Hubbry Logo
Religious behaviourReligious behaviourMain
Open search
Religious behaviour
Community hub
Religious behaviour
logo
7 pages, 0 posts
0 subscribers
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Religious behaviour
Religious behaviour
Religious behaviour
View on Wikipedia
from Wikipedia

Religious behaviours are behaviours motivated by religious beliefs. Religious actions are also called 'ritual' and religious avoidances are called taboos or ritual prohibitions.

Religious beliefs can inform ordinary aspects of life including eating, clothing and marriage, as well as deliberately religious acts such as worship, prayer, sacrifices etc. As there are over 4,000 religions in the world,[1] there is a wide variety of behaviour.

Actions

[edit]
See also: Spiritual practice, Religion § Practices, and Cult (religious practice)

Religious behaviours may take on several aspects;[2]

  • they may be public, such as participating in religious rituals, making pilgrimages, or donating time and money to religious groups;
  • they may be group-orientated, such as meeting regularly to carry out traditional rituals in a temple or church.
  • they may also be individual and private, such as prayer, meditation, and reading sacred texts.
  • they may be professional, with a few people set aside to focus their lives on only carrying out actions in connection with their faith (eg, rabbi, guru, etc)[3]

The most general religious action is prayer. It can be done quietly by a person all alone,[4] but people can also pray in groups using songs. Sacrifice is also a widely spread religious action (usually time, money or food).[5] Prayer and sacrifice, as well as reading scriptures and attending a meeting at a religious building,[6] often form the basis of other, more complicated religious actions like pilgrimage, processions, or consulting an oracle. Many rituals are connected to a certain purpose, like initiation, ritual purification and preparation for an important happening or task. Among these are also the so-called rituals of transition, which occur at important moments of the human life cycle, like birth, adulthood/marriage, sickness and death.[7] A special religious action is spirit possession and religious ecstasy. Religious specialists, such as priests, vicars, rabbis, imams and pandits are involved in many religious actions.

Avoidances

[edit]
See also: Taboo

A religious avoidance is when a person desists from something or from some action for religious reasons. It can be food or drink that one does not touch because of one's religion for some time (fast). This abstinence can also be for a longer time. Some people do not have sex (celibacy); others avoid contact with blood, or dead animals. Well known examples are: Jews and Muslims do not eat pork; the celibacy of Catholic priests; the purity rules of Hinduism and Judaism; the Word of Wisdom (which teaches to avoid alcohol, coffee, tea, etc.) of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.[8]

These avoidances, or 'taboos', are often about;

Religious avoidances are often not easily recognisable as (part of) religious behaviour. When asked, the believers often do not motivate this kind of behaviour explicitly as religious but say the avoidance for health reasons, ethical reasons, or because it is hygienic.

Academic study

[edit]
See also: Study of religion

Religious behaviour is seldom studied for itself. When it is given attention at all, it is usually studied as an illustration of the religious images, like in comparative religion and cultural anthropology, or as part of the study of man in the social sciences.

Studies can look at both beliefs and actions; for example, studies in the UK looked at people’s attitude to God and the afterlife, as well as actions such as worship attendance and prayer.[10][11] Other surveys may look at similar actions.[12][13]

Religious behaviour is part of a larger area of human behaviour; as such, studies and opinions are always changing.

Controversies

[edit]

Persecution

[edit]

Opposition to religious behaviour can lead to Religious Persecution, where certain individuals and groups are seen as 'separate' and unwelcome due to their beliefs or actions.[14][15][16]

Behaviour in sacred spaces

[edit]

Christian

[edit]

There are a number of etiquette rules which would include showing up about five or 10 minutes early to allow some time of prayer and "to be ready to participate in the Mass."[17] Other suggestions may include when to stand, sit or kneel, the use of candles or touching of icons.[18]

Jean-Baptiste Massillon gives a lengthy sermon on the Bible verse, "And Jesus went into the temple of God, and cast out all them that sold and bought in the temple, and overthrew the tables of the money-changers, and the seats of them that sold doves." (Matthew 21:12) stating that "of all crimes, in effect, by which the greatness of God is insulted, I see almost none more deserving of his chastisements than the profanations of his temples; and they are so much the more criminal, as the dispositions required of us by religion, when assisting there, ought to be more holy."[19]

Hindu

[edit]

There are a number of etiquette rules when attending a temple, including removal of shoes, bowing and bringing an offering.[20]

Muslim

[edit]

There are a number of etiquette rules when attending a mosque, including wearing clean clothes and carrying out ablutions.[21]

Sikh

[edit]

There are a number of etiquette rules for the gurdwara, including wearing clean clothes and using head coverings.[22]

Judaism

[edit]

There are a number of etiquette rules for the synagogue, including seating arrangements and wearing head coverings.[23]

See also

[edit]

References

[edit]
[edit]
Revisions and contributorsEdit on WikipediaRead on Wikipedia

Religious behaviour

View on Grokipedia
from Grokipedia
Religious behaviour encompasses the observable actions, practices, and conducts that individuals and groups perform in response to religious , doctrines, and commitments, including rituals such as , communal , ethical adherence, scriptural , and costly signaling through sacrifices or pilgrimages. These behaviors manifest both privately, as in personal devotion or self-regulation, and publicly, as in collective ceremonies that reinforce group identity and norms. Empirical analyses distinguish religious behaviour from mere by focusing on measurable outcomes, such as frequency of participation or adherence to proscriptive rules, which interconnect with broader social and psychological processes. From evolutionary and biological standpoints, religious behaviour likely emerged through , with genetic heritabilities estimated between 20% and over 50% for specific practices and attitudes, suggesting innate predispositions shaped by ancestral environments favoring and group survival. Theories posit it as either an via mechanisms like credible commitment to shared agents, which reduced free-riding in large groups, or a of cognitive modules for agency detection and social intuition. In psychological terms, it correlates with traits like lower and higher among practitioners, influencing and coping strategies during adversity. Sociologically, religious behaviour fosters prosocial effects, including elevated , volunteerism, and community cohesion, often through repeated interactions in congregations that build trust and reciprocity beyond kin ties. However, variations across cultures highlight defining characteristics like enforcement and , which predict commitment levels but also spark debates over whether such patterns primarily serve individual satisfaction or collective enforcement. Controversies persist regarding causal impacts, with evidence linking frequent engagement to expanded sympathy networks and reduced isolation, yet questioning persists on whether these stem from selection biases in self-reporting or inherent dynamics.

Conceptual Foundations

Definition and Scope

Religious behavior refers to the observable actions, practices, and rituals enacted by individuals or groups in response to beliefs involving supernatural agents, forces, or realms beyond empirical verification. These behaviors typically manifest as communicated affirmations of claims about non-observable realities, such as deities, spirits, or states, distinguishing them from secular activities through their orientation toward the sacred or transcendent. The scope of religious behavior is broad, encompassing both proactive engagements—like prayer, offerings, festivals, and pilgrimages—and restrictive conduct, such as taboos on certain foods, sexual practices, or interactions deemed profane. These actions serve to maintain social cohesion, enforce moral codes, or seek supernatural intervention, varying by cultural context but consistently tied to cosmologies that attribute to non-material entities. Anthropological surveys indicate such behaviors are universal across documented human societies, with no known exceptions lacking some form of supernatural-oriented practice, though intensity and form differ; for instance, in an appears in approximately 79% of sampled societies, often prompting associated rituals. Empirically, religious behaviors integrate into lifecycle events (e.g., birth rites, funerals) and daily routines, influencing everything from dietary habits to communal gatherings, with participation rates varying globally—for example, over 80% of the world's population engages in some religious practice as of recent surveys. This universality stems from cognitive predispositions toward agency detection and pattern-seeking, enabling behaviors that address existential uncertainties, though scholarly definitions emphasize observable conduct over unverifiable internal states to avoid conflation with mere cognition.

Evolutionary and Psychological Bases

Religious behaviors arise from cognitive predispositions shaped by evolutionary processes, with key mechanisms including hyperactive agency detection, where humans intuitively attribute ambiguous events to intentional agents rather than chance, fostering beliefs in oversight. This tendency, rooted in survival adaptations for detecting predators or allies, extends to gods or spirits, as evidenced by experimental studies showing children and adults default to agent-based explanations for natural phenomena. Similarly, — the capacity to infer mental states in others—facilitates anthropomorphic conceptions of deities, making religious narratives cognitively intuitive and memorable due to minimal violations of ordinary expectations, such as omnipotent yet person-like beings. Evolutionary accounts debate whether religion constitutes an adaptation enhancing fitness or a byproduct of unrelated cognitive traits. The byproduct view, dominant in cognitive science of religion, posits that religious beliefs emerge incidentally from mechanisms like agency detection and causal reasoning, without direct selection for religiosity itself, as these traits evolved for non-religious purposes such as threat avoidance. Critiques argue this underestimates persistence of costly religious practices, like rituals demanding time and risk, which should face selection pressure unless they confer group-level benefits; empirical data indicate religious groups historically outcompete non-religious ones in survival and reproduction, with heritability estimates of religiosity at 30-50% from twin studies suggesting a genetic underpinning amenable to selection. Adaptationist perspectives highlight religion's role in signaling commitment and enforcing cooperation, as religious priming increases prosociality and generosity in economic games, while communal rituals correlate with higher in-group trust and reduced free-riding. Psychologically, religious behaviors fulfill needs for existential coherence and anxiety reduction, drawing on evolved modules for pattern-seeking and amid uncertainty. Behavioral genetic research confirms moderate in dimensions like religious attendance and , implying innate temperamental factors influence susceptibility to doctrinal adherence. posits god concepts as extensions of parental bonds, with secure early attachments predicting positive religious orientations that buffer stress, as shown in longitudinal studies linking to lower responses during adversity. reveals activation in reward and networks during or , underscoring how these practices leverage dopamine-mediated reinforcement akin to social bonding mechanisms. While cultural transmission amplifies these bases, core dispositions persist across societies, explaining religion's near-universality despite varying forms.

Core Types of Behaviors

Affirmative Rituals and Practices

Affirmative rituals constitute a core category of religious behaviors involving deliberate, positive actions that express devotion, seek divine favor, or commemorate sacred events, distinguishing them from prohibitive taboos by their proactive engagement with the divine or communal structures. These practices often include , offerings, liturgical services, and sacramental acts, performed individually or collectively to affirm beliefs and foster . Empirical research indicates that such rituals enhance and emotional regulation; for instance, a 2016 study posits religious rituals as psychological exercises that bolster adaptive self-regulation by signaling commitment and reducing anxiety through repetitive, effortful actions. Similarly, integrative reviews of psychology demonstrate that engagement in these behaviors buffers against negative and improves performance under stress by decreasing physiological . In , affirmative rituals prominently feature the , a commemorative rite reenacting the , administered weekly in many denominations to symbolize spiritual nourishment and communal unity, with participation linked to reported increases in life satisfaction among adherents. serves as an initiatory practice, marking entry into the faith through symbolic purification via water immersion or sprinkling, historically documented since the 1st century CE in accounts and early ' writings. Islamic practices include the five daily prayers, oriented toward , which involve physical prostrations and recitations from the , fulfilling one of the Five Pillars and empirically associated with reduced tension and stabilized emotions in longitudinal studies of religious coping. The pilgrimage to , obligatory once in a lifetime for capable Muslims, culminates in rituals like Tawaf of the , drawing over 2 million participants annually as of 2019 data, reinforcing collective identity. Hinduism employs Puja, a devotional offering ritual involving flowers, , and food presented to deities at home altars or temples, performed daily by observant families to invoke blessings and maintain cosmic harmony, with variations across sects emphasizing personal devotion. In Judaism, affirmative rituals encompass observance through candle lighting, blessings over wine, and festive meals on Fridays, prescribed in the and , which studies correlate with enhanced family cohesion and subjective well-being. Buddhism features meditative practices like rituals derived from the , such as metta loving-kindness meditation, which experimental evidence shows mitigate anxiety and promote by restructuring cognitive appraisals of stressors. Across these traditions, affirmative rituals often scale from solitary acts—such as personal , engaged in by 55% of U.S. adults weekly per 2021 surveys—to large-scale festivals, like the Hindu , attracting 50 million pilgrims in 2013 for ritual bathing believed to confer spiritual purification. These practices' efficacy in promoting individual stems from their structured repetition, which cultivates and social signaling of commitment, as evidenced by cultural evolutionary models where ritual costly signaling fosters group without invoking unverifiable claims as causal necessities. However, outcomes vary; while meta-analyses link frequent participation to lower depression rates—e.g., positive religious reducing symptoms in psychotic patients over prospective follow-ups—effects depend on contextual factors like support rather than ritual form alone, underscoring causal realism over idealized narratives of universal benefit.

Prohibitive Avoidances and Taboos

Prohibitive avoidances and constitute a core category of religious behaviors, encompassing explicit bans on specific actions, consumptions, or associations deemed spiritually contaminating, morally transgressive, or disruptive to divine order. These prohibitions often invoke sanctions such as divine wrath or impurity, distinguishing them from secular norms by their sacred enforcement mechanisms. Anthropological analyses trace to early human societies where they regulated social boundaries, with violations risking communal or retribution. In major , dietary s exemplify prohibitive avoidances, serving to demarcate group identity and enforce discipline. Judaism's laws, codified in Leviticus 11, prohibit , shellfish, and blood consumption, alongside separations of meat and dairy, with adherence linked to covenantal fidelity rather than explicit health rationales in scriptural texts. Islam similarly bans and alcohol (), as stipulated in the (e.g., 5:3), framing these as tests of obedience that foster self-control and communal purity. Hinduism imposes taboos on for many adherents, rooted in reverence for cows as sacred symbols of life sustenance, with ethnographic studies noting their role in reinforcing and vegetarian ideals. Beyond diet, taboos extend to sexual and ritual domains, often amplifying social cohesion through costly signaling. Christian traditions vary, but many prohibit , , and per injunctions (e.g., 1 Corinthians 6:9-10), with historical vows among imposing personal sacrifices to enhance perceived spiritual authority. indicates such prohibitions correlate with reduced risky behaviors; for instance, religious adherents avoiding alcohol exhibit lower rates of , though causality involves both doctrinal adherence and community enforcement rather than inherent effects. Anthropologists argue these avoidances evolve culturally to mitigate responses to perceived contaminants, promoting in pre-modern contexts, yet modern violations rarely incur claimed penalties, suggesting symbolic over literal functions. Taboos also manifest in menstrual or death-related avoidances, as in Orthodox Judaism's laws isolating women during to avert impurity, or widespread Hindu customs barring widows from certain rituals post-cremation. These practices, while critiqued in secular analyses for disparities, empirically bolster group by codifying boundaries against chaos, per . Violations historically prompted rituals, underscoring taboos' role in maintaining moral equilibrium without reliance on state law.

Communal and Solitary Expressions

Communal expressions of religious behavior involve collective participation in rituals, services, and gatherings that reinforce social bonds and shared beliefs among adherents. These include weekly worship services, festivals, pilgrimages, and communal prayers, which are prevalent across major religions such as Christianity's masses, Islam's congregational prayers (Jumu'ah), and Hinduism's temple festivals. Empirical data indicate that approximately 33% of U.S. adults attend religious services in person at least once or twice a month, with 24% participating weekly, either virtually or in person, reflecting sustained communal engagement despite secular trends. Such practices foster generalized trust, , and perceived cooperativeness, as frequency of service positively correlates with these outcomes in longitudinal studies controlling for confounders. Communal rituals also enhance social stability and human flourishing by promoting prosocial behaviors and community cohesion, with repeated evidence linking regular group involvement to reduced all-cause mortality and improved policy-relevant outcomes like family stability. In contrast, solitary expressions encompass private devotions such as personal prayer, , scripture reading, and ascetic practices conducted without group involvement, allowing for individualized spiritual introspection. These are more widespread than communal attendance; for instance, daily private is reported by a substantial portion of believers, with studies showing it predicts higher rates over six years ( of 1.48 for daily pray-ers versus non-pray-ers) independent of other factors. Positive religious through solitary practices correlates with better psychological and stress reduction, though negative coping styles in isolation can exacerbate distress. Unlike communal forms, which emphasize social reinforcement, solitary expressions prioritize personal connection to the divine, as seen in monastic traditions or daily personal supplications in and , and they remain resilient amid declining attendance, with private faith practices declining less sharply than public ones. The distinction between communal and solitary modes influences their respective outcomes: communal participation builds networks that buffer through , particularly in later life, while solitary practices offer flexible, introspective coping mechanisms that may protect against depression and anxiety in , albeit with smaller effect sizes. Many s integrate both, prescribing solitary alongside obligatory group rites to balance individual with , though empirical patterns reveal solitary behaviors often outpace communal ones in frequency, suggesting personal devotion as a core, adaptable element of religious life.

Variations in Specific Contexts

Behaviors in Sacred Spaces

In sacred spaces such as mosques, temples, churches, and synagogues, religious adherents typically adopt behaviors that emphasize reverence, ritual purity, and separation from everyday profane activities. Common practices include removing footwear before entry, observed in Islamic mosques, Hindu temples, and Buddhist shrines to symbolize humility and prevent contamination of holy ground with external impurities. Head coverings are required for men in Jewish synagogues, often via a kippah or yarmulke, and for both sexes in some Muslim contexts to denote respect and submission to divine authority. These actions serve to psychologically transition participants into a focused state, fostering communal discipline and individual mindfulness, as physical demarcations reinforce cognitive shifts toward the sacred. Specific postural and gestural behaviors further distinguish sacred engagement. In mosques, the prayer ritual involves sequential movements of standing (qiyam), (ruku), and (sujud) facing the toward , performed five times daily to embody total submission to . In Hindu temples, devotees undertake darshan by gazing upon the deity's image after circumambulating (pradakshina) the clockwise, often following hand and foot washing for ritual cleanliness. Jewish synagogue customs mandate silence during and services, prohibiting idle conversation or lightheartedness to maintain the space's sanctity as a locus for and study. Christian churches commonly feature —bending one knee toward the altar—or the upon entry, signaling acknowledgment of Christ's presence, though variations exist across denominations. These behaviors, rigid and repetitive, cultivate group cohesion and individual commitment by channeling affective responses like and , as evidenced in analyses where ritual formality in sacred settings enhances perceived meaning and social bonding. Violations, such as loud speech or disruptive movement, are avoided to preserve the space's efficacy, with etiquette extending to low voices in mosques during and no during active in multiple traditions. Empirically, such practices correlate with heightened emotional regulation and reduced secular distractions, though their origins often trace to practical concerns like alongside symbolic intent.

Daily and Lifecycle Integration

Religious behaviors integrate into daily life primarily through repetitive practices such as and , which serve as mechanisms for personal devotion and stress . In the United States, surveys indicate that 55% of adults pray daily, with women more likely to do so than men (64% versus 46%), embedding these acts into morning, evening, or routines regardless of formal service attendance. Empirical studies further show that daily religious behaviors, including , exert positive main effects on affective states by buffering the impact of daily stressors and enhancing responses to positive events. Such routines often extend to dietary observances, like or kosher adherence among and , or periodic in traditions such as or , which temporally structure eating and reflection patterns. These daily integrations foster consistency in , with "highly religious" individuals—defined by daily combined with weekly service attendance—reporting higher engagement in scripture reading or influenced by . Cross-culturally, anthropological evidence highlights how routines like communal meals or work pauses for reflection reinforce social cohesion, as seen in societies where repetitive acts align with environmental cycles to mark time and affirm beliefs. However, integration varies by context; urban believers may adapt practices via digital tools, negotiating traditional rituals with modern schedules while maintaining core elements of identity. Lifecycle integration manifests through rites of passage that ritually demarcate biological and social transitions, including birth, or , , and , universal across societies to signify status changes. At birth, rituals often invoke or incorporation, such as purification ceremonies or naming rites documented in diverse ethnographic accounts, emphasizing communal validation of new life. or coming-of-age initiations, prevalent in indigenous and tribal groups, involve seclusion, trials, or symbolic rebirth to confer adult responsibilities, with evidence from global samples linking these to reinforced roles and moral frameworks. Marriage rituals standardize union formation, typically involving vows, exchanges, or feasts to publicly affirm commitments, as observed in historical and contemporary data where they mitigate alliance uncertainties through performative oaths. rites, conversely, address mortality by facilitating , , or ancestral incorporation, with practices like vigils or commemorations aiding processing and social continuity, per anthropological reviews of lifecycle ceremonies. These events, while culturally variable, consistently employ symbolic acts to navigate existential shifts, with empirical correlations to enhanced family resilience and identity transmission.

Empirical Impacts and Evidence

Positive Outcomes for Individuals and Societies

Religious participation, particularly regular attendance at services, has been associated with reduced risks of all-cause mortality, with one of over 5,000 adults finding that frequent attendees experienced a 26% lower mortality compared to non-attendees, independent of behaviors and . Similarly, analyses of U.S. obituaries from 2010-2017 indicated that individuals with religious affiliations lived approximately 3.82 years longer on average than those without, attributing this partly to ties and behavioral factors like reduced . For , positive religious —such as seeking spiritual support during stress—predicts reductions in depressive and anxiety symptoms among clinical populations, including psychotic patients, as evidenced in prospective studies tracking symptom changes over time. At the individual level, religiosity correlates with enhanced , with a of 498 studies (N=1,281,424) reporting a small but significant positive association (r=0.16) across dimensions like attendance and intrinsic , potentially mediated by purpose and . Religious involvement also fosters resilience, providing resources that buffer against stress-induced negative emotions, as synthesized in reviews of over 3,000 empirical studies linking faith practices to lower depression incidence. For societies, religious behaviors promote prosocial actions, with frequent service attendance linked to higher rates of charitable giving and ; longitudinal data show attendees are more likely to donate time and money post-participation, enhancing community welfare. In diverse national samples, predicts greater generalized trust and behaviors, as attendance frequency boosts by 10-15% in European cohorts. Regarding crime, higher concentrations of religious congregations correlate with reduced violent and rates, particularly in socioeconomically disadvantaged areas, per analyses of U.S. county-level data where per capita congregations lowered offense rates by up to 20%. Cross-national comparisons of 13 industrial countries further confirm that nations with higher exhibit lower , attributed to moral frameworks discouraging deviance. These patterns suggest religious behaviors contribute to social stability through shared norms and mutual support networks.

Negative Consequences and Risks

Religious behaviors, particularly those involving rigid adherence to doctrines emphasizing divine punishment or moral perfectionism, have been empirically linked to heightened risks of disorders. Scrupulosity, a subtype of obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD) characterized by excessive religious obsessions and compulsions such as persistent fears of sinning or blaspheming, correlates with increased anxiety, guilt, and impaired daily functioning. Studies indicate that individuals with religious scrupulosity experience more severe OCD symptoms, including intrusive thoughts about offending a , which negatively impact religious experiences and overall well-being compared to non-scrupulous OCD sufferers. Negative religious —such as viewing suffering as divine punishment—mediates these effects, exacerbating depression and psychological distress, with longitudinal data showing associations between such coping styles and poorer outcomes. Certain religious practices prioritizing over conventional pose direct physical risks, including preventable morbidity and mortality. In cases where parents reject medical interventions for children due to religious convictions, faith healing has resulted in substantial child fatalities from treatable conditions like , , and infections; a review of 18 such U.S. cases from 1975 to 1995 documented 23 deaths, with medical evidence indicating high survival probabilities had standard care been provided. Exclusive reliance on or has led to documented and deaths in faith-based communities, with estimates suggesting hundreds of preventable pediatric fatalities annually when exemptions from laws apply. These risks extend to adults in sects like , where refusal of treatments such as insulin or antibiotics has caused avoidable deaths, underscoring causal links between doctrinal prohibitions and adverse health outcomes. Socially, intense religious behaviors can foster interpersonal strains, including family disruptions from excessive devotion or enforcement of taboos. Empirical analyses reveal that overcommitment to religious practices, such as prolonged rituals or proselytizing, contributes to marital and familial isolation, with qualitative from clinical samples highlighting family breakups tied to such excesses. Religious struggles, including doubts or perceived divine anger, predict declines in and relational quality among adherents, independent of positive faith aspects. While broader societal intolerance stems from group behaviors, individual-level risks include stigmatization of non-conformists within communities, amplifying isolation for those questioning .

Controversies and Debates

Persecution and Intolerance

Religious persecution involves systematic discrimination, harassment, violence, or suppression directed at individuals or groups due to their faith or lack thereof, often justified through religious doctrines or behaviors emphasizing doctrinal purity and exclusivity. Intolerance manifests in religious behaviors such as enforcing orthodoxy via social ostracism, vigilante enforcement of taboos, or communal pressures against apostasy, which can escalate to lethal outcomes in contexts where religious identity overrides individual rights. Empirical data indicate that such behaviors persist across history and regions, with government-imposed restrictions peaking globally in recent years; Pew Research Center reported that in 2022, government restrictions on religion remained at their highest levels since tracking began in 2007, affecting 198 countries through measures like banning faiths or limiting preaching. Historically, early Christian communities endured sporadic but intense persecution in the Roman Empire, driven by behaviors rooted in imperial cult worship and perceptions of Christian refusal to participate in pagan rituals as disloyalty. Under Emperor Nero in 64 CE, following the Great Fire of Rome, Christians were scapegoated and subjected to crucifixions, burnings, and arena executions, with Tacitus documenting their torture as public spectacles. The Diocletianic Persecution from 303 to 313 CE represented the most systematic campaign, involving church demolitions, scripture burnings, and forced sacrifices, affecting thousands across the empire before Constantine's Edict of Milan in 313 CE granted toleration. Later, Christian majorities exhibited intolerance, as in the Spanish Inquisition established in 1478, where behaviors enforcing Catholic orthodoxy led to trials, torture, and executions of suspected heretics, Jews, and Muslims, with estimates of 3,000 to 5,000 deaths over centuries. Islamic expansions from the 7th century onward involved conquest behaviors that imposed dhimmi status on non-Muslims, entailing taxes, restrictions on worship, and occasional forced conversions, though empirical records show variability by ruler and region. In modern contexts, intolerance often codifies into laws punishing perceived offenses against religious sensibilities, with blasphemy statutes in 89 countries affecting 57% of the global population as of 2024, predominantly in Muslim-majority states where such laws derive from interpretations of emphasizing protection of prophetic honor. These enable behaviors like mob violence or state executions; for instance, Pakistan's (Section 295-C) mandates death for insulting , resulting in over 1,500 accusations since , many leading to extrajudicial killings despite low conviction rates. remains acute, with ' 2025 World Watch List documenting 380 million facing high or extreme levels, primarily in 10 top countries—, , , , , , , , , and Pakistan—where Islamist or authoritarian regimes enforce religious conformity through violence, abductions, and church attacks, killing 4,476 for faith-related reasons in the reporting period. Social hostilities compound this, as data show facing harassment in 17 Middle East-North Africa countries in recent years, while and other minorities endure displacement of over 800,000 in conflict zones tied to . State atheism under communist regimes exemplified secular intolerance mimicking religious zeal, with the from 1917 to 1991 closing 40,000 churches, executing or imprisoning millions of believers, and promoting behaviors denouncing faith as superstition to enforce ideological monopoly. Today, 19 countries maintain "very high" government restrictions, including ’s suppression of Uyghur and via re-education camps holding over 1 million since 2017, and India's rising communal tensions under Hindu nationalist policies targeting and with mob lynchings and forced conversions reported in hundreds of incidents annually. These patterns reveal causal links between religious behaviors prioritizing group cohesion over pluralism and heightened risks, particularly where majorities wield state power, though empirical trends show no religion immune—Christian, Muslim, and Hindu contexts alike feature intolerance when unchecked by secular limits.

Religious Violence and Extremism

Religious violence encompasses acts of physical aggression, , or justified through religious doctrines or directed against individuals or groups on account of their . Such violence often stems from interpretations of sacred texts that endorse conflict against perceived apostates, infidels, or rivals, though empirical analyses indicate it frequently intersects with political, ethnic, or socioeconomic grievances rather than deriving solely from . For instance, the (GTD), which tracks over 200,000 incidents since 1970, classifies terrorist attacks by perpetrator ideology, revealing that religiously motivated attacks—predominantly Islamist—accounted for a rising share in the United States, from 9% of attacks in earlier decades to 53% between 2010 and 2016. Globally, the 2024 reports that affiliates remain the deadliest terrorist entities, responsible for significant deaths in , with nearly 2,000 fatalities from 258 incidents in alone in the prior year, highlighting concentrations in regions of weak . Extremism in religious contexts involves rigid, absolutist ideologies that demonize outsiders and legitimize or elimination to achieve eschatological or puritanical aims. Scholarly models dissect this across theological (e.g., literalist scriptural ), ritual (e.g., martyrdom cults), social (e.g., in-group ), and political dimensions, as seen in analyses of Islamic groups where extremists amplify selective hadiths to mobilize support. Causal factors extend beyond ; economic marginalization, state failure, and identity fusion in groups amplify , with peer or dysfunction heightening susceptibility per Radicalisation Awareness Network assessments. Empirical reviews challenge oversimplified , noting that emerges from interactions like perceived or resource competition, where serves as a framing device rather than root cause. Prominent modern examples include the September 11, 2001, attacks by , which killed 2,977 people in the United States through hijacked aircraft strikes justified as against Western influence. The Islamic State's self-proclaimed , established on June 29, 2014, in and , involved systematic beheadings, enslavement of (over 5,000 abducted in August 2014), and territorial conquests that displaced millions, framed as fulfilling prophetic battles. Other cases span faiths: by Myanmar's Buddhist nationalists since 2017 displaced over 700,000 Muslims amid arson and killings, while Hindu-Muslim clashes in , such as the 2002 Gujarat riots killing around 1,000 (mostly Muslim), illustrate how electoral politics can inflame doctrinal tensions. These incidents underscore that while religious rhetoric mobilizes perpetrators, underlying causal realism points to power asymmetries and historical animosities, with data showing 95% of 2023 terrorism deaths occurring in conflict zones where multiple motives converge. Mitigation efforts emphasize countering narratives through and inclusive development, as correlates with and exclusion in fragile states like or the . However, academic sources, often from Western institutions, may underemphasize intra-religious violence (e.g., Sunni-Shia conflicts killing tens of thousands annually) due to sensitivities, privileging secular framings over doctrinal incentives. Peer-reviewed evidence supports that religion's role in is amplified by and perceived existential threats, not inherent to itself, as non-religious ideologies have similarly fueled mass violence in the .

Secular and Internal Critiques

Secular critiques of religious behavior frequently highlight the absence of verifiable causal mechanisms underlying practices like and , positing them instead as psychological placebos or socially conditioned habits without external . Statistician , in his 1872 analysis, examined intercessory directed toward British monarchs—who received widespread public supplications—and found their lifespans statistically indistinguishable from those of non-prayed-for peers, such as European royalty without similar devotional focus. A 2006 systematic review of clinical trials on distant intercessory for health outcomes similarly concluded that evidence shows no consistent positive effects, with some studies indicating potential harm from heightened patient anxiety upon learning of prayers on their behalf. These findings underpin arguments that religious behaviors fail first-principles tests of , relying on anecdotal correlations rather than controlled empirical validation. Psychoanalytic and materialist frameworks further portray religious rituals as maladaptive responses to human vulnerabilities. , in works like (1927), interpreted rituals and as projections of infantile helplessness onto a paternal , functioning as defensive illusions that repress instinctual drives and foster dependency rather than adaptive reasoning. , critiquing religion's behavioral manifestations in Critique of Hegel's Philosophy of Right (1843-1844), deemed them "the ," instruments that ritualize submission to earthly hierarchies, dulling and perpetuating exploitation by framing suffering as divine will. extended this in The Antichrist (1888), decrying Christian rituals as embodiments of "," promoting life-denying virtues like meekness that stifle individual and natural hierarchies. Such views attribute ritual persistence to cultural inertia over truth, warning that uncritical adherence impedes scientific progress and rational self-determination. Internal critiques within religious traditions often target behaviors perceived as hypocritical or mechanistic, prioritizing outward forms over inner ethical transformation. Hebrew prophets repeatedly condemned ritualism untethered from ; Micah 6:6-8, for instance, rejects elaborate sacrifices—rivers of oil or firstborn offerings—in favor of "doing , loving , and walking humbly with your ," arguing that values moral conduct over performative . :11-17 echoes this, dismissing multiplied prayers, incense, and festivals as abominations when accompanied by injustice, such as neglecting the oppressed or shedding innocent blood, insisting that true demands ceasing and correcting . Amos similarly critiques feasting and sacrifices amid societal , declaring divine rejection of rituals from those who trample the needy. In , the records denouncing Pharisaic practices—such as ostentatious praying, tithing mint while neglecting justice, or ritual handwashing without heart purity—as hypocritical burdens that strain adherents without alleviating (:1-36). The Protestant Reformation amplified such internal dissent; Martin Luther's 95 Theses (1517) assailed indulgences and relic veneration as corrupt rituals exploiting believers, advocating to supplant sacramental mechanization with personal faith. Reformers like further critiqued Catholic mass rituals as idolatrous repetitions obscuring Christ's once-for-all sacrifice, urging behaviors grounded in scriptural simplicity over tradition-bound excess. These critiques, while varying by denomination, consistently demand alignment of religious behavior with doctrinal cores, rejecting dilutions into or moral complacency.

Academic Perspectives

Historical Development of Study

The academic study of religious behavior originated in the mid-19th century within , where scholars sought to explain rituals and practices through evolutionary frameworks. , in his 1871 work Primitive Culture, proposed as the foundational form of , positing that behaviors such as and offerings stemmed from primitive attributions of souls to natural phenomena, marking an early empirical classification of cross-cultural practices. James Frazer extended this in (1890), analyzing s like and sacrificial rites across societies as stages in a progression from magic to , emphasizing observable behavioral patterns over theological claims. These works shifted focus from doctrinal interpretation to behavioral observation, though later critiques highlighted their speculative evolutionary assumptions lacking direct causal evidence. In , the late 19th and early 20th centuries introduced functionalist analyses of religious behavior's societal roles. Émile Durkheim's The Elementary Forms of Religious Life (1912) examined Australian Aboriginal totemic rituals as mechanisms for , arguing that repetitive behaviors reinforced social solidarity through shared symbols rather than supernatural beliefs per se. , in The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism (1904–1905), traced ascetic behaviors among Calvinists—such as methodical work and reinvestment—as causal drivers of economic rationalization, inverting prior views by linking individual religious conduct to macroeconomic outcomes. These approaches privileged observable social functions and historical causation, contrasting with theological defenses, but Durkheim's collectivist emphasis has been noted for underplaying individual agency in behavioral motivations. Psychology of religion emerged concurrently, emphasizing experiential and cognitive dimensions of behaviors. William James's The Varieties of Religious Experience (1902) cataloged personal accounts of conversion, prayer, and mystical states as empirically verifiable phenomena influencing conduct, establishing the field by treating religious actions as psychological processes amenable to pragmatic assessment. Sigmund Freud's The Future of an Illusion (1927) later interpreted rituals and observances as neurotic defenses against helplessness, rooted in infantile projections, though this drew empirical challenges for overlooking adaptive behavioral benefits observed in longitudinal studies. By the mid-20th century, interdisciplinary integration began, with post-World War II quantitative surveys measuring behavioral correlates like and adherence, building on these foundations to test causal hypotheses via statistical methods.

Modern Interdisciplinary Approaches

Cognitive science of religion examines how ordinary cognitive processes generate religious beliefs and behaviors, positing that concepts of supernatural agents emerge as by-products of evolved mental systems such as agency detection and . Pascal Boyer's 2003 analysis argues that religious ideas activate domain-specific inference systems—like those for intuitive and social exchange—producing minimally counterintuitive representations that are memorable and transmissible, without requiring dedicated religious modules in the . Experimental evidence supports this through the hyperactive agency detection device (HADD), where individuals, particularly children, over-detect intentional agents in ambiguous stimuli, fostering and as adaptive error-management strategies in ancestral environments. Evolutionary psychology integrates genetic and cultural selection to explain religious behaviors, debating whether they constitute direct adaptations for cooperation or spandrels of other traits like morality and group cohesion. Twin and adoption studies reveal moderate heritability for religiosity, with meta-analyses estimating genetic influences at 18-44% across dimensions like church attendance and fundamentalism, indicating polygenic contributions interacting with shared and non-shared environments. Empirical models, such as costly signaling theory, demonstrate how rituals impose verifiable fitness costs to signal commitment, enhancing intragroup trust and reducing free-riding in large-scale societies, as evidenced by ethnographic data from hunter-gatherers to modern denominations. Behavioral experiments further show that priming religious concepts increases prosociality toward ingroup members, aligning with kin selection extensions to symbolic kin in religious communities. Neuroscience employs imaging techniques to map correlates of religious experiences, revealing distributed brain networks rather than localized "God spots." Andrew Newberg's SPECT studies from 2001 onward, scanning meditating Tibetan Buddhists and praying Franciscan nuns, found decreased activity—linked to self-other boundaries—during peak spiritual states, alongside heightened prefrontal engagement for focused attention and emotional regulation. fMRI on and glossolalia confirms involvement of reward circuits like the , suggesting religious behaviors hijack neurochemical pathways for and , akin to attachment systems. These findings underscore causal roles for , where repeated practices reshape default mode networks, potentially explaining persistence of behaviors like communal despite secular alternatives. Interdisciplinary syntheses, such as those in the Oxford Handbook of Evolutionary Psychology and Religion (2021), combine these strands to model religion's emergence around 70,000-100,000 years ago amid cognitive revolutions enabling symbolic thought and large-scale cooperation. While critiques note reductionism—overlooking cultural variance—these approaches prioritize falsifiable predictions, like heritability gradients across societies, yielding predictive power absent in purely interpretive frameworks. Ongoing work in credition science further dissects belief formation as neural subprocesses, bridging gaps between cognition and overt behavior.

References

  1. https://compass.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1749-8171.2008.00089.x
  2. https://joyinger.expressions.syr.edu/wp-content/uploads/J.MiltonYinger.ExplanationInYingersSociologyOfReligion.pdf
  3. https://www.sciencedirect.com/org/science/article/pii/S2365314021000139
  4. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/19485561003709305
  5. https://www.journals.uchicago.edu/doi/full/10.1093/bjps/axr035
  6. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC3428642/
  7. https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/psychology/articles/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.01462/full
  8. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/2153599X.2022.2131892
  9. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/382236724_The_Influence_of_Religious_Beliefs_on_Social_Behavior_and_Community_Cohesion
  10. https://www.jstor.org/stable/2579261
  11. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/2153599X.2020.1712618
  12. https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0022022111412267
  13. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/1061736195900349
  14. https://hraf.yale.edu/ehc/summaries/religion
  15. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC4958132/
  16. https://pressbooks.cuny.edu/discoveringculturalanthropology/chapter/chapter-11/
  17. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/226010821_The_Cognitive_and_Evolutionary_Psychology_of_Religion
  18. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/28761016/
  19. https://www.bps.org.uk/psychologist/cognitive-science-religion
  20. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC3045647/
  21. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0092656613000500
  22. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0167268123003475
  23. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/47337052_Genetic_and_Environmental_Influences_on_Multiple_Dimensions_of_Religiosity
  24. https://emmons.faculty.ucdavis.edu/wp-content/uploads/sites/90/2015/08/2003_3-emmons_paloutzian.pdf
  25. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7825388/
  26. https://ffrf.org/fttoday/november-2004/articles-november-2004/the-evolutionary-psychology-of-religion/
  27. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/2153599X.2016.1156562
  28. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC3705681/
  29. https://niujournals.ac.ug/ojs/index.php/niujoss/article/download/2188/2982
  30. https://www.zwemercenter.com/guide/10-overlapping-rituals-among-abrahamic-faiths/
  31. https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11577-024-00937-3
  32. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8462234/
  33. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1697260024000565
  34. https://sk.sagepub.com/ency/edvol/the-sage-encyclopedia-of-sociology-of-religion/chpt/taboo
  35. http://skhid.kubg.edu.ua/article/view/139766
  36. https://rady.ucsd.edu/_files/faculty-research/uri-gneezy/taboo.pdf
  37. https://helpfulprofessor.com/taboo-examples-cultural-religious-food/
  38. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10427447/
  39. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC4753840/
  40. https://rai.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/1467-9655.14098
  41. https://americanjournal.org/index.php/ajrhss/article/download/2333/2184/2320
  42. https://perspectives.americananthro.org/Chapters/Religion.pdf
  43. https://www.pewresearch.org/religion/2025/02/26/religious-attendance-and-congregational-involvement/
  44. https://prri.org/research/religious-change-in-america/
  45. https://academic.oup.com/esr/article/40/1/143/7140383
  46. https://www.heritage.org/civil-society/report/why-religion-matters-the-impact-religious-practice-social-stability
  47. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC5665144/
  48. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC6354668/
  49. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11319365/
  50. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC4157065/
  51. https://www.barna.com/research/changing-state-of-the-church/
  52. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC3551208/
  53. https://bmcpsychiatry.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12888-023-05091-2
  54. https://www.pewresearch.org/religion/2025/02/26/prayer-and-other-religious-practices/
  55. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/00207659.2021.1958181
  56. https://www.bbc.com/travel/article/20110616-travelwise-religious-tourism-etiquette
  57. https://hinduvigyan.com/faq/how-should-one-approach-hindu-temple-worship-mandir-darshan/
  58. https://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/synagogue-customs-and-etiquette
  59. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0272494417301846
  60. https://www.dummies.com/article/body-mind-spirit/religion-spirituality/general-religion-spirituality/practicing-religion-in-places-of-worship-199686/
  61. https://www.chabad.org/library/article_cdo/aid/383929/jewish/Synagogue-Etiquette.htm
  62. https://rsc.byu.edu/new-testament-history-culture-society/worship-ritual-practices-new-testament
  63. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S2352250X2030186X
  64. https://studioarabiya.com/etiquettes-of-mosque/
  65. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC3705686/
  66. https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2016/05/04/5-facts-about-prayer/
  67. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0092656624000473
  68. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10191893/
  69. https://www.pewresearch.org/religion/2016/04/12/religion-in-everyday-life/
  70. https://www.mdpi.com/2077-1444/14/5/649
  71. https://openstax.org/books/introduction-anthropology/pages/13-4-rituals-of-transition-and-conformity
  72. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/319716670_Birth_Rituals_A_Cross-Cultural_View
  73. https://academic.oup.com/edited-volume/34340/chapter/334358144
  74. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1135263.pdf
  75. https://scholarsarchive.byu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1890&context=etd
  76. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7825951/
  77. https://www.aau.edu/research-scholarship/featured-research-topics/people-religious-affiliations-live-longer-study-shows
  78. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/364086091_A_Meta-Analysis_of_ReligionSpirituality_and_Life_Satisfaction
  79. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC3671693/
  80. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/00380253.2025.2487686
  81. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/0191886996000232
  82. https://iocdf.org/faith-ocd/what-is-ocd-scrupulosity/
  83. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8374933/
  84. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S2211364913000456
  85. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2666915323002184
  86. https://www.apa.org/news/press/releases/2013/03/religion-spirituality
  87. https://publications.aap.org/pediatrics/article/101/4/625/62022/Child-Fatalities-From-Religion-motivated-Medical
  88. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/9521945/
  89. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7545013/
  90. https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2016/08/12/most-states-allow-religious-exemptions-from-child-abuse-and-neglect-laws/
  91. https://www.psychiatrictimes.com/view/religion-spirituality-and-mental-health
  92. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7677265/
  93. https://templetonreligiontrust.org/areas-of-focus/social-consequences-of-religion/
  94. https://www.pewresearch.org/religion/2024/12/18/government-restrictions-on-religion-stayed-at-peak-levels-globally-in-2022/
  95. https://www.uscirf.gov/news-room/releases-statements/uscirf-releases-updated-blasphemy-factsheet-and-blasphemy-law
  96. https://www.pewresearch.org/religion/2024/03/05/globally-government-restrictions-on-religion-reached-peak-levels-in-2021-while-social-hostilities-went-down/
  97. https://www.historytoday.com/archive/causes-early-persecutions
  98. https://teachdemocracy.org/online-lesson/religious-tolerance-and-persecution-in-the-roman-empire/
  99. https://www.ebsco.com/research-starters/religion-and-philosophy/religion-and-society-religious-persecution
  100. https://www.gisreportsonline.com/r/global-crisis-religious-persecution/
  101. https://humanists.international/2025/01/new-report-exposes-the-scale-of-blasphemy-laws-worldwide/
  102. https://www.opendoors.org/en-US/persecution/countries/
  103. https://www.christianitytoday.com/2025/01/christian-persecution-2025-countries-open-doors-watch-list/
  104. https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2016/07/07/6-facts-about-religious-hostilities-in-the-middle-east-and-north-africa/
  105. https://www.pewresearch.org/religion/2024/03/05/number-of-countries-with-very-high-government-restrictions-stays-level-in-2021/
  106. https://www.cato.org/commentary/religious-persecution-rising-islam-threatens-religious-minorities-especially-middle-east
  107. https://www.nber.org/system/files/working_papers/w11663/w11663.pdf
  108. https://www.start.umd.edu/news/proportion-terrorist-attacks-religious-and-right-wing-extremists-rise-united-states
  109. https://www.economicsandpeace.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/02/GTI-2024-web-290224.pdf
  110. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC6876432/
  111. https://home-affairs.ec.europa.eu/document/download/63770ad9-8c0b-44c4-a568-254bb22a8009_en?filename=ran_root_causes_of_violent_extremism_ranstorp_meines_july_2024.pdf
  112. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8724742/
  113. https://www.start.umd.edu/research-projects/global-terrorism-database-gtd
  114. https://www.pewresearch.org/religion/2019/07/15/a-closer-look-at-how-religious-restrictions-have-risen-around-the-world/
  115. https://www.brookings.edu/wp-content/uploads/2016/06/2010_confronting_poverty.pdf
  116. https://digitalcommons.usf.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1139&context=jss
  117. https://www.equip.org/articles/the-problem-with-prayer-research/
  118. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC2802370/
  119. https://divinity.uchicago.edu/sightings/articles/freud-and-other-god-killers-are-here-stay
  120. https://philosophy.institute/philosophy-of-religion/nietzsche-marx-freud-religion-insights/
  121. http://www.scielo.org.za/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1010-99192019000300002
  122. https://wtctheology.org.uk/theomisc/prophetic-critique-sacrifice/
  123. https://oxfordre.com/religion/display/10.1093/acrefore/9780199340378.001.0001/acrefore-9780199340378-e-67
  124. https://hobotheology.com/dangers-of-religious-traditions/
  125. https://courses.lumenlearning.com/atd-herkimer-westerncivilization/chapter/discontent-with-the-roman-catholic-church/
  126. https://www.gotquestions.org/rituals-in-Christianity.html
  127. https://www.coptic-magic.phil.uni-wuerzburg.de/index.php/2019/03/15/anthropology-of-magic-ii-frazer-and-the-golden-bough/
  128. https://firstthings.com/god-and-the-anthropologists/
  129. https://www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctt1cgf6sv
  130. https://www.degruyterbrill.com/document/doi/10.7312/king14542-029/html
  131. https://courses.lumenlearning.com/suny-intro-to-sociology/chapter/reading-the-sociological-approach-to-religion/
  132. https://fiveable.me/religion-psychology/unit-1/historical-overview-religion-psychology/study-guide/uenzBMArlfWMRPfH
  133. https://psycnet.apa.org/record/2024-54062-001
  134. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S1364661303000317
  135. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/233684268_What%27s_HIDD%27n_in_the_HADD
  136. https://medium.com/%40mindandculture/the-origin-of-belief-in-supernatural-agents-f999bfd44c1e
  137. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/14746700.2011.563585
  138. https://riojournal.com/article/66132/
  139. https://academic.oup.com/edited-volume/34242
  140. http://www.andrewnewberg.com/research
  141. https://andrewnewberg.squarespace.com/s/the-neuropsychology-of-religious-and-spiritual-experience.pdf
  142. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC3957224/
  143. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0149763425003203
  144. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10242170/
Add your contribution
Related Hubs
User Avatar
No comments yet.