A key requirement for the framework is to design a monitoring system at an appropriate spatial and temporal resolution that is able to i capture key physical, biological, and socio-economic processes; and ii enable robust governance systems to be established. In order to lay the groundwork for achievement of the goal, this project has the following objectives: In addition, we will hold two workshops during
Advanced Search It has been more than a decade since Peter Berger 1 famously introduced the concept of desecularization to denote a variety of manifestations of the worldwide resurgence of religion.
Studying the interplay of secularizing and counter-secularizing trends and forces, Berger wrote, is a most important task of the sociology of religion. This would have meant a massive shift of focus in research within the sociology of religion. The shift, however, has been slow to emerge.
Recent studies of the resurgence of religion and its influence on societies worldwide 3 have generated mounting evidence in support of Berger's desecularization thesis. Yet, there has been remarkably little effort to conceptualize desecularization and heuristically apply this theoretical notion to comparative studies of religions' resurgence around the world.
The absence of such a general conceptual framework impedes large-scale comparisons of desecularization's known cases. This, in turn, prevents theoretical generalization and the development of a theory of desecularization.
This contrasts sharply with existing prolific work dedicated to defining, conceptualizing, and theorizing secularization understood as a general decline of religion's societal influence. Debates and disagreements notwithstanding, secularization studies have developed into a relatively coherent field that enables theoretical generalization and hypotheses testing.
Thus, the sociology of religion today still appears much better equipped to study the secularizing trends and forces than the desecularizing ones. Consequently, the important goal of systematically exploring the forces and trends' interplay remains elusive.
Why this has been so is a question that merits investigation, yet is too big for a journal article. Debates still largely revolve around an eighteenth- and nineteenth-century agenda originally set to herald religion's decline in the West.
This applies to critics of the secularization thesis no less than to its proponents. It is still about proving Comte right or wrong. Yet, sociologists are immersed in rearguard theoretical skirmishes and are inadequately prepared for conceptualizing and theoretically explaining these new realities on the ground.
The deathwork is enacted everyday in the halls of our institutions of higher illiteracy. As a result, sociology that often boastfully presents itself as critical thinking incarnate and as a reflexive force behind social change fails on both counts.
This essay is written in an attempt to contribute to overcoming the aforesaid lag. It introduces a conceptual framework for desecularization analysis based on contemporary and classical concepts of the sociology of religion.
While these scholars represent divergent and at times rivaling theoretical orientations, the essay shows that their ideas shed light, albeit from different angles, on the nature and meaning of desecularization.
The essay begins by developing an analytical definition of desecularization as counter-secularization. The definition specifies desecularization's constituent processes that include changes in collective representations and institutions both formal and informal and ultimately transform societies' material substrata.
It further discusses desecularization's unintegratedness and links it to the underlying dynamics of sociocultural systemic transitions.
Next, the analysis focuses on the actors and activists of desecularization.
A typology of mass reactions to desecularizing regimes is offered in this context. Next, I consider analytical levels and time-scales involved in desecularization analyses. I further suggest that the time-scales we apply to desecularization studies are consequential for understanding its social forces and foundations.
Finally, I introduce the notion of multiple, overlapping, and clashing desecularizations and briefly address globalization's role in their development. Toward a Definition The Point of Departure Although Peter Berger's seminal essay 10 does not contain a fully developed definition of desecularization, it provides crucially important leads to constructing such a definition.
In particular, pivotal to the discussion that follows is Berger's notion of desecularization as counter-secularization. Evident as it may seem, the distinction is still important to note if we are to arrive at a logically stricter definition of desecularization.
This is a story of religion's growth, but not of a desecularization of America, simply because the initially low adherence rate cannot be attributed to a preceding secularization of the country.
It is also a demonstration that even in emblematically modern Western settings secularization's effects on society are limited. Yet, survival and adaptation are clearly different from resurgence and cannot be considered under the conceptual rubric of desecularization.
I would not have addressed this obvious distinction had it not been somewhat blurred in recent discussions. Both classes of phenomena manifest the limits of secularization and logically come up together when the shortcomings of religious decline theories are discussed. Moreover, as was stated above, congruent with Berger's original idea, a valid conceptualization of desecularization as counter-secularization rests upon acknowledging the presence of secularizing trends and forces.
Only in such a manner will we be able to approach the important task of studying the interplay between secularizing and counter-secularizing trends. Therefore, the development of a theory of desecularization will, in my view, benefit once this issue is detached more clearly from the never-ending debate on whether or not and to what extent secularization is a reality.
Some proponents and opponents of the secularization thesis may see the debate as a zero-sum game. Yet, desecularization and secularization studies are not mutually exclusive.
Rather, they tell mutually complementary stories of the complex relationships between religion and society; that is, to the extent that both theories are understood as scientific accounts rather than conflicting normatively prescriptive models of modern society.Resilience in individual development: Successful adaptation despite risk and adversity.
In Wang, M. and Gordon, E. (eds.). Educational Resilience in Inner-City America: Challenges and Prospects. Model® Framework The Model® incorporates 3 tasks, 5 conceptual questions and 7 interpersonal skill elements to support this work. The three (3) tasks of the model engage children, individuals and families, guiding practices that support their work of grieving and building relationships.
Submitted for publication in Earthquake Spectra Measuring and Improving the Disaster Resilience of Communities Stephanie E. Chang, alphabetnyc.com, and Masanobu Shinozuka This paper proposes a conceptual and measurement framework to. The absence of such a general conceptual framework impedes large-scale comparisons of desecularization's known cases.
This, in turn, prevents theoretical generalization and the development of a theory of desecularization. (a combination of resilient individual belief with declining belonging to religious communities). The resilience refers rather to identifying new internal resources of the individual or of the economy, and in our case, to facing situations of imbalance, shock or disaster, catastrophic events, and extreme natural phenomena etc.
Similarly, researchers may consider exploring alternate pathways and conceptual links between individual and family resilience and other factors, such as community resilience (Walsh, ) and posttraumatic growth.
Posttraumatic growth is both similar to and different from resilience and may add to and extend our under-standing of resilience.