Abstract
I argue that empirical studies into the phenomenon of religious conversion suffer from conceptual unclarity owing to an absence of philosophical contributions. I examine the relationship between definition and empirical result in the social sciences, and I show that a wide divergence in conceptual approach threatens to undermine the possibility of useful comparative study. I stake out a distinctive role for philosophical treatments of studies into religious conversion. I conclude with the suggestion that use of the terms ‘convert’ and ‘conversion’ may not in fact be conducive to clarity in the present context, and that subsequent studies may improve their precision through replacing them.
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
See de Cruz (2018) for an exception.
See also Snow and Machalek (1984: 178–184).
I include this rider here so as not to be interpreted as holding that individuals in non-scientific contexts are required to be in the possession of a precise definition in order that they be able to identify converts.
McGann (2010).
See Hui et al., (2017: 223) for another survey-based study involving similar methods.
See Davidman (1991).
See (2014: 169–174).
(2014: 169).
In fact, the subject was not yet a member of the Unitarian Universalist church at the time of interview; see (2014: 171).
A component of this alternative definition may involve an emphasis on changes of institutional affiliation. If so, Jindra’s view clearly shares features with that of Barro and Hwang.
See Cottingham (2013).
See Winch (1958: 17–18).
My thanks to an anonymous referee for urging greater clarity here.
As, for instance, proposed by Webb (2009) with the respect to the notion of a religion.
References
Barro, Robert J., & Hwang, Jason. (2007). ‘Religious Conversion in 40 Countries' (December 2007). NBER Working Paper No. w13689, Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=1077815
Cottingham, J. (2013). Conversion, self-discovery and moral change. In I. Falferth & M. Rogers (Eds.), Conversion, Claremont Studies in the Philosophy of Religion (pp. 211–229). Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck.
Davidman, L. (1991). Tradition in a rootless world. Berkeley: University of California Press.
De Cruz, H. (2018). Religious conversion, transformative experience, and disagreement. Philosophia Christi, 20(1), 265–276.
Hui, C. H., Cheung, S.-H., Lam, J., Lau, E. Y. Y., Yuliawati, L., & Cheung, S. F. (2017). In search of the psychological antecedents and consequences of christian conversion: A three-year prospective study. Psychology of Religion and Spirituality, 9(2), 220–230.
Lofland, J., & Stark, R. (1965). Becoming a world-saver: A theory of conversion to a deviant perspective. American Sociological Review, 30, 862–875.
McGann, J. (2010). ‘2010 Global go to think tanks index report', TTCSP Global Go To Think Tank Index Reports. 5
Rambo, R. L. (1993). Understanding religious conversion. New Haven: Yale University Press.
Rambo, R. L., & Farhadian, C. E. (Eds.). (2014). The oxford handbook of religious conversion. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Snook, W. D., Williams, J. W., & Horgan, J. G. (2019). Issues in the sociology and psychology of religious conversion. Pastoral Psychology, 68, 223–240.
Snow, D., & Machalek, R. (1983). The convert as a social type. Sociological Theory, 1, 259–289.
Snow, D., & Machalek, R. (1984). The sociology of conversion. Annual Review of Sociology, 10, 167–190.
Ullman, C. (1989). The transformed self: The psychology of conversion. New York: Plenum Press.
Webb, M. O. (2009). An eliminativist theory of religion. Sophia, 48, 35–42.
Williams, J. (2020). Reconceptualising conversion: A phenomenological analysis of religious conversion, with particular reference to Maurice Merleau-Ponty. Ph.D. thesis. Edinburgh: University of Edinburgh.
Winch, P. (1958). The idea of a social science and its relation to philosophy. London: Humanities Press International Inc.
Wynn, M. (2012). Renewing the senses: Conversion experience and the phenomenology of the spiritual life. International Journal for the Philosophy of Religion, 72(3), 211–226.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflict of interest
The author reports no conflict of interest.
Additional information
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Rights and permissions
Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.
About this article
Cite this article
Spinney, O.T. Religious conversion, philosophy, and social science. Int J Philos Relig 94, 139–149 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11153-023-09873-2
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11153-023-09873-2