Advertisement

Deconversion and “Spirituality”—Migrations in the Religious Field

  • Heinz StreibEmail author
  • Ralph W. HoodJr.
  • Barbara Keller
Chapter

Abstract

The Bielefeld-based Cross-cultural Study on “Spirituality” has been inspired by the previous Bielefeld-based Cross-cultural Study on Deconversion . In this chapter we review this previous study and highlight the open questions and desiderata for the present study. Linking the two research perspectives implies the interesting question: Does “spirituality” and biographical development toward “spirituality” involve processes of deconversion ? Because both are changes in the religious field that are associated with the “spiritual” self-attribution, our model of the religious field may help to understand this link. Where is privatized, experience-oriented religion located in the religious field?

Keywords

Deconversion Semantics of spirituality Spirituality 

References

  1. Bourdieu, P. (1971a). Genesis and structure of the religious field. Comparative Social Research, 13(1991), 1–44.Google Scholar
  2. Bourdieu, P. (1971b). Une interprétation de la théorie de la religion selon Max Weber [An interpretation of the theory of religion according to Max Weber]. Archives Européennes de Sociologie, 12, 3–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Daiber, K.-F. (2002). Mysticism: Troeltsch’s third type of religious collectivities. Social Compass, 49, 329–341.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Hood, R. W., & Chen, Z. (2013). Conversion and deconversion. In S. Bullivant & M. Ruse (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of atheism (pp. 537–551). Oxford: Oxord University Press.Google Scholar
  5. Keller, B., Klein, C., Hood, R. W., & Streib, H. (2013). Deconversion and religious or spiritual transformation. In H. Westerink (Ed.), Constructs of meaning and religious transformation. Current issues in the psychology of religion (pp. 119–139). Göttingen: Vienna University Press; V&R unipress.Google Scholar
  6. Luckmann, T. (1967). The invisible religion. The problem of religion in modern society. New York: Macmillan.Google Scholar
  7. Paloutzian, R. F., Murken, S., Streib, H., & Namini, S. (2013). Conversion, deconversion, and transformation: A multilevel interdisciplinary view. In R. F. Paloutzian & C. L. Park (Eds.), Handbook of the psychology of religion and spirituality (2nd ed., pp. 399–421). New York: The Guilford Press.Google Scholar
  8. Schäfer, H., Seibert, L. H., Hahne, P., Tovar, A., & Stockmeier, A. (2008). Bourdieu’s categories for “field”-construction. CIRRuS Working Papers, No. 8, Bielefeld. online at: http://www.uni-bielefeld.de/theologie/CIRRuS-downloads/Schaefer-ea_2009_CIRRuS_field-categories.pdf
  9. Simmel, G. (Ed.). (1911). Verhandlungen des Ersten Deutschen Soziologentages vom 19–22. Oktober 1910 in Frankfurt a.M. Tübingen: Schriften der Deutschen Gesellschaft für Soziologie, I. Serie, Mohr (Paul Siebeck).Google Scholar
  10. Streib, H. (2014). Deconversion. In L. R. Rambo & C. E. Farhadian (Eds.), Oxford handbook on religious conversion (pp. 271–296). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  11. Streib, H., & Hood, R. W. (2013). Modeling the religious field: Religion, spirituality, mysticism and related world views. Implicit Religion, 16, 137–155.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Streib, H., Hood, R. W., Keller, B., Csöff, R.-M., & Silver, C. (2009). Deconversion. Qualitative and quantitative results from cross-cultural research in Germany and the United States of America. Research in Contemporary Religion; 5, Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht.Google Scholar
  13. Streib, H., & Keller, B. (2004). The variety of deconversion experiences: Contours of a concept in respect to empirical research. Archive for the Psychology of Religion/Archiv für Religionspsychologie, 26, 181–200.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Streib, H., & Klein, C. (2013). Atheists, agnostics, and apostates. In K. I. Pargament, J. J. Exline, & J. W. Jones (Eds.), APA handbooks in psychology: APA handbook of psychology, religion and spirituality (Vol. 1, pp. 713–728). Washington: APA.Google Scholar
  15. Troeltsch, E. (1911). Das stoisch-christliche Naturrecht und das moderne profane Naturrecht [The Stoic-Christian natural law and the modern profane natural law]. In Verhandlungen des Ersten Deutschen Soziologentages vom 19–22. Oktober 1910 in Frankfurt a.M. (pp. 166–214). Tübingen: Mohr (Paul Siebeck).Google Scholar
  16. Troeltsch, E. (1912). The social teaching of the Christian churches (Vol. 2). London; New York: George Allen & Unwin; MacMillan 1956.Google Scholar
  17. Weber, M. (1921). Religious groups (sociology of religion). In G. Roth & C. Wittich (Eds.), Max Weber economy and society (pp. 399–634). Berkeley; Los Angeles: University of California Press 1978.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  • Heinz Streib
    • 1
    Email author
  • Ralph W. HoodJr.
    • 2
  • Barbara Keller
    • 1
  1. 1.University of BielefeldBielefeldGermany
  2. 2.University of TennesseeChattanoogaUSA

Personalised recommendations