Defining “Religion”

Abstract

The context: I have used this in my World Religions course during the first week of class. The pedagogical purpose: (1) To help students understand that there is no single definition of religion. By using a chronological list of definitions of religion students see how historical contexts have shaped what is defined as religion and how the understanding of the purpose of religion has changed from one historical period to another; (2) to create awareness of the variety of opinion about religion in the classroom and (3) to empower students' voices in the discussion of the study of religion. Description of the strategy: On the first day I have students write answers to two basic questions: what is religion and what purpose does it serve? I distribute definitions of religions for them to read for the next class. Lists of definitions are widely available. The list starts with early definitions by Feuerbach and Freud and ends with modern definitions by Charles Long and Cornell West. In the next class students discuss in small groups the following: which definitions do they agree or disagree with, and why. Then the group discusses their answers and how definitions of religion have changed over time. Finally, I write the main elements of their definitions of religion and its purpose on a board and we discuss how their definitions are similar to the theorists' definitions. Why it is effective: This tactic is effective for several reasons. First, it shows students that their own definitions of religion are similar to religion theorists' definitions. Students see that their understanding of religion is valid and that each of them has something to add to this ongoing debate. Second, discussion about the purpose of religion allows the students to see that religion has many purposes and not all people agree with what it is that religion does. This is an effective approach to this topic because students see that not only do they as a group disagree on what religion is and what it does but they see that scholars of religion also disagree. This is a useful conversation to have in the first week since it creates an atmosphere of critical engagement with different viewpoints.