Personal religion has, in recent years, been conceptualized in terms of a dichotomy. That defined as Intrinsic and Committed serves as a master-motive for living. Its Extrinsic-Consensual counterpart has been treated as utilitarian, instrumental, and superficial. Utilizing measures designed to evaluate the latter in the framework of American cultural values, Extrinsic-Consensual faith was shown to associate with concern for money, prestige and materialistic goals. In contrast, Intrinsic-Committed religion appeared to counter these tendencies while stressing social-religious-humanistic themes.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AllenR. O., & SpilkaB.Committed and consensual religion: A specification of religion-prejudice relationships.Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, 1967, 6, 191–206.
2.
AllportG. W.Religion and prejudice.Crane Review, 1959, 2, 1–10.
3.
AllportG. W.The religious context of prejudice.Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, 1966, 5, 447–457.
4.
AllportG. W., & RossJ. M.Personal religious orientation and prejudice.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1967, 5, 432–433.
5.
FleckJ. R.Dimensions of personal religion: A dichotomy or trichotomy. Paper presented at the National Evangelical Conference on Research in Mental Health and Religious Behavior, Atlanta, Georgia, January 24–26, 1976.
6.
GoldsenR. K., RosenbergM., WilliamsR. M.Jr., & SuchmanE. A.What college students think.Princeton, N.J.: D. Van Nostrand, 1960.
7.
HogeD. R.A validated intrinsic religious motivation scale.Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, 1972, 11, 369–376.
8.
KahoeR. D., & DunnR. F.The fear of death and religious attitudes and behavior.Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, 1975, 14, 379–382.
9.
KaufmanW. C.Status, authoritarianism, and anti-semitism.American Journal of Sociology, 1957, 62, 379–382.
10.
MagniK. G.The fear of death: Studies of its character and concomitants. In GodinA. (Ed.), Death and presence.Brussels, Belgium: International Center for Studies in Religious Education, 1972, 129–142.
11.
RaschkeV.Dogmatism and committed and consensual religion.Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, 1973, 12, 339–344.
12.
RobinsonJ. P., & ShaverP. R.Measures of social psychological attitudes (Rev. ed.). Ann Arbor, Mich.: Institute for Social Research, Survey Research Center, University of Michigan, 1973.
13.
SpilkaB., & MintonB.Defining personal religion: Psychometric, cognitive and instrumental dimensions. Paper presented at the 1975 convention of the Society for the Scientific Study of Religion, Milwaukee, October 24, 1977.
14.
SpilkaB., & MullinM.Personal religion and psychosocial schemata: A research approach to a theological-psychology of religion.Character Potential, 1977, 8, in press.
15.
SpilkaB., PellegriniR. J., & DaileyK.Religion, American values and death perspectives.Sociological Symposium, 1968, 1, 57–66.
16.
StrausM. A., & HoughtonL. J.Achievement, affiliation, and cooperation values to trends in American rural society, 1924–1958.Rural Sociology, 1960, 25, 394–403.
17.
WilliamsR. M.Jr.American society (3rd ed.) New York: Knopf, 1970.
