چکیده:
Sociological debates on globalization have often neglected the position of religion in a global age. This neglect is problematic given the creative role of world religions in shaping the processes of modernization and globalization. This article considers globalization as a specific stage of the overall process of modernity and examines religion in light of four paradoxes. The first paradox (Nietzsche's paradox) posits that, contrary to common wisdom, fundamentalism is a form of modernization. Although religious fundamentalism can be a reaction to the hybridity caused by globalization, this reaction is not a traditional one. The second paradox (Parsons' paradox) posits that modernization and globalization reconstruct religion as a specific and separate institutional dominance from society, thereby turning religion into an issue of modernity. Fundamentalism attempts to reverse this pattern, and in the peripheral societies of the global system, fundamentalist religion challenges this Westernized version of modern religion. The third paradox (McLuhan's paradox) posits that religious values in a global village lack common ground among cultural systems, yet relativism cannot be easily practiced in reality, and globalization paradoxically increases the need for universal human rights. While nationalism, as a framework for cultures, struggles with efforts to expand universal legal discourse systems, it is not clear whether creating alternative legal systems (such as Confucian laws) is possible. The final paradox (Montaigne's paradox) explores the contradiction between Orientalism as a necessary consequence of discovering alterity and otherness, and alterity and otherness as a necessary experience of universal humanism. The article concludes by presenting a discussion on the possibilities of universal virtue within the context of these paradoxes of globalization and religion.
خلاصه ماشینی:
In an attempt to consider the possibility of cosmopolitan virtue as an ally of universal democracy, I will examine some of the paradoxical consequences of globalization that has torn apart the traditional relationships between religion, national identity, and gender.
My main concern in this discussion is to confront the specific tensions that exist between religious fundamentalism, global universalism, and national citizenship, and therefore a comprehensive defense of this position requires arguments much broader than what can be presented here (Turner, 1993).
The Protestant ethic is the cultural foundation of modernity, because in a sociological sense, it brought about such results: 1- it strengthened a theological view of history; 2- it led to the acceptance of a single view regarding truth and authority; 3- it rejected rigid and tightly organized hierarchical forms; 4- it promoted a quasi-democratic form of government that stood against ecclesiastical powers; 5- it encouraged a view of authority that prioritized written documents, documents about which public dispute could arise; and 6- ultimately, it created a set of ideological resources that could be used to attack absolutism in episcopal and monarchical forms.
In this discussion, I want to address the issue of universalism and cultural relativism from the perspective of Western Orientalism from the late sixteenth century onwards, a time when Europe was divided by religious wars and Islam (in the form of the Ottoman Empire) was a powerful and real threat to European political independence.
(
, 
, 
)
