<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<!DOCTYPE article PUBLIC "-//NLM//DTD JATS (Z39.96) Journal Publishing DTD v1.3 20210610//EN" "JATS-journalpublishing1-3.dtd">
<article article-type="research-article" dtd-version="1.3" xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance" xml:lang="ru"><front><journal-meta><journal-id journal-id-type="publisher-id">mgimoconcept</journal-id><journal-title-group><journal-title xml:lang="ru">Концепт: философия, религия, культура</journal-title><trans-title-group xml:lang="en"><trans-title>Concept: philosophy, religion, culture</trans-title></trans-title-group></journal-title-group><issn pub-type="ppub">2541-8831</issn><issn pub-type="epub">2619-0540</issn><publisher><publisher-name>МГИМО</publisher-name></publisher></journal-meta><article-meta><article-id pub-id-type="doi">10.24833/2541-8831-2021-3-19-101-112</article-id><article-id custom-type="elpub" pub-id-type="custom">mgimoconcept-547</article-id><article-categories><subj-group subj-group-type="heading"><subject>Research Article</subject></subj-group><subj-group subj-group-type="section-heading" xml:lang="ru"><subject>РЕЛИГИОВЕДЕНИЕ</subject></subj-group><subj-group subj-group-type="section-heading" xml:lang="en"><subject>RESEARCH ARTICLES. RELIGIOUS STUDIES</subject></subj-group></article-categories><title-group><article-title>Родни Старк, субъективная религиозность и затянувшееся прощание с теорией секуляризации</article-title><trans-title-group xml:lang="en"><trans-title>Rodney Stark, Subjective Religiousness and a Prolonged Farewell to Secularization Theory</trans-title></trans-title-group></title-group><contrib-group><contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="yes"><contrib-id contrib-id-type="orcid">https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8140-1206</contrib-id><name-alternatives><name name-style="eastern" xml:lang="ru"><surname>Апполонов</surname><given-names>А. В.</given-names></name><name name-style="western" xml:lang="en"><surname>Appolonov</surname><given-names>A. V.</given-names></name></name-alternatives><bio xml:lang="ru"><p> доктор философских наук, доцент, доцент кафедры философии религии и религиоведения философского факультета </p><p>119991, Москва, Ленинские горы, МГУ, учебно-научный корпус  Шуваловский, ауд. Г–502 </p></bio><bio xml:lang="en"><p> Doctor of Philosophy, Docent, Associate Professor, Department of ReligiousStudies, Faculty of Philosophy</p><p>119991, Moscow Leninskie Gory, Shuvalovskiy building, room G-502 </p></bio><email xlink:type="simple">alexeyapp@yandex.ru</email><xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff-1"/></contrib></contrib-group><aff-alternatives id="aff-1"><aff xml:lang="ru"><institution>МГУ имени М.В. Ломоносова</institution><country>Россия</country></aff><aff xml:lang="en"><institution>Lomonosov Moscow State University</institution><country>Russian Federation</country></aff></aff-alternatives><pub-date pub-type="collection"><year>2021</year></pub-date><pub-date pub-type="epub"><day>26</day><month>09</month><year>2021</year></pub-date><volume>5</volume><issue>3</issue><fpage>101</fpage><lpage>112</lpage><permissions><copyright-statement>Copyright &amp;#x00A9; Апполонов А.В., 2021</copyright-statement><copyright-year>2021</copyright-year><copyright-holder xml:lang="ru">Апполонов А.В.</copyright-holder><copyright-holder xml:lang="en">Appolonov A.V.</copyright-holder><license xml:lang="ru" license-type="creative-commons-attribution" xlink:href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/" xlink:type="simple"><license-p>Данная работа распространяется под лицензией Creative Commons Attribution 4.0.</license-p></license><license xml:lang="en" license-type="creative-commons-attribution" xlink:href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/" xlink:type="simple"><license-p>This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.</license-p></license></permissions><self-uri xlink:href="https://concept.mgimo.ru/jour/article/view/547">https://concept.mgimo.ru/jour/article/view/547</self-uri><abstract><p>В 1999 г. Родни Старк заявил о том, что теория секуляризации скончалась и должна быть погребена на кладбище несостоятельных доктрин. Основания для этого приговора он представил в статье «Покойся с миром, секуляризация», которая должна была показать, что теория секуляризации не способна корректно описывать ни прошлое, ни современное состояние религиозности в европейских странах и, тем более, во всём остальном мире. Несмотря на то, что выводы Старка были приняты многими учёными, текущие исследования показывают, что Старк сильно поторопился со своим заключением, а теория секуляризации всё ещё обладает значительным описательным и объяснительным потенциалом. В ситуации продолжающейся дискуссии о том, насколько полно и точно теория секуляризации способна описывать закономерности общественных изменений, актуальным становится также и рассмотрение вопроса о том, почему предшествующая критика теории, включая критику Старка, оказалась не слишком действенной. Как представляется, в случае Старка негативную роль сыграли следующие факторы: идеологизированный подход, приравнивающий теорию секуляризации к секуляризму, трактовка субъективной религиозности отдельных обществ как постоянной величины, которая к тому же должна быть таковой и для всех остальных обществ, а также крайне упрощённая интерпретация фундаментальных положений теории секуляризации, которая, согласно Старку, возвещает «конец религии». Некорректность отдельных критических идей Старка демонстрируется посредством обращения к статистическому анализу долгосрочных тенденций в религиозности населения таких стран как Исландия и Великобритания, а также США.</p></abstract><trans-abstract xml:lang="en"><p>In 1999, Rodney Stark announced that the secularization theory had died and should be buried in a graveyard of failed doctrines. He presented the rationale for this verdict in Secularization, R.I.P., which was supposed to show that the theory of secularization is not capable of correctly describing either the past or the current state of religiosity in European countries, and even more so in the rest of the world. While Stark’s findings have been accepted by many scholars, the current researches show that Stark was too hasty with his conclusion, and the theory of secularization still has significant descriptive and explanatory potential. Thus, the results of recent research by Ronald F. Inglehart show that, although religions continue to play an important role in the modern world, their importance is steadily declining even in countries and regions that were previously considered permanently religious (for example, in the United States or in South America). Accordingly, Inglehart speaks of “recent acceleration of secularization” as the reality in which most countries in the world live. In the situation of the ongoing discussion about how fully and accurately the secularization theory is able to describe the laws and mechanics of social changes, it also becomes relevant to consider the question of why the previous criticism of the theory, including that of Stark, was not very effective. It seems that in Stark’s case the following factors have played a negative role: an ideologized approach equating the theory of secularization with secularism, the interpretation of the subjective religiosity of some societies as an unchangeable constant, which, moreover, should be accepted as constant for all other societies, and an extremely simplified interpretation of fundamental principles of secularization theory, which, according to Stark, is no more than the prophecy about the end of religion. The incorrectness of some Stark’s critical ideas is demonstrated by a statistical analysis of long-term trends in the religiosity of Iceland, Great Britain, and the United States. The most telling example seems to be that of Iceland, whose religious landscape has changed dramatically over the past three decades and bears little resemblance to the image of rural religiosity of the 1980s that Stark drew in Secularization, R.I.P., and which he considered unchanged.</p></trans-abstract><kwd-group xml:lang="ru"><kwd>социология религии</kwd><kwd>Родни Старк</kwd><kwd>субъективная религиозность</kwd><kwd>теория секуляризации</kwd><kwd>модернизация</kwd><kwd>религия в Исландии</kwd><kwd>религия в Великобритании</kwd></kwd-group><kwd-group xml:lang="en"><kwd>sociology of religion</kwd><kwd>Rodney Stark</kwd><kwd>subjective religiousness</kwd><kwd>secularization theory</kwd><kwd>modernization</kwd><kwd>religion in Iceland</kwd><kwd>religion in Great Britain</kwd></kwd-group></article-meta></front><back><ref-list><title>References</title><ref id="cit1"><label>1</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Stark R. Secularization, R.I.P. // Sociology of Religion. — 1999. — Vol. 60. — № 3. — Рp. 249–273. — DOI: 10.2307/3711936.</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Stark, R. (1999) ‘Secularization, R.I.P.’, Sociology of Religion, (60), pp. 249–273. DOI: 10.2307/3711936.</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit2"><label>2</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Sommerville J. C. Stark’s Age of Faith Argument and the Secularization of Things: A Commentary // Sociology of Religion. — 2002. — Vol. 63. — № 3. — Pp. 361–372. — DOI: 10.2307/3712474.</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Sommerville, J. C. (2002) ‘Stark’s Age of Faith Argument and the Secularization of Things: A Commentary’, Sociology of Religion, (63), pp. 361–372. DOI: 10.2307/3712474.</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit3"><label>3</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">The Desecularization of the World / Ed. by P. L. Berger. — Washington : Eerdmans, 1999. — 135 p.</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Berger, P. L. (ed.) (1999) The Desecularization of the World. Washington: Eerdmans. Wilson, B. R. (1966) Religion in Secular Society. London, C. A. Watts &amp; Co.</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit4"><label>4</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Wilson B.R. Religion in Secular Society. — London, C. A. Watts &amp; Co. 1966. — XIX, 252 p.</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Berger, P. (1967) The sacred canopy : elements of a sociological theory of religion. Garden City, NY: Doubleday.</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit5"><label>5</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Berger P. The sacred canopy : elements of a sociological theory of religion. — Garden City, NY : Doubleday, 1967. — VII, 229 p.</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Martin, D. (1978) A General Theory of Secularization. New York: Harper &amp; Row.</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit6"><label>6</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Martin D. A General Theory of Secularization. — New York : Harper &amp; Row, 1978. — IX, 353 p.</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Bruce, S. (2011) Secularization: In Defence of an Unfashionable Theory. Oxford: Oxford University Press.</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit7"><label>7</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Bruce S. Secularization: In Defence of an Unfashionable Theory. — Oxford : Oxford University Press, 2011. — IX, 243 p</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Bruce, S. (2016) ‘Appendix Two’, in Wilson, B. R. Religion in Secular Society: Fifty Years On. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 241–258. DOI: 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198788379.001.0001.</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit8"><label>8</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Bruce S. Appendix Two // Religion in Secular Society: Fifty Years On. / Wilson B.R. — Oxford : Oxford University Press, 2016. — Pp. 241–258. — DOI: 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198788379.001.0001.</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Pollack, D. (2015) ‘Varieties of Secularization Theories and Their Indispensable Core’, The Germanic Review: Literature, Culture, Theory, (90), pp. 60–79. DOI: 10.1080/00168890.2015.1002361.</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit9"><label>9</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Pollack D. Varieties of Secularization Theories and Their Indispensable Core // The Germanic Review: Literature, Culture, Theory. — 2015. — Vol. 90. — № 1. — Pp. 60–79. — DOI: 10.1080/00168890.2015.1002361.</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Martin, D. (1965) ‘Towards Eliminating the Concept of Secularisation’, in Gould J. (ed.) Penguin survey of the social sciences. Harmondsworth (UK): Penguin, pp. 169–182.</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit10"><label>10</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Martin D. Towards Eliminating the Concept of Secularisation // Penguin survey of the social sciences. — Harmondsworth: Penguin, 1965. — Pp. 169–182.</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Cox, J. (2010) ‘Towards Eliminating the Concept of Secularisation: A Progress Report’, in Brown C. G., Snape V. (ed.) Secularisation in the Christian World. Essays in honour of Hugh McLeod. Farnham: Ashgate Publishing Limited, pp. 13–28.</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit11"><label>11</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Cox J. Towards Eliminating the Concept of Secularisation: A Progress Report // Secularisation in the Christian World. Essays in honour of Hugh McLeod. — Farnham : Ashgate Publishing Limited, 2010. — Рp. 13–28.</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Bruce, S. (2002) God is Dead: Secularization in the West. Malden, Oxford, Carlton: Wiley-Blackwell.</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit12"><label>12</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Bruce S. God is Dead: Secularization in the West. — Malden, Oxford, Carlton: Wiley-Blackwell, 2002. — XV, 288 p.</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Wilson, B. R. (1982) Religion in Sociological Perspective. Oxford: Oxford University Press.</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit13"><label>13</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Wilson B.R. Religion in Sociological Perspective. — Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1982. — VII, 185 p.</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Thomas, K. (1971) Religion and the decline of magic. New York: Scribner’s.</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit14"><label>14</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Thomas K. Religion and the decline of magic. — New York: Scribner’s, 1971. — XX, 716 p.</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Stark, R., Iannaccone, L. R. (1994) ‘A Supply-Side Reinterpretation of the “Secularization” of Europe’, Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, (33), pp. 230–252. DOI: 10.2307/1386688.</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit15"><label>15</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Stark R., Iannaccone L. R. A Supply-Side Reinterpretation of the “Secularization” of Europe // Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion. — 1994. — Vol. 33. — № 3. — Рp. 230–252. — DOI: 10.2307/1386688.</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Tomasson, R. F. (1980) Iceland: The first new society. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press. Magnusson, S. (1977) Northern Sphinx: Iceland and the Icelanders from the Settlement to the Present. Montreal: McGill-Queen’s University Press.</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit16"><label>16</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Tomasson R. F. Iceland: The first new society. — Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 1980. — VII, 247 p.</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Swatos, W. H. (1984) ‘The relevance of religion: Iceland and secularization theory’, Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, (23), pp. 32–43. DOI: 10.2307/1385455.</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit17"><label>17</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Magnusson S. Northern Sphinx: Iceland and the Icelanders from the Settlement to the Present. — Montreal: McGill-Queen’s University Press, 1977. — VIII, 261 p.</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Tomasson, R. F. (1968) ‘Religion is irrelevant in Sweden’, Trans-action, (6), pp. 46–53. DOI: 10.1007/BF03180860.</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit18"><label>18</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Swatos W. H. The relevance of religion: Iceland and secularization theory // Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion. — 1984. — Vol. 23. — № 1. — Pp. 32–43. — DOI: 10.2307/1385455.</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Davie, G. (1994) Religion in Britain Since 1945: Believing Without Belonging. Oxford, Cambridge (Mass.): Blackwell.</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit19"><label>19</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Tomasson R. F. Religion is irrelevant in Sweden // Trans-action. — 1968. — Vol. 6. — № 2. — Pp. 46–53. — DOI: 10.1007/BF03180860.</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Davie, G. (1990) ‘Believing Without Belonging: Is This the Future of Religion in Britain?’, Social Compass, (37), pp. 455–469. doi: 10.1177/003776890037004004.</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit20"><label>20</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Davie G. Religion in Britain Since 1945: Believing Without Belonging. — Oxford, Cambridge (Mass.): Blackwell, 1994. — XIII, 226 p.</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Gunnarsson, G. J. (2020) ‘Facing the New Situation of Religious Education in Iceland’, Religions, 11(10), p 537. DOI: 10.3390/rel11100537.</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit21"><label>21</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Davie G. Believing Without Belonging: Is This the Future of Religion in Britain? // Social Compass. — 1990. — Vol. 37. — № 4. — Pp. 455–469. — DOI: 10.1177/003776890037004004.</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Voas, D., Crockett A. (2005) ‘Religion in Britain: Neither Believing nor Belonging’, Sociology, (39), pp. 11–28. DOI: 10.1177/0038038505048998.</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit22"><label>22</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Gunnarsson G. J. Facing the New Situation of Religious Education in Iceland // Religions. — 2020. — 11. — Pp. 537. — DOI: 537. 10.3390/rel11100537.</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Gunnarsson G. J. Facing the New Situation of Religious Education in Iceland // Religions. — 2020. — 11. — Pp. 537. — DOI: 537. 10.3390/rel11100537.</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit23"><label>23</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Voas D., Crockett A. Religion in Britain: Neither Believing nor Belonging // Sociology. — 2005. — Vol. 39. — № 1. — Pp. 11–28. — DOI: 10.1177/0038038505048998.</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Voas D., Crockett A. Religion in Britain: Neither Believing nor Belonging // Sociology. — 2005. — Vol. 39. — № 1. — Pp. 11–28. — DOI: 10.1177/0038038505048998.</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref></ref-list><fn-group><fn fn-type="conflict"><p>The authors declare that there are no conflicts of interest present.</p></fn></fn-group></back></article>
