Bibliographic record
Abstract
Reviewed by: A Sociology of Spirituality Philip Sheldrake (bio) A Sociology of Spirituality. Edited by Kieran Flanagan and Peter C. Jupp. Aldershot/Burlington VT: Ashgate Publishing, 2007. 286 pp. $99.95 (hardback), $34.95 (paper). This collection of essays on spirituality from the perspective of the sociology of religion is at times fascinating and illuminating but in other ways somewhat frustrating. The book is part of a series published by Ashgate and sponsored by the British Sociological Association Sociology of Religion Study Group. What is particularly fascinating, and gratifying, is that this is the first substantial collection of scholarly work to explore the meaning and significance of "spirituality" in relation to the method and preoccupations of sociology. There are twelve essays plus a substantial Introduction by Kieran Flanagan and a briefer but interesting Conclusion by both editors. This represents a modest selection from thirty-four papers given at a 2004 international conference at the University of Bristol. Despite the British origins of the overall collection, the writers represent not only British but also Dutch, Italian, American and Canadian perspectives. Until relatively recently, sociologists have usually been suspicious of notions of "the spiritual" because of its theological resonances and their concern to protect a non-ideological observation of concrete circumstances from dogmatic frameworks. Equally, some Christian scholars have been suspicious of sociologists (though less so of social scientific tools) because of a perception that they are beset with relativistic [End Page 318] thinking and a tendency to reduce everything to cultural constructs. Therefore, from the point of view of the wider field of spirituality studies, the entry of sociologists into the debate is to be warmly welcomed as it serves to expand in important ways what is already a multidisciplinary discourse. Both sides will surely gain from mutual engagement rather than unhelpful polarisations. Interestingly, both the editors Kieran Flanagan and Peter Jupp are significant figures in the British world of sociology but also interested in Christian theology. The result is a modest degree of explicit engagement with the themes and preoccupations of theology and religion more broadly not merely in the Introduction but also in a number of other essays. Giuseppe Giordan examines the shift from theological preoccupations with spirituality in contemporary Italy. Ivan Varga analyzes Georg Simmel's writings on religion. Simmel, one of the founding figures of modern sociology, is better known for his writings on sociological theory yet took religion seriously and wrote substantial and important works on it that deserve to be much better known. Mathew Guest's essay is an exploration of the ways the Christian tradition has evolved to meet a growing desire for the cultivation of the subjective self. His case study focuses on the notion of "spiritual capital" (based on Pierre Bourdieu's theories of social and religious capital) in the context of Anglican clergy families. Kieran Flanagan's closing essay explores "the visual" in relation to spiritual experience and iconography particularly in Orthodox and Roman Catholic contexts. Paul Chambers' on the politics of spirituality analyses the explicitly spiritual symbolism for some Muslim women of modest dress and veiling. Flanagan's wide-ranging and sometimes idiosyncratic Introduction explores why sociological interest in spirituality has been absent until recently. He hints that, in terms of sociology's priorities, it may now prove to be a conceptual key for opening new cultural doors. For Flanagan, "spirit" and "the spiritual" are not merely supernatural but constitute an indispensable dimension of what it is to be human. Spirituality, therefore, focuses on a recognition and pursuit of matters of ultimate concern. In Western cultures, it embraces a search for meaning that is independent of institutional authority. Flanagan raises interesting and important questions about the contemporary fascination with spirituality, particularly in its holistic forms. Is it in effect a substitute religion? Is it a passing response to concrete cultural circumstances? Is it more than simply a form of therapy or leisure activity? Is it primarily individualistic and therefore encourages the loosening of social bonds? Interestingly, while acknowledging that the discipline of sociology is the product of modernity, Flanagan is deeply critical of what he perceives as modernity's de-spiritualization of culture. Three of the essays in the book...
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".