Religious Practice Precedes Religious Belief?
Vložit
- čas přidán 28. 07. 2024
- "Religion is a belief system" is a common definition that I've seen around here on CZcams. However, I see this definition as obscuring other important dimensions of religion beyond the interior thought processes of religious adherents.
Become a member of our Patreon community!: / religionforbreakfast
You can also donate to the show at: www.paypal.me/religionforbrea...
For religious studies book recommendations, see: amazon.com/shop/religionforbr...
Follow me on:
Twitter @andrewmarkhenry
religionforbreakfast
Footnotes
1 Kelly Baker, “What’s belief got to do with it?” Religion Bulletin, 2012. bulletin.equinoxpub.com/2012/0...
2 Joseph Henrich, “The evolution of costly displays, cooperation and religion: credibility enhancing displays and their implications for cultural evolution,” Evolution and Human Behavior 30 (2009), 258.
3 Leslie Dorrough Smith, “Why Durkheim Was Right: On the Perils of Being a Young, Cute Shoplifter,” Religion Bulletin, 2014. bulletin.equinoxpub.com/2014/0...
Other sources:
Seligman et. al. “Ritual and Its Consequences"
I am pretty sure part of the reason for looking at belief first over practice stems from a Protestant bias because so much of Protestant doctrine focuses on belief before practice.
Definitely agree. Lots of Protestant influence on how people in the US and Europe in particular think about religion.
Absolutely
@@ReligionForBreakfast I personally might disagree as within a large minority of Latino Pentecotals all over the US there tends to be a mixture of both belief and practice. since I personally am part of these groups. I think religion in itself can also determine how certain practices can change a culture I.e SDA abstaining from pork, Fundemtal Mormonism practice of Polygamy, etc.
@@ReligionForBreakfast Totally agree. "Sola fide" as Luther said. These words have affected our understanding of religion, and not just ours but how a lot of practicioners of religion tend to think in regards to religion. Act religious. Then the question is of course: how do you do that?
@@abuhado-verbigraciaramirez8682 I'm curious what the role of culture might be there. Many Latino pentecostals are relatively recent converts from Catholicism, which emphasizes practice to a much greater extent than American protestantism. Moreover, the extent to which Catholicism has influenced various Latino cultures on the whole - regardless of individual doctrine or belief - may have an impact on how protestant Christianity is practiced by Latinos.
Conversely, I have noticed that Catholics in predominately protestant countries (ex. Canada, the US) tend to put a lot more emphasis on belief than Catholics from predominantly Catholic countries, and I can't help but think that this is related to the dominant role of protestantism in these countries. If that makes sense?
Really getting the mileage out of your vacation footage aren’t you haha
The concept of credibility enhancing displays is really interesting to me. Especially when you consider how we have such a negative reaction to hypocrisy. Which, I guess, you could consider to polar opposite of a credibility enhancing display.
I suspect people tend to only have a problem with hypocrisy when it is a hipocrisy performed by others, different from the hypocrisy performed by themselves and their in group. :-)
I really do respect this channel, never seen anyone analyse Religion in a unbiased way. I'm an atheist now but used to be Indian Orthodox Christian, and Religious history has always amazed me. Love the work keep up the great content
The Jews had an expression: the art of doing is the art of believing.
Where did you quote that expression?
It isn't a quote.
Isn't this a form of self deception?
The original quote is pretty hard to translate, but goes something like:
"Do until your doing becomes a habit, practice that habit until it becomes your nature"
@@AMcAFaves No, because your *purposefuly* "re-educates yourself" (in the words of Maimonides). You do untill that thing you do is internalized, first as custom, than habit, than second nature.
The whole foundation of Maimonides' theory of morals is that you can train your own nature to become identical with the Torah
Arguably I have "done" more religion than I have "believed" religion. Similarly, most of the religion I have "done" has been for the benefit of my social interactions. Catholic mass with grandpa, easter sunday with my girlfriend's family, funeral services, weddings, etc.
Thanks for opening my eyes!
We’re a social tribalistic species longing for direction , are sensitive to social cues, seek normatives that guide our actions that favor positive outcomes, connect to others, follow mores that provide positive feedback, and accept/practice customs, beliefs that would help further these gains in our sociological context.
Yes to all. Plus, we are hyperactive at agency-detection.
Miikhiel Aali the problem is these beliefs are meant to bond small tribes and are inherently sectarian.
Maybe. Whether or not we should be is another question altogether.
Personally I would rather find a tribe who already subscribes to my opinions than compromise myself by conforming to a tribe that does not.
I'm talking about strongly held, axiomatic opinions here. Not the sort that can be debated.
Then again, we all have pretty much the same axioms within a given society don't we don't we?
I.e. that we are all equal in dignity
Most people will at the very least agree with that intellectually if not deeply/subconsciously.
What I really meant is I want to be around people who are accepting of my opinions whether or not they agree.
Love this channel! Hope you get more subs.
I was raised in the church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (Mormon) church, and the idea that action precedes belief is definitely one that is taught within that church. I've always viewed religion as a very cultural thing, a way of life followed by a community using cultural symbols and practices as a form of belief and social expression.
I run into that constantly when dealing with Roman religion. They didn't have a well-defined belief system, they didn't care much about the afterlife, and so on. It was, as far as we can see, a set of traditions and practices that had to be performed in order to keep the gods happy - without ever really bothering to define the nature of these gods. Roman intellectuals and philosophers had wildly varying beliefs about the gods, the universe, and all the rest, and still participated in the traditional rituals and deemed them important.
As others have already remarked, I also think that this emphasis on belief and individual conviction is the result of our Abrahamic background, and more specifically due to the influence of Protestantism.
OTOH, what is the point of "keep[ing] the gods happy" unless you believe they exist? Also, the Romans despised atheists--people who did not believe in the gods, and they sometimes expanded the definition of this word to include Christians.
I didn't say anything about atheism. Assuming that the gods (in whatever form) exist, is not a belief system. Or rather, there were many Roman belief systems, and the point where they all met was adherence to traditional ritual.
A self-confessed Epicurean like Horace (and Epicurean theology was as functionally atheist as you could get) wrote a prayer song to Apollo and Diana and drew extensively on mythology. Cicero rejected Epicureanism, preferred Academic scepticism, and saw some value in Stoicism, and at the same time he was an augur. Caesar was [i]pontifex maximus[/i] and we have not one glimmer of theological thought in his writings. As were later the emperors Elagabal and Severus Alexander, while also being head priest of, or initiate into, an Eastern sun cult, or the arguably Christian Constantine. In Late Antiquity, traditional pagan ritual was championed by adherents of a quasi-monotheistic Neoplatonism; and so on.
Belief in some form played a role but it was ritual and tradition that were at the centre of the religion, and defining it as "a belief system" fails to hit the mark by a considerable margin.
@@varana the point is that having any reference to gods in your ritual practices contradicts the argument summarized in the video. No gods? it is literally a set of funky cultural rituals. Therefore with God's in the equation, belief is part of the equation. This, belief is an essential (not secondary) part of religion.
That would be the logical reasoning there.
It is possible that ritual is more important than belief in many (most?) religions, but it is still very much a defining (if not THE defining) feature.
@@RobespierreThePoof Two remarks:
First, that is a very modern and very atheist way of looking at it. For most people, both historical and present, assuming the existence of the divine is not a belief that you can argue about but simply a fundamental fact of life. Yes, it's not scientifically verifiable, but that doesn't change how people see it.
Second, what is a god? Two people offer sacrifices to Zeus. When asked, "what is Zeus?", they give completely different answers. Do they believe in the same god? Are their theological differences central to the ritual they're about to perform? Do they matter, for all practical purposes?
My Rabbi says that this is the difference between Ortho*dox* to Ortho*praxis* - different practitioners can sometimes believe different nuance fundamentals and still have the same practice.
I very much agree that religious practice precedes religious belief.
PS
Love your new backdrop studio
0:52 Thanks for featuring the Syriac Orthodox Church 😇
I'm reading Iain McGilchrist' neuroscience book 'the Master and Emissary'. And in it he explains how learning words or terms is not necessary to grasping ideas in fact we understand the concepts first before the terms. e.g. we don't need to know what a spoon is called to understand what it is.
We do this by literally grasping things as well as metaphorically. We are grasping at the world since birth with our right hands (Left Brains) for most of us. So as our hand grasps at the active world it also attempts to understand it. This is what it means to get a grasp on something. So this concept of credibility enhancing works well in practical use for children.
I recommend reading the book and will end with this quote from it:
"The realm of all that remains, and has to remain, implicit and ambiguous is extensive, and is crucially important. This is why one feels so hopeless relying on the written word to convey meaning in humanly important and emotionally freighted situations: 'Non-verbal behaviour, language, facial expression, intonations and gestures are instrumental in establishing complex contradictory, predominantly emotional relations between people and between man and the world. How frequently a touch by the shoulder, a handshake or a look tell more than can be expressed in a long monologue. Not because our speech is not accurate enough. Just the contrary. It is precisely its accuracy and definiteness that make speech unsuited for expressing what is too complex, changeful and ambiguous.' "
Thank you for sharing this book, I intend to read it. I'm beginning a masters' program in speech language pathology, and a lot of folks in our field focus way too much on just the speech part, not the all-encompassing areas of communication production and processing. Speech is just our best attempt at categorizing a complex crazy world. Looking forward to reading this
What I like about your definition is that it's broad enough to be applied in a lot of different areas. Like, this can define political parties, or nation-states, or the process of scientific discovery, or a gossipy high school.
Yeah, some might say that makes it a useless definition, but I think it highlights that there are “religious dimensions” in these other arenas of life (e.g rituals and sacred figures in politics)
This is an important first step in thinking about the concept of “religion” more critically, but it goes even deeper. Different religions themselves have different ways of emphasizing the relative importance of believing, behaving, and belonging. Ritual has an important place in most kinds of Catholicism that’s often disavowed and criticized by evangelicals. Secular Jews emphasize the importance of belonging to a historical religious tradition, de-emphasizing the practices that Orthodox and especially ultra-Orthodox Jews see as nearly the essence as Judaism. Consequently, we should recognize that “religion is a belief system” is not so much the wrong way to define religion writ large, but rather a particular (I’d argue vaguely Protestant, Christian) concept of religion mistakenly applied to other faiths. This is actually a crucial point in many debates in religious studies, the sociology of religion, and secularism: by defining religion (and/or the secular) in one way or another, are we always taking sides-elevating some complexes of belief/behavior/affiliation above others which we want to label “less religious”? Remember that defining religion is not just a scholarly, analytical activity-it has real impacts on, say, what gets counted as “religious freedom,” “religious exemptions,” “free exercise of one’s faith,” etc.
@fnijett, I would say that, in practice, practice is important even in Protestantism, even if belief is officially believed to be almost everything. IOW, even Protestantism is, in practice as opposed to doctrine, a blend of faith and practice, and credibility-enhancing displays are important for the continuance of the Protestant faith. It is just that Protestants and any observer of religion who is part of a heavily Protestant culture may not perceive just how important the practice component is as a practical matter. Thus, one not infrequently hears Americans and especially Protestants arguing that atheism is a religion because it is a belief system. While I certainly agree that atheism is a belief, it lacks the synthesis of belief, practice, way of life, and communal identity that comprise real religions.
Personally I have more respect for a person who practises religion without believing than vice versa. At last their motives are not totally irrational.
The trouble I have with a definition of religion being that broad is then it becomes very difficult to tell what ISN'T a religion. "A mode of living that is comprised of certain beliefs, behaviors and identities shared among a community". What doesn't fall under that category.
So fraternities? Political parties? The cub scouts? New York Yankee fans? What isn't a religion?
Sport is a religion.
I was thinking the same. That definition of religion is so broad as to be almost indistinguishable from culture. Still, I think it has merit in context.
And viewed through the lens of the Nacirema, sport is totally a totemic and polytheistic faith :P
Maybe adding “regarding that which is spiritual, supernatural, or metaphysical” at the end would narrow it enough
Well some people take Liberalism and Sports teams to a religious sense, so yeah, it’s entirely applicable.
@@CameronSmith_New_Felinus The problem with that is that not all religions are all that concerned about those things. Confucianism, for example.
I've often thought that there is a clear difference between Religion and Philosophy. In the context of this video, you might say that Religion is a matter of action, such as the ritual action of prayer and worship, and Philosophy is a matter of belief, namely moral and theological beliefs. The two certainly overlap a great deal, but I think they're essentially different because you can have one without the other. This was the case in Ancient Greece and Rome, where you had the ritual worship of various deities and the playing the part of Religion, and the moral/societal/cosmological teachings of Aristotle and Plato playing the part of Philosophy.
That difference is very recent. For most of human history, religion and philosophy have not been separate. It's hard to pull oneself out of the modern thinking box, but a lot of our supposedly solid ideas about things like this are neither universal nor historical.
But the difference isn't modern, there was a clear divide between them several thousand years ago. If anything, the spreading of the Abrahamic faiths is what caused them to be so intricately bound in the first place.But even when people think it's the same thing, there's a very strong difference between a philosophical debate on the nature of God and a religious ceremony designed to incur God's favor.
What separates a “religion” from “a way of life”?
Just found your channel, super thankful for the content you make. Its so refreshing to find material on the study of religion that isn't supercharged with pro/anti emotionality. These videos are a great way to learn about a really interesting part of how we humans act, and have acted, throughout history and up until modern times. Subbed!
This is a perspective that gets ignored in America and it doesn't help that American Christianity stresses the primacy of faith in religious practice. I think it's unfortunately led to some in America to see religion as a whole as something completely illogical and archaic just based on their contemporary experience of Christianity. If religious literacy was improved in the US, perhaps it could help stem such harsh views and lead to more understanding between those who have religion and those who do not.
It's also led to a lot of American Christians thinking they can just behave however they want to others so long as they "believe in Jesus". What does that even mean if you ignore everything he ever said about how to be a decent human being?
You know, I'm not a religious person really... but your content is really good and really well informed, always looking forward to your new videos
Very insightful. It also reminded me of Confucious' teaching about the importance of rituals.
Drew of Genetically Modified Skeptic sent me, and I'm
pleased he did so.
You get me thinking. Keep up the good work. I'd really like to see something on sacred space.
I think belief is especially central to Christianity (particularly the Evangelical variety), probably moreso than in Buddhism, Hinduism or even Judaism, which seem more ritualistic and pragmatic in practice. Some branches of Christianity, like Quakerism and Unitarianism, lack any real organised rituals at all.
I agree with this, at least for protestant Christianity. With protestant Christianity, the belief IS the ritual.
You haven't hung out with many Catholics if you think that.
I would have to agree that religion is more than just belief (what we think). That would simply make it more like philosophy. I have long held that what distinguishes religion from philosophy is when it becomes something lived - philosophy lived: a way of life based on beliefs and values.
Your comments here also stress the importance of community (in addition to practice) as a key aspect of religion. This would seem to hold up when we consider those who say they are "spiritual but not religious." Such people tend to have "belief (or faith) in" a higher power, even a sense of personal connection to that power, but do not "go to church" or otherwise participate in communal religious practices (public rituals) - though they may pray privately, meditate, or even read and reflect upon sacred texts. But they do so alone.
Thank you for this. I was reading Robert Segal's introductory book on Myth and he mentions at some point the theory of William Robertson Smith (1846-94) that states that belief was not as important as ritual in ancient religions. Thus ritual precedes and gives birth to myth and belief. Any comment on that?
Love the new set and I agree 1000%!
This channel is awesome!
New set looks great. Nice work!
Thanks! Shout out to my brother and fellow CZcamsr EC Henry for designing it.
That's a pretty nice bookshelf in the background. Pretty good set design.
Why not use Smart's 7 Dimensions of Religion to define what is or isn't a religion?
In your context would a self-described "non-practicing Christian" (I term I have often heard) not be religious? Would they no longer belong to the Christian religion since they do not put their faith/belief into action within the community?
That's something that I have identified as and always qualified it with "so I'm not actually religious but believe in God." Had many an atheist look at me with just blinking eyes afterwards lol
I study ancient mythology and history. This is very true when you look at the ancient world - religion was once thought of as something you do. It consisted of rituals, sacrifices, and prayers to representations of gods and goddesses. Sometimes these were private and solitary, sometimes they were large communal events. It was very gradually that it shifted towards the concept of belief. My argument would be that Judaism played a major role in the shift. Judaism originally meant you sacrificed only to one god, named Yahweh or Elohim, who was originally from a shared ancestral pantheon to both the Jews and their polytheistic neighbors. But over time, it came to mean belief as well - belief not only that this God was the only one worthy of ritual animal sacrifice, but that He would aid believers and punish non-believers. As religion started to use written texts more, it also became more about beliefs, since the beliefs and the specific myths someone believed in were written in books. You saw the simultaneous development of writing myths down on papyrus or another more portable format around the world, shaping religion into what I think was a belief system used as a "just so story" to explain both natural phenomena we don't understand, but also to explain existing religious practices. We did religion for our own social and psychological reasons originally. Religious conflict also requires belief/disbelief. Maybe when there was more war and persecution, there was a greater need to not only have a specific code of religious beliefs, but to have them justified.
True, true. Then with Christianity's dominance it influenced the very definition of religion around the world.
Wow such a great thorough explanation
I love the new set.
I kinda think that this video has the potential to both anger the apologetic types AND certain atheists who have a tendency to reduce all the social ills of the world to some nebulous idea of "religion" without a serious investigation into people's motivations and other driving forces in their lives.
Very well put. This is why it's a mistake for people to use the words religion and faith interchangeably
I'm loving the set!
Belief, by common acceptance by the person on the street, not the person behind some desk, is what forms the basis of practice. "We do this, because ..." "We think this, as it displays to 'our dieties', our acceptance of them in and over our lives." Humanity pays homage to their chosen deities, and has for thousands of years. Witchcraft, to some, is a practice, and to others is a religion of principles.
I personally view Religion as a system of how to live your life. Whether it be in terms of moral actions, or rituals. I view it like Chinese philosophical "religions", you follow Confucian or Daoist behavior and thought. As you mention, community is a major factor. The rituals are what bring people together.
I consider myself agnostic, but I attended a Catholic school up to 8th grade. The school itself was connected to a church, but you didn't have to be Catholic to attend. There were only like 7? baptized Catholics in my class of 35. We had religion class, but it was more a history of Catholicism and its doctrines-more scholarly than moral. We as a class attended monthly Mass, which I enjoyed as a communal gathering of the whole school. Singing together with the choir, listening to the Priest talk about usually a story relating to recent daily life, etc.
This is a fantastic video and these are fantastic sources
wow you deserve so many more subs
Great video, Sir! Perhaps you could make one on the concept of religion, as it exists now and is it existed in the past. As in, how Non-Western and pre-Protestant Reformation cultures had no such conception. I find that stuff really interesting but I have a hard time explaining it to my friends since the concept of religion is such a fundemental way that we relate the world to.
Like Holland's speech?
czcams.com/video/ZeCTC_r4vMI/video.html
I heard someone - I don't remember who - who made the comparison with martial arts. Martial arts aren't something you *believe* in necessarily, they're something you *practice. You don't believe* in Karate, you practice it. You don't *believe* in Taekwondo, you practice it. And whether one is more effective than the other, or what have you, maybe that's where belief comes in. But at the end of the day, Martial Arts is an action word - it implies a system of actions, partially informed by the philosophical and historical underpinnings of that particular martial art.
Similarly, religion is more of an action word too. It's a Martial Art for the soul, in a sense. The teachings of, say, Jesus aren't just things you should abstractly believe are *good*, they're things you're supposed to *practice*. Same thing with the teachings of the Buddha, or Muhammad, or Krishna, or whatever other prophet or enlightened teacher who catches your fancy.
After all, anyone can believe that Karate is effective. But you don't *do* karate unless you walk the walk and practice at karate. Religion is the same. *Anyone* can believe Jesus existed, or Muhammad, or the whole list I gave above. That on it's own doesn't mean anything, though, unless you walk the walk and practice their teachings. Practicing the actions which are informed by the historical and philosophical underpinnings of those religions are much more important than just believing that those practices work in theory.
Now granted, I must admit in saying all this, that I am neither a martial artist or a member of a religious group. I am a theist, though, and I do hold spiritual beliefs... just not ones that fit so neatly into any particular religion I've found, unfortunately. Regardless, just something that popped into my mind after watching. Simply thought I'd share. Great video.
It's much more of "actions speak louder than words".
Practice what you Preach!
Like your beard man. Also, great video!
I understand your point. However, a clear analysis of religious/spiritual experience must be more nuanced. Belief in doctrine, attitude, behavior, interaction with others, ritual practice... are all essential and inclusive components of a religious life. They are correlated and arise together as a whole of religious practice. The term "faith" goes even further (than belief) to imply the dynamic of personal trust and reliance upon God (as God is understood to be a POWER greater than ourselves). What ensues is a transformed way of living in relationship with this Power... an inner reality manifesting outwardly. Thereby moving beyond a religious structure and into a "spiritual" dynamic. (Referred to by Jesus as "the new wine in a new wineskin").
I know you guys probably dont want this here
But this what has been explained in a video, is what i think exactly what jordan peterson is trying to tell sam harris when he tells him he is not an atheist
Sam acts and behaves as judeo-christian no matter what he is thinking or believing inside his mind
I have also read in one book that one buddhist monk has written, it was about love, but there was a line where he said that in India, religion doesnt really mean institution like in the west, it means something more like "celebration of life" and further he says that the simple BBQ is basically by that definition a religious act, and that westerners are more religious than we tend to admit
Anyhow, really like this channel, good job, please keep it up
You are first theologist for whom i can say that is not engaged in a game of religious one-up-mentship :)
Creed, Code, Cult (what we believe, how we are bound to act, how we worship) is religion according to Saint Robert Bellarmine SJ
When Galileo Galilei tried to explain to your “saint” that the surface of the Moon was not smooth and offered him his own telescope to look at the Moon, Bellarmino refused because the matter was already settled by Aristotle. Not exactly a reliable source of information.
Love your channel, and look forward to your videos. I'm not a scholar, just a person interested in history and spirituality (belief systems). The following may seem cynical, but the take that seems to match my observations is that Spirituality is a belief system that attempts to answer those questions which science can't. Religion was invented to utilize these great belief systems to justify why those with power are ordained to keep that power, and shouldn't be challenged. Just my thoughts. All the best!
Good information.
This may be true (in certain instances/for some people) - what about people who convert later in life, who did not have this influence in childhood, who believe before practicing (or believe without practising?)
I would say that there are two sides to the coin.
So if I am hearing your correctly, rituals are the foundation upon which religions are built and beliefs are of only secondary importance if at all. That resonates with my own experiences.
As a child, was forced to endure the mind numbing ritual of the Catholic liturgy. Every Sunday it was the same thing with the same old words in the same order and the kneeling and the praying and the standing and the sitting and the bell ringing and the formation of the line to receive the host followed by more praying and the sermon and the collection and the hand shaking and finally blessed escape! It got to the point where I could have gone up and performed the ritual myself reciting all of the words in the proper order.
Gods above did I hate it, but a funny thing happened. After years of not going to Mass, I would find myself going back to church for a wedding or funeral or out of nostalgia on the odd Christmas eve only to be annoyed to find out that they had changed the liturgy. It threw off the whole cadence and music of what I had come to expect from the whole experience. I could really empathize with the those Catholics who would bitterly complained about the Mass changing from Latin to the vernacular a generation before me.
Those changes in effect ruined an already bad experience if that makes any sense.
Well done! Thank you for this. One might be surprised to find a person functioning inside a religion despite not in the least taking part in that "given believe-system". An atheist Roman Catholic for example. In theology this begs the question: "What works salvation?" I say: "When on Safari, what ever you do, STICK WITH THE GROUP!"
I like the new set!
Cool video as usual. May i ask how you consider yourself from religious/spiritual point of view?
I like your new set!
Thanks! Special thanks to my brother and fellow CZcamsr EC Henry for making it happen. He’s done some set design in the past.
super cool! resembles a little bit jane harrison´s myth and religion theory
Thanks for your great work. I was wondering if you might do something on the Synoptic Gospels vs John. What is this rift all about? And why would an early church that was--according to most historians--seeking cohesion in thought to such a degree that it was willing to burn people (Gnostics) at the stake, allow for such a different perspective on Jesus of Nazareth? Cheers.
Many "religions" have very simple beginnings which then practitioners add on to. For an example, Buddhism as taught by Siddhartha has very little ceremony. But the religion now is very ceremonial.
I think that, while your thesis has merit, it is too simple. As an adult convert from a cerebral-based Protestant religious life to an Eastern Orthodox religious life, the belief system developed slightly ahead of the Credibility Enhancing Display component of my adopted faith. The practice component is very important but not all important and may not always precede the belief system.
I was wondering how his thesis would apply to converts, especially converts who have gone from no religious practice or belief to a religious practice and belief which differs from the majority of their community, which is my experience. I notice that converts like me struggle immensely with the practice aspects of religion, as well as a lack of belonging within the community. But converts who were practicing another religion seem to find it easier to adapt their existing routines/rituals to those of their new religion, though they experience different struggles. But people convert for many different reasons and in many different ways, with some converting for intellectual or theological reasons, finding peace in the practice, or being moved by a hymn, so I expect it is a lot more complex than a short video can cover.
This seems so trivial to me. Just look at children: Of course they practice religion way before understanding it cognitively.
Also, since I never believed, I focused on “doing” religion, since it comes with a community. There are some nice traditions and comforting practices in Catholicism.
Biggest thing I learned from this video: there are people that think religion is mainly a belief system
The Sun King, Louis XIV of France would be an awesome video. I would LOVE to have more information on this particular king. I wonder what you’ll dig up...🤗
This may also explain why many people practice traditions even when they aren't believers. I know many people raised in Jewish households who practice Jewish traditions long after they stopped believing, and many non-Christians celebrating Christmas because it's ingrained into their relationships with their family and culture.
What if only a subset of the believers are supposed to participate in the practices? I give as an example in Eastern Orthodoxy communion is shared from infancy whereas this is delayed in Catholicism, does this make Catholicism less of a religion? Or is a member of a Charismatic denomination who doesn't speak in tongues not really part of the church?
I understand in general that without an action it's not a religion, but does this not get us back to the 'good Scot' debate?
No matter what religion we're talking about, there will be actions that people are socially conditioned to participate in. For Catholicism, it might be attending Mass. The practices aren't necessarily strictly religious rituals either...such as refraining from pre-marital sex. For that example, there is social pressure not to engage in the action based on the identity and community you are a part of from birth even before you actually "believe" that God will be unhappy if you engage in that activity.
@@ReligionForBreakfast Maybe I'm not being clear. Let's say in the religion of the Ititli Islanders only the oldest brother of the mother of a baby can name a child.
@@johnkilmartin5101 I have problems understanding what you're trying to say, as well. Religion is full of exclusive rituals and restrictions on participation. "Only the oldest uncle can do X", "only men can do X", "only unmarried women can do X" is quite common, and I think you're meaning something else but I'm not sure what.
So how do you distinguish between a religious practice like the one in the video, and attending Coachella? Is watching the Superbowl with your fantasy football league a religious practice? The only thing that would distinguish them are the beliefs of the participants, no?
It would be interesting to address why people came to think of religions as belief systems to begin with.
It's kind of hard to separate any action we take from the mental processes that preceded it. It's hard to separate belief from practice because what you believe in will end up determining what you do. But the cognitive behavioral therapy perspective relies on the theory that actions also determine beliefs/thoughts. I know that religious actions produced specific feelings, that's why religion is compelling for most people. Feelings like peace, universal transcendent love, oneness with this planet, hope, etc. Those feelings are what people are looking for in religion.
You used the term ,'conditioning ', do you consider that the same as or different from indoctrination?
This guy is brilliant!
I think some religions e.g. Western Christianity focus more on orthodoxy "right belief" versus orthopraxy "right action." While Christianity includes practice a lot of Western Christians might say that belief defines a Christian rather than practice. Hence why so many trinitarian Christians dismiss non trinitarians as "not Christian."
Religion is more of a social construct than a belief system. Got it.
That seems reasonable to me. Dan Dennent lectures on the evolution of religion. His quote 'when we repeat we make a copy'...I.e Amen and call back phrases. Our c of e Church also trained scouts guides and contained all village social function. We repeat and it makes a copy.
.we had little choice so we.....do do do
I identify as Sedian Ásatrú which means I practice Germanic polytheism according to the tenants of Sedianism. While it’s not necessarily codified I believe there are three pillars to Sedian Ásatrú: Know the Gods, preform the blót, and keep the law. The law refers to the Rune Law, the religious law given to us by Heimdall which consists of 24 laws and 9 virtues. Some including myself have also argued that the law of Urd and the law of Odin should be included as well but I digress. My point is that when you boil it down, belief is only one third of our religious practice, knowing the Gods. The other two pillars are more concerned with what you do, both in ritual and daily conduct.
We get thrown orthodoxy from every angle, but no one much talks about orthopraxy..
The idea of “belief” is itself a practice.
I think ritual is just a way to participate into beliefs, because beliefs is not mere intellectual or cognitive, it also experience and practice..
I have always preferred philosophy to religion but by your definition, if I made certain philosophies into my lifestyle, they would become religion. Just a secular ones. Am I understanding things correctly?
Interesting definition. I think that religion is more often practices than actual belief or theological understanding of one's faith. In modern times religion has become synonymous with the belief (pun intended) that a person has to believe to be religious. But I would like to argue that this understanding is strictly close to Lutherian in its way of understanding religion. A lot of religions (shintou, confucian, judaism, hinduism et cetera) may often not have a real definition of belief like we in the west often understand it as such. To therebye apply such a term on these different relgiions makes everything a bit iffy and hard and may I say close to westernized. Of course I don't have a answer in regards to which term to use instead; but to show that religion very often more is underlined through practices and rituals will allow us to maybe study religion in another way then scriptual texts or the researcher trying to valuate a person's level of belief.
@notorax1, Are you sure you are not pulling the pendulum too far in the other direction? It seems to me that beliefs are fundamental to any religion, even if many religions do not articulate the importance of believing as Christianity does. Basically, I am saying that while other religions may not say that you must believe in order to be saved, even those religions would not continue to exist if no one really believed them.
@@michaels4255 You have a good point there. I would like to say that there has to be a middle ground when it comes to belief and practice. Even for Christianity. To study religion, is to study humans, and to study humans it is often more interesting to study what they do, then what they think what they are doing.
I agree with you and it I can come at it from another angle. If you look at the Chinese Traditional religion, there are many influences from a wide verity of religions but they all have a similar practice in the Chinese system if you are layman.
I'm very much reminded of Elaine A Pina's "Preforming Piety" which about the Cult of Le Vigen/ The Virgin of Guadalupe. She speaks intimately in the introduction about how her elders always taught her "religion wasn't something you (just) believed it was something you did".
Some of the accounts in the Ethnogophy some of the women do the Pilgrimage for seemingly non religious reasons but they do it all the same. Practice is very tied to belief more so than what what many might think. Religion is very much in the doing more than the believing in some ways.
(I am fully aware this comment is half baked, I'm tired I've been diving for like 3 hours and it's the middle the night. I'll probably come back and edit it)
Where do you see "communitas" (as used in anthropology of religion) fitting into, affecting, or even being the most gratifying element of, "shared practice" in regard to Credibility Enhancing Displays? Don't you think communitas is a much more profound, psychological-emotional factor, and in some ways distinct from simply observing others acting devout? Also, a general thank-you: I always find your videos informative, well-researched & thought-provoking, and hope you'll keep this channel going for a long time!
There is quite a bit on this in Seven Types of Atheism by John Gray.
It's non scholarly, and is more likely to quote Shakespeare or Borges or Keats then religious scholars, but interesting non the less.
I just finished watching "The Last Temptation of Christ" (1988) and it was a really good movie!
Do you feel equipped to tackle less abrahamic-centered topics? I enjoy these videos so much because of your ability to talk about the real life effects and causes of beliefs while upholding the integrity of each religion. I’d love to hear more on more contemporary belief systems as well as indigenous religions that have been oppressed by colonialism.
That's interesting. Do you then think that people can be members of multiple religions?
It's not that uncommon for polytheistic religions (where just adding a few more deities to your pantheon may not that big of a deal). It's also quite common in Japan to take part in both Shinto and Buddhist traditions, and as Shinto doesn't really have some centralised doctrine, taking part in its (or some of its) rituals is often seen as being a follower of the religion, allowing for "membership" in another religion as well.
Catholicism in Chile is mostly based on belief over practice.
For the the last few decades, Catholics are defined mostly by what they say are their beliefs. But in reality, their actions do not match up with those creeds. Catholicism, at least in my country, seems to be a label you acquire from birth, but that doesn't requiere coherence or engagement between what is said and what is done.
In this specific scenario, I support the idea of religion being a belief system overall, which might, in some cases, lead to certain practices.
Kind regards!
Would it be too much to ask you to do a video on cargo "cults"? I work in the South Pacific as a linguist and your perspective (and citations as a scholar) would go a long way in helping me to understand their concepts. For instance, I am clearly human but some people see me as a ghost and I'm having a hard time understanding and negotiating this belief. I know there are many scholarly avenues to explore, but I am a linguist and not an anthropologist or a religious studies expert. I love your channel regardless!
I think it depends on the religion itself. For example the catholic or orthodox religion: Here we have a form of religion in which ritual actions are more common and represent the base of that religion. Of course there is a believe system, too. But it seems to be secondary and doesn’t interest a lot of people. Or at least we can say that the believe system is based on the ritual actions and that the ritual actions are primary! But evangelical christians or protestants in general are the opposite. For them religion is more a kind of a believing system. And if there are a few ritual actions they are all based on believe or are meant to be symbolic.
I think if we keep a close watch on especially modern religious movements we will see that they are more“believing-systems” or life philosophies and have no or just a few ritual actions that are meant to be symbolic.
And if we watch the development or reforms of the old school religions we will see that they are trying to reach the same goal: to reduce ritual actions or explaining them as symbolic and trying to find the “right” and often a modern interpretation that is different from traditional one.
Just read an article about chimpanzees that fill a hollow tree with rocks and occasionally ritualistically take some out throw them at the tree and depending on the troop they might only be male or in others both a male/female do the same. this video reminded me of the article. about how the ritual action precedes the belief its even true in one of our closest animal relatives. nice video thanks for the insight.
Every religion with a well-documented origin began when someone claimed to have divine revelation, secret knowledge, or inner enlightenment. (Inventing rituals and then saying you "rediscovered" them counts as secret knowledge.) The change in beliefs came before the change in practice.
"Everybody is doing it" explains why religions persist, and sure, any religion that indoctrinates children who aren't even old enough to understand will end up with people who practice without believing (or if it's a religion that strongly emphasizes belief over practice, people who say they "believe" a book they've never even read); but it only applies AFTER they get well-established (or sufficiently isolated in the case of small cults), and is something that any new religion (or reform in religion) has to actively overcome.
Otherwise known as ''Methodological Individualism" or "Rational Choice Theory". David Sloan Wilson has a good take down on why this belief centered or "Theory theory" approach is somewhat impoverished. The new atheists unfortunately haven't progressed much beyond that way of framing/explaining religious behaviour.
This makes a lot of sense to me. It's commonly said among Muslims that Islam isn't just a belief, it's a way of life. And people take really seriously. This is why in a lot of Muslim majority countries religion is a huge part of public life. The concept of separation of religion and state runs completely counter to this belief. This is a fundamental difference in values that many westerners don't understand, and then they become surprised when they try to push their western ideals and people don't want it.
It's also interesting because here in Malaysia if you are born into Islam, there is no legal way to renounce it. You're pretty much forced to participate in religion because you have no other choice. So then, this makes you a Muslim anyway no matter what you actually believe. Well, that's an interesting way to look at my agnosticism that I've never thought of before lol
I think there's something to your definition. My ten month old surely doesn't believe in Jesus but she participates heavily in our faith. She prays (aka holds hands together as I pray quickly) before every bottle or meal, goes to church each Sunday, reads a Bible story before evening prayers, and so on. She is emerssed in my belief all day. I feel like there's a samantic issue though. I think there's a difference between being religious or a follower of the faith and someone that takes place in religious practices. My daughter is not a Christian...yet. Despite her mother being clergy or the multiple times a day she engages in religious practices. If and when her belief develops to reflect a saving knowledge of Christ she will be a Christian. Right now she simply lives in the social and cultural aspects of the faith.
Thanks so much for this personal story. It does get to the heart of my argument here. We often assume belief leads to practice. But I think sometimes it is the other way around.
Actually she try to be a Christian , and the is real magic that attracts us specially in young age to religious practice/ ritual but that isn't meant she understands fully what she is doing , this ritual make anyone feel comfortable, safe even happy " for sometimes at least "
Your 10 month old reads a bible story before bed? Surely you meant you read her a Bible story yes? I want to point out I'm not having a pop at you im just trying to clarify what you mean. Apart from that I see what your getting at-in my own limited way I did the same.
My mother is Christian (but doesn't pray before every meal etc...she goes to her local church in the village she stays in here in Scotland on Sundays and certain important days) and my father claims he is an Atheist but its rather confusing as he is a Freemason and one of the requirements of being a Freemason is to believe in a higher spiritual power-it doesn't matter whether that's a Christian one, Islamic, Jewish, Hindu or even just a personal belief, so I'm not sure how he squares that but anyway I'm straying a little. My point is religion has never been prominently practiced at home so when growing up I'd no concept of a god at all. Then I started going to the local Boys Brigaid and they are a Christian group which is also a little like the boy scouts, and because we were reciting the lords prayer every week before activities and sometimes being taught a little of the Bible I found myself offering to do the readings at church which the group did every year on Remembrance day. So I was practicing Christianity in my own little way because my peers around me were also doing the same yet when I left in my teenage years and no longer practiced I realised I'd never actually believed there was a god, i was acting out the ritual without having the belief.
That was a very long winded comment and I apologise, im an insomniac and havnt slept in 3 days so my brain isn't very sharp right now lol hopefully you find some of it mildly interesting though, i certainly found your comment interesting
@@teethgrinder83 take some sedative pills and get sleep therapy, thanks anyway for your nicely written article
@@teethgrinder83 yes my husband or I read to her lol. I think she's a smart baby but not that smart.
Without belief, when does culture end and religion begin?
Hi, where did the Angels of Christianity came from? Michael, Gabriel. Believers of Abrahamic faith knows about these angels from their childhood. But what is their history? Can u do an episode on that? Also satan, the fallen angel was initially one of these angels. Please include satan in that episode.
That new microphone is a distraction. I suggest you avoid having it front and center in sight of the camera.
This kinda explains why budhism is a religion and why platonism isn’t.
I would like to learn more about the Gnostic Apocalypse of Peter