Religion has long been an important social force. It organizes people into groups and provides them with common moral beliefs and practices, giving them a sense of belonging and purpose. It binds societies together, helping them deal with conflict and crises. And it provides practical benefits, such as support for the poor and disadvantaged.
However, over the years scholars have struggled with how to analyze Religion as a concept. One problem is that the meaning of the word changes over time. The term was once used only for scrupulous devotion; now it is a broader, more functional category. What’s more, there are many ways to define what is and is not a religion.
The resulting debate about what is and is not a religion raises two philosophical issues, both of which are central to an understanding of religion in the modern world. One is that the development of a language for social kinds like Religion takes time, and that the emergence of this concept was not entirely a product of Western thought.
The other is that the way we use the concept of Religion reveals its political character. For example, some scholars have defined Religion in terms of social cohesion or as the beliefs and practices that provide direction in life; these functions suggest that it is a universal phenomenon. Others, however, have taken a reflexive turn and pulled back the camera to examine how Religion was invented for particular purposes.