Question 1
In Psychology of Religion by Dan Merkur, religion is brought to light from a psychological perspective. Upon analysing the various work of different psychologist, Dan Merkur argues that some of the religion devotees are not pleased with the fact that religion ought to be viewed psychologically based on the notion that such analysis reduces religion to psychology. Dan Merkur views that religion should be perceived from psychological perspective mainly because religion can be explained psychologically. On the other hand, some other devotees apparent according to Dan Merkur value critical research as a means of purifying idolatry of the mealy human (Merkur 164). To support his arguments, Dan Merkur cited works from prominent psychologists who essentially talked about psychology in relation to religion. According to Sigmund Freud, religion is a neurosis and an error that a rational man ought to abandon at all means.
In support of his notion, Sigmund Freud argued that religion was a misunderstanding of the nature that had been substituted with irrational wishes and hope for a true parapsychology (Merkur 166). Similar to Merkur, Freud perceived religion from a psychological perspective terming it as a human misunderstanding of nature. In other works cited by Merkur, Maslow in his psychoanalysis of religion argued that religion particularly during the past acted as an obstacle to self-actualization especially to the conservatives (Merkur 172). In a nutshell, Merkur cited, David Bakan, where he argued that people have long been conceptualized as machines regulated entirely by casual determinism. He also argued that what is currently expressed as psychology is inconsistent with our real self (Merkur 180).
According to Mark Chaves religious congruence refers to the similarities or rather consistencies that exist in individual’s religious beliefs, identities, religious ideas, and attitudes. Based on anthropological, psychological and sociological research done during the past, it is evident that religious congruence is rare but from a more critical view, it is presumed that religion is common (Chaves 2), to support thus notion, Mark Chaves argues that cultural systems are not congruent and therefore people perceive religion differently in accordance to their cultural systems in which the belong, finally establishes the rule that cultural systems are not congruent so is the religious beliefs in this case. The fact that make various religions incongruent or rather sprouts the fallacy is the fact that; different people give religion different interpretations depending on their perceptions of religion, the differing interpretations essentially makes religion incongruent. To ascertain this claim, Mark Chaves argues that the congruency achieved in scientific communities is not essentially achieved elsewhere basically because the social stratifications and institutions responsible for achieving congruence in science have no functional similarities in any other place (Chaves 14).
According to Judith Fox, the meaning of secularization developed overtime (Fox 292). In eighteen century, the intellects strongly believed that man had the power and intelligence of controlling the nature and its destiny by discerning the laws and discovering the truth. This provided a framework of perceiving science and reason in place of religion and divine to provide definite solutions to problems of life, it also provided framework under which truth can be sought through the use of scientific methods.
The three works mentioned herein complement each other based on the fact that they are all psychologically, oriented. Religion according to Dan Merkur ought to be analysed psychologically, this notion is supported by the Mark Chaves work on religious congruence and Judith Fox work on secularization. The three works essentially perceive religion from a psychological perspective in giving explanations in matters regarding to secularization, religion congruence and psychological insights of religion.
Question 2
In Psychology of Religion by Dan Merkur, some of the work incorporated postulates that religion ought to be viewed as a group pathology. In support of this argument, the author closely relates with the work of Sigmund Freud, where he argues that religion and magic are the apparent misunderstandings of the spiritual nature that substituted for wishes and hopes for science parapsychology. Essentially, it is apparent from Dan Merkur’s work that religion ought to be perceived from a psychological perfective and reason, not as a matter of belief (faith), by perceiving religion form a psychological perspective, one is in a good position to deduce the true meaning of religion.
Max Weber religion as a form of human productive labor (Otto Maduro 223). He argues that it is the power that pushes for change of cultural legacy so as to attain new requirements. It is because of this religious labor that conflicts, power, interests and groups arise. Religion also resists the forces of change. This clearly states religion as an action, process, and production and not a belief. It is from these actions and practices that theory arise. The rise of groups as a result of religion lead to them these people doing a lot of things to themselves, to others, and to their religion. For instance religion brings people together to help each other economically. This way, a theory may develop that those who help others will prosper in life as compare to those who are mean.
Question 3
A ritual can be defined as a chain of activities where words, objects and gestures are used for different meaning and purposes. Rituals are usually carried out at specific places, time and are done with specific people. In religion, rituals are most common and they have several purposes.
One of the major reasons why rituals are done is because it is as a way of communicating with gods. Since the early times, believers went to perform certain activities such as sacrificing animals at the altar. In most cases hymns, songs and dances were done to as the rituals were carried on. All these acts were done so as to create a channel that will allow human beings to communicate with gods. Human beings needed to communicate with gods for different reasons which include: as a way of seeking comfort after a tragic occurrence such as death, and to seek hope and guidance in their future life.
Rituals, in religion, was also a way of getting the truth from witnesses (Foucault 59). Since time memorial. Wrong doers had to face the consequences of their actions. Where witnesses had to give testimonies, rituals were done so that he/she could tell the truth failure to which they would get punished by the gods themselves. Rituals (in the name of religion) were therefore done to get the truth from witnesses.
Rituals were also done as a way of thanks giving to gods. This was normally done after a good fortune came to the community such as birth of twins or a good harvest. In most cases, sacrifices accompanies such rituals so as to get bring more good fortunes to the community.
Works Cited
Fox, Judith. "Secularization." J. Hinnells (red.), The Routledge companion to the study of
religion (2005): 291-305.
Merkur, Dan. "Psychology of religion." The Routledge Companion to the Study of Religion
(2005): 164.
Chaves, Mark. "SSSR presidential address rain dances in the dry season: overcoming the
religious congruence fallacy." Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion 49.1 (2010): 1-14.
Foucault, Michel. "The history of sexuality, Vol. 1: An introduction.: Part Three: Scientia
Sexualis " Trans. Robert Hurley. New York: Random House (1978). (pp. 53-73)
Maduro, Otto. "" Religion" under imperial duress: Postcolonial reflections and proposals."
Review of religious research (2004): 221-234.
