Religion and the State: Types of Relations in the Religious Market

IF 2.9 1区 哲学 Q1 ETHICS Journal of Political Philosophy Pub Date : 2022-09-09 DOI:10.30570/2078-5089-2022-106-3-65-79
S. Gorokhov, R. Dmitriev, M. M. Agafoshin
{"title":"Religion and the State: Types of Relations in the Religious Market","authors":"S. Gorokhov, R. Dmitriev, M. M. Agafoshin","doi":"10.30570/2078-5089-2022-106-3-65-79","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The article presents the attempt of using the marketing paradigm in the analysis of state-confessional relations. Considering such relations through the prism of market structures, the authors identify three main types: religious monopoly, religious oligopoly, and religious monopolistic competition. Religious monopoly implies the dominance of one religion, which enjoys the full support of the state that protects it from competition from other religions. In the modern world, religious monopoly exists in two forms — closed and open, with the differences between the two lying in the degree of monopolization of the market by one of the confessions. According to the authors’ conclusion, the religious monopoly imposed from above (by the state) ultimately has a secular effect, reducing the level of participation of the population in religious activities and thereby weakening the monopoly of religion, which, in turn, can lead to the termination of state support for it. Religious oligopoly implies that several dominant religions or their branches that are equally supported by the state and have the same status compete in the market; the emergence of new ones is difficult (open oligopoly) or even seriously limited (closed oligopoly). Religious monopolistic competition is characterized by the inclusion in the process of competition not only of religions and their branches, but also religious denominations. Each of these “players” produces its own unique religious product and has relatively free access to the market of religions, which is almost not limited by the state. The proposed typology is historical in its nature, which makes it possible to predict the dynamics of state-confessional relations.","PeriodicalId":47624,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Political Philosophy","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.9000,"publicationDate":"2022-09-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Political Philosophy","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.30570/2078-5089-2022-106-3-65-79","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ETHICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The article presents the attempt of using the marketing paradigm in the analysis of state-confessional relations. Considering such relations through the prism of market structures, the authors identify three main types: religious monopoly, religious oligopoly, and religious monopolistic competition. Religious monopoly implies the dominance of one religion, which enjoys the full support of the state that protects it from competition from other religions. In the modern world, religious monopoly exists in two forms — closed and open, with the differences between the two lying in the degree of monopolization of the market by one of the confessions. According to the authors’ conclusion, the religious monopoly imposed from above (by the state) ultimately has a secular effect, reducing the level of participation of the population in religious activities and thereby weakening the monopoly of religion, which, in turn, can lead to the termination of state support for it. Religious oligopoly implies that several dominant religions or their branches that are equally supported by the state and have the same status compete in the market; the emergence of new ones is difficult (open oligopoly) or even seriously limited (closed oligopoly). Religious monopolistic competition is characterized by the inclusion in the process of competition not only of religions and their branches, but also religious denominations. Each of these “players” produces its own unique religious product and has relatively free access to the market of religions, which is almost not limited by the state. The proposed typology is historical in its nature, which makes it possible to predict the dynamics of state-confessional relations.
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
宗教与国家:宗教市场中的关系类型
本文提出了运用市场营销范式分析国家-忏悔关系的尝试。通过市场结构的棱镜来考虑这种关系,作者确定了三种主要类型:宗教垄断、宗教寡头垄断和宗教垄断竞争。宗教垄断指的是一种宗教的统治地位,这种宗教得到国家的全力支持,保护它免受其他宗教的竞争。在现代世界,宗教垄断以封闭和开放两种形式存在,两者的区别在于一种宗教对市场的垄断程度。根据作者的结论,自上而下(由国家)强加的宗教垄断最终具有世俗效应,降低了人口对宗教活动的参与水平,从而削弱了宗教的垄断,这反过来又可能导致国家对其支持的终止。宗教寡头垄断是指受国家同等支持、地位相同的几个占主导地位的宗教或其分支在市场上竞争;新寡头的出现是困难的(开放式寡头垄断),甚至严重限制(封闭式寡头垄断)。宗教垄断竞争的特点是在竞争过程中不仅包括宗教及其分支,而且包括宗教派别。这些“参与者”各自生产自己独特的宗教产品,并相对自由地进入宗教市场,几乎不受国家限制。所提出的类型学本质上是历史性的,这使得预测国家-忏悔关系的动态成为可能。
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
4.10
自引率
5.60%
发文量
17
期刊介绍: The Journal of Political Philosophy is an international journal devoted to the study of theoretical issues arising out of moral, legal and political life. It welcomes, and hopes to foster, work cutting across a variety of disciplinary concerns, among them philosophy, sociology, history, economics and political science. The journal encourages new approaches, including (but not limited to): feminism; environmentalism; critical theory, post-modernism and analytical Marxism; social and public choice theory; law and economics, critical legal studies and critical race studies; and game theoretic, socio-biological and anthropological approaches to politics. It also welcomes work in the history of political thought which builds to a larger philosophical point and work in the philosophy of the social sciences and applied ethics with broader political implications. Featuring a distinguished editorial board from major centres of thought from around the globe, the journal draws equally upon the work of non-philosophers and philosophers and provides a forum of debate between disparate factions who usually keep to their own separate journals.
期刊最新文献
Evaluating International Agreements: The Voluntarist Reply and Its Limits Issue Information The Journal of Political Philosophy Index, Volume 31 (2023) The challenge of policing minorities in a liberal society Noncompliance and the Demands of Public Reason
×
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