Has "The Secularization Thesis" been falsified?

[Tetro Kornbluth]

ie. The theory that as the world or "civilization" "advances" (whatever that means) and moves towards a more "modern" (again, WTM) society, religion will disappear.

I was reading an interview with Charles Taylor just then a few minutes ago: here where he finally put into words the intuitions I have had about this whole neo-atheism thing for quite a while now.

So I'm leaving it up to the poll; I vote yes of course, it shows how shallow view of humans that people have imo to have ever thought otherwise.

[JohnFKennedy]

Yes, as most grand narrative theories that postulate some notion of progress have.

Of course, that's not to say that generally theories are always unhelpful, just that we should be wary when discussing them that the reality is more nuanced than that.

[Tetro Kornbluth]

Yes, as most grand narrative theories that postulate some notion of progress have.

Of course, that's not to say that generally theories are always unhelpful, just that we should be wary when discussing them that the reality is more nuanced than that.

That would say that in such words... was so predictable.

I would then to agree with the rest of that, with the caveat that I don't think it was "progress" as such will weakened religion as such - actually given the state of religious education among the more isolated peasantry in the 17th and 18th Centuries it might have even strengthed it - but all kinds of interweaving socioeconomic, cultural, political and intellectual trends all of which were somewhat disconnected from each other to a large degree, ie. It was only events which made the French left so anticlerical rather it to being a simple reaction to the past.

[Earth]

I smell the hand of Lyotard in this one. I believe this theory to be filled with air. It all rests on history being linear, as if we have any clue about future events.

[Torie]

ie. The theory that as the world or "civilization" "advances" (whatever that means) and moves towards a more "modern" (again, WTM) society, religion will disappear.

I was reading an interview with Charles Taylor just then a few minutes ago: here where he finally put into words the intuitions I have had about this whole neo-atheism thing for quite a while now.

So I'm leaving it up to the poll; I vote yes of course, it shows how shallow view of humans that people have imo to have ever thought otherwise.

Taylor is one of those academics I guess who just can't get to the money line. After reading the interview in its entirety, I don't have a clue as to why Taylor thinks religion will not slowly wane in influence in Western culture as time goes on.

[Ban my account ffs!]

I think it is better to say that in the western world, as time goes on and we rely more and more on science and technology to answer our questions, religion will decline.  Of course we could change our priorities and focus more on spirituality as a way to answer our questions... or we could revert backwards... it has happened before... I'm sure it will happen again.  Religion will not cease to exist, it will simply evolve along with society.

[ilikeverin]

Funny that you ask that question... I have a fellowship in the Political Science department that involves going to speakers talk about that very question!

The answer, in short, is yes, without a doubt.  Modernity has, in many cases, increased religious fervor.

[Tetro Kornbluth]

ie. The theory that as the world or "civilization" "advances" (whatever that means) and moves towards a more "modern" (again, WTM) society, religion will disappear.

I was reading an interview with Charles Taylor just then a few minutes ago: here where he finally put into words the intuitions I have had about this whole neo-atheism thing for quite a while now.

So I'm leaving it up to the poll; I vote yes of course, it shows how shallow view of humans that people have imo to have ever thought otherwise.

Taylor is one of those academics I guess who just can't get to the money line. After reading the interview in its entirety, I don't have a clue as to why Taylor thinks religion will not slowly wane in influence in Western culture as time goes on.

Sorry, that was only a fraction of the interview. But for some reason it doesn't link to the other sections...

I don't really see how technology is weakening religion (as opposed to traditional practice)... at least not any more.

[John Dibble]

Rather than be outright falsified, I'd say it's partially right. Compare society now to just fifty years ago. Yeah, you've still got a lot of religious folks in modern society, but a lot of people don't take their religion as seriously. Lots of people who claim to be believers don't go to church and bend or outright ignore the rules set forth in their religious texts and traditions. You've still got some hardcore believers who take it seriously, but religion has essentially become more "secular" in the grand scheme of things. You also see a lot more openly deist, atheist, and agnostic folks these days. I think this trend will continue, though religion won't disappear completely.

[Verily]

It certainly hasn't been falsified. The evidence in favor is not conclusive, by any means, but since the hypothesis itself demands that it be considered in the long-term, it can only be falsified by centuries of modernity with no secularization (or by a shorter period with increasing religious fervor), neither of which do we have evidence for.

Given your own militant agnosticism, Gully, this should be quite obvious.

[Sensei]

Rather than be outright falsified, I'd say it's partially right. Compare society now to just fifty years ago. Yeah, you've still got a lot of religious folks in modern society, but a lot of people don't take their religion as seriously. Lots of people who claim to be believers don't go to church and bend or outright ignore the rules set forth in their religious texts and traditions. You've still got some hardcore believers who take it seriously, but religion has essentially become more "secular" in the grand scheme of things. You also see a lot more openly deist, atheist, and agnostic folks these days. I think this trend will continue, though religion won't disappear completely.

this.

People are getting less and less religious, regardless of what they state their religious affiliation as.

[War on Want]

It depends what your definition of religion is.

[ilikeverin]

Rather than be outright falsified, I'd say it's partially right. Compare society now to just fifty years ago. Yeah, you've still got a lot of religious folks in modern society, but a lot of people don't take their religion as seriously. Lots of people who claim to be believers don't go to church and bend or outright ignore the rules set forth in their religious texts and traditions. You've still got some hardcore believers who take it seriously, but religion has essentially become more "secular" in the grand scheme of things. You also see a lot more openly deist, atheist, and agnostic folks these days. I think this trend will continue, though religion won't disappear completely.

this.

People are getting less and less religious, regardless of what they state their religious affiliation as.

Surveys of religious participation (not affiliation) have remained relatively constant for the past few decades.

[Earth]

It depends what your definition of religion is.

Since when is the definition of religion fluid? Religion is to spirituality as the NBA is to the sport of basketball.

[Tetro Kornbluth]

Rather than be outright falsified, I'd say it's partially right. Compare society now to just fifty years ago. Yeah, you've still got a lot of religious folks in modern society, but a lot of people don't take their religion as seriously. Lots of people who claim to be believers don't go to church and bend or outright ignore the rules set forth in their religious texts and traditions. You've still got some hardcore believers who take it seriously, but religion has essentially become more "secular" in the grand scheme of things. You also see a lot more openly deist, atheist, and agnostic folks these days. I think this trend will continue, though religion won't disappear completely.

That's true in a couple of countries, yes, but not in general. In many ways certain societies are more religious than in, say, the eighteenth century (and Eastern Europe, for obvious reasons, is more religious - outwardly at least - than 50 years ago). But in general how religious "the past" was is generally an exagerration (now how religious the upper classes/intellectual classes were in the past is another matter entirely).

Also it is beyond doubt that Islam as a socioreligious-political force has increased dramatically since the 1960s... A period when the idea of an Iranian theocracy was unthinkable and most of the muslim world was undergoing large secularization.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Well I guess then it is in the frame of Thesis, but given that many late 19th Century Atheists expected religion just to disappear around the corner of the future due to the advances of natural sciences, I think we can agree that historical whiggery has been falsified - not that the criteria for whiggery was anything other than subjective and somewhat arbitrary. Yet even today we have Daniel Dennett proclaiming that in a few generations the religious 'meme' (ugh) will disappear due to the light of science, blah, blah, blah, etc.

[John Dibble]

That's true in a couple of countries, yes, but not in general.

America + Canada + a significant portion of Europe + a few in Asia > a couple countries.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Yes, due to various factors there was a religious backlash in those areas, such as the US arming a certain group of extremists to fight the reds. I believe that things will gradually go back in the other direction given time.

[Tetro Kornbluth]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

#1: Christian Right had more influence over government in the Reagan-Bush years than they did in the Eisenhower and Pre-Eisenhower period; for the simple reason that the Christian Right as an organized force didn't really exist back then. In certain ways they are as much a product of the 1960s as hippies were (or rather a reaction to it).

#2: "A couple in Asia": Like What? Hindu Nationalism and Hinduism seem stronger (and certainly more systemized) than ever. Japan and China have their own particular traditions which can't really be identified as religious as such (well, if we want to get into a semantic debate about the word "religion", always a tricky one that) and even "communism" in the latter hasn't stopped traditional peasant superstition and now there is even a rise in Confucianism (which isn't really a religion as such, but the closest we can get). In non-"Communist" South East Asian countries the Buddhist monkhood is a significant social force; see Opposition to government in Burma and Thailand. So I don't see which Asian countries you are referring to really (though then again, China really is an ambigious case... I need to read up more about it).

#3: I accept Canada and Western Europe; but can we really hold that this is due to "Modernity" in itself? While the Catholic Church in Ireland declined slowly from about the 1950s onwards it wasn't until the 1990s did it steeply collapse in popularity and that was due to circumstance. Also I must point out here that in Ireland, like many places, most people weren't what we call 'spiritual' or 'religious' but rather went to church simply because that is what one does and that was where everyone else was (i.e: It had a social function). I could hypothesize using makeshift sociology that with increased mobility and technology new types of relationships could form away from the traditional patterns in a gemeinschaft which weaken the social function of religion. But if true (and it certainly is on at least one level) that suggests not that religion necessarily declines from modernity; but that different forms of religious practice and ideas may come into being. See how Christianity, Islam, et al try and use the internet. Also it suggests that communities will increasingly form, like this forum, from people hundreds of miles away from each other.

Also as I said earlier, the religious 'decline' always exaggerated because people exaggerated how religious the past; especially among the lower class (as opposed to say, the Intellectual classes)

I think also we can agree that religion has gone under a revival over the past 30 years - especially if you count "new age" and actually "irrationalism" and "counter-enlightenment" in general. Whether this will last or not, is in the hands of the gods.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

The rise of extreme Islam had nothing to do with Afghanistan as such, by 1979 the job was already halfway done (and god knows, it isn't over now). Remember Iran?

Also the idea of militant Islam has increased and I'm not just thinking about 'terrorism' here; the incidents revolving around the Satanic Verses is a case in point.

[ilikeverin]

Tum tee tum, don't mind me, Gully seems to be handling things well.  I would of course like to add the issue of evolutionary psychology into the mix, but I'm afraid that would lead Gully and I to have another bitter argument and that would probably distract from the main point of this thread

[Tetro Kornbluth]

Tum tee tum, don't mind me, Gully seems to be handling things well.  I would of course like to add the issue of evolutionary psychology into the mix, but I'm afraid that would lead Gully and I to have another bitter argument and that would probably distract from the main point of this thread

No, this thread deals in facts, not post hoc rationalizations for reality.

(Sorry, had to get that in).