The Role of Religious Experiences and Religious Institutions: Comparing Peter L. Berger’s and Hans Joas’ Approach to Religion

Hans Joas (born 1948) has repeatedly criticized Peter L. Berger (1929–2017) for placing religious experiences in the cognitive realm, where it runs the risk of being “contaminated” by secularization and pluralism. Instead, Joas has proposed to locate religious experiences in the “deeper layers” of t...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:  
Bibliographische Detailangaben
1. VerfasserIn: Deman, Isaak (VerfasserIn)
Medienart: Elektronisch Aufsatz
Sprache:Englisch
Verfügbarkeit prüfen: HBZ Gateway
Journals Online & Print:
Lade...
Fernleihe:Fernleihe für die Fachinformationsdienste
Veröffentlicht: Brill 2022
In: Method & theory in the study of religion
Jahr: 2022, Band: 34, Heft: 4, Seiten: 328-348
normierte Schlagwort(-folgen):B Joas, Hans 1948- / Berger, Peter L. 1929-2017 / Religiöses Erlebnis / Methodologie / Religionssoziologie
IxTheo Notationen:AD Religionssoziologie; Religionspolitik
AG Religiöses Leben; materielle Religion
weitere Schlagwörter:B Peter L. Berger
B Religious Experience
B Methodology
B Theories
B Religion
B Hans Joas
B Religious Institution
Online Zugang: Volltext (lizenzpflichtig)
Volltext (lizenzpflichtig)
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:Hans Joas (born 1948) has repeatedly criticized Peter L. Berger (1929–2017) for placing religious experiences in the cognitive realm, where it runs the risk of being “contaminated” by secularization and pluralism. Instead, Joas has proposed to locate religious experiences in the “deeper layers” of the human person, where it is protected against mere cognitive reductionism and against contamination by secularization and pluralism. Despite his critique, Joas follows a similar path of Berger, as he explains the phenomenon of religion from an inductive point of view that originates in the experiential realm. This article demonstrates how Joas’ approach operates on a similar methodology like the one of Berger and ultimately results in similar theoretical conclusions despite their differing theoretical foundations. Moreover, this article illuminates an implicit methodological similarity between Joas and Berger that, on the one hand, differs from one of the taken-for-granted methodologies in the discipline of sociology (of religion), and, on the other hand, strongly influences the disposition of religious institutions in their definition of religion.
ISSN:1570-0682
Enthält:Enthalten in: Method & theory in the study of religion
Persistent identifiers:DOI: 10.1163/15700682-12341514