By Niklas Luhmann
Synthesizing methods as disparate because the philosophy of language, historic linguistics, deconstruction, and formal structures theory/cybernetics, A structures conception of Religion takes on very important subject matters that diversity from religion's that means and evolution to secularization, turning a long time of sociological assumptions on their head. It presents us with a clean vocabulary and a clean philosophical and sociological method of considered one of society's so much basic phenomena.
Read Online or Download A systems theory of religion PDF
Best religious studies books
This scarce antiquarian booklet is a facsimile reprint of the unique. as a result of its age, it will possibly comprise imperfections similar to marks, notations, marginalia and incorrect pages. simply because we think this paintings is culturally very important, we've got made it to be had as a part of our dedication for shielding, keeping, and selling the world's literature in cheap, prime quality, smooth versions which are real to the unique paintings.
All through background, arguments for and opposed to the life of God were mostly limited to philosophy and theology. meanwhile, technology has sat at the sidelines and quietly watched this online game of phrases march up and down the sector. even though technology has revolutionised each point of human existence and significantly clarified our knowing of the realm, by some means the concept has arisen that it has not anything to assert in regards to the risk of a best being, which a lot of humanity worships because the resource of all fact.
- Social Theory and Religion
- Al-Kindī (Great Medieval Thinkers)
- The SAGE handbook of the sociology of religion
- Sociology and Development
Additional info for A systems theory of religion
In addition, the spectator sees and understands the performed distinction between truth and deception as a reality, as long as he ignores that the distinction, in truth, is deceptive. 40 But if that is the case: can one not just as well proceed in the opposite direction, giving priority to the form in the form? Instead, could one assume that the starting distinction is being invented as the frame of the frame, if one is unable to deal with the world as it represents itself (as with the distinction between sacred and profane, for instance)?
As a result, every text can be conveyed by inconclusive references—something that would also be true when making a literary-critical analysis of holy texts (and which such texts in turn would have to disavow). Meaning is deferral, différance (Derrida), “unlimited semiosis” (Pierce). Yet we have to be able to believe that every actualization has a secure foothold somewhere, since we are certain that it will ultimately continue. A parallel moment is when all ontic certainties dissolve into relationships of time.
If religion in turn constitutes forms by means of limitation and exclusion, is not every explanation of religion religious, since it is falling back on a method of limitation and exclusion? Or, asking the question differently: can there be a scientific description of religion if religion claims that it can justify the exclusionary power of forms (as “this and not that”)? Can we then still proceed according to the science of causation, or do we have to fall back on cybernetic theories, which have a preference for circular explanations (based on an operative self-limitation of the circle)?