Changes

'''[[Theory|Theories]] of [[religion]]s''' can be classified into substantive (focusing on what it is) theories and functional or [[reductionism|reductionist]] (focusing on what religions does) theories.  

'''[[Theory|Theories]] of [[religion]]s''' can be classified into substantive (focusing on what it is) theories and functional or [[reductionism|reductionist]] (focusing on what religions does) theories.  

Influential susbtantive theories have been proposed by [[Theories of religion#Edward_Burnett_Tylor_and_James_George_Frazer|Tylor and Frazer]] (treating explanatory value for its adherents), the [[theology|theologian]] [[Theories of religion#Rudolf_Otto|Rudolf Otto]]  (treating the importance of [[religious experience]], more specifically experiences that are both fascinating and terrifying), [[Theories of religion#Mircea_Eliade|Mircea Eliade]] (treating the longing for otherwordly perfection, quest for meaning, and seeking patterns in mythology in various religions)

Influential substantive theories have been proposed by [[Theories of religion#Edward_Burnett_Tylor_and_James_George_Frazer|Tylor and Frazer]] (treating explanatory value for its adherents), the [[theology|theologian]] [[Theories of religion#Rudolf_Otto|Rudolf Otto]]  (treating the importance of [[religious experience]], more specifically experiences that are both fascinating and terrifying), [[Theories of religion#Mircea_Eliade|Mircea Eliade]] (treating the longing for other-wordly perfection, quest for meaning, and seeking patterns in mythology in various religions)

Influential functional theories have been proposed by [[Theories_of_religion#Karl_Marx|Karl Marx]] (focusing on the economic background) , [[Theories_of_religion#Sigmund_Freud|Sigmund Freud]] (focusing on [[neurosis]] as a [[psychology|psychological]] origin of religious beliefs), and [[Theories_of_religion#Émile_Durkheim|Émile Durkheim]] (focusing on the social function of religions).

Influential functional theories have been proposed by [[Theories_of_religion#Karl_Marx|Karl Marx]] (focusing on the economic background) , [[Theories_of_religion#Sigmund_Freud|Sigmund Freud]] (focusing on [[neurosis]] as a [[psychology|psychological]] origin of religious beliefs), and [[Theories_of_religion#Émile_Durkheim|Émile Durkheim]] (focusing on the social function of religions).

The [[Theories_of_religion#Rational_choice_theory|rational choice theory]]  has been applied to religions, among others by the sociologists [[Rodney Stark]] and [[William Sims Bainbridge]]. They asserted that religion is able to function as compensators for unobtained rewards.

The [[Theories_of_religion#Rational_choice_theory|rational choice theory]]  has been applied to religions, among others by the sociologists [[Rodney Stark]] and [[William Sims Bainbridge]]. They asserted that religion is able to function as compensators for unobtained rewards.

[[:wikt:prescientific|Prescientific]] theories have been proposed since [[presocratic]] times. <ref>[[Robert A. Segal|Segal, Robert A.]] ''Theories of Religion'', page 49 in [[John R. Hinnells|Hinnells, John R. (editor)]], ''The Routledge Companion to the Study of Religion'' (Routledge 2005)</ref>[[Herodotus]] (484 – 425 [[Common Era|BCE]]) stated that the gods of Greece were the same as the gods of Egypt.<ref>Pals, page 4</ref>[[Euhemerus]] (appr. 330– 264 [[Common Era|BCE]]) wrote that gods were excellent historical persons who eventually became worshiped.<ref>Pals, page 4</ref>

[[:wikt:prescientific|Pre-scientific]] theories have been proposed since [[pre-socratic]] times. <ref>[[Robert A. Segal|Segal, Robert A.]] ''Theories of Religion'', page 49 in [[John R. Hinnells|Hinnells, John R. (editor)]], ''The Routledge Companion to the Study of Religion'' (Routledge 2005)</ref>[[Herodotus]] (484 – 425 [[Common Era|BCE]]) stated that the gods of Greece were the same as the gods of Egypt.<ref>Pals, page 4</ref>[[Euhemerus]] (appr. 330– 264 [[Common Era|BCE]]) wrote that gods were excellent historical persons who eventually became worshipped.<ref>Pals, page 4</ref>

Theorizing beyond mere specualtion became possible after data from tribes and peoples all over the world became available in Europe and the United States in the 18th and 19th century. <ref>[[Robert A. Segal|Segal, Robert A.]] ''Theories of Religion'', page 49 in [[John R. Hinnells|Hinnells, John R. (editor)]], ''The Routledge Companion to the Study of Religion'' (Routledge 2005)</ref>The founder of the scientific study of religion is generally considered to be [[Max Müller]]  (1823 – 1900), who advocated [[comparative religion]].<ref>Pals, page 3</ref>Later serious doubts were raised about the question whether it possible to provide a general theory of all religions.<ref>Pals, page 9</ref>

Theorizing beyond mere speculation became possible after data from tribes and peoples all over the world became available in Europe and the United States in the 18th and 19th century. <ref>[[Robert A. Segal|Segal, Robert A.]] ''Theories of Religion'', page 49 in [[John R. Hinnells|Hinnells, John R. (editor)]], ''The Routledge Companion to the Study of Religion'' (Routledge 2005)</ref>The founder of the scientific study of religion is generally considered to be [[Max Müller]]  (1823 – 1900), who advocated [[comparative religion]].<ref>Pals, page 3</ref>Later serious doubts were raised about the question whether it possible to provide a general theory of all religions.<ref>Pals, page 9</ref>

==Scope and classifications==

==Scope and classifications==

Most sociologists and anthropologists, who tend to see religion, as inseparable from and determined by the social context, resort to what is called 'methodological atheism'. This means that when explaining religion they reject divine or supernatural explanations for the status or origins of religions, because they are not testable. <ref>Kunin, page 74</ref>

Most sociologists and anthropologists, who tend to see religion, as inseparable from and determined by the social context, resort to what is called 'methodological atheism'. This means that when explaining religion they reject divine or supernatural explanations for the status or origins of religions, because they are not testable. <ref>Kunin, page 74</ref>

The anthropologist [[E. E. Evans-Pritchard]] preferred detailed ethnographical study of a tribe and their religion to form a theory about the tribe's religion over untestable speculation over the origins of religions by e.g. [[Max Müller|Müller]], [[Edward Burnett Tylor|Tylor]], and [[Émile Durkheim|Durkheim]], and what he termed 'armchair anthropologist'.<ref> Evans-Pritchard, page 101</ref><ref> Evans-Pritchard, page 108</ref>

The anthropologist [[E. E. Evans-Pritchard]] preferred detailed ethnographical study of a tribe and their religion to form a theory about the tribe's religion over untestable speculation over the origins of religions by e.g. [[Max Müller|Müller]], [[Edward Burnett Tylor|Tylor]], and [[Émile Durkheim|Durkheim]], and what he termed 'armchair anthropologist'.<ref> Evans-Pritchard, page 101</ref><ref> Evans-Pritchard, page 108</ref>

==Karl Marx==

==Karl Marx==

{{main|Sociology_of_religion#Karl_Marx|Marx's theory of alienation|Opium of the People}}

{{main|Sociology_of_religion#Karl_Marx|Marx's theory of alienation|Opium of the People}}

[[Karl Marx]] (1818 – 1883) held a strictly materialist world view and saw economics, including [[class]] distinctions (including [[class struggle]]), as the determining factor of society. According to Marx, the human mind and human consciousness as part of matter. <ref>Kunin, page ?</ref>The dynamics of society was fueled by economics, according to [[Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel|Hegelian]] concept of [[Dialectics|theses, antitheses, and synthese]]<ref>Kunin, pp 6-7</ref> [[False consciousness]] is a term used by Marx' collaborator [[Friedrich Engels]]  (1820 – 1895), not by Marx.<ref>Kunin</ref>He saw religion originating from [[Marx%27s_theory_of_alienation|alienation]] and aiding the persistence of alienation. <ref>Kunin, page ?</ref>He saw religion as supportive as the status quo, in correspondence with his famous saying that [[Opium of the People|religion is opium of the people]]. This view is however contradicted by the existence of certain religious groups, like the [[liberation theology]].<ref>Kunin, page ?</ref>

[[Karl Marx]] (1818 – 1883) held a strictly materialist world view and saw economics, including [[class]] distinctions (including [[class struggle]]), as the determining factor of society. According to Marx, the human mind and human consciousness as part of matter. <ref>Kunin, page ?</ref>The dynamics of society was fuelled by economics, according to [[Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel|Hegelian]] concept of [[Dialectics|theses, antitheses, and syntheses]]<ref>Kunin, pp 6-7</ref> [[False consciousness]] is a term used by Marx' collaborator [[Friedrich Engels]]  (1820 – 1895), not by Marx.<ref>Kunin</ref>He saw religion originating from [[Marx%27s_theory_of_alienation|alienation]] and aiding the persistence of alienation. <ref>Kunin, page ?</ref>He saw religion as supportive as the status quo, in correspondence with his famous saying that [[Opium of the People|religion is opium of the people]]. This view is however contradicted by the existence of certain religious groups, like the [[liberation theology]].<ref>Kunin, page ?</ref>

<ref>Kunin, page ?</ref>Religion can be a source of happiness, though illusory and temporary, or at least a source of comfort.<ref>Kunin, page ?</ref> Religion is not a necessary part of human culture.<ref>Kunin, page ?</ref>

<ref>Kunin, page ?</ref>Religion can be a source of happiness, though illusory and temporary, or at least a source of comfort.<ref>Kunin, page ?</ref> Religion is not a necessary part of human culture.<ref>Kunin, page ?</ref>

<!--WHAT IS FALSE CONSCIOUSNESS AND HOW IS IT RELATED TO RELIGION? (Pals, page ) --><!--WHAT IS ALIENATION IN RELIGION (Pals, page 140) -->

<!--WHAT IS FALSE CONSCIOUSNESS AND HOW IS IT RELATED TO RELIGION? (Pals, page ) --><!--WHAT IS ALIENATION IN RELIGION (Pals, page 140) -->

Weber acknowledged that religion had a strong social component, but diverged from Durkheim by arguing, for example in his book  [[The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism]] that religion can be a force of change in society. In the book Weber wrote that modern [[capitalism]] spread quickly partially due to the protestant wordly ascetic morale. <ref>(Kunin)</ref><ref>{{cite web |url=http://hirr.hartsem.edu/ency/Theory.htm |title=Theory |accessdate=2008-03-14 |author=Nielsen, Donald A. |date=1998  |work=Encyclopedia of Religion and Society edited by William H. Swatos, Jr.|publisher=Altamira}}</ref> Weber's main focus was not on developing a theory of religion but on the interaction between society and religion, while introducing concepts that are still widely used in the [[sociology of religion]]. These concept include

Weber acknowledged that religion had a strong social component, but diverged from Durkheim by arguing, for example in his book  [[The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism]] that religion can be a force of change in society. In the book Weber wrote that modern [[capitalism]] spread quickly partially due to the protestant wordly ascetic morale. <ref>(Kunin)</ref><ref>{{cite web |url=http://hirr.hartsem.edu/ency/Theory.htm |title=Theory |accessdate=2008-03-14 |author=Nielsen, Donald A. |date=1998  |work=Encyclopedia of Religion and Society edited by William H. Swatos, Jr.|publisher=Altamira}}</ref> Weber's main focus was not on developing a theory of religion but on the interaction between society and religion, while introducing concepts that are still widely used in the [[sociology of religion]]. These concept include

*[[Church sect typology]], <ref>http://hirr.hartsem.edu/ency/cstheory.htm</ref> Weber distinguished between [[sect]]s and churches by stating that membership of the former is a choice while the latter is determined by birth. The typology later developed more extensively by his friend [[Ernst Troeltsch]] and others. <ref name="Bendix49-50">{{cite book |last=Bendix |title=Max Weber |url=http://books.google.com/books?vid=ISBN0520031946&id=63sC9uaYqQsC&pg=PA49&lpg=PA49&sig=5_6_YcPUQvbgsE5Qo2--jiKG13s  

*[[Church sect typology]], <ref>http://hirr.hartsem.edu/ency/cstheory.htm</ref> Weber distinguished between [[sect]]s and churches by stating that membership of the former is a choice while the latter is determined by birth. The typology later developed more extensively by his friend [[Ernst Troeltsch]] and others. <ref name="Bendix49-50">{{cite book |last=Bendix |title=Max Weber |url=http://books.google.com/books?vid=ISBN0520031946&id=63sC9uaYqQsC&pg=PA49&lpg=PA49&sig=5_6_YcPUQvbgsE5Qo2--jiKG13s  

|pages=pp. 49-50}}</ref>According to the typlogy, churches, [[Ecclesia (sociology of religion)|ecclesia]], [[denomination]], and [[sect]]s form a continuum with decreasing influence on society. Sects are protest break away groups and tend to be in tension with society.  

|pages=pp. 49-50}}</ref>According to the typology, churches, [[Ecclesia (sociology of religion)|ecclesia]], [[denomination]], and [[sect]]s form a continuum with decreasing influence on society. Sects are protest break away groups and tend to be in tension with society.  

*[[Ideal type]], a hypothetical "pure" or "clear" form, used in [[typology|typologie]]s

*[[Ideal type]], a hypothetical "pure" or "clear" form, used in [[typology|typologie]]s

*[[Charismatic authority]] Weber saw charisma as a volatile form or authority that depends on the acceptance of unique quality of a person by this person's followers. Charisma can be a revolutionary force and the authority can either be [[Charismatic_authority#Routinizing_charisma|routinized]] (change into [[Tripartite classification of authority|other forms of authority]]) or disappear upon the death of the charismatic person.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://hirr.hartsem.edu/ency/Theory.htm |title=Theory |accessdate=2008-03-14 |author=Nielsen, Donald A. |date=1998  |work=Encyclopedia of Religion and Society edited by William H. Swatos, Jr.|publisher=Altamira}}</ref>

*[[Charismatic authority]] Weber saw charisma as a volatile form or authority that depends on the acceptance of unique quality of a person by this person's followers. Charisma can be a revolutionary force and the authority can either be [[Charismatic_authority#Routinizing_charisma|routinized]] (change into [[Tripartite classification of authority|other forms of authority]]) or disappear upon the death of the charismatic person.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://hirr.hartsem.edu/ency/Theory.htm |title=Theory |accessdate=2008-03-14 |author=Nielsen, Donald A. |date=1998  |work=Encyclopedia of Religion and Society edited by William H. Swatos, Jr.|publisher=Altamira}}</ref>

{{main|Psychology_of_religion#Sigmund_Freud|Future of an Illusion|Totem and Taboo|Moses_and_Monotheism|Oedipus complex}}

{{main|Psychology_of_religion#Sigmund_Freud|Future of an Illusion|Totem and Taboo|Moses_and_Monotheism|Oedipus complex}}

[[Sigmund Freud]] (1856 – 1939) saw religion as an illusion. With illusion Freud means a belief that people want very much to be true. Unlike Tylor and Frazer, Freud attempted to explain why religion persists in spite of the lack of evidence for its tenets. Freud asserted that religion is a largely unconscious neurotical response to [[Psychological_repression|repression]]. With repression Freud meant that civilized society demands that we cannot fulfill all our desires immediately, but that they have to be repressed. Rational arguments to a person holding a religious conviction will not change the neurotic response of a person, in contrast to Tylor and Frazer who saw religion as rational conscious, but  primitive and mistaken attempt to explain the natural world.

[[Sigmund Freud]] (1856 – 1939) saw religion as an illusion. With illusion Freud means a belief that people want very much to be true. Unlike Tylor and Frazer, Freud attempted to explain why religion persists in spite of the lack of evidence for its tenets. Freud asserted that religion is a largely unconscious neurotical response to [[Psychological_repression|repression]]. With repression Freud meant that civilized society demands that we cannot fulfil all our desires immediately, but that they have to be repressed. Rational arguments to a person holding a religious conviction will not change the neurotic response of a person, in contrast to Tylor and Frazer who saw religion as rational conscious, but  primitive and mistaken attempt to explain the natural world.

{{main|Psychology_of_religion#Rudolf_Otto|Religious_experience#The_numinous|Numinous}}

{{main|Psychology_of_religion#Rudolf_Otto|Religious_experience#The_numinous|Numinous}}

The theologian [[Rudolf Otto]] (1869–1937) focused on [[religious experience]], more specifically moments that he called [[numinous]] which means "Wholly Other". He described it as ''mysterium tremendum'' (terrifying mystery) and ''mysterium fascinans'' (awe inspiring, fascinating mystery). He saw religion as emerging from these expierences.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://hirr.hartsem.edu/ency/Theory.htm |title=Theory |accessdate=2008-03-14 |author=Nielsen, Donald A. |date=1998  |work=Encyclopedia of Religion and Society edited by William H. Swatos, Jr.|publisher=Altamira}}</ref>

The theologian [[Rudolf Otto]] (1869–1937) focused on [[religious experience]], more specifically moments that he called [[numinous]] which means "Wholly Other". He described it as ''mysterium tremendum'' (terrifying mystery) and ''mysterium fascinans'' (awe inspiring, fascinating mystery). He saw religion as emerging from these experiences.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://hirr.hartsem.edu/ency/Theory.htm |title=Theory |accessdate=2008-03-14 |author=Nielsen, Donald A. |date=1998  |work=Encyclopedia of Religion and Society edited by William H. Swatos, Jr.|publisher=Altamira}}</ref>

He asserted that these experiences arise from a special, non-rational faculty of the human mind, largely unrelated to other faculties, so religion cannot be [[reductionism|reduced]] to culture or society <ref>Kunin</ref> Some of his views, among others that the experience of the [[numinous]] was caused by a [[transcendental]] reality, are untestable and hence unscientific.<ref>Kunin, page 66</ref>

He asserted that these experiences arise from a special, non-rational faculty of the human mind, largely unrelated to other faculties, so religion cannot be [[reductionism|reduced]] to culture or society <ref>Kunin</ref> Some of his views, among others that the experience of the [[numinous]] was caused by a [[transcendental]] reality, are untestable and hence unscientific.<ref>Kunin, page 66</ref>

He argued that the religion of the Azande ([[witchcraft]] and [[oracle]]s) can not be understood without the social context and its social function. Witchcraft and oracles played a great role in solving disputes among the Azande. In this respect he agreed with Durkheim, though he acknowledged that Frazer and Tylor were right that their religion also had an intellectual explanatory aspect. The Azande's faith in witchcraft and oracles was quite logical and consistent once some fundamental tenets were accepted. Loss of faith in the fundamental tenets could not be endured because of its social importance and hence they had an elaborate system of explanations (or excuses) against disproving evidence. Besides an alternative system of terms or school of thought did not exist.<ref>Pals, page 208</ref>

He argued that the religion of the Azande ([[witchcraft]] and [[oracle]]s) can not be understood without the social context and its social function. Witchcraft and oracles played a great role in solving disputes among the Azande. In this respect he agreed with Durkheim, though he acknowledged that Frazer and Tylor were right that their religion also had an intellectual explanatory aspect. The Azande's faith in witchcraft and oracles was quite logical and consistent once some fundamental tenets were accepted. Loss of faith in the fundamental tenets could not be endured because of its social importance and hence they had an elaborate system of explanations (or excuses) against disproving evidence. Besides an alternative system of terms or school of thought did not exist.<ref>Pals, page 208</ref>

He was heavily critical about earlier theorists of [[primitive religion]] with the exception of [[Lucien Lévy-Bruhl]], asserting that they made statements about primitive people without having enough inside knowledge to make more than a guess. In spite of his praise of Bruhl's works, Evans-Pritchard disagreed with Bruhl's statement that a member of a "primitive" tribe saying "I am the moon" is prelogical, but that this statement makes perfect sense within their culture if understood metaphorically.<ref>Kunin, page 122</ref><ref>Pals, ch. "Evans-Pritchard"</ref>

He was heavily critical about earlier theorists of [[primitive religion]] with the exception of [[Lucien Lévy-Bruhl]], asserting that they made statements about primitive people without having enough inside knowledge to make more than a guess. In spite of his praise of Bruhl's works, Evans-Pritchard disagreed with Bruhl's statement that a member of a "primitive" tribe saying "I am the moon" is pre-logical, but that this statement makes perfect sense within their culture if understood metaphorically.<ref>Kunin, page 122</ref><ref>Pals, ch. "Evans-Pritchard"</ref>

Apart from the Azande, Evans-Pritchard, also studied the neighbouring, but very different [[Nuer]] people.The Nuer had had an abstract monotheistic faith, somewhat similar to [[Christianity]] and [[Judaism]], though it included lesser spirits. They had also [[totemism]], but this was a minor aspect of their religion and hence a corrective to Durkheim's generalizations should be made.  Evans-Pritchard did not propose a theory of religion''s'', but only a theory of the Nuer religion.

Apart from the Azande, Evans-Pritchard, also studied the neighbouring, but very different [[Nuer]] people.The Nuer had had an abstract monotheistic faith, somewhat similar to [[Christianity]] and [[Judaism]], though it included lesser spirits. They had also [[totemism]], but this was a minor aspect of their religion and hence a corrective to Durkheim's generalizations should be made.  Evans-Pritchard did not propose a theory of religion''s'', but only a theory of the Nuer religion.

{{Main|Clifford_Geertz#Thought_and_works|Thick description}}

{{Main|Clifford_Geertz#Thought_and_works|Thick description}}

The [[anthropology|anthropologist]] [[Clifford Geertz]] (1926 – 2006) made several detailed [[ethnography|ethnographic]] studies, but in [[Java]]nese town, a more complex and multi-religious society than Evans-Pritchard had studied. He avoided the subjective and vague concept of [[group attitude]] as used by [[Ruth Benedict]] by using the analysis of society as proposed by [[Talcott Parsons]] who in turn had adapted it from [[Max Weber]].<ref>Pals, page 239</ref>Parsons' adaptation Weber's consisted of distinguished all human groups on three levels i.e. ''1.'' an individual level that is controlled by ''2.'' a [[social system]] that is in turn controlled by ''3.'' a [[cultural system]]. <ref>Pals, page 239</ref>Geertz followed Weber when he wrote that man is an animal suspended in webs of significance he himself has spun and the analysis of it to be therefore not an experimental science in search of law but an interpretive one in search of meaning.  <ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.nytimes.com/2006/11/01/obituaries/01geertz.html?_r=1&oref=slogin |title=Clifford Geertz, Cultural Anthropologist, Is Dead at 80 |accessdate=2008-03-14 |author=Andrew L. Yarrow |date=November 1, 2006 |work= |publisher=New York Times}}</ref> Mere explanations to describe religions and cultures are not sufficient. Interpretations are needed too. <ref>(Pals)</ref>He advocated what he called ''[[thick description]]s'' to interpret symbols by observing them in use. Therefore the anthropologist must be both empirically rigorous and a savvy interpreter, akin to a psychoanalyst. In 1972 he wrote that “cultural analysis is (or should be) guessing at meanings, assessing the guesses and drawing explanatory conclusions from the better guesses.”

The [[anthropology|anthropologist]] [[Clifford Geertz]] (1926 – 2006) made several detailed [[ethnography|ethnographic]] studies, but in a [[Java|Javanese]] town, a more complex and multi-religious society than Evans-Pritchard had studied. He avoided the subjective and vague concept of [[group attitude]] as used by [[Ruth Benedict]] by using the analysis of society as proposed by [[Talcott Parsons]] who in turn had adapted it from [[Max Weber]].<ref>Pals, page 239</ref>Parsons' adaptation Weber's consisted of distinguished all human groups on three levels i.e. ''1.'' an individual level that is controlled by ''2.'' a [[social system]] that is in turn controlled by ''3.'' a [[cultural system]]. <ref>Pals, page 239</ref>Geertz followed Weber when he wrote that man is an animal suspended in webs of significance he himself has spun and the analysis of it to be therefore not an experimental science in search of law but an interpretive one in search of meaning.  <ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.nytimes.com/2006/11/01/obituaries/01geertz.html?_r=1&oref=slogin |title=Clifford Geertz, Cultural Anthropologist, Is Dead at 80 |accessdate=2008-03-14 |author=Andrew L. Yarrow |date=November 1, 2006 |work= |publisher=New York Times}}</ref> Mere explanations to describe religions and cultures are not sufficient. Interpretations are needed too. <ref>(Pals)</ref>He advocated what he called ''[[thick description]]s'' to interpret symbols by observing them in use. Therefore the anthropologist must be both empirically rigorous and a savvy interpreter, akin to a psychoanalyst. In 1972 he wrote that “cultural analysis is (or should be) guessing at meanings, assessing the guesses and drawing explanatory conclusions from the better guesses.”

<ref>[http://www.nytimes.com/2006/11/01/obituaries/01geertz.html?_r=1&oref=slogin Clifford Geertz, Cultural Anthropologist, Is Dead at 80] by Andrew L. Yarrow published on November 1, 2006 in the [[New York Times]]</ref>

<ref>[http://www.nytimes.com/2006/11/01/obituaries/01geertz.html?_r=1&oref=slogin Clifford Geertz, Cultural Anthropologist, Is Dead at 80] by Andrew L. Yarrow published on November 1, 2006 in the [[New York Times]]</ref>

==References==

==References==

*[[Reinhard Bendix|Bendix Reinhard]], ''Max Weber: An Intellectual Portrait'', 1977 (originally published in 1960), University of California Press, ISBN 0520031946 [http://books.google.com/books?vid=ISBN0520031946&id=63sC9uaYqQsC&pg=PA49&lpg=PA49&sig=5_6_YcPUQvbgsE5Qo2--jiKG13s google books]

*[[Reinhard Bendix|Bendix Reinhard]], ''Max Weber: An Intellectual Portrait'', 1977 (originally published in 1960), University of California Press, ISBN 0520031946 [http://books.google.com/books?vid=ISBN0520031946&id=63sC9uaYqQsC&pg=PA49&lpg=PA49&sig=5_6_YcPUQvbgsE5Qo2--jiKG13s Google books]

*[[John R. Hinnells|Hinnells, John R. (editor)]], ''The Routledge Companion to the Study of Religion'' (Routledge 2005) [http://books.google.nl/books?id=p4Exlk7gPrIC&pg=PA135&lpg=PA135&dq=stark+bainbridge+towards+a+theory+of+religion&source=web&ots=BnHm7Suifa&sig=VGeYh243V5eu_XmE2uNbHGAEIRE&hl=en#PPP1,M1 google books]

*[[John R. Hinnells|Hinnells, John R. (editor)]], ''The Routledge Companion to the Study of Religion'' (Routledge 2005) [http://books.google.nl/books?id=p4Exlk7gPrIC&pg=PA135&lpg=PA135&dq=stark+bainbridge+towards+a+theory+of+religion&source=web&ots=BnHm7Suifa&sig=VGeYh243V5eu_XmE2uNbHGAEIRE&hl=en#PPP1,M1 Google books]

*Nauta, André (1998). [http://hirr.hartsem.edu/ency/StarkR.htm Stark, Rodney] in  the ''Encyclopedia of Religion and Society'' edited by William H. Swatos, Jr.. Altamira.

*Nauta, André (1998). [http://hirr.hartsem.edu/ency/StarkR.htm Stark, Rodney] in  the ''Encyclopedia of Religion and Society'' edited by William H. Swatos, Jr.. Altamira.

*Nielsen, Donald A. [http://hirr.hartsem.edu/ency/Theory.htm Theory] in  the ''Encyclopedia of Religion and Society'' edited by William H. Swatos, Jr.. Altamira.

*Nielsen, Donald A. [http://hirr.hartsem.edu/ency/Theory.htm Theory] in  the ''Encyclopedia of Religion and Society'' edited by William H. Swatos, Jr.. Altamira.

*Kunin, Seth D. "Religion; the modern theories" University of Edinburgh 2003 ISBN 0748615229 [http://books.google.nl/books?hl=en&id=P2ZgBL37gb0C&dq=kunin+theories&printsec=frontcover&source=web&ots=eNa2DEJD2m&sig=qILnGZMaJUghzUZz6rHT4bQbjPg#PPA20,M1 google books]

*Kunin, Seth D. "Religion; the modern theories" University of Edinburgh 2003 ISBN 0748615229 [http://books.google.nl/books?hl=en&id=P2ZgBL37gb0C&dq=kunin+theories&printsec=frontcover&source=web&ots=eNa2DEJD2m&sig=qILnGZMaJUghzUZz6rHT4bQbjPg#PPA20,M1 Google books]

*Pals, Daniel L. 1996. Seven Theories of Religion. USA: Oxford University Press. ISBN 0-19-508725-9 [http://atheism.about.com/library/books/full/aafprSevenTheory.htm book review]

*Pals, Daniel L. 1996. Seven Theories of Religion. USA: Oxford University Press. ISBN 0-19-508725-9 [http://atheism.about.com/library/books/full/aafprSevenTheory.htm book review]

*[[Robert A. Segal|Segal, Robert A.]] ''Theories of Religion'', in [[John R. Hinnells|Hinnells, John R. (editor)]], ''The Routledge Companion to the Study of Religion'' (Routledge 2005) [http://books.google.nl/books?id=p4Exlk7gPrIC&pg=PA135&lpg=PA135&dq=stark+bainbridge+towards+a+theory+of+religion&source=web&ots=BnHm7Suifa&sig=VGeYh243V5eu_XmE2uNbHGAEIRE&hl=en#PPP1,M1 google books]

*[[Robert A. Segal|Segal, Robert A.]] ''Theories of Religion'', in [[John R. Hinnells|Hinnells, John R. (editor)]], ''The Routledge Companion to the Study of Religion'' (Routledge 2005) [http://books.google.nl/books?id=p4Exlk7gPrIC&pg=PA135&lpg=PA135&dq=stark+bainbridge+towards+a+theory+of+religion&source=web&ots=BnHm7Suifa&sig=VGeYh243V5eu_XmE2uNbHGAEIRE&hl=en#PPP1,M1 Google books]

*[[Rodney Stark|Stark, Rodney]] & [[William Sims Bainbridge]] "Theory of Religion". Rutgers University Press 1996, (originally published in 1987) ISBN 0813523303 [http://books.google.nl/books?id=9kA0LW4PA6cC&printsec=frontcover&dq=theory+of+Religion&hl=en&sig=MPZSubsGuUIDVYdeGNYveiVyq-M google books] [http://www.questia.com/library/book/a-theory-of-religion-by-william-sims-bainbridge-rodney-stark.jsp Questia selected preview]

*[[Rodney Stark|Stark, Rodney]] & [[William Sims Bainbridge]] "Theory of Religion". Rutgers University Press 1996, (originally published in 1987) ISBN 0813523303 [http://books.google.nl/books?id=9kA0LW4PA6cC&printsec=frontcover&dq=theory+of+Religion&hl=en&sig=MPZSubsGuUIDVYdeGNYveiVyq-M Google books] [http://www.questia.com/library/book/a-theory-of-religion-by-william-sims-bainbridge-rodney-stark.jsp Questia selected preview]

*Swatos, William H. Jr. Editor Encyclopedia of Religion and Society  by Altamira press 1998 [http://hirr.hartsem.edu/ency/coverpage.htm web version]

*Swatos, William H. Jr. Editor Encyclopedia of Religion and Society  by Altamira press 1998 [http://hirr.hartsem.edu/ency/coverpage.htm web version]

*Yarrow, Andrew L. (November 1, 2006). Clifford Geertz, Cultural Anthropologist, Is Dead at 80. New York Times. [http://www.nytimes.com/2006/11/01/obituaries/01geertz.html?_r=1&oref=slogin online version]

*Yarrow, Andrew L. (November 1, 2006). Clifford Geertz, Cultural Anthropologist, Is Dead at 80. New York Times. [http://www.nytimes.com/2006/11/01/obituaries/01geertz.html?_r=1&oref=slogin online version]