e-Religion

A Critical Appraisal of Religious Discourse on the World Wide Web

Anastasia Karaflogka

• Publisher: Taylor & Francis
• Year: 2014
• Print ISBN: 9781904768845
• eBook ISBN: 9781317488897
• Edition: 1
• Topic: Theology & Religion
• Subtopic: Religion

Religion has flourished in cyberspace, bringing individuals together, helping to consolidate fringe religions, promoting activism and evangelism, and providing sites for the promotion and examination of specific issues. 'E-Religion' is one of the first systematic scholarly studies of religion on the Web. Providing a clear outline of Web epistemology and theory, the book outlines the key methodologies for the study of e-religions. The book will be invaluable to students of religion, sociology and technology.

1 Introduction

Introducing the Field/Study

Prologue

The advancement and contemporary development of information communication technologies (ICTs)¹ have created new media which have changed and will continue to change almost all human perceptions of daily activities in all areas of life, whether these be professional, financial, educational, commercial, social, political, cultural and/or religious.

From its conception, and up to the beginning of the 1990s, ICTs were a territory occupied solely by an elitist minority consisting of academics, the military and computer scientists. Today, their widespread usage suggests that the public now occupies the foreground of “online life”, which in turn indicates that the “computer world now supports a new and real social space” (Cybernauts Awake! 1999) where people can “meet” to interact, to exchange ideas, knowledge, information and experience, to give substance to creative, imaginative and innovative new concepts and ideas and to re-locate, re-evaluate and deconstruct old concepts and ideas in a new setting.

This is the first time in history that a medium offers, theoretically,² unlimited access to an open space, thus providing the opportunity to all humankind to express itself to a global audience. The presence of humanity’s vast diversity of cultures, languages, political and economic systems, institutions, ways of life, religions and individuals constitutes the Internet’s identity and uniqueness, representing the experiences of all those who participate in the formation of that identity, differentness and diversity.

Internet: perceptions and perspectives

A historical exploration of the Internet, from its origin and through its development, reveals two contrasting ways in which the Net has been perceived, understood and interpreted. The first way is that the Internet originated from wealth, power and the armed forces of one of the richest, if not the richest, countries in the world, the USA. That, by definition, implies that it incorporates the value system, ideology, political and economic principles and approaches to advanced technologies of the US and more especially of its West coast. The relationship between the Net and society, seen through the eyes of the “virtual class” (i.e. the skilled workers and entrepreneurs of the information communication industries of the American West coast) is expressed by a particular ideology which Barbrook and Cameron (1995) have termed the “Californian Ideology”: a “mix of cybernetics, free market economies and counter-culture libertarianism” which promotes and supports concurrently the “New Left utopia of the electronic agora and the New Right’s vision of the electronic marketplace”.³ With an emphasis on a predetermined view of the inevitability and conquest of the hi-tech free market, Californian Ideology promotes a “Jeffersonian democracy”⁴ in cyberspace (Barbrook and Cameron 1995) and ignores issues such as racism, poverty, gender inequalities and illiteracy, which exert influence on the participation process. Popular culture magazines, such as Wired and Mondo 2000,⁵ advocate and forcefully promote in their pages the West coast’s view of ICTs, which clearly equates New Edge technophilia with New Age spiritualism, and compares at the same time the “sixties’ counter cultural ‘guerrilla’ political action and social consciousness with a particularly privileged, selfish, consumer-oriented, and technologically dependent libertarianism” (Sobchack 1993).

The second way is that despite its militaristic and elitist origins, the Internet has been a democratizing and emancipating medium giving voice to many different kinds of marginalized groups and individuals, who are now capable not only of publicizing their opinions and convictions, but also of organizing both their members and fellow sympathizers, and forming coalitions, alliances and collaborations. In this way they extend their presence from that of a confined and local one, to one which is wide open and global.⁶

Widespread usage

A number of factors may have contributed to the widespread adoption of the Internet, and these could be summarized as belonging to either functional or infrastructural causes. The functional category includes the elimination of distance between interlocutors, speed of communication and relatively low cost of connection.⁷ Apart from factors relating to the Internet’s general functionality, there are also infrastructural constituents, related to its technical development, which further aided its rapid proliferation. For instance, the design of a friendly user interface has been, according to Poster (1995a, 93), a critical factor for the success of the Internet, for it minimized—if not eliminated—the fear that humans feel toward machines and their interaction with them. Interface means a boundary across which two independent systems meet and communicate with each other.

Regarding computers there are three types of interface: First is the user interface, such as the keyboard, software menus and any other tools that enable communication between the user and the computer. Additionally, this could be expanded to include tools that are used to facilitate users’ access to virtual reality. Second is the software interface, that is, the computer language that the different programs use to communicate with each other and with the hardware. Last is the hardware interface, such as the wires, plugs and sockets (i.e. hard discs, disc drives, screens, printers, keyboards etc.) that are used to communicate with each other (Source: Webopedia.com 2002). Furthermore, the development of the World Wide Web, which enables the transmission of multimedia files, not only enriched substantially the aesthetics of transmitted information, but radically also transformed the power of control of information flow by the mass media, such as newspapers and broadcasting corporations, by allowing every individual to become a publisher. However, it should be noted that the Web, as it exists today, is not as its creator envisioned it. Berners-Lee’s design⁸ was based on his conception of the Web as a “social place”; as a “creative and expressive tool” where anyone could add their views and/or comments on a website (Wright 1997). One need not imagine the repercussions of such an eventuality.⁹

Internet, the Web and cyberspace: perceptions and approaches

Another factor which may have contributed to the success of the Internet is the notion of cyberspace. The term cyberspace, as well as a number of terms with the prefix “cyber”, have now become a part of the lives and vocabulary of cybernauts all over the world. Although today’s cyberspace is a far cry from the one presented in its founder’s books,¹⁰ it has nevertheless become a celebrated term, used in every work on ICTs and computer mediated communication (CMC), generating considerable numbers of discourses about its subjectivity and its role and impact on netizens’¹¹ perception of technology, society, culture and themselves.

Cyberspace, as well as the Internet, has been defined and perceived in a number of different ways; its proponents fall into two main categories: enthusiastic supporters and sceptical critics. Their rhetoric has been termed by Hakken (1999, 17) as “computopian” and “computropian” respectively. Thus, while for some, cyberspace promotes active participation, interaction and cooperation among all citizens, for others, it diminishes the idea of a global village by increasing the chasm between rich and poor and by creating an exclusive “cyburbia”¹² for its netizens. The principal claim of Internet supporters is that of democratization of society, which is generally understood to mean significant equality, both in terms of access to information, and in terms of communication, across established boundaries (Ess 1998). On the opposite side, and despite arguments supporting the view that human computer interaction, especially via the Net, could offer a vision of freedom and a shared humanity, the predominant assertion is that the Internet may become the means of global surveillance and personal alienation (Aycock 1995; Silver 2000; Fisher and Wright 2001). Additionally, cyberspace has been criticized as being the “perfect market place” where, alongside goods, information itself is commodified and saleable at a price (Stallabrass 1995, 10, 20) to those who can afford it.

Apart from socio-political, cultural and economic approaches to the medium’s actual and/or potential function, impact and influence on society, the Internet has also been understood and interpreted through a number of religious and metaphysical lenses, some of which ascribe to it spiritual qualities.

These perceptions derive from particular understandings of religion and its communicative function. For example, Arthur (1993a, 1) highlights that every expression of human devoutness is, inevitably, a mediated expression which comes through a variety of means of communication, such as words, symbols, music, architecture and so on. Moreover, as Fore states (1993, 5), communication is the essential function which religious activities have in common. Also, in Lehikoinen’s (2003, 16) view, there is an exceptional compatibility between religion and the media, in the sense that not only does religion possess a substantial number of communicative objectives, but it also has a message of great significance to convey. Taking into account that throughout their history, religions, especially the institutionalized ones, have proved quite able to extend continuously to new regions (Lehikoinen 2003, 15), one can appreciate that, as a rapidly evolving global communication technology, the Internet could be perceived by religious institutions, organizations and groups as a fascinating new medium for further developing existing methods of communicating their messages.

This can be seen quite clearly in, for example, the Catholic Church’s view of and approach to the media, which are understood as “gifts”¹³ that enable the Church to disseminate its message. The fundamental role of the media in the religious communicative process, is, on the one hand, acknowledged by the Vatican through the expression of the Church’s gratitude to the world of communication for the opportunities it offers to religion in general and to the Church in particular (Pope John Paul II 1989),¹⁴ and on the other hand, especially with regard to the role of ICTs, is clearly evident in the presence of the immeasurable amount of online activity related to religion. For example, the number of religion groups listed in Yahoo’s directory is 101,703.¹⁵ This number does not include the alt.¹⁶ religion, or alt.spirituality, alt.philosophy, alt.atheism and so on—groups which are too numerous to be counted. Moreover, the Web is hosting the e-presences of almost all—if not all—religious expressions, understandings and interpretations. A small sample of such presences include: Hindu net; Sivananda yoga; Sufism; Wicca; Kali-Yuga; Catholic Church for Global Justice; Pagan Web; ADIDAM; Rastafarian; Raelian Movement; Theosophical Society, Jainism; Religious Science; Shamanic studies; Mazdaznan Temple; ECKANKAR, Religion of the Light and Sound of God; Church of Satan, Troth; Bon religion; Alpheus, Lion and Lamb Ministries, Dominican Vodou, Virtual Voodoo, Gaia Mind, Pantheism and the Irmandade da Boa Morte (Sisterhood of the Good Death).

Other utterances, within the Christian framework, equate the Web with the Word and/or God.¹⁷ This kind of perception ascribes to the Web the quality of sacredness which bestows on to it a different dimension. Such discernment is also found in various theoretical analyses of cyberspace. For instance, examples of such approaches and/or definitions include contemplating cyberspace as the place where all humanity may meet in disembodied form, completely free from the boundaries of the body in a state of pure consciousness; as an “emerging satsang”; as the “new Jerusalem”; as a “multi-dimensional illuminated living web”; as “strengthening people’s spiritual bond around the world” (Benedickt 1991; Davidson 1995; Wertheim 1999; Brown 1996; Cobb 1998).

Conceptual clarifications

Religion/religious

The title of this thesis incorporates three terms which may need to be defined in order to provide its conceptual platform. “Religion” is perhaps the only term in humanity’s wealth of signifiers that does not correspond to a single signified and, in some cases, as noted by Smith (1998) and others (Herbrechtsmeier 1993; Fitzgerald 1995), the term has been applied, mostly by Western scholars, to non-Western cultures in which the concept of “religion” was totally absent.

Although the term is used innumerable times every day by vast numbers of people in a multitude of different contexts, no single use is in agreement with another; no one perception of “religion” corresponds to another. Despite scholars’ efforts to provide a fixed etic notion of “religion”, defining the term has been, and still is, a problematic endeavour, for there is as yet no consensus among scholars on exactly “what constitutes a religion” (Barker 1992, 145). However, as Fitzgerald (1995) points out:

[w]e need working definitions as part of our methodology. Definitions are not final statements of absolute truth, but part of a working methodology which make explicit what is and is not included, what is the focus of our field, what distinguishes it from neighbouring fields, and so on.

Thus, in order to discuss or present a case as religious, it is necessary to have a conceptualization of religion which cannot but be based on existing denotations. A search for a definition of “religion” results in a plethora of definitions from scholars, individuals and religious authorities/organizations/leaders. Since there is no consensus on one definition, it could be assumed that each of these definitions, in essence, expresses the views, understandings and interpretations of the term, as these have been developed within their providers’ particular sociocultural, educational, economic and ideological matrix.¹⁸

The variety of definitions shows that there are no delineated boundaries circumscribing the term. In some cases the boundaries are exact while in other they are ambiguous; some attempted definitions are narrow, but others are broad; some are based on the understanding of religious participants, that is, from an insider’s point of view, while others derive from an outsider’s stand-point. For example, while narrow definitions, which focus on the belief and worship of a god/superhuman being, exclude Buddhism (Herbrechtsmeier 1993), broad definitions may be quite “all-encompassing [in] that they could include ideologies such as Marxism” (Barker 1992, 145).

The problem of defining and/or conceptualizing “religion” becomes more evident when “religion” is addressed within different theoretical or cultural contexts. As it appears, the term carries preconceived semantic and cultural interconnections which are reflected in the language, methodology and sample gathering of different studies about the subject. For example, Mahan (2005), points out that examinations of religion in American life are still “limited to the announcement of the activities of a few dominant or privileged religious groups”. Herbrechtsmeier (1993), in his work on ‘Buddhism and the Definition of Religion’, underlines that people in “the West are predisposed to believe that religion has to do with the worship of superhuman beings”. Fitzgerald (1995), examining the term “religion” within the Japanese context, suggests that

[b]y and large “religion” scholars who are not doing straightforward theology, or the more covert variety called phenomenology, are in fact studying values and their institutionalisation in different cultures.

Definitions prove quite troublesome when a new “religious” expression (termed New Religious Movements, NRMs) appears and academics embark on its study. Depending on the definition, a NRM may be categorized as a religion, cult, sect, church and so on.¹⁹ This would not be problematical if the categorization was solely used as an academic methodological tool. However, outside academia the result of the categorization process, not only of NRMs but of “religion” in general, may have considerable implications, espec...

Table of contents

• Cover
• Half Title
• Title Page
• Copyright Page
• Dedication
• Table of Contents
• Preface
• Acknowledgements
• About the CD
• 1 Introduction
• 2 Literature Review
• 3 Web Epistemology
• 4 Theory
• 5 Research Process and Method
• 6 Methodology
• 7 Conclusions
• Glossary of Terms
• Notes
• Bibliography