Religion and Science Embraced
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
RELIGION AND SCIENCE EMBRACED: HOW A RELIGION ACTIVELY TEACHES AND UTILIZES ALTERNATIVE RELIGIOUS AND SCIENTIFIC KNOWLEDGE WITHOUT CONFLICTING INTERPRETATIONS ARISING by Jason Allan Jean B. A. Hons., University of Saskatchewan 2007 THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF ARTS In the College of Arts and Sciences, Department of Sociology © Jason Allan Jean, April 2011. All Rights Reserved. UNIVERSITY OF SASKATCHEWAN PERMISSION TO USE In presenting this thesis/dissertation in partial fulfillment of the requirements for a Postgraduate degree from the University of Saskatchewan, I agree that the Libraries of this University may make it freely available for inspection. I further agree that permission for copying of this thesis/dissertation in any manner, in whole or in part, for scholarly purposes may be granted by the professor or professors who supervised my thesis/dissertation work or, in their absence, by the Head of the Department or the Dean of the College in which my thesis work was done. It is understood that any copying or publication or use of this thesis/dissertation or parts thereof for financial gain shall not be allowed without my written permission. It is also understood that due recognition shall be given to me and to the University of Saskatchewan in any scholarly use which may be made of any material in my thesis/dissertation. Requests for permission to copy or to make other uses of materials in this thesis/dissertation in whole or part should be addressed to: Head of the Department of Sociology University of Saskatchewan Saskatoon, Saskatchewan S7N 5A5 Canada OR Dean College of Graduate Studies and Research University of Saskatchewan 107 Administration Place Saskatoon, Saskatchewan S7N 5A2 Canada i ABSTRACT Religious fundamentalism is a confusing and not well understood phenomenon in present day Western societies. In order to obtain fresh insights into what social forces and conditions affect religious organizational development such that they become fundamentalist organizations, this study seeks to analyze a religious group that historically has been mandated to integrate and utilize alternative scientific and/or religious knowledge into their canon of teachings. A triangulation study consisting of a content analysis of its accepted history and a discourse analysis of its accredited membership are utilized to gather data on this religious organization to understand the historical, organizational, and external social circumstances that have allowed this religious community to engage and interact with alternative scientific and/or religious knowledge without interpretations of conflict becoming a source of social strife within their organization. Keywords: paradigm, exemplar, disciplinary matrix, legitimate authority, charisma, traditional, rational-legal, typology, exclusive realism Subject Terms: religion, science, fundamentalism ii DEDICATION This thesis is dedicated to my family. Their belief and support is the guiding light in my world. iii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I would like to acknowledge the assistance and support of my committee members, especially my supervisor Terry Wotherspoon, as well as the many sociology professors at the University of Saskatchewan. They have all helped to shape and temper me as a sociologist. iv TABLE OF CONTENTS Approval ..................................................................................................................... 2 Abstract ...................................................................................................................... 3 Dedication .................................................................................................................. 4 Acknowledgements ................................................................................................... 5 Table of Contents ...................................................................................................... 6 Chapter 1: Introduction ............................................................................................. 8 1.1 Compatible, Incompatible, Incommensurable, Integrationist, or Conflicting? ...... 11 1.2 Problems with Arguments of Ontological Supremacy .......................................... 17 1.3 Rationale ............................................................................................................. 22 1.4 Outline ................................................................................................................. 25 Chapter 2: Background Information and Literature Review ................................ 28 2.1 Where Does the Understanding of Conflict Come From ..................................... 28 2.2 A History of Conflict or a History of Traditional Institutionalized Roles ................ 30 2.3 The Relationship between Religion and Science: when did a historical means of differentiation occur ................................................................................................... 38 Chapter 3: Family Resemblances and Paradigms ............................................... 45 3.1 How to Define Religion and Science ................................................................... 45 3.2 Family Resemblances ......................................................................................... 50 3.3 Paradigmatic Models ........................................................................................... 53 3.4 Types of Paradigms ............................................................................................ 57 3.5 The Interrelationship of Facts, Theories, Anomalies, Discovery, and Creation ... 60 3.6 Scientific Revolutions .......................................................................................... 64 3.7 Kuhn‟s Critical Realist Approach ......................................................................... 70 v Chapter 4: Max Weber’s Pure Forms of Legitimate Authority and Its Relationship with Kuhn’s Paradigmatic Epistemology .............................................................. 71 4.1 Three Ideal Forms of Legitimate Authority .......................................................... 71 4.2 Charismatic Individuals ....................................................................................... 73 4.3 Traditional and Rational-Legal Roles .................................................................. 77 4.4 How to Determine Types of Scientific and/or Religious Interactions ................... 80 4.5 The Formation of Defined and Rational Boundaries and the Problem of Fundamentalism ........................................................................................................ 86 Chapter 5: Methodology ......................................................................................... 94 Chapter 6: The History of New Thought and the Creation of the Centres for Spiritual Living ...................................................................................................... 101 6.1 “I didn‟t make it up ............................................................................................. 101 6.2 Phineas Quimby: the Clockmaker, Mesmerist, and Spiritual Healer ................. 105 6.3 Quimby‟s New Paradigm: Christian Science ..................................................... 112 6.4 The Routinization of Quimby‟s Science: the Society of Christian Science and New Thought ................................................................................................................... 116 6.5 The New Thought Institution: International Centres for Spiritual Living ............. 128 6.6 Legitimate Authority and the Splitting of Religious Science ............................... 136 Chapter 7: Interviews with Practitioners and Ministers from Saskatoon’s Centre for Spiritual Living ................................................................................................. 148 Chapter 8: Conclusion .......................................................................................... 166 vi CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION Secularization may be occurring in parts of Europe, but they are the exception not the rule. Most of the world remains deeply religious (Watts, 2006: 57). [Fundamentalism] is now an essential part of the modern scene and will certainly play an important role in the domestic and international affairs of the future. It is crucial, therefore, that we try to understand what this type of religiosity means, how and for what reasons it has developed, what it can tell us about our culture, and how best we should deal with it (Armstrong, 2000: xii). Over the years many differing theoretical perspectives have been utilized in order to interpret how scientific and religious ways of understanding reality relate to each other. The continuing civil strife and academic writing conceiving this issue demonstrates just how important and contentious a subject it currently is. The present literature in this area represents a myriad of differing interpretations of scientific and/or religious interactions that can be roughly categorized into compatible, incompatible, incommensurable, integrationist, and conflicting interpretations (Barbour, 2000: 2-4; Scott, (1999) 2003: 113). The core issue to be addressed here is the interpretation of incompatibility which, when combined with certain ontological assumptions or other social circumstances, can lead to an interpretation of conflict that is acted upon by both individuals and groups. This area that is a hotly debated and often