UDC

316.472.4+316.624

DOI

10.37482/2227-6564-V054

Authors

Tat’yana V. Izluchenko
Siberian Federal University;
prosp. Svobodnyy 79, Krasnoyarsk, 660041, Russian Federation;
ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5644-301X e-mail: izluchenko@mail.ru

Abstract

This paper studies the social construction of reality in religious extremism. The daily life of extremists is viewed here as an alternative social reality, which is opposed to objective reality and portrayed by the ideologists as the only right one. The methodology of the research is based on Peter Berger’s phenomenological theory of world construction by numerous transcendental subjects. The daily life of extremists is regulated by the social order established in the extremist community, which is ensured by specific attitudes, preferences, conventions, values, and knowledge systems that are contained in their ideology. An important result of the study is the characterization of the social construction mechanisms according to the extremist worldview. Cognitive biases and assertion of personal significance contribute to a positive perception of the ideology and an active participation in extremist activities, while the “Us vs Them” opposition leads to the polarization of views and fewer external contacts, as well as forms a positive image of “Us” while ignoring their negative qualities and hyperbolizing the negative qualities of “Them”. The idealization of history and the heroization of individual participants in this movement form false notions of justice and of the possibility of creating an ideal state system, thereby motivating extremists to commit unlawful acts, including violent ones. Thinking models are adjusted to conform to the ideology, new patterns of behaviour are established through social actions and ritual practices. Illegal extremist activity is presented as following the will of the higher forces, thus acquiring the status of a sacred duty to establish the common good and fight against the universal evil. These mechanisms are characteristic of various types of extremism (national, political). Religion acts as an element reinforcing ideological content and allowing extremist communities to project ultimate meanings onto objective reality, endowing it with a given meaning.
For citation: Izluchenko T.V. The Mechanisms of Social Construction of Reality in Religious Extremism: A SocioPhilosophical Analysis. Vestnik Severnogo (Arkticheskogo) federal’nogo universiteta. Ser.: Gumanitarnye i sotsial’nye nauki, 2020, no. 5, pp. 106–113. DOI: 10.37482/2227-6564-V054

Keywords

social reality, religious extremism, Peter Berger, extremist ideology

References

1. van Prooijen J.-W., Kuijper S.M.H.C. A Comparison of Extreme Religious and Political Ideologies: Similar Worldviews but Different Grievances. Pers. Individ. Differ., 2020, vol. 159. Art. no. 109888.
2. Timoshchuk E.A. Konstruirovanie sotsial’nykh protsessov v fenomenologii Pitera Bergera [Construction of Social Processes in Peter Berger’s Phenomenology]. Tsifrovoy uchenyy: laboratoriya filosofa, 2019, vol. 2, no. 3, pp. 76–88. DOI: 10.5840/dspl20192339
3. Berger P.L., Luckmann T. The Social Construction of Reality: A Treatise in the Sociology of Knowledge. New York, 1966. 219 p. (Russ. ed.: Berger P., Lukman T. Sotsial’noe konstruirovanie real’nosti. Traktat po sotsiologii znaniya. Moscow, 1995. 323 p.).
4. Berger P. The Sacred Canopy: Elements of a Sociological Theory of Religion. New York, 2011. 470 p. (Russ. ed.: Berger P. Svyashchennaya zavesa. Elementy sotsiologicheskoy teorii religii. Moscow, 2019. 208 p.).
5. On Countering Extremist Activity: Federal Law of the Russian Federation No. 114-FZ of July 25, 2002. Available at: https://base.garant.ru/12127578/ (accessed: 23 March 2020) (in Russ.).
6. Komlev Yu.Yu. Postmodernizm o deviantnosti i prestupnosti [Postmodernism on Deviance and Crime]. Sotsiologiya, filosofiya, pravo v sisteme protivodeystviya prestupnosti [Sociology, Philosophy, and Law in the System of Combating Crime]. Krasnoyarsk, 2018, pp. 174–179.
7. van Prooijen J.-W., Krouwel A.P.M. Psychological Features of Extreme Political Ideologies. Curr. Dir. Psychol. Sci., 2019, vol. 28, no. 2, pp. 159–163.
8. Rutkevich E.D. Piter Berger – polveka tvorcheskogo puti [Peter Berger: Half a Century of Creative Development]. Sotsiologicheskie issledovaniya, 2011, no. 1, pp. 114–123.
9. Schütz A. Smyslovaya struktura povsednevnogo mira: ocherki po fenomenologicheskoy sotsiologii [The Semantic Structure of the Everyday World: Essays on Phenomenological Sociology]. Moscow, 2003. 336 p.
10. Bering J.M. The Folk Psychology of Souls. Behav. Brain Sci., 2006, vol. 29, no. 5, pp. 453–462.
11. Agnati L.F., Marcoli V., Agnati U., Ferraro L., Guidolin D., Maura G. The Mis-Exaptation of the Prediction Capability of Humans and Emergence of Intolerant Religious Beliefs. Neurol. Psychiatry Brain Res., 2017, vol. 23, pp. 43–53.
12. Kruglanski A., Fernandez J., Factor A., Szumowska E. Cognitive Mechanisms in Violent Extremism. Cognition, 2019, vol. 188, pp. 116–123.
13. Waldenfels B. Motiv chuzhogo [The Motif of the Alien]. Minsk, 1999. 176 p.
14. Coates J.F. Utopia – An Obsolete Concept. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Change, 2016, vol. 113, pt. A, pp. 110–111.
15. Isaac R.K. Every Utopia Turns into Dystopia. Tour. Manag., 2015, vol. 51, pp. 329–330.
16. Vial T. Harvey Whitehouse. Arguments and Icons: Divergent Modes of Religiosity. Religion, 2004, vol. 34, no. 3, pp. 248–250. Available at: http://docslide.net/documents/harvey-whitehouse-arguments-and-icons-divergentmodes-of-religiosity-ne... (accessed: 13 December 2019).
17. Atran S., Ginges J. Religious and Sacred Imperatives in Human Conflict. Science, 2012, vol. 336, no. 6083, pp. 855–857.
18. Brandt M.J., van Tongeren D.R. People Both High and Low on Religious Fundamentalism Are Prejudiced Towards Dissimilar Groups. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol., 2017, vol. 112, no. 1, pp. 76–97.