Boundary Problem - Revision history

Michael at 13:30, 11 September 2026

2026-09-11T13:30:09Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 13:30, 11 September 2026
Line 42:		Line 42:
	==Book Terms==		==Book Terms==

	[[Rocket ~~Scientist~~'s Guide to Religion]] > {{#ask:[[Is a key term::RSGR]]\|format=ul}}		[[Rocket Scientists' Guide to Religion]] > {{#ask:[[Is a key term::RSGR]]\|format=ul}}

	{{endstuff}}		{{endstuff}}

Michael at 13:27, 11 September 2026

2026-09-11T13:27:30Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 13:27, 11 September 2026
Line 40:		Line 40:
	'''LP resolution.''' The Boundary Problem cannot be solved because there is no boundary there. "Humans are complex and creative. They do not honour the boundaries scholars attempt to impose. They can make their institutions serve whatever needs they want."<ref>Ibid., 48.</ref> The continuing attempt to solve it is not scholarship but the [[Boundary Fetish]] — "not an accident or a relic of a less enlightened age.... It is structural. It is what the academic study of religion has repeatedly been mobilized to produce."<ref>Ibid., 14.</ref> The productive move is not a better boundary but no boundary: religion as "a complicated and flexible human institution set up to meet essential and non-essential human needs," organized around answers to big questions with a core emphasis on alignment and connection,<ref>Ibid., 56.</ref> embraces the overlap of human institutions, breaks the study of religion open, and exposes centuries of elite interference in spiritual systems. Abandoning the boundary quest is "the first step in any serious and authentic attempt to decolonize not only the study of religion and spirituality, but religion and spirituality as well."<ref>Ibid., 58.</ref>		'''LP resolution.''' The Boundary Problem cannot be solved because there is no boundary there. "Humans are complex and creative. They do not honour the boundaries scholars attempt to impose. They can make their institutions serve whatever needs they want."<ref>Ibid., 48.</ref> The continuing attempt to solve it is not scholarship but the [[Boundary Fetish]] — "not an accident or a relic of a less enlightened age.... It is structural. It is what the academic study of religion has repeatedly been mobilized to produce."<ref>Ibid., 14.</ref> The productive move is not a better boundary but no boundary: religion as "a complicated and flexible human institution set up to meet essential and non-essential human needs," organized around answers to big questions with a core emphasis on alignment and connection,<ref>Ibid., 56.</ref> embraces the overlap of human institutions, breaks the study of religion open, and exposes centuries of elite interference in spiritual systems. Abandoning the boundary quest is "the first step in any serious and authentic attempt to decolonize not only the study of religion and spirituality, but religion and spirituality as well."<ref>Ibid., 58.</ref>

			==Book Terms==

			[[Rocket Scientist's Guide to Religion]] > {{#ask:[[Is a key term::RSGR]]\|format=ul}}

	{{endstuff}}		{{endstuff}}
Line 45:		Line 48:
	[[category:terms]]		[[category:terms]]
	[[category:lightningpath]]		[[category:lightningpath]]
			[[category:rsgr]]
			[[Is a key term::RSGR\| ]]
	[[Is a keyword::Spiritual Theory\| ]]		[[Is a keyword::Spiritual Theory\| ]]
	[[Is a term in::RSGR\| ]]		[[Is a term in::RSGR\| ]]
	[[Is a related term::Religions\| ]]		[[Is a related term::Religions\| ]]
	[[Is a related term::Spirituality\| ]]		[[Is a related term::Spirituality\| ]]

Michael at 13:15, 11 September 2026

2026-09-11T13:15:47Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 13:15, 11 September 2026
Line 1:		Line 1:
	{{navmenu}}		{{navmenu}}
	<h1 class="customtitle">{{FULLPAGENAME}}</h1>		<h1 class="customtitle">{{FULLPAGENAME}}</h1>
	<blockquote class="definition">{{~~TODO~~}}		<blockquote class="definition">The '''Boundary Problem''' is the persistent scholarly problem of how to draw a defensible line, substantively, functionally, ontologically, or epistemologically, between religion and other human institutions and knowledge systems, such as magic, science, Hollywood, sports, or the New Age movement. The problem is insoluble, because the boundaries it seeks do not exist.
			</blockquote>

			==Concept Map==

			===Key Concepts===

			[[Avatar.GLOBAL Knowledge System]] > {{#ask:[[Is a key term::Avatar.GLOBAL Knowledge System]]\|format=ul\|sort=Has sort AG}}

			[[Spiritual Theory]] > {{#ask:[[Is a keyword::Spiritual Theory]]\|format=ul}}

			===Syncretic Terms===

			[[Boundary Problem]] > {{#ask:[[Is a syncretic term::Boundary Problem]]\|format=ul}}

			===Related LP Terms===

			[[Boundary Problem]] > {{#ask:[[Is a related term::Boundary Problem]]\|format=ul}}

			===Non-LP Related Terms===

			[[Boundary Problem]] > {{#ask:[[Is a related term::Boundary Problem]]\|format=ul}}

	</~~blockquote~~>		== Notes ==

			The Boundary Problem arises the moment scholars attempt to define religion by what distinguishes it from everything else. Every attempted boundary fails under empirical attention, at four successive lines of defense.<ref>Mike Sosteric, ''Rocket Scientists' Guide to Religion'', draft v.095, introductory unit for Athabasca University Sociology 231: ''The Sociology of Religion'' (manuscript in preparation; E.T.A. 2027). Page references herein are to the draft PDF. Hereafter cited as Sosteric, ''RSGR draft''.</ref>

	~~==Syncretic Terms==~~		'''1. Substantive boundaries fail.''' Defining religion by belief in supernatural beings runs into Buddha, who rejected gods and supernatural forces outright, yet Buddhism is clearly a religion.<ref>Sosteric, ''RSGR draft'', 16.</ref> Defining it by a sacred/profane distinction is a Western category imposition: the distinction is not made by the LoDagaa and other West African peoples studied by Goody,<ref>Jack Goody, "Religion and Ritual: The Definitional Problem," ''The British Journal of Sociology'' 12, no. 2 (1961): 142–64, as discussed in Sosteric, ''RSGR draft'', 16–17.</ref> is not meaningful among the Azande,<ref>E. E. Evans-Pritchard, ''Witchcraft, Oracles and Magic among the Azande'' (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1937), as discussed in Sosteric, ''RSGR draft'', 17.</ref> and is meaningless for the Huichol of Mexico.<ref>Barbara G. Myerhoff, ''Peyote Hunt: The Sacred Journey of the Huichol Indians'' (London: Cornell University Press, 1974), as discussed in Sosteric, ''RSGR draft'', 17.</ref>

	[[Boundary Problem]] > ~~{{#ask~~:~~[[Is a syncretic term~~::~~Boundary Problem]]}}~~		'''2. Durkheim's "solution" fails.''' Having failed to separate magic and religion from science by supernatural content — and unable to elevate Western religion above Indigenous magic on that basis either — Durkheim "solved" the Boundary Problem by suggesting religion was more social, while magic was more individualistic.<ref>Sosteric, ''RSGR draft'', 17.</ref> "Unfortunately, like other ethnocentric boundaries, Durkheim's assertions are more wishful thinking than empirical fact."<ref>Ibid., 17.</ref> Ancient magical and ritual practices had social aspects and social intent — "fisherman who used magic to help with their catch were doing so with their families and communities in mind"<ref>Ibid., 17, citing Sir James George Frazer, ''The Golden Bough: A Study in Magic and Religion'' (New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 1990).</ref> — and modern magical systems like Wicca and Thelema are deeply embedded in the social fabric: witches have covens and cast spells "for the good of themselves and their community";<ref>Sosteric, ''RSGR draft'', 17, citing Starhawk, ''The Spiral Dance: A Rebirth of the Ancient Religion of the Goddess'', 20th anniversary ed. (New York: HarperOne, 2011).</ref> Aleister Crowley, patriarch of Thelema, "was embedded in exoteric and elitist social networks."<ref>Sosteric, ''RSGR draft'', 17.</ref>

	~~==Related LP Terms==~~		'''3. Functional boundaries fail.''' Functional definitions (religion as what provides cohesion, meaning, or answers to ultimate questions) are even worse at boundary work: as Scharf notes, "they are simply too broad and inclusive. If religion is defined as that which promotes unity or social cohesion, then anything which does this is religion."<ref>B. Scharf, ''The Sociological Study of Religion'' (London: Hutchinson, 1970), as quoted in Sosteric, ''RSGR draft'', 29.</ref> Communism, fascism, nationalism, capitalism, sports, and rock concerts all become religious events. Hamilton therefore advises abandoning functional definitions altogether<ref>Malcolm Hamilton, ''The Sociology of Religion: Theoretical and Comparative Perspectives'' (London: Routledge, 2001), as discussed in Sosteric, ''RSGR draft'', 29–30.</ref> — but this is rejected in the [[Rocket Scientists' Guide to Religion]]: institutions are always functional, since "all institutions ... are instrumental means for the satisfaction of needs";<ref>Melford E. Spiro, "Religion: Problems of Definition and Explanation," in ''Anthropological Approaches to the Study of Religion'', ed. Michael Banton (London: Routledge, 2004), 96, as quoted in Sosteric, ''RSGR draft'', 30.</ref> "if we ignore the functions of religion, we might as well not bother studying it."<ref>Sosteric, ''RSGR draft'', 30.</ref>

	~~[[Boundary Problem]]~~ > ~~{{#ask~~:[[Is a ~~related LP term~~:~~:Boundary Problem]]}}~~		'''4. Ontological/epistemic boundaries fail.''' With content and function unable to separate religion from science, the last line of defense is ontology (materialism vs. idealism) and epistemology (empirical method vs. authority and tradition).<ref>Ibid., 44–45.</ref> These too collapse: transpersonal and humanistic psychology cross the materialist line and even provide techniques for spiritual connection;<ref>Ibid., 44.</ref> scientists report mystical and "enlightenment" experiences — Kekulé's dream of the benzene ring, Darwin's "innumerable little illuminations,"<ref>Peter Caws, "The Structure of Discovery," ''Science'' 166, no. 3911 (1969): 1375–80; Howard E. Gruber, "On the Relation between 'AHA Experiences' and the Construction of Ideas," ''History of Science'' 19, no. 1 (1981): 41–59; both as cited in Sosteric, ''RSGR draft'', 25.</ref> Einstein's awe before "the old one"<ref>Albert Einstein, ''Out of My Later Years'' (New York: Citadel Press, 2000), as discussed in Sosteric, ''RSGR draft'', 25, 45–46.</ref> — and science itself behaves like a church when challenged: Kuhn showed it to be one of the most conservative institutions going,<ref>Thomas S. Kuhn, ''The Structure of Scientific Revolutions'' (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1962), as discussed in Sosteric, ''RSGR draft'', 47.</ref> and Yinger notes that many scientists "sanctify science just like priests sanctify religion, by presenting it as a superior path towards truth."<ref>Roy Rappaport, as quoted in J. Milton Yinger, ''The Scientific Study of Religion'' (London: Macmillan, 1970), in Sosteric, ''RSGR draft'', 47.</ref> Rupert Sheldrake was publicly shamed and excommunicated by ''Nature''<nowiki>'</nowiki>s senior editor, who called his book "the best candidate for burning there has been for many years."<ref>Anthony Freeman, "The Sense of Being Glared At: What Is It Like to Be a Heretic?," ''Journal of Consciousness Studies'' 12, no. 6 (2005): 4–9, as discussed in Sosteric, ''RSGR draft'', 48.</ref>

	~~==Non~~-~~LP Related Terms==~~		'''The problem metastasizes.''' Smart's substantive elements — social, ritual/practical, experiential, narrative/mythic, doctrinal, ethical/legal, material, plus healing — are found everywhere.<ref>Ninian Smart, ''The World's Religions'' (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1992); Ninian Smart, ''The Phenomenon of Religion'' (New York: Macmillan, 1973); as synthesized in Sosteric, ''RSGR draft'', 18–23.</ref> Hollywood has its master narratives: Lucas "intentionally set out to awaken (some might say indoctrinate) children" with a monomyth that "echoes in nearly every belief system," admitting "I put the Force into the movie in order to try to awaken a certain kind of spirituality in young people."<ref>Bill Moyers, "Of Myth and Men," ''Time'', April 18, 1999, as quoted in Sosteric, ''RSGR draft'', 24.</ref> Sports has its sacred figures and superstitions; the Boy Scouts' oath requires affirmation of "belief and submission to God";<ref>Bryan Wendell, "About the 'Belief in God' Requirement in Scouting," ''Bryan on Scouting'', October 3, 2014, as cited in Sosteric, ''RSGR draft'', 42.</ref> science has its rituals, myths, martyrs, and mystical musings. "So what makes the institution of science different than religion? Where is the all-important boundary?"<ref>Sosteric, ''RSGR draft'', 25.</ref>

	[[Boundary ~~Problem~~]] > ~~{{#ask~~:~~[[Is~~ a ~~related term::Boundary Problem]]}}~~		'''LP resolution.''' The Boundary Problem cannot be solved because there is no boundary there. "Humans are complex and creative. They do not honour the boundaries scholars attempt to impose. They can make their institutions serve whatever needs they want."<ref>Ibid., 48.</ref> The continuing attempt to solve it is not scholarship but the [[Boundary Fetish]] — "not an accident or a relic of a less enlightened age.... It is structural. It is what the academic study of religion has repeatedly been mobilized to produce."<ref>Ibid., 14.</ref> The productive move is not a better boundary but no boundary: religion as "a complicated and flexible human institution set up to meet essential and non-essential human needs," organized around answers to big questions with a core emphasis on alignment and connection,<ref>Ibid., 56.</ref> embraces the overlap of human institutions, breaks the study of religion open, and exposes centuries of elite interference in spiritual systems. Abandoning the boundary quest is "the first step in any serious and authentic attempt to decolonize not only the study of religion and spirituality, but religion and spirituality as well."<ref>Ibid., 58.</ref>

	~~==Notes==~~

	{{endstuff}}		{{endstuff}}
Line 23:		Line 45:
	[[category:terms]]		[[category:terms]]
	[[category:lightningpath]]		[[category:lightningpath]]
	[[Is a related term::~~Religion~~\| ]]		[[Is a keyword::Spiritual Theory\| ]]
			[[Is a term in::RSGR\| ]]
			[[Is a related term::Religions\| ]]
			[[Is a related term::Spirituality\| ]]

Michael at 22:45, 13 July 2024

2024-07-13T22:45:02Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 22:45, 13 July 2024
Line 3:		Line 3:
	<blockquote class="definition">{{TODO}}		<blockquote class="definition">{{TODO}}

	<blockquote>		</blockquote>

	==Syncretic Terms==		==Syncretic Terms==

Michael: Created page with "{{navmenu}}

{{TODO}}
==Syncretic Terms== Boundary Problem > {{#ask:Is a syncretic term::Boundary Problem}} ==Related LP Terms== ..."
2024-07-13T22:44:04Z

Created page with "{{navmenu}} <h1 class="customtitle">{{FULLPAGENAME}}</h1> <blockquote class="definition">{{TODO}} <blockquote> ==Syncretic Terms== Boundary Problem > {{#ask:Is a syncretic term::Boundary Problem}} ==Related LP Terms== ..."

New page
{{navmenu}}
<h1 class="customtitle">{{FULLPAGENAME}}</h1>
<blockquote class="definition">{{TODO}}

<blockquote>

==Syncretic Terms==

[[Boundary Problem]] > {{#ask:[[Is a syncretic term::Boundary Problem]]}}

==Related LP Terms==

[[Boundary Problem]] > {{#ask:[[Is a related LP term::Boundary Problem]]}}

==Non-LP Related Terms==

[[Boundary Problem]] > {{#ask:[[Is a related term::Boundary Problem]]}}

==Notes==

{{endstuff}}

[[category:terms]]
[[category:lightningpath]]
[[Is a related term::Religion| ]]