Search
Share & Follow Religion News Blog
Remember These Stories?
Researchers struggle to explain religious behavior
Some scholars at annual meeting believe that social science and faith just don’t mix
The Dallas Morning News, Nov. 30, 2002
http://www.dallasnews.com/
By JEFFREY WEISS / The Dallas Morning News
SALT LAKE CITY – It’s useful, if not quite fair, to think of this meeting as the annual conference of religion bean counters.
When the Society for the Scientific Study of Religion and the Religion Research Association got together this month, data were in the air from any kind of study of faith in which something can be counted. But stories without numbers were found here, too. Anthropologists and ethnologists presented their reports of time spent with various kinds of religious folk all over the world.
These were not academics concerned with Eternal Truths that explain the world. These 450 academics, from as far away as Australia and Europe, tried to explain human behavior and, in particular, behavior associated with religious activity.
“What ‘science’ means in the title is an attempt to be rigorous and systematic about one’s scholarship,” said Dr. Robert Wuthnow, professor of sociology and director of the Center for the Study of Religion at Princeton University and the president of the SSSR.
In one corner, there were survey experts who shake every detail but angels on pinheads from the responses to questionnaires worldwide. And in another corner were economists who are trying to apply the same sorts of theories to explain religious behavior – market forces, “rational choice” – that have had only limited success in the world of commerce. And then there were the “lived religion” forces that all but deny there’s anything general to be said about any religion – that faith doesn’t exist beyond the peculiar and specific actions of the faithful.
Dr. Charles Glock, sociology professor emeritus at the University of California at Berkeley, is a former president of the SSSR. One of his presentations this year was an attempt to answer the question of whether social science was even compatible with religion. His answer, after a distinguished career of putting the two topics together, was no.
“Surface appearances to the contrary, I do believe that the social sciences and religion are inherently incompatible,” he said. “The inherent incompatibility derives from the social scientist’s search for explanation.”
He basically said the social scientist explains all behavior in terms of nature or nurture. That leaves no room for free will or the action of the supernatural.
As with all such conference presentations, some may become honored and accepted and some may never be heard from again. But some of this year’s interesting assertions included:
* An attempt to define how Oprah Winfrey’s audience is something like a congregation. Kathryn Lofton, a doctoral student at the University of North Carolina, looked at the “rituals” that Oprah recommends with her television show, Web site and magazine. Three stood out: reading, journaling and shopping. The books and product recommendations are well known. But how many people know that Oprah recommends keeping six journals a day: daily, gratitude, “Spa girls,” discovery, health and “create your own.” By comparison, traditional Judaism calls for three designated prayer periods a day, and Islam calls for five.
* Yet another attempt to estimate how many Americans attend religious services. Estimates ranging from more than 40 percent to around 20 percent have been debated for years. Kirk Hadaway, a researcher with the United Church of Christ, was already well known for his estimate at the low end of the range. He offered a new analysis at this conference, based on numbers produced by the U.S. Congregational Life Survey. The survey counted the worshippers in 2,000 chosen congregations on a weekend in April 2001.
Using that number to come up with average religious service attendance and using a range of estimates of total churches in the United States, Mr. Hadaway estimated that between 20.2 percent and 22.5 percent of Americans over the age of 5 go to services on an average weekend.
* A suggestion that an all-but-lost record of past behaviors can be pulled out of current surveys. Dr. Lawrence Iannaccone, an economics professor at George Mason University, looked at a series of surveys that asked people in 30 nations whether they or their parents went to religious services when the responders were children. The results indicate that kids in America, who once attended 15 percent more often than their parents, no longer do so. And that the change began during the 1960s.
This is meaningful because children who attend services are much more likely to attend as adults and vice versa. And that might help explain a recent increase in Americans who say they do not belong to a religion.
* An effort to form a panel of “exemplars of Christian virtue.” Dr. Paul Kennedy, a sociology professor at George Fox University in Oregon, identified 96 people from a range of Christian denominations who were recognized by their congregations as exemplifying humility, forgiveness, justice, truthfulness, practical wisdom, courage, compassion, perseverance, generosity, hope, gratitude, temperance and peaceableness. “Faith,” perhaps oddly, was not on the list. Panel members were asked about their attitudes toward religious pluralism. Most of them were very much for it.
* An attempt at a mathematical model to explain a theory that “stricter” churches that place more narrowly doctrinal standards on membership are more likely to grow in the long run. Dr. John Hayward, a math professor at the University of Clamorgan in Wales, suggested that sustained growth is more a matter of zeal than numbers. New members are brought in by the action of a relatively small core of enthusiastic existing members. Lowering the standards of membership is likely to bring in more people with less zeal and discourage those with more zeal. And, in the long run, Dr. Hayward asserted, that will lead to a decline.
* An effort to show that religiosity is connected with whether a person thinks tax fraud is acceptable. Dr. Steven Stack, chairman of the department of criminal justice at Wayne State University, looked at surveys from 36 countries. The more religious that respondents said they were, the less likely they thought cheating on taxes was acceptable. The numbers accounted for 14 percent of differences in opinion, Dr. Stack said, which was more than any factor measured other than age.
Bookmark, Share, or Email This Page
Read Another Article
|
Related News Articles
Topic(s): 
Subscribe to Religion News Blog updates
Find Related Information
Find Related 
Possibly related... or Most Popular Religion News Articles
Search Religion News Blog