Taken at its face, sociology is simply the study of human relationships
and interactions. As sociologists we
attempt to understand the structures and influences on human beings and how
those will affect people. So what does
God have to do with this? In a world
that values diversity, and is pluralistically influenced, this question is
considered a taboo. We aren’t allowed to
introduce God into an equation or a model, because that will open up too much
controversy. Instead, we take God out of
the equation, and the result is we have a form of institutionalized atheism at
work. This is all well and good,
provided that the atheistic model is an accurate reflection of reality. However, if there really is a God, then we
are forcing ourselves to willfully ignore an aspect of reality. This limits our ability to analyze human
interactions, to model and successfully help people, and to have the full impact
that we might strive for. Let us look at
one example of what happens when we put God into a model and compare the
theistic vs atheistic models.
If we are using the theistic model (here using the Judeo-Christian God), then
what we find is there is literally an entire dimension of human reality that is
not being taken into consideration when we are looking at the most basic of
human relationships. Now let’s see what
happens when we examine the basis of authority in each of these models.
Here, we have one person achieving authority or leadership
over another. This is due to a perceived
superiority on the part of one person, and inferiority on the part of the
other. This could even be as simple as
status, a person with a PhD ignoring a valid criticism of a person who only has
an MA for instance.
Now, this isn’t to say that this model hasn’t been
absolutely horrendously abused over the years.
People take the authority they were given and use it for evils which
were never meant to be committed. I’m
not remotely going to try and justify those actions here. And I’m still processing all of this if I’m
honest. However, the purpose of this is
to demonstrate that what we believe about God as a presupposition is important
if we are to offer a proper representation of reality, by showing that there is a distinction between the way we will explain the source of authority in interpersonal relationships. This has broader implications, into the way we evaluate inequalities for instance.
Now, we may still develop theories that work in spite of
whether or not our beliefs in God are correct or not. We may have models in place that explain a
portion of reality. However, if we
really want to develop an accurate conception of reality, then we need to look
beyond the raw data that we gather. Our
findings are colored and interpreted through a set of lenses. These lenses are made up of our theological
and philosophical beliefs. These are not
testable, there isn’t an experiment that will prove the existence of God or the
nonexistence of God. Here we must rely
on logic and develop a theory that works in line with logical mandates like the
infinite causality principle. Ignoring
metaphysical questions as if they were the realm of ignorant savages will not
help us understand reality, we have to tackle these more nebulous concepts as
will if we are to truly begin understanding the full picture of the complexity
of human relationships.
