13 May '08 12:40>1 edit
From Wikipedia:
Institution: Institutions are structures and mechanisms of social order and cooperation governing the behavior of a set of individuals. Institutions are identified with a social purpose and permanence, transcending individual human lives and intentions, and with the making and enforcing of rules governing cooperative human behavior. The term, institution, is commonly applied to customs and behavior patterns important to a society, as well as to particular formal organizations of government and public service.
"Institutions" is then an umbrella term. Something so vaguely defined that has little meaning in and of itself. The "structures" and "mechanisms" are extremely vague terms and so is the concept of "social order" and "social purpose and permanence". Commonly applied to "customs" and "behavior patterns" that are "important to a society", is also extremely vague. The degree of freedom in the vagueness of this definition are gigantic.
Attacks on "institutionalized religion" that attempt to safeguard "non-institutionalized religion" are therefore particularly meaningless considering the vast range of what an institution actually is. They strike me as being mostly expressions of politically correct attacks on religion.
Although this roughly reflects my position, I feel that it's still somewhat embryonic and I need to be confronted with alternate views to either solidify or correct this view. Feel free to comment or pick apart.
Institution: Institutions are structures and mechanisms of social order and cooperation governing the behavior of a set of individuals. Institutions are identified with a social purpose and permanence, transcending individual human lives and intentions, and with the making and enforcing of rules governing cooperative human behavior. The term, institution, is commonly applied to customs and behavior patterns important to a society, as well as to particular formal organizations of government and public service.
"Institutions" is then an umbrella term. Something so vaguely defined that has little meaning in and of itself. The "structures" and "mechanisms" are extremely vague terms and so is the concept of "social order" and "social purpose and permanence". Commonly applied to "customs" and "behavior patterns" that are "important to a society", is also extremely vague. The degree of freedom in the vagueness of this definition are gigantic.
Attacks on "institutionalized religion" that attempt to safeguard "non-institutionalized religion" are therefore particularly meaningless considering the vast range of what an institution actually is. They strike me as being mostly expressions of politically correct attacks on religion.
Although this roughly reflects my position, I feel that it's still somewhat embryonic and I need to be confronted with alternate views to either solidify or correct this view. Feel free to comment or pick apart.