religious market theory Flashcards
religious market theory
stark and bainbridge - critical of secularisation theory, which they
see as eurocentric - focuses on the decline of religion in europe and fails to explain its continuing vitality in america and elsewhere.
puts forward a distorted view of the past and future argue that there
was no ‘golden age’ of religion in the past, as they claim secularisation theory implies, nor is it realistic to predict a future end-point for religion when everyone will be an atheist.
propose religious market theory which is based on two assumptions:
-people are naturally religious and religion meets human needs. Therefore the overall demand for religion remains constant, even though the demand for particular types of religion may vary.
- it is human nature to seek rewards and avoid costs. when people make choices, they weigh up the costs and benefits of the different options available.
compensators
stark and bainbridge - religion is attractive because it provides us with compensators. when real rewards are scarce or unobtainable, religion compensates by promising supernatural ones. for example, immortality is unobtainable, but religion compensates by promising life after death.
the cycle of renewal- alterative to secularisation theory, which sees a one-way process of continuous decline, stark and bainbridge put forward the concept of a cycle of religious decline, revival and renewal. describe a perpetual cycle throughout history, with some religions declining and others growing and attracting new members. when established churches decline, they leave a gap in the market for sects and cults to attract new followers.
religious competition - churches operate like companies selling goods in a market. where secularisation theory sees competition between
different religious organisations as undermining religion, religious market theorists take the opposite view. they argue that competition leads to improvements in the quality of religious goods on offer
america vs europe
demand for religion increases when there are different sorts to choose from, because consumers can find one that meets their needs.
in contrast, where there is a religious monopoly - one church with no competition - it leads to decline - without competition, a church has
no incentive to provide people with what they want.
stark and bainbridge - religion thrives in the usa because there has never been a religious monopoly there. the constitution guarantees freedom of religion and the separation of church and state, and there has always been a great variety of denominations to choose from.
encouraged the growth of a healthy religious market where religions grow or decline according to consumer demand
most european countries have been dominated by an official state church which had a religious monopoly, such as the church of
england. competition has been held back and the lack of choice has led to decline.
supply not demand - the main factor influencing the level of religious
participation is not the demand for religion, but the supply. participation increases when there is an ample supply of religious groups to choose from, but declines when supply is restricted
supply led religion
hadden and sharpe - the growth of ‘televangelism’ in america shows that the level of religious participation is supply led. when commercial funding of religious broadcasts began in the 1960s, it opened up competition in which evangelical churches thrived - responded by preaching a prosperity gospel
finke - the lifting of restrictions on asian immigration into america in the 1960s allowed asian religions such as hare krishna and transcedental meditation to be set up permanently in the usa
growth of evangelical megachurches. most are in the usa. with such lavish resources, they are able to offer a vast range of activities to meet the diverse needs of their members
stark - japan is another society where a free market in religion has stimulated participation. until 1945, shintoism was the state religion, and other religions were suppressed. however, after ww2, religion was deregulated, creating a market in which new religions have thrived
criticisms of religious market theory
bruce - rejects the view that diversity and competition increase the demand for religion. statistics show that diversity has been accompanied by the religious decline in both europe and america
bruce - stark and bainbridge misrepresent secularisation theory. the theory does not claim that there was a past golden age of religion, or that everyone will become atheists - it simply states that religion is in long term decline
norris and inglehart - show that high levels of religious participation exist in catholic countries, where the church has a near monopoly, such as ireland and venezuela
beckford - criticises religious market theory as unsociological, because it assumes people are naturally religious and fails to explain why the make the choices they do
existential security theory
norris and inglehart - the reason for variation in religiosity in societies is not different degrees of religious choice, but different degrees of existential security - the feeling that survival is secure enough that it can be taken for granted
religion meets a need for security, and therefore societies where people already feel secure have a low level of demand for religion
poor societies - people face life threatening risks such a disease and famine, therefore have high levels of insecurity and high levels of religiosity
rich societies - people have a higher standard of living and are less at risk and have a higher sense of security, therefore low demand for religion
however, norris and inglehart note that global population growth undermines the trend towards secularisation. rich western countries have low population growth, whereas poor countries have high population growth
europe vs america
western europe is heading towards increasing secularisation because they’re the most developed, offering comprehensive healthcare and social services - reduces poverty and protects those at the bottom from insecurity
the usa remains much more religious since the usa is the most unequal of the rich societies, with an inadequate welfare safety net, and dog eat dog values - creates high levels of poverty and insecurity
state welfare and religiosity
gill and lundegaarde - the more a country spends on welfare, the lower the levels of religious participation
in the past, religion used to provide welfare for the poor and still does so in poorer countries. however from the 20th century , the state in the west began to provide welfare and this contributed to religion’s decline
religion will not disappear completely because although welfare provision provides security, it does not answer ‘ultimate questions’ about the meaning of life, like religion does
evaluation of existential security theory
vasquez - norris and inglehart only use quantitative data about income levels, they don’t examine people’s own definitions of existential security
only sees religion as a negative response to deprivation
