What is Nonreligion? On the Virtues of a Meaning Systems Framework for Studying Nonreligious and Religious Worldviews in the Context of Everyday Life

Abstract

Discussions of nonreligion or secularity face a central challenge that has long plagued scholars of religion – that of specifying an object of study. Although several suggestions have been made, I think we can most effectively capture the range of things we want to study by (1) adopting worldviews, defined in terms of “big questions,” as an overarching rubric that encompasses both religious and nonreligious outlooks and (2) nuancing our understanding of worldviews in light of the meaning systems (MS) framework, already in use in psychology. Doing so relieves scholars of the obligation of defining religion and nonreligion and allows us to focus on how individuals and groups characterize themselves. It provides a neutral starting point for analyzing worldviews that is not biased toward religion, and, in so far as a case can be made that all humans must address these questions at least implicitly, it offers a basis for comparison across cultures. The so-called “existentially indifferent” provide a challenge in this regard and allow us to consider the value of an evolutionary perspective on meaning making.

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 — 33 citations exist upstream.

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