Sociology of Knowledge, Science and Religion - Essay Example

SOCIOLOGY OF KNOWLEDGE, SCIENCE AND RELIGION Name Institution Instructor Course Date Sociology of Knowledge, Science and Religion Introduction Sociology of knowledge tries to explore the systematic interrelationship that exists between the thoughts of individuals and society. This is aimed at understanding the ways in which human beings are able to understand, construct, interpret and interpret different human views in the realism of life (Elder-Vass, 2012, p. 214). There is a connection between social life and religion of an individual. In most cases, various religious leaders and scientist have tried to explain the concept of knowledge and how human beings interpret the construction of reality in everyday life. In understanding social knowledge, sociologists have been interested in understanding g how knowledge is determinant in the social lives of human beings (Borda, 2006, p. 95). In understanding social knowledge is possible to understand the ways in which social structures are affecting various aspects such as production and presentation of scientific and religious information (Berger, & Luckmann, 2011, p. 36). In sociology, the term knowledge is wide and can be used to mean scientific data ideas, emotions, opinions and suggestions, political doctrines, perceptions and theological philosophies. This is because every human being, scientist, religious leader, teachers and other professionals socially situated knowledge which is able to influence their thinking abilities and what they think about. This means that the sociology of knowledge tries to explore the contracts of everyday realities in the larger system of knowledge and disclosure (Gaventa, 2003). This paper presents an evaluation of the various contributions of sociology of knowledge in science and religion. In explaining this contribution, the paper will explore various concepts such as social constructionism, regime of truth and subjugated knowledge and how these concepts can be used in avoiding different argument in understanding the sociology of knowledge and its contribution in science and religion. The Social Constructionism The social construction concepts argue that the existence of human beings in the society is influenced by their social and interpersonal relationship between themselves and their environment (Elder-Vass, 2012, p. 82). In understanding the contribution of sociology of knowledge of science, Berger argues that hereditary factors may be influential in human life the social factors in the environment and life of an individual are also at work. In such cases, the social constructionism concepts does not disagree on the inheritance and the role of genetics in human life but concentrates on the social and communal influences on the personal life of an individual. According to social constructionism, behaviours are explained in terms of social constructionism processes rather than biological phenomena. For example, behaviours such as aggression are explained by social theories as variables of sociology. However, in social constructionism, such behaviours are social constructs. This means that social constructionism helps individuals in understanding the meaning and the power of human reality (Reed, 2011, p. 67). However, according to social constructionism, meaning is constructional and is termed as the products of the various cultural and social frameworks. This includes social frameworks, symbolic cultural beliefs and practices as well as different languages in the community. A human being not only responds to physical events in the lives but also but to the various meanings of these objects in their society (Berger, & Luckmann, 2011, p. 122). Therefore, social constructionism helps us in understanding how various religious and scientific concepts are constructed in the society. In fact, it focuses on understanding of how various sociological phenomena in the society are constructed over a certain period. Social construction theory opposes the aspect of realism in the society. This is because realism argues that human being representations which include perception, thoughts, beliefs, language, artefacts and desires exists in an independent external world (Elder-Vass, 2012, p. 8). However, relativism is not accepting these facts since it argues that external worlds are inaccessible to human beings thus impossible to refer to it. This makes social constructionism has a relativist’s epistemology, which is expressed in various ways. In terms of religion, social constructionism of reality argues that religion is an implication which is farthest on a man’s reach in a mankind infusion of what can be termed as reality with its own meanings. Religion can also be projected in to mean the totality of the human being and conceives that the world as significantly human. Types of Relativism Sematic relativism: this argues that meaning of words in various languages is specific in these communities and cannot be translated to other languages since they will lose their meanings. Ontological relativism: the existence of certain things such as God, which may appear real in one community and false in another community (Elder-Vass, 2012, p. 10). Epistemological relativism: this argues that the theories in sociology and science are best understood when they are embedded in the location where they emerged. Oral relativism: this claim that the value and meaning of various things in society are specific to certain cultures and histories. Therefore, in understanding science and religion knowledge, social constructionism argues that human beings and their actions are influenced by changes in the society. Hence the various inherent and lack of stability of people in the society proves that human beings provide the stable environment for his behaviours. This means that human beings should be able to specialize and drive his values and beliefs. Hence the biological aspects only help man in understanding the sociological order of his environment. This is to say that, although there is no social order that can be developed from biological data, this biological equipment are crucial in developing social orders (Berger, & Luckmann, 2011, p. 200) Regimes of Truth According to social constructionism, human reality is influenced by how powerful one is so as to bring about the meaning of certain objects. Truth in the world is also subjected to power. This means that a country such as the western country, which are powerful have managed to influence other parts of the world in believing in what they call it as the truth. According to Foucault, power is the determinant of social truth and social knowledge (Carrette, 2013, p. 54) Foucault is well known for his postmodern approach to sociological knowledge and has argued that power influences knowledge and regimes of truth in the world. Foucault argues that knowledge in the society is constructed through various disciplines (Irvine, 2005). These disciplines are institutionalized in what can be termed as objects of knowledge and power. He believes that knowledge is what is representable in sanction disclosures and can only be visible when it is practiced. He believes that the knowledge and the truth are constructed by the people in the political regime. In fact, what a society calls as knowledge and the truth are just a construction of power. This means that the western countries are using the power in making other people into believing their truth and knowledge (Gaventa, 2003). The social practices in the society are influenced by power and knowledge in the society. This means that the discursive practices in the society we live in determine our identity and knowing subjects. In addition, discursive practices in the society we live in constituting the subjectivities of being part of knowledge and truth (Elder-Vass, 2012, p. 143). Foucault explains the regimes of truth and sociology of knowledge in terms of economy. In his views, he argues that the policing process displays the construction of languages as well as social institutions in which human beings can define them. Therefore, the modern societies are responsible for the creation of various policing processes and control of various aspects and disciplines. Moreover, human beings are responsible for creating the authority structure which is influential in determining what is true and what is knowledge. Therefore, there is a bias of the sociology of knowledge since the powerful countries in the west determine what truth is. The western secular practices have become accepted by most people in the society simply because they have the authority structure which determines truth and knowledge (Guest & Arweck, 2012, p. 1929. Therefore, the west perceives itself as a section with intellectuals who are able to tell others about why they should believe as the truth and knowledge. This is because they are powerful hence regimes of truth are conditions of what can be said to be a formation and developments in areas of capitalism and provides the basis for modification in social countries. This theory is consistent with Marxism concepts that the society is controlled by those in high class. In this case, the powerful are in control of the authorities and determine what is knowledge and truth (Irvine, 2005). Sociology of Knowledge and Religion The social of knowledge is crucial in understanding the sociology of religion (Scheler, 2012, p. 65). According to Emile Durkheim, the social commitments of human beings also trace to their religious commitment in the society. This implies that the human ways of life, human thinks and perception and ways in which human beings conceive time and space can be traced from his social mode of life. According to Durkheim’s theory, religion of a society is regulated by external forces, which is powerful and has the knowledge that is used in popularizing the religion. This is to mean that the powerful west has the ability to make other countries in the world into believing that their religious beliefs are more beneficial than others (Borda, 2006, p. 94). The sociology of knowledge views religion as intertwined in the society and as a function of the social ways of human lives (Reed, 2011, p. 17). He believes that social cohesion is essential in sharing of values and beliefs in the society that determines the religion of a particular community. Therefore, Durkheim is not agreeing with the notion that religion of a society is determined by power, intellectualism, but a function of the society values. In fact, he was trying to explain the social functionalism concepts of sociology. Although the religion of different parts of the world emerges from historical background, there is a connection between religion and society. The society and its beliefs are what can be termed as the religion of a community. Therefore, each society is supposed to have a different religion which is specific to the values and beliefs of that society. This also implies that imposing beliefs in another country are like imposing another religion which may not be acceptable in that society. According to science of knowledge, religion is termed as the science of the society. This argues that the religion of a society is not based on a supernatural being but the society. In fact, the society is God. This implies that one cannot subordinate religion to science. This is because religion originates from external institutions (Pyysiainen, 2010, p 112). Conclusion The sociology of knowledge is fundamental in helping human beings to understand the relationship between the thoughts, beliefs and values of the human society. This is crucial in understanding g the reality of social constructionism, modernist and functionalism in terms of religious beliefs and scientific laws. There are different views on the role of sociology of knowledge in understanding the religion and science in society. Although biological factors are crucial in determine the thought values and beliefs in a human being, social constructionists believe that the society shapes the ways and values of an individual’s life. Knowledge and power are among the objects that are used to influence the religious beliefs in society. This means that the powerful west countries present a biased form of sociology in order to influence other communities into believing what they term as the truth and knowledge. This led to the emergence of social class of people in various parts of the world. In these classes, authority was used to determine the regimes of truth and what can be accepted in society. The western countries are using the power in making other people into believing their truth and knowledge. The social practices in the society are influenced by power and knowledge in the society. Those who are high in social class are able to determine the religion of the society. However, sociologists such as Durkheim believe that the society values and beliefs constitute the religion of the community. The value of social cohesion is what makes the religious norms and practices in the community. Imposing beliefs and values from other parts of the world is seen as a way of interfering or secularizing the society. Therefore, although the social knowledge is crucial in understanding science and religion, some sociologists represent the class of power of the western world. References Berger, P., & Luckmann, T., 2011. The Social Construction of Reality: A Treatise in the Sociology of Knowledge. New York: Open Road Borda, M. 2006. Knowledge, Science, Religion: Philosophy as a Critical Alternative to Metaphysics. Wurzburg: Königshausen & Neumann Carrette, J., 2013. Foucault and Religion. London: Routledge Elder-Vass, D., 2012. The Reality of Social Construction. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press Gaventa, J., 2003. Foucault: power is everywhere. Powercube. [Online]. Available at < http://www.powercube.net/other-forms-of-power/foucault-power-is-everywhere/> Accessed on 08-06-2013 Guest, M., & Arweck, E., 2012. Religion and Knowledge: Sociological Perspectives. Burlington: Ashgate Publishing Irvine, M., 2005. Notes on Kuhn and Foucault. Georgetown University. [Online]. Available at < http://www9.georgetown.edu/faculty/irvinem/cctp748/foucault-outline.html> Accessed on 08-06-2013. Pyysiainen, I., 2010. Religion, Economy, and Cooperation. New York: Walter de Gruyter Reed, I., 2011. Interpretation and Social Knowledge: On the Use of Theory in the Human Sciences. Chicago: University of Chicago Press Scheler, M., 2012. Problems of Sociology of Knowledge. London: Routledge Read More