Secular Society, Religious Meanings: A Contemporary Paradox
A random sample of the adult population of an English industrial city was interviewed to ascertain the proportion of people reporting certain types of human experience which are commonly given a religious interpretation. Whilst the number claiming active membership of a religious institution was ver...
| Published in: | Review of religious research |
|---|---|
| Authors: | ; |
| Format: | Electronic Article |
| Language: | English |
| Check availability: | HBZ Gateway |
| Journals Online & Print: | Drawer...
|
| Fernleihe: | Fernleihe für die Fachinformationsdienste |
| Published: |
Springer
1985
|
| In: |
Review of religious research
|
| Online Access: |
Volltext (lizenzpflichtig) Volltext (lizenzpflichtig) |
| Parallel Edition: | Non-electronic
|
| Summary: | A random sample of the adult population of an English industrial city was interviewed to ascertain the proportion of people reporting certain types of human experience which are commonly given a religious interpretation. Whilst the number claiming active membership of a religious institution was very low, a majority of people (62%) said they had this type of experience at least once or twice in their lives. Respondents were asked to give descriptions of their experiences and it was possible to classify these. The coded categories were found to relate to the extent to which an experience was, in fact, interpreted religiously. Furthermore, the more important an experience was judged to be by the individual, the more likely it was to be interpreted religiously. The hypothesis is proposed that interpretations of these experiences are given according to the sector of society within which the experiencer finds himself. There is evidence of a strong taboo against the public admission of these experiences, perhaps because they conflict with currently dominant secular models of reality. |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 2211-4866 |
| Contains: | Enthalten in: Review of religious research
|
| Persistent identifiers: | DOI: 10.2307/3511273 |