权益分类	功能权益	普通用户	{{item.name}}会员
{{category.name}}	{{benefitItem.name}}

Religious Elites and Social Organization in South-Eastern Europe

东南欧的宗教精英和社会组织

基本信息

批准号：
249166551
负责人：
Dr. Jochen Töpfer
金额：
--
依托单位：
Osteuropa-Institut
依托单位国家：
德国
项目类别：
Research Grants
财政年份：
2014
资助国家：
德国
起止时间：
2013-12-31 至 2018-12-31
项目状态：
已结题

来源：
https://gepris.dfg.de/gepris/projekt/249166551?language=en
关键词：
Religious Elites Social Organization South

项目摘要

The relationship between traditional religion and processes of modernity is a central issue in contemporary public discussions as well as in debates in the social sciences. The enlargement of the European Union, which becomes more diverse also in spiritual terms, new religious movements and anti-Islamic populism within several societies of the region, violent conflicts with religious background in South-Eastern Europe and new developments in the Arabic world give an empirical basis to justify the above-mentioned attention and hence arguments on hand for the relevance of a scientific analysis of religion in society today.The project `Religious Elites and Social Organization in South-Eastern Europe` asks for the integrative as well as the conflict-afflicted potentials of religion in multi-religious societies. Several major branches of Christianity and Islam are traditionally rooted in this region. Why are some societies threatened by religious conflict, while others with a comparable differentiated structure of religious communities are not? Are reasons located exclusively within the religious sphere or rather caused by external factors as political power arrangements? The selection of cases is based on the specific differences in the structure of the religious field and comprises Albania, Macedonia, and Slovenia.Central source of the interpretation of traditional religion for today are religious dignitaries. They represent their religious community to the external environment and interpret the content of religion internally for the members of their spiritual community. Thus, they are accepted as normative multiplicators within their group and additionally influence wider parts of society by public statements and symbolic behaviour. Consequently, it is the intention of the proposed project to take the perspective of religion and detect central types of attitudes of religious dignitaries towards the triangle of religion, politics, and population in multi-religious societies of South-Eastern Europe and ask for their integrative and separative potential.In order to determine the attitudes adequately, a relatively new qualitative method will be applied which refers explicitly to the internal frame of reference of the respondents (Q-method). It is designed for explorative approaches; e.g. a data collection in foreign countries or in areas of society which were rarely subject of scientific analysis before. Religious conflict-potential within a society is given in the first step of the analysis, if central attitudes of religious dignitaries towards religion, politics, and society are significantly diverging (intra- and inter-religious comparison). Secondly, these results and the patterns of attitudes of the population towards the topic are contrasted. Next, the legal and factual situation of the relationship between religion and politics is considered to identify the impact of relevant intervening variables on the conflict potential of religion.

传统宗教与现代性进程之间的关系是当代公共讨论以及社会科学辩论的中心问题。欧洲联盟的扩大，在精神方面也变得更加多样化，在该地区的几个社会中出现了新的宗教运动和反伊斯兰民粹主义，东南欧与宗教背景的暴力冲突，阿拉伯世界的新发展，为证明上述注意的合理性提供了经验基础，因此，对当今社会中的宗教进行科学分析的论据也就有了依据。“东南欧的宗教精英和社会组织”这个项目要求在多宗教社会中宗教的融合以及冲突的潜力。基督教和伊斯兰教的几个主要分支传统上扎根于该地区。为什么有些社会受到宗教冲突的威胁，而另一些具有类似的宗教社区分化结构的社会却没有？原因是完全在宗教领域内还是由政治权力安排等外部因素引起的？案例的选择是基于宗教领域结构的具体差异，包括阿尔巴尼亚、马其顿和斯洛文尼亚。今天对传统宗教解释的主要来源是宗教要人。他们对外代表自己的宗教团体，对内为自己的精神团体成员解释宗教的内容。因此，他们在自己的群体中被接受为规范的乘数者，并通过公开声明和象征性行为影响社会更广泛的部分。因此，拟议项目的目的是采取宗教的观点，发现宗教要人对东南欧多宗教社会中宗教、政治和人口三角关系的主要态度类型，并要求他们的整合和分离潜力。为了充分确定态度，将采用一种相对较新的定性方法，明确指受访者的内部参考框架（q法）。它是为探索方法而设计的；例如，以前很少进行科学分析的外国或社会领域的数据收集。如果宗教要人对宗教、政治和社会的核心态度存在显著分歧（宗教内部和宗教间比较），则在分析的第一步给出了社会内部的宗教冲突潜力。其次，将这些结果与人口对该主题的态度模式进行对比。其次，考虑宗教与政治关系的法律和事实情况，以确定相关干预变量对宗教冲突潜力的影响。