Religious Exclusivism and Mass Beliefs about the Religion v. Science Debate: A Cross-National Study

IF 1.8 Q2 SOCIOLOGY International Journal of Sociology Pub Date : 2022-03-31 DOI:10.1080/00207659.2022.2055288
John J. Lee
{"title":"Religious Exclusivism and Mass Beliefs about the Religion v. Science Debate: A Cross-National Study","authors":"John J. Lee","doi":"10.1080/00207659.2022.2055288","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract When religion and science are in conflict, who supports religion? Using data from 71 diverse societies in the World Values Survey (n = 120,728), this study assesses the relative predictive strength of science optimism, moral concerns about science, religiosity, and religious exclusivism. Perhaps counterintuitively, science beliefs (science optimism, in particular) are weak predictors of the outcome, even in wealthy societies with high levels of scientific productivity. In contrast, believing that only one’s religion is acceptable is the strongest predictor of choosing religion over science; this is generally consistent across religious groups, regions, and specific countries/territories. These findings suggest that making the public more aware of major scientific advances will not, by itself, increase the cultural authority of science—especially if it is explicitly contested by another influential social institution. The implications for social scientific theories of modernization and secularization are discussed.","PeriodicalId":45362,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Sociology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2022-03-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Sociology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/00207659.2022.2055288","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"SOCIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

Abstract

Abstract When religion and science are in conflict, who supports religion? Using data from 71 diverse societies in the World Values Survey (n = 120,728), this study assesses the relative predictive strength of science optimism, moral concerns about science, religiosity, and religious exclusivism. Perhaps counterintuitively, science beliefs (science optimism, in particular) are weak predictors of the outcome, even in wealthy societies with high levels of scientific productivity. In contrast, believing that only one’s religion is acceptable is the strongest predictor of choosing religion over science; this is generally consistent across religious groups, regions, and specific countries/territories. These findings suggest that making the public more aware of major scientific advances will not, by itself, increase the cultural authority of science—especially if it is explicitly contested by another influential social institution. The implications for social scientific theories of modernization and secularization are discussed.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
宗教排他主义与大众信仰关于宗教与科学之争:一项跨国研究
当宗教与科学发生冲突时,谁支持宗教?利用世界价值观调查(n = 120,728)中71个不同社会的数据,本研究评估了科学乐观主义、对科学的道德关注、宗教虔诚和宗教排外主义的相对预测力。也许与直觉相反,科学信念(尤其是科学乐观主义)对结果的预测能力很弱,即使在科学生产力水平很高的富裕社会也是如此。相比之下,相信只有一个人的宗教是可以接受的,这是选择宗教而不是科学的最强预测因素;这在宗教团体、地区和特定国家/地区之间通常是一致的。这些发现表明,让公众更多地了解重大的科学进步本身并不能增加科学的文化权威——尤其是当它受到另一个有影响力的社会机构的明确质疑时。讨论了现代化和世俗化对社会科学理论的影响。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.00
自引率
4.80%
发文量
21
期刊最新文献
Including Marine-Related Items in the ISSP Environment Module is Important for a More Holistic Measure of Public Environmental Perceptions When do Women Take the Lead? Exploring the Intersection Between Gender Equality and Women’s Environmental Political Participation from a Comparative Perspective Automated Futures, Altered Priorities: The Impact of Technological Change on Environmental Attitudes and Policies Using the Campbell Paradigm to Understand the Role of Institutional Trust in Environmental Policy Support Do “environmental losers” pay the price? The role of individual and country vulnerabilities in the relationship between environmental concern and willingness to pay to protect the environment
×
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
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 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 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1