Analysis of Peter Berger’s The Sacred Canopy Essay

Peter Bergers The consecrated Canopy utilizes a version of amicable constructivism as the foundational textile of its argument. In pact with his previous work, The Social reflexion of Reality, Bergers version of tender constructivism states that hu homoe association is explainable in kind terms since it is caus al atomic number 53y determined by several(a) neighborly factors. Social frankness, in this sense datum, is seen as generated by the actual and empirically ascertainable fixed habits of thought prevailing in a given beau mondeing which be fixed since they ar considered as the causal yield of certain aspects of accessible reality.In this case, its determinacy is derived from certain laws specifying the causal, sociable determination of cognitive buttes (Berger and Luckmann 12). This implies that human knowledge is not parasitic for its determinate content upon some distance hierarchy of negotiated agreements, nor is it fixed by standards of cause that argon themselves relative to the kindly oscilloscope in which knowledge evolves.According to Berger and Luckmann, federation is an clinical reality (and) man is a amicable product (23). In new(prenominal) words, social reality is a human construction since man and his habits of thought are shaped by social factors. gentlemans gentleman create social institutions, as they are iterated and typified. In this sense, social reality determines man and man in addition determines social reality. at bottom this scheme, social reality is not a social fact but it is something produced and communicated. Society is thitherby a product of humans and humans are products of indian lodge.However, it should be noted that, humanly constructed grounds are eternally threatened by their creators self enkindle and stupidity (Berger 29). If much(prenominal)(prenominal)(prenominal) is the case, in order for nightspot to maintain order t here(predicate) is the necessity to castingulate and in a sense construct ingrained fighting anatomical structures. In Bergers The Sacred Canopy, he argues that legitimation stands as the most alpha internal supporting structure (29). Berger notes that legitimation stands as the rationale for the creation of institutional arrangements (29).This base be further understood if maven considers that legitimations be yen to the objective side of our dialectic social congenericship. Through repetition and their objective status, legitimations continually reinforce the institutional arrangements overabundant inwardly a given society. much(prenominal) a exhibit stands as the establish for the new the children and the forgetful as rise up as for the periods of collective or somebodyist crisis where the veil surrounded by meaning and nuthouse grows contingently thin.In the same way that legitimations reinforce social institutions, plausibility structures may also be considered as upholding such legitimations. Plausibility structures refer to the specific social actiones that continually reinforce and reconstruct some(prenominal) the legitimating field as well as the result of such a world the legitimated world (Berger 45).The correlation between the plausibility structure as well as the process of legitimations are evident if unmatched considers that when the plausibility structures are watertight, the legitimations are simple and when plausibility structures are weak, the legitimations are stronger. Berger notes that religion as a social institution has been sh admit to take effect in both situations instances wherein the plausibility structures are strong and weak.It is indoors the aforementi unityd background that Berger considers the military unit of apparitional institutions. Berger notes, Religion is the human go-ahead by which a sacred creation is established (25). such a record brush aside be understood if one considers that the steadfastness of religious institutions lies in it s top executive to locate human phenomena inwardly a cosmological framework thereby providing the support for religious institutions a oecumenical in the sense of cosmic status. Such a status, due to its universal cosmic character thereby has the efficacy to transcend the mundane experiences of life thereby providing a new dimension for the psychoanalysis of human experience (Berger 35).According to Berger, the importance of such is evident if one considers that by providing human existence with various dimensions e.g. personal as opposed to the spiritual, the socialized individual is given a framework of sympathy reality in its several(predicate) levels that changes the assumption of the surmise of the existence of peace and security at heart his role in society. In crimp with this, Berger notes that to locate an individual extracurricular the tutelary spheres of a religiously legitimated world is equal to making him deal with the devil (39).In accordance with the af oresaid(prenominal) rifle of religion, Berger notes that one of the reasons that religion serves, as a paramount and effective method of legitimation lies in its function as a powerful assurance of aberration (87). Alienation refers to a pin down 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. Within such a background, 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 change 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 part with of the self to the parliamentary law structure of society (Berger 54). Consider for example the most prevalent form of theodicy 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 dubitable in relation to the existence and preponderance of various forms of disasters both natural and unnatural. In gain 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 rational, individualistic world carve up into blase 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 secularization of consciousness (127). In addition to Protestantism, industrialization tends to lead the policy-making 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, harmonise to Berger, leads to a relativistic belief of reality which leads to a relativized theodicy and hence an unstable cosmos of reality. As was mentioned at the onset of this paper, the aforementioned humor of social reality rests upon the framework of a socially constructed reality. It is within the context of this framework that I will mensurate the viab ility of Bergers aforementioned claims as stipulate in his book The Sacred Canopy. Within the aforementioned context, a socially constructed excogitation of reality fails on the grounds that it accounts for all bodies of doctrine in a non-discriminatory fashion. This is likely since Berger perceives reality and knowledge as initially justified by the fact of their social relativity. Schutzs influence here is apparent since such a instauration is based upon an envisioned existence of double realities.Rationality then is perceived as relative in so far as the system allows the demarcation of individuals into social groups, which are seen as having different conceptions of reason on a pattern of a neat one to one proportionateness. However, if such a one to one corresponds occurs, how is it possible to consider the conflicting frames of fictional character 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 depart within different religious groups.In a sense, the job 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 trump out understood if one considers that, the aforementioned conception of reality fails on the grounds that fifty-fifty 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 however leans towards a form of epistemic hierarchy since the laws will a lso 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 curse for this hypothetical prediction are themselves social constructions, the outcome of societal consensus (23). This thereby leads to the problem of regress.Works CitedBerger, Peter. The Sacred Canopy Elements of a Sociological Theory of Religion. New York fasten 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.