tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37589721331585843.post2242601298928763300..comments2024-03-26T11:33:59.219-06:00Comments on Religion in American History: New Metaphysicals: Online SymposiumPaul Harveyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13881964303772343114noreply@blogger.comBlogger1125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37589721331585843.post-7158322701715186852010-06-25T14:12:27.504-06:002010-06-25T14:12:27.504-06:00I am suspicious of every discussion of "spiri...I am suspicious of every discussion of "spirituality" that makes no attempt to distinguish religion from superstition. I believe that while religion may be impossible to isolate, that is not the case with superstition.<br /><br />Bender, insofar as everything I have read confirms, does not employ a distinction between spiritual and superstitious.<br /><br />While I grant to sociology of religion its privilege to analyze whatever might claim one of the synonyms of "religion," the lack of a disciplined designation of superstition seems to me to invalidate claims to any such sociology as scientific.<br /><br />Psychology, long ago, identified the training that behaviorists employ to reveal superstition in non-humans. Although I have not followed the literature, I am convinced that the description of behavior that repeats what the subject was satisfied with on the most previous similar occasion requiring action qualifies as superstitious. Yes, we all are superstitious, but we are not all spiritual, even if we so designate ourselves.<br /><br />In addition, Bender's awareness of the tension between her 'new spirituals' and science ought to have indicated as a misconception of cause and effect in the practices she calls spirituality. By whatever name, superstition is instinctive; religion is not.Januaryhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13649626766802972984noreply@blogger.com