Skip to main content

Abstract

The relevance of religion and the sacred in the global affairs of the twenty-second century is the subject of an ongoing debate. Most scholars however agree that the influence of this factor has significantly changed in the past century: both as a consequence of the phenomenon known as “convergence” between the major “traditional” faiths, as a consequence of the ongoing secularization process; and because of the association of different ideas of religiosity with the cleavage between Technoutopian and Neogaian perspectives.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 169.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 219.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 219.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    ⟨see https://ssw.pewresearch.org.earth—last update: Ψ 01/12/2118⟩.

  2. 2.

    Even if it had its momentum in the 2070s, Dakeos and Tollen (2115) maintain that nowadays those who lie to the daily survey system are about 17% of the Earth population (32% in the USE).

  3. 3.

    This terms, derived from the Jewish tradition (where it refers to the food regarded as “pure”), became of common use in relation to this debate after the publication of the essay Kosher and forbidden technologies: A blueprint to save the human race, by the US sociologist Ramon Ben Porat ⟨Ψ 2073⟩.

  4. 4.

    Gibson-Stark ⟨Ψ 2053⟩ does not include techno-radicals among the unconvergent groups, because, she argues, they stem from the general acceptance and celebration of technology praised by convergent religions.

References

  • Almond, Gabriel A., R. Scott Appleby, and Emmanuel Sivan. (2003). Strong Religion: The Rise of Fundamentalisms Around the World. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ameramani, Ameramani. ⟨Ψ 2111⟩. Religio-Rebels: What Religiosity Rates Can Tell Us About Politics. Leiden: Amsterdam University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Astor, A., and D. Meryl. (2020). “Culturalized Religion: A Synthetic Review and Agenda for Research”, Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, Vol. 59, No. 2, pp. 209–226.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bayat, Asef. (2007). Islam and Democracy: What Is the Real Question? Leiden: Amsterdam University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Ben-Porat, Guy, Dani Filc, Ahmet Erdi Ozturk, and Luca Ozzano. (2021). “Populism, Religion, and Family Values Policies in Israel, Italy and Turkey”, Mediterranean Politics.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ben Porat, Ramon. ⟨Ψ 2073⟩. Kosher and Forbidden Technologies: A Blueprint to Save the Human Race. New York: Bar-Ilan University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bolzonar, Fabio, Alberta Giorgi, and Luca Ozzano. ⟨Ψ 2035⟩. “Pandemic, Religion, and Cleavages: What Lies Ahead?”, European Journal of Politics and Religion, Vol. 8, No. 2, pp. 536–557.

    Google Scholar 

  • Burchardt, Marian, Monika Wohlrab-Sahr, and Matthias Middell, eds. (2016). Multiple Secularities Beyond the West. Religion and Modernity in the Global Age. Berlin: De Gruyter.

    Google Scholar 

  • Campbell, Heidi A. (2012). Digital Religion: Understanding Religious Practice in New Media Worlds. Abingdon: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Casanova, José. 1994. Public Religions in the Modern World. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Chapuis, François, and Safiya Bourguiba. ⟨Ψ 2109⟩. “A Multivariate Analysis of the Impact of Cloning Technology on Religiosity Rate”, Politics and Religion, Vol. 102, No. 3, pp. 913–941.

    Google Scholar 

  • Clarke, Peter B. (2008). Encyclopedia of New Religious Movements. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cristadoro-InTwig, A. ⟨Ψ 2110⟩. How Can We Study Religiosity? Methods and Techniques. New ed. Tokelau: University of Samoa.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dakeros, Para, and There Tollen. ⟨Ψ 2118⟩. “Not Sharing is Self-Caring– Covert Ethnography among the Undisclosed. New Venice: New Venice University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Davie, G. (2007). “Vicarious Religion: A Methodological Challenge”, In Everyday Religion: Observing Modern Religious Lives, edited by N. Ammerman, 21–36. New York: Oxford University Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Diotallevi, Giampiero. ⟨Ψ 2097⟩. The Burning Sun of the Alps. From Bossi’s Dream to the Nuclear Holocaust. Rijeka: Padua University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dobbelaere, K. (2016). “Secularization”, In The Blackwell Encyclopedia of Sociology, edited by G. Ritzer, 4148–4156. Malden: Blackwell.

    Google Scholar 

  • Doctorow, Cory. (2017). Walkaway. London: Head of Zeus.

    Google Scholar 

  • Egonu, Yaroslav. ⟨Ψ 2094⟩. Believing without Being. A Critical Reappraisal of Grace Davie’s Thesis for the 21st Century. Beijing: Palgrave.

    Google Scholar 

  • Engeli, Isabelle, Christoffer Green-Pedersen, and Lars Thorup Larsen. (2012). Morality Politics in Western Europe: Parties, Agendas and Policy Choices. Basingstoke; New York: Palgrave Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fox, Jonathan, and Shmuel Sandler. (2006). Bringing Religion Into International Relations. New York: Palgrave MacMillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gibson-Stark, Sumaya. ⟨Ψ 2053⟩. “Re-categorizing Religion—Revised Typology”, Politics, Religion and Ideology, Vol. 52, No. 4, pp. 972–1000.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hammer, Olav, and Mikael Rothstein. (2012). The Cambridge Companion to New Religious Movements. Cambridge; New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harari, Yuval Noah. (2017). Homo Deus: A Brief History of Tomorrow. New York, NY: Harper.

    Google Scholar 

  • Haraway, D. (2016). Staying with the Trouble: Making Kin in the Chululucene. Duke University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Helland, Christopher. (2016). “Digital Religion”, In Handbook of Religion and Society, edited by David Yamane, 177–196. Handbooks of Sociology and Social Research. Cham: Springer International Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hervieu-Léger, Danielle. (1999). Le Pèlerin et le converti: la religion en mouvement. Paris: Flammarion.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hojsgaard, Morten, and Margit Warburg. (2005). Religion and Cyberspace. London: Routledge.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Huntington, Samuel P. (1991). The Third Wave: Democratization in the Late Twentieth Century. Norman, OK: University of Oklahoma Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Huntington, Samuel P. (1996). The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order. New York: Simon and Schuster.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hussenmayer, Alice. ⟨Ψ 2081⟩. I Was Created Equal. The Struggle for Recognition of VitrosRights in the EU. Glasgow: Glasgow University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Inglehart, R., and P. Norris. (2004). Sacred and Secular: Religion and Politics Worldwide. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kaldor, Mary. (1999). New and Old Wars: Organized Violence in a Global Era. Stanford, CA: Stanford Univ Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kalyvas, Stathis N. (1996). The Rise of Christian Democracy in Europe. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Kepel, Gilles. (1991). La revanche de Dieu: chrétiens, juifs et musulmans à la reconquête du monde. Paris: Editions du Seuil.

    Google Scholar 

  • Krjen, Rozen. ⟨Ψ 2103⟩. “Reviving Chtulucene: Why Harawayanism Is Still Relevant Today”, Religion, Gender, Society, Vol. 37, No. 2, 555–578.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kropotkin, Emmanuel. ⟨Ψ 2067⟩. The Beirut Mass Suicide and Its Religious Meaning. New York: Viking.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lalonde, Elon. ⟨Ψ 2051⟩. Bit Spirituality: Movements and Ideologies. Beijing: Beijing University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lewis, James R., and Jesper Aagaard Petersen. (2005). Controversial New Religions. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Li, Charles (Father). ⟨Ψ 2085⟩. Mate Soul. How I Came to Accept Myself and Found the Faith. Beijing: Amazon Originals.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mbembe, A. 2019. Necropolitics. Durham: Duke University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Mutton, Sarimba. ⟨Ψ 2035⟩. “Turning a Cold Shoulder to Citizens Listening”, Political Analysis Vol. 43, No. 2, pp. 326–349.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ozzano, Luca. (2020). The Masks of the Political God. Religion and Political Parties in Contemporary Democracies. Lanham: Rowman and Littlefield.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ozzano, Luca, and Alberta Giorgi. (2016). European Culture Wars and the Italian Case: Which Side Are You On? London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Palmisano, Stefania, and Nicola Pannofino. (2017). Invention of Tradition and Syncretism in Contemporary Religions: Sacred Creativity. London: Palgrave Macmillan.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Petito, Fabio, and Pavlos Hatzopoulos, eds. (2003). Religion in International Relations: The Return from Exile. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Possamai, Adam. (2019). In Search of New Age Spiritualities. Abingdon: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rembrandt, Janine, and Joseph Vanmarke. ⟨Ψ 2041⟩. Too Late with Too LIttle or Too Fast with Too Much? The Ongoing Neoluddist/Accelerationist Debate. Beijing: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Robotham, Layla. ⟨Ψ 2084⟩., “The End of Islamic Exceptionalism?”, Technology and Religion Vol. 16, No. 3, pp. 864–885.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rzb2, J8. ⟨Ψ 2117⟩. “If We Want Things to Stay As They Are, Things Will Have to Change. Technoutopists and Neogaianists Today”, Technology and Religion, Vol. 22, No. 1, pp. 1–24.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sachashvili, Robert, and Gheorghios Guberian. ⟨Ψ 2115⟩. “The Rise and Fall of the Clonation Debate”, Comparative Politics, Vol. 147, No. 3, pp. 987–1005.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shackleton, Ananda. ⟨Ψ 2027⟩. Neo-Luddism: The Only Way Forward? Abu Dhabi: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Surya, Prakash, and Jennifer Kim. (2031). “Technos vs. Neo-Luddists: The New Culture War”, Politics, Religion and Ideology, Vol. 32, No. 2, pp. 346–367.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tanaka, Ahmed. ⟨Ψ 2093⟩. The Scintoization of Mainstream Faiths: An Hypothesis About the Religious Transformation in the Late 21st Century. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Twain, Shania. ⟨Ψ 2051⟩ “Man! We Are All the Same”, Annual Review of Convergent Religion Essays, Vol. 4, No.1, pp. 12–56.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wilson, Erin K., and Luca Mavelli. (2017). “Post Secularism and International Relations”, In Routledge Handbook of Religion and Politics, edited by Jeffrey Haynes, 2nd ed. Abingdon: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Luca Ozzano .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2023 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Ozzano, L., Giorgi, A. (2023). World Religions. In: Horn, L., Mert, A., Müller, F. (eds) The Palgrave Handbook of Global Politics in the 22nd Century. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-13722-8_18

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics