The Scientific Study of Religion? You Must Be Joking!*

Abstract

This chapter examines some ways the study of new religions can result in the researcher's "making a difference" for both methodological and ethical or political reasons. It is concerned with "the cult scene," secondary constructions, including those of the sociologist, make a difference and must be considered as part of the primary construction of that social reality. The chapter summarizes some basic differences between six ideal types of secondary constructors: sociologists and others involved in the scientific study of religion, members of the new religions themselves, the anticult movement, the media, the legal profession, and therapists. It explores an exercise in the sociology of knowledge, examining how the socio-logic of group aims and interests can give rise to systematic differences between the various secondary constructions. New religious movements have an interest in gaining new members and, perhaps, political and financial or legal advantage by presenting a secondary construction of their own primary reality in the public domain.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 46 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.