Access the full text.
Sign up today, get DeepDyve free for 14 days.
P. Berger (1974)
Some Second Thoughts on Substantive versus Functional Definitions of ReligionJournal for the Scientific Study of Religion, 13
Stark Stark (1965)
“A Taxonomy of Religious Experience”Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, 5
R. Stark (1999)
Micro Foundations of Religion: A Revised Theory*Sociological Theory, 17
Neitz Neitz, Spickard Spickard (1989)
“Steps Toward a Sociology of Religious Experience: The Theories of Mihaly Csikszentmihaly and Alfred Schutz”Sociological Analysis, 50
David Yamane (2000)
Narrative and Religious ExperienceSociology of Religion, 61
H. Collins (1994)
A strong confirmation of the experimenters' regressStudies in History and Philosophy of Science, 25
Harold Collins (1981)
II.3 What is TRASP?: The Radical Programme as a Methodological ImperativePhilosophy of the Social Sciences, 11
I. Lakatos (1976)
Falsification and the Methodology of Scientific Research Programmes
A. Kellehear (1993)
Culture, Biology, and the Near-Death Experience: A ReappraisalThe Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease, 181
R. Schoenherr (1987)
Power and Authority in Organized Religion: Disaggregating the Phenomenological CoreSociology of Religion, 47
Schoenherr Schoenherr (1987)
“Power and Authority in Organized Religion: Disaggregating the Phenomenological Core”Sociological Analysis, 47
Peter Berger has been the most seminal of contemporary sociologists of religion (see Woodhead et al. 2001 ), so much so that today the form of bracketing Berger labeled “methodological atheism” is virtually a taken for granted presupposition of the sociological study of religion. This paper argues that when it comes to the sociological study of religious experience, methodological atheism prescribes an inappropriate form of bracketing. More appropriate—and even more in keeping with Berger's own deeper convictions—would be a form of bracketing that might be termed “methodological agnosticism.” Adopting methodological agnosticism over methodological atheism results in a revised social constructionism that acknowledges that objects of our experience are not all entirely constructed socially. Without perhaps actually overturning it, applied to religious experience, such a revised social constructionism calls sociology's naturalism into serious question. Naturalism is the assumption that all scientific explanation must be this‐worldly, never referencing supernatural or transcendental realities. One way of preserving naturalism is the methodological atheism first articulated by Peter Berger (1967 ; 1979 ). Methodological atheism is the practice of bracketing—or refusing to consider—for the purpose of sociological study the ultimate reality of such religious objects as God, angels, or cosmic unity. As well
Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour – Wiley
Published: Mar 1, 2006
Read and print from thousands of top scholarly journals.
Already have an account? Log in
Bookmark this article. You can see your Bookmarks on your DeepDyve Library.
To save an article, log in first, or sign up for a DeepDyve account if you don’t already have one.
Copy and paste the desired citation format or use the link below to download a file formatted for EndNote
Access the full text.
Sign up today, get DeepDyve free for 14 days.
All DeepDyve websites use cookies to improve your online experience. They were placed on your computer when you launched this website. You can change your cookie settings through your browser.