新瓶装旧酒:基督教民族主义、专制主义和宗教政治冲突解释中的本质主义问题

IF 1.8 3区 社会学 Q2 SOCIOLOGY
Jesse Smith
{"title":"新瓶装旧酒:基督教民族主义、专制主义和宗教政治冲突解释中的本质主义问题","authors":"Jesse Smith","doi":"10.1111/socf.13014","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In 2001, John Levi Martin published a critique of authoritarianism scholarship, arguing that it was marred by fundamental biases of tautology, selective interpretation, and overtheorization of some research subjects but neglect of others. Drawing from this critique, I argue that Christian nationalism scholarship in sociology operates as a variant of authoritarianism research, exhibiting similar claims, strengths, and shortcomings. In a short span of time, the Christian nationalism research agenda has come to dominate the sociological study of religion and enjoyed a high profile in public discourse, presumably due to its relevance to matters of acute political concern. However, this literature interprets empirical results based on unverified assumptions of essentially authoritarian goals and motivations while ignoring plausible alternative explanations. It further neglects respondents who are low on Christian nationalism measures, despite evidence that these respondents play a role in religiopolitical conflict. The result is an essentialist account of Christian nationalism that is politically resonant but theoretically problematic. I propose that these issues can be addressed by a shift away from essentialist and toward social models of belief systems, which offer important advantages: greater consistency with current theories of political polarization, a stronger sociological element, and less susceptibility to researcher bias.","PeriodicalId":21904,"journal":{"name":"Sociological Forum","volume":"45 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Old wine in new wineskins: Christian nationalism, authoritarianism, and the problem of essentialism in explanations of religiopolitical conflict\",\"authors\":\"Jesse Smith\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/socf.13014\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"In 2001, John Levi Martin published a critique of authoritarianism scholarship, arguing that it was marred by fundamental biases of tautology, selective interpretation, and overtheorization of some research subjects but neglect of others. Drawing from this critique, I argue that Christian nationalism scholarship in sociology operates as a variant of authoritarianism research, exhibiting similar claims, strengths, and shortcomings. In a short span of time, the Christian nationalism research agenda has come to dominate the sociological study of religion and enjoyed a high profile in public discourse, presumably due to its relevance to matters of acute political concern. However, this literature interprets empirical results based on unverified assumptions of essentially authoritarian goals and motivations while ignoring plausible alternative explanations. It further neglects respondents who are low on Christian nationalism measures, despite evidence that these respondents play a role in religiopolitical conflict. The result is an essentialist account of Christian nationalism that is politically resonant but theoretically problematic. I propose that these issues can be addressed by a shift away from essentialist and toward social models of belief systems, which offer important advantages: greater consistency with current theories of political polarization, a stronger sociological element, and less susceptibility to researcher bias.\",\"PeriodicalId\":21904,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Sociological Forum\",\"volume\":\"45 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-08-12\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Sociological Forum\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1111/socf.13014\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"SOCIOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Sociological Forum","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/socf.13014","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"SOCIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

2001 年,约翰-列维-马丁(John Levi Martin)发表了一篇对威权主义学术研究的批判文章,认为威权主义学术研究存在着同义反复、选择性阐释、过度理论化某些研究对象而忽视其他研究对象等基本偏见。借鉴这一批判,我认为社会学中的基督教民族主义学术研究是威权主义研究的变体,表现出类似的主张、优势和不足。在很短的时间内,基督教民族主义研究议程就主导了宗教社会学研究,并在公共讨论中享有很高的知名度,这大概是因为它与尖锐的政治问题相关。然而,这些文献对实证结果的解释是基于未经证实的假设,即基本上是独裁的目标和动机,而忽略了似是而非的其他解释。尽管有证据表明基督教民族主义程度较低的受访者在宗教政治冲突中扮演了一定的角色,但这些文献却进一步忽视了这些受访者。其结果是对基督教民族主义的本质主义解释在政治上引起共鸣,但在理论上却存在问题。我建议,这些问题可以通过从本质主义转向信仰体系的社会模型来解决,后者具有重要的优势:与当前的政治极化理论更加一致、社会学元素更强、不易受研究者偏见的影响。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Old wine in new wineskins: Christian nationalism, authoritarianism, and the problem of essentialism in explanations of religiopolitical conflict
In 2001, John Levi Martin published a critique of authoritarianism scholarship, arguing that it was marred by fundamental biases of tautology, selective interpretation, and overtheorization of some research subjects but neglect of others. Drawing from this critique, I argue that Christian nationalism scholarship in sociology operates as a variant of authoritarianism research, exhibiting similar claims, strengths, and shortcomings. In a short span of time, the Christian nationalism research agenda has come to dominate the sociological study of religion and enjoyed a high profile in public discourse, presumably due to its relevance to matters of acute political concern. However, this literature interprets empirical results based on unverified assumptions of essentially authoritarian goals and motivations while ignoring plausible alternative explanations. It further neglects respondents who are low on Christian nationalism measures, despite evidence that these respondents play a role in religiopolitical conflict. The result is an essentialist account of Christian nationalism that is politically resonant but theoretically problematic. I propose that these issues can be addressed by a shift away from essentialist and toward social models of belief systems, which offer important advantages: greater consistency with current theories of political polarization, a stronger sociological element, and less susceptibility to researcher bias.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Sociological Forum
Sociological Forum SOCIOLOGY-
CiteScore
2.90
自引率
11.10%
发文量
73
期刊介绍: Sociological Forum is the flagship journal of the Eastern Sociological Society. The journal is peer reviewed and committed to publishing high quality, cutting edge research on substantive issues of fundamental importance to the study of society. The journal"s mission is broad in scope, encompassing empirical works (both quantitative and qualitative in nature), as well as works that develop theories, concepts, and methodological strategies. All areas of sociology and related fields are welcomed in Sociological Forum, as the journal strives to create a site of learning and exchange for scholars and students of the social sciences.
×
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