Exploring the Richness of Nonreligion

"Josh Bullock’s and David Herbert’s study advances our understanding of un/belief, belonging, and the sociality of nonreligion across different countries and generations," writes Dr. Rachel Shillitoe in response to Episode #313 "Unbelief as a Social Phenomenon"

By Rachel Shillitoe

Dr. Rachael Shillitoe is a Research Fellow at the University of Birmingham. Her research is primarily in the sociology of religion and sits in conversation with childhood studies, education, and the anthropology of religion and ethics.  She is currently completing a monograph examining children’s experiences of collective worship in schools, Negotiating Religion and Nonreligion in Childhood: Experiences of Worship in Schools (under contract with Palgrave Macmillan, in their Childhood and Youth Series).

Rachel Shillitoe

Dr. Rachael Shillitoe is a Research Fellow at the University of Birmingham. Her research is primarily in the sociology of religion and sits in conversation with childhood studies, education, and the anthropology of religion and ethics.  She is currently completing a monograph examining children’s experiences of collective worship in schools, Negotiating Religion and Nonreligion in Childhood: Experiences of Worship in Schools (under contract with Palgrave Macmillan, in their Childhood and Youth Series).

In response to:

Unbelief as a Nuanced Phenomenon: The Sociality of Nonreligion across Europe

Unbelief has often been defined as either ignorance or rejection of religious systems, but this week's guests David Herbert and Josh Bullock see far more diversity in the ways one can be nonreligious based on their research on Gen Y in Europe.

A response to “Unbelief as a Nuanced Phenomenon” with Josh Bullock and David Herbert by Sidney Castillo

Josh Bullock and David Herbert’s fascinating project exploring unbelief and the sociality of Generation Y non-believers across in young adults across six nations in northern and Central Europe provides a unique opportunity to examine what both belief and unbelief means from a cross-cultural perspective. Opening the podcast, Bullock addresses the difficulty with using the term unbelief, commenting on the different interpretations and unwanted connotations this term can sometimes raise, and preferring to use nonreligious instead. Their findings show the complexity and richness of nonreligious populations and the value of such empirical studies in highlighting the variety of beliefs the nonreligious may indeed hold. Bullock and Herbert initially discuss some of their findings that relate to how we conceptualise belonging in relation to belief and unbelief and whether people feel the need to get together as being nonreligious and if so, what do those gatherings look like. Building on Bullock’s PhD research on the Sunday Assembly, Bullock and Herbert provide a nuanced approach to belonging for the nonreligious, demonstrating how gathering ranged from loose affiliation to more organised groupings. This was especially true in those countries where religion or religion in public spaces is particularly prominent and so nonreligious gatherings or organising provides a form of counter narrative or a resistance identity.

 

Further in the podcast, Bullock and Herbert discuss some of their main findings that relate to the diversity of beliefs found within the nonreligious. Bullock and Herbert found their participants’ beliefs were often expressed in a way that connected them to other people, whether that be family or friends, or, in some cases, gave them ‘some sense of moral orientation in the universe,’ which clearly resonates with Abby Day’s (2011 and 2009) work on belief and social identity. The researchers also found that over a third of their participants, some of whom were firmly nonreligious, held beliefs related to the existence of supernatural beliefs such as cosmic or karmic beliefs or practices such as reading horoscopes. This was a finding similar to that of my research with Anna Strhan (Shillitoe and Strhan 2019) on nonreligious childhood: children express a range of beliefs while still affirming a nonreligious identity or unbelief. The core research from the Understanding Unbelief project, Across Disciplines Across Culture, also found that being atheist or agnostics does not automatically entail an unbelief in supernatural phenomena such as karma. This speaks to the broader question of how we think of these beliefs and identities in terms of conflict and compatibility, with Bullock and Herbert noting the tension and frustration their participants expressed when trying to articulate their belief or feelings towards these seemingly contradictory positions. Drawing on literature from developmental psychology, Bullock and Herbert consider whether this is reflective of people toggling between intuitive and analytical modes of thinking, with this switching between such modes arising as way to control particular situations.

 

An alternative way of considering the complexities and nuances of belief and nonreligion would be to think of the literature from the study of science and religion. Originally a focus of classic sociology, efforts to understand the relationship between science and religion waned somewhat during the 20th Century, but a ‘second wave’ of research in this area is now emerging (Catto et al 2019, 1). This interest in science and religion was largely the domain of historians, philosophers, and theologians, but a renewed interest in science and religion from the social sciences is now creating more opportunities to critically investigate the relationship between science and religion across different contexts and identities and challenge the various assumptions and constructions that pervade these domains. The works of Ecklund (2010), Evans (2012 & 2016), Elsdon-Baker (2015), Catto et al (2019), and Jones et al (2019) all provide interesting and original ways for sociologists of religion to engage the debates surrounding public understanding of science, rationality, logic, belief, and identity. For example, Eklund et al’s (2008) work on scientists and religion has found that scientific institutions can have a secularising effect. Elsdon-Baker (2015) troubles the previously held assumptions of the conflict relationship between science and religion, demonstrating that science can also belong to the religious, while findings from a large-scale survey highlight the prejudices that often prevail regarding religious identity and acceptance or rejection of evolutionary theory. Unsworth and Voas (2018) found that many of their respondents hold unconfident or inconsistent views relating to science and evolution, so that, for example, there were similar levels of uncertainty about the age of the earth found across both religious and nonreligious groups.

 

In relation to Bullock and Hebert’s work, these approaches within the social scientific study of science and religion could provide a fruitful way of analysing findings that also reveal complex and seemingly contradictory positions about individuals’ beliefs. It will be interesting to learn more about the background of the participants in terms of their education, family upbringing, and any engagement with religion in Bullocks and Herbert’s forthcoming publications. Kaden et al (2018) highlight the influence of both professional knowledge and ethical and moral concerns in terms of which mark a key difference between lay people’s and professional views of science and religion.  Thinking about the range of beliefs Bullock’s and Herbert’s participants held and how this may transgress or complicate religious/nonreligious boundaries, a relational approach to nonreligion (Campbell 2013; Quack 2014; Lee 2015) may also be helpful and could provide a useful framework when analysing empirical data on the nonreligious.

 

Ultimately this was an impressive and extremely engaging discussion. Josh Bullock’s and David Herbert’s study advances our understanding of un/belief, belonging, and the sociality of nonreligion across different countries and generations. I eagerly await their forthcoming publications from this study and look forward to the future projects that will arise from it.

 

 

References

 

Campbell, C. (2013) Towards a Sociology of Irreligion, London: Alcuin Academics.

Catto R, Jones S, Kaden T, and Elsdon-Baker F. (2019) Diversification and internationalization in the sociological study of science and religion. Sociology Compass, 13:e12721, 1-13.

Day, A. (2009), Believing in belonging: An ethnography of young people’s constructions of belief, Culture and Religion, 10(3): 263-278.

Day, A. (2011), Believing in Belonging: Belief and Social Identity in the Modern World, Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Ecklund, E. H. (2010). Science vs Religion: What Scientists Really Think. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.

Ecklund, E. H., Park, J. Z., and Veliz, P. T. (2008). Secularization and religious change among elite scientists. Social Forces, 86(4), 1805–1839.

Elsdon-Baker, F. (2015). Creating creationists: The influence of ‘issues framing’ on our understanding of public perceptions of clash narratives between evolutionary science and belief. Public Understanding of Science, 24(4), 422–439.

Evans, M. S. (2012). Supporting science: Reasons, restrictions, and the role of religion. Science Communication, 34(3), 334–362.

Evans, M. S. (2016). Seeking Good Debate: Religion, Science, and Conflict in American Public Life. Oakland, CA: University of California Press.

Jones, S, Catto, R, Kaden, T and Elsdon-Baker, F 2019, ‘That’s how Muslims are required to view the world’: Race, culture and belief in non-Muslims’ descriptions of Islam and science, The Sociological Review, vol. 67, no. 1, pp. 161-177.

Kaden T, Jones S, Catto R, and Elsdon-Baker F. (2018) Knowledge as explanandum: Disentangling lay and professional perspectives on science and religion. Studies in Religion / Sciences Religieuses. 2018, Vol. 47(4) 500–521

Lee, L. (2015) Recognizing the Non-Religious: Reimagining the Secular. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Quack, J. (2014) Outline of a Relational Approach to ‘Nonreligion’. Method & Theory in the Study of Religion 26 (4-5): 439-469.

Strhan, A. and Shillitoe, R. (2019) The Stickiness of Non-religion? Intergenerational Transmission and the Formation of Non-religious Identities in Childhood. Sociology, 53 (6): 1094–1110.

Unsworth, A. and Voas, D. (2018) ‘Attitudes to evolution among Christians, Muslims and the Non-Religious in Britain: Differential effects of religious and educational factors’, Public Understanding of Science, 27(1), pp. 76–93

Other EPISODES YOU MIGHT ENJOY

Buddhism in the critical classroom

Podcast

How do we deal with different cultural languages when teaching an Introduction to Buddhism course? Is cultural familiarity something to be broken immediately and displaced by new concepts and perspectives? Is it to be leveraged as devices for easy onboarding to other, more unfamiliar terms and ideas? Are they to be outright ignored? David Robertson is joined by Matthew Hayes
Religion in a Networked Society

Podcast

On a recent visit to Edinburgh, Louise met with Heidi Campbell to discuss her recent article “Understanding the Relationship between Religion Online and Offline in a Networked Society”, which presents five key traits of the concept of “networked religion”. These are: networked community; storied identities; shifting authority; convergent practice; ...
The Sacrality of the Secular and Philosophy of Religion

Podcast

In this week's podcast, we speak with Bradley Onishi about the ways in which philosophy of religion has thought "with" religion rather than for or against religion. "It's possible," he says, "to hold an enchanted secularity" if we think about religions themselves as tools for questioning our basic assumptions about the world.
Editors’ Picks 2: The Phenomenology of Religion

Podcast

The second of our Editors' Picks "repodcasts", and this time Jonathan has chosen our interview with James Cox on the Phenomenology of Religion. It was, incidentally, also our very first podcast, originally broadcast on the 14th of January, 2012. Jonathan also wrote the response to this interview, entitled “What is Phenomenology?“.
Religion, Education, and Politics in Australia and NZ

Podcast

Following on from the delivery of her conference paper at the EASR 2018 in Bern, in this podcast, Professor Marion Maddox of Macquarie University speaks to Thomas White regarding the historical, national and regional differences in the presence of religion in Australian and New Zealand schools.
Against Invention: A richer history for ‘Hinduism’

Podcast

In this interview Associate Professor Will Sweetman talks to Thomas White about the idea that ‘Hinduism’ and many of the other terms we use to classify religions—including the term religion itself—are modern inventions, emerging out of nineteenth-century inter-cultural contact and European colonialism. Will argues against this critique, and to make his case he draws on historical sources that discuss ‘Hinduism’ both outside of the anglophone ...

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution- NonCommercial- NoDerivs 3.0 Unported License.

The views expressed in podcasts, features and responses are the views of the individual contributors, and do not necessarily reflect the views of The Religious Studies Project or our sponsors. The Religious Studies Project is produced by the Religious Studies Project Association (SCIO), a Scottish Charitable Incorporated Organisation (charity number SC047750).