It seems to me that, for many people, religion is more of a social phenomenon than an intellectual phenomenon. (For me personally, it's the opposite.) So what factors draw someone to be part of a religious group when that person harbors significant doubt about that group's teachings?
People belong to a religious group for various reasons: tradition, family, needs, philosophy and others.
After they already belong to the group, then begins a cognitive process of what they profess. In many cases doubt assaults, like all intelectualization there are born options to follow: not to find answers and abandon, or persist in the search.
I think then that the basic is more an individual phenomenon, secondarily a social phenomenon and later an intellectual phenomenon.
People belong to a religious group for various reasons: tradition, family, needs, philosophy and others.
After they already belong to the group, then begins a cognitive process of what they profess. In many cases doubt assaults, like all intelectualization there are born options to follow: not to find answers and abandon, or persist in the search.
I think then that the basic is more an individual phenomenon, secondarily a social phenomenon and later an intellectual phenomenon.
Agreeing with Jorge I assume that the reasons to belong to a profession or to a religious group are as different as we, people are. Historically religion has been (and still is) a pert of the world-view of the population (culture) we live in. Therefore most people even do not think of alternatives. It is only in mature (or over-mature, disintegrating) societies where the question even arises to belong or not to belong. There are many different levels of understanding and practicing a religion. In some cases maybe the "belonging" to a group is the main motive (sociology of religion). In some other cases the intellectual attraction may be dominant.
Algunas de las funciones de las religiones en mi opinión son las de introyectar desde temprana edad creencias duraderas que llegan a perdurar normalmente toda la vida del individuo. Las creencias religiosas son comúnmente aceptadas socialmente. Sin embargo la gran mayoría de las veces no permite el desarrollo de la espiritualidad. Como dice un gran filósofo no habrá paz en el mundo mientras no haya paz entre las religiones.
Las religiones han sido insuficientes para promover la cultura de la paz el amor y la ética como camino para la felicidad humana. Las funciones de las religiones en el mundo actual no permiten el crecimiento de la religiosidad
.
Es recomendable conceptualizar qué entendemos por religión, religión institucionalizada, religiosidad, espiritualidad y ésto nos permitiría tener una aproximación más correcta de "Las principales funciones sociales de las religiones."
Quizá, también qué queremos decir con funciones sociales...
Coincido con Arwa de la importancia de las "religiones" es difundir y promover la ética, el amor, la paz, la felicidad, la sinceridad, la compasión y todas las virtudes, valores, principios y moral que coadyuven a nuestro desarrollo holistico como seres vivientes.
The social function of religions is manifold. On the one hand, religions give an explanation on the question of transcendence in a symbolic way. At the base of the religions are explained the "answer" without answer, ie, Who are we? Where we come from? and where do we go? . Religion in this sense serves as a balm of calm for those people who can not stand the emptiness of "agnosticism." On the other hand, I believe that the second essential function of religions is to consolidate a set of axioms that allow a social order, hence, that religions have always been linked to organizational structures of power.
- Emile Durkheim argued that religion provides social cohesion and social control to maintain society in social solidarity.
- Badges
- Science method
- Similar topics
- Teaching