A Qualitative and Critical Religion Analysis of the Category of Spirituality within The Visible Recovery Advocacy Movement

IF 0.1 0 RELIGION
Liam Metcalf-White
{"title":"A Qualitative and Critical Religion Analysis of the Category of Spirituality within The Visible Recovery Advocacy Movement","authors":"Liam Metcalf-White","doi":"10.1558/imre.40680","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Critiques of the category \"spirituality\" argue that it functions to anesthetise affiliates to inequalities such as the suffering caused by capitalism. Furthermore, spirituality is regarded as both a superficial consequence of late-modernity and reifying the neoliberal agenda of an \"individual\" as narcissistic and morally responsible. While these critiques of spirituality are useful, they are totalising and only partially examine the complexities of such varied discourses. This article qualitatively examines the category of spirituality within the Visible Recovery Advocacy Movement (VRAM). Alongside \"faithbased,\" \"non-religious,\" and allegedly \"secular\" recovery modalities, many individuals and groups identifying within this movement utilise the language of spirituality. This article does not suggest that discourses on spirituality among people within the VRAM are immune to the tropes of neoliberalism, or that the formation of that category in contemporary usage, is not reliant upon specific cultural, economic, and political trends. Rather, I demonstrate that motivations among VRAM participants for engaging with this classification are far more complicated and dependant on a range of intersecting circumstances than critical evaluations acknowledge. Moreover, utilising study of religion and spirituality literature, I critically examine participants' construction of the category of spirituality, and what they report as the outworkings of that classification, especially in terms of addiction recovery, identity formation, making meaning, and community.","PeriodicalId":53963,"journal":{"name":"Implicit Religion","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.1000,"publicationDate":"2020-12-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Implicit Religion","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1558/imre.40680","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"RELIGION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Critiques of the category "spirituality" argue that it functions to anesthetise affiliates to inequalities such as the suffering caused by capitalism. Furthermore, spirituality is regarded as both a superficial consequence of late-modernity and reifying the neoliberal agenda of an "individual" as narcissistic and morally responsible. While these critiques of spirituality are useful, they are totalising and only partially examine the complexities of such varied discourses. This article qualitatively examines the category of spirituality within the Visible Recovery Advocacy Movement (VRAM). Alongside "faithbased," "non-religious," and allegedly "secular" recovery modalities, many individuals and groups identifying within this movement utilise the language of spirituality. This article does not suggest that discourses on spirituality among people within the VRAM are immune to the tropes of neoliberalism, or that the formation of that category in contemporary usage, is not reliant upon specific cultural, economic, and political trends. Rather, I demonstrate that motivations among VRAM participants for engaging with this classification are far more complicated and dependant on a range of intersecting circumstances than critical evaluations acknowledge. Moreover, utilising study of religion and spirituality literature, I critically examine participants' construction of the category of spirituality, and what they report as the outworkings of that classification, especially in terms of addiction recovery, identity formation, making meaning, and community.
可见复苏运动中精神范畴的定性与批判性宗教分析
对“精神”类别的批评认为,它的作用是麻醉不平等的附属机构,比如资本主义造成的痛苦。此外,精神性被视为晚期现代性的表面结果,并将“个人”的新自由主义议程具体化为自恋和道德责任。虽然这些对精神的批评是有用的,但它们是全面的,只是部分地考察了这些不同话语的复杂性。这篇文章定性地考察了可见恢复倡导运动(VRAM)中的精神范畴。除了“基于信仰”、“非宗教”和所谓的“世俗”恢复模式外,许多在这场运动中认同的个人和团体还使用了精神语言。这篇文章并不意味着VRAM内部人们对精神的论述不受新自由主义的比喻的影响,也不意味着该类别在当代用法中的形成不依赖于特定的文化、经济和政治趋势。相反,我证明了VRAM参与者参与这一分类的动机比关键评估所承认的要复杂得多,并且取决于一系列交叉的情况。此外,利用对宗教和精神文学的研究,我批判性地研究了参与者对精神类别的构建,以及他们所报告的对该分类的超越,特别是在成瘾恢复、身份形成、创造意义和社区方面。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Implicit Religion
Implicit Religion RELIGION-
CiteScore
0.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
2
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信