1. EXAMINING THE RELATIONSHIPS AMONG SECULARIZATION, RELIGIOSITY AND SUBJECTIVE-OBJECTIVE WELLBEING
Chong Ho Yu, Danielle Reimer, Anna Yu, Jean-Paul Snijder
Azusa Pacific University, Azusa, CA
Department of Psychology
Contact Information: Chong Ho Yu, cyu@apu.edu
Purpose
Utilizing credible archival data, several researchers (Zuckerman, 2008, 2012,
2014; Harris, 2006; Paul, 2014) suggest that there is a strong positive
relationship between secularization and wellbeing, as indicated by measures
of life expectancy, adult literacy, per-capita income, educational attainment,
gender equality, homosexual rights, divorce rates, homicide rates, and infant
mortality. This paper aims to re-examine this claim by using more recent
international databases (including the United Nations Human Development
Index, the Gallop Global Wellbeing Index, and the World Value Survey).
Definitions of religiosity and secularism
In recent years there has been much debate on the subject of secularization
and religiosity. Pollack (2008) defined religiosity using the following criterion:
denominational membership, practice, conviction, and extra-church religiosity.
Despite attempts to clearly define religiosity, the term is confounded by
geographically- and culturally-dependent levels of difficulty/ease with pursuing
religion, over self-identification with societal norms, and limitations of research
to Western countries and Christian religions.
Modernity and religion
Many believe that religion cannot coexist with modernity. However, Berger,
Davie, and Fokas (2008) asserted that it is both possible and ‘normal’ for the
world to be both modern and religious. Modernity does not have to be a fully
secular enterprise; rather, it can come in both secular and religious forms.
For example, there is a negative association between unaccepting neighbors of a
different religion and purpose thriving. At first glance, religion seems to be the source
of the problem. It is important to point out that three countries/regions at the lower right
of Figure 4 form a distinct cluster: Palestine, Yemen, and Armenia. Needless to say,
the high degree of unaccepting neighbors of a different religion can be explained by
the conflict between Israel (Jewish) and Palestine (Muslim). Until May of 1990, Yemen
had been divided into two nations: North Yemen and South Yemen. In 1990 the
separate nations became one. However, the armies of the North and South never
integrated and stayed at opposing sides during the unification. Armenia experienced
the 1915 massacre; this is one of the reasons that Armenian citizens may have a
skeptical view of another religion.
This study is limited by use of archival data, which pre-determined the variables. In the
World Values Survey many religion-related statements are stated in a negative way.
These include: “Would not like to have as neighbors: People of a different religion,”
“Religious authorities interpret the laws: essential to democracy,” “Whenever science
and religion conflict, religion is always right”, “The only acceptable religion is my
religion”, and “We depend too much on science and not enough on faith”. There is no
positive statement like: “Religious moral codes can help maintain the social order,”
“Belief in a Creator and a design universe facilitates scientific research,” or “Religious
belief strengthens the belief of universal human rights.” Very often, the conclusion on
the survey has depended on how the questions were written. It is not surprising to see
that the current study, as well as many other studies on this topic, appear to concur
with the secularization-wellbeing thesis. Future studies with more neutral questions are
recommended.
LogHIV
-2.5
-1.5
-0.5
0.5
1.5
2.5
3.5
country colored by LogHIV
100° W 50° W 0° E 50° E 100° E 150° E
50° S
0° N
50° N
100° N
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9
Inequality-adjustedHDI(IHDI)Value2013
1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5
Important in life: Religion
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
Thrivingin3+
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5
Would not like to have neighbors of a different religion
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
FinancialThriving
1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5
The only acceptable religion is my religion
Data source and data analysis
Wellbeing data were sourced from United Nations Development Program (2014) and
Gallop’s Global Wellbeing Survey (2014), whereas religious attitude data were
sourced from World Values Survey (2014). Preliminary analysis was performed by
generalized regression (GR) - a more robust procedure than conventional OLS
regression modeling. After certain significant predictors were identified by GR, the
relationship between the dependent and independent variables was examined in a
pairwise fashion through robust regression. If outliers were present, robust regression
would downweight outliers, in order to obtain a better estimate.
Results
The prevalence of HIV rates among adults aged between 15 and 49 is highly skewed;
it therefore necessitated a log transformation. Figure 1 indicates the following: The
highest LogHIV rates, depicted in red, are found in the Southern African continent,
especially in South Africa, Botswana, and Zimbabwe. The least affected countries are
South Asia (e.g. India, Nepal), Middle East (e.g. Iran), North Africa (e.g. Morocco,
Egypt), Southwest America (Argentina, Chile, Bolivia, Peru, Columbia, Ecuador).
North America (e.g. USA, Canada), Europe, China, Australia, and Russia are in the
middle. LogHIV and religion/secularization do not form a clear pattern.
Sweden
Figure 2 shows that the less people agree
that “the only acceptable religion is my
religion” (higher scores = less agree), the
more the nation thrives financially. Sweden is
extreme in both dimensions and thus robust
regression was employed (Logworth = 1.511,
p = 0.03081). In Sweden, religious authorities
have little influence on public opinion and
policy, yet there is little anti-clericalism.
Figure 3 indicates that the less people who
regard religion as important (higher score =
unimportant), the more equality a society has
(LogWorth = 21.610, p < .00001). What is
most interesting is the cluster of countries in
the upper right corner. Most are developed
and secular nations, such as Japan,
Australia, The Netherlands, Sweden,
Slovenia, Estonia, Germany, and Spain.
Discussion and conclusions
On one hand, findings from this study yielded
no clear patterns between religion and some
social problems (e.g. HIV). On the other
hand, the data analysis partly supports the
secularization-wellbeing thesis. As shown
previously, many proxy measures of close-
mindedness have a negative relationship with
several wellbeing indices. However, some of
the political turmoil and social problems can
be better explained by their particular
historical background, rather than by religion.
Figure 4.
Figure 2.
Figure 3.
Figure 1.
Country colored by LogHIV