The Sacred Canopy: Elements of a Sociological Theory of

The Sacred Canopy: Elements of a Sociological Theory of



10 thoughts on “The Sacred Canopy: Elements of a Sociological Theory of Religion

  1. John David John David says:

    This book is an extension of Peter Berger and Thomas Luckmann s earlier book, The Social Construction of Reality A Treatise in the Sociology of Knowledge written in 1966, in which the authors begin with basic sociological assumptions about mental representations and how human beings come to know the world and form impressions of it The Sacred Canopy, while heavily informed by the ideas in The Social Construction of Reality, was written only by Berger himself The book is a thoroughly Mar This book is an extension of Peter Berger and Thomas Luckmann s earlier book, The Social Construction of Reality A Treatise in the Sociology of Knowledge written in 1966, in which the authors begin with basic sociological assumptions about mental representations and how human beings come to know the world and form impressions of it The Sacred Canopy, while heavily informed by the ideas in The Social Construction of Reality, was written only by Berger himself The book is a thoroughly Marxist critique of religion with a dash of Freud thrown in for good measure The Marxism comes from Berger s understanding of human consciousness He emphasizes the dialectical nature of individual man and his relationship to culture and society According to him, we can only world build or cosmize, to use his argot through a process of constant internalization and externalization of distinct mental representations Berger defines religion as a sacred form of world building, an audacious attempt to conceive of the entire universe as humanly significant p 28 Forget temporarily, as I had to, that to call religion a sacred form of world building seems to very much beg the question He argues religion to be the oldest, most powerful legitimizing order which plays a central role in construing order and rationality in our lives, and therefore in maintaining reality because they are the only things that can provide sacred legitimation for this socially constructed reality Thus religion makes permanent the temporary, transcendentalizes the immanent, sacralizes the profane, and ensures a nomological that is, rational and law based rather than chaotic reality.Evil, death, injustice, and suffering can threaten the nomological world that is shored up by religious legitimation However, theodicies minimize the threat to nomos by bestowing meaning on these things and by making them understandable in a larger epistemological scheme Berger claims that religion is ultimately alienating, as it enforces the idea that the socially constructed world is not a human product, but rather a permanent product of divine construction religion is, in other words, a source of false consciousness that perpetuates the idea that human beings had nothing to do with creating their social world He also claims that the world is gradually becomingsecular For exactly these reasons, secularization is paradoxically both de alienating, while at the same time anomic and ridden with existential anxiety precisely because religion, according to Berger, has lost its legitimacy, having slowly been replaced in the industrial world with a materialistic positivistic model for knowledge In short, secularization allows people to realize that the world is their own, not that of a distant, supernatural God, and that our disconnection from this leaves us hanging, alone, in a world devoid of any meaning or order Berger claims to break down the book into two parts, the first being the theoretical portion and the second providing the concrete, historical, empirical facts that support the theory However, I found almost no substantive distinction in the level of theory used in the two parts Both are highly theoretical and abstract, which is not to say that the text is difficult if afforded a careful reading But the entire book is maintained on such a level of abstraction that it would be difficult to take any applied ideas away from it This might have something to do with the fact that Berger recanted the central thesis of The Sacred Canopy about twenty years ago in the face of evidence that directly suggested that the boundaries of secularization and modernization were not necessarily coterminal Also, for being published less than fifty years ago, the ideas here seem much, much older Connecting the ideas of secularization, alienation, and social anomy which seem to me to the fundamental concept here go back to the nineteenth century, and Berger doesn t seem to work in any new ideas This book is interesting for its historical value and arguments it is still seen on sociology reading lists nearly everywhere , but it doesn t bring much value added to the contemporary sociology of knowledge or religion


  2. David David says:

    The Sacred Canopy is a classic in the sociology of religion, and is simply one of the finest studies I know of religious people acting in groups I first read it in fall of 2001, and Berger was one of the few thinkers who helped me make sense of 9 11.Based on the work of Emile Durkheim, one of the founders of modern sociology, Berger examines how communities construct their own version of reality and then enforce it among its members This socially constructed reality becomes the norm through wh The Sacred Canopy is a classic in the sociology of religion, and is simply one of the finest studies I know of religious people acting in groups I first read it in fall of 2001, and Berger was one of the few thinkers who helped me make sense of 9 11.Based on the work of Emile Durkheim, one of the founders of modern sociology, Berger examines how communities construct their own version of reality and then enforce it among its members This socially constructed reality becomes the norm through which the world is interpreted, measured and judged To violate the social construct, ie to disagree with that reality, appears to its adherents as insanity Not appearing insane is a powerful motivation to keep people toeing the line of orthodoxy.This is a thin little book, but it is very meaty and very hard chewing I recommend it ferociously


  3. Peter Peter says:

    Berger s writing is lucid and smooth very readable His painstakingly supported discussion of religion is anchored in sociological and mythical concepts that can be recognized in the writings of Eliade or Campbell There is much of interest here, from an analysis of the Pauline gesture of faith, the Christian switch to a friendlier, approachable God, and the masochism which dates the writing to the 60s underpinning the whole structure In later chapters he explains the trend of secularization Berger s writing is lucid and smooth very readable His painstakingly supported discussion of religion is anchored in sociological and mythical concepts that can be recognized in the writings of Eliade or Campbell There is much of interest here, from an analysis of the Pauline gesture of faith, the Christian switch to a friendlier, approachable God, and the masochism which dates the writing to the 60s underpinning the whole structure In later chapters he explains the trend of secularization that started wait for it with the Jews exodusUnder secularization, which I found most enlightening, when Berger describes what happens to religion when exposed to pluralistic competition, he unwittingly provides a sociological explanation for the prosperity gospel It is impossible, almost a priori, to market a commodity to a population of uncoerced consumers without taking their wishes concerning the commodity into consideration This means, further, that a dynamic element is introduced In other words, in this situation it becomes increasingly difficult to maintain the religious traditions as unchanging verity Consumer preference reflects the needs of this sphere This means religion can beeasily marketed if it can be shown to be relevant to private life that if it is advertised as entailing specific applications to the large public institutions As a result, the religious institutions have accommodated themselves to the moral and therapeutic needs of the individual in his private life The emphasis on family and neighborhood as well as on the psychological needs of the private individual What is relevant to many Americans since the 1980s Money They don t have enough of it In the prosperity gospel, the answer is provided The prosperity gospel is therefore not merely a sham mockery of Christian teachings, it is also a new product responding to a vital consumer need The same market forces that produce the prosperity gospel and mega churches also produce the strengthening of neo orthodoxy brackets added The pluralistic situation presents the religious institutions with two ideal typical options They can either A accommodate themselves to the situation, play the pluralistic game of religious free enterprise, and come to terms as best they can with the plausibility problem by modifying their product in accordance with consumer demands Or B they can refuse to accommodate themselves, entrench themselves behind whatever socio religious structures they can maintain or construct and continue to profess the old objectivities as much as possible i.e., build a stronger brand Berger explains that the need to retrenching towards a stronger brand has been the cause of the U.S neo evangelical movement, which, he points out, found its start in Karl Barth s Epistle to the Romans, which was a response to Bolshevism and Nazism Please see my review of that book fordetail If one is to understand the rise of neo orthodoxy in the 1930s in Europe, it is most important to remember that modern at the time meant, above all, to be in accord with Nazism Neo orthodoxy entails the energetic reassertion of the objectivity of the tradition Wherever this kind of objectivity can be plausibly asserted, to this day, it serves as an Archimedean point from which, in turn, all contradictory definitions of reality may be relativized And, finally, a few notes of entertainment Berger seemed to be less than happy with married life at the time he wrote this I can imagine him in the fleshpots of the sixties university campus The individual may daydream of living in a state of delightful polygamy In his daydreams the individual may be a Turkish pasha But he is only daydreaming, because he is stuck playing the role of faithful husband One way of defining bad faith is to that that it replaces choice with fictitious necessities The particular case of bad faith that interests us here is one where the individual, faced with the choice of acting or not acting within a certain role program, denies this choice on the basis of his identification with the role in question For example, the faithful husband may tell himself that he has no choice but to program his sexual activity in accordance with his marital role, suppressing any lustful alternatives as impossibilities I hope he was able to work through his issues


  4. Rebecca Rebecca says:

    The first half of this is essentially an application of basic principles of sociology to religion It is wordy, rambling, uses the royal we in an annoying way and probably could just be skimmed Part two then seeks to apply those principles to the Christian church This section moves a biteasily and held my interest inasmuch as it sought to explain why secularization has taken place and attributes that to the ancient Israelites However, much of the author s style continued to annoy me The first half of this is essentially an application of basic principles of sociology to religion It is wordy, rambling, uses the royal we in an annoying way and probably could just be skimmed Part two then seeks to apply those principles to the Christian church This section moves a biteasily and held my interest inasmuch as it sought to explain why secularization has taken place and attributes that to the ancient Israelites However, much of the author s style continued to annoy me throughout Certainly understand why this was assigned in a multi cultural context course for Christians, but wonder if someone s written something similar since the late 1960s, with gender inclusive language and easy readability.Hoping the rest of the reading for this course getsinteresting


  5. Leah Leah says:

    So informative, but SO dry It was difficult to trudge through I learned so much about how religion is constructed and how it is studied, but it was just so dense and I had to reread paragraphs a few times to understand the meaning Definitely not for the casually interested.


  6. Paul Frank Spencer Paul Frank Spencer says:

    The sociological theory expressed in this treatment is unarguably whole however, I disagreed with it as a whole To begin with, the atheistic assumptions that the theory is based off of willfully ignore that the way man objectivates and internalizes sociological phenomena is not so different from how he does the same with all objective nature Berger shifts too easily between man as mankind and man as individual, ignoring the important differences brought about by the equivocation By readi The sociological theory expressed in this treatment is unarguably whole however, I disagreed with it as a whole To begin with, the atheistic assumptions that the theory is based off of willfully ignore that the way man objectivates and internalizes sociological phenomena is not so different from how he does the same with all objective nature Berger shifts too easily between man as mankind and man as individual, ignoring the important differences brought about by the equivocation By reading religion as a purely sociological or group psychological fact, Berger completely ignores the implications of genuine religious belief as opposed to socio religious identity Lastly, in brief, Berger takes too many liberties in generalizing and summarizing historical and social facts in support of his theory Perhapsdetail would repulse any possible readers, but conclusions come to withoutestablished arguments and examples become very shakey indeed.The read was interesting, but I found essential elements I disagreed with from top to bottom


  7. Terry Tse Terry Tse says:

    This is an inspiring book, worthy of its classic status It explains why religion is so powerful a force in world building and world maintenance, and explains how religion functions in a socio psychological sense It can also serve as a template to understand how non religious ideology such as Marxism and even a lot of so called corporate values operates to maintain nomos for a specific group.Even though Peter Berger has moved away from his secularization theory, upon close reading it still This is an inspiring book, worthy of its classic status It explains why religion is so powerful a force in world building and world maintenance, and explains how religion functions in a socio psychological sense It can also serve as a template to understand how non religious ideology such as Marxism and even a lot of so called corporate values operates to maintain nomos for a specific group.Even though Peter Berger has moved away from his secularization theory, upon close reading it still holds plenty of merit In the book, Peter Berger actually discussed how modernity spawned pluralism along with secularization The weakness of this theory, which he addressed in his later works, lies in relying too much on the notion of rational consciousness However, it is not the case that he attributed the decline of religion to secularization alone


  8. Abby Abby says:

    This made some sense Don t read it while drunk then it makes NO sense.I think I got this book because of Fromm There s a fair amount of Weber here, along with Durkheim, Hegel, Marx, Sartre, and Heidegger Overall, interesting ideas, but ones that may not be new to you if you re well versed in the aforementioned thinkers Further, I don t understand why some reviews praise Berger s concise and lucid writing style This was one of the driest books I ve ever read If you re the average reade This made some sense Don t read it while drunk then it makes NO sense.I think I got this book because of Fromm There s a fair amount of Weber here, along with Durkheim, Hegel, Marx, Sartre, and Heidegger Overall, interesting ideas, but ones that may not be new to you if you re well versed in the aforementioned thinkers Further, I don t understand why some reviews praise Berger s concise and lucid writing style This was one of the driest books I ve ever read If you re the average reader, and not a student of sociology or religious studies, I d say eschew reading this text and find a summary of Berger s ideas I even saw some Goodreads reviews that would fit the bill, and I guarantee they re a lot less painful to read


  9. Jeff Jeff says:

    This book follows on from Berger and Luckmann s The Social Construction of Reality but is written by Berger alone Many insights that might provide clarity for the situation the church finds itself in today Of course, this was written fifty years ago so these insights are not new but religious folk often seem to think themselves and their institutions beyond or immune to such truths Such is the canopy which covers their world E.g As we have seen, the fundamental problem of the religious i This book follows on from Berger and Luckmann s The Social Construction of Reality but is written by Berger alone Many insights that might provide clarity for the situation the church finds itself in today Of course, this was written fifty years ago so these insights are not new but religious folk often seem to think themselves and their institutions beyond or immune to such truths Such is the canopy which covers their world E.g As we have seen, the fundamental problem of the religious institutions is hard to keep going in the milieu that no longer takes for granted their definition of reality


  10. Dan Glover Dan Glover says:

    Perhaps I will have time to review this in future For now, it is an exercise in viewing history from an atheist sociological perspective, as a human construct The sociological insights of the dialectical process of how societies are shaped first people shape culture and society institutions, practices, technologies, processes, etc and then they shape us, often in ways we don t anticipate or intend is superb.


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

The Sacred Canopy: Elements of a Sociological Theory of Religion [Download] ➾ The Sacred Canopy: Elements of a Sociological Theory of Religion ➹ Peter L. Berger – Capitalsoftworks.co.uk Influential scholar Peter L Berger explores the sociological underpinnings of religion and the rise of a modern secular society Acclaimed scholar and sociologist Peter L Berger carefully lays out an u Influential Canopy: Elements of a PDF \ scholar Peter L Berger explores the Canopy: Elements MOBI í sociological underpinnings of religion and the rise of a modern secular society Acclaimed scholar and sociologist Peter The Sacred PDF or L Berger carefully lays out an understanding of religion as a historical, societal mechanism in this classic work of social theory Berger examines the roots Sacred Canopy: Elements PDF/EPUB ½ of religious belief and its gradual dissolution in modern times, applying a general theoretical perspective to specific examples from religions throughout the ages Building upon the author s previous work, The Social Construction of Reality, with Thomas Luckmann, this book makes Berger s case that human societies build a sacred canopy to protect, stabilize, and give meaning to their worldview.

10 thoughts on “The Sacred Canopy: Elements of a Sociological Theory of Religion

  1. John David John David says:

    This book is an extension of Peter Berger and Thomas Luckmann s earlier book, The Social Construction of Reality A Treatise in the Sociology of Knowledge written in 1966, in which the authors begin with basic sociological assumptions about mental representations and how human beings come to know the world and form impressions of it The Sacred Canopy, while heavily informed by the ideas in The Social Construction of Reality, was written only by Berger himself The book is a thoroughly Mar This book is an extension of Peter Berger and Thomas Luckmann s earlier book, The Social Construction of Reality A Treatise in the Sociology of Knowledge written in 1966, in which the authors begin with basic sociological assumptions about mental representations and how human beings come to know the world and form impressions of it The Sacred Canopy, while heavily informed by the ideas in The Social Construction of Reality, was written only by Berger himself The book is a thoroughly Marxist critique of religion with a dash of Freud thrown in for good measure The Marxism comes from Berger s understanding of human consciousness He emphasizes the dialectical nature of individual man and his relationship to culture and society According to him, we can only world build or cosmize, to use his argot through a process of constant internalization and externalization of distinct mental representations Berger defines religion as a sacred form of world building, an audacious attempt to conceive of the entire universe as humanly significant p 28 Forget temporarily, as I had to, that to call religion a sacred form of world building seems to very much beg the question He argues religion to be the oldest, most powerful legitimizing order which plays a central role in construing order and rationality in our lives, and therefore in maintaining reality because they are the only things that can provide sacred legitimation for this socially constructed reality Thus religion makes permanent the temporary, transcendentalizes the immanent, sacralizes the profane, and ensures a nomological that is, rational and law based rather than chaotic reality.Evil, death, injustice, and suffering can threaten the nomological world that is shored up by religious legitimation However, theodicies minimize the threat to nomos by bestowing meaning on these things and by making them understandable in a larger epistemological scheme Berger claims that religion is ultimately alienating, as it enforces the idea that the socially constructed world is not a human product, but rather a permanent product of divine construction religion is, in other words, a source of false consciousness that perpetuates the idea that human beings had nothing to do with creating their social world He also claims that the world is gradually becomingsecular For exactly these reasons, secularization is paradoxically both de alienating, while at the same time anomic and ridden with existential anxiety precisely because religion, according to Berger, has lost its legitimacy, having slowly been replaced in the industrial world with a materialistic positivistic model for knowledge In short, secularization allows people to realize that the world is their own, not that of a distant, supernatural God, and that our disconnection from this leaves us hanging, alone, in a world devoid of any meaning or order Berger claims to break down the book into two parts, the first being the theoretical portion and the second providing the concrete, historical, empirical facts that support the theory However, I found almost no substantive distinction in the level of theory used in the two parts Both are highly theoretical and abstract, which is not to say that the text is difficult if afforded a careful reading But the entire book is maintained on such a level of abstraction that it would be difficult to take any applied ideas away from it This might have something to do with the fact that Berger recanted the central thesis of The Sacred Canopy about twenty years ago in the face of evidence that directly suggested that the boundaries of secularization and modernization were not necessarily coterminal Also, for being published less than fifty years ago, the ideas here seem much, much older Connecting the ideas of secularization, alienation, and social anomy which seem to me to the fundamental concept here go back to the nineteenth century, and Berger doesn t seem to work in any new ideas This book is interesting for its historical value and arguments it is still seen on sociology reading lists nearly everywhere , but it doesn t bring much value added to the contemporary sociology of knowledge or religion

  2. David David says:

    The Sacred Canopy is a classic in the sociology of religion, and is simply one of the finest studies I know of religious people acting in groups I first read it in fall of 2001, and Berger was one of the few thinkers who helped me make sense of 9 11.Based on the work of Emile Durkheim, one of the founders of modern sociology, Berger examines how communities construct their own version of reality and then enforce it among its members This socially constructed reality becomes the norm through wh The Sacred Canopy is a classic in the sociology of religion, and is simply one of the finest studies I know of religious people acting in groups I first read it in fall of 2001, and Berger was one of the few thinkers who helped me make sense of 9 11.Based on the work of Emile Durkheim, one of the founders of modern sociology, Berger examines how communities construct their own version of reality and then enforce it among its members This socially constructed reality becomes the norm through which the world is interpreted, measured and judged To violate the social construct, ie to disagree with that reality, appears to its adherents as insanity Not appearing insane is a powerful motivation to keep people toeing the line of orthodoxy.This is a thin little book, but it is very meaty and very hard chewing I recommend it ferociously

  3. Peter Peter says:

    Berger s writing is lucid and smooth very readable His painstakingly supported discussion of religion is anchored in sociological and mythical concepts that can be recognized in the writings of Eliade or Campbell There is much of interest here, from an analysis of the Pauline gesture of faith, the Christian switch to a friendlier, approachable God, and the masochism which dates the writing to the 60s underpinning the whole structure In later chapters he explains the trend of secularization Berger s writing is lucid and smooth very readable His painstakingly supported discussion of religion is anchored in sociological and mythical concepts that can be recognized in the writings of Eliade or Campbell There is much of interest here, from an analysis of the Pauline gesture of faith, the Christian switch to a friendlier, approachable God, and the masochism which dates the writing to the 60s underpinning the whole structure In later chapters he explains the trend of secularization that started wait for it with the Jews exodusUnder secularization, which I found most enlightening, when Berger describes what happens to religion when exposed to pluralistic competition, he unwittingly provides a sociological explanation for the prosperity gospel It is impossible, almost a priori, to market a commodity to a population of uncoerced consumers without taking their wishes concerning the commodity into consideration This means, further, that a dynamic element is introduced In other words, in this situation it becomes increasingly difficult to maintain the religious traditions as unchanging verity Consumer preference reflects the needs of this sphere This means religion can beeasily marketed if it can be shown to be relevant to private life that if it is advertised as entailing specific applications to the large public institutions As a result, the religious institutions have accommodated themselves to the moral and therapeutic needs of the individual in his private life The emphasis on family and neighborhood as well as on the psychological needs of the private individual What is relevant to many Americans since the 1980s Money They don t have enough of it In the prosperity gospel, the answer is provided The prosperity gospel is therefore not merely a sham mockery of Christian teachings, it is also a new product responding to a vital consumer need The same market forces that produce the prosperity gospel and mega churches also produce the strengthening of neo orthodoxy brackets added The pluralistic situation presents the religious institutions with two ideal typical options They can either A accommodate themselves to the situation, play the pluralistic game of religious free enterprise, and come to terms as best they can with the plausibility problem by modifying their product in accordance with consumer demands Or B they can refuse to accommodate themselves, entrench themselves behind whatever socio religious structures they can maintain or construct and continue to profess the old objectivities as much as possible i.e., build a stronger brand Berger explains that the need to retrenching towards a stronger brand has been the cause of the U.S neo evangelical movement, which, he points out, found its start in Karl Barth s Epistle to the Romans, which was a response to Bolshevism and Nazism Please see my review of that book fordetail If one is to understand the rise of neo orthodoxy in the 1930s in Europe, it is most important to remember that modern at the time meant, above all, to be in accord with Nazism Neo orthodoxy entails the energetic reassertion of the objectivity of the tradition Wherever this kind of objectivity can be plausibly asserted, to this day, it serves as an Archimedean point from which, in turn, all contradictory definitions of reality may be relativized And, finally, a few notes of entertainment Berger seemed to be less than happy with married life at the time he wrote this I can imagine him in the fleshpots of the sixties university campus The individual may daydream of living in a state of delightful polygamy In his daydreams the individual may be a Turkish pasha But he is only daydreaming, because he is stuck playing the role of faithful husband One way of defining bad faith is to that that it replaces choice with fictitious necessities The particular case of bad faith that interests us here is one where the individual, faced with the choice of acting or not acting within a certain role program, denies this choice on the basis of his identification with the role in question For example, the faithful husband may tell himself that he has no choice but to program his sexual activity in accordance with his marital role, suppressing any lustful alternatives as impossibilities I hope he was able to work through his issues

  4. Rebecca Rebecca says:

    The first half of this is essentially an application of basic principles of sociology to religion It is wordy, rambling, uses the royal we in an annoying way and probably could just be skimmed Part two then seeks to apply those principles to the Christian church This section moves a biteasily and held my interest inasmuch as it sought to explain why secularization has taken place and attributes that to the ancient Israelites However, much of the author s style continued to annoy me The first half of this is essentially an application of basic principles of sociology to religion It is wordy, rambling, uses the royal we in an annoying way and probably could just be skimmed Part two then seeks to apply those principles to the Christian church This section moves a biteasily and held my interest inasmuch as it sought to explain why secularization has taken place and attributes that to the ancient Israelites However, much of the author s style continued to annoy me throughout Certainly understand why this was assigned in a multi cultural context course for Christians, but wonder if someone s written something similar since the late 1960s, with gender inclusive language and easy readability.Hoping the rest of the reading for this course getsinteresting

  5. Leah Leah says:

    So informative, but SO dry It was difficult to trudge through I learned so much about how religion is constructed and how it is studied, but it was just so dense and I had to reread paragraphs a few times to understand the meaning Definitely not for the casually interested.

  6. Paul Frank Spencer Paul Frank Spencer says:

    The sociological theory expressed in this treatment is unarguably whole however, I disagreed with it as a whole To begin with, the atheistic assumptions that the theory is based off of willfully ignore that the way man objectivates and internalizes sociological phenomena is not so different from how he does the same with all objective nature Berger shifts too easily between man as mankind and man as individual, ignoring the important differences brought about by the equivocation By readi The sociological theory expressed in this treatment is unarguably whole however, I disagreed with it as a whole To begin with, the atheistic assumptions that the theory is based off of willfully ignore that the way man objectivates and internalizes sociological phenomena is not so different from how he does the same with all objective nature Berger shifts too easily between man as mankind and man as individual, ignoring the important differences brought about by the equivocation By reading religion as a purely sociological or group psychological fact, Berger completely ignores the implications of genuine religious belief as opposed to socio religious identity Lastly, in brief, Berger takes too many liberties in generalizing and summarizing historical and social facts in support of his theory Perhapsdetail would repulse any possible readers, but conclusions come to withoutestablished arguments and examples become very shakey indeed.The read was interesting, but I found essential elements I disagreed with from top to bottom

  7. Terry Tse Terry Tse says:

    This is an inspiring book, worthy of its classic status It explains why religion is so powerful a force in world building and world maintenance, and explains how religion functions in a socio psychological sense It can also serve as a template to understand how non religious ideology such as Marxism and even a lot of so called corporate values operates to maintain nomos for a specific group.Even though Peter Berger has moved away from his secularization theory, upon close reading it still This is an inspiring book, worthy of its classic status It explains why religion is so powerful a force in world building and world maintenance, and explains how religion functions in a socio psychological sense It can also serve as a template to understand how non religious ideology such as Marxism and even a lot of so called corporate values operates to maintain nomos for a specific group.Even though Peter Berger has moved away from his secularization theory, upon close reading it still holds plenty of merit In the book, Peter Berger actually discussed how modernity spawned pluralism along with secularization The weakness of this theory, which he addressed in his later works, lies in relying too much on the notion of rational consciousness However, it is not the case that he attributed the decline of religion to secularization alone

  8. Abby Abby says:

    This made some sense Don t read it while drunk then it makes NO sense.I think I got this book because of Fromm There s a fair amount of Weber here, along with Durkheim, Hegel, Marx, Sartre, and Heidegger Overall, interesting ideas, but ones that may not be new to you if you re well versed in the aforementioned thinkers Further, I don t understand why some reviews praise Berger s concise and lucid writing style This was one of the driest books I ve ever read If you re the average reade This made some sense Don t read it while drunk then it makes NO sense.I think I got this book because of Fromm There s a fair amount of Weber here, along with Durkheim, Hegel, Marx, Sartre, and Heidegger Overall, interesting ideas, but ones that may not be new to you if you re well versed in the aforementioned thinkers Further, I don t understand why some reviews praise Berger s concise and lucid writing style This was one of the driest books I ve ever read If you re the average reader, and not a student of sociology or religious studies, I d say eschew reading this text and find a summary of Berger s ideas I even saw some Goodreads reviews that would fit the bill, and I guarantee they re a lot less painful to read

  9. Jeff Jeff says:

    This book follows on from Berger and Luckmann s The Social Construction of Reality but is written by Berger alone Many insights that might provide clarity for the situation the church finds itself in today Of course, this was written fifty years ago so these insights are not new but religious folk often seem to think themselves and their institutions beyond or immune to such truths Such is the canopy which covers their world E.g As we have seen, the fundamental problem of the religious i This book follows on from Berger and Luckmann s The Social Construction of Reality but is written by Berger alone Many insights that might provide clarity for the situation the church finds itself in today Of course, this was written fifty years ago so these insights are not new but religious folk often seem to think themselves and their institutions beyond or immune to such truths Such is the canopy which covers their world E.g As we have seen, the fundamental problem of the religious institutions is hard to keep going in the milieu that no longer takes for granted their definition of reality

  10. Dan Glover Dan Glover says:

    Perhaps I will have time to review this in future For now, it is an exercise in viewing history from an atheist sociological perspective, as a human construct The sociological insights of the dialectical process of how societies are shaped first people shape culture and society institutions, practices, technologies, processes, etc and then they shape us, often in ways we don t anticipate or intend is superb.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *