Suchergebnisse

The paper starts from hypothesis that current religious change may be best approached within the categorical framework not of a sociology of religion, conceived of & practiced as a sociology of religion of individuals & values, but a political sociology of religion (Guizzardi), focused on political exchange aimed at generating legitimacy &, therefore, creating consensus. Two current complementary trends of religious change, described as politicization of religion & religionization of politics (Robertson), are interpreted in such a way. First, some aspects of the current politicization of religion have been identified & described. Second, the crucial aspects of the religionization of politics, projected primarily on the background of transitional processes in former Yugoslavia, have been identified & analyzed. Finally, an interpretation of such trends has been elaborated, basically by taking into consideration two crucial discrepancies & their precariousness. The first one is the discrepancy & precariousness of legitimacy of dominant political strategies to be obtained by a politics coherently situated in the relative, dissociated from any kind of absolute & sacred. The second is the discrepancy & precariousness of a possible religious revival to be achieved strictly on religious bases. 35 References. Adapted from the source document.

The paper starts from hypothesis that current religious change may be best approached within the categorical framework not of a sociology of religion, conceived of & practiced as a sociology of religion of individuals & values, but a political sociology of religion (Guizzardi), focused on political exchange aimed at generating legitimacy &, therefore, creating consensus. Two current complementary trends of religious change, described as politicization of religion & religionization of politics (Robertson), are interpreted in such a way. First, some aspects of the current politicization of religion have been identified & described. Second, the crucial aspects of the religionization of politics, projected primarily on the background of transitional processes in former Yugoslavia, have been identified & analyzed. Finally, an interpretation of such trends has been elaborated, basically by taking into consideration two crucial discrepancies & their precariousness. The first one is the discrepancy & precariousness of legitimacy of dominant political strategies to be obtained by a politics coherently situated in the relative, dissociated from any kind of absolute & sacred. The second is the discrepancy & precariousness of a possible religious revival to be achieved strictly on religious bases. 35 References. Adapted from the source document.

Polazeći od nekih ranijih rekonstrukcija nastanka sociologije u kojima se isticala izmiješanostmodernističkih i konzervativnih elemenata, pa čak i dominantnija prisutnost potonjih, u člankuse argumentira u prilog tezi da je sociologija bitno modernistički utemeljena. Pri tome je osobitoistaknuto kako je navodna bliskost rane sociologije s tezom konzervativaca o prvenstvu društvanad pojedincem dovedena u kontekst nastojanja da se novouspostavljena znanost o društvu isvojim predmetom proučavanja omeđi u odnosu na ostale društvene znanosti, a ne kako bi sesuprotstavilo modernističkoj vrijednosti individualizma. Prisutnost nekih elemenata ideologijamoderne – liberalizma, konzervativizma i socijalizma – u većoj ili manjoj mjeri prepoznaje se i udjelima istaknutih protagonista klasičnog razdoblja sociologije, ali je njihova osnovna intencijada izbjegnu spekulaciju i moraliziranje, te da primjenom vlastitih znanstvenih metoda pristupesvom predmetu izučavanja, društvu i društvenim promjenama. Osim znanstvenosti sociologijaje moderna znanost i zbog toga što razvoj društva vidi u okviru temeljnih dimenzija promjenainiciranih političkom i industrijskom revolucijom, dakle, daljnjim napretkom znanosti, industrijei političke demokracije. ; Starting from some earlier reconstructions of the emergence of sociology which emphasized themixture of modernist and conservative elements, and even the domination of the latter, in thisarticle we argue in favour of the idea that sociology is essentially modernist. Particular emphasisis given to how the supposed closeness of early sociology with the thesis of conservatives on theprecedence of society over the individual when brought into the context of the newly establishedscience of society and its subject of research is restricted in relation to other social sciences, andnot to oppose the modernist values of individualism. The presence of some elements of modernideologies – liberalism, conservatism and socialism – can be recognized more or less in the worksof the prominent leading names from the classical age of sociology, but their primary intentionwas to avoid speculation and moralization, and that by applying their own scientific methodsthey approach their subject of study, society and social changes. Sociology is a modernist sciencealso because it sees the development of society within the framework of the basic dimensions ofchanges initiated by the political and industrial revolution, and as such, the further progress ofscience, industry and political democracy.

Hegelove riječi iz Enciklopedije filozofskih znanosti, da revolucija nije moguća bez reformacije, mogu se shvatiti kao načelno upozorenje da svakoj korjenitoj političkoj promjeni mora prethoditi promjena u unutrašnjem svijetu uvjerenja pojedinca i zajednice. Te riječi povijesno preciznije upućuju na reformirano kršćanstvo kao na inherentni poticaj modernim revolucionarnim previranjima. Religiozno oslobođenje savjesti prethodilo je političkom oslobođenju i u tom smislu Hegel izdvaja protestantizam kao najviši lik religioznosti koji je u modernoj običajnosti moguć. Hegel favorizira protestantizam ne samo zato što je uvjeren da je religijska reformacija prethodila i da uvijek mora prethoditi revoluciji nego i zbog toga što smatra da s protestantizmom postaje očito da i reformiranje religije ostaje nedovršeno i apstraktno ne preraste li u politički prevrat. Razmatranje načina na koji Hegel problematizira odnos države i religije autora vodi k zaključku: revolucije ne može biti bez reformacije, ali ni istinske reformacije bez revolucije. ; Hegel's words from the Encyclopedia of the Philosophical Sciences, that a revolution is not possible without a reformation, can be understood as the general warning that the change within the inner world of beliefs of individual and community must precede every radical political change. Historically more precise, these words point to the Reformed Christianity as the inherent impetus to the modern revolutionary movements. The religious liberation of conscience preceded the political liberation, and Hegel, therefore, points out Protestantism as the highest form of religiosity which is possible in the modern ethical life. On the other hand, Hegel favours Protestantism not only because he is convinced that the religious reformation preceded and must precede the revolution, but also because he considers that with Protestantism becomes evident that the reformation of religion remains incomplete and abstract if it does not grow into the political upheaval. Considering the way Hegel is problematizing the nature of the relationship between state and religion, the author concludes: there can be no revolution without a reformation, but neither a true reformation without a revolution.

The author looks into the relation between politics, state and religion from the political-science perspective, as part of an analysis and evaluation of tasks, achievements and failures of polity, policy or politics from the standpoint of normative-constructive philosophy of equity. At present the central task of policy is to stimulate and strengthen the Western political culture based on the fundamental distinction between "reasonable" and "unreasonable" pluralism. "Reasonable" pluralism rests on the assumption that the state is a just power, the sovereignty of which can be recognized in distinguishing the "public" and the "private", the just and the good, and, in connection therewith, it is almost self-understandable that such a liberal guaranteed private sphere must be the primary arena of religious practice and religious freedoms. The crucial trait of the relation between state and religion is manifest in the fact that only the legal state and the liberal constitution are competent to state what the freedom of individuals consists of within the framework of norms of what is just. The author defines "religion" in the comprehensive sense as central to the processes of forming cultural identity, and he deems that cultural policy (which, in principle, has to do with relations between state and religion), as policy of equitable integration of multi-culturally shaped political unities, must be oriented toward stimulation of those attitudes and values which make possible the reasonable pluralism defined according to Rawls. Since the political encompasses also the possibility to make enemies, the author advocates the cultural policy of "weakening the feelings of enmity" (N. Elias). In this way, a systematic concept of policy would be created, one which would reflect and preserve the conditions of reasonable pluralism. On the policy level and, in particular, on the politics level, cultural policy is a very demanding project. Perhaps it is precisely Switzerland, with its special prospects of civil democracy, that offers promising cultural-policy opportunities for activity, which are as yet still insufficiently researched. Adapted from the source document.

The author gives an overview of political sociology as a (sub)discipline of modern political science, with special reference to Croatia. The paper consists of three parts. In the first part the method and the development of modern political sociology is given by putting special emphasis on the eclectic nature of the (sub)discipline. The second part is dedicated to the bibliometric analysis with respect to the subject matter of political sociology of three journals relevant to political science in Croatia, namely Politicka misao, Anali Hrvatskog politoloskog drustva and Suvremene teme. The analysis results show an extremely small number of papers in the field of political sociology in all three journals, as well as the uneven distribution of topics within the subject of political sociology. The third and final part of the paper compares Croatian experiences in the field of political sociology with international trends and other political science (sub)disciplines. The author concludes that the Croatian political sociology is underdeveloped and inconsistent with the topics of political sociologies in other countries. Adapted from the source document.

The logic of civil religion consists of minimizing community in order to maximize pluralism. Every modern society needs pluralism on the one hand, and securing of its foundations on the other. Still, civil religion may raise suspicion with regard to use of religion for political purposes. And instrumentalization is contradictory to the character of religion, although the latter always has political consequences as well. Civil religion serves politics with the aim of educating citizens. Perhaps, however, it can also be perceived as preparation of totalitarian beliefs and liturgies, such as are known to us from the first half of the 20th century. Civil religion can go hand in hand with excessive nationalism, proselytism, and Satanization of enemies. Such undesirable consequences of civil religion are discussed in this article on the basis of examples from the time of the French Revolution. The Revolution was largely marked by civil religion, the former even legitimized the latter. Four examples from the history of the French Revolution are analyzed: human rights as civil religion; cult of reason and of the supreme being; worship of the Revolution's "martyr" Jean-Paul Marat, and, finally, Satanization of enemies. Following his expose, the author confronts these questions: Is the confusing element of civil religion the fact that it wants to utilize religion per se for political purposes? What is it that protects civil religion from degenerating into nationalism and proselytism? Or else civil religion can be both: the basis of a tolerant pluralist democracy as well as the preparatory stage of totalitarianism? Adapted from the source document.

In the course of its history, Europe has structured itself by means of two models. The first was based on the territorial expansion of regional forces that used violence to break down the resistance of their weaker neighbors & establish the balance of power. In this way, at least temporarily, the way was paved for more radical changes in their polities. This model was in use until the end of WWII. The second model has been built around European integration. The aim of this process has not been the expansion of regional powers & the territorial conquest of their neighbors; it is based on the initiative of the weak to join the organizations that can satisfy their interests & goals. The process of integration excludes coercive methods. However, there is certain asymmetry in the relationship between the center & the periphery (the strong & the weak). The countries that belong to the center define the membership standards for the 'periphery' & evaluate their implementation. The 'central' countries are in a better position than the peripheral ones since the process of integration bolsters their collective identity, while the weaker states -- by accepting the standards of stronger countries -- have to alter their original identity. 3 References. Adapted from the source document.

According to Luhmann, religion transforms the indefinable/un-defined into the definable/defined complexity, thus outlining the problems of the whole society. Due to this function, religion remains bound to the level of the entirety of a social system. Nevertheless, in time, in the course of the functional differentiation of society, different sub-systems have been created for different tasks (economy, science, politics, education, etc) & religion has been accorded the status of one such system. Besides distinguishing among various subsystems, this process implies the separation of diverse task-areas within the religious system itself. By & by, within the Christian religion, three functionally differentiated spheres have emerged which Luhmann labels as a) the church, ie, the entirety of spiritual communication in which the function of the system of religion is fulfilled for the whole social system; b) Diaconate (Diakonie), which performs the system's tasks towards other social sub-systems (these tasks, in line with the theory of systems, may be termed services Leistungen) as well as towards personal systems (in line with the theory of systems they may be termed pastoral -- Seelsorge); & c) theology (Theologie) whose role within the religious system may be described as reflexion (Reflexion) ie, the task of the reflexive contact of one's own identity. 1 Table, 10 References. Adapted from the source document.