Analysis of Peter Berger’s The Sacred Canopy Essay

Peter Bergers The Sacred Canopy utilizes a version of genial constructivism as the foundational simulation of its argument. In accordance with his front work, The Social Construction of Reality, Bergers version of favorable constructivism states that hu homo intimacy is explainable in social terms since it is causatively unconquerable by various social factors. Social universe, in this sense, is seen as generated by the genuine and empirically ascertainable fixed habits of thought prevalent in a given association which argon fixed since they argon considered as the causal yield of certain aspects of social cosmos.In this case, its determinacy is derived from certain laws specifying the causal, social decisiveness of cognitive processes (Berger and Luck bitn 12). This implies that human friendship is not dependent for its determinate nitty-gritty upon some infinite hierarchy of negotiated agreements, nor is it fixed by standards of rationality that are themselves relati ve to the social setting in which knowledge evolves.According to Berger and Luckmann, society is an objective humankind (and) man is a social product (23). In other words, social reality is a human construction since man and his habits of thought are shaped by social factors. Humans puddle social institutions, as they are iterated and typified. In this sense, social reality determines man but man too determines social reality. inside this scheme, social reality is not a social fact but it is something produced and communicated. Society is thereby a product of humans and humans are products of society.However, it should be telephone circuitd that, humanly constructed arenas are constantly threatened by their creators self disport and stupidity (Berger 29). If such is the case, in rear for society to maintain put up there is the necessity to conformityulate and in a sense construct cozy supporting structures. In Bergers The Sacred Canopy, he argues that legitimation stands as the most important internal supporting structure (29). Berger notes that legitimation stands as the rationale for the creation of institutional arrangements (29).This tin be further mum if sensation considers that legitimations belong to the objective side of our dialectic social sexual congressship. through with(predicate) repetition and their objective status, legitimations continually reinforce the institutional arrangements prevalent in spite of appearance a given society. much(prenominal) a process stands as the moxie for the new the children and the forgetful as wellhead as for the periods of collective or singular crisis where the veil amid meaning and chaos grows particularly thin.In the same manner that legitimations reinforce social institutions, plausibility structures may also be considered as upholding such legitimations. Plausibility structures refer to the specific social processes that continually reinforce and reconstruct both the legitimating world as well as the result of such a world the legitimated world (Berger 45).The correlation in the midst of the plausibility structure as well as the process of legitimations are diaphanous if one considers that when the plausibility structures are strong, the legitimations are simple and when plausibility structures are weak, the legitimations are stronger. Berger notes that religion as a social institution has been shown to take lay out in both situations instances wherein the plausibility structures are strong and weak.It is within the aforesaid(prenominal) context that Berger considers the strength of unearthly institutions. Berger notes, Religion is the human enterprise by which a sacred cosmos is established (25). Such a line of reasoning can be understood if one considers that the steadfastness of phantasmal institutions lies in its ability to locate human phenomena within a cosmological framework thereby providing the support for religious institutions a universal in the s ense  of cosmic status. Such a status, due to its universal cosmic character thereby has the efficiency to transcend the mundane experiences of liveness thereby providing a new symmetry for the analysis of human experience (Berger 35).According to Berger, the importance of such is lucid if one considers that by providing human human beings with various dimensions e.g. physical as opposed to the spiritual, the socialized individual is given a framework of drive reality in its different levels that enables the assumption of the possibility of the existence of peace and aegis within his role in society. In line with this, Berger notes that to locate an individual outside the protective spheres of a religiously legitimated world is tantamount to making him deal with the devil (39).In accordance with the aforementioned function of religion, Berger notes that one of the reasons that religion serves, as a prevalent and effective method of legitimation lies in its function as a powerful agency of alienation (87). estrangement refers to a condition wherein an individual forgets that he is co-creator of his world (Berger 85).It is important to note that alienation stands as an overextension of the process of objectivation in the dialectic relationship between self and society (Berger 85). Berger notes that through the objectivation of legitimations, alienation renders them virtually unassailable as long as an alienated conscious can be maintained. in spite of appearance such a context, de-alienation may only occur as a result of the demise of a particular institutional framework.In relation to this, Berger notes that the function of religious legitimation is that of enabling theodicy wherein theodicy refers to the explanations of the human condition e.g. life and death. Theodicy, in this sense, is highly irrational since it necessitates a surrender of the self to the tell structure of society (Berger 54). Consider for example the most prevalent form of the odicy Christian theodicy. Within the framework of Christian theodicy, an omnipotent, omniscient, and omnipresent entity God is depicted as suffering for humanity.Such a theodicy is questionable in relation to the existence and prevalence of various forms of disasters both natural and unnatural. In addition to external assailants of religious plausibility structures, Berger argues that Protestantism itself carried the seeds for its own destruction (129). In its critique of Catholicism, Protestantism enabled a more(prenominal) rational, individualistic world divided into laic and sacred spheres (Berger 123). As the secular sphere expanded to encompass everything outside of the church, Christianity became marginalized in a pluralistic society. It is within this context that the concept of pluralism arises.According to Berger, pluralism refers to a social-structural correlate of the secularisation of consciousness (127). In addition to Protestantism, industrialization tends to lead t he political order away from the influences of religion (Berger 130). This process compartmentalized religion into the private world creating a pluralistic market situation. Such a situation thereby fails to enable the continuance of the universal cosmological ordering function of religion. This is evident if one considers that within pluralistic conditions, various and different and sometimes contradictory conditions of truth exists. Such a condition, according to Berger, leads to a relativistic cosmos of reality which leads to a relativized theodicy and hence an unstable conception of reality.            As was mentioned at the outpouring of this paper, the aforementioned conception of social reality rests upon the framework of a socially constructed reality. It is within the context of this framework that I will assess the viability of Bergers aforementioned claims as specified in his book The Sacred Canopy. Within the aforementioned context, a socially constructed conception of reality fails on the reasonableness that it method of accountings for all bodies of doctrine in a non-discriminatory fashion. This is possible since Berger perceives reality and knowledge as initially justified by the fact of their social theory of relativity. Schutzs influence here is apparent since such a conception is based upon an envisioned existence of multiple realities.Rationality then is sensed as relative in so far as the dodging allows the demarcation of individuals into social groups, which are seen as having different conceptions of rationality on a pattern of a neat one to one equalizer. However, if such a one to one corresponds occurs, how is it possible to consider the contrary frames of reference in relation to understanding reality as different individuals converge within a social sphere. In the aforementioned context, the individuals specified may be specifically construed as individuals who belong within diffe rent religious groups.In a sense, the problem with the above conception of reality fails on the grounds that, in the same manner that a particular theodicy fails within a pluralistic society, such a conception of reality fails within a pluralistic society itself since in order to assume the existence of religious institution as a institutional structure which enables legitimation, it is important to account how such is possible within a society with varying yet conflicting theodicies.This can be best understood if one considers that, the aforementioned conception of reality fails on the grounds that even if it seems to supply us with the fixed laws in terms of which the outcome of hypothetical cognitive processes can be determined, these laws are fixed by the social context of the cognitive process. This unless leans towards a form of epistemic hierarchy since the laws will also be constructed via a particular societys presupposed notion of the existence of social construction. In Collins words, we cannot define social fact as the product of a hypothetical societal discussion (since)the lawswould rely for this hypothetical prevision are themselves social constructions, the outcome of societal consensus (23). This thereby leads to the problem of regress. industrial plant CitedBerger, Peter. The Sacred Canopy Elements of a Sociological Theory of Religion. New York prime Press, 1990.Berger, Peter and Thomas Luckmann. The Social Construction of Reality A Treatise of the Sociology of Knowledge. atomic number 20 University of California Press, 1967.Collin, Finn. Social Reality. London Routledge, 1997.