Spiritual revolution and the ‘subjective turn’

A summary of;
Heelas, P., Woodhead, L., Seel, B., Szerszynski, B., & Tusting, K. (2005). The Spiritual Revolution: Why religion is giving way to spirituality. Blackwell Publishing: Oxford.

The authors of this book argue that while religion seems to be in decline, spirituality seems to be on the rise; and that this can be attributed to what they call the ‘subjective turn’: “It is a turn away from life lived in terms of external or ‘objective’ roles, duties and obligations, and a turn towards a life lived by reference to one’s own subjective experiences (relational as much as individualistic)”(2). The authors use somewhat confusing terminology: it is a “turn away from ‘life-as’ (life lived as a dutiful wife, father, husband, strong leader, self-made man etc.) to ‘subjective-life’ (life lived in deep connection with the unique experiences of my self-in-relation)” (3). The latter includes all those things that happen inside us (“states of consciousness, states of mind, memories, emotions, passions, sensations, bodily experiences, dreams, feelings, inner consciences, and sentiments” (3)). So the difference in modern culture is that increasingly, this inner experience, our subjectivities, “become a, if not the, unique source of significance, meaning and authority” (3-4).

In the words of one interviewee, “Religion asks you to learn from the experience of others. Spirituality urges you to seek your own” (13?). This is very much in line with what Szerszynski wrote about with regards to the modern imperative to choose, for self-realization. People search for answers within, rather than turning to outside sources; they are taking more responsibility for various aspects of their lives (125): “‘Needing to become what one is is the feature of modern living’ (p. 32). And in the words of Gordon Allport (1962), what matters is ‘the right of every individual to work out his own philosophy of life to find his personal niche in creation, as best he can. His freedom to do so will be greater if he sees clearly the forces of culture and conformity that invite him to be content with a merely second-hand and therefore for him, with an immature religion’ (pp. vii-viii; our emphases)” (125). (I notice a link between this and Corus's The Journey - about being a process of becoming... more on Corus at some other point.)

The authors explain further: “Most generally, the subjective turn involves the turn to what Dick Houtman and Peter Mascini (2002) call ‘moral individualism’ – namely ‘the granting of a moral primacy to individual liberty’ (p. 459). The person serves as the locus of moral authority, with value being attached to staying true to oneself rather than succumbing to outside agency” (95). The value of this is that spirituality enables “many participants to explore more deeply what they already know to be the case – that they have more to offer, both with regard to themselves and to others – than is allowed expression in everyday, relational and other, spheres of life (105).

The authors identify the development of ‘the ethic of subjectivity’: “which is evident in the value attached to self-expression and fulfillment; to doing ‘what feels right’, ‘following your heart’, ‘being true to yourself’, cultivating ‘emotional intelligence’ and respecting other people’s feelings” (80). In line with this, another interviewee said that “what was helpful in the spiritual life was to follow ‘whatever seems heart-centred to you” (13?). In terms of my PhD, if I want the foundation of my research to be a spiritual process, it is important that I follow my heart to a degree; and to this end, it will be important to engage in research through design, i.e. creating as I am inspired.

To make their case, the authors did a great deal of interviews and surveying of people in the Lake District. Their findings “unequivocally demonstrates growth” of a belief in the spiritual from 1970 to now (45). Here are some telling statistics:

In answer to the question ‘Do you believe in any of the following?’ the greatest number of respondents (82.4 per cent) agree that ‘some sort of spirit or life force pervades all that lives’, with 73 per cent expressing belief in ‘subtle energy (or energy channels) in the body’. Presented with a range of options and asked to select the statement which best describes their ‘core beliefs about spirituality’ 40 per cent of respondents equate spirituality with ‘love’ or being ‘a caring and decent person’, 34 per cent with ‘being in touch with subtle energies’, ‘healing oneself and others’ or ‘living life to the full’. Spirituality, it appears, belongs to life-itself (‘subtle energy in the body’ which serves to keep us alive) and subjective-life (‘love’, ‘caring’). It seems that spirit/energy/spirituality is understood to dwell within the lives of participants, an interpretation that is supported by the finding that very few associate spirituality with a transcendental, over-and-above-the-self, external source of significance (25).

This is also interesting:
1 “Holistic milieu, subjective-life spirituality – which pays most attention to the cultivation of unique subjectivities – tends to be faring best.
2 Religions of experiential humanity and experiential difference – which address unique subjectivities whilst placing them within a life-as frame of reference – tends to be faring relatively well.
3 Religions of difference – which pay some attention to unique subjectivities whilst emphasizing life-as ‘oughts’ – tend to be faring relatively badly.
4 Religions of humanity – which pay least attention to unique subjectivities – tend to be faring worst” (75).

Here’s the conclusion:

Some hundred years ago, Durkheim drew a distinction between ‘a religion handed down by tradition’ and ‘a free, private, optional religion, fashioned according to one’s own needs and understanding’ (cited in Pickering, 1975, p. 96). Writing at much the same time, William James, Simmel, Troeltsch and others drew similar distinctions. They too thought that spiritualities of life were a growing force, so they would not be surprised by the (148) extent to which the spiritual revolution has developed since their time, or about our predictions. Arguing that the sacred gravitates towards ultimate value to affirm, enhance, validate and express that value, they all reflected on the significance that was coming to be placed on subjective-life. As Simmel (1997) put it so vividly, ‘This emotional reality – which we can only call life – makes itself increasingly felt in its formless strength… claiming inalienable rights as the true meaning or value of our existence’ (p. 24). And as it progresses, the turn to subjective life draws the sacred within (149).