诸神之争的再阐释:一个社会学的结构视角

Re-Examining "The Conflict of Gods":A Sociological Structural Perspective

世俗化及逆世俗化范式的对立其实蕴含着更大的连续性,即如何理解宗教多元主义背后的诸神之争,总的来说,韦伯之后那些解释宗教变迁的理论范式均未突破韦伯对宗教的比较研究范畴,难以在当前复杂而多元的文化环境下为个人提供总体指导,但是二者共同揭露了诸神之争条件下西方宗教工具理性和价值理性交互作用所促成的理性化的动力机制,即西方宗教维护自身价值理性的方式从中世纪教会主导的政治性垄断过渡到现代性条件下宗教多元主义的市场化竞争。

The secularization paradigm and religious marketplace theory are two competing theoretical explanations for religious changes. However, despite of their differences, the two theories are intrinsically connected, This connection can be best understood through the examination of ＂the Conflict of Gods＂, This paper first offers a review of the secularization discussion in the West, followed by a discussion of the politic-economical conditions under which the religious changes had occurred. The theoretical analysis of the relationship between religion and social structure presented by both theories demonstrates the importance of the politic-economical structure. Its change is the key to understand the relationship between value rationality and instrumental rationality in religion as well as the mechanism that drives the rationalization of religion in the West. The western religions preserve their value rationality by moving away from the parish dominated political monopoly of the Middle Ages to the religious pluralism of market competition in modern society. This study shows that both secularization paradigm and religious marketplace theory overlook the complex structural differences of value rationality among world religions as discussed by Max Weber in his comparative study of religions. Nevertheless, such an understanding is imperatively important in religious study in today＇s multifaceted religious world. It also should be noted that the division between religious and secular people and their respective behaviors reflects a structural distinction between elites and masses. Although the marketization of religion has helped in popularizing religion, it does not ease the intensity of the debates on value rationality of religious pluralism, nor it prevents the development of secular humanism, and at the end it is also unable to provide individuals with an overall guidance in today＇s complicated multi-cultural environment.