20 Robert Wuthnow
has observed, one sibling is often more devout than another sibling, a faith system may
explain this in terms of God’s mysterious grace bringing light to some and darkness
to others. Even for a student who does not fully believe this explanation, it may seem
mischievous to look for explanations in birth-order patterns or family dynamics. Doing
so somehow seems disrespectful of those who believe in grace. Making it sociological
may be even less attractive if the student thinks there are odd sociological notions about
family dynamics that even she would find difficult to accept.
The surprising thing, however, is that the student is already casting her topic largely
in sociological terms. Her question may have been prompted by comparing her own
religious views with those of a sibling, but she is not proposing to write an autobiog-
raphy. Nor is she asking questions like: Does God really exist? Will siblings recognize
each other in heaven? Or what does the Qu’ran say about siblings? The sociological
perspective is already guiding her thinking. In large measure, this is because she knows
she is writing a paper for sociology and has perhaps absorbed more of the sociologi-
cal perspective in her courses than she realizes. But a sociological perspective has also
become commonplace in contemporary culture. Newspapers and television programs
frequently report the results of sociological studies. And, in a religiously diverse culture,
we have all learned to separate ourselves at least to a small degree from our own reli-
gious beliefs and practices, making it possible to look with some detachment at these
beliefs and practices. We can ask why some people are more religious than others or
why people adhere to different religions. Thus, the idea that sociology has a quirky
view of the world turns out to be less of a problem than at first might be imagined.
Beyond formulating the topic in sociological terms, though, the student proba-
bly does need to apply some specialized knowledge to it from sociology. Newspaper
knowledge can scarcely stand in for the thousands of person-years that professional so-
ciologists devote to probing the mysteries of human behavior. The same student would
hardly assert, “I have an interesting topic about amino acids, but I’m not sure how
to bring in molecular biology.” She would recognize that certain skills, concepts, and
previous studies would need to be mastered in the course of pursuing her research.
What is puzzling, therefore, is why the student thinks the specialized language
of sociology will deaden, rather than enliven, her project. Sociologists take pride in
having developed what they sometimes lovingly refer to as a sociological imagination.
They mean that certain skills, concepts, and studies actually do help people see things
that others would miss. These tools of the trade should be cumulative enough that a
student having majored in sociology does not have to ask about sociology as if it were
an alien language. Certainly they should be regarded as helpful (which, in the case of
many students, they are), rather than as a meaningless series of hoops to jump through.
Even if some anxiety is present about having to learn new ideas, the student should
relish this opportunity to see further and more acutely than in the past.
But let us suppose that the student is not simply reacting with fear of the unknown,
but with some intuitive discomfort about sociology. If we consider the possibility that
there may be some basis for her concern about sociology not quite fitting what she wants
to learn, then it becomes necessary to probe more deeply. What is it about sociology –
or the ways in which it is often perceived – that makes it hard for some students (and
professors) to see its value to the study of religion? Answering this question requires
us to turn first to a consideration of the ways in which sociological theory is often
misunderstood.