Selective Religiosity among Young Girls in Mashhad: A Grounded Theory

علوم اجتماعی دانشگاه فردوسی مشهد

Article 2, Volume 13, Issue 2 - Serial Number 28, March 2017, Pages 1-22   

Document Type: Scientific-Research

DOI: 10.22067/jss.v13i2.32095

Authors

Seyedeh Samaneh Amiri; Ahmad Reza Asgharpour Masouleh^*

Ferdowsi University of Mashhad

Abstract

Extended Abstract
1. Introduction
The twenty first century is assumed to be the era of attention to social transformation conditions and factors due to the third world developments, mass media development and technological developmentsfrom the viewpoints of social issues analysts (Roche, 1996). Social changes in Iran recent community is so quick that even little attention in the most important cultural elements in a short period of time is clear. According to Roche (1996) strong social changes indicate a cut between today cultural relationships and the past. Change in cultural elements such as norms, values and tastes indicate how Iranian youths have been changed during the recent generations. Studying these youths’ new life features is important as it can present a realistic image of the status quo. As youths play a very important role in establishing society culture, studying their life style is of prime importance.
Religiosity is one of the basic components for life style construct; especially in Iranian culture which is assumed to be one of the essential parts of social life. In Iranian culture, beliefs and rituals play an important role and this indicates its origins in life style. According to interpretive approach in the present research, the present research tries to study actors’ mentality toward religiosity among young girls living in Mashhad. The present research tries to find out the image of religiosity in actors’ mentality so that conditions or infrastructures, interactions and processes as well as consequences of this kind of religiosity can be studied. The present research main goal is reproducing the youth mental meaning of religiosity.
2. Concepts
Religiosity means enjoying “religious commitment” such that individuals’ attitude and actions are effected. The type of effect is determined by the religion (Shojaee Zand, 2005, cited in Himmelfarb, 1975). Religious refers to anyone or any phenomena in which religion values and signs are manifested. Religion values and signs manifestation can be recognized in his/her overt and covert actions and attitudes. Therefore, he/she can be distinguished from others through "commitment” and “religious obligation” as well as religiosity “consequence” and its effects on his/her thought, mind and social and individual action (Mahdavi Kani, 2008).
Life style consists of individuals’ performance, style of behavior and pattern in social life mainstream and in a coherent social structure by which one is distinguished from others. Life style enjoys different aspects such as family system, religion, and media.
Individuals’ life style is effected by his/her semantic system and religion is one of these semantic systems. All religions enjoy semantic systems, teachings, entities as well as structures which enable their followers in establishing life styles based on them. Religion can play a role in creating manner, taste and aesthetic and as a result in life style. It also involves forming other life styles apart from religion life styles (Mahdavi Kani, 2008).
Some thinkers believe that life style is dependent on values that originates from culture or religion. Values and norms that Islam bestows human beings effect his/her taste, manner and his/her interpretations of life. Finally, it depicts and propagates a style which results in forming religious life style and behavior (Mahdavi Kani, 2008).
3. Methodology
As the present research is focused on studying actors’ mentality of religiosity among young girls in Mashhad, therefore, interpretive and qualitative method has been selected as the dominant methodology and the grounded theory has been applied for carrying out the research process.
Qualitative method and grounded theory have been applied in the present research due to the sensitivity of the issue and the religiosity wide and deep aspects in life style. So, the present research tries to study and reproduce youth understanding and interpretation of religiosity through interpretative approach and by entering into the studied society semantic system.
4. Findings
After extracting and encoding the information related to actors’ mentality regarding religiosity, 18 concepts were extracted during open coding which were classified in forms of 4 main categories duringaxial coding. These categories include tolerance, individual taste centrality, more effectiveness of religion, anti-traditionalism and dual identity. During selective coding stage, these categories resulted in extracting one central category which comprises the above mentioned categories. The central category in the present research is “selective religiosity”.
5. Discussion and Conclusion
According to the data collected by interview with individuals, five axial categories were found including tolerance, individual taste centrality, the dichotomy of value, religion effectiveness and anti-traditionalism among which the central category as “selective religiosity” was found out. Selective religiosity means that individuals obey a part of the religion they agree with and they put aside those parts which prevent them from achieving their goals.
Changes incurred in individuals’ religiosity especially young people such as selective religiosity enjoy a series of conditions and grounds which are resulted by certain processes. Western culture components (modernity) such as individuals’ taste, different life styles and anti- traditionalism, etc. result in changes in individuals’ life style and their attitudes. As life style and religiosity style are two interrelated categories, any changes in one of them brings about change in the other. As a result, selective religiosity is the result of this process.
The other point to refer is that those who follow a selective religiosity are still inclined toward being religious and they avoid words such as “impious” or “Non-Muslim” and call themselves “Muslim”; it means that in Iran society, avoiding from Islamic rules still is not a value but people relate their own personal interpretations to a part of religion (paying attention to religion material effectiveness aspect).
Today's youngpeople require redefinition of identity especially their own religion identity. He/she is trapped among plurality of western values and a mass of traditional values whichhe/ she acquires through sociability and are transferred to him/her by parents. As a result, he/she suffers from a kind of identity crisis or value crisis and the consequences will be seen during life difficult choices. Among its consequences one can refer to destruction of unifying role of religion among individuals, individuals’ attention toward religion effectiveness aspect instead of nature of religion and religiosity.

Keywords

religiosity; Youths; life style; Selective religiosity; Grounded theory

References

1. اباذری، ی. و چاوشیان، ح. (1381). از طبقۀ اجتماعی تا سبک زندگی. نامۀ علوم اجتماعی، 10 (20)، 27-3

2. اشتراوس، ان. و کوربین، ج. (1390). مبانی پژوهش کیفی: فنون و مراحل تولید نظریۀ کیفی. (ا. افشار، مترجم). تهران: نشر نی

3. اورعی، غ ر. (1390). بررسی جامعه‌شناختی شیوۀ تصمیم‌گیری و دلایل پس‌انداز مردم مشهد. پایان‌نامۀ منتشرنشدۀ دکتری، دانشگاه فردوسی مشهد. مشهد، ایران

4. آرون، ر. (1377). مراحل اساسی اندیشه در جامعه‌شناسی. (ب. پرهام، مترجم). تهران: سازمان انتشارات و آموزش انقلاب اسلامی

5. آزاد ارمکی، ت. (1386). زندگی روزمره در ایران. زندگی روزمره، قدرت و فرهنگ. تهران: جهاد دانشگاهی تهران

6. آهنکوب نژاد، م. (1388). بررسی میزان تقیّد به دین در جوانان اهواز. پژوهش جوانان، فرهنگ و جامعه، 1 (3)، 24-1

7. بوستانی، د. و محمدپور، ا. (1388). بازسازی معنائی جهت‌گیری جنسیتی پسران نسبت به دختران (ارایۀ یک نظریۀ زمینه‌ای). مطالعات راهبردی زنان، 11 (44)، 142-111

8. تافلر، ا. (1372). شوک آینده. (ح. کامرانی، مترجم). تهران: نشر مترجم

9. توسلی، غ. و مرشدی، ا. (1385). بررسی سطح دین‌داری و گرایش‌های دینی دانشجویان (مطالعۀ موردی: دانشگاه صنعتی امیرکبیر). مجلّۀ جامعه‌شناسی ایران، 7 (4)، 118-96

10. خدامی، ع. (1391). دلالت‌هایی بر روند فردی‌شدن امر دینی در ایران: مطالعۀ موردی جوانان شیراز. مجلّۀ مطالعات اجتماعی ایران، 7 (1)، 59-30

11. خواجه نوری، ب؛ ریاحی، ز. و مساوات ا. (1391). رابطۀ سبک زندگی با میزان دین‌داری جوانان، مورد مطالعه: جوانان شیراز. فصل‌نامۀ تخصصی علوم اجتماعی دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی- واحد شوشتر، 7 (20). 130-103

12. دورکیم، ا. (1373). قواعد روش جامعه‌شناسی.(ع. م. کاردان، مترجم). تهران: مؤسسۀ مطالعات و تحقیقات اجتماعی

13. ربانی، ر و رستگار، ی. (1387). جوان، سبک زندگی و فرهنگ مصرفی. ماه‌نا‌مۀ مهندسی فرهنگی، 3 (23 و 24)، 53-44

14. رفیع پور، ف. (1387). آناتومی جامعه: مقدمه‌ای بر جامعه‌شناسی. تهران: شرکت سهامی انتشار

15. روشه، گ. (1380). تغییرات اجتماعی. (م. وثوقی، مترجم). تهران: نشر نی

16. زاکرمن، ف. (1384). درآمدی بر جامعه‌شناسی دین. (خ. دیهیمی، مترجم). تهران: لوح فکر

17. سراج زاده، س. ح. و پویافر، م. ر. (1387). دین و نظم اجتماعی: بررسی رابطۀ دین‌داری با احساس آنومی و کج‌روی در میان نمونه‌ای از دانشجویان. دانشکدۀ ادبیات و علوم انسانی دانشگاه تربیت معلم، 16 (63)، 105-71

18. سفیری خ و غفوری، م. (1388). بررسی هویت دینی و ملّی جوانان شهر تهران با تأکید بر تأثیر خانواده. پژوهش جوانان، فرهنگ و جامعه، 1 (2)، 27-1

19. شجاعی زند، ع. (1384). مدلی برای سنجش دین‌داری در ایران. جامعه‌شناسی ایران، 6 (1)، 66-34

20. فلیک، ا. (1387). درآمدی بر تحقیق کیفی. (ه. جلیلی، مترجم). تهران: نشر نی

21. گیبینز، ج. و ریمر، ب. (1381). سیاست پست مدرنیته. (م. انصاری، مترجم). تهران: گام نو

22. گیدنز، آ. (1377). جامعه‌شناسی. (م. صبوری، مترجم). تهران: نشر نی

23. گیدنز، آ. (1382). تجدّد و تشخّص (جامعه و هویت شخصی در عصر جدید). (ن. موفقیان، مترجم). تهران: نشر نی

24. لیتل، د. (1373). تبیین در علوم اجتماعی: درآمدی به فلسفۀ علم‌الاجتماع. (ع. سروش، مترجم). تهران: مؤسسۀ فرهنگی صراط

25. محمدپور، ا. (1390). ضدروش. تهران: نشر جامعه‌شناسان

26. محمدپور، ا. و ایمان، م. ت. (1387). بازسازی معنایی پیامدهای تغییرات اقتصادی در منطقۀ اورامان تخت کردستان ایران: ارایۀ یک نظریۀ زمینه‌ای. فصل‌نامۀ علمی‌پژوهشی رفاه اجتماعی، 7 (28)، 213-191

27. محمدپور، ا.، رضایی، م.، پرتوی، ل. و صادقی، ر. (1388). بازسازی معنایی تغییرات خانواده به شیوۀ نظریۀ زمینه‌ای. فصل‌نامۀ خانواده‌پژوهی، 5 (19)، 332-310

28. مهدوی کنی، م. (1387). دین و سبک زندگی. تهران: دانشگاه امام صادق (ع )

29. میر سندسی، م. (1390). مقدمه‌ای بر جامعه‌شناسی دین و انواع دین‌داری. تهران: جامعه‌شناسان

30. وریج کاظمی، ع. و فرجی، م. (1382). عرفی‌شدن و زندگی روزمره. نامۀ علوم اجتماعی، 11 (1)، پیاپی 21، 269-243

31. Ali Shah, A. (2004). Self-religiosity, father’s attitude and religious education in the moral behaviour of adolescents. Psychology & Developing Societies, 16(2), 187-207

32. Brayant, A., & Charmaz, K. (2007). The sage handbook of grounded theory. London: Sage Publication

33. Chu, D. C. (2012). The links between religiosity, childhood sexual abuse, and subsequent marijuana use: An empirical inquiry of a sample of female college students. International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology, 56(6), 937-954

34. Clark, A. (2005).Situational analysis (Grounded theory after postmodern turn). London: Sage Publications

35. Duriez, B., Soenens, B., Neyrinck, B., & Vansteenkiste, M. (2009). Is religiosity related to better parenting? Disentangling religiosity from religious cognitive style. Journal of Family Issues, 30 (9), 1287-1307

36. Gannon, K., Becker, T., & Moreno, M. (2013). Religion and sex among college freshmen. Journal of Adolescent Research, 28(5), 535-556

37. Gebauer, J. E., Paulhus, D. L., & Neberich, W. (2013). Big Two personality and religiosity across cultures: Communals as religious conformists and agentics as religious contrarians. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 4(1), 21-30

38. Giddens, A. (1991). Modernity and self-identity: Self and society in the late modern age. California: Stanford University Press

39. Glaser, B., & Strauss, A. (1967). Discovery of grounded theory. Chicago: Aldine

40. Ritchie, J., & Lewis, J. (2003).Qualitative research practice: A guide for social science students and researchers. London: Sage