
    • Little, D. (2018), “Disaggregating Historical Explanation: The Move to Social Mechanisms”, In the Routledge Handbook of Mechanisms and Mechanical Philosophy, Edited by Stuart Glennan and Phyllis Illari, 413-422, Routledge.
    • Lopez, J., and Garry, P. (2005), After Postmodernism: An Introduction to Critical Realism, Continuum International Publishing Group.
    • Manicas, P. (2006), A Realist Philosophy of Social Science, Cambridge University Press.
    • Norris, P., and Ronald, I. (2011), Sacred and Secular: Religion and Politics Worldwide, Cambridge University Press.
    • Porpora, D. (2008), “Recovering Causality: Realist Methods in Sociology”, in A. Maccarini, E. Morandi, R. Prandini (eds.), Sociological Realism, Genova-Milano: Marietti.
    • Sayer, A. (1992), Method in Social Science: A Realist Approach, Routledge.
    • Sayer, A. (2000), Realism and Social Science, Sage Publications Ltd.
    • Smith, Christian (2008), “Future Directions in the Sociology of Religion”, Social Forces, No. 86: 1561–1589.
    • Stark, R., and William S. B. (1987), A Theory of Religion, New Brunswick, N. Rutgers University Press.
    • Stark, R., and Roger, F. (2000), Acts of Faith: Explaining the Human Side of Religion, University of California Press.
    • Stark, R. (2006), “Economics of Religion”, In the Blackwell Companion to the Study of Religion, Edited by Robert Segal, 47-68, Blackwell Publishing Ltd.
    • Stark, R., and Katie, C. (2019), The Morality of Nations, Rutgers University Press.
    • Steinmetz, G. (1998), “Critical Realism and Historical Sociology”, Comparative Studies in Society and History, Vol. 40, No. 1: 170-86.
    • Turner, J. (2010), “Toward Hard-Science Sociology”, JISS, Vol. 4, No. 1: 5-34.
    • Warner, S. (1993), “Work in Progress: Toward a New Paradigm for the Sociological Study of Religion in the United States”, American Journal of Sociology, Vol. 98, No. 5: 1044- 1093.